Tag Archives: Christina-Taylor Green

How about a Memorial for the Victims of Enterovirus?

Eli Thomas WallerOriginally posted at American Thinker

It’s always nice to reminisce about Barack Obama’s many selective responses to tragedies over the years. When Arizona congresswoman Gabby Giffords and 18 other innocent Americans were shot in a Tucson, Arizona shopping mall parking lot, six of whom died, Barack Obama rushed to Giffords’s bedside.

At the Tucson Memorial, which took place four days after the shooting, the president shared with America how, when he walked into the room where Gabby lay with a bullet wound to her head, she miraculously opened her eyes. It was a Jesus-and-Lazarus moment for sure.

Nonetheless, with that kind of miracle-working track record, too bad Son of Africa Barack “My Brother’s Keeper” Obama didn’t do what he’s asked every American to do, which is to show ‘no greater love than to lay down his life’ for the now-deceased Thomas Eric Duncan.

If Duncan hadn’t died, Obama could have proven to America that Ebola is not a threat by paying the Liberian Ebola victim a visit at Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital in Dallas. Then, just like it did with Gabby Gifford, his mere presence probably could have saved Thomas Eric Duncan’s body from the ravages of viral hemorrhagic fever.

Seeing as how Obama paying a hospital visit to an Ebola patient is never going to happen, how about headlining another memorial for dead children like he’s done in the past?

So far, there has been no mention of commemorative gatherings for the latest round of Americans killed as a result of Barry’s political viciousness. Still, the next one could be in the style of the memorial that honored Christina Taylor Green, the nine-year-old killed in the Giffords shooting.

The difference would be that the newest group would include four-year-old Eli Waller of New Jersey; Emily Otrando, a 10-year-old girl from Rhode Island; and three adults, all of whom recently succumbed to a viral infection called Enterovirus 68, imported from Latin America compliments of Barack Obama.

Remember all the wonderful things Obama had to say about Christina during the Tucson Memorial speech? It was there that the president said that all of our children are “deserving of our love.” Unfortunately, even though love for children should include protection from harm, protection is what the president failed to provide Eli and Emily.

It was during the Tucson Memorial that President Obama said:

If this tragedy prompts reflection and debate, as it should, let’s make sure it’s worthy of those we have lost. Let’s make sure it’s not on the usual plane of politics and point scoring and pettiness that drifts away with the next news cycle.

Speaking of politics, both Eli and Emily died from a virus brought across our borders by unaccompanied minors whom Obama purposely encouraged, for political reasons, to migrate north.

Using Christina’s death as a springboard, in Tucson, Obama also talked about living up to our children’s expectations. Children like Emily, whose expectations were dashed and whose premature obituary described her as a “sweet, loving, beautiful child who found joy in life and nature.”

Christina Taylor Green loved civics and being on the student council. Emily loved dolphins and horses, swimming, and clamming, as well as writing and making art.

If by chance there is a memorial for children who are victims of Obama policies and the president attends, maybe he can stir the emotions of the crowd by talking about how, when Emily died of an Enterovirus 68 staph infection, she was in the process of growing her hair long like Luna Lovegood, her favorite Harry Potter character.

Fantasies aside, for lack of acknowledgment on his part, one can’t help but notice that the senseless deaths of children like Christina Taylor Green and Hadiya Pendleton, the 15-year-old shot to death in Chicago, certainly receive more sympathy from Barack Obama than children who die in the furtherance of his personal political agenda.

The president is willing to pass laws and sign executive orders to save children from gun violence, but in reality, a threat far greater than guns looms in the form of deadly pathogens. Still, the man who talked about caring for our children remains staunchly defiant in his refusal to protect those very children from people carrying not guns and ammunition, but deadly contagions and infectious disease.

Then there’s Eli Waller, the youngest of triplets, who died because of a virus the president who wiped away tears at Sandy Hook allowed to infiltrate the lives of the most vulnerable and helpless among us.

Andy Waller described his little boy: “He was a beautiful mix of eagerness and hesitancy, need and striving, caution and surprise, all of which were grounded in a pure, unconditional love.”

What goes through Barack Obama’s mind when he listens to Eli’s heartbroken father talk about the gentle, loving preschooler who, thanks to Enterovirus 68, went to bed with pinkeye and never woke up?

Christina Taylor Green died as the result of a madman with a Glock 19 named Jared Loughner. During the Tucson Memorial, Obama said, “If there are rain puddles in heaven, Christina is jumping in them today.” Three years later, because of a president with a “pen and a phone,” Emily and Eli are jumping in those heavenly puddles alongside Christina.

It was at the Interfaith Vigil in Newtown that the president reminded America that our “first task [is] caring for our children[.] … If we don’t get that right, we don’t get anything right.”

Yet Barack Obama is the one who has exposed America’s children to an unprecedented danger.

And as Americans who would never fall victim to a school shooting continue to die as a result of reckless immigration policies, those deaths are a tragic reflection of a presidency that has gotten nothing right.

