Quote:
Originally Posted by ottopilot
If you saw my reply to Tully, I said I will take a look. I'm on my cell-phone, so I'll look when I get home. If true about Beck's on-air Michael Moore fantasy I'll say "that's terrible" and "how irresponsible". Let's pretend that IS the case... "that's terrible" and "how irresponsible", says otto. And I would not approve of such speech.
|
Thank you for your honesty. I have similarly troubling statements from Palin, O'Reilly, Hannity, Bachmann, Savage, Angle, and a host of others on the right, if you're interested. That's the point of the thread. There's too much in the discourse that has nothing to do with honest opinion and everything to do with violence against people who disagree with you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ottopilot
Getting back to my point... I asked where do you stand on violent speech in general, or does only count when it comes from the right?
|
It's abhorrent no matter where it's coming from and deserving of strong rebuke. I was furious with Eric Fuller, one of the 19 shoot victims, for his outburst at the Tucson Tea Party gathering. He clearly was furious and let it out in an extremely inappropriate way. I'm glad he's
subsequently apologized publicly. What happened to him was truly tragic and he's deserving of our sympathies, but his veiled threat against Tucson Tea Party leader Trent Humphries was an unacceptable response. Come to think of it,
Keith Olbermann recently apologized for past comments that might have been needlessly inflammatory. I believe his quote was, “violence, or the threat of violence, has no place in our democracy.” I certainly agree with that sentiment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ottopilot
They could have used a fictional president for the assassination play I mentioned, but they used the name of a sitting president.
|
Was there a movie version done? I remember watching a fake documentary on the assassination of George Bush a few years ago. It was not at all what I expected. In the story, the country came together to mourn the President and to condemn the gunman, the father of a dead soldier. It wasn't a murderous fantasy like Glenn Beck above, but rather served primarily as a dramatic warning to would be assassins. In other words, it's not the same thing by a long shot. Inappropriate pun not intended.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ottopilot
But wait.. is W dead? Is Michael Moore dead? And with his (MM) considerable means, has he made an attempt to take civil action against Beck or launch a campaign to discredit Beck? Where does all this hate come from? I don't like it either. But what makes your argument appear suspect is the obvious slant against the right when the evidence just doesn't support your one-sided view. If you're interested in solving a problem, perhaps polarizing the problem isn't the best place to start.
|
This line is a little too convenient when it comes from the right, that somehow both sides share equal responsibility in the current climate of outrageous lies and violent rhetoric. No such balance exists in reality, and suggesting that it does exist only serves to stop a real solution which involves conservatives standing up to their bullies. There's no one on the left like Beck, Palin, Hannity, or Savage. They don't exist. The left is not neck-deep in gun culture and revolutionary language, even at the peak of the Bush administration. Liberals aren't bringing bombs or knives or whatever the equivalent of guns might be to our political get togethers.
"I'll get right to fixing things once it doesn't seem like my side enjoys the vast majority of the blame." Really?