The MSM has their mantra, and they are sticking to it. Just as you can trust reporting from MSNBC and Chrissy Matthews. After all, as Chrissy says "We have a vested interest in the success of this administration."

Loughner was clearly politically motivated--it's just that his politics aren't all that easy to pin on either the left or the right. Explaining away his actions purely as the result of "mental illness" doesn't really cut it. He had prior interactions with Giffords, and his disagreements and anger toward her were certainly political in nature--albeit obsessive and irrational.

Obviously, there are plenty of other issues with Loughner (social/mental troubles among them), but I definitely would not dismiss the political component. The presence of social issues or mental illness by no means provides some clear cut explanation (or cause) for his actions. But a lot of people want to chalk it up to insanity and leave it at that. To me, that avoids many other critical factors and issues. Lougher had a strange brew of reactionary and paranoid political beliefs, but they were political nonetheless.

Now, I completely agree with you that the MSM was completely out of line with how THEY presented the AZ/Loughner issue (by blaming Palin out of political convenience). Blaming Palin or the Tea Party was definitely politically motivated, and completely unfounded. There was no connection between Loughner's politics and either Palin or the Tea Party. Period. Yet another blatant case of political opportunism from certain members of the media and certain politicians. No doubt about that.

The Fort Hood shooter certainly had his political motivations as well--again along with plenty of other "issues". The lesson for both cases: it probably makes sense to take a close look at as many factors involved, avoid quick judgments, and more importantly we should probably avoid placing blame on larger collectives for the actions of specific individuals/groups. Of course, the stock and trade of many folks in the MSM, along with many pundits, is doing the EXACT OPPOSITE and blaming any and all political opponents when such opportunities present themselves. Conservatives blame liberals and Muslims, while Liberals blame conservatives and the Tea Party.

And so it goes in a nice big ridiculous circle. So there we have it: we should probably take all analysis from most media professionals and pundits with a grain of salt (like a 50 lb bag).

/soapbox

Interesting post Ryan. I agree with just about everything you said. There is one major difference though between these two individuals. One was doing it for a cause, while the other did not.

Up until this point, the only real explanation we have for Loughner's rampage is that he really has no definitive political view to speak of, and he's just out of his mind. Either way, the man deserves the death penalty.

Now, with Hassan and Fort Hood we have a clear motive. Hassan believes he was carrying out Allah's will by murdering all of those soldiers and he was carrying out the cause of Islam. Hassan's was more or less an act of war due to the fact we are at war with Islamic extremism.
That's my view on this issue.

theatleeappeal.com