Associated Press
In the wake of tragic gun violence, most politicians realize the decent, responsible thing to do is send sympathies to those affected while leaving politics out of it. Others aren't as sensible.
After the Columbine massacre, for example, then-Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Texas) blamed science textbooks for the murders: "Our school systems teach the children that they are nothing but glorified apes who are evolutionized [sic] out of some primordial soup."
In 2007, after the Virginia Tech massacre, Newt Gingrich blamed liberals for supporting "situation ethics," adding, "Yes, I think the fact is, if you look at the amount of violence we have in games that young people play at 7, 8, 10, 12, 15 years of age, if you look at the dehumanization, if you look at the fact that we refuse to say that we are, in fact, endowed by our creator, that our rights come from God, that if you kill somebody, you're committing an act of evil." Gingrich, explaining the VT tragedy, went on to condemn Halloween costumes and the McCain-Feingold campaign-finance law.
And this morning, after the slayings in Aurora, Louie Gohmert weighed in with some stupidity of his own.
Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) said Friday that the shootings that took place in an Aurora, Colo. movie theater hours earlier were a result of "ongoing attacks on Judeo-Christian beliefs" and questioned why nobody else in the theater had a gun to take down the shooter.
During a radio interview on The Heritage Foundation's "Istook Live!" show, Gohmert was asked why he believes such senseless acts of violence take place. Gohmert responded by talking about the weakening of Christian values in the country.
"Some of us happen to believe that when our founders talked about guarding our virtue and freedom, that that was important," he said. "Whether it's John Adams saying our Constitution was made only for moral and religious people ... Ben Franklin, only a virtuous people are capable of freedom, as nations become corrupt and vicious they have more need of masters. We have been at war with the very pillars, the very foundation of this country."
"You know what really gets me, as a Christian, is to see the ongoing attacks on Judeo-Christian beliefs, and then some senseless crazy act of a derelict takes place."
I see. So, in the mind of this strange Republican congressman, a madman killed 12 people because of ... the separation of church and State? The First Amendment is to blame for a shooting spree in a movie theater?
If decency had any place in American politics, this would be an immediate career-ender for the ridiculous congressman from Texas. Some political missteps are simply unforgivable.
Update: Gohmert also wondered aloud why no one else in the theater was armed, complaining that the victims should have shot back.
Leave a Comment:
What a senseless, horrible tragedy. In response to ole Louis's dumb comment - I'm not proud of this fact, but you really don't want to pull a gun here in Texas. Unless you want to get shot.
This Mr. Gohmert is the REAL reason this is happening in the U.S.: http://speedchange.blogspot.com/2011/11/what-have-we-been-teaching.html
A vote for Romney will be a vote for more of this nonsense. When will he speak out against this bigotry? The ultra right wing zealots of the GOP make us off any opportunity to try to change our democracy into a theocracy. A theocracy is a dictatorship by one religion over all others. Beware of the Gohmerts, Bachmann's and Becks as they are out to take your rights away if you do not believe in their God. Jesus would not approve.
This, Mr. Gohmert, is the REAL reason this is happening in America: http://speedchange.blogspot.com/2011/11/what-have-we-been-teaching.html
Fantastically one sided fiction. Clever use of misspellings and questionably vague grammar though.
Couldn't agree more.
I'm from S. Texas, and it always gave me the creeps having to go anywhere north of an imaginary line between Austin and Houston. My last trip to east Texas, years ago, it was nothing but these drooling Gohmert types. They are proud of their ignorance.
I was saddened beyond belief when I woke to hear of this tragic attack. I am angered that this jerk would use politics to blame religion. The God I know is forgiving. The God I know doesn't teach us to judge others but to be compassionate and caring; love thy neighbor, I don't remember hearing him say love thy Christian neighbor. We live in a scary world where someone so twisted so broken that he lashed out at total strangers and changed all of our lives a little and the families and friends of those innocent victims forever. Pray for them, whomever or whatever you pray to. And pray too for those who think that their God gave them the right to judge for he or she shall be judged in eternity. I am a Christian just so you know.
So Gohmert, besides joining the noise of those looking for others to blame, since the person who committed these acts died in their commission, also is concerned with the fact that the perpetrator was the only one in the room with a weapon? Is this an alternate universe he lives in? I would assume the man who did this crime had to have serious mental problems, certainly; that would be an assumption about anyone committing an antisocial act such as this. But the fact that Mr. Gohmert, an elected representative--not mine, thankfully--is questioning why a group of individuals, all wishing to spend time being entertained at a movie, would not be carrying weapons and ammunition, is beyond my comprehension and any reasonable understanding of any reasonable person I ever knew. What is worse, I assume he would expect said ammunition to have been loaded into those weapons and ready to fire! My wish to believe he is simply reacting to the terrible event wants me to give him the benefit of the doubt and let me think he didn't mean what he said, and will be announcing forthwith his apology to those he shocked with his statement.
