And it seems Sarah isn't the only one who "targets" or puts "bulleyes" on political opponents. Over at the daily kos (hardly a bastion of conservative thinking) they specifically targeted Rep. Giffords as someone who "sold out the Constitution"
You can read it here (until they scrub it to avoid taking the responsibility they demand of the conservatives) http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/6/25/1204/74882/511/541568
Twist it all you want. Most of us can see through the spin.
US politics is something of a mystery to me. I'm not quite sure what "selling out the constitution" signifies. Presumably its not so serious that Rep. Gifford deserved to get shot for it.
Without thinking too much about it I would tend to classify the character depicted in the above video as "extreme right". Maybe I'm wrong to do that. On the other hand one doesn't often hear the term extreme Left. How these terms relate to the US political parties I'm not sure but, judging by the reactions to my Rural Revolution comments some readers recognise themselves as "extreme Right".
The extreme left is much more prominent and active though it is downplayed by the media.
In my own community we've had eco-terrorists burn residences and even university buildings. Protests are excuses for the extreme left to break windows and vandalize local businesses. Programming on the discovery channel caused a left wing extremist to try to bomb the headquarters. An extremist left wing professor (amy bishop) killed 3 board members for denying her tenure. Francis Fox Piven calls for European style riots to forward social justice. Unions terrorize corporate officers at their homes. I could go on an on.
The left gets a free pass in the (mainstream) media. Anyone that does not adhere to the progressive dogma group think is labeled a racist or an extremist or hater of some kind.
Fortunately they don't have a monopoly on news coverage anymore and Americans are waking up to see the hypocrisy of the elected elite on left and the right. This led to the rise of the Tea Party and their successful unseating of corporatist/pork barrel career politicians, though I think they were very clumsy which I guess is expected from a disorganized grassroots movement without centralized leadership.
I believe a majority of Americans don't wear the labels the media assigns to sensationalize to get ratings. We don't fit into tidy little boxes so the debate is over simplified and the extreme (minority) examples are broadcast to hold the attention of the viewers. Most Americans are NOT democrats or republicans but Independents who recognize rhetoric from political parties, including the tea party.
The American Spirit maybe watered down a bit but it still exists. We resent the interference of government in matters of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. Our Constitution limits government and nothing riles up a patriot like an infringement upon it. Using tragic events to erode rights is nothing short of vile and Americans are rightfully offended by anyone hijacking it for political gain.
I think you've misjudged those that frequent the Rural Revolution blog. While we may be Constitutionally conservative we value our independence and self reliance. It is what we strive for. The only thing worse that a politician telling us what to do is a foreigner.
I wish you well. I find your perspective interesting though my own experiences bring me to a very different point of view. I'm glad to live in a place where there is free and peaceful exchanges of ideas and an individual has the freedom to choose his own path.
Thanks Mo for the overview of the US political scene. Interesting and far more complicated than I had imagined. It seems that there must be many groups within US Society who cannot find a Party that exactly represent their views and this leads to a democratic deficit.
As to the Rural Revolution lot, they both perplex and amuse me. I cannot understand (or judge) people who think attacking the messenger somehow deals with the message. Amid all the words they have expended, usually far in excess of my modest contributions, I have yet to find any cogent rebuttal to the 3 propositions.: 1) That, in the US, guns and ammunition are comparatively easy to acquire. 2) That Loughner is mentally ill and until a court finds otherwise should be presumed not guilty by reason of insanity. 3) That he was probably encouraged in his actions by the prevailing toxic climate of political discourse in the US. Surely all these factors contributed in some measure to the Tucson tragedy. Why do some people so resent having it pointed out even by a "foreigner". Is it because they know it is accurate and thus takes them out of their comfort zones?
1) Comparatively your statement is true except in areas like New York, California, Washington DC, Illinois, New Jersey and Massachusetts where private ownership is HEAVILY regulated and/or banned by private citizens.
At a very minimum one must be 21 years old, wait the prescribed waiting period and pass a background check by both local and federal agencies. How this person (with more than 50 police reports on file including drug related offenses. Obviously the sheriff in that county didn't do his job when he OK'd the sale.
In areas with the most strict gun laws/bans also have the highest gun crime. Gun laws simply do not work and have seem to embolden criminals. When these sort of incidents happen they ALWAYS happen on "soft" (unarmed) targets and usually in "Gun Free" zones.
Conversely areas with the highest concentrations of gun ownership violent crime is rare and gun crime is even lower.
