******************** THIS BLOG HAS MOVED TO WWW.LEGALINSURRECTION.COM ********************

This blog is moving to www.legalinsurrection.com. If you have not been automatically redirected please click on the link.

NEW COMMENTS will NOT be put through and will NOT be transferred to the new website.

Saturday, September 26, 2009

Ghouls Preparing To Dance on Sparkman's Grave

We do not know how or why Bill Sparkman -- a part time Census worker -- was killed in Kentucky. Let me repeat this, since this is the internet and lower case lettering does not carry any meaning: WE DO NOT KNOW HOW OR WHY BILL SPARKMAN WAS KILLED.

There are speculative reports, sometimes conflicting. But that has not stopped the left-wing internet ghouls from seeking to exploit Sparkman's death for political purposes, turning his part-time Census status into the reason for his killing and creating a cause célèbre out of thin air.

Think Progress, which never met a fact it couldn't twist, blames Michelle Bachmann's expressions of concerns over the intrusive nature of the Census for the death. Steve Benen at Washington Monthly spreads the blame around to Bachmann, Glenn Beck and Neil Boortz. While acknowledging that there is no real proof of anything, Benen ends with the transparently false hope "that their reckless and irresponsible rhetoric did not have deadly consequences."

Andrew Sullivan cites "Southern populist terrorism, whipped up by the GOP and its Fox and talk radio cohorts" as the most likely culprit. MyDD uses the death to demand that "Conservatives must stop demonizing the census." A blogger at Crooks and Liars runs with the theme, arguing that the death is the inevitable result of Census "facts" being "scary things to those wingnuts." Richard Benjamin at Huffington Post, while acknowledging that it is just as likely Sparkman stumbled onto a meth lab as it is that he was killed by anti-government elements, nonetheless uses the death to "highlight the precarious struggles of the white working class and the brewing storm surrounding the 2010 Census."

The Moderate Voice is not always so moderate, but I think they have it right: The left-wing bloggers are acting like ghouls preparing end-zone dances. Indeed, despite their words to the contrary, the left-wing blogs would love nothing more than for Sparkman to have been killed by someone who didn't want to answer the Census, so they could do their political victory dance.

This is becoming a pattern. Left-wing politicians and blogs appear to be hoping for an act of right-wing violence so that they can justify their attacks on ordinary citizens who are against the overly intrusive and destructive Democratic policies. The problem is, right-wing extremists have not obliged, fortunately. So in the absence of right-wing death squads, the left-wing agitators invent facts and events to fit their narrative.

So here's my moderate voice on the subject: You are a bunch of ghouls who would love to do nothing more than perform a political dance on the grave of poor Bill Sparkman, about whom you really don't give a damn.

UPDATE: Not to be out-ghouled, Mark Kleiman writes: "Unless and until contrary facts emerge, I’m prepared to call this a terrorist incident, and to say that Glenn Beck very likely has Bill Sparkman’s blood on his tongue and lips." Seems to me that the people hoping beyond hope that Sparkman's death was political are the ones with blood on their tongues and lips.

And JammieWearingFool asks a good question: Does the logic of the Sparkman ghouls apply to the terrorist plot against a Republican Congressman? After all, MSNBC, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid are responsible for the "climate of hate" against Republicans, so they must be responsible for the plot, no?

And the hits just keep on coming, this time from No More Mister Nice Blog who covers his conspiratorial rear end by concluding that right-wingers are just like meth lab operators because they both don't like government control. So it doesn't matter whether Sparkman was killed by anti-government zealots or meth dealers, the right-wing ultimately is to blame. Brilliant! Using this logic, the hooligans running wild in Pittsburgh at the G-20 summit, the environmental activists who set fire to houses, the assassins of JFK and RFK, the attempted assassins of Ford and Reagan, the gangs terrorizing Chicago and LA, and every other act of violence against society -- must be those damn right-wingers again.

Added: See Robert Stacy McCain's post, You'd be surprised what some of these morons write on the internet

Related Posts:
Is the Left-Wing Hoping for Violence?
Because Only The Far Right Incites Violence
Our Leaders Versus the Un-Americans
We're All Political Terrorists Now

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook


  1. I tried leaving a comment on the article over at Huffington Post when this was first reported, simply cautioning the reader to avoid arriving at conclusions, when (at that point) police hadn't even ruled it a homicide yet. One can imagine the vibrant responses I received.

