Angry progressives, liberals, Democrats, the mainstream media and other left-wingers are spreading messages of hate, alleging that hate messages, mostly from the right, contributed to the shootings in Tucson.

No, respond some on the right, it’s them, not us, who caused the shootings.

The fellow, Jared Lee Loughner, who is alleged to have pulled the trigger, seems to be not at fault at all.

The blame game is a fertile field, so let’s pile on.

First, what about the failures of liberals, self-described protectors of those too stupid or incompetent to look out for themselves? Should they have enacted legislation that might have prevented this?

Why didn’t community organizers or other nonprofits, funded by taxpayers, step in and take control of Loughner when he dropped out of high school? Did government oversight ensure that the billions spent to prevent high school dropouts was spent effectively or did responsibility cease when the check was mailed?

Have the pompous sheriff of Pima County, Clarence W. Dupnik, Pima Community College and others spent their government grants wisely?

Had stricter laws been in place, would Pima Community College have been forced to notify mental health agencies when the alleged shooter was kicked out? Would that not have led to a court order forcing Loughner to either undergo therapy from a government licensed psychiatrist or be institutionalized in a government controlled facility?

Maybe, though, the community college was shackled by laws already enacted by do-gooders, those protectors of the rights of little people, that prevented it from divulging personnel information. Then again, a community college instructor seemed to have had no qualms about reading for television a paper written by one of his students, the alleged shooter.

Should the community college and the sheriff be blamed for Loughner’s ability to purchase a gun? Apparently Dupni’s office had previous notices of Loughner’s threats to the staff of Pima Community College and others, so would a felony conviction have prevented him from purchasing a gun?

Since the shooting, Loughner’s privacy has been invaded all over the Internet, which undoubtedly speaks to a call for firm control of the Internet by the federal government.

By the time this is published, it would not be surprising if one of these progressive protectors of the populace has introduced legislation to clamp down on what can be posted on the Internet, going further than what the Obama administration has already proposed, issuing an Internet ID for all users.

The sheriff apparently believes the Tea Party should be muted or banned. For this, can he be compared to Germany’s Adolph Hitler who, when he became chancellor, banned all criticism of the government and, while he was at it, banned all parties but the Nazi Party?

What caused the breakdown in police protection at Safeway? Should the pompous, protective sheriff have sent deputies to assist? Or did he think protecting citizens was one of the laws he chose not to enforce, the stance he took on immigration laws, with its emphasis on protecting illegal immigrants rather than citizens?

Did Safeway provide adequate security for a crowd that would include very valuable citizens; i.e, Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and the federal judge? If not, should its license be revoked?

What about the Monday morning quarterbacking of Loughner’s acquaintances and the Loughner family’s neighbors? No doubt their desire to get a couple of minutes on television has embellished it, but they seem to have gained a lot of insight they didn’t have before the shooting.

Giving their failure to act on what they said they knew, should they now face possible charges of criminal negligence?

Is the government to blame for not providing training to citizens, teaching them how to react to situations such as developed at Safeway? From all reports, the two men who wrestled Loughner to the pavement did so clumsily and could have easily injured the suspect. The woman who grabbed the gun magazine could have cut her hand.

The blame list goes on, ad nauseum.

Yet, their seems to be a recurring element in all the rhetoric: Very few wish to take responsibility for their own actions. It’s all too typical of what seems to have permeated the national psyche: Blame the other guy.