Originally Posted By utahjosh <It's absolutely true that there's no evidence that conservative violent rhetoric influenced the shooter.> So glad to hear you say that. <So why are conservatives more interested in pointing that out than in denouncing the rhetoric?> Because way too many people HAVE blamed them for the shooting. And I also wish they would also say "Hey, let's have more of a civil dialog and less shrill voices."
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>And I also wish they would also say "Hey, let's have more of a civil dialog and less shrill voices." << But that's what they are saying. I don't know how long we can thrive as a country if political debate is nothing but divisive. It seems we are at a point not where there are two opinions on how to approach a particular problem, but rather two opinions on whether or not something even IS a problem. With healthcare, you have millions and millions of people unable to afford insurance. The debate ought to be how we solve that problem. Instead, it becomes a debate about the status quo vs. attempting even half-measures to address the problem. From the environment to the economy, we can't seem to agree on IF there are problems or not, let alone what steps should be considered. So we start at these polar opposite ends of the spectrum on each of these matters. And then to ratchet up that sort of argument with a few layers of gun-inspired rhetoric is just stupid, no matter who is doing it.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <Sarah Palin had an opportunity in this to legitimately deny any causation but also step up to be a real leader and declare that from this point forward, she'd help set a higher level of debate. She fumbled that opportunity because she couldn't get over herself.> Exactly. As I said on another thread, in the days following the incident everyone from Roger Ailes to Keith Olbermann said we needed to ratchet the overheated atmosphere down. Pols far less culpable than Palin for contributing to the poisonous atmosphere said some variation of "to the extent that I contributed to that atmosphere, I'm sorry, and I resolve to be more civil in the future." But Palin wouldn't. She could have done herself a world of good just with uttering the teensiest mea culpa (even an insincere one, for crying out loud), and then saying "at the same time, I don't think these attacks on me have been fair." But no. It became a long narcissistic whine-fest about "poor me." No taking of responsibility for the toxic atmosphere that she has done more than most to create. And by the way, only a very few people have said there was anything causal about the rhetoric and the shooting, i.e. "this rhetoric caused this shooting." But naturally that's the straw man some are intent on attacking. What many more have said is that our discourse has become toxic, some are intent on seeing those they disagree with as un-American or even enemies, and that this atmosphere CAN ultimately have consequences - a divisive country for most of us where we distrust and disdain our neighbors, and perhaps worse for people not very stable to begin with. And we need to dial it down.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***<So why are conservatives more interested in pointing that out than in denouncing the rhetoric?> Because way too many people HAVE blamed them for the shooting*** Interestingly, I watched this very carefully from the start (well, after reading and semi-absorbing the horrible news, anyway)...and let me tell you the first ones to spring into action were NOT angry liberals pointing fingers. No, it was with surprising swiftness that they circled the wagons and went into damage control mode. Palin's website was DOWN and being scrubbed literally within hours (maybe minutes), and IMMEDIATELY after the shooting the RIGHT WING folks started attacking the left because "the Socialist Obama loving stoner killed the Congresswoman (yes, killed, they were shouting it before the headlines were changed) because she was too moderate for them!". They tried desperately for about half a news cycle to throw that garbage and see if it would stick. It didn't. So they changed to "he was apolitical, and the Libs are attacking us!". Now, if their cockamamy attempt HAD born fruit, think we'd hear them call for civility and demand apologies from their own people for jumping the gun? Ha!
Originally Posted By mele It amazes me how quickly the general consensus was that the political discourse in this country was so toxic that it needed to be addressed immediately after the shooting. So, even if there was no actual link between the two, they will always be linked and nothing *any* republican (leader or follower) can say will make that not true. It's too bad some can't just admit they've made mistakes try to do better.
Originally Posted By plpeters70 <<It's too bad some can't just admit they've made mistakes try to do better.>> It is a shame, but it seems that in today's charged political environment, no one will ever admit to making a mistake. They either try and foist the blame "on the other guy", or try and pretend there isn't anything to apologize for. And the media let's them get away with it.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt >>So you really believe that it's all just a coincidence?<< "The Palin map and the shooting? Yes, I do believe it's a coincidence." Do you believe that there is a possibility that they could be indirectly related? What if Giffords had been a Palin/Tea Party endorsed candidate? Do you think that the shootings would have still happened?
Originally Posted By utahjosh That's impossible to answer nor knowing the mind of the shooter. I did hear the interview with his friend who claimed he probably never saw plains map and was indifferent to the tea party. My guess is yes.
Originally Posted By ecdc Again, what does it matter? Why are conservatives more interested in circling the wagons and absolving themselves of responsibility instead of contributing to a more civil culture? This is exactly the problem. It's all about them. It's all about being right all the time. They certainly never did anything wrong. No siree. Don't point a finger in their direction. How about a statement like this from Glenn Beck: "We will likely never know the motivation of the shooter, but knowing will not bring back the dead or heal the wounded. What we do know is that our country is deeply fractured and our rhetoric too heated. I have at times participated in that heated rhetoric. I apologize and I commit, as have others, to improving and creating more meaningful dialogue. Being more civil may not have stopped this shooter, but it will bring us closer together as Americans." That's it. How is that so bloody hard? Instead, it's all about how the shooter is supported by Democrats (Rush Limbaugh) and how Obama finally decided to be President (Glenn Beck) and how I'm actually the big victim in all this (Sarah Palin). Why anyone would defend these people is beyond me, but here we are.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>I apologize and I commit, as have others, to improving and creating more meaningful dialogue.<< I hope he means it.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>I hope he means it.<< Well he didn't say it, I did. I was trying to ask, but wasn't very clear, why would it be so hard for him to say that? But Glenn Beck would deface his own chalkboard before he said something like that.
Originally Posted By gadzuux I heard a soundbite from Rush this morning, in which he states that democrats are secretly hoping for another tragedy like Tuscon, but is more traceable to conservative rhetoric - BECAUSE they want to get him off the air. Yet another ridiculous example of how, in the eyes of these GOP mouthpieces, it's all about them.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan Well he didn't say it, I did.<< D'oh! I was thinking that somehow, someway, a small glimmer of hope emerged that he might dial it down just a bit. What was I thinking? LOL
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>democrats are secretly hoping for another tragedy like Tuscon<< He's projecting again.
Originally Posted By Labuda When is Rush going to get the hell out of here and move to Costa Rica like he promised he'd do when our President was elected?
Originally Posted By mele Good question, Labuda. Rush has also been saying (spewing) nonsense about how the shooter has the "full support" of the Democratic party. Uh, yeah. Especially the victim, I'm sure. Perhaps it's all an elaborate hoax by the Dems to gain power.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 >>democrats are secretly hoping for another tragedy like Tucson>> It almost did happen yesterday in Spokane. www.cbsnews.com.504083_162-20028818-504083.html
