Leave Gabrielle Giffords Alone!
By Ken Falkenstein | Saturday, June 18th, 2011 | Politics
Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ) 5-17-11 (AP Photo/southwestphotobank.com, P.K. Weis, File)
The efforts by leftists to exploit Gabrielle Giffords are disgraceful. Some wish to run her for the Senate. Others wish for her immediate return to Congress so that she can champion a gun control agenda. And the news media have been covering her every move since she was discharged home from the hospital.
None of these exploitative efforts reflect any consideration for Gabrielle Giffords herself. This woman was shot in the head and has suffered severe brain damage from which it will take years, if ever, for her to recover.
To the leftists and their news media who seek to exploit this woman for their own selfish ends, I ask one simple question: Have you no decency?
I have written that leftists will do whatever it takes, regardless of honor and decency, to advance their agenda of forcing as many people into their control as possible. Their efforts to exploit a brain-damaged victim of a terrible violent crime is the latest example of this truism.
Gabrielle Giffords is not some abstract news story or political opportunity. She is a flesh-and-blood human being who has suffered a severe and likely permanent brain injury from a horrendously violent crime. Clearly it is not in her interest to run for higher office, spearhead a political agenda, or be hounded by the news media. What this woman needs is to be left alone to convalesce.
The leftists and their news media already milked this human tragedy to smear Sarah Palin and other conservatives by blaming them, with no factual basis whatsoever, for the shooting of Ms. Giffords. Can’t we agree that it is now time for the leftists and their news media to put aside their Machiavellian ambitions and treat the woman herself with some basic human compassion?
Tags:
Contribute for Conservatism!
Share this post
About the author
Ken Falkenstein has been a staffer in the United States Senate and the Virginia House of Delegates. He has managed political campaigns. He was a military intelligence analyst in the U.S. Army in West Germany during the Cold War. He is currently a civil litigation attorney with Poole Mahoney, P.C. in Virginia Beach. But his concern for his kids' future is what most informs his writing.
We're 75% there! Thank you to everyone who has so far contributed! Just $2000 to go!
Comments
17 Responses to "Leave Gabrielle Giffords Alone!"
While I agree with the “leave Cong. Giffords alone” portion of this post, I wish to go further & query why she has not resigned her seat in Congress.
As tragic as her circumstances are at present, wouldn’t her district be better served by a Congressperson who could be in DC to participate?
@ Ken: “The efforts by leftists to exploit Gabrielle Giffords are disgraceful. Some wish to run her for the Senate. Others wish for her immediate return to Congress so that she can champion a gun control agenda.” Say whaaaat??!
#1 ~ “Helmke said the Bradys were rooting for Giffords, knowing she will be an advocate for their cause, strengthening gun control laws.” ~ ABC news article you linked.
- Jim and Sarah Brady are Republicans, not leftists.
- Paul Helmke (President of Brady Campaign) is also Republican.
#2 ~ You’ll have to point out the ‘disgraceful’ section of the Politico article. What I’m reading is an homage to Gabby, from both the left AND the right.
@Kelly: that would have to come from her constituents and there isn’t that much time left on her term to warrant cost of special election would be my guess.
Jay- I don’t know whether the Bradys have identified themselves as Republicans since they began their anti-gun rights crusade 30 years ago. But frankly, I don’t care about their party affiliation; I care about their actions. They have made it their lives’ mission to curtail Americans’ gun rights, and that is a leftist mission. Their organizations’ desire to get Ms. Giffords back to work to advance their anti-gun agenda is typical of leftist Machiavellianism.
I agree that this particular ABC News article was not reflective of most of the rest of the news coverage of Ms. Giffords. I was prompted to write this column when I heard a news report yesterday that Ms. Giffords’ plane’s wheels had just touched down in Tucson, reflecting that the news media were giving minute-by-minute coverage of her voyage to join her husband after her discharge from the hospital. That kind of coverage of this woman serves the purposes of the news media but reflects an abject lack of basic human compassion for this woman. My point is that the left and their news media, for once in their lives, should make an effort to see the human side of a situation instead of their own selfish agendas. This woman was shot in the head. Basic human decency would guide any reasonable person to leave her alone and let her begin her long and difficult journey to recover. Such human compassion does not come naturally to leftists, but that doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t call them out and shame them into doing the right thing.
Mr. Falkenstein:
If it is true that concern for your kids’ future is what most informs your writing, I would suggest that you need to learn how to think before you write.
