Violent rhetoric

[rgraham666]

My opinion is that the violent rhetoric is a symptom, not an illness.

The illness is the preference to use violence almost in exception to all other tools. The illness is the belief that only those of a particular political ideology are Americans. The illness is taking a lovely idea like personal liberty and making it an excuse to take the liberty of others.

We can't treat the symptom, not without betraying ourselves. Treating the illness will take a very long time, and the willing co-operation of the patient. Too bad we may not have the time and the patient won't co-operate.

 

[xssve]

Yes, but it's exacerbated by those who first, focus on the politics to the exclusion of policy, on which no debate can be tolerated, then, politics being everything, can't stand to lose and turn to violence when they're beaten fair and square.

After Bush stole the 200 election, it was all, "get over it", after Obama was elected, the violent rhetoric just escalated.

This is somewhat predictable, since for the most part, they don't have a leg to stand on policy wise, they've painted themselves into a corner where violence is the only solution.

And you're right, the problem with violent solutions is that you start thinking of it as the only solution, not a last resort when all other options have failed - they very quickly start up with the violent rhetoric at the slightest hint of having their ambitions thwarted, it's turned into an instant gratification thing.

The irony is, that the constitution lays out the political process specifically to allow debate on issues to take place, and avoid violence, and without the constitution, we're not Americans at all, we're a bunch of self absorbed Eurotrash refugees with bad attitudes.

 

[Pure]

Jefferson

as recounted by Jill Lepore in the NY Times:

Lepore: //Consider Thomas Jefferson’s first inaugural address, delivered at the close of an election in which a Federalist newspaper described the choice as one between God and John Adams and Jefferson and no god. Jefferson, in a plea for unity, spoke of the dreadful consequences of bringing religious absolutism into politics: //


TJ:

having banished from our land that religious intolerance under which mankind so long bled and suffered, we have yet gained little if we countenance a political intolerance as despotic, as wicked, and capable of as bitter and bloody persecutions.

 

[Stella_Omega]

A little quiz:

1. Who started the current practice of attending political rallies with loaded gun?
(a) Right-wingers (b) Left-wingers

2. Why do people bring loaded weapons to political rallies?
(a) They're proud of their 2nd amendment rights and like to take their guns everywhere.
(b) They're sending a subtle message that if they don't like what they hear, they're fully ready to use these guns.
(c) You never know when some Liberal might try to hold you up so they want to be prepared.

3. At what candidate's rally during the 2008 campaign was the candidate castigating Obama when someone in the crowd yelled out, "Kill him!"
(a) Joe Biden's (b) John McCain's (c) Sarah Palin's (d) Lynden LaRouche's

4. In regards to Q 3. above, what was the speaker's response to this suggestion that Obama be killed?
(a) Shouter was ejected from hall (b) Shouter was arrested by police.
(c) Candidate denounced violence and/or physical intimidation as a political tool.
(d) Candidate smiled weakly and did nothing.

5. In the last 30 years, how many instances can you name of firearm attacks on the US public &/or Conservatives by Liberals?

6. In the last 30 years, how many instances can you name of firearm attacks on the US public &/or Liberals by a Conservative?

Those are all trick questions, to a conservative.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

This is all a cop out. Another example of trying to take the blame away from a person when it really lies upon him. This is the same theory that years ago led people to sue Ozzy Osbourne because a kid killed himself after listening to suicide solution. Bottom line is that although something can influence a person to a degree it is ultimately the person who makes the choice. I am sick and tired of politically correct weak willed assholes blaming everything for their problems. That song made my son kill himself. Well mom and dad were you watching your kid? The movie the Matrix caused Columbine Mom and dad where were you when your kid was ordering gun parts on the net? Sarah Palin says reload and she is now responsible for a shooting oh please. Anyone screwy enough to do this shit was going to do it anyways. What's next? I tell someone to go fuck himself and he blames me when he's caught masturbating. Stop looking for a cause and find a solution oh wait there is one it's called discipline.

Yes, people are responsible for their actions, and those actions include the things they say and the attitudes they foster and encourage, which is exactly the point here: that American politics has become infused with an unprecedented level of personal hatred, contempt, and vitriol. And if you don't believe that, all you have to do is go back and look at the postings in this thread, or your own mention of "politically correct weak willed assholes" as a characterization of people who don't agree with you.

Attitudes like that are certainly not part of the solution, friend. They're part of the problem.

