Sargent: "I hope Giffords shooting gets folks to stop rewarding incendiary rhetoric"

[Clio the Leo]

Sums up my thoughts on the matter perfectly.

On the Gabrielle Giffords shooting
By Greg Sargent

It's crass and counterproductive to start asking whether any political parties or ideologies are to blame for the tragic and horrific shooting of Dem Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and others at an event with constituents yesterday. That's especially true given that the shooter is looking more and more like a deranged loner and early chatter that he might have had an accomplice is turning out to be false.

But it's fair to ask lawmakers and commentators to use this tragedy as a jumping off point for some serious reflection about what has become of our political discourse. Even if there's no clear connection between the shooting and the incendiary political rhetoric that has now become perilously close to the norm in American politics, that doesn't mean the shooting can't serve as a reminder to those who are inclined towards over-the-top rhetoric that words matter and risk having consequences that are somewhat more important than whether they earn their purveyors cable and Internet play.

As a number of folks have argued persuasively today, even if we don't know whether the shooter's motives have anything to do with the tone of our politics, that doesn't mean we can't use the shooting to call for more introspection and self-restraint from those who flirt with violent rhetoric or paint their opponents as treasonous and anti-American.

I'd like to take this one step further, though. I hope the shooting is also a gut-check moment of sorts for lawmakers and commentators who wouldn't dream of trafficking in such rhetoric themselves but tend to just dismiss it as "part of the game." I'm talking about those who shower uncritical media and Internet attention on purveyors of hateful rhetoric because it gets "clicks" and "eyeballs"; those who look the other way when colleagues indulge in it; and those who scoff at criticism of such rhetoric as motivated by nothing but "partisanship."

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2011/01/gabrielle_giffords_shooting.html

[doc03]

1. That's why people like Ann Coulter and Sarah Palin

exist. If they weren't bomb throwers they would have disappeared from view 2 years ago.

[Bluenorthwest]

2. I came to DU to try to stop Obama rewarding incendiary rhetoric

I'm very sorry, but at times like this playing patsy cake is out of the question. I came to DU because the Barack Obama campaign hired some of the most extreme speakers of incendiary rhetoric this nation has to offer. The made the worst of them, Donnie McClurkin, into personal surrogate for Barack, the sole speaker at campaign events where he railed against the same minority group he had many times slandered in the extreme. Donnie McClurkin called for a war against minorities he does not like, he urged his faith mates to 'take off the gloves, because this is war. They are trying to kill our children.'
I wonder if the OP or any of the former defenders of McClurkin wish to step up here today, and tell us why it is acceptable for a Democratic candidate to employ surrogates who have called for war upon minority groups. War. Accused us of murdering kids. This is the rhetoric Obama rewarded. Deal with it. Oprah also rewarded that hate monger, over and over again.
Add the President's own declarations that he thinks only straight people are 'sanctified by God' to his more aggressive surrogates, and what do you have? God does not like them and you should go to war against them.
Does anyone still think McClurkin and his war against gay people was just good old time religion? Anyone from the 'faith community' want to stand up for Donnie today? Anyone got a reason why such rhetoric should have been rewarded with status as surrogate to a Presidential candidate and US Senator? Anyone want to talk about Michelle saying that the man who declared war on minorities is her favorite singer of 'Gospel'?
Many on DU said calling for war against gay people was just talk. The way the churches are. They said Obama needed to use hate preachers to prove his "boan fides" to the 'faith community' which apparently would not be happy without calls for violence against teh gay.
So unless you folks are comfortable with calls for war against those Americans you do not like, unless you see some minorities as vampires and child murderers, you most certainly all should have told those people that back then.
Tell me, how is it that Donnnie is ok calling for war against my family, but others are not ok when they call for war? I mean, if you embraced or accepted Donnie McClurkin, and you are castigating the other hate speakers, you are just in orbit.
"We are at war. They are trying to kill our children." The words of an Obama surrogate. Does that make you feel great today?
Should Obama do more events with such preachers, do you think? Yes, or no? I say he should have been drummed out of the Party for that shit. The events in Arizona describe why NO ONE has the right to speak of attacking other groups of Americans, no one has the right to call for war, one group against the other. All who played that game are in part culpable for what we are now dwelling in, this is the world Donnie and Sarah made for your children to live in.
I came here to protest the use of hate speech by Democratic surrogate Donnie McClurkin, surrogate to Senator Barack Obama, due to his violent invective against large minority groups. Because he called for war upon us. War means killing, we all know that. He called for us to be killed, and Obama cut him a check, gave him the spotlight. How is that so spiffy? How is that a Godly thing, m'dear?
So in the primary, Obama and his ardents claimed to be at war with my community. Are you maybe starting to understand the vile nature of the McClurkin events? Does the blood in Arizona show you why calling for war and violence is not ever acceptable?
Or should I expect more slanders in the next campaign? More talk of war, and more preachers calling my family thieves and prostitutes for the pleasure of the 'faith community'?
I love seeing Donnie's fanclub get all nervous about the rhetoric they have endorsed. Because they did endorse Donnie, and his rhetoric meets and outpaces any other vile speaker out there. He called for war and open attacks against innocent gay families. Obama calls him friend.
I wash my hands of this set of people, the rhetoric and the utter culpability that all who supported any hate filled rhetoric now share. When it comes to those who sew hate, there is no 'left and right' just haters and non haters. McClurkin and the war against gay is hate, pure, violence based hate.
I see Obama as a McClurkin duplicate, just a monger of whatever will get him paid. Hate gays? Sure, why not, call that guy who declared war on them! Hot! T

[Imajika]

3. Why not just blame violent video games and hip hop music?

"As a number of folks have argued persuasively today, even if we don't know whether the shooter's motives have anything to do with the tone of our politics, that doesn't mean we can't use the shooting to call for more introspection and self-restraint from those who flirt with violent rhetoric or paint their opponents as treasonous and anti-American."

So basically, it's turning out that Loughner was just a nut and probably not driven at all by the "tone of our politics", but we should change the tone of our politics anyway?

Huh?

Did Loughner play videos games. I bet they were violent ones. Bah, who cares, even if he didn't play a single video game, how about we argue we need to "dial back" the violence in video games just because....well, because.

Same could be said for music, same could said for movies.

This is ridiculous. There is no indication whatsoever that the "tone of our politics" had anything to do with Loughner's assassination attempt. Some people are crazy and do crazy things. Period. Did the tone of our politics effect John Hinckley? Not a bit.

[Clio the Leo]

4. I'm not saying there's a link....

.... between what Loughner did and our rhetoric.

I'm saying that a lot of our rhetoric is in poor taste and gets us nowhere. I'm hoping that the incidents this week will remind us of that fact.