How much does right-wing rhetoric contribute to right-wing terrorism?

[EagleSmack]

Wow, fool me once. Hear I am telling you you don't get it, and then I tell you to go post your illiterate gibberish to someone else without realizing you wouldn't get that either.

Typical libtard. Thanks for playing idiot.

 

[Corduroy]

The OP is saying right wing rhetoric (otherwise known as opinions and points of views not of his/her own) incites violence. In particular the Cop killings in Vegas. You are saying that we cannot separate these killers from ourselves if they share some of the same views as us.

Is this seriously what you thought I said?

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

Oh yeah... Oh I missed the point.

Scare quotes? Seriously?

Um. . . yes. It's a standard journalistic term these days. Used by all sides.

 

[EagleSmack]

Um. . . yes. It's a standard journalistic term these days. Used by all sides.

Used to create fear in the reader?

By golly you're right.

Mea Culpa Cord.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

I understood perfectly...



The OP is saying right wing rhetoric (otherwise known as opinions and points of views not of his/her own) incites violence. In particular the Cop killings in Vegas. You are saying that we cannot separate these killers from ourselves if they share some of the same views as us.

This is what I meant when I said they don't make crazy, they just aim it. All rhetoric is intended to influence people (i.e., aim them). So when teh crazee goes off in this or that direction, clearly the direction was influenced by rhetoric. Radical Muslim rhetoric aims teh crazee at the West and whatever else Allah don't like. Misogynistic rhetoric aims teh crazee at women. Right-wing rhetoric aims teh crazee at the tyrannical gubmint of the Kenyan Muslim Socialist. Left-wing rhetoric aims teh crazee at research labs, logging, and Wall Street.

At some point, in certain situations, the rhetoric can rise to the level of incitement. When it does, it's a crime. If the authorities feel that Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck or Bill O'Reilly are inciting to violence, they are free to charge those individuals with same and try them.

Never stop a fella from making a fool of himself.

Used to create fear in the reader?

By golly you're right.

Mea Culpa Cord.

I don't understand why they call it "scare quotes" myself. To me, it seems like the so-called scare quotes would be better called BS quotes, since the use of them seems to imply that the writer thinks the term being quoted is BS.

I'm just saying that "scare quotes" is the term they're using these days.

 

[EagleSmack]

I don't understand why they call it "scare quotes" myself. To me, it seems like the so-called scare quotes would be better called BS quotes, since the use of them seems to imply that the writer thinks the term being quoted is BS.

I'm just saying that "scare quotes" is the term they're using these days.

I've never heard them called that and that is what they intend...BS and sarcasm. I use them all the time but I never knew they were called scare quotes.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

I've never heard them called that and that is what they intend...BS and sarcasm. I use them all the time but I never knew they were called scare quotes.

It's pretty new to me, but I've been seeing the term over the past month or two. As I said, it doesn't seem to be used by one side or the other. I guess it's the newest thing in cool journalism.

Meh. Buzzwords. Every profession has them.

 

[Corduroy]

They've been called scare quotes for decades. Though I wouldn't blame anyone for not knowing that, it's the reaction that's telling.

Instead of looking up something he didn't understand, EagleSmack's reaction is to misunderstand it and mock it with hysterical nonsense. That's basically how EagleSmack approaches all new information and why his opinions are what they are. Anything different is not met with understanding but amplified ignorance.

 

[EagleSmack]

Instead of looking up something he didn't understand, EagleSmack's reaction is to misunderstand it and mock it with hysterical nonsense. That's basically how EagleSmack approaches all new information and why his opinions are what they are. Anything different is not met with understanding but amplified ignorance.

Hey I looked it up and did apologize to you. Now who's looking ignorant?

 

[Corduroy]

Hey I looked it up and did apologize to you. Now who's looking ignorant?

I hope you learned more than just the meaning of scare quote today. Maybe after a few months of intellectual curiosity you'll come back a liberal, instead of, ya know, having strong opinions on things you don't understand.

 

[EagleSmack]

I hope you learned more than just the meaning of scare quote today. Maybe after a few months of intellectual curiosity you'll come back a liberal, instead of, ya know, having strong opinions on things you don't understand.

Oh spare me.

Now you're just being a d***.

As far as your other rant... FAIL.

 

[Corduroy]

As far as your other rant... FAIL.

You mean my first post in this thread? The one you thought meant the opposite of what it really meant? We can't talk about that until you understand it.

I would be motivated to explain it to someone who didn't understand if they were respectful about it. But if you reply to me with crazy ignorant gibberish, you're not going to get much courtesy from me.

 

[EagleSmack]

You mean my first post in this thread? The one you thought meant the opposite of what it really meant? We can't talk about that until you understand it.

