Acceptable political discourse?

1. 78

   junksellerposted 11 years ago

   Acceptable political discourse?
   
   The man in this photo (Paul Smith) is an elected official--a City Councilman for Sterling Heights, MI. This photo was taken from a Tea Party rally in Troy, MI. I'm all for free speech, but don't we need at least SOME level of basic civility? Can't the vast majority of us agree to restrict depictions of violence, and derogatory slurs? Do organizers of political rallies do any self-policing at all of the content of signs? Should they? Just in case the photo isn't very clear, yes, that is a decapitated Obama head with a spear through it.
   
   

   replyreport
2. 69

   junkoposted 11 years ago

   Conservatives and  many Teaparty members are "ALL IN" on hate for this President. They are putting everything and anybody on the table, including The "UNITED" States of America. They know if they fail the Republican Party will take years to recover, so it's now or never. This unprecedented political insanity may turn around and bite moderate republicans and tea party members if voted in.

   replyreport
   1. 78

      junksellerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Insanity is the only way to really describe it. How can people, presumably with brains, be so completely ruled by irrationality. I just don't get it. It's amazing to watch. And horrifying.

      replyreport
3. 68

   LandmarkWealthposted 11 years ago

   Almost as bad as the ad that is being run blaming Romney for some guys wife dying of cancer.  That was the lowest I have seen yet.

   replyreport
   1. 78

      junksellerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Better or worse, I don't know. At that level of crudeness we are really just asking which pile of crap smells worse. I don't know how people can watch TV and survive. I couldn't do it.

      replyreport
   2. 73

      i scribbleposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      "Almost as bad"?  Really??

      replyreport
   3. 68

      LandmarkWealthposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I don't find this quite as offensive as accussing a man who watched his wife battle breast cancer that he killed someone else's wife because their company was a viable economic entity to continue to operate.  Those who have dealt withcancer know this

      replyreport
4. 65

   ThompsonPenposted 11 years ago

   People in a position of power are supposed to be leaders, people that are meant to set an example. This is disturbing and disgusting. I don't care if it were Hitler on that sign, one does not express their distaste for ANYONE like this. It is unprofessional, it teaches intolerance, and it it keeps the hate ball rolling.
   This is beyond freedom of speech. This is taking what was meant to be stating an opinion freely to wishing some one - our president, mind you - ill. That is illegal on many levels.

   replyreport
5. 84

   Freeway Flyerposted 11 years ago

   I've come to expect this from the political freak show that is found on the ideological extremes. But this is particularly disgusting behavior from an elected official who is supposed to be serve as some sort of an example. Sure, he has the freedom to express himself. But I would like to think that are enough reasonable people out there to make him pay some sort of a price for this kind of stupidity.

   replyreport
6. 0

   SassySue1963posted 11 years ago

   
   
   I don't know. Did you post something when these were going around:

   replyreport
   1. 78

      junksellerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      The photo was an example. It is something I saw today and wanted to say something about. My condemnation of this type of crudeness is universal. It is unacceptable wherever it is found.

      replyreport
   2. 77

      lovemychrisposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Was it an elected official who put that sign of Bush there?
      We have-since BO got in, people who are elected to lead doing this-blatantly spewing their racism for the world to see.
      (ps, Bush did committ war crimes. How has BO turned us into  Uganda?)

      replyreport
   3. 0

      SassySue1963posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      @lovemychris Thank you for proving my point of the hypocrisy of the left. Any time it is a GOP candidate it's this excuse or that excuse or well, who did this. Nope. You don't get it both ways.

      replyreport
   4. 78

      junksellerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Bush committing war crimes is a legitimate criticism to make, just like there are legitimate criticisms to be made about Obama. It is perfectly valid to make those criticisms, but we don't need to do so with  nooses and spears.

      replyreport
   5. 62

      SportsBetterposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      BO and Bush both committed war crimes killing many people, should they not be held accountable through imagery? If it were the founders of this country it wouldn't be pictures, it would be real life.

      replyreport
   6. 0

      SassySue1963posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      The Uganda reference is legitimate as well then. It is referencing the decline into poverty of Americans, which is fact. Makes that one alright as well.

      replyreport
   7. 62

      SportsBetterposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Poverty is inevitable no matter who is president.  It is because the Federal Reserve automatically increases the money supply, which lowers the value of each dollar and prices rise.

      replyreport
   8. 68

      LandmarkWealthposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Poverty is inevitable because there will always be people who work smarter, harder and more innovative as well as those that are simply the opposite. In order to have freedom someone will always be at the top and someone at the bottom

      replyreport
7. 91

   Dr Billy Kiddposted 11 years ago

   Hatred is a family value. That's the new politics of a divided middle class. While it would make sense to hate the wealthy, who doubled their incomes on our backs these last 15 years, we hate each other instead.
   
