Treat violent rhetoric the same as racist rhetoric. Shut it down.

[stevietheman]

It's time to start viewing violent rhetoric the same way we view racist rhetoric. Shut it down. It's not about ideology. It's about supporting individual freedoms that violent rhetoric ultimately denies and preserving a decent republic.

Whenever you come across any person, organization, movement, etc., of any point of view, using violent rhetoric especially to incite violence, call them on it. Tell them you object. Tell them their behavior is unacceptable in our country.

(Sure, I realize most of the violent rhetoric comes from the right, but still, I think we can approach this matter in a nonpartisan, nonideological way and just start demanding that people stop this kind of rhetoric no matter where it originates.)

[jtrockville]

1. Maybe we should report it to the FBI?

Not necessarily every co-worker's utterance. But certainly for violent rhetoric that is spewed on a national stage.

[OneAngryDemocrat]

2. No

"I think we can approach this matter in a nonpartisan, nonideological way..."

How has appeasement worked out for you so far?

[stevietheman]

4. It has worked very well for toning down racist rhetoric.

It is not appeasement. It is standing on high moral ground.

[OneAngryDemocrat]

9. It is NONSENSE.

It's nonsense because liberals are not talking about shooting conservatives.

Pretending that liberals are shooting conservatives plays into the conservative mind-set that liberals are a threat to their very existance, which is precisely why conservaties ARE (in fact) shooting liberals.

It is the conservative mind-set that liberals are a threat that HAS to be dispelled, and that will not happen by RE-INFORCING that false conservative belief.

Got it?

[ClassWarrior]

6. Who's suggesting appeasement? I like this suggestion, from another DUer...

We say, "Okay, from this point on, liberals won't talk about shooting conservatives if conservatives don't talk about shooting liberals."

That's not appeasement. That's being fair and responsible.

NGU.

[OneAngryDemocrat]

8. It's Nonsense.

It's nonsense because liberals are not talking about shooting conservatives.

Pretending that liberals are plays into the conservative mind-set that liberals are a threat to their existance, which is precisely why conservaties ARE shooting liberals.

It is the conservative mind-set that liberals are a threat that HAS to be dispelled, and that will not happen by RE-INFORCING that false belief.

Got it?

[Horse with no Name]

3. Problem is these days

We don't have a way to shut down racist rhetoric anymore. Ever see transcripts of the racist shit rush spews on a constant basis?

[stevietheman]

5. And Rush is called on it all the time

We don't call out violent rhetoric the same way we call out racist rhetoric. That needs to change.

[Horse with no Name]

7. By who? We post it here.

I personally wrote the FCC trying to shut that motherfucker down with specific rhetoric.
I got a response that said he was allowed to say what he wants.

So--other than when it is posted here--WHO exactly calls him out and what repercussions happen to him when he does it?

He was removed from Armed Forces Radio--oh wait...no, he wasn't. :eyes:
He is still allowed to spew hate to our troops.

[OneAngryDemocrat]

10. .