You have written a rabidly vitriolic screed in which you demonstrate an ignorance of history. You have imputed to persons you do not know the basest and most vile of motives. You have provided an absentee, neurological diagnosis though it is unclear where you did your medical training. And, finally and most jaw-droppingly, you have decided for Congresswoman Giffords what is “clearly” in her interest.
You may not remember that President Ronald Reagan also survived an assassination attempt. In the aftermath and during his convalescence, significant numbers of his loyal Republican supporters engaged in speculation quite similar to that you find so exploitative with respect to Rep. Giffords. Some of such was probably purely based on fidelity and hope for Reagan’s complete recovery. Some was likely well-intended though shaded by an agenda thought helpful to the President. Some was in poor taste. All were almost inevitable because Reagan was, as Giffords is, a public figure, an elected official. To condemn those who engaged in such speculation in 1981 or have done so recently as “selfish”, “disgraceful” schemers with some nefarious agenda not only misunderstands human nature but also suggests a troubling, absolutist willingness to see evil.
Some things, however, do not trouble me. I am glad that there were people who speculated publicly that George Wallace could be elected Governor of Alabama after an assassination attempt put him in a wheelchair. I am glad that there were people who speculated that Ronald Reagan’s literal grace under fire would serve him well politically. And if there are people who want to suggest that Gabrielle Giffords run for the United States Senate or “champion a gun control agenda” or become Queen of Rumania, I am delighted. My sentiments are not based on adherence to Wallace’s, Reagan’s or Gifford’s political agendas but on the fact that each was, or is, a politician to the core; and campaigns and causes enervate and rejuvenate politicians.
Your statement that Congresswoman Giffords “has suffered a severe and likely permanent brain injury” prompts a simple question: Have you no decency? You are not a neurologist. Neither you, I, or likely even her neurologists can predict the course her recovery will take.
As for your proclamation that “clearly it is not in her interest to run for higher office”, the arrogance of the presumption goes beyond disgraceful. It almost makes me think that you would write whatever it takes, regardless of honor and decency, to advance your agenda of forcing as many people into your control as possible.
_______________________
Kelley: Years ago, you wrote something on another blog that must have prompted in Barnie Day the same reaction I had to your post here. So, I’m just going to steal his earlier response.
Uh….nevermind.
@Ken – Our sensitivity meters must be set at different levels. The congresswoman’s return home after multiple months in an out-of-state recovery facility is news … and good news at that. And I’m fairly sure the family intended to allow media coverage; otherwise they would have moved her and announced it after the fact. This is good news, and good news is meant to be shared.
“I have written that leftists will do whatever it takes, regardless of honor and decency, to advance their agenda of forcing as many people into their control as possible. Their efforts to exploit a brain-damaged victim of a terrible violent crime is the latest example of this truism. … Such human compassion does not come naturally to leftists…”
Not seeing it in this example. I do see a ton of respect, admiration, hope, and compassion in the articles you linked to and the comments contained within.
Jim- Your analogy to Reagan is inapposite. Reagan suffered a punctured lung and was able to recover quickly with no medical restrictions on his ability to get back to work. Giffords, by contrast, was shot in the head and suffered brain damage from which, by all reports, she is far from recovering and may never fully recover. By all reports, she is far from able to return to work. In fact, from published reports, she can only speak in short bursts and still requires 24-hour in-home care.
Furthermore, Reagan was the President of the United States – an entire branch of government encapsulated in one man. Giffords is 1/435th of 1/2 of a branch of government. The nation can continue with its business during her absence in a way that is not the case when a president is incapacitated.
The fact that leftists, apparently like yourself, cannot see the human side of this situation and have enough compassion for this woman to leave her alone to convalesce without exploiting her for their own selfish political purposes is a perfect illustration of the Machiavellian nature of leftism and of leftists.
I find it ironic that the left does champion Gabbie Gifford while one of Reagan’s aides was murdered and left in a landfill…in disgrace.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1343881/Presidents-aide-John-Wheeler-dead-Delaware-landfill-Police-admit-leads.html
Meanwhile, it was mentioned on the news…and left for the wolves. His murderer still at large and I cannot remember when this story has hit the air waves.
http://www.examiner.com/criminal-profiles-in-national/john-p-wheeler-iii-jack-wheeler-to-be-inurned-killer-still-free
I guess John Wheeler did not fit into the left’s agenda, funny how that works. But it was great that Gabbie Giffords benefitted from that horrible healthcare system. A lady got shot in the head and lived…and the left wishes to dismantle it.
….nice!
Ahh FCS! – can you get any more partisan?! Ken – if you transposed any other group (for ‘leftists’) in your comments, you’d be accused (justly) of hate speech. You’re grossly over-reaching here. Not only was President Reagan’s recovery reported in detail, so was press secretary Jim Brady’s ~ who was NOT an elected official and certainly NOT critical to government functioning. Why? Because the nation (not just the right) cared about the man and his family. The same is true for Gabby Giffords.
The “human side of this situation” is that a woman, apparently much beloved by her constituency, reached a milestone this week – she’s coming home after 5 months of intensive therapy. Anyone that has experienced similar (stroke or brain injury) understands the significance of both homecoming AND the patient’s ABILITY to return to work. The extent of Giffords final recovery is unknown; the brain has a magnificent ability to heal and re-route circuitry. I can attest that rest, time, spunk, optimism, persistence, determination, humor, and damn hard work can and do produce results that baffle ‘experts’. By all accounts, Congressman Giffords has exactly what it takes to potentially beat the odds and frankly, I’d be pissed at anyone that wrote my wife off as quickly as you (and Kelly) appear to do so with Giffords. Not very compassionate of you guys.
Jay- You are using the typical leftist tactic of responding to straw men rather than my actual expressed views. I never said that there should be no news coverage of Giffords. What prompted me to write this column – as I stated above – was that the news media were stalking her – reporting when her plane’s “wheels touched down” in Tucson, etc. Professor Larry Sabato wrote an entire book on this kind of “feeding frenzy” mentality in the establishment news media. I thought that the news media’s engagement in such a feeding frenzy over Giffords was excessive and insensitive. What bothered me more, though, was the various leftists who have sought to exploit her politically by hoping to immediately run her for higher office or get her back to work in the House specifically to promote their anti-gun rights agenda.
I also note that you are engaging in the typical leftist tactic of twisting my words. I never wrote that Giffords would never be able to return to work. In fact, I have not called on her to resign, as some have done. I believe the decision as to when/if she should return to work in elective politics or any other capacity is hers and hers alone. My point is that all reports indicate that she has suffered a severe injury from which she is not anywhere close to recovering, and for various leftists to ignore her condition and try to use her to advance their agendas is indecent.
Finally, I would note that a typical tactic of leftists is to characterize their critics as engaging in “hate speech.” This is similar to referring to taxes as “revenues,” spending as “investing,” and leftism as “progressive.” The Russian Communists referred to themselves as “Bolsheviks,” meaning “majority,” and their opponents as “Mensheviks,” meaning “minority,” even though the reverse was true. I enjoy exposing leftists who attempt to use this kind of propagandist twisting of the language, and I appreciate your giving me this opportunity to do so.
“The Russian Communists referred to themselves as “Bolsheviks,” meaning “majority,” and their opponents as “Mensheviks,” meaning “minority,” even though the reverse was true.”
A tactic copied by that noted Leninist Jerry Falwell.
Seriously, everybody who disagrees with you is not a “leftist.” The term “leftist” doesn’t even have any meaning unless we measure it against some quantifiable scale of ideology. Having read a number of your posts and comments, I’m pretty sure you’re nowhere close the hypothetical “middle” of that spectrun. Thus, the perception you have from out there on your wing may be a little skewed.
Personally, I believe that everything posted on this site is to meant to advance some political agenda.
Ken claims to be outraged at the left’s inability to “treat the woman herself with some basic human compassion”; while simultaneously using this story as a means to vilify the left. Some may call this hypocrisy.
They say actions speak louder than words. If that’s the case, why write this article in the first place?
@Steve- I don’t characterize everyone with whom I disagree as leftist. In fact, I often disagree with conservatives, since my personal ideology has a strong libertarian bent. I refer to leftists as leftists.
Leftists in our current politics include President Obama and most (but not all) of his political appointees, the leadership (but not all of the members) of the congressional Democrats, the leadership (but certainly not all of the members) of organized labor, the editors of most national newspapers and other news media outlets, and many (but certainly not all) college professors and administrators.
Leftists are those whose agenda is to force people into a collective so as to have control over their lives. They are radicals whose pursuit of power is their religion and is a higher priority than any other aspect of their lives. They are people who will say or do anything to accomplish their objectives, regardless of honesty, honor, or decency.
I have said before and will repeat her that not all Democrats and liberals are leftists. For example, most elected Virginia Democrats, while often more opportunistic than principled, are not leftists as described above. But the current national Democrat leadership is leftist and is determined to do whatever it takes, regardless of honor, legality, and decency, to impose their will on as many of us as they can. And those are the people who I am calling out in my articles – in this case, the ones who see a charismatic politician get shot in the head and can think only of how to use it to advance their agenda.