   Representative Bachman has almost made it a virture to hate Muslims.
   
   People hate me for talking about Bachman and the Romney plan for war in Iran.
   
   But, we should be able to talk about these things in a civilized manner. And I'm telling you: I respect the people who disagree with me, even some of the people who hate me. Maybe their right more often than I'd like them to be.

   replyreport
   1. 68

      LandmarkWealthposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      The is an economically false statement when one person makes money that has not bearing on another.  Economics is not a zero sum Game.  When steve Jobs makes a billion dollars nobody lost a billion dollars.  He simply created new capital.

      replyreport
   2. 91

      Dr Billy Kiddposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      The .01% of the upper end of the income scale, doubled their incomes twice during the last 30 years. Middle class America got virtually no increases. Yet middle class America doubled it's productivitiy--creating new capital for the rich.

      replyreport
   3. 68

      LandmarkWealthposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      America doesn't create new capital, Individuals create their own capital.  My income increasing has no bearing on your income declining or stagnating.  Their is no cause and effect here.

      replyreport
   4. 78

      junksellerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Perhaps you are both right. Economics is (and has been for decades now) a zero sum game for ordinary people. For Steve Jobs and the wealthy it isn't. Two feeding tubes from the machine. One is a dribble the other is on steroids.

      replyreport
   5. 68

      LandmarkWealthposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      You income is soley a function of the skill set you bring to the markeplace.  The US has numerous high paying jobs currently available  The problem is the labor force doesn't match the demand.  That is why MSFT imports software engineers from abroad.

      replyreport
   6. 91

      Dr Billy Kiddposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      hey, junkseller, that's the point, I guess. Two people in the middle class can both be right. And when the whole middle clsss does the same thing--divides into two camps--the wealthy prosper. Economocally, were at 1929 before the crash.

      replyreport
   7. 68

      LandmarkWealthposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Not sure where you guys studied economics, but there is not a finite amount of wealth.  It's up to you to create it, and what another person creates has no bearing on you. You're free to invent the next ipad if or comparable tech if you like.

      replyreport
   8. 0

      SassySue1963posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      @Landmark What? Logic? That has no place here
      
      The only way the wealthy got wealthy was clearly stealing it from the pockets of the poor.

      replyreport
   9. 78

      junksellerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      The laws you state are true only in theory for a Capitalist model running a perfectly free market. They don't hold true in messy reality, they aren't true for non-Capitalists, and even so, many would argue that the market is hardly free.

      replyreport
   10. 68

       LandmarkWealthposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       they hold true for anyone who is willing to make the committment to never give up in a free society.  I wasn't happy with my old employer so I started my own firm. Anyone can do the same.  I came from poverty most americans have never seen.

       replyreport
8. 62

   SportsBetterposted 11 years ago

   It is called freedom of speech. I don't mind it, people are entitled to their opinion.

   replyreport
   1. 62

      SportsBetterposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Then you would have to censor movies, internet, and everything else.

      replyreport
   2. 78

      junksellerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Well, I was really thinking more along the lines of self-censorship by individual groups. If I was a Tea Party person, I wouldn't want that guy at my rally. I really think we need to fight a little harder for civility and equanimity.

      replyreport
   3. 65

      ThompsonPenposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      people are entitled to their opinion, yes. But don't you think that supporting violence like that is taking it a step too far? I believe in freedom of speech, yes, but in a civilized manner.

      replyreport
   4. 62

      SportsBetterposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Shouldn't you be more worried about the violence Obama commits everyday he keeps troops in every country we are in.  What about the list of American Citizens to assassinate? Shouldn't you worry about that instead of some picture?

      replyreport
9. 73

   pagesvoiceposted 11 years ago

   I think we need to draw some parameters between freedom of speech and hate filled speech that promotes violence. There is such a lack of decorum and respect in this country that it is disgusting. I hung my head in shame during President Obama's State of the Union address when he was shouted down with "You lie!" Never before was a president shown the level of disrespect displayed during this national event. On the world stage I am ashamed of the way certain segments of society are acting with their outlandish, derogatory and inflammatory comments. When people act out simplistic, unintelligible, bigoted and loathsome words and posters it ultimately brings down an entire nation to a low life level and I am afraid that is the direction we are heading if we continue on this course.

   replyreport
10. 77

    daskittlez69posted 11 years ago

    Most of the politicians of the past 10 years or so don't have much class if any.

    replyreport
11. 73

    i scribbleposted 11 years ago

    It's reprehensible and grotesquely immoral. The guy had his picture made holding up the sign.  That's a ringing endorsement of the message.

    replyreport