Right wing on Pentagon shooter: ‘He ain’t one of us’

An Arlington County (VA) police officer at Pentagon shooting scene (Reuters)

The rabid-right is rushing to distance itself from Pentagon shooter John Patrick Bedell, the latest nutcase with a grudge, guns and gripes against the government.

Bedell, declares conservative blogger Sistah Toljah, is “a far left nutcase.” Another blog of right-wing ramblings tags Bedell an “Anti-Bush nut case and 9/11 truther.”

The same “he ain’t one of us” frenzy emerged when Joe Stack crashed his plane into an Austin, Texas building because of a grudge against the IRS.

The conservative blogosphere erupted into self-righteous anger over a Christian Science Monitor story that asked “did right-wing extremism lead to shooting?”

When it was first posted Friday, the Monitor story suggested Bedell “appears to have been a right-wing extremist with virulent antigovernment feelings.”

The news site has since backed off that statement, posting an update saying “as more information emerges about Mr. Bedell, the less it appears that any coherent ideology was behind his actions, except that he was deeply antigovernment.”

In some cases, the right-wing has a point in its indignation. Bedell was a registered Democrat and his involvement in the 9/11 “truther” movement is more anti-Bush.

But, as Ken Vogel at Politico points out:

Bedell’s riffs against the American monetary system and “far-reaching violation of property rights” would fit in well at a rally of libertarian hero Ron Paul’s supporters (or even at the Conservative Political Action Conference, for that matter).

Like many extremists, Bedell’s beliefs were all over the place, which — if nothing else — proves that extremism — and the insanity that fuels it — can be non-partisan and reach across both political and ideological lines.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

8 Responses to "Right wing on Pentagon shooter: ‘He ain’t one of us’"

  1. bmclellan  March 7, 2010 at 10:22 am

    Rove, Limbaugh, Cheney, Ahmajinidad, Bedell,
    a rose by any other name….

  2. tc  March 7, 2010 at 3:40 pm

    The kind of talk that comes out of the rabid right, exacerbated by the likes of Limbaugh, Beck, et al, only agitate folks like the Pentagon shooter, and lead then to believe that their thinking is mainstream, and that they’re taking a principled stand with their action. This is not a behavior unique to the right, far lefters can fall prey to the same thinking, except that extreme right radio is the dominant creature of talk radio, not liberal radio.

  3. woody188  March 7, 2010 at 7:00 pm

    This is a set up for independents and libertarians to be demonized by the lamestream media and made out to be the USA’s next ‘biggest threat’ and then the crack downs begin. This is what we get for demanding our government stick to our Constitution.

    It started last year with the MIAC report and law enforcement agencies and the Department of Homeland Security declaring that Ron Paul and Constitution Party supporters were to be singled out for traffic stops and extra surveillance because they are supposedly terrorists.

    Just remember when they are done with us, you are next!

  4. Jim  March 8, 2010 at 7:40 am

    Oh, when one of their “own” actually comes out of the “closet”, they disown him. Typical right wing “spin”.

  5. Arthur  March 8, 2010 at 5:58 pm

    Ok, here’s my take on all this. If we take guns away from the victims (remember gun control never worked – even in Russia) then the street thugs out there will all of a sudden get the ban and quit raping old ladies and running away with their coins, and instead start helping them across the street?

    Being that the article was all over the map mentally, perhaps someone can help me out here to understand the point of the article, the seeming rabid approach to anyone who wants to arm a law-abiding citizen, and lumps the advocates of same into nazi groups or something?

    Now are there extremists out there. Of course. Are there mercenary camps, and does our own government employ them? Yup. But here I am trying to figure out all this bile as spewed above, and am at a loss. Anybody willing to help here?

    As one who has lawfully qualified to go about armed — both mentally and by past behavior as investigated by the powers that be — let me say that I will not be in a hurry to pull out a weapon in order to defend a stranger, nosirree.

    For all I know, I might be aiding and abetting someone who lobbies to see to it that I am left to the mercy of the perpetrators also.

    • woody188  March 8, 2010 at 7:26 pm

      I just had to comment on your “one who has lawfully qualified to go about armed — both mentally and by past behavior as investigated by the powers that be” because therein lies the rub. According to common law we are allowed to carry arms unconcealed so laws allowing us to be armed (licensing, permits, etc.) are unnecessary and only work in favor of the state.

  6. Guardhouse lawyer  March 8, 2010 at 8:11 pm

    Common law only applies when there is not statute authorizing or prohibiting something. You can look it up.

  7. woody188  March 8, 2010 at 8:45 pm

    Proof that 9/11 Truthers are Dangerous

Comments are closed.