News Did Fox News help to motivate the killing of three cops?

[seycyrus]

Perhaps the real question is why has this rag tag group of libertarians and conservative fundamentalists chosen a tea bag as their symbol?

Symbolically it's simply stupid. The Boston Tea Party was about taxation without representation. Not about taxation per se.

How amusing! A Regurgitation the liberal blogs.Do you honestly think you are foolling anyone besides yourself?

The Boston Tea Party was an act of defiance against a government. That act illustrated the people's dissatisfaction.

*THAT* is why it was chosen.

The question was a great question. Why is it acceptable to redefine lower standards when the target is a conservative rather than a liberal?

Why is it acceptable for liberals to call people "losers", "stupid","idiots" etc. etc. simply because they disagree with them?

Why is it acceptable for conservatives right to free speech to be impinged at universities throughout this nation?

Why is potty humour tolerated, if not outright encouraged, when it is at a conservatives expense?

 

[edward]

So you think that they created that fear in him? Do you think it would be unreasonable to assume that he already possessed such a fear and that perhaps he watched a news station that supported what he believes? And most importantly, do you see any real connection between a fear of the government banning guns and a decision to shoot at police officers who arrive at a house regarding a domestic dispute?

It is my understanding that the domestic dispute call was originated due to the the mans activity in the home involving the guns. Domestic disputes are a dangerous situation for police , but they seldom result in a person intentionally waiting to kill police officers.

Personally I think that it would be safe to say that the guys nut was already cracked. So you may argue that Fox is irresponsible in that they could theoretically provoke people who are already nutbags to violent action. But the same could be said, and has been said, of all sorts of media as I have already pointed out. But at what point does this moral obligation become apparent and why? Do you agree with similar assessments made regarding other forms of media?

They certainly reinforced an irrational mans fears. He didn't get it from sitting at home and watching the comedy channel.

As for other media, hate radio doesn't help with people like this.

Even the other news channels comment on FOX news' hell bent rants on perceived gun control, socialism, communism and fascism coming to us in the near future.

 

[drankin]

So, are we blaming FN for this guy or just saying that they didn't help? If FN didn't exist, would this guy have done this? Maybe, maybe not. It a rediculous stretch to hold them responsible legally or otherwise. Basically, if some nut case does some crime should we hold any media they consume responsible? Of course not. This thread should be locked.

 

[LowlyPion]

How amusing! A Regurgitation the liberal blogs.Do you honestly think you are foolling anyone besides yourself?

The Boston Tea Party was an act of defiance against a government. That act illustrated the people's dissatisfaction.

*THAT* is why it was chosen.

The question was a great question. Why is it acceptable to redefine lower standards when the target is a conservative rather than a liberal?

Why is it acceptable for liberals to call people "losers", "stupid","idiots" etc. etc. simply because they disagree with them?

Why is it acceptable for conservatives right to free speech to be impinged at universities throughout this nation?

Why is potty humour tolerated, if not outright encouraged, when it is at a conservatives expense?

Lots of things express dissatisfaction. The idea of tea bags though is to my mind not particularly well though out given that it relies on historical events and the facts simply don't fit. Now while I certainly don't think all that highly of the intellects on display at these tea party events, or their promoters, I will agree that it is rude to call attention to things that they can't help about themselves, and so I agree that giving voice to such thoughts isn't a polite way to refer to others, even if true.

But as to potty humor, ... this is something that these folks brought on themselves. You think things would go better if they chose say a toilet plunger as their symbol, or a giant condom, or large clown feet? Face it the idea of sending and wearing tea bags is a pretty lame idea. The promoters that chose that iconic metaphor, I'd say really didn't have their CPUs going at full throttle to settle on such a flawed analogy.

 

[Al68]

Anyone else find it interesting that a thread supposedly about purported "hate speech" from the right is so full of hate speech from the left?

 

[LowlyPion]

So, are we blaming FN for this guy or just saying that they didn't help? If FN didn't exist, would this guy have done this? Maybe, maybe not. It a rediculous stretch to hold them responsible legally or otherwise. Basically, if some nut case does some crime should we hold any media they consume responsible? Of course not. This thread should be locked.

