abneo3sierra Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 Totally off topic here, sorry...but Diesel, just thought I should tell you that it was your signature that got me to try Mozilla firefox a year or so ago,and love it :-P. On topic...yeah he had apparently traded correspondence with her a few times over the past 3-4 yrs. On your other post above...too may people on the supporter side of that bill,left too many things in that would protect people like the wikileaks jerk Assange. As someone who has seen casualties caused by people who cannot keep a secret, I am not at all in favor of making it even more tempting to people to "tell what they know". Ron 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Speedy Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 Are there no advertising regulations in the States that specifically state that posting images or text that could incite violence is banned, with some sort of hefty penalty if ignored? Regards KR Not with regard to target maps. http://www.dlc.org/upload_graphics/BP_0405_heartland1.gif 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dieseltaylor Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 This may be of interest KR. http://www.fair.org/blog/2010/11/10/fox-news-the-no-1-name-in-murder-fantasies/ The gist is that Fox presenters [presumably more than most] suggest direct action as a means of solving opponents. If you follow the link inside there is a revealing interview with Rupert Murdoch. He jokes that not continuing to carry Fox News might involve a station owners house getting burnt down. It seems he has a feeling what his target! audience is like. I think that Loughner would have done what he did regardless, however another whackjob does implicate Fox heavily in his own attack in California. EDIT Specific Arizona political http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/01/flashback-giffords-opponent-had-m16-shooting-event-help-remove-gabrielle-giffords-from-office.php?ref=fpblg Whilst I am sure it is not an overt cause to a sane person the use of gun imagery might tend to steer the crazed in that directio. Given I like States and am generally not keen on proscribing how language is used I am a bit gutted. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abneo3sierra Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 this all assumes that he even saw the map,which was passed out to political supporters,not released "nationwide",and which by all accounts of his friends,etc,he was NOT a political supporter of Palin,having been angry that this congresswoman was not far enough to the left,not at all angry that she was too far,which was Palin's viewpoint. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ironbar Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 Why Gifford? Perhaps because she was across town? Not 14 hours away like Nancy Pelosi, although nut jobs do seem to like driving across country, re Lisa Nowak the Femme Fatale of the NASA love triangle. Maybe he couldn't raise the gas money. This loon had no more an appreciation of Representative Gifford's positions than any of the other conspiracy freaks. She was the government to him, but she could just as easily been, THE MAN, the ZOG, shape shifter, Brandenberger, what ever, or Berkowitz's black dog. If you want to muzzle Rupert Murdoch, fine by me, but shouldn't we also declaw George Soros? And if you really want to pin the blame on a media tycoon shouldn't we heap some on Ted Turner? That's the guy who brought us the 24 hour news cycle and started us down the path to 'news' networks as entertainment outlets. Althogh honestly I don't think any media can be unbiased- Civil War era vitrol was pretty potent and the lines were clearly drawn, Col McCormick's Chicago Tribune was hardly 'Fair and Balanced' toward the New Deal. The problem we face in some of the more heated parts of the states now is that political messaging has gone broad spectrum. A lot like horizontal escalation; you bid FAIR, I raise you AIM, bring out one academic study, say UC Berkley,and counterpoint it with one from UCLA. Add to this the vultures who profit directly from the fray, O'Reilly (TV contract, book sales, and Pay Per View on his website) or Al Franken who managed to parlay it into a Senatorial office (ha, the jokes on him, show us how easy it is Al). And of course the granddaddy of them all- Rush, who I am beginning to suspect is the smartest person in that particular game. He developed his own brand, (which I doubt he really subscribes to, I think he falls into the same category as TV preachers), he never allows his brand to be co-opted, at least as far we the peasants can see. But in the end how much impact do the dreck purveyors have? Obama got elected didn't he? The Republicans made gains in the House, but that happens almost every mid term doesn't it (the party that holds the White House loses some sway in Congress), but certainly not the red state landslide Bill Orally predicted. So final tally; lunatic creates a tragedy, innocent peoples lives changed forever and some craven folk look to make political headway out of it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dieseltaylor Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 I do not think Soros has the clout of Murdoch by a long stretch. Soros is a poorer counter to the Koch brothers. http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/08/30/100830fa_fact_mayer Ironbar - do you see anyway this could all cool down? Seems it will be lipservice for a week or two and then back to hammering the other side. : ( 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Belenko Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 I love how every one says how inflamatory Sarah Palins comments are. Perhaps we all should have taken President Johnson's words to heart when he said "Declare war on Poverty". Was he really saying "Urban assault the ghettos and carpet bomb Appalachia." And when Sarah said "Target Gifford in her run for congress" She wasn't talking about using a gun. Several reports from this guys friends say this guy didn't listen to radio, watch the news or wasn't political, but that won't make main stream media. This guy was a complete psycho, plain and simple. Politics had nothing to do with it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 Seems it will be lipservice for a week or two and then back to hammering the other side. : ( Back to hammering? Most of what has been said of this event so far has been for the purpose of hammering the other side. