Free Speech and Inflammatory Rhetoric

[WinePusher]

With the recent tragedy in Tuscon Arizona, many on the left have been blaming this on conservatives and their supposed "inflammatory rhetoric." Conservative leaders such as Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, Michele Bachmann, Sharon Angle and others have been their primary targets. They have focused particular attention on Palins bullet map and the call to use "second amendment remedies" by Sharon Angle.

But let's look a little closer at this. The DNC used a bullet map similar to Palin, people on the left like Ed Schultz and Mike Malloy have called for the death of some presidents and conservative leaders, a documentary was made about killing Bush by a leftist, and Obama himself has made inflammatory remarks with violent connotations. The left also was so concerned about jumping to conclusions about Fort Hood, but jumps to conclusions about the political affiliations of this psychopath in the absense of evidence.

1) Are second amendment remedies to problems ever justified? Remember that the point of the 2nd amendment was to combat a tyrannical government.

2) Are conservatives to blame for this?

3) Are liberals being hypocrties by jumping to conclusions over this, and not jumping to conclusions over Fort Hood. Are they also being hypocrites for charging conservatives with violent and inflammatory rhetoric while leaving their own ranks uncondemned?

[Wyvern]

Back to the civility issue, here is another example of what I would call disappointing political rhetoric.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/2 ... 11774.html

Democratic TN congressmen Cohen uses Nazi analogies in his criticisms of Republican statements on health care.

Have Republicans lied about the health care bill?

Yes.

Actually, Palin was right about the death panels.

http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/death-pa ... was-right/

The Democrat lie about the health bill was that it won't add to the deficit. Only if you use Enron accounting.

Actually Palin was not right about death panels. What this is though is an example of the uncivil inflammatory language that Palin regularly engages in which is so divisive to the national discourse on important issues. Palin had a chance to demonstrate some statesmanship with the message she released after the shootings but instead she chose the low road by basically saying not me and probably killed any chance she had of running for president.

Is it necessary or helpful to drag in allusions to Hitler's propaganda minister to make this point?

No.

So why hasn;'t Obama repudiated this outrageous statement by a prominent member of his own party? By prominent I mean he's a member of the House, not dogcatcher of Apaloosa County. Was he serious in his Tucson speech?

Probably because he's the president of the country not the democratic party. Any kind of repudiation on this matter should be handled by the democratic party not the president. If the president would rebuke what this person said he would have to do the same towards what anyone else says and that would by all likelihood take up all his time and I think the presidents time is a bit more valuable than that.

Here's another example of liberal media bias, if anyone needs one. After the Tucson shooting the MSM targeted conservatives 8-1 over liberals.

http://www.mrc.org/realitycheck/reality ... 34318.aspx

Face it the conservatives are at the forefront of gun rights, so it makes perfect sense to conservatives on this issue. No bias needed to see why this is so.

The attempted media hit job on Sarah Palin was criminal - there was absolutely nothing to link this kook to her movement. He is a Bush-hating druggie atheist who doesn't listen to talk radio - not exactly the profile of your average Palin fan. This was done immediately after the shooting from the same crowd who said let's not rush to judgement about the motive of the jihadist, 'Allah Akbar' shouting Ft. Hood killer.

And yet it was the environment that Palin is in large part responsible for that allowed the shooting to occur. To put it in other terms Palin was an enabler to the unbalanced person that did the shooting.

[East of Eden]

Actually Palin was not right about death panels. What this is though is an example of the uncivil inflammatory language that Palin regularly engages in which is so divisive to the national discourse on important issues.

Allow me to quote Hillary Clinton:

"I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration somehow you're not patriotic. We should stand up and say we are Americans and we have a right to debate and disagree with any administration."

Palin had a chance to demonstrate some statesmanship with the message she released after the shootings but instead she chose the low road by basically saying not me and probably killed any chance she had of running for president.

