Hey, Lefties

[Saint Peter]

It has nothing to do with anything outside of your prejudiced mind.

Still no answer.

Weak or strong, there is a connection. There is a connection between the shooters crazy actions and the hate filled political arena that is our country. There is a connection to Rush, and Fox, and busybody going off at Lit. All of these things feed the fire.

It is a dangerous path.

 

[Liar]

One website with cross-hairs set him off (if we take your statement on its face). It's not the website, vile as it is. It's the idiot.

There are hundreds of millions of people. It's a statistical certainty that there will always be an idiot.

Should those in the business of adressing the masses take this into consideration?

 

[Sonny Limatina]

There are hundreds of millions of people. It's a statistical certainty that there will always be an idiot.

Should those in the business of adressing the masses take this into consideration?

Inciteful language is violent. But where do you stop the chain of causation? The inciteful person is not speaking in a vacuum--his or her words are being broadcast. The broadcasters are not charities; they are being paid by advertisers. The advertisers are not bottomless wells, their products are being bought.

Has anyone said he got the idea from Palin's site? Or is that just a knee-jerk bit of hysteria?

The way to frame this would be to compare the current number of violent acts vaguely traceable to hate speak now as to those before that hate-speak was so interactively ubiquitous. I think we'd find people always killed each other, and crazy people always killed other people more than non-crazy people. And that's as far as it goes, as awful as this truly terrible and stupid crime is.

 

[Spider Rand]

Still no answer.

Weak or strong, there is a connection. There is a connection between the shooters crazy actions and the hate filled political arena that is our country. There is a connection to Rush, and Fox, and busybody going off at Lit. All of these things feed the fire.

It is a dangerous path.

Yes there is something of a connection.

Unfortunately, in competitive arenas such as sports and politics, the vernacular of violence is often commonplace. We talk of our opponents as enemies, we speak of victories in terms of killing them. Was putting cross-hairs on people a smart thing to do? No. Has it been done by both sides? Yes. Someone posted a similar ad here today from Bush's time in office with bulls-eyes next to Republican officeholders. Was any of that intended to get someone shot? No. It was meant to be provocative, to get free airtime on the news, and to motivate voter turnout.

Did Palin take down the ad because this is what she wanted? No. She didn't cheer "mission accomplished", she was appalled. The ad is now in poor taste. The same way a coach, after holding a rally and speaking of his team killing their hated rivals, would react with horror that a deranged fan had decided to shoot them.

It like blaming the Matrix for the Columbine Massacre. What did the film makers expect, filling a movie with violence? With characters wearing trench coats and indescribably killing people. It looked so cool it's a wonder everyone didn't run out and do it. Oh, wait. Not everyone is nuthouse crazy and decides to kill people based on what they see, hear, or read.

Should political discourse be more civil? Movies and video games less violent? Music less vulgar? Books less enciteful(yes, I meant enciteful, not insightful). Sure, why not, but that's not going to happen. Because that's not what the majority of people enjoy. Most want to hate our opponents and glory in their defeat like a righteous kill. It appeals to our baser instincts, much like porn does, and I don't expect high minded idealism to make real changes to that anytime soon.

 

[Sonny Limatina]

In Defense of Inflamed Rhetoric
The awesome stupidity of the calls to tamp down political speech in the wake of the Giffords shooting.
By Jack Shafer
Slate
Posted Sunday, Jan. 9, 2011, at 12:24 PM ET

The attempted assassination of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz., and the killing of six innocents outside a Tucson Safeway has bolstered the ongoing argument that when speaking of things political, we should all avoid using inflammatory rhetoric and violent imagery.

"Shooting Throws Spotlight on State of U.S. Political Rhetoric," reports CNN. "Bloodshed Puts New Focus on Vitriol in Politics," states the New York Times. Keith Olbermann clocked overtime on Saturday to deliver a commentary subtitled "The political rhetoric of the country must be changed to prevent acts of domestic terrorism." The home page of the Washington Post offered this headline to its story about the shooting: "Rampage Casts Grim Light on U.S. Political Discord."