    It is disturbing how at every turn, every crime that happens to show signgs (oftentimes, only when you really dig or stretch) that the offense might carry clues of "right-wing" "anti-government" sentiment, suddenly the entire right-of-center establishment is to blame and called upon to denounce those who favor lowering taxes, shrinking government, etc.

    Guilt by ideological association, apparently. Even when your basic political beliefs are shared by upwards of 50% of the nation...

  2. Whenever Excitable Andy tears himself away from his musings about Sarah Palin's uterus, you can count on it being a well considered, insightful piece. /sarc/

    Like I said yesterday, the narrative has been determined. If the facts won't conform to it, they'll just make new facts.

    "Southern populist terrorism"- I wonder if that would look anything like the G20 summit.

  3. 'The man had "Fed" marked on him for God's sake. It was obviously an act of anti-government terrorism. Too many died in Oklahoma City to ignore this threat.'
    Or, in an area that seems to be filthy with meth labs, he stumbled upon one and said "Hi, I'm from the government." Or a still. Or a drug deal. Or just said the wrong thing to the wrong person in the wrong neighborhood.
    But hey, why wait for the police to determine such piddling things like motive or suspects? Or even to give a press conference confirming press accounts of the crime? Just scream out accusations.

    Anti-census violence? How do you guys come up with this crap?

  4. jfrancis ... keep up ... the "fed" rumor has not been confirmed ... the guy wasn't hanging in a tree either ... he was touching the ground when found ...

    I will bet that many of the "protestors" arrested at the G20 are daily readers of Daily Kos and Huffington. Should we blame Kos and HuffPo for their behavior ?

  5. also jfrancis ...

    if by overhyped you mean showed the video that the MSM ignored then yes, the right "overplayed" the black racists beating the white kid video ...

    notice the difference ... video that you and I can watch for ourselves and unverified rumors ...

    If you actually believe that the tea party movement would cause a American citizen to kill a Census worker who comes to his/her door you really need to cut down on the Kos kool aide ...

  6. As opposed to 100 million+ (and counting) killed by their own Marxist governments. We ignore that, I might suggest, at our own peril.

  7. Bury Obamacare with Kennedy!

  8. So the first thing that jumps to your mind when you hear that someone is murdered, with the word "Fed" scrawled on them, is that a right winger killed him? Not something drug related? Really? In the last fifty years, how many people do you suppose have been murdered with that word scrawled on them where it wasn't either drug related or an undercover agent/informant?
    I'm not going to concede that beating thing to you. You're going to have to say what mainstream conservatives, specifically (and preferably with links), were blaming it on the election of Obama. Don't say Rush, because I listened to him that day, and it was all about making fun of the press for telling us over and over how electing Obama would heal all the racial problems in the country. He didn't blame it on anyone. If you'd care to show otherwise, give the quote, including the six sentences before and after for the sake of context. I'm all ears.
    And, as you state above, at least in that case the police were initially citing a racial motive (and there was actual videotape of the kid being beaten by black students), as opposed to the census worker, where they haven't given any suspected motive and we don't have any clue who it was that did it. At all. None. Its just a hysterical jumping to conclusions by the left.
    I'd still like to hear about the wave of anti-census sentiment sweeping across conservative America.

  9. Actually, "Obama's America" can be blamed for the death of the census worker, too. Obama's penchant for inserting Fed control into, oh, every aspect of our private lives, down to what light bulbs we're allowed to use and what we sell at our yard sales, makes some people jumpy. Clay County, KY is notorious for illegal drug manufacture. Daniel Boone National Forest is lousy with pot farms, meth labs and stills. You'd think the census guys would have talked to the mailman before they wandered off into the underbrush. But anyway. People who never gave a moment's thought to what the Government was doing to them are way more aware of it now. People who are already keenly aware of the Fed's role in their lives are unlikely to think or care that the census taker is who he says he is. I hope they catch who killed that guy and find out why. It probably won't be because of the census. Sorry.

  10. I think the big picture here includes the painfully obvious fact that they are simply using this man's death. Their hatred of conservatives is their only concern. They want mileage out of his death. When it all comes out and maybe it doesn't turn into the glorious endzone victory dance they hoped, will they be apologizing about trying to use his death to try and smear patriotic, law abiding conservatives as dangerous lunatics?

    This should be an easy crime to solve. Retrace the man's steps. When you get to a point where nobody talked to the census, you're probably red hot.

  11. Analyzed logically, the hysterical innuendo coming from the left over this is simply a confession of their intellectual bankruptcy -- that is, it's a confession that they have no actual, valid, logical arguments to support Obama's fascist attempts to obliterate our few remaining freedoms.

