Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by TK on January 9, 2011 at 9:19am

I'll agree that the hate mongering is much more abundant on the right, but I don't think we know enough about the situation yet to make a clear call on the situation.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jim DePaulo on January 12, 2011 at 12:55pm

This may provide some answers as to an underlying cause of violence of this type.

Stochastic terrorism is the use of mass communications to stir up random lone wolves to carry out violent or terrorist acts that are statistically predictable but individually unpredictable.
This is what occurs when Bin Laden releases a video that stirs random extremists halfway around the globe to commit a bombing or shooting.
This is also the term for what Beck, O'Reilly, Hannity, and others do. And this is what led directly and predictably to a number of cases of ideologically-motivated murder similar to the Tucson shootings.
At any given time there are hundreds of thousands of Americans with combinations of personality characteristics (such as emotional instability, a paranoid ideology, and a propensity for violence) that put them at risk of going off the deep end and becoming lone wolves. All it takes is the right push, the right nudge at the right time, to dislodge a few of them and send them on their way to fifteen minutes of fame surrounded by dead bodies.
So let's take Beck, Hannity, and O'Reilly. There is no question that their emotional rhetoric appeals to people who are emotionally unstable. And, since their audiences are tracked and analyzed in detail, there is no question that they know

Somebody sold a gun to this guy?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Susan Stanko on January 12, 2011 at 1:02pm

Can I copy and paste this to another message board that I am on?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jim DePaulo on January 12, 2011 at 2:25pm

Be my guest.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Abnormal on January 11, 2011 at 7:15pm

This bipartisan system we have is nothing but hate mongering. They both feed on it.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Susan Stanko on January 11, 2011 at 8:57pm

I just saw an awesome status on Facebook.  Sarah Palin needs a swirly.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jim DePaulo on January 12, 2011 at 11:56am

Violent Rightwing Rhetoric Doesn't Kill People. People Living in a World Where They Hear A Lot of Violent Rightwing Rhetoric Kills People.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by ETres on January 12, 2011 at 1:23pm

There's zero evidential connection between Loughner's actions and conservative media - just wishful thinking on the part of the left. Contrarily, folks that knew him say he wasn't very interested in TV or radio.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Kosak Grabovsky on January 12, 2011 at 4:58pm

While there isnt any evidence showing that Loughner had heard any of the conservative rhetoric, it still is dangerous. Most of what ive seen people talk about with (regard to the conservative rhetoric), is that it can produce incidents like this. He was more interested in government "conspiracies", such as going back to the gold standard and the government controlling people's minds through Grammer.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by eric stone on January 12, 2011 at 6:14pm

There's zero evidence for wishful thinking on the part of the left.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Fred Derf on January 12, 2011 at 4:20pm

and you know that they incited him on what basis?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by eric stone on January 12, 2011 at 6:08pm

I think it's highly likely that they incited him on the basis of the fact that he chose a democratic congresswoman who had been "marked" for violence and whose party had been threatened with eliminationalist rhetoric from the far right.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• …
• 9
• Next ›
• Page