Thursday, January 13, 2011

"Our Hearts Are Broken"

Print Friendly Version of this pagePrint Get a PDF version of this webpagePDF
It seems that Jared Lounghner is neither on the "left" or the "right".

After the media has exhausted itself blaming, or at least implicating; Sarah Palin, Rush, Glenn Beck, FOX News and a list of others who disagree with their political positions for the shooting in Tucson, friend of Lounghner, Zach Osler, sets the record straight.

Zach says his friend Jared wasn't even shooting at people, "He was shooting at the world."

And about his friend being driven or influenced by conservatives on radio or television, Zach says, no, Jared didn't even watch the news. He didn't like it. He said, "He wasn't on the left. He wasn't on the right."

So now what? Who can be blamed? Will they find something on Zach in order to diminish his words?

Osler referenced an online documentary series called, "Zeitgeist," as the most likely influence on his friend Jared.

This, of course, put the press on high alert. Could this be something that is politically on the right?

I don't know a lot about it except that it seems to rail on the concept of currency-based economics.

I also know that Joey Toribo, who created the docu-drama series and claims to be the founder of the Zeitgeist movement, says the fact that the media is now associating the tragedy with his work is "disingenuous".

He said, "Frankly, I find the isolating, growing association tremendously irresponsible on the part of ABC, NBC and their affiliates---further reflecting the disingenuous nature of the American Media Establishment today."

So as the elite heads of the media gather in Tucson to broadcast live, who can they blame?

Will they report that Rep. Giffords was apparently a
subscriber to Lounghner's website and what that could possibly mean? If anything?

ABC is still
going with Palin. Yesterday they were reporting that Palin has "once again become part of the story."

NBC says Palin is "ignorant" in her response to the media.

CBS says Sarah is playing the "victim card " in her response.

Good grief. What did she say in response?

Here's the part they dislike most:
"If you don't like a person's vision for the country, you're free to debate that vision. If you don't like their ideas, you're free to propose better ideas. But, especially within hours of a tragedy unfolding, journalists and pundits should not manufacture a blood libel that serves only to incite the very hatred and violence they purport to condemn. That is reprehensible." Sarah Palin.

The term "Blood Libel" is their problem.

The term is one used against the ancient Jews who were said to have murdered their children in order to use their blood for religious rituals and holidays.

Where now can the press turn? The boy's father who has been said to have been angry the day of the shooting? The loss of a job? The rejection of a woman? All have been mentioned as possibilities.

Most likely it will be the gun shop. You will see news stories or segments originating at the gun shop. Or maybe they will go for the bigger prize---the Constitutional right of Americans to own guns. If only, they will say, we had stricter gun laws, these things would never happen.

The Speaker of the House gave a moving and
appropriate speech from the floor of the House yesterday, saying among other things, "Our hearts are broken, but our spirit is not."

The Speaker asked that God would bless America.

I would humbly add a prayer that America would bless God, as well--- by acknowledging Him, and by publicly invoking His eternal principles and values back into our culture and our collective experience, as our Founders wisely did.

May God help us in this, our time of need. And while our hearts are broken, may our spirit be strong.

Gary Randall
Faith and Freedom

Click here to add these blogs to your email inbox.