Over the last 30 years or so, ad hominem vilification of the political opposition has been developed and exploited as a political tool, and the fact is, it's a technique that was born and perfected on right-wing talk radio. It's a technique that ignores the legitimate concern of politics, which is public policy, and goes straight for attacking the people who support it. Liberals aren't just people who have different ideas about policy any more. They're traitors, communists, idiots, politically correct weak willed assholes. Ultimately, they're the enemy. They're legitimate targets.

I was around in the 60's and 70's when the radical left was the source of political violence in America, and I saw how that worked. But even then, the arguments were political and not personal. There was nothing like the level of hatred and contempt I see directed against the left today, and it's spreading. Just look at Amicus' posts, or JBJ's.

What it feels like from this side is something like what Hitler did with the Jews in Germany. He started out blaming them, then mocking them, then dehumanizing them to the point where killing them was easy, and he did it simply by encouraging a political atmosphere in which hatred and intolerance could flourish. You don't have to go far into the Amicus library to find casual mention of imprisonment and concentration camps for Liberals, and he's certainly not the only one who find the idea appealing.

And I'm sorry, but you don't find the same level of systematic hatred, insult, and depersonalization coming from the left. It's not a case of "both sides doing it."

So yeah, discipline is the key. Discipline by our political leaders over what they say and what they tolerate, and what we say and tolerate too.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Youre full of shit per usual. I was around in the 60s and the Leftie bull shit got very personal at times, especially for those of us in uniform returning from Vietnam. Your team were simpleton mother-fuckers.

Sticks and stones, Elliott. Regardless of what I call you, youre not obliged to act on my provocations. Your IQ need not suffer if I call you an idiot; you need not get a boner if I suggest that you go fuck yourself; and you need not hire on at Disney if I call you goofy.

You stooges wanna control the debate, and MF, it aint gonna happen.

 

[xssve]

You do know that was like 50 years ago?

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

So what? Shit has an expiration date? Elliott has a 1/2 life and turns into manure after 25 years?

 

[xssve]

The past is gone, and the future is unknowable, that's what.

So your needle is stuck, that's not respectable, it's just senile.

 

[JackLuis]

It is true that there is violent rhetoric in our press as it makes riveting reading. So the press plays these things up, knowing that the knee-jerkers will get crazy.

There is little justice left in America for those who are at the top of the economic/political food chain. Perhaps if we applied the law more evenly, people wouldn't get so crazy.

DeLay sentenced to 3 years in prison, 10 years probation

http://www.rawstory.com/images/new/tomdelaymugshot.jpg

Earlier in the day, Travis County prosecutor Steven Brand argued that DeLay should begin his sentence immediately.

"He needs to go to prison, your Honor, and he needs to go today," he said.

But DeLay's lawyer, Dick DeGuerin, told the judge that the guilty verdict alone was punishment enough.

"Tom DeLay was convicted of a felony," he said. "That alone is consequence is enough."

Applying the laws we have might go a long way to easing the frustrations of 'the people'.

 

[xssve]

I don't think it deniable that all the violent talk, both outright and veiled hints contributes to an overall atmosphere that might encourage some people to act out on it - I mean we went through this not that long ago with the George Tiller murder, it's cannot escape the minds of conservatives that they host a number of fringe groups dedicated to violence when they don't get their way, and that violent rhetoric is only going to egg them on.

The point is it's copping out of the political process, by threatening to kill people you don't agree with, and a clear abuse of free speech - it doesn't pass the "fire in a crowded theater" test if there is no demonstrable fire.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

A little quiz:

5. In the last 30 years, how many instances can you name of firearm attacks on the US public &/or Conservatives by Liberals?

There was that little brewhaha in Chicago in '68, but I guess that's why you used that 30 year rule, huh. When a bunch of liberal pansies decided it was a good idea to demonstrate...and get this part...at a Democratic convention. What a bunch of dummies.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

There are some who believe our Civil War erupted because of the constant quarreling and name-calling between North & South in the years before the war. When it came it felt marvelous to stick your bayonet in the bastard's gut.

 

[cloudy]

There was that little brewhaha in Chicago in '68, but I guess that's why you used that 30 year rule, huh. When a bunch of liberal pansies decided it was a good idea to demonstrate...and get this part...at a Democratic convention. What a bunch of dummies.

That was actually closer to 50 years ago than it was 30. But it's okay, Zeb. We already know that you and yours have trouble with simple words and grammar, so it isn't surprising that numbers over ten are confusing for you.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Youre forced to wonder why CLOUDY hangs on to the slave daze and injun wars.

 

[DeeZire]

Here's an interesting quote from an opinion piece by Leonard Pitts Jr.

