In the aftermath of the Fort Hood killings, the left and the right are accusing each other of politicizing the tragedy. Liberals say conservatives use Fort Hood to bash President Obama and Muslims; conservatives say liberals are spinning Fort Hood as a cautionary tale about war and guns. Who's really exploiting Fort Hood? (Watch a round up of commentators talking about Islam's role in the Fort Hood attacks)
Conservatives are trying to smear Obama: Right-wingers are "exploiting the Fort Hood horror," says David Corn in Politics Daily. The American Family Association, a conservative Christian group, called for barring Muslims from military service. On Fox News, Sean Hannity accused the government of ignoring red flags about Nidal Hasan because of that conservative bugaboo, political correctness, and Rush Limbaugh simply blamed the massacre on Obama.
"How right-wing talkers crassly exploited Ft. Hood tragedy"
Liberals are the ones trying to score points: The liberal media is spinning the Fort Hood killings, says Rich Lowry in National Review, as a case of post-traumatic stress disorder—not terrorism—to support its "favorite narrative of soldiers as victims." Time, The Washington Post, The New York Times—they all suggested Nidal Hasan cracked because he counseled combat-traumatized soldiers. Forget it: the real source of his stress was mixed loyalties, with Islam trumping his uniform.
"The PTSD evasion"
The right's holding an orgy of Muslim bashing: Thirteen people are dead, says Mohammad Anwar in Examiner.com, and all some people care about is "spreading hate" by linking this tragedy to Islam. The truth is that the military has a long list of horrible incidents in which soldiers have lost it and killed their comrades. But since Nidal Hasan is a Muslim, the "hate mongers" couldn't wait to huff that any offense committed by a Muslim is jihad.
"Exploiting the Fort Hood Army base shooting incident"
The worst offenders? Gun-control fanatics: The most contrived argument, says Jacob Sullum in Reason, came from gun-control advocates, who said if a "heavily fortified army base" is vulnerable, arming more people doesn’t reduce gun violence. But soldiers can't carry weapons at U.S. bases—armed civilian police officers finally stopped the slaughter. See? "Having a gun is better than not having one when you are confronted by a homicidal maniac."
"The folly of unilateral disarmament"
SEE THE WEEK'S LATEST COVERAGE OF FORT HOOD:
• Obama's speech at Fort Hood
• Fort Hood: The Al Qaeda question
• Who is Anwar al-Awlaki: What's known about Hasan's Al-Qaeda's connection
• Fort Hood: What the world is saying
• Red flags at Fort Hood
• Sunday Talk Show Briefing: Religion's role in Fort Hood (Video)
• Fort Hood: Obama's "flippant" speech
THE WEEK'S AUDIOPHILE PODCASTS: LISTEN SMARTER
- How U.S. special forces are preparing for the worst-case scenario in North Korea
- Why you shouldn't eat dog. Not even once.
- Why Israel can no longer let the Palestinian Authority be responsible for security in the West Bank
- Why you should really take a nap this afternoon, according to science
- Here's the schedule very successful people follow every day
- What would a U.S.-Russia war look like?
- Grammar quiz: Do you know the passive voice?
- How social conservatives became a minority in need of protection
- 7 grammar rules you really should pay attention to
- I hate Ayn Rand — but here's why my fellow conservatives love her
Subscribe to the Week