Civility? It didn't last a week...

[whell]

I wonder if we'll hear the press or the administration crying foul about these gems of moderation and tolerance via multiple media outlets:

http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/201...-get-much.html

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefi...ling-americans

[finnbow]

Rhetoric/hyperbole aside, both politicians made valid points. The same cannot be said for death panels, assertions of Dem's being enemies of the constitution, the need for 2nd Amendment solutions,etc.

I think the orchestrated outrage on the right over these two (the right has been ranting all day about it) is a desperate attempt to draw a false equivalency to their own eliminationist rhetoric. O'Reilly has been doing this exact same thing every night this week. Yawn.

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Rhetoric/hyperbole aside, both politicians made valid points. The same cannot be said for death panels, assertions of Dem's being enemies of the constitution, the need for 2nd Amendment solutions,etc.

I think the orchestrated outrage on the right over these two (the right has been ranting all day about it) is a desperate attempt to draw a false equivalency to their own eliminationist rhetoric. O'Reilly has been doing this exact same thing every night this week. Yawn.

You've got a lot of whitewash in that bucket Finn....

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

You've got a lot of whitewash in that bucket Finn....

Their underlying points happen to be correct, or at least defensible positions on the policy spectrum. Granted their rhetoric was uncool by the standards of the past week. It's still qualitatively different than the GOP rhetoric up until the shootings, whether you want to agree or not.

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Their underlying points happen to be correct, or at least defensible positions on the policy spectrum. Granted their rhetoric was uncool by the standards of the past week. It's still qualitatively different than the GOP rhetoric up until the shootings, whether you want to agree or not.

So, the new definition of civility, if you're a fan of the left, is that its OK to label your political opponents Nazis and murderers, as long as the "underlying points" are salient. Got it.

[d-ray657]

Originally Posted by whell

So, the new definition of civility, if you're a fan of the left, is that its OK to label your political opponents Nazis and murderers, as long as the "underlying points" are salient. Got it.

That is your favorite trick - to exaggerate the comments that you want to criticize. No one called the GOP Nazis. He compared their rhetoric to Goebbels statement about the big lie - repeat it often enough and it becomes the trute - i.e. death panels. Rep Jackson did not call anyone a murderer - she talked about the effect of withdrawing coverage from 30 million people - that the legislation would be people-killing if it passed.

Regards,

D-Ray

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by whell

So, the new definition of civility, if you're a fan of the left, is that its OK to label your political opponents Nazis and murderers, as long as the "underlying points" are salient. Got it.

Why not? Isn't this what your party has been doing for what, at least thirty years now? Turnabout is all it is. Hows it feel?

If you have the audacity to ask for proof, then I really will think you're head is deeply buried in the sand.

Dave

[d-ray657]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Rhetoric/hyperbole aside, both politicians made valid points. The same cannot be said for death panels, assertions of Dem's being enemies of the constitution, the need for 2nd Amendment solutions,etc.

I think the orchestrated outrage on the right over these two (the right has been ranting all day about it) is a desperate attempt to draw a false equivalency to their own eliminationist rhetoric. O'Reilly has been doing this exact same thing every night this week. Yawn.

+1

Frankly, when I read the comments I didn't see anything designed to stir hatred. It is a relevant point in the health care debate to point out the nature of the arguments that have been used about the bill - arguments that have been proven false, but are being repeated anyway. At that point, the line about repeating a lie often enough became very relevant. Gobbels is the source of the line, so it makes sense to attribute it.

Rep Jackson made a fine compare and contrast point about the title of the bill's title. The GOP's title accuses the existing law of being a job killer. When the GOP's bill will serve to deny access to health care to thirty million people - it will inevitably lead to more people dying of preventable causes. Thus the GOP is taking on what they call a job killing bill by proposing legislation that has the effect of being a people-killing bill.

Regards,

D-Ray

[BlueStreak]

So? You were expecting something else?

When does the GOP reveal it's health bill?

Thought bubble;
(Hmmmm, a health bill designed by angry tightwads who think they should never, ever have to pay for anyone elses problems---Because that's SOCIALISM!............This crap is going to be interesting.)

Dave

[merrylander]

Originally Posted by BlueStreak

So? You were expecting something else?

When does the GOP reveal it's health bill?

Thought bubble;
(Hmmmm, a health bill designed by angry tightwads who think they should never, ever have to pay for anyone elses problems---Because that's SOCIALISM!............This crap is going to be interesting.)

Dave

I do this all the time with Medicare, paying $96.50 per month for which on average I get one flu shot each year.