I would be motivated to explain it to someone who didn't understand if they were respectful about it. But if you reply to me with crazy ignorant gibberish, you're not going to get much courtesy from me.

Is BornRuff there with you?

Trying to get you caught up since you've lost your way would be challenging to say the least.

 

[mentalfloss]

Eaglesmack: BLABLABLABLABLA

Corduroy: I'm sorry Dave but you are wrong again for the following reasons.

 

[Retired_Can_Soldier]

After only one day Fox News has already eliminated coverage of the Tea Party Cop Killers in Las Vegas who went on a murderous rampage Sunday. On Monday, Fox's primetime programs (Bill O'Reilly, Megyn Kelly, and Sean Hannity) were silent on the subject except for four sentences on Kelly's show.


On Tuesday morning's edition of Fox & Friends, the curvy couch potatoes failed to mention Jerad Miller and his wife Amanda. Later, on Happening Now, Fox ignored the story entirely. Outnumbered also declined to report on the Millers, despite having guest co-host "doctor" Keith Ablow who has psychoanalyzed every criminal, politician, and other public figure this century (without ever examining, or even meeting, any of them).


Fox has replaced the Sunday massacre with older stories about the Bergdahl prisoner swap, the Veterans Administration, and Hillary Clinton's book release and presidential aspirations. The producers and editors at Fox News have never been shy about reporting acts of alleged terrorism, even before any evidence has emerged. But for this story they have refused to even refer to the crime as terrorism.


There are some obvious reasons why Fox would skew their reporting and ultimately remove this story from their news coverage. And all of them represent biases that are a long-standing part of what can be called the Fox News Creed: Racism, Guns, Anti-Government, and Tea Party.


First of all, the perpetrators are not who Fox's racist producers typically profile as terrorists. Rather than being brown-skinned, Muslim, foreigners, the Millers are white Christians from Indiana. So not only would it run counter to Fox's philosophy to implicate the Millers in terrorism, it would offend their 90% white, right-wing audience.


Secondly, the issue raises concerns about access to dangerous firearms. The NRA constituency at Fox is loathe to focus on such events that make the public uncomfortable with the wild west society that is favored by the gun fetishists and right-wingers who program and watch the network. Fox avoids or downplays most stories about gun violence, but jumps on any report that they can frame as an Obama attempt to repeal the Second Amendment.


Thirdly, Fox is well known for promoting some of the very same political ideologies as the Millers. They have featured guests who advocate secession from the United States, as well as armed resistance to federal law and authorities. An example of that is the recent Cliven Bundy affair where Jerad Miller just happened to show up threatening to use "the language of violence" against representatives of the Bureau of Land Management. Fox has also hyped Republican leaders, like Texas governor Rick Perry, who have made public statements that come just short of declaring secession.


Finally, the Millers' association with Tea Party groups is something that Fox will work vigorously to excise from the public discourse. The Millers were supporters of the biggest Koch brothers-bankrolled Tea Party organizations (Americans for Prosperity and FreedomWorks), and openly espoused their anti-government views. It was only a matter of time before people who came to rallies with signs that said "We Came Unarmed - THIS TIME," would keep their promise of violence. Of course, Fox News also supports the same groups and views, and has been instrumental in creating and promoting the Tea Party. In fact, there would be no Tea Party without Fox News. Consequently, Fox is not going to risk alienating such a critical part of their audience.




Fox News Has Ceased Coverage Of Las Vegas Tea Party Cop Killers | News Corpse

First of all your source is from a propaganda Fox hating Blog. I`m not a fan of Fox News, but let`s get serious.

Are you really that much of a left wing zealot that you believe that Fox News is suppressing information because of a supposed connection to the Tea Party. Really?

That's as bad as someone trying to connect the CBC to the NEW WORLD ORDER.

What does Alex Jones have to say about all this Tay?

 

[EagleSmack]

Eaglesmack: BLABLABLABLABLA

Corduroy: I'm sorry Dave but you are wrong again for the following reasons.

Wow... you're really an idiot.

Shouldn't you be posting another repetitive thread on climate change?

 

[Zipperfish]

Hey I looked it up and did apologize to you. Now who's looking ignorant?

I think the point is that, even though you apologized, you're still an idiot.

 

[EagleSmack]

I think the point is that, even though you apologized, you're still an idiot.

The point is that I did look it up, apologize and he went on to say I didn't research it.

Now you're ignorant like him!

 

[Locutus]

Is BornRuff there with you?

He would have been back tomorrow supper time but tried to slip in with a secondary account to dodge a wee 7 day timeout. That particular IP was banned permanently. We'll see how it plays out.

 

[EagleSmack]

He would have been back tomorrow supper time but tried to slip in with a secondary account to dodge a wee 7 day timeout. That particular IP was banned permanently. We'll see how it plays out.

How stupid of him.