The lead spokesman for the anti-inflammatory movement, however, was Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik, whose jurisdiction includes Tucson. Said Dupnik at a Jan. 8 press conference in answer to questions about the criminal investigation:

I'd just like to say that when you look at unbalanced people, how they are—how they respond to the vitriol that comes out of certain mouths, about tearing down the government, the anger, the hatred, the bigotry that goes on in this country is getting to be outrageous. And unfortunately, Arizona, I think, has become sort of the capital. We have become the mecca for prejudice and bigotry.

Embedded in Sheriff Dupnik's ad hoc wisdom were several assumptions. First, that strident, anti-government political views can be easily categorized as vitriolic, bigoted, and prejudicial. Second, that those voicing strident political views are guilty of issuing Manchurian Candidate-style instructions to commit murder and mayhem to the "unbalanced." Third, that the Tucson shooter was inspired to kill by political debate or by Sarah Palin's "target" map or other inflammatory outbursts. Fourth, that we should calibrate our political speech in such a manner that we do not awaken the Manchurian candidates among us.

And, fifth, that it's a cop's role to set the proper dimensions of our political debate. Hey, Dupnik, if you've got spare time on your hands, go write somebody a ticket.

Sheriff Dupnik's political sermon came before any conclusive or even circumstantial proof had been offered that the shooter had been incited by anything except the gas music from Jupiter playing inside his head.

For as long as I've been alive, crosshairs and bull's-eyes have been an accepted part of the graphical lexicon when it comes to political debates. Such "inflammatory" words as targeting, attacking, destroying, blasting, crushing, burying, knee-capping, and others have similarly guided political thought and action. Not once have the use of these images or words tempted me or anybody else I know to kill. I've listened to, read—and even written!—vicious attacks on government without reaching for my gun. I've even gotten angry, for goodness' sake, without coming close to assassinating a politician or a judge.

From what I can tell, I'm not an outlier. Only the tiniest handful of people—most of whom are already behind bars, in psychiatric institutions, or on psycho-meds—can be driven to kill by political whispers or shouts. Asking us to forever hold our tongues lest we awake their deeper demons infantilizes and neuters us and makes politicians no safer.

The call by Sheriff Dupnik and others to take our political conversation down a few notches might make sense if anybody had been calling for the assassination in the first place, which they hadn't. And if they had, there are effective laws to prosecute those who move language outside of the metaphorical. I can't be overly critical of the sheriff. After all, he's the one who has spent his career witnessing how threats can turn into violence: gang wars, contract killings, neighborhood rows, domestic disputes, bar arguments, and all the rest.

The great miracle of American politics is that although it can tend toward the cutthroat and thuggish, it is almost devoid of genuine violence outside of a few scuffles and busted lips now and again. With the exception of Saturday's slaughter, I'd wager that in the last 30 years there have been more acts of physical violence in the stands at Philadelphia Eagles home games than in American politics.

Any call to cool "inflammatory" speech is a call to police all speech, and I can't think of anybody in government, politics, business, or the press that I would trust with that power. As Jonathan Rauch wrote brilliantly in Harper's in 1995, "The vocabulary of hate is potentially as rich as your dictionary, and all you do by banning language used by cretins is to let them decide what the rest of us may say." Rauch added, "Trap the racists and anti-Semites, and you lay a trap for me too. Hunt for them with eradication in your mind, and you have brought dissent itself within your sights."

Our spirited political discourse, complete with name-calling, vilification—and, yes, violent imagery—is a good thing. Better that angry people unload their fury in public than let it fester and turn septic in private. The wicked direction the American debate often takes is not a sign of danger but of freedom. And I'll punch out the lights of anybody who tries to take it away from me.

******

http://www.slate.com/id/2280616/pagenum/all/#p2

 

[semen4her]

I'm right handed.

 

[Sonny Limatina]

I'm right handed.

Then you should die. Quick, someone shoot him.

 

[overthebow]

Stop being idiots and trying to hang this shitty shooting on a party or religion.

Crazy is crazy.

That goes for you too, righties.

Why is it that righties aren't being killed by gun violence?

We've got Tiller the Killer (per Bill O.) killed by someone who the righties says was not influenced by their non-stop demonization. How about that one?

Fucking right-wing bastards.

 

[pointless]

at what point did inciteful become a word?

 

[Sonny Limatina]

at what point did inciteful become a word?

