Those unfamiliar with the Southern Poverty Law Center can be forgiven for assuming it’s a non-partisan group "dedicated to fighting hate and bigotry,"as its Who We Are page clearly states. In reality they are a left wing group that exploits (for donations) incidents they can, plausibly or not, describe as right-wing intolerance or hate.

The SPLC documents incidents of hate such as the following, "Approximately 10 members of the Traditional Rebel Knights of the Ku Klux Klan held a rally" (reported 6/27/2014 in Gettysburg, PA). Reminds me of this scene from Fletch Lives. (This is not to make light of the hateful ideology of the KKK, but to point out their increasing irrelevance.)
But the SPLC’s "Hate Incident" list is conspicuous in its omissions. Perhaps the most publicity they’ve received in recent years followed the shooting of a security guard at the headquarters of the Family Research Council in Washington, D.C. by Floyd Lee Corkins. Corkins chose his target because the SPLC had labeled the FRC a "Hate Group" and his motivation was pure political hatred. Yet the shooting is not listed as a "Hate Incident" on the groups website.
Following the acquittal of George Zimmerman last summer, at least one act of racially motivated violence occurred in Baltimore, MD, where a group of black youths beat a Hispanic man with a gun while yelling, "This is for Trayvon."Yet this racially motivated attack cannot be found on the SPLC list.
You get the idea. If the Klan holds a rally and manages to scrounge up 10 attendees, it’s news. Assault or attempted murder, not so much. There isn’t any logic to it other than the SPLC can claim the Klan is a right wing organization (how exactly they’re right wing isn’t immediately clear to me, do they support increased liberty and lower taxes and less government?). The SPLC can’t claim a similar lineage for the two other attacks, so they simply ignore them.
When the SPLC isn’t cherry picking hate incidents to report, they also produce lengthy reports such asWar in the West: The Bundy Ranch Standoff and the Radical American Right.
For years the far left has attempted to link conservative ideology with mental disorders or violence or both. They tried as hard as they could to paint Jared Loughner as a conservative, but even the SPLC had to conclude that "it’s hard to say" whether or not he was a right wing extremist. And who can forget David Sirota hoping the Boston bomber was a white American?
In their newest report, the SPLC writes ominously about "antigovernment zealots" growing "emboldened" following their victory in Nevada. You can almost feel the author’s disappointment that the Bundy standoff concluded with no gunfire. But the SPLC has to link the Bundys with violence somehow, and as a result the author spends a considerable amount of time on the horrendous murder of three people by Jerad and Amanda Miller. Why? Because the Millers were at one point at the Bundy ranch.
However, the SPLC fails to note that the Millers were "asked to leave for being ‘too radical’" because that doesn’t fit very well with their thesis: "Government officials need to understand what motivates this movement because the Millers will not be the last to demonstrate their antigovernment rage with bullets."
The SPLC also fails to note what the Governor of Nevada called an "atmosphere of intimidation" created by the Bureau of Land Management during the cattle round-up, the creation of a "1st Amendment Zone," or the arrest of Dave Bundy by heavily armed federal agents for exercising his 1st Amendment rights outside of that zone.
But perhaps the most interesting part of the report is the "Timeline" chapter at the end which "emphasizes Patriot resistance to the federal government, in particular over land use and related issues that came to the fore with the April 2014 Nevada standoff between federal agents and rancher Cliven Bundy."
In the entry for March 2010, the SPLC writes this: "A CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll finds that 56% of Americans believe the federal government is ‘so large and powerful that it poses an immediate threat to the rights and freedoms of ordinary citizens.’" For comparison, Gallup asks nearly the same question and the positive responses are about 10 points lower.
Not content with only demonizing the Millers or Cliven Bundy, the SPLC targets roughly half of the population in an attempt at fear mongering.
The SPLC also targets civil libertarians, writing in the April 19, 2010 entry that "Patriot leaders including Richard Mack and Stewart Rhodes play prominent roles at a Second Amendment March in Washington, D.C."
This from an organization, as I stated at the beginning of this piece, which is "dedicated to fighting hate and bigotry." Where’s the hate? Are you automatically in that category if you support 2nd Amendment rights? If you believe the government is too big? If you protest the government’s seizure of land or cattle?
Just about the only thing the latest report demonstrates is that the SPLC hates conservatives. That’s the real takeaway.
Note that I’m not criticizing SPLC’s work in documenting the hate of such groups like the KKK and the Nation of Islam. But they decided long ago to move far to the left edge of the political spectrum. As a result, "antigovernment hate" is apparently now a thing.
And about half of the country is guilty.
UPDATE: Instapundit shares a link to this hate crime in Boston. It’s not currently noted on the SPLC’s hate incident list and given their political tendencies it likely won’t be.
0 0 votes
Article Rating