MrSilverMaC Posted January 9, 2011 Author Share Posted January 9, 2011 Thanks, but I really feel this in my soul. This is just all-around horrific. Don't take this on yourself, man. You aren't of his ilk, and just because you have Aspergers doesn't mean you are some sort of bad person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ardowling Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Good answers, but arn't we at this point now? If I believe whats being spewed it won't matter what you have to say about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Good answers, but arn't we at this point now? If I believe whats being spewed it won't matter what you have to say about it. What a pathetic cop out. No, the future is mutable and if we change our behaviors now it will have an impact going forward. More if responsible people shout down the idiots, then the people susceptible to the idiots will not have the fuel they otherwise would. Silence is sometimes taken as approval. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ardowling Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 What a pathetic cop out. No, the future is mutable and if we change our behaviors now it will have an impact going forward. Cop out??? The question I asked is that if I am someone who has a voice and I speak irresponsibly who will hold me accountable and how without violating my right to free speech, what if I don't want to change my behavior are you going to censor me? How will you keep my message from getting to my target audience? Quote: Silence is sometimes taken as approval. And sometimes its because the person you addressed is eating. My apologies in advance if I misunderstood this quote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Cop out??? The question I asked is that if I am someone who has a voice and I speak irresponsibly who will hold me accountable and how without violating my right to free speech, what if I don't want to change my behavior are you going to censor me? How will you keep my message from getting to my target audience? And my answer is twofold. First, you have to be better and more responsible. If you can't find that within you then it is incumbant upon the silent majority to stand up and not be silent and shout you down. To quote a very famous poem... In Germany they came first for the Communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time no one was left to speak up." --------- To say there is nothing we could do is pathetic. To say we are incapable of self-censoring or demanding better is pathetic. To say, "that's the way it is" is... wait for it... pathetic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ardowling Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 And my answer is twofold.First, you have to be better and more responsible. If you can't find that within you then it is incumbant upon the silent majority to stand up and not be silent and shout you down. To quote a very famous poem... In Germany they came first for the Communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time no one was left to speak up." --------- To say there is nothing we could do is pathetic. To say we are incapable of self-censoring or demanding better is pathetic. To say, "that's the way it is" is... wait for it... pathetic. And I agree with everything you have said however, I'm trying to play devils advocate how do you stop me when I work for RPN and the station has a certain agenda that may be just on the edge of inappropriate, but it appeals to a certain demographic...lets say NAMBLA should the silent majority stand up and violate this groups (no matter how disgusting they are) their first amendment rights by preventing them the ability to spew their agenda? By the way I think were getting off thread sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The 12th Commandment Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 As over the top as the rhetoric in AZ (and I'm not evening considering Palin just the locals from the Gov down) is, I wouldn't be surprised if it's part of the story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THEREALTOR1 Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Cop out??? The question I asked is that if I am someone who has a voice and I speak irresponsibly who will hold me accountable and how without violating my right to free speech, what if I don't want to change my behavior are you going to censor me? How will you keep my message from getting to my target audience? And my answer is twofold.First, you have to be better and more responsible. If you can't find that within you then it is incumbant upon the silent majority to stand up and not be silent and shout you down... To say there is nothing we could do is pathetic. To say we are incapable of self-censoring or demanding better is pathetic. To say, "that's the way it is" is... wait for it... pathetic. Finite points. Time and space I guess... If I read both of these sentences 50 years ago, and took them literally, I can't imagine the effect they might have on the world today... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 And I agree with everything you have said however, I'm trying to play devils advocate how do you stop me when I work for RPN and the station has a certain agenda that may be just on the edge of inappropriate, but it appeals to a certain demographic...lets say NAMBLA should the silent majority stand up and violate this groups (no matter how disgusting they are) their first amendment rights by preventing them the ability to spew their agenda? By the way I think were getting off thread sorry. Okay, I can answer this from practical experience. I've been on the radio for about six years now delivering news and commentary. Before my report goes on the air a producer has to green light the story and then an editor has to approve the script. There's two levels of checks if I'm a dirty rotten loudmouth. Now, if I choose to say something rotten and controversial say like the Greaseman, or Don Imus, or Rush and it's live the radio station has the right to rebuke me, suspend me, or fire