1971, apparently.

Although you won’t find the word in standard dictionaries, the Oxford English Dictionary has an entry that defines it this way: “Liable to rouse to passion; provocative.”

The earliest OED citation is from a 1971 case in the Federal Supplement, a collection of US court opinions:

“The public mutilation of the flag is an act which is likely to elicit a violent response from many who observe such acts. The Supreme Court has clearly recognized the inciteful impact of flag desecration.”

In a more entertaining citation, a 1984 issue of The Listener, a now defunct BBC magazine, refers to the provocative Diana Rigg as “terribly sexy and coolly inciteful.”

 

[Sinny]

I thought this was going to be a thread about which side of the pants you men put your thingees on.

 

[pointless]

1971, apparently.

well, throw it in the bin with proactive because it's fucking terrible.

 

[Sonny Limatina]

well, throw it in the bin with proactive because it's fucking terrible.

But it clears up your zits better.

 

[Luk]

I thought this was going to be a thread about which side of the pants you men put your thingees on.

Left, can't help it. My left ball hangs lower and the cock has no choice but to follow.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

I thought this was going to be a thread about which side of the pants you men put your thingees on.

Do you have a preference for it hanging right or left?

Dammit, now you have me thinking about your hoo-hoo and it's getting me all like Priapus!

http://www.thetraveltart.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/Priapus-Funny-Travel-Souvenirs-Turkey.jpg

 

[pointless]

But it clears up your zits better.

only if you drop the e.

 

[Sinny]

Left, can't help it. My left ball hangs lower and the cock has no choice but to follow.

I am strangely fascinated with how you men hang your dangly bits.

I would like to details from everyone on how you hang. Thank you in advance.

 

[Cade Is Here]

Stop being idiots and trying to hang this shitty shooting on a party or religion.

Crazy is crazy.

That goes for you too, righties.

There is only 1 left here with a bunch of screen names. Not everyone can be that crazy.

 

[Sinny]

Do you have a preference for it hanging right or left?

Dammit, now you have me thinking about your hoo-hoo and it's getting me all like Priapus!

http://www.thetraveltart.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/Priapus-Funny-Travel-Souvenirs-Turkey.jpg

I have no preference, but I would like to know for all the men here. I will assign you fun nicknames after I learn your preference.

 

[Powertone]

Sarah Palin, the cunt, posts a map on her site with a target on the Congresswoman that was shot today.

Do you think these two actions are a coincidence?

the FBI will confiscate Loughner's hard drive and discover if he visited Palin's " site " or not .
and you'll ignore the findings of course when it turns out he didn't .

 

[IrezumiKiss]

I have no preference, but I would like to know for all the men here. I will assign you fun nicknames after I learn your preference.

I swing to the right. I could put it the other way, but it feels "off" if it gets stiff in that direction. Although when in "action" it masts straight on quite good.

Also, I'm right-handed, but I bop my baloney with my left hand. Funny how the brain works the rest of the body, innit?

 

[Sinny]

I swing to the right. I could put it the other way, but it feels "off" if it gets stiff in that direction. Although when in "action" it masts straight on quite good.

Also, I'm right-handed, but I bop my baloney with my left hand. Funny how the brain works the rest of the body, innit?

See? This is the kind of intelligence I love knowing. I've just assigned you the nickname Hot Lefty Baloney.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

See? This is the kind of intelligence I love knowing. I've just assigned you the nickname Hot Lefty Baloney.

Ha! I'm liking that, for some bent reason!

What about you? Do you gots a naughty nick? Should I assign you as "Princess Cream Melons?"

 

[Sonny Limatina]

AP characterizes him, according to classmates, as a stoner far-lefty who creeped everyone out. The knee-jerk blame of Palin is going to serve to elevate her and make her sympathetic in the end.

Crazy people are crazy people. That goes for Muslim radicals and stoner murderers.

 

[Sinny]

Ha! I'm liking that, for some bent reason!

What about you? Do you gots a naughty nick? Should I assign you as "Princess Cream Melons?"

Shit, I wish I could remember the nickname Sonny had for me. Was it Hot Tits? I cannot remember. And he keeps trying to get this thread back on track. Whatev. I bet he hangs to the right.