By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Following the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk, Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro criticized former President Donald Trump for selectively condemning political violence. Shapiro emphasized the need for universal condemnation of all political violence, regardless of political affiliation, and highlighted the rise in such incidents across the nation. While Trump’s remarks on Kirk’s death did not mention attacks against Democrats, Shapiro ordered flags to be flown at half-staff in Pennsylvania in Kirk’s honor. Shapiro expressed concerns about the detrimental impact of unchecked political violence on the safety and progress of the United States, referencing the recent arson at his own residence and the assassination of a Democratic lawmaker in Minnesota.
Read the original article here
The core argument centers on the notion that condemning political violence should be a universal principle, yet former President Donald Trump selectively denounces instances of such violence. This “cherry-picking,” as described by Josh Shapiro, is a key point of contention. It highlights a perceived inconsistency in Trump’s rhetoric and actions, implying that his condemnations are often motivated by political expediency rather than a genuine commitment to opposing violence. The act of cherry-picking, in this context, involves choosing which violent acts to condemn based on whether they benefit his political narrative or support his base.
This selective condemnation is further underscored by specific examples. Trump’s response to the attack on Nancy Pelosi’s husband is cited as an illustration of his casual disregard for political violence. The article highlights the fact that he made light of the incident during a public address. Additionally, his son’s “funny” costume referencing the event is also raised. This demonstrates a pattern of downplaying or even subtly condoning violence, especially when directed at his political opponents.
The article also contrasts Trump’s actions in different situations, highlighting the inconsistency in his responses. Specifically, it points out his reaction to the murder of Democratic State Representative Melissa Hortman. The contrast between Trump’s response to this event and his actions surrounding the death of others further illustrates the perception of selective outrage. The fact that Trump didn’t explicitly mention the victims by name, nor did he address the partisan nature of the attacks, is contrasted with his demands for lowering flags in other situations. This demonstrates that his reactions are often based on partisanship.
The article delves into the consequences of this selective approach. The implications extend beyond mere hypocrisy, as it suggests that such behavior can contribute to a climate where political violence is normalized or even encouraged. When a leader fails to consistently condemn violence across the political spectrum, it weakens the societal norms against such actions.
The discussion touches on a number of other factors playing into this situation. The role of the media in amplifying certain events over others is a central idea. The impact of social media is also explored, and how these platforms can contribute to the spread of misinformation and hateful rhetoric. The rise of authoritarianism, and the potential for such behavior to embolden extremist groups and individuals, further compound the issue. These discussions emphasize that the issue of political violence is a complex and multi-faceted one, requiring a comprehensive approach.
Finally, the article circles back to the original point of universal condemnation. It makes the point that this consistency in condemnation is essential for preserving a healthy democracy and protecting political opponents and figures. By failing to condemn all forms of political violence, it further entrenches division and allows for the normalization of violence. The article asserts that a strong moral stance on violence, irrespective of partisan affiliations, is the only way to counter the growing problem of political violence.