DemoKat
The person who did this terrible atrocity didn't die. He was covered in body armor. I am suspecting since this was posted Friday you hadn't seen his court appearance on Monday.
At least this fool is in great company-The axis of evil-ness and blame-others-ness.
The BEST way to fight these right wing nutjobs is to VOTE. It's no longer a RIGHT. If we are going to save our country for our children, it's your OBLIGATION. NOVEMBER. VOTE. Make sure EVERY DEMOCRAT YOU KNOW VOTES TOO! We need 100% Participation. Vote a straight Democratic ticket. We don't have "Til next time" ANY MORE!
How is voting the best way to "fight these right wing nutjobs?"
It figures the liberals find the republican who has expressed his reasoning for such a horrible event. I have a nephew who fought for this wonderful country, who lost 16 of his company in a matter of one minute; if he was in the movie theater that gunman would have been taken down and there would have been less killed by that deranged lunatic. And if your son, daughter, sister, brother, mother, father and friend were spared because of him and his gun, you would be thinking that a license to carry a gun responsibly is maybe not so bad. You liberals seriously make me sick to my stomach, your entitlements and the mere destruction of what this country stands for. They say a country is just a generation away from loss, how true that statement is. Sad. And Velkyn, you are a mess. Read your statement - you are a rambling fool. And please, upper case "G" on God please.
So anybody who differs from your opinion is unAmerican and wants to destroy the country. This is just a crock of BS. What this country stands for, supposedly, is freedom and democracy for ALL of its citizens, not just religio-babbling chubby little white boys in glasses from Texas.
I seriously doubt that your Steven Segal fantasy that someone with a gun could have put a stop to the tragedy in Colorado has any basis in reality, given that the gunman was dressed in head-to-toe body armor and had an AR-15, as well as a shotgun, and two Glocks. Ever see the video of the shootout between the bank robbers and the cops in California? Even if your fantasy hero could get a clear shot in the middle of a darked theater, full of gas and running, screaming people, where would your hero have shot the gunman--his pinkie finger?
The right-wing white macho fantasy machine is getting pretty boring. The country belongs to all of us, and you guys are not the most fabulous or wise or deserving people on earth. It's time you all started living in the real world rather than a Hollywood sound stage.
The theater was dark and filled with tear gas. No one without gear had a chance against this guy without possibly killing and injuring even more people.
Goober Gohmert is a shameless hack and the poster child against inbreeding !!
Just remember - the shooter was a Christian. But he still shot. And if other patrons in the theater were also armed, just imagine the wild cross fire occurring in the theater, killing how many more people?
I grew up thinking that - in order to hold public office - especially in Congress - you have to be very very smart, accomplished and have an excellent education.
Now I realize that not only is none of that true - hell, you don't even have to be SANE.
You know, if anyone had shot back, they would have been charged for shooting the gun man. It's a catch 22 situation.
And I like how this guy says Hollywood's attacking Judeo-Christian beliefs (that is what he's implying), and how Rush Limbaugh says the movie Dark Knight Rises, is an attack on Bain Capital because of the character Bane.
These right-wingers will connect any dots they want to make their position seem stronger than it is. I really wish it were legal to beat these people senseless. I can't take much more of their garbage.
That is exactly right. The fervor to carry a gun for protection comes with consequences if you fire it. One must weigh that before getting one. Are you willing to kill someone you think is about to harm you or someone else and go to jail, or worse, kill a bystander.
Great article. For a nice look at the current gun control fight in the wake of this, here's another article:
http://politicizenow.wordpress.com/2012/07/21/gun-control-a-fight-worth-resurrecting/
Sigh ~ audible !
Look, I try to keep a positive viewpoint, y'all are making it diffiicult ~ I pray the US as a whole has enough good sense to vote for a Democrat !
Unlike a lot of liberals, I support gun rights. But they should come with responsibilities - a gun battle in a dark, small movie theater is a stupid idea, and anyone trained in the use of firearms would recognize that immediately. If everyone who wants to own a gun has to be trained on how to use it, when to use it (and more importantly, when not to) and has to keep up on that knowledge, I see no reason not to allow it.