Consider the premise. Was the guy reacting to the idea that someone was taking away his guns? Was he watching Fox News? Do they falsely misrepresent themselves as "Fair and Balanced" to the extent that he might not be aware of their Conservative promotional agenda, but actually thinks they are a reliable "town crier". And finally has Fox been representing to these gun nuts in their demographics that Obama was taking their guns away?

I have readily agreed from the beginning that I doubt that there is sufficient evidence for any particular adverse judgment against Fox. I doubt, for instance, that they would have sent a memo about suggesting that they mobilize conservative gun toters and incite them with amplified representations about imminent gun controls to commit peremptory acts of violence. Fox lawyers and management surely know better than to put something like that in writing, even if they would think it. So is there a direct nexus, wherein actions by Fox in which they fully understood the risks of consequences, but recklessly proceeded regardless? I have serious doubts on that score.

But might they have a responsibility? I'd say that they just well may. With power comes responsibility.

 

[edward]

Time for some comic relief with: POTATO DAY

http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=223862&title=Baracknophobia---Obey

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

It is my understanding that the domestic dispute call was originated due to the the mans activity in the home involving the guns. Domestic disputes are a dangerous situation for police , but they seldom result in a person intentionally waiting to kill police officers.

So because of Fox News this man must have been impressed with the idea that these police were sent by Obama to take his guns away from him? And that's why he shot them?
Can you seriously connect these two things logically or would you agree that the man was most likely unhinged to begin with?

They certainly reinforced an irrational mans fears. He didn't get it from sitting at home and watching the comedy channel.

As for other media, hate radio doesn't help with people like this.

Anything could theoretically have pushed this mans buttons; websites, movies, books, music, an annoying wife or mother. And he chose to watch Fox News. Just like a suicidal person may chose to listen to music by bands like Marilyn Manson or Slayer. And people who consider murder may listen to violent music or may be attracted to violent video games. If the vast vast majority of people in this world can indulge in these froms of media without snapping and killing themselves or others can you really say that it is at all a foreseeable consequence of the medium and not really just a preexisting condition of the individual?

You are confusing me with someone that is saying there is a civil or criminal nexus with Fox News and the acts of a misguided individual. I don't see it.

You say that these are foreseeable consequences of their actions. That would make them criminally and civily liable. It would also take a string of logic that somehow connects Obama wanting to take away a mans guns to a man shooting police officers for it to be realisticly foreseeable. And that would apply regardless of whether you believe it to be criminal or just moral liability.
I am not going to hold anyone morally/ethically liable for the actions of others simply because there was an off chance that something they said may have been the straw that broke the camels back. Such a vague notion of ethical responsibility is all kinds of slippery. It would also fit into the sort of thinking that these rabid conservative ideologues like to promote.

 

[drankin]

Anyone else find it interesting that a thread supposedly about purported "hate speech" from the right is so full of hate speech from the left?

Absolutely. I hear more "hate speech" on this forum than any AM radio talk show. But the term is so ambigouos and subjective I refuse to use it in my normal vocabulary.

 

[LowlyPion]

Anything could theoretically have pushed this mans buttons; ...

That is rather the point. Buttons getting pushed. And on the pushing side of things you have Fox News repetitiously pushing these kinds of buttons, and apparently any others they can conjure on a range of wedge issues, apparently without regard to the havoc, but to the point of amplifying whatever discontent may be imagined to be exploited. Simply because their apparent disregard for the consequences of their political filablustering may not rise in a specific instance to the standards set by the legal system, doesn't in my mind absolve them of all responsibility, seeing as how such results seem to be in the first instance a part of their strategy.

 

[Proton Soup]

That is rather the point. Buttons getting pushed. And on the pushing side of things you have Fox News repetitiously pushing these kinds of buttons, and apparently any others they can conjure on a range of wedge issues, apparently without regard to the havoc, but to the point of amplifying whatever discontent may be imagined to be exploited. Simply because their apparent disregard for the consequences of their political filablustering may not rise in a specific instance to the standards set by the legal system, doesn't in my mind absolve them of all responsibility, seeing as how such results seem to be in the first instance a part of their strategy.

it's your fault. it's comments like yours that pushed this man's buttons.