Pick-pocketing the Dead

In Tucson, Arizona, Democrat Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords was gravely injured in a horrific shooting that seriously injured 12 and killed six, including a nine year-old child. “Shocked and saddened lawmakers” are now grappling with the idea that “new laws and regulations are needed to curb incendiary speech.”

Although despondent and disgusted over the bloodbath, Americans should not be fooled. Compassionate concern from the left has little to do with protection for politicians and everything to do with reining in freedom of speech.  If inflammatory words – not politics – were the real issue, “Allahu Akbar” would be relegated along with “targeted…crosshairs…kill the bill…the ‘N’ word and Hawaiian Punch” to the no-no column of the vocabulary list. The last time I checked, the terrorist battle cry “Allahu Akbar” was not on that list.

It’s safe to say that it’s not beneath liberal logic to tie together fire/arson/shouting/panic and Rush Limbaugh if the result accomplishes the curtailing of First Amendment rights. Democrats would love to apply to unrelated circumstances the 1919 US Supreme Court case of Schenck v. United States where Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote: “The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic.” Using legislative duct tape, the left can seal the mouths of anyone who disagrees with liberalism and promote it as prevention of political violence ignited by the use of combustible words.

In 2007, a tow truck driver was convicted of stealing from a victim “in a double-fatal car crash.”  As the crumpled casualties lay in the road, Ronald Forget of Pawtucket, Massachusetts “took the wallet of one of the victims and used credit cards from the wallet to pay his cell phone bill and to buy gasoline.”

The truck driver’s actions, cold as they seem, are eerily similar to the response of liberal politicians and left-wing media types to the carnage brought about by the psychotic madman in Tucson, Arizona.   The left smells blood from miles away and will pull up alongside any convenient casualty.  In this case, liberals all but politically picked the pockets of the deceased in hopes of furthering a freedom-stifling agenda.

Granted, caution should be used when accusing anyone of heartlessly exploiting tragedy.  However, following the horrendous shooting, and based on the left’s ghoulish behavior, the only conclusion that seems reasonable is that the crisis provided a prime opening for liberal government bureaucrats to look for another excuse to further restrict the Constitutional rights and freedoms of US citizens, and to do it on the backs of those who suffered and died.

Based on public disapproval of healthcare reform and reeling from stinging defeat, Democrats came across a pileup in Arizona that has provided a liberal Thought Police scenario with the potential to justify a “warning against a return to [what they call] the divisive rhetoric of last year’s healthcare debate.”

Misfortune provided post-election Democrats the perfect storm.  The situation culminated in an impeccably timed critical mass, where politics, guns, conservatism, the healthcare reform debate, and the Tea Party could be directly tied to a massacre.  Rather than focus on truth, the left chose to manipulate terror to quash telltale condemnation of an out-of-control left-wing ideologue President, an ousted Congress, and a Democrat-controlled Senate hell-bent on placing a yoke of socialism on the back of a resistant nation.

After the fact, in a pseudo-display of false solidarity, the shooting is now being described as a “rare moment of unity on Capitol Hill.”  That is pure political spin. What transpired was the Democrat ambuscade hit pay dirt.  The left patiently laid in wait for an excuse to blame unrelated violence on “inflammatory rhetoric,” Fox News, conservative talk radio, and popular politicians, and in the process are using a self-righteous demeanor to chide anyone who dares disparage liberal/Democrat policies or politicians.

Rhetoric-reaction to the shooting has been so bizarre that Maine Congresswoman Chellie Pingree proposed expunging the word “killing” from the name of the “Repeal the Job-Killing Healthcare Law Act.”

Phantom Democrats are parsing words and pointing fingers at the innocent, making ridiculous statements such as Pingree saying “I’m not suggesting that the name of that one piece of legislation somehow led to the horror of this weekend — but is it really necessary to put the word ‘killing’ in the title of a major piece of legislation?”

Hey Chellie, do we really need the word “punch” in punch line? How about bullet proof, gun shy, slaphappy, choke hold, and shoot off your mouth?  The words kilt and kiln sound too much like “kill,” which poses a potential problem in a heated political environment. How about cutting the rug, loaded for bear or pipe down?

So far, despite the highly charged atmosphere surrounding the shootings, the left has yet to acknowledge the multitudinous examples of provocative language used by Democrats. For example, for twenty years, Barack Obama was mentored by a racist, anti-Semite, anti-American deranged preacher whose revolting rhetoric far exceeded use of the word “target,” or the metaphoric placement of benign symbols on a map.

There is still not one scintilla of evidence that the Arizona shooter was motivated by political rhetoric.  Nevertheless, even before the police and ambulance arrive the left continues to cruise the Arizona crash site by censuring crosshairs, touting the merits of the Fairness Doctrine, and blaming Sarah Palin and Sharron Angle for influencing a person who was unbalanced long before either woman showed up on the national scene.

So as Gabrielle Giffords heals and six innocent murder victims, including nine year-old Christina-Taylor Green, are laid to rest, it appears the left will continue to pick-pocket the dead by taking advantage of heartbreak, feigning righteous indignation over nothing more than hyperbole, and looking for obscure excuses to muzzle political opposition in the name of moderating incendiary rhetoric.

%d bloggers like this: