Rhetoric and Tucson
In his column this morning, Paul (If-You-Disagree-With-Me-You-Must-Be-Evil) Krugman notices there is a lot of hate speech going around these days. But he has no ability to introspect.
Is there any columnist writing for any major newspaper who goes after people he disagrees with personally — attacking their motives, their ethics, their character — more than Paul Krugman? Okay, maybe Frank Rich. But there is nothing in The Wall Street Journal, Washington Times, etc., that even approaches this level of vitriol.
Krugman goes on to say that Glenn Beck and Bill O’Reilly are worse than Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann. I don’t watch TV talk shows that much, but my casual impression is that it’s the other way around, by a long shot.
What do you think?
It’s not just Keith Olbermann or Glenn Beck -– the Congress itself has done more to provoke this supposed vitriol in recent years by carelessly governing and recklessly jeopardizing the future. On top of that are many other signs on uninhibited government intrusion (TSA pat-downs, health insurance mandates, bailouts). Average people are frustrated with Congress – not because of TV talk shows, but because of Congress itself.
Nevertheless, I wouldn’t mind if the rhetoric calmed down. We should attack and defend ideas, not people.
As far as newspaper columns are concerned, there’s no question about it. Krugman is tops on vitriol.
Agree.
MSNBC commentary is much more hateful than anything you kill see on Fox News. I can’t believe Krugman even bothered to compare them.
I think Jeff is half correct. We need to stop paying attention to the MSNBC/FOX commentary shows disguised as news. Both are used to shape political policy agendas and not report the facts. They should be designated as opinion/editorial shows so people will not confuse commentary with news.
We also know that Arizona has been a hotbed of angry political rhetoric lately. This event is simply an outgrowth of that rhetoric.
True news simply reports the facts and leaves the viewer to decide.
“We also know that Arizona has been a hotbed of angry political rhetoric lately. This event is simply an outgrowth of that rhetoric.”
Erik, please post a link to the news article that reports Jared Loughner was involved politically or moved to act by the debates on policy- esp. immigration- which have taken place in the last couple years.
I’m with Tom. The shooting was unconnected to the rhetoric.
How’s this for over the top rhetoric:
That’s exactly what Barack Obama said he would do to counter Republican attacks “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun,” Obama said at a Philadelphia fundraiser Friday night. “Because from what I understand folks in Philly like a good brawl. I’ve seen Eagles fans.”
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2008/06/14/obama-if-they-bring-a-knife-to-the-fight-we-bring-a-gun/
More on Krugman here:
http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerkimball/2011/01/09/how-to-turn-a-tragedy-into-an-emetic/
And here:
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/256696/conservatives-crosshairs-roger-kimball
What’s Krugman’s rationale for thinking Fox is worse than MSNBC? Is it because people actually watch Fox?
Tom,
Here is one,
http://www.baycitizen.org/crime/story/was-loughner-sovereign-citizen/
and Ken proves that as long as you agree with the rhetoric it is okay.