You don't sit still when accused of blood libel. She is one of the few who will speak up and say the right and true thing regardless of consequences. I don't care if she runs or not, she's doing a good job discombobulating the right people now judging by the hysteria the left has for this private citizen.

Probably because he's the president of the country not the democratic party. Any kind of repudiation on this matter should be handled by the democratic party not the president.

Fair enough, but I haven't heard anything from Pelosi, Reid, etc., only crickets chirping.

If the president would rebuke what this person said he would have to do the same towards what anyone else says and that would by all likelihood take up all his time and I think the presidents time is a bit more valuable than that.

Yes, it might impinge on one of his many vacations.

Face it the conservatives are at the forefront of gun rights, so it makes perfect sense to conservatives on this issue. No bias needed to see why this is so.

What this kook did is not a gun right.

And yet it was the environment that Palin is in large part responsible for that allowed the shooting to occur. To put it in other terms Palin was an enabler to the unbalanced person that did the shooting.

Baloney. You have NO basis to connect this event with Palin. This is why most distrust the MSM, and are tuning them out.

[Grumpy]

East of Eden

You don't sit still when accused of blood libel.

But you certainly shouldn't be stupid enough to call it that. I don't think anything Palin said had a thing to do with what that nutjob did. But the things she has said go far beyond where political speech should go, The whole RWFPN(Right Wing Fox Propaganda Network)has done the same. They have created a political atmosphere where they treat their political opponents as traitors(interesting, since the last traitorous event was the outing of Valery Plame), demonizing them with pure fabricated male bovine excrement. For years people have been pointing out that if, for instance, a preacher expresses his sincere belief that abortion is wrong by calling those who have other ideas murderers and the like, can he really be totally innocent if a troubled, impressionable soul in his congregation bombs an abortion clinic? If there are many such preachers reaching many more troubled people there will be more such acts.

If one political party encourages the preachers by playing to their prejudice for political gain is that party not culpable? And if there are very rich men, who own TV stations they call news but are filled with lies(lies that play to the existent prejudice of their audience), how is that different. Would it really be better if the nutjob in Arizona had been a Fox viewer? Or political? Does it help any that an abortion bomber is truly religious, make it all right to encourage him to think of others as murderers?

She is one of the few who will speak up and say the right and true thing regardless of consequences. I don't care if she runs or not, she's doing a good job discombobulating the right people now judging by the hysteria the left has for this private citizen.

She is a...less than stellar intellect, but I would encourage her to speak at every occasion. She makes me smile every time she speaks! You guys are the one she makes cringe the most, or at least the ones who care what the party looks like. She is much more a problem for you and yours, we are just pointing and laughing(I really hope her feet taste good, they are in her mouth so often).

Grumpy

[micatala]

FIrst, I will simply offer my own opinion that Reagan deserves at least a small amount of credit for helping end the Cold War, but I think the major factor was Gorbachev. He was the first Russian leader who had not lived through the horror of WWII, and who did not look at the west as seeking to "finish off what had been left unfinished" at that time.

Highly doubtful Gorbachev would have 'surrendered', for lack of a better term, without Reagan's hard consistent pressure on them, all the while being criticized by the left for 'warmongering', etc. To liberals, Reagan demanding that Gorbachev 'Tear this wall' was a 'gaffe'.

I won't belabor the point. I agree Reagan's actions probably accelerated the demise of the U.S.S.R, but I also think it would not have happened at all on his watch without Gorbachev there.

I certainly don't think Reagan's comment was a gaffe.

But let's be clear. Gorbachev is the one who made the decisions that led to dissolution.

Back to the civility issue, here is another example of what I would call disappointing political rhetoric.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/2 ... 11774.html

Democratic TN congressmen Cohen uses Nazi analogies in his criticisms of Republican statements on health care.

Have Republicans lied about the health care bill?

Yes.

Actually, Palin was right about the death panels.

http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/death-pa ... was-right/

Sorry, completely and utterly false. Palin lied plain and simple. The Cato institute is now going back after the fact and trying to give another explanation for her death panel comments.