 

[LowlyPion]

it's your fault. it's comments like yours that pushed this man's buttons.

Probably not. If he was an avid reader of PF, I'd think he would have absorbed a bounty of insight and knowledge here that would have inoculated him against the kinds of tyrannies he might have imagined from listening only to Fox.

 

[Proton Soup]

Probably not. If he was an avid reader of PF, I'd think he would have absorbed a bounty of insight and knowledge here that would have inoculated him against the kinds of tyrannies he might have imagined from listening only to Fox.

LOL! well, there is plenty of incite, i'll give you that.

 

[edward]

Absolutely. I hear more "hate speech" on this forum than any AM radio talk show. But the term is so ambigouos and subjective I refuse to use it in my normal vocabulary.

The blatant terms of hatred used used on the radio programs are not even allowed on this forum.

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/09122008/watch.html

 

[WhoWee]

The guy was reported to have stayed up drinking (beer I assume) all night, then argued with his mother. I'm sure alcohol had NOTHING to do with his state of mind. I lived in Pittsburgh, if you haven't...go rent "The Deer Hunter" then feel free to reconsider your entire argument.

 

[drankin]

The blatant terms of hatred used used on the radio programs are not even allowed on this forum.

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/09122008/watch.html

You are welcome to IM me these "blatant terms" so I know what you are talking about. I watched the Bill Moyers link and it played some clips of various talk show hosts suggesting some pretty violent things towards libs. Yes, it's raw and Beck is an idiot anyway (I don't have cable at home but I watched it this weekend at my dad's. Fox News is mostly, but not totally, a bunch of tabloid clowns). I appreciate listening to people like Savage because he has the cohonas to say how he feels. Whether I agree with it or not (and I often don't) I respect his complete disregard for political correctness or worrying about offending others. The media doesn't create an audience they find it, whether it's porn or the cooking channel. I refuse to hold any media responsible for the acts of an individual. Yes, unbalanced people can use the rhetoric they consume to fuel their lunacy and criminal activity (rape, arson, murder). I don't argue that.

 

[ExactlySolved]

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/09122008/watch.html

I had been trying to formulate an idea like this to describe the particular tactic that these conservative talking heads use to create their battle slogans:

the American author Oliver Wendell Holmes said that language is sacred, and wrote that its abuse should be as criminal as murder. He called it "...verbicide...violent treatment of a word with fatal results to its legitimate meaning..."

 

[edward]

The guy was reported to have stayed up drinking (beer I assume) all night, then argued with his mother. I'm sure alcohol had NOTHING to do with his state of mind. I lived in Pittsburgh, if you haven't...go rent "The Deer Hunter" then feel free to reconsider your entire argument.

Guess what people on the edge do not need a push from hate radio or anywhere else.

Got a link on the guy staying up all night drinking? I have done that but it never made me take a shotgun into a church.

Live in Pittsburg eh? Big deal. Am I supposed to be impressed because you saw a violent war movie??

The Deer Hunter came out back about 78 or so. SO WHAT?? I saw it in a movie theater at the time and several times since. Guess what, no real people were killed they were all actors.

As long as we are off topic:

I preferred Full Metal Jacket just for the laughs.

 

[edward]

I had been trying to formulate an idea like this to describe the particular tactic that these conservative talking heads use to create their battle slogans:

There is a lot of psychology involved. You will notice that the boys at Fox always have some kind of button pushing gimmick. It may be video running in the background. (Beck loves Nazis), or a controversial guest who just happens to be a Fox employee.

They use key words. Beck says we are heading toward fascism, Hannity sticks with socialism and O'rielly prefers communism.

 

[ExactlySolved]

They use key words. Beck says we are heading toward fascism, Hannity sticks with socialism and O'rielly prefers communism.

