I hate to cast the shooting and likely assassination of a Democratic Congresswoman as the latest—and most chilling—example that political discourse in the United States has veered well past the point of civility. But it’s a fair question, even as we wait for more information to come in.
Giffords had already been among a handful of Democrats targeted over support for national health care reform. Sarah Palin, these days trying to come off as a cutesy, rustic reality star, has repeatedly been accused of incendiary remarks. And everyone remembers the ugly epithets hurled at other federal representatives during the health care battles in the summer of 2009.
Update 2:36 PM: So now we know who the shooter is. He’s not quite the poster child for the Tea Party. Does that mean we shouldn’t worry about violent political rhetoric, no matter which side is spout it? No.
A HuffPo writer offers a good look here at the dangers of the “lock and load” rhetoric that’s been seeping ever closer inward from the fringes of our politics.
I know politics ain’t beanbag. But words have consequences, rhetoric shapes reality, and much as we like to believe that we are creatures of reason, there is something about our species’ limbic system and lizard brainstems that makes us susceptible to irrational fantasies.
If you’re worried that violent video games may make kids prone to bad behavior; if you think that mysogenic and homophobic rap lyrics are dangerous to society; if you believe that a nipple in a Superbowl halftime show is a threat to our moral fabric – then surely you should also fear that the way public and media figures have framed political participation with shooting gallery imagery is just as potentially lethal.
Well yes: one of the two viable political parties in the U.S. has made it clear that they’d like us to be more like Rwanda. This is because someone somewhere was briefly suggesting that medical costs are too high, or something.
After the first paragraph about a congress woman shot, you write “Giffords had already been among a handful of Democrats targeted over support for national health care reform.” So when you say ‘Democrats targeted’, isn’t your language a bit cold and heartless? Or azre you serious about the language you use? Sounds like a hate crime to me.
Andy, the image of a gunsight is rather unambiguous. Palin, Angle, and other Tea Partiers have been trying to score political points with their base without caring that the outcome may be that this country will turn into a much more violent and dangerous place. “Second Amendment remedies,” remember that Angle quote?
http://www.lasvegassun.com/blogs/ralstons-…
Oh, but Todd… it was:
a) A joke! Just kidding around!
b) Taken out of context! I was really making a point about over the counter cold remedies just before and after that part about bears with arms!
c) Just a reflection of what our Founding Fathers really meant when they wrote the Constitution!
I mean, it couldn’t have possibly had any kind of reference to actually taking up arms to acheive a political gain, could it? I mean, that would just be crazy talk.
Everyone has to have an opinion 5 fucking minutes later, fully fleshed out and posted on the internet about how this totally fits with everything they’ve been saying and it’s a clarion call to do what they’ve been saying we should do.
For fuck’s sake: wait until it’s sorted out. MAYBE SOMETIMES MORE THAN 24 HOURS. Then you don’t have to make an assload of telling assumptions and logical contortions.
That’s what I meant on another thread when I agreed with the sentiment “fuck this country.”
USA: From stupid/crazy horrific act to vertical miles of self-serving punditry in no time flat.
And almost all of it for the sake of viewers/page views (a.k.a. ads).
Sadly, Colin, things move so quickly in our wired society that speculation becomes fact in many people’s minds. It sucks, but that’s the way it is. The right hopes a leftist did it, the left hopes a rightist did it. So we all look for information that fits what we hope is the reality. And if we don’t have facts, we say what we hope the reality is, almost as if that will become the reality…or at least people will think it is.
A woman on Twitter posted that when she knew the shooter in ’07, she thought he was left-wing. I went to a Yahoo News story and dozens of right-wing commenters were writing “See, he’s a leftist!” and so forth. Never mind that he spoke against federalism and for the gold standard. And tried to enlist in the military in late ’08. There, I’m cherry-picking too.
But, guess what, everyone isn’t just going to say “Let’s wait a month and then form an opinion.” I suppose you could go back in time and prevent the internet from being invented…
I think it’s weird how the death of one female politician somehow becomes about the future of another female politician.
I’m sad for Congresswoman Giffords family. Everything is not about politics.
Some disturbed person just profoundly changed her family’s life forever for the worst.
@ES: “Everything is not about politics.” True. A politician being stalked and shot? Sorry to have to tell you, but that has to do with politics. Loony politics, maybe, but that’s a not insubstantial portion of American politics these days. As for “another female politician,” she has now taken down the graphic shown on this post, which shows at least a slight though rather late acceptance that she went too far.
@Todd: So the right should watch its political rhetoric about “targeting” districts, etc, but if the media jumps the gun — oh shit, how can I avoid this violent language — about what happened and the causes of what happened, that’s just the way things are? Ugh.
@ Todd, thanks for knocking down that “one month” straw man you built for me.
Hopefully it tells you something that the only way you could disagree with me was to stretch my point to an absurdity, and mention the infeasibility of time travel.
Colin: actually through most of my comment at #6 I thought I was agreeing with your main point and amplifying on it. I think you’re mistaking my my opinion of how things are for a declaration that this is how I think things should be. It’s rather that I think you’re whispering into a hurricane.
As for “knocking down [the] straw man,” I’m not sure I understand. I never said I wasn’t speculating like everyone else (well, almost everyone else). I don’t think calling this political is speculation, frankly. This was not a random drive-by shooting. If I misunderstand you, I apologize.
@extramsq: See my reply to Colin above. I never said that I like the rampant speculation, but it goes on, on all sides. I’d like to know how you and others would like to stop it, without limitations on the media–and internet freedom–that might cause far more problems than they solve. Seriously, let me hear some suggestions, other than “let’s just all knock it off,” which is a fine sentiment but isn’t likely to change anything.
Sorry, I mean extramsg, not extramsq. Mistook you for a fan of the Minsk National Airport for a moment.
@Todd: Well, you could start by not being part of the problem.
OK, got it. Please let us know when we can start speculating.