After a full week of watching the left go from trying to blame the tea party for the Boston bombing, to cautioning people not to speculate about motives once the suspects were identified, to actually making excuses for them, The Five’s Greg Gutfeld has had enough.
“What do hacks do when they’re wrong about terror?” Gutfeld asked. “They cling to relativism. Yes, Muslim extremism is no different than any other kind of extremism – but in order to make that stick, you’ve got to really suck at math.”
I think he’s hit on something! Liberals are notoriously bad at math!
SEE ALSO:
The Conversation: News Alert: Boston Marathon Bombing Suspects Motivated by Religion not Ben Affleck Movies:
Via the AP:
Two U.S. officials say preliminary evidence from an interrogation suggests the suspects in the Boston Marathon attack were motivated by religion but were apparently not tied to any Islamic terrorist groups.
Someone alert MSNBC host, Melissa Harris Perry, because over the weekend, she bloviated that Tsarnaev’s faith is about as relevant to the investigation as Ben Affleck movies.
Her panel guests agreed and added that Americans have to “otherize” violent actors in order to absolve themselves from responsibility for or connection to their violence.
Actually, no. I feel no responsibility for, or connection to, what they did in Boston. Only seething anger, sadness, and revulsion – aka normal reactions.
“We don’t really know,” said Harris-Perry, throwing her hands up about the discussion into the Tsarnaev’s motives. “The younger brother, he’s getting all kinds of tweets from his friends. I think part of the answer is that it’s still an open question.”
Wrong again. By the time they had this discussion it was no longer an “open question.” It was pretty darn obvious that they were motivated by radical Islam. You had to be willfully blind not to have picked up on that, by then.
Keep reading at the link.
Nice Deb 
There are two important reformulations in the above, and one reuse of a term we should retire. The important reformulations are: “Muslim extremism” and “Islamic terrorist.” Islam is inherently terroristic, in that its core doctrines mandate the use of violence and subterfuge against non-Muslims.
The term we should obsolete is “radical Islam.” Islam is inherently radical, for “radical” really means “from the root,” and the root of Islam is a belief in Muslims’ superiority and right to world dominion, which energizes everything else about it.
Some highly intelligent, utterly well-intentioned people disagree with me. They’re wrong.
LikeLike
Just so Harris-Perry will feel some measure of comfort in all her justification contortions, I do believe the younger brother did do one good thing in all this.
He ran over his brother in his escape from the firefight after knocking over the 7-11! That can’t be all bad now, can it?
And speaking of justification contortions, I’d sure like to know about all the terrorist bombings attempted and/or accomplished by Christians in the last fifty years that they (the lib relativists) keep referring to implicitly. Other than a couple/few murder factory (abortion clinic) shootings and bombings by whackos self-associating with the Christian bible, I’m not real familiar with a whole lot of Christian terrorist activities. They must be like the language they use, the activities must be in code ’cause they’re only obvious to libs, I guess.
It’s time moral people started standing up to these relativist liars and call them on their bull scat.
LikeLike
Timothy McVeigh!!!11!!!
(Oh, wait – he was an atheist. Nevermind.)
LikeLike
Not only was he an avowed atheist, his ideology falls much more in line with those policies being pushed by the current administration than it does with any right-wing Christian group. He was a statist fer cryin’ out loud!!!
LikeLike
But he was a typical white guy and former military – so – you know – — {{{tea party}}}
LikeLike