Their meaningless applications of these 'isms' is a prime example of verbicide, as is the constant use of 'tyranny' to refer to a basic aspect of democracy. Another victim of right-wing verbicide is the phrase 'theory' as used in the debate over teaching evolution.

In the interest of being balanced towards genuine conservative concerns, I am trying to think of acts of verbicide by the left-wing. The most obvious would be the use of 'marriage' to apply to people who are glbt --- although a forceful change in language is being applied, I think in this case it is part of natural progress, just as the term 'citizen' has evolved in American history to include people of color and people of other groups who have not been included.

Admittedly, that was a bit of a liberal wuss-out on my behalf, but if we look at how much benefit a large group of people will derive in their daily life by the broadening of 'marriage' I think it is incomparably larger than the benefit derived from Beck's broadening of 'fascism' and 'tyranny.'

 

[Oscar Wilde]

Absolutely. I hear more "hate speech" on this forum than any AM radio talk show. But the term is so ambigouos and subjective I refuse to use it in my normal vocabulary.

I used to get my jollies from watching MSNBC, but now I just get on PF and look for Ivan's threads.

 

[humanino]

Have you seen "Outfoxed" ? Media is one essential ingredient of democracies. It would be worthwhile to think seriously how some media can deeply challenge people's ability to sustain the rest of their freedom.

 

[jaap de vries]

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/09122008/watch.html

Thanks for posting. This pretty much seems to summarize it pretty well.

 

[jaap de vries]

You are welcome to IM me these "blatant terms" so I know what you are talking about.

You just said you watched the video. If you want us to type it down we will but why give us an errand.

I thought the comment about autistic children was pretty inflammatory but I guess you like that because at least Savage "says it how it is" ?!?

Now that admittedly it seems like Moyers has done the work for us I would like to challenge you to find similar remarks coming from the left. I try to remain neutral but I could honestly not think of any.

 

[drankin]

You just said you watched the video. If you want us to type it down we will but why give us an errand.

I thought the comment about autistic children was pretty inflammatory but I guess you like that because at least Savage "says it how it is" ?!?

Now that admittedly it seems like Moyers has done the work for us I would like to challenge you to find similar remarks coming from the left. I try to remain neutral but I could honestly not think of any.

IM me the terms so I know what you are talking about.

Yes, I like how Savage says what he thinks. Even when it's "inflammatory".

Why would I look for similar remarks from the left media? What is your point?

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

Now that admittedly it seems like Moyers has done the work for us I would like to challenge you to find similar remarks coming from the left. I try to remain neutral but I could honestly not think of any.

I don't think I'll be able to find it but I recall reading an article by a left wing media personality that talked of the hope that anti gun control people wind up with their kids blowing their brains out and anti abortion people see their wives and daughters dying in back alley abortion clinics.

Specific to the claims of lies perpetrated by Fox News personalties for a political agenda as discussed in this thread; over the last eight years I have heard all sorts of claims from Bush going to war with Iran to rebublicans wanting to take away women's right to vote.

 

[humanino]

Bush going to war with Iran to rebublicans wanting to take away women's right to vote.

To a democrat, there is no need to demonstrate republican's error potential. To a republican, both proposals sound reasonable anyway
Sorry...
Would anyone happen to know of a decent source of news free on the internet produced by the U.S. ?

 

[rootX]

Would anyone happen to know of a decent source of news free on the internet produced by the U.S. ?

I like BBC. I don't like any of the U.S. sources - personally, I think U.S. doesn't have anything as good as BBC.

 

[Proton Soup]

try google's news search. look at a news item from a couple different sources and make up your own freakin' mind. half the crap is just reprinted from AP or UPI, anyway...

 

[humanino]

I am european. I speak english, french and german. I know France, England, Germany, Belgium, and also others, have each several website where I can daily find (reasonably) short and good quality reports of what significant happens in the world. Free of showbizz useless story, relatively honest, as un-bias as it comes. Where can I find that produced by the U.S. ? If it turns out there is no such thing, I claim the U.S. can not be called a democracy. So I hope there is !