If Palin was really worried about rationing by some government appointed group, where is the identified group? Can she point it out in the bill? If not, then she is lying.


On the larger issue of rationing, sure one could make a case that we already ration in Medicare and Medicaid and even ER's because of waits.
BUt that ignores that we ALSO ration by who has insurance and what the insurance companies cover.


Sorry, "death panels" is still a lie.

The Democrat lie about the health bill was that it won't add to the deficit. Only if you use Enron accounting.

Red Herring.

Is it necessary or helpful to drag in allusions to Hitler's propaganda minister to make this point?

No.

So why hasn;'t Obama repudiated this outrageous statement by a prominent member of his own party? By prominent I mean he's a member of the House, not dogcatcher of Apaloosa County. Was he serious in his Tucson speech?

If President's rebuked every unfortunate comment made by members of their party, they would be offering constant rebukes.

Why doesn't John Boehner rebuke Michelle Bachmann when she makes outrageous statements?

[Wyvern]

Actually Palin was not right about death panels. What this is though is an example of the uncivil inflammatory language that Palin regularly engages in which is so divisive to the national discourse on important issues.

Allow me to quote Hillary Clinton:

"I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration somehow you're not patriotic. We should stand up and say we are Americans and we have a right to debate and disagree with any administration."

Disagreeing and debating about healthcare reform is one thing lying about it is an entirely different matter.

Probably because he's the president of the country not the democratic party. Any kind of repudiation on this matter should be handled by the democratic party not the president.

Fair enough, but I haven't heard anything from Pelosi, Reid, etc., only crickets chirping.

The people you mention are also not the leaders of either the national or state democratic parties. It's amazing how you vociferously defend Palins right to say whatever she wants but complain when a democrat exercises the same right.

If the president would rebuke what this person said he would have to do the same towards what anyone else says and that would by all likelihood take up all his time and I think the presidents time is a bit more valuable than that.

Yes, it might impinge on one of his many vacations.

Care to count how many days off Obama has had? Or is this another example of hyperbolic speech you like to employ?

Face it the conservatives are at the forefront of gun rights, so it makes perfect sense to conservatives on this issue. No bias needed to see why this is so.

What this kook did is not a gun right.

Face it conservatives are intimately tied into the gun rights lobby. The shooter used a gun which means the news is going to focus on those people who are in favor of guns not against them. The bias you claim on this issue simply does not exist. See the guilt by association thing you like to use isn't so much fun when you're on the receiving end is it?

And yet it was the environment that Palin is in large part responsible for that allowed the shooting to occur. To put it in other terms Palin was an enabler to the unbalanced person that did the shooting.

Baloney. You have NO basis to connect this event with Palin. This is why most distrust the MSM, and are tuning them out.

I like how you people like to disparage the MSM but never include Fox as part of it even though they are the biggest cable news channel by far.

[Darias]

[center](WARNING: THESE VIDEOS CONTAIN VITRIOLIC, VIOLENT, AND HATEFUL RHETORIC. THEY ARE ONLY BEING POSTED TO PROVE A POINT. LISTEN AT YOUR OWN RISK.)[/center]


Inflammatory Rhetoric isn't just an accusation by the left towards the right. But it doesn't mean the left doesn't have a pole in their eye either.

[center][youtube][/youtube][/center]

[center][youtube][/youtube][/center]


And here's some love from the Liberal side:

[center][youtube][/youtube][/center]

[center][youtube][/youtube][/center]

You know what I've realized? Each partisan side, whether they are on the right or on the left, are totally oblivious to their own respective a______es in their ranks.

This kind of stuff: shoot them in the head, and having violence fantasies -- those things can affect paranoid schizophrenics who, when they watch the news/hear the radio, believe that they are being spoken to personally.

