"In the US, where hate rules at the ballot box, this tragedy has been coming for a long time"

[Kurovski]

Michael Tomasky guardian.co.uk, Sunday 9 January 2011


"...In sum, he had political ideas, which not everyone does. Many of them (not all, but most) were right wing. He went to considerable expense and trouble to shoot a high-profile Democrat, at point-blank range right through the brain. What else does one need to know? For anyone to attempt to insist that the violent rhetoric so regularly heard in this country had no likely effect on this young man is to enshroud oneself in dishonesty and denial."

*clip*

"The Coalition to Stop Gun Violence has documented more than two dozen killings by or arrests of rightwing extremists who intended to do serious political violence since 2008. One Tennessee man killed two worshippers at a liberal church, regretting only that he had not been able to ice the 100 liberals named by author Bernard Goldberg as those most responsible for destroying America. Giffords herself received threats after voting for the healthcare reform bill, and shots were fired through the window of her district office. An event like this has been coming for a long time."

*clip*

"...Today's Republicans and conservative commentators, however, surely understand the fire they're playing with. But they do it, and a tragedy like Saturday's won't stop them, as long as they can maintain a phoney plausible deniability and as long as hate continues to pay dividends at the ballot box."

Please read all...


http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/jan/09/us-shooting-republicans-giffords-loughner

[liberal N proud]

1. It has been coming for far too long

[bemildred]

2. "It happens all the time" is more like it.

Political violence is as american as apple pie.

[Kurovski]

4. But never has hate been used so openly and methodically for purposes of gaining power.

That seems to be one of the points in the article.

Rep. Giffords herself mentioned that her colleagues and her had discussed that they had never seen the level of threats so high in the past.

There is definitely a difference.

[bemildred]

5. Oh yes it has, all the time.

I have no intention of letting any of these weasels off the hook, but hate-mongering is neither new nor different. It may not have got this bad in Ms Giffords memory, but it has in mine. I remember Abraham, Martin, and John.

[Kurovski]

6. Again: it is used openly, with little push-back or responsibility.

It is a political tool. Gone mainstream. Acceptable. Not shocking to speak that way. The media would not promote those ideas openly in the 60s. They were considered nutso, not given an airing as though it were acceptable to openly threaten lives. Not considered "the other point of view". it was incitment to murder, just as it is now, only now it is considered "free speech" in some qaurters to threaten violence.

I disagree that the times are similar, and I may be incorrect.

[bemildred]

9. I don't think I want to fight with you, even though I don't share all your views.

The MSM as it is now is new, the "consolidation" of the MSM is new, but political murder and incitement to it are very old school, and the political strain that the tea-party represents is as old as our republic.

So I'm going to leave it at that.
:hi:

[Kurovski]

11. I agree bemildred.

And I do understand that you lived through these times as an adult, and have a different perspective.

Besides, nothing's going to change my respect for you as I've observed you over the years. you could even call me an asswipe, and i'd still admire you. :D I'd be given pause, rather than offense.

:hi:

[Lifelong Protester]

3. Hate rules, controversy sells ad time... I can only imagine what

the Guardian is printing is selling all over Europe. We must be looked upon as one nation of crazies...

I especially agree with this line:

"as long as they can maintain a phoney plausible deniability and as long as hate continues to pay dividends at the ballot box"

[Kurovski]

7. When you look at the comments, there are many rightwingers flooding it.

They think the author is out of line. But who knows where the contributing critics actually reside.

The first page is more outraged with the author than the event. Always a good sign of tighty-righty priorities.

[mrcheerful]

8. From what I picked up on there are at least 2 posters over there that hail

from the US. That also shows how the right are busy trying to influence and spin opinions. I even saw one guy who used the shooter was an atheist flag burner so he has to be left wing crap.

[enuegii]

10. Spinning all over...

I saw comments on the le Monde site defending Palin and the baggers.