"So what does that amount to? We're unsure. A court will decide whether what you just saw qualifies as self-defense. As of tonight, we really don't have more details. We do know why it all happened, though. Kenosha's devolved into anarchy because the authorities in charge of the city abandoned it. People in charge, from the governor of Wisconsin on down, refused to enforce the law. They stood back and they watched Kenosha burn. So are we really surprised that looting and arson accelerated to murder? How shocked are we that 17-year-olds with rifles decided they had to maintain order when no one else would? Everyone could see what was happening in Kenosha. It was getting crazier by the hour."
--Tucker Carlson, on his Wednesday show
Some of our readers will remember that Tucker Carlson used to work here, for this editorial column, back when he still wore a bowtie. He's moved on to bigger, or at least better-paying, things. This past week he was dragged through the Twitter mud for what he said above, right after the shooting in Kenosha, Wis., in which two people were killed.
He was given the Tom Cotton treatment, as people twisted his meaning completely. Tucker Carlson was accused of "justifying" murder and "condoning" violence, when he did no such a thing. But--and we've said it several times already this month--some people just won't understand the clear meaning of their own language if it profits them not to.
Those who have been protesting, those athletes who have been boycotting games, and those who march to demand social justice (and police reforms) are doing their all-American best to make their country better. But the people who use the cover of protests to loot and destroy aren't making anything better. And those who "counter-protest" or maybe just looking to pick a fight--a gun fight--aren't helping, either.
The Washington Post ran a story last week about how the political divide is becoming more and more violent, rattling not just activists in the streets, but police standing beside them. The Post noted the reports of violence out of Chicago, Portland, Los Angeles, Tyler . . . .
Tyler?
Tyler, Texas, that is. Little, rural, mostly friendly Tyler, which is not far from Texarkana. Just down the road from Longview. (Isn't Don Henley from around there?) When photographs of violence at a protest in Tyler make the national papers, you know the unrest isn't limited to the big cities up North, back East, or out West.
From the report: "In a spate of exchanges that have spanned from Kalamazoo, Mich., and Bloomington, Ind., to Chicago and Portland, Ore., people on both sides of the United States' political and cultural divide have been filmed exchanging punches, beating one another with sticks and flagpoles, or standing face-to-face with weapons, often with police appearing to be little more than observers."
And then this, from our own newspaper, toward the end of the week: "On Thursday, prosecutors [in Portland, Ore.] said they had resolved the first felony case related to the protests when the defendant pleaded guilty. Rollin Tristan Fodor, 18, entered the plea on a charge of first-degree arson and was sentenced to 45 days of time served, community service and three years probation."
If that is resolve, then what would ambivalence and equivocation be?
Protests are sometimes needed in a free country. But those who turn them into violent clashes, and put other lives in danger, and ramp up the turbulence in this already divided nation, need to pay a price, legally. Things are getting ugly, and without real resolve by authorities to punish law-breakers, things could get uglier.
Those who'd lead a violent mob to break things and harm people don't need this kind of green light.