Media empires have been built and political careers advanced upon a kind of violent, proudly extremist rhetoric that has less to do with elucidating philosophical differences than with demonizing them, stoking division through hatred and fear of the other, whether the other be Mexican, Muslim, gay or a dreaded liberal. There is, we have been repeatedly told, a difference between people like that and ``real'' Americans.

Read more: http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/01/12/2011947/born-in-hope-she-leaves-lesson.html#ixzz1AxLSCMmz

Since the talking heads on the right can't support their political positions with logic, is it any surprise that they have to resort to obfuscation to keep their followers in line? History is littered with examples of brilliant propaganda campaigns that resulted in absolutely horrible outcomes. (Hitler comes to mind.) I'm sure the historians of the future will be scratching their heads when tasked with explaining the total disconnect between reality and the reality portrayed by our current crop of "news" outlets. The old adage: "There's a sucker born every minute," may be their only hope of making sense of the situation we're in.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Pitts belongs to a liberal newspaper thats going down the drain with the rest.

 

[DeeZire]

Pitts belongs to a liberal newspaper thats going down the drain with the rest.

We would expect you to attack the messenger, JBJ, but what about the message? I'd suggest he nailed it. He does have a Pulitzer Prize on his resume. What sort of awards are on your mantle, beside the ones you win at the County Fair for your gargantuan melons, and your victorious escapades at the bowling alley?

 

[Zeb_Carter]

That was actually closer to 50 years ago than it was 30. But it's okay, Zeb. We already know that you and yours have trouble with simple words and grammar, so it isn't surprising that numbers over ten are confusing for you.

And we know that this thread is actually about the violent rhetoric your lot spews went presented with a view that isn't yours or doesn't meet your standards of Political Correctness. But that okay, I've come to expect the name calling and hate that issues forth from you and your kind.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Youre forced to wonder why CLOUDY hangs on to the slave daze and injun wars.

Yep...that was what 200 years or more ago, but I can't mention something that happened 50 years ago. Makes ya wonder huh?

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Here's an interesting quote from an opinion piece by Leonard Pitts Jr.



Since the talking heads on the right can't support their political positions with logic, is it any surprise that they have to resort to obfuscation to keep their followers in line? History is littered with examples of brilliant propaganda campaigns that resulted in absolutely horrible outcomes. (Hitler comes to mind.) I'm sure the historians of the future will be scratching their heads when tasked with explaining the total disconnect between reality and the reality portrayed by our current crop of "news" outlets. The old adage: "There's a sucker born every minute," may be their only hope of making sense of the situation we're in.

Yes he did hit it...only problem is it applies to both side of the aisle. Both side demonize instead of elucidate. Each side tries to shout down the other. Each side does exactly what they accuse the other of doing.

 

[sr71plt]

Yes he did hit it...only problem is it applies to both side of the aisle. Both side demonize instead of elucidate. Each side tries to shout down the other. Each side does exactly what they accuse the other of doing.

Dr. M answered this and challenged those who think "both sides" are doing it in anything close to equality to provide evidence. Neither you nor anyone else did.

It's not being done equally by "both sides." This is a ridiculous fig leaf. It's been done predominately on the right side all the way back to the Nixon administration. It's a key tool in the rightists' tool kit. Reality sucks, Zeb, but it's no less reality--and it doesn't go away just because you want to play pretend.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Dr. M answered this and challenged those who think "both sides" are doing it in anything close to equality to provide evidence. Neither you nor anyone else did.

It's not being done equally by "both sides." This is a ridiculous fig leaf. It's been done predominately on the right side all the way back to the Nixon administration. It's a key tool in the rightists' tool kit. Reality sucks, Zeb, but it's no less reality--and it doesn't go away just because you want to play pretend.

Again you don't fucking read the posts do you? You just puke up a reply to what you thought you read.

Dr. M was talking about gun violence...I'm talking about name calling. You sure are a dumbass aren't you? Oh and when did you stop beating your wife?

 

[sr71plt]

Again you don't fucking read the posts do you? You just puke up a reply to what you thought you read.

Dr. M was talking about gun violence...I'm talking about name calling. You sure are a dumbass aren't you? Oh and when did you stop beating your wife?

I knew you wouldn't see the connection between the volatile rhetoric and the violence. You have no qualms whatsoever to only see what is convenient for you.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Again you don't fucking read the posts do you? You just puke up a reply to what you thought you read.

Dr. M was talking about gun violence...I'm talking about name calling. You sure are a dumbass aren't you? Oh and when did you stop beating your wife?

You sure do present an eloquent case for your point of view there, ol' pal.