As Neal Boortz explains, this is nothing new. The first media responses to the Kennedy assassination hinted at conservative groups being to blame. When it turns out that Lee Harvey Oswald was actually a communist and Soviet sympathizer, nary a peep about that. Really, how many people know about Oswald's politics? But, if he had been on the right, you can bet that every history student in the country would know about it.
As reported in this Big Hollywood story, many voices in the media jumped to condemn the Tea Party and specifically Sarah Palin. The political rhetoric, they say, is getting too heated. Between Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, et. al, the fires of conservatism are at a boiling point.
Well, what if this crazy individual who killed six people was actually just a nut, a crazy guy who lists The Communist Manifesto and Mein Kampf on his reading list? I'm sure we'd hear all about it in the media, right?
Wrong. The media loves to paint outrageous behavior as having conservative roots, even if there's not a shred of truth to it. If in fact the roots of deplorable behavior happen to be on the left, or totally insane, it's not important enough to mention.
Truth be told, the rhetoric out there is heated. Try these quotes on for size:
"We’re gonna punish our enemies" (not international enemies, political enemies)
Those nasty right-wing talk shows, right? Nope, Barack Obama or his staff. I am cherry picking quotes from the left, but just to make a point. There is heated rhetoric on both sides. For the media to highlight only the outrageous statements on the right and ignore those on the left is dishonest.
Despite overheated rhetoric, and short of outright calls for physical violence by prominent voices, no one should be to blame for violent acts, except the perpetrator of those acts.
Of course, even a broken clock is right twice a day. Credit should be given to individuals I generally disagree with who take the higher road.