@Ben – The difference between criticizing a movement and its members and exploiting a severely wounded innocent is so obvious that I won’t insult your intelligence by spelling it out. Suffice it to say that “vilify” is another of those words and phrases routinely used by leftists to – well, vilify – their critics, kind of like referring to our criticism as “hate speech.” Thanks for giving me another opportunity to illustrate my point. And, by the way, note that I have not attacked leftists in any personal way. I have merely pointed out their conduct and characterized that conduct.
” But the current national Democrat leadership is leftist and is determined to do whatever it takes, regardless of honor, legality, and decency, to impose their will on as many of us as they can.”
Um, no. They are people who favor policies that you disagree with in what they think is the best interest of the country.
You are certainly within you rights to question the policy choices they make. I question some of them myself. Just as I question some made by the last adminsitration and some currently coming from the Republican leadership in the House.
But, when you get into questioning people’s motives ..such as “force people into a collective so as to have control over their lives” …you lapse into what’s best been described as “the paranoid style in American politics.”
Any implication that either party wants to turn the country in some sinister totalitarian direction is just partisan bullshit. Which is especially ludicrous in the United States where, by world standards, the right and the left aren’t really that far apart.
BTW, this would be equally true of someone on the other side who claimed that Republicans were primarilly motivated by “racism and the desire to see all the money in the world collected into fewer and bigger piles to allow the wealthy elite to take control of the U.S. and ultimately the world.”
When you’ve slipped over the line from feeling that your political opponents are merely wrong to accusing them of being actively evil, that’s just demagoguery.
I can understand the temptation. Looking at the Ryan plan, if one didn’t understand that Republican actually believe cutting taxes increases revenue, you could be tempted to think they are TRYING to kill any recovery and create a double-dip recession so they can win the White House in 2012.
But, choosing not to infer malice where stupidity will suffice, I don’t think that’s the case.
Question: How can you tell when a civil litigation attorney with a top-rated law firm in Virginia Beach is lying?
Answer: His lips move.
Ken – give it up. This is a manufactured story you simply pulled out of your ass to beat up on ‘leftists’. No stalking involved. In fact, the objectionable “wheels down” came from Giffords’ own Twitter account.
Returning to the town where she was attacked by a gunman, Giffords was emotional as she encountered supporters and public signs of well-wishing posted on billboards.
Giffords’ Twitter account posted a quick note announcing her return; “Wheels down Tucson. Gabrielle & Mark looking forward to a beautiful weekend.”
“We’ve been dreaming of this trip for some time,” Giffords’ husband, NASA astronaut Mark Kelly said. “Gabby misses Tucson very much and her doctors have said that returning to her hometown could play an important role in her recovery.”
“After everything she’s been through, this was a milestone. It was motivational for her to drive through the district and see some of the people she represents and see how things are,” Kelly added. Source:
http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/90052063?Rep.%20Giffords%20enjoys%20%26quot%3Bbeautiful%20weekend%26quot%3B%20return%20to%20Tucson
HHHMMMMMM. I usually keep up on things but I must admit I’ve been quite busy lately. To be quite frank, I have a hard time believing Gabby, (a Democrat), is being used by anyone on the left except at first, when the left tried to use her as a hate speech issue against the Republicans. It didn’t wash because the shooter is crazy! I think we all are so thankful she is alive and still with us. At some point, the ones who voted her in will have to decide if they need a special election. Since none of us are in her district, all we can do is pray for her recovery, her family and her district. God Bless you Gabby.
We on the right need to be careful of hate speech as well. For God’s sake, we are in a crisis I’ve never seen in my whole life! We better start working together in this worldwide financial crisis. Not just finances but wars! We better find some common ground instead of petty stuff.
@Steve- I have been very clear about what I mean by the term “leftist,” and no, I am not condemning people for their ideological views. I am condemning them for their actions. In this case, the exploitation of a severely wounded woman. For many other examples, see my article here. I would never condemn a person based on a good faith difference of opinion, and I challenge you to point to where I have ever done so.
@Jay- Thank you for pointing out that the “wheels down” reference originated with the Giffords themselves. I was not aware of that, and based on this information, I concede that my condemnation of the news media was unwarranted in this instance. I stand on my comments regarding those leftists who have sought to exploit Ms. Giffords for their political ends.
“I was not aware of that, and based on this information, I concede that my condemnation of the news media was unwarranted in this instance. I stand on my comments regarding those leftists who have sought to exploit Ms. Giffords for their political ends.”
…until someone does my job for me again and proves that I am wrong about that one as well that is….
Leave your response