Criminals by definition do NOT obey laws. It is already illegal for them to kill, harm or steal from people yet the continue to do it regardless of what laws are on the books. I bet despite all the regulations in your country crime still exists and thugs are capable of lethal harm (bombs, vehicles, knives and guns) in your country.
Our prisons have shown us that even under COMPLETE government control and supervision, complete safety is impossible to achieve. In fact they are the most dangerous areas and weapons and illegal drugs are still problems.
Luckily we live a country where most of us have the right to self defense. A VAST majority of us don't require laws to keep us from harming each other. They are simply tools of our government to exert control and order to our society. They don't prevent crimes they simply outline a course of action to deal with those incapable of societal harmony.
2) Your understanding of our justice system is incorrect. In the "eyes of the law" during the trial he is presumed innocent and it is the duty of the State to prove otherwise. Insanity is something that must be proved by the defendant. Insanity does NOT excuse the crime, it simply dictates the punishment (i.e. capital punishment is off the table, a life in prison is not). The fact is he was caught red handed in the commission of a crime.
3) There is zero evidence supporting that politics had anything to do with it. He did NOT vote in any recent elections. He did NOT listen to talk radio or watch the news. His diatribes via videos, internet postings and public outbursts indicate he was anti-government and NOT aligned with any party except an anarchist.
I too believe the American Political scene is far more complex than the dumbed-down version portrayed in the media. It gives a voice to primarily the extreme fringes of either side (at best) and sometimes only one extreme of the right or the left. It creates polarization which is good for ratings which brings in advertising revenue. It also perpetuates the "two party" system, which in my opinion are very much alike than different - but that is a whole 'nuther can o' worms'
Most of use don't wear a label. We are independent and free thinkers. We don't believe or fit within the confines of democrat or republican dogma or buy their rhetoric. At street level politics is background noise at best/worst despite what is contrived in the media.
Please forgive my poorly written jumbled rambling above. I'm a victim of the public school education system and my arthritic fingers were not in sync with my caffeine deprived brain.
I should have re-read before posting. Perhaps it would have been slightly more cohesive. Hopefully those that do read it can make some sense of it.
I would encourage those with open minds to read this article.
ReplyDeletehttp://michellemalkin.com/2011/01/10/the-progressive-climate-of-hate-an-illustrated-primer-2000-2010/
And it seems Sarah isn't the only one who "targets" or puts "bulleyes" on political opponents. Over at the daily kos (hardly a bastion of conservative thinking) they specifically targeted Rep. Giffords as someone who "sold out the Constitution"
You can read it here (until they scrub it to avoid taking the responsibility they demand of the conservatives)
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/6/25/1204/74882/511/541568
Twist it all you want. Most of us can see through the spin.
Thank you for the links Mo.
ReplyDeleteUS politics is something of a mystery to me. I'm not quite sure what "selling out the constitution" signifies. Presumably its not so serious that Rep. Gifford deserved to get shot for it.
Without thinking too much about it I would tend to classify the character depicted in the above video as "extreme right". Maybe I'm wrong to do that. On the other hand one doesn't often hear the term extreme Left. How these terms relate to the US political parties I'm not sure but, judging by the reactions to my Rural Revolution comments some readers recognise themselves as "extreme Right".
The extreme left is much more prominent and active though it is downplayed by the media.
ReplyDeleteIn my own community we've had eco-terrorists burn residences and even university buildings. Protests are excuses for the extreme left to break windows and vandalize local businesses. Programming on the discovery channel caused a left wing extremist to try to bomb the headquarters. An extremist left wing professor (amy bishop) killed 3 board members for denying her tenure. Francis Fox Piven calls for European style riots to forward social justice. Unions terrorize corporate officers at their homes. I could go on an on.
The left gets a free pass in the (mainstream) media. Anyone that does not adhere to the progressive dogma group think is labeled a racist or an extremist or hater of some kind.
Fortunately they don't have a monopoly on news coverage anymore and Americans are waking up to see the hypocrisy of the elected elite on left and the right. This led to the rise of the Tea Party and their successful unseating of corporatist/pork barrel career politicians, though I think they were very clumsy which I guess is expected from a disorganized grassroots movement without centralized leadership.
I believe a majority of Americans don't wear the labels the media assigns to sensationalize to get ratings. We don't fit into tidy little boxes so the debate is over simplified and the extreme (minority) examples are broadcast to hold the attention of the viewers. Most Americans are NOT democrats or republicans but Independents who recognize rhetoric from political parties, including the tea party.
