The random political thoughts thread (Part Deux)

[scaeagles]

For the same reason, I suppose, that people aren't up in arms over James Cameron recently saying that global warming deniers should be shot.

I can't answer why people don't respond the way you would like them to.

As far as the political affiliation of the person who threw a brink through the window - whomever, regardless of political affiliation, should be responsible for their actions. All I did was point out that a widely publicized right wing threat and intimidation in CO that was touted all over as being right wing extremism on parade was, in fact, a liberal democrat trying to frame republicans. Do you condemn the actions of that person? I'm sure you would....just as I have condemned the actions and the republican leaders in your links have condemned them. It may not go as far as you'd like, but there is the condemnation.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

For the same reason, I suppose, that people aren't up in arms over James Cameron recently saying that global warming deniers should be shot.

To be accurate, he challenged them to a duel.

[scaeagles]

Well, I suppose I'm making the extrapolation the Cameron doesn't want to die.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

Well, I suppose I'm making the extrapolation the Cameron doesn't want to die.

Perhaps. But I do think there's a difference between, "Let's battle" vs. "I'm going to kill you."

[scaeagles]

So it's OK to choose the honorable way of killing someone?

[Alex]

To the extent that either side couches their political disagreements in terms of violence and killing it is wrong and a needless escalation.

That said, there is a difference between using imagery of violence as a metaphor as both Cameron and Palin both clearly have, nobody seriously thinks either wants to literally shoot the people with whom they are disagreeing and simply expressing a desire for violence as sometimes happens.

So, my preference would be that everybody say to the people offering the violence metaphors "tsk, tsk, don't be an ass" and to those pretending to be offended by obvious metaphors "tsk, tsk, don't be an ass."

And everybody should condemn in the strongest terms threats or exhortations to violence that are not metaphors, regardless of whether the person uttering them is likely or even capable of carrying them out.

[JWBear]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

To be accurate, he challenged them to a duel.

I thought it was a debate.

[flippyshark]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

For the same reason, I suppose, that people aren't up in arms over James Cameron recently saying that global warming deniers should be shot.

I hadn't heard that (or about him wanting to duel with deniers) - but Cameron isn't a political leader. I agree with his position re: global warming, but I also find him silly. (He sure can direct action sequences, though!)

This game of "why didn't you object when this or that happened?" is one of the most tiresome, predictable and potentially endless gambits in any political discussion. Alex had it pretty right on when he said that most of us can recognize metaphor in rhetoric, as opposed to outright incitement, or actual criminal acts. So, Palin's crosshair map doesn't bother me in the least, nor does the "Fire Nancy Pelosi" with fiery flames in the background on the RNC website. I can easily see that these mean "Hey, get these people out of office in November."

In case anyone missed it, here is what incitement looks like, courtesy of Mike Vanderboegh, as reported on a Fox site. No question about it - a militia man who relishes the thought of violent overthrow, actively telling people to break windows as a warning for the gunshots that are to follow if the government continues on its present course. And he's practically giddy at the thought of being arrested and charged with sedition because of the platform it will give him. Chilling. Okay, this isn't a political leader, but I would sleep a little more soundly if I heard Republicans call this guy out by name and say no, that's not the way things are going to happen.

(By the way, for what it's worth, I thought Boehner's public response to all of this was reasonable, if predictably politicized, but I'm not expecting anything any politician says to be otherwise.)

Okay, rambling as usual. I'm going to pop extra popcorn this November.

[scaeagles]

My only point in this, Flippy, is to say that this is nothing new. I have been more than clear in condemning any violence and property crimes. I am just amazed at those who seem to believe (and sincerely so) that it is one sided or that this is new, particularly when the Iraq war is relatively recent. I won't go back as far as Viet Nam or any other number of controversial things.

It isn't right. It also isn't new.

[mousepod]

And now Anthony Weiner's Office Receives Threatening Letter Containing White Powder

Weiner, who is Jewish, has reportedly received anti-Semitic notes in recent days, including one addressing him as "Schlomo." He has acknowledged that his strong support for reform, which has included multiple media appearances defending reform legislation, has made him "something of a lightning rod."

classy.