© We Are Better Than This"When public figures demonize whole swaths of people for their own political gain, they are complicit in the escalation from words to deeds that follow," said Heather McGhee, president of Demos.
It is incumbent on every public figure, elected politician, and media outlet to stand up against the "dangerous tide of hatred, violence, and suspicion" taking hold in the United States, over 700 prominent organizations and people declared in a
full-page ad in Thursday's
New York Times.
"We grieve the many lives that have been lost or painfully transformed in recent weeks through extreme acts of violence. And we are appalled by the surge of divisive rhetoric that sows the seeds of more violence to come," reads the ad, which was organized by the National Domestic Workers Alliance, United We Dream, Center for Community Change, Demos, NARAL Pro-Choice America, Arab-American Association of New York, MPower Change, SEIU, Color of Change, and MoveOn.org.
Signatories warn that, in particular, violence is aimed at "Arab and Muslim Americans, women and the places we seek health care, Black people, immigrants and refugees, or people just going about their daily lives."
Comment: From the White House we hear that: But what if this is all bullshit? If it is common knowledge that Obama's incessant calls for more control legislation only drive up the purchasing of guns then why keep harping on about more gun control? Could it be that the people who pull the strings behind the White House are that clueless? If this induced demand is intentional, then this begs the question: Why might the puppet masters be manipulating the masses into buying guns (not that having one used judiciously and for protection is necessarily a bad idea)?
Is it possible that the snakes in power anticipate a situation in the US where they actually want a well armed public battling the Police State apparatus and Federal forces? And if so, why? Or, a more simple explantation, the puppet masters still anticipate major social unrest and are trying to do all they can to maintain their positions via their own firepower and therefore really just want less guns available for when that happens - but are going about it in a counterproductive way?