The American Spirit maybe watered down a bit but it still exists. We resent the interference of government in matters of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. Our Constitution limits government and nothing riles up a patriot like an infringement upon it. Using tragic events to erode rights is nothing short of vile and Americans are rightfully offended by anyone hijacking it for political gain.
I think you've misjudged those that frequent the Rural Revolution blog. While we may be Constitutionally conservative we value our independence and self reliance. It is what we strive for. The only thing worse that a politician telling us what to do is a foreigner.
I wish you well. I find your perspective interesting though my own experiences bring me to a very different point of view. I'm glad to live in a place where there is free and peaceful exchanges of ideas and an individual has the freedom to choose his own path.
Thanks Mo for the overview of the US political scene. Interesting and far more complicated than I had imagined. It seems that there must be many groups within US Society who cannot find a Party that exactly represent their views and this leads to a democratic deficit.
ReplyDeleteAs to the Rural Revolution lot, they both perplex and amuse me. I cannot understand (or judge) people who think attacking the messenger somehow deals with the message. Amid all the words they have expended, usually far in excess of my modest contributions, I have yet to find any cogent rebuttal to the 3 propositions.:
1) That, in the US, guns and ammunition are comparatively easy to acquire.
2) That Loughner is mentally ill and until a court finds otherwise should be presumed not guilty by reason of insanity.
3) That he was probably encouraged in his actions by the prevailing toxic climate of political discourse in the US.
Surely all these factors contributed in some measure to the Tucson tragedy. Why do some people so resent having it pointed out even by a "foreigner". Is it because they know it is accurate and thus takes them out of their comfort zones?
I'll give it a try.
ReplyDelete1) Comparatively your statement is true except in areas like New York, California, Washington DC, Illinois, New Jersey and Massachusetts where private ownership is HEAVILY regulated and/or banned by private citizens.
At a very minimum one must be 21 years old, wait the prescribed waiting period and pass a background check by both local and federal agencies. How this person (with more than 50 police reports on file including drug related offenses. Obviously the sheriff in that county didn't do his job when he OK'd the sale.
In areas with the most strict gun laws/bans also have the highest gun crime. Gun laws simply do not work and have seem to embolden criminals. When these sort of incidents happen they ALWAYS happen on "soft" (unarmed) targets and usually in "Gun Free" zones.
Conversely areas with the highest concentrations of gun ownership violent crime is rare and gun crime is even lower.
Criminals by definition do NOT obey laws. It is already illegal for them to kill, harm or steal from people yet the continue to do it regardless of what laws are on the books. I bet despite all the regulations in your country crime still exists and thugs are capable of lethal harm (bombs, vehicles, knives and guns) in your country.
Our prisons have shown us that even under COMPLETE government control and supervision, complete safety is impossible to achieve. In fact they are the most dangerous areas and weapons and illegal drugs are still problems.
Luckily we live a country where most of us have the right to self defense. A VAST majority of us don't require laws to keep us from harming each other. They are simply tools of our government to exert control and order to our society. They don't prevent crimes they simply outline a course of action to deal with those incapable of societal harmony.
2) Your understanding of our justice system is incorrect. In the "eyes of the law" during the trial he is presumed innocent and it is the duty of the State to prove otherwise. Insanity is something that must be proved by the defendant. Insanity does NOT excuse the crime, it simply dictates the punishment (i.e. capital punishment is off the table, a life in prison is not). The fact is he was caught red handed in the commission of a crime.
3) There is zero evidence supporting that politics had anything to do with it. He did NOT vote in any recent elections. He did NOT listen to talk radio or watch the news. His diatribes via videos, internet postings and public outbursts indicate he was anti-government and NOT aligned with any party except an anarchist.
I too believe the American Political scene is far more complex than the dumbed-down version portrayed in the media. It gives a voice to primarily the extreme fringes of either side (at best) and sometimes only one extreme of the right or the left. It creates polarization which is good for ratings which brings in advertising revenue. It also perpetuates the "two party" system, which in my opinion are very much alike than different - but that is a whole 'nuther can o' worms'
Most of use don't wear a label. We are independent and free thinkers. We don't believe or fit within the confines of democrat or republican dogma or buy their rhetoric. At street level politics is background noise at best/worst despite what is contrived in the media.
Please forgive my poorly written jumbled rambling above. I'm a victim of the public school education system and my arthritic fingers were not in sync with my caffeine deprived brain.
ReplyDeleteI should have re-read before posting. Perhaps it would have been slightly more cohesive. Hopefully those that do read it can make some sense of it.
My apologies.
Thank you for the thorough, reasonable response Mo and for correcting me on the US insanity laws. I appreciate it.
ReplyDelete