We have many problems with our government over here in England ,but if a guy in a high profile position like this guy said that over here..... WOW!! the media,even his own parties networks would have him castrated!All those poor people shot dead and he's talking this bull@!$%#? And let's face it...... Just to get popular.
As is in the laws of nature, with guns now in every single corner of every city in the nation, sooner or later it seems as if we will all experience such a tragic event first hand. And then all of you eager to express opinions over this Colorado tragedy might sing a different tune.
To further tear into this, which I should not because it is hardly worth the time and energy, Gohmert, the Representative from Texas misspoke. Adam's own words were far more stringent, far more complex than this quote would suggest. Adams' words were also, in my opinion, true.
Gohmert's use: "Whether it's John Adams saying our Constitution was made only for moral and religious people" would suggest that the Constitution only applies, at least as he, Gohmert, is quoted here (I haven't and will not seek out the original interview) anyway, he, Gohmert, suggests in this quote that the Constitution only applies to religious people and to moral people. So, according to Gohmert's quote if you are not either a religious person, someone who holds to at least one religious belief, or a moral person, someone who defines themselves as holding to certain morals or values, the Constitution does not apply to you. Surely I don't need to follow this thought out any farther. In short Gohmert, again, in this quote only, basically says the Constitution covers everyone.
Adams on the other hand, in the original quote from a letter written to Officers of the Massachusetts Militia in 1798, said: "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people." Note the article "a" before "moral and religious". Adams' statement had little or nothing to do with "guarding our virtue and freedom" as Gohmert, in this quote, suggests. Simply, Adams was making a point that our constitution REQUIRES a participatory, a people, that is, in the aggregate, religious and moral to function. Adams says:
"But should the people of America once become capable of that deep simulation towards one another, and towards foreign nations, which assumes the language of justice and moderation while it is practising iniquity and extravagance, and displays in the most captivating manner the charming pictures of candor, frankness, and sincerity, while it is rioting in rapine and insolence, this country will be the most miserable habitation in the world; because we have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion."
Gohmert should pay particular attention to the bit about "displays in the most captivating manner the charming pictures of candor, frankness, and sincerity, while it is rioting in rapine and insolence".
Sadly, Adams also says:
"Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."
Another passage Gohmert should have read and understood before he went into this interview. It is a passage that nauseates me to read. I also believe that it is true.
It is also interesting that Gohmert should quote Adams in any kind of defense of "Judeo-Christian beliefs" since the man, Adams, was notably and publicly questioning of Christian religious beliefs. Not an atheist by any stretch but not at all a true believer either.
In short, Gohmert, in this interview, managed to wave his ignorance around like a giant flag. It would be immensely satisfying to just sit back and laugh at the child. It would also be completely appropriate to shed a tear for our own democracy. Neither, in the end, accomplishes anything measurable. It's my belief that the best tack is to take the long game here. Education. Education is not sexy, it is not satisfying on any visceral level, there is no immediate reward, you cant swing education of fire education, few will fear you for the education you are giving, fewer still will truly care or notice you for it. But, if Gohmert truly had the education he believes he does he would not have made this embarrassing mistake. If his constituency had the education they, as good, well informed, citizens of a Democracy need in order to participate in their own governance, they would not have made the embarrassing mistake of electing this human joke.
Another, equally important point to make here, while I do believe in Adams' idea here it should be pointed out that at the time of this writing Adams held office. He was a politician thinking about re-election and these letters were public record.
I'll never forget Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell, in the days after the 9/11 attacks, blame the attacks on their fellow Americans who sought equal rights and fair treatment in society. This jerk Gohmert comes from their cult. Of course he's going to capitalize on tragedy to forth his political cause. These power-hungry cult-heads will stoop to anything to impose a theocracy on the rest of us that would be run by their ignorant and greedy "pastors."
I haven't read all of the comments, but here is my take. Religion has nothing to do with a crazy person shooting a bunch of people. We need to stop having Gun Shows where you can buy guns with no ID. We also need to put up metal detectors every where like the school have, and who left the exit door opened in this movie theater. I seems to remember that these doors can be open only from the inside.
Umm...any more information on this shooter's name showing up on a Colorado? Tea Party membership list and if it's someone else can we see that person?
I also find it weird that every bit of possible "social network" trail for him is missing or scrubbed. That is either deliberate on his part or something isn't right because it's nearly impossible in this day and age -especially for his age bracket.
I agree the comments listed are inappropriate. However, there were parties on both sides of the political aisle that made this error. I thought Rachel was not so biased as to only point out conservatives. I'm disappointed in the one sided presentation that is also nothing more than furthering an agenda. Poor taste.