Top conservative writers and bloggers are all pointing out the double standard the media is applying to the FRC shooter and SPLC, compared to the outcry the media expressed in the wake of the Rep. Gabby Giffords shooting as they attempted to pin the violence on right-wing politics.
"...It's impossible not to notice that this is precisely what many on the left accused Sarah Palin of doing in January 2011 after Jared Loughner shot Rep. Giffords and several bystanders in a Tucson parking lot. At the time, the left claimed Palin's district map featuring crosshairs might have given Loughner ideas. No connection between the map and the shooting was ever found. Indeed, it turned out Loughner had been obsessed with Giffords before Palin's map even existed.
Now that anti-right, anti-hate SPLC is implicated in providing targets for a politically motivated mass shooter will the national media turn on the SPLC the way they did on Sarah Palin?"
Erick Erickson of RedState:
"...Floyd Lee Corkins, II, who shot a security guard at the Family Research Center as he attempted to shoot up the organization was directly inspired to take action by a list of supposed “hate groups” on the Southern Poverty Law Center’s website.
... I hope my friends in the media who spent much time talking about Sarah Palin’s political target map will now talk about the Southern Poverty Law Center’s routine and reckless use of the label “hate group” with which is smears conservatives.
By the way, Palin took down her target map after the controversy. The Southern Poverty Law Center? Crickets..."
"...Why yes, this is eerily similar to the left claiming after Gabby Giffords was shot that Palin’s “crosshairs” election map inspired Jared Loughner. With two differences. First, Loughner was not, in fact, inspired by Palin whereas this guy, per his own plea bargain, did consult the SPLC website in choosing people to kill. Second, you’ll see zero coverage of this inconvenient entry in the canon of political hate in wider media because it can’t be used as a blunt object with which to bludgeon the right.
... Funny thing, though: The SPLC itself was verrrrry quick to try to tie Jared Loughner to the “far right”, and kept at it long enough that they were posting speculative pieces about “political rhetoric” and its role in the Tucson shooting as late as 13 days after it occurred. Not only are they comfortable with a free-speech slippery slope when it’s right-wingers who are at risk, they’re willing and eager to add some grease."

Now that anti-right, anti-hate SPLC is implicated in providing targets for a politically motivated mass shooter will the national media turn on the SPLC the way they did on Sarah Palin?"









5 Comments
The Liberals bought the media a long time ago. I'm not surprised that they're pushing stories like this under the rug. They're not interested in the truth. They're only interested in pushing socially corrupt agendas.
I'd suggest readers study the comment by Rich, as it illustrates a widely-used approach by pseudo-marriage advocates, from the president on down. Any disagreement with their agenda is labeled "hate." As such, they now feel justified in demonizing us, even killing us. Lacking any cogent argument they must stop any debate. Labeling us is how they do this.
Then, like many perpetrators of domestic violence, they blame the victim for making them do it.
Part and parcel of the agenda for marriage terrorism.
I do not believe everything FRC says; for example I do not believe homosexual behaviour is harmful for your health (and I wouldnt care if it were because that's their problem frankly), nor do I think they are all pedos or Nazis. I do think it is abberent behaviour but it is their business. I know the SPLC is outspoken in its support of redefining marriage and see it as a human right. I think they have a right to their beliefs for it is a free country, if they want to brand christians as "homophobic haters", let them, I see it as a compliment!
The homosexual lifestyle presents a health risk to the public.
Homosexual people tend to experience more mental health problems than heterosexual people, research indicates. –
http://psychcentral.com/lib/2011/higher-risk-of-mental-health-problems-for-homosexuals/
Gay and bisexual men are more severely affected by HIV than any other group in the United States (US). Among all gay and bisexual men, blacks/African Americans bear the greatest disproportionate burden of HIV. From 2006 to 2009, HIV infections among young black/African American gay and bisexual men increased 48%
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/msm/