This may not have happened in this specific case in Arizona -- but it is a risk that we are taking everyday, to allow such rhetoric to go on, unchallenged or unconfronted. Sure, free speech is fine, so long as someone else uses their free speech to denounce the vitriol coming from the other side. To act like it doesn't exist is not helping.

[East of Eden]

I won't belabor the point. I agree Reagan's actions probably accelerated the demise of the U.S.S.R, but I also think it would not have happened at all on his watch without Gorbachev there.

I certainly don't think Reagan's comment was a gaffe.

But let's be clear. Gorbachev is the one who made the decisions that led to dissolution.

.....in response to Reagan's decisions.

Sorry, completely and utterly false. Palin lied plain and simple. The Cato institute is now going back after the fact and trying to give another explanation for her death panel comments.

Cite? Government health-care involves rationing. Dr. Emmanuel (Rham's brother) was very open about it. Is he lying too?

Red Herring.

But the allegation that the GOP lied about the healthcare bill isn't?

If President's rebuked every unfortunate comment made by members of their party, they would be offering constant rebukes.

Gee, how many Democrats are saying things as offensive as Cohen?

Why doesn't John Boehner rebuke Michelle Bachmann when she makes outrageous statements?

She isn't comparing Democrats to Nazis or saying their policies will lead to something equivalent to the holocaust.

[East of Eden]

But you certainly shouldn't be stupid enough to call it that. I don't think anything Palin said had a thing to do with what that nutjob did. But the things she has said go far beyond where political speech should go, The whole RWFPN(Right Wing Fox Propaganda Network)has done the same. They have created a political atmosphere where they treat their political opponents as traitors(interesting, since the last traitorous event was the outing of Valery Plame), demonizing them with pure fabricated male bovine excrement. For years people have been pointing out that if, for instance, a preacher expresses his sincere belief that abortion is wrong by calling those who have other ideas murderers and the like, can he really be totally innocent if a troubled, impressionable soul in his congregation bombs an abortion clinic? If there are many such preachers reaching many more troubled people there will be more such acts.

It would take a very confused parishoner to think the solution to murder is murder. Jesus never advocated that.

She is a...less than stellar intellect, but I would encourage her to speak at every occasion. She makes me smile every time she speaks!

She has more common sense in her little finger than the 'Professor' does in his body. She would never pal around with terrorists, or borrow trillions from our grandchildren to pay off union buddies, or refuse to close the border, etc. etc.

You guys are the one she makes cringe the most, or at least the ones who care what the party looks like.
She is much more a problem for you and yours, we are just pointing and laughing(I really hope her feet taste good, they are in her mouth so often).

What problem? In case you didn't notice last November, the GOP severely kicked the donkey's butt, harder than any election since 1938. In my own state, our new GOP hispanic governor was behind in the primary election until Sarah came in to campaign for her. She ended up winning the primary and election. Thank you, Sarah.

[East of Eden]

Disagreeing and debating about healthcare reform is one thing lying about it is an entirely different matter.

What is a lie is subjective. Back when Hillary said that IMHO her party was doing lots of lying about Bush. With a 2,000 page health bill few have read there are a lot of gray areas unfortunately.

The people you mention are also not the leaders of either the national or state democratic parties. It's amazing how you vociferously defend Palins right to say whatever she wants but complain when a democrat exercises the same right.

Palin isn't comparing the Democrats to Nazis or their policies to the Holocaust.

Care to count how many days off Obama has had? Or is this another example of hyperbolic speech you like to employ?

He takes enough that he should have five minutes to issue a statement rebuking this hateful statement from a member of his own party, that is if he was serious in his Tucson speech.

Face it conservatives are intimately tied into the gun rights lobby.

And proudly so, the Second Amendment guarantees all the others. If liberals treated the 2A like the do the 1A we'd all have nuclear weapons by now.

The shooter used a gun which means the news is going to focus on those people who are in favor of guns not against them.

Conservatives are against the misuse of guns as much as liberals are.

The bias you claim on this issue simply does not exist.

