Within a day after the shooting of AZ representative Gabrielle Giffords, the liberal left-wing MSM has already decided that this incident is the fault of right-wing extremists:

“Many on the American Left said the horror could be traced to the malign influence of American conservatives; members of the Tea Party right-wing pundits Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck; former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin and Fox News.”

Yet as reported in the 1/10/11 Washington Examiner, the Left bent over backwards to avoid calling the Ft. Hood attack an act of Muslim terrorism, even though it indisputably was:

“On November 5, 2009, Maj. Nidal Hasan opened fire at a troop readiness center in Ft. Hood, Texas, killing 13 people. Within hours of the killings, the world knew that Hasan reportedly shouted “Allahu Akbar!” before he began shooting, visited websites associated with Islamist violence, wrote Internet postings justifying Muslim suicide bombings, considered U.S. forces his enemy, opposed American involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan as wars on Islam, and told a neighbor shortly before the shootings that he was going “to do good work for God.” There was ample evidence, in other words, that the Ft. Hood attack was an act of Islamist violence.

Nevertheless, public officials, journalists, and commentators were quick to caution that the public should not “jump to conclusions” about Hasan’s motive. CNN, in particular, became a forum for repeated warnings that the subject should be discussed with particular care.

“The important thing is for everyone not to jump to conclusions,” said retired Gen. [and 2004 Democratic Presidential contender] Wesley Clark on CNN the night of the shootings.

“We cannot jump to conclusions,” said CNN’s Jane Velez-Mitchell that same evening. “We have to make sure that we do not jump to any conclusions whatsoever.”

“I’m on Pentagon chat room,” said former CIA operative Robert Baer on CNN, also the night of the shooting. “Right now, there’s messages going back and forth, saying do not jump to the conclusion this had anything to do with Islam.”

The next day, President Obama underscored the rapidly-forming conventional wisdom when he told the country, “I would caution against jumping to conclusions until we have all the facts.” In the days that followed, CNN jouralists and guests repeatedly echoed the president’s remarks.

“We can’t jump to conclusions,” Army Gen. George Casey said on CNN November 8. The next day, political analyst Mark Halperin urged a “transparent” investigation into the shootings “so the American people don’t jump to conclusions.” And when Republican Rep. Pete Hoekstra, then the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, suggested that the Ft. Hood attack was terrorism, CNN’s John Roberts was quick to intervene. “Now, President Obama has asked people to be very cautious here and to not jump to conclusions,” Roberts said to Hoekstra. “By saying that you believe this is an act of terror, are you jumping to a conclusion?”

(Read more at the Washington Examiner)

Although intentional on the part of some Liberal operatives, this double-standard is so deeply-ingrained in the liberal media and its followers that most Liberals don’t even recognize it for what it is.

On yesterday’s Fox News Sunday panel (Fair and Balanced, as always, between two Conservatives—Brit Hume and William Kristol—and two liberals—NPR’s Mara Liasson and former NPR-er Juan Williams), Liasson said something along these lines (not a direct quote, but the three operative words are accurate):

“I think this unfortunate event will serve to lower the rhetorical heat and people will no longer characterize politicians as Fascists, Nazis, and Socialists. That is a good thing.”

Brit Hume, to his everlasting credit, was incredulous over her statement:

(Again, a paraphrased quote): “Socialists? While there is no doubt that calling a current-day American politician a “Fascist” or a “Nazi” is clearly over the top and has no place in any rational discussion, there are, in fact, several liberal politicians on Capitol Hill who proudly call themselves “Socialists.” Mara, you simply can’t equate criticizing someone for being a Socialist with calling them a Fascist or a Nazi.”

Liasson responded first with a series of throat-clearing “Ers” and “Ahs,” then weakly retraced her steps, replacing “Socialist” with “Communist,” as if the two are even remotely the same in the context of current-day Washington-speak. Liasson well knows the vast difference between the two, and so do we all.

But her attempt to preemptively fold all the supposed Conservatives’ criticisms of Obama and Liberals into one neat package (“….maybe now they’ll stop calling them Fascists, Nazis, and Socialists, which is good….”) is very telling and indicative of the mindset of a significant number of ever-media-savvy Liberal political opportunists. The Left’s hysterical, wholly unwarranted outcry over the Right’s (Palin, Rush, et. al.) purported role in Gifford’s shooting sadly confirms many Liberals’ outlook in such circumstances: As Rahm Emanuel said very early on in Obama’s first year, “It’s a crime to let a good crisis go to waste.”

It’s difficult to even know how to react to the Left’s response. But it will certainly be interesting to observe the degree to which Conservative Talk Radio, Palin, The Tea Party, etc. are mentioned by the Liberal MSM in the coming weeks in connection with the shooting.