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 this all assumes that he even saw the map, which was passed out to political supporters, not released "nationwide"Out here, in the less civilised parts of the world, teh interwebs isn't only passed out to political supporters. It goes out to everyone. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ironbar Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 George Soros is credited with forcing the firing of Juan Williams from NPR after Williams' comments about Muslims on airliners. So I rather give points to Soros on actually implementing something as opposed to just having high priced soiree's. "Wealthy philanthropist dabbles in politics," true, but really the oldest of stories, if they are effective I would guess is the difference. It makes me think of the story about the New York Times Christmas cocktail party in December of '72; "How could Nixon get re-elected without cheating, nobody I know voted for him." Surround yourself with like minded individuals, or folks cagey enough to say they are like minded so long as you continue to dole out the goodies, and I'm sure soon enough you think you can change the world. As for changing the climate of discord, and the viciousness of politics, I wonder if that would ever be possible. The caning of Sumner, Abe Lincoln the ape, the attacks in popular media on the Truman family (particularly his daughter), and on and on to the present day. I think it's more interesting to wonder what direction media will go in. Already internet usage has outstripped TV time in parts of Europe and the US. Will the next generation of voters take their news from a demographically sliced, pre oriented outlet that will only tell them what they want to hear? Or will variety rule, less political orthodoxy and more like a "Cafeteria Dem/Repub"? The danger here is not being able to determine quickly just how much bias is involved from a given outlet. A point I made in our previous, "Fox News makes you dumberer," debate is at least Faux doesn't hid it under a bushel, there is absolutely no doubt about their orientation. In the early eighties, there was a great letter to the editor in Playboy, about the 'new' political realities of the divide in that class known as Yuppies. How half of that class fell into the category of "Neo liberals," and the rest were the "Neo conservatives," ( although the intended meaning was much closer to what Mr Webster had intended, neo conservative meaning nearly conservative- not the current far right meaning). "The difference between the neo liberals and neo conservatives is; neo liberals listen to Bruce Springsteen, while neo conservatives listen to John Cougar Mellencamp. They both read the Washington Post, but are outraged by different stories." I can't help but think a lot of people watch/listen the talking heads of talk radio and 'The Dirty Digger's Evil Empire" just to get outraged. A lot like Howard Stern on WNBC in New York, half listened because they thought he was hilarious, the other because they thought he was terrible. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abneo3sierra Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 In agreement with ironbar,and extending that some...many of the worst possible things were said about President Bush while he was in office, by, hypocritically,many of the same people now demanding both sides (really meaning one side) "calm down its rhetoric". Nobody has put out more hateful,trash talk than the Soros/moveon.org crowds, who, in various posts, have called on supporters to rape Ann Coulter (a conservative commentator), to shoot the then-sitting president,etc. NOT ONE, of the people now so vocal, ever even lifted a finger to stop those attacks. Amazingly now that the majority of people in the US have made clear their wishes in the most historic defeat of one political side in an election, something happens that the media can try to even the field back out again. It won't likely work. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
costard Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 ... If you follow the link inside there is a revealing interview with Rupert Murdoch. He jokes that not continuing to carry Fox News might involve a station owners house getting burnt down. It seems he has a feeling what his target! audience is like. ... He might be talking about his own house, and the owners of Fox. He couldn't get the poison pill into the company's constitution (he left this too late and tried to get it in about the time the US backers took a big slice for themselves in return for access to the market. His personal position hasn't been affected (as far as we can see) but his freedom of action has.) He survived a couple of big downturns (the Simpsons helped hiim out here, more than once) and was the guy expanding - Conrad Black fell foul of some law or another. His business model has proved to be a good vehicle to get [the message] out - it makes money, too. Lots of it. Then he split again - into China. Sure, state-run has the monopoly position for information, but everything else, with a company used to running on the behalf of a leadership clique... He's sort of an Aussie. I'm not saying we don't breed the worst of the bastards, but somehow I don't think he's the very worst. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.