    Lacking such arguments, they have nothing left but various appeals to emotion: "The right is stupid! The right is racist! The right is violent!" These are all Argumentum ad Hominem fallacies.

    Even if it were true that every person on the right is a racist who harbors a secret desire to kill government workers, this would not refute their arguments against, for instance, Obama's healthcare power-grab. Proving that a man's character is vile does not refute his arguments.

    This is simple high-school level logical analysis -- but the left is incapable of even this as they abandoned reason long ago.

    The best response to these attacks is to calmly point out that they are nothing but logical fallacies that in no shape, form or fashion justify Obama's anti-freedom, rights-violating agenda.

    The focus needs to remain on the fact that Obama's entire agenda is fascist to the core. Fascism is socialism without the nationalization of property. Fascism maintains the pretense of private property, but grants the government totalitarian power to dictate what must be done with that property. Fascism is the end of individual rights and liberty.

    Take, for instance, the so-called “individual mandate” that Obama is pushing. It would require, under penalty of jail time, that all individuals purchase government-approved health insurance. So the pretense of private property is retained -- government is not going to seize your money or your property -- they are merely going to have totalitarian power to dictate how you spend it.

    This, of course, is not the only fascist proposal on the table, and Republicans have been guilty of the same thing. The law signed by President Bush that dictates what light bulbs we can burn is blatantly fascist.

    But the Republicans were pikers compared to the fascism being pushed by Obama -- and we must learn to resist it on principle, specifically on the principle of individual rights. Nothing justifies the notion that one man -- or the government -- can violate the property rights of another man by dictating how he must use and dispose of his property.

    We must learn to uphold the principle that our lives and the fruits of our labor belong to US, not to society, not to the government, and not to any band of power-lusting thugs that deceives their way into power.

  12. Rest in Peace, sir. From what I gather, the man, Bill Sparkman, was an Eagle Scout and an asset to his community.

    If, on the outside chance that this was a murder perpetrated by an allegedy “right-wing” buck-toothed hillbilly with a bad attitude and murder in his heart (as some have already joyfully assumed), you may hang the sonofabitch forthwith, after a trial by a jury of his peers, of course. And I don’t mean twenty years from now, either.

    Despite the fact that the census has been known to ask questions like “How many bowel movements did you have today and would you describe them as firm, moderately firm or as squishy as Jimmy Carter in a national crisis?”, no conservatives I know will abide a murderer.

    Unlike the Left, we will not be interested in giving the killer a five-weeks-to-life jail term, assigning him to sensitivity classes, hearing about his bad childhood, releasing him from prison early because the politicians spent all the money on hookers and bad mortgages, nor in providing him culturally-appropriate meals of corn pone, fatback and collard greens.

    And we certainly will not give him millions of dollars of Other People’s Money and a board position on a foundation with the next president of the United States or provide him and his sociopathic wife with cushy professorships and access to Other People’s Children.

    damned Vampires.

  13. A.G. I'm not sure if you are serious or not, but if you are, then you are making the left's point for them. Obama is bad, so it's OK to be mad and kill people. Please tell me that's not what you are saying.

  14. Jason wrote:

    A.G. I'm not sure if you are serious or not, but if you are, then you are making the left's point for them. Obama is bad, so it's OK to be mad and kill people.

    Jason, even if that IS what A.G. is saying, the left does not have a point. "Obama is bad, so it's OK to kill people" is a non sequitur, and thus a fallacy and a vicious falsehood.

    But even if tens of thousands of those on the right were guilty of this fallacy, that fact would not justify what Obama is doing and it would not in any shape, form or fashion refute the many good arguments being offered against Obama's agenda by those on the right.

    The left has no actual, valid arguements to support Obama's fascist power-grab. And we shouldn't let them hide their intellectual vacuum by diverting us into debates about the motives of any particular person or group of persons on the right.

  15. As a Kentuckian and a conservative, I'm rolling my eyes at a lot of the coverage. Thanks for keeping everyone straight.

  16. Michael,
    Obviously there are many valid arguments against Obama and the current Government. However, Mr. Sparkman's death is not the appropriate forum for stating them. Doing so, in my humble opinion, smacks of justifying any alleged political motivation behind it. I find this highly distasteful and politically dangerous.

  17. Jason,

    My position is that it is never wrong to state the truth, no matter what the topic.

    No honest, rational reader of my comments here could possibly construe them to be an argument justifying Sparkman's killing. And if you refrain from stating the truth because those who are dishonest and irrational will distort what you've said, look who you are allowing to set the terms of the debate.