me. If I'm a listener or a sponsor, I have the right to direct a complaint at what I consider bad behavior. So, there really are built in checks. If you get someone like a Coulter who is always starting fires and she still gets airtime that's a conscious choice. The producers don't have to put her on. They're making a choice. We also have the choice to take our business elsewhere. If we don't tune in to these shock jock shows... guess what, they'll change their behavior... because their agenda isn't what's important to the tv or radio station... making money is. Honestly, it's why I get so frustrated with FOX at times. If I even tried to say some of the stuff they routinely do or get away with the exageration or fiction... I'd never be allowed to do another story. There needs to be greater accountability at all levels. Personal. Corporate. Political. I truly believe that it all bleeds together. I also believe that we need to start being better. In other words, "Get off my grass!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ardowling Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Thanks, I don't think the vitriol from both side caused this but maybe it will cause some to reflect....sadly I doubt it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevenaa Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Every violent act has some motivation behind it. Whether it is political, religous, sexual or whatever is irrelevant when you're talking about the violent act of an individual. It only speaks to the individuals instability. If it isn't one thing, it would be another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 I don't think so either. At the end of the day, our actions are our own. Even if someone eggs us on or pours gasoline, we need to be resposible and listen to our conscience and our intellect. In this specific case, I don't even know if the charged atmosphere contributed, but even if it did, the person is ultimately to blame. Now, that's not to say that the serial killer who was an abused child wasn't influenced by their parent's abuse. There are catalysts, but even if I have great sympathy for the abuse it doesn't forgive the action. Likewise, those who commit the abuse which inspire bad behavior bare a fault and blame though it is at a different level. I think I explained my opinion on that last part poorly. Edit: Steven's a lot more concise than I am this evening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ardowling Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Burgold I think as B.B. Bell used to say in the VTCs I attended: "We are in violent agreement" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Let me ask you serious question, how would you stop "Irresponsible speech" without violating the constitution? And who decides what "Irresponsible speech" is? The government can't solve everything. The people funding and supporting the hatred are the only ones that can stop it. Ultimately as well those supporters share in the responsibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stadium-Armory Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 What's going on in AZ anyway? They've been in the news a few times in the last week for the shooting at a Chipotle, the transplant patients dying, and now this. Are these unrelated coincidence, or is there something else at work here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The 12th Commandment Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 I thought the Sheriff was very eloquent in his statements condemning the act and the general lack of grace in today's political discourse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stadium-Armory Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Here's a video interview of Gillfords, taken after her office was vandalized. In the video she addresses the Palin "target" issue, as well as the rhetoric surrounding the health care vote: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Dang, she sounds so cool and not like a politician. Sigh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fergasun Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Did a 9 year old die too? Did a Federal judge die too? Did a staff member die too? Did 2 other people (potential staff?) die too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 So, don't you figure someone has to have video of this? What happens these days without cameras around, especially an event with a congresswoman and judge attending? ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stadium-Armory Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Did a 9 year old die too? Did a Federal judge die too? Did a staff member die too? Did 2 other people (potential staff?) die too? She is not dead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aREDSKIN Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 So, don't you figure someone has to have video of this?What happens these days without cameras around, especially an event with a congresswoman and judge attending? ~Bang There probably is. The sheriff alluded to it by not commenting on it when asked by a reporter. He was not allowed to comment on specific evidence they have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The 12th Commandment Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Did a 9 year old die too? Did a Federal judge die too? Did a staff member die too? Did 2 other people (potential staff?) die too? Of course and it's horrible, but it's been pretty clearly stated that she was the target. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 You want a vid?...I saw a link earlier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seabee1973 Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Instead of argueing about which politacal motivation this guy was because that really doesnt matter it is a travesty that this had to happen Violence like this is never the answer. I pray for the families of those involved and hope that this brave congresswomen makes a quick and speedy and full recovery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.