On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 2:46 PM, Judah McAuley <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Sat, Jan 15, 2011 at 7:35 AM, Scott Stroz <[email protected]> wrote: >> I am not denying that. But to date, there has been no connection >> between what she said and what he did. I am not saying she was right >> in saying what she did, nor am I condoning what she said, but in this >> case, the case that brought all this to a boil, it seems, as of yet, >> there is no connection...at all. >> >> Does that mean I don't think the rhetoric needs to be toned down? No. >> All it mean is that in this particular case, I do not think it had >> anything to do with it. Something a lot of people can;t seem to grok. > > You also have no evidence that the rhetoric had nothing to do with > this shooting.
Really? You want me to prove a negative? That is like a Bible thumper asking me to prove God does not exist. That is not the way it works. The burden of proof is on those trying to make a connection, not the ones saying no connection exists...yet. I was very particular in saying that I don't think that > Sarah Palin or anyone else was responsible for this particular act of > violence. None the less, I keep saying people say "the rhetoric has > nothing to do with these sorts of things" and that is flat out > bullshit. I have been very particular in what I have said. I have said there is no proof of a connection between what she said and what this guy did. I was being specific to this incident. > > Words matter and Sarah Palin and her ilk push an odious brand of > vitriol that drags things further and further into the muck and push > an Us vs Them, violence justified, view of the world. Did it cause > this particular act of violence? I don't know. As you mentioned, there > have always been acts of violence against public figures by the > mentally unstable. But does it encourage people who have an already > twisted view of the world in their delusional fantasies? Hell yes it > does. It is dangerous and sickening and should be condemned right and > left, not tolerated and celebrated. Here is what transpired after the shooting, as I see it: Liberals (and CNN): This is tragic. The shooter was influenced by Sarah Palin and her drivel. Rational people: There has been no evidence that anything Sarah Palin said had anything to do with the shooting. Liberals (and CNN): Well....but...the rhetoric still needs tobe tined down. Don't you see that by bringing up the rhetoric at all (much less IMMEDIATELY after the shooting) you _are_ blaming Sarah Palin? No one has argued that the rhetoric was good. Only that 'blaming' the rhetoric so quickly after the shooting was, at best, shoddy journalism. -- Scott Stroz --------------- You can make things happen, you can watch things happen or you can wonder what the f*&k happened. - Cpt. Phil Harris http://xkcd.com/386/ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:333529 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