Yes it does, and was demonstrated by the finding that found an 8 to 1 media bias in the aftermath of Tucson.

I like how you people like to disparage the MSM but never include Fox as part of it even though they are the biggest cable news channel by far.

By MSM, I'm referring to the dinosaur, in the tank for Obama presstitutes.


I'll give you another example of media bias. When Timothy McVeigh did his crime in OK City, he openly said it was because of Clinton's actions at Waco and Ruby Ridge. Those were about the two worst abuses of government power against US citizens in my lifetime. Talk about incivility, shooting and burning unarmed women and children qualifies. Janet Reno should have been fired for those two events. Yet the MSM never blamed Clinton for McVeigh's actions, they rightly blamed McVeigh. With Palin, not only is there NO tie to the criminal, they are trying to blame her anyway.

[Wyvern]

Disagreeing and debating about healthcare reform is one thing lying about it is an entirely different matter.

What is a lie is subjective. Back when Hillary said that IMHO her party was doing lots of lying about Bush. With a 2,000 page health bill few have read there are a lot of gray areas unfortunately.

Okay fine we'll play it that way. Palins initial statement was merely misinformed about death panels but after being informed about such a thing not being in the health bill and not retracting or correcting her comment then it became a lie.

[

quote]The people you mention are also not the leaders of either the national or state democratic parties. It's amazing how you vociferously defend Palins right to say whatever she wants but complain when a democrat exercises the same right.

Palin isn't comparing the Democrats to Nazis or their policies to the Holocaust.

I don't see how the type of objectionable comment makes one okay but not the other. I have not heard the Republican party leadership making any comments on Palins objectionable statements.

Care to count how many days off Obama has had? Or is this another example of hyperbolic speech you like to employ?

He takes enough that he should have five minutes to issue a statement rebuking this hateful statement from a member of his own party, that is if he was serious in his Tucson speech.

Previously you agreed that it would be inappropriate for the president to comment on this issue. I'll say it again since you apparently forgot it already, the president is the president of the nation not the democratic party.

Face it conservatives are intimately tied into the gun rights lobby.

And proudly so, the Second Amendment guarantees all the others. If liberals treated the 2A like the do the 1A we'd all have nuclear weapons by now.

The shooter used a gun which means the news is going to focus on those people who are in favor of guns not against them.

Conservatives are against the misuse of guns as much as liberals are.

When you are for the virtually unfettered access of guns for everyone you greatly increase the chances of guns being misused. This is yet another example of the law of unintended consequences.

The bias you claim on this issue simply does not exist.

Yes it does, and was demonstrated by the finding that found an 8 to 1 media bias in the aftermath of Tucson.

Exactly what kind of news article would be published against people that are for gun control in this situation? If you are in the gun lobbies pocket you got to expect bad press when there is gun related violence.

I like how you people like to disparage the MSM but never include Fox as part of it even though they are the biggest cable news channel by far.

By MSM, I'm referring to the dinosaur, in the tank for Obama presstitutes.

Sorry but if you want to call it the MSM you have to include Fox. It would be like referencing the american auto manufacturers but not include GM.

I'll give you another example of media bias. When Timothy McVeigh did his crime in OK City, he openly said it was because of Clinton's actions at Waco and Ruby Ridge. Those were about the two worst abuses of government power against US citizens in my lifetime. Talk about incivility, shooting and burning unarmed women and children qualifies. Janet Reno should have been fired for those two events. Yet the MSM never blamed Clinton for McVeigh's actions, they rightly blamed McVeigh. With Palin, not only is there NO tie to the criminal, they are trying to blame her anyway.

Another thing that happened after the OKC bombing, legislation was passed that made it much more difficult to obtain the materials used to make that bomb. Would you be in favor of legislation to make it harder to get a handgun? You really shouldn't pay much attention to insane people, McVeigh also was convinced that the bombing would trigger a race war. Isn't it amazing how right wing propaganda can twist unbalanced people.