NYT: "it is legitimate to hold Republicans & their most virulent supporters in media responsible"

[kpete]

Today's New York Times editorial:
Editorial
Bloodshed and Invective in Arizona
Published: January 9, 2011

It is facile and mistaken to attribute this particular madman’s act directly to Republicans or Tea Party members. But it is legitimate to hold Republicans and particularly their most virulent supporters in the media responsible for the gale of anger that has produced the vast majority of these threats, setting the nation on edge. Many on the right have exploited the arguments of division, reaping political power by demonizing immigrants, or welfare recipients, or bureaucrats. They seem to have persuaded many Americans that the government is not just misguided, but the enemy of the people.

That whirlwind has touched down most forcefully in Arizona, which Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik described after the shooting as the capital of “the anger, the hatred and the bigotry that goes on in this country.” Anti-immigrant sentiment in the state, firmly opposed by Ms. Giffords, has reached the point where Latino studies programs that advocate ethnic solidarity have actually been made illegal.

Its gun laws are among the most lenient, allowing even a disturbed man like Mr. Loughner to buy a pistol and carry it concealed without a special permit. That was before the Tucson rampage. Now, having seen first hand the horror of political violence, Arizona should lead the nation in quieting the voices of intolerance, demanding an end to the temptations of bloodshed, and imposing sensible controls on its instruments.

the rest:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/10/opinion/10mon1.html?_r=2

[spanone]

1. k&r....

[Raschel]

2. Now is the time to address it, while this tragedy is fresh in peoples' minds.

Stand up politicians and media. Do the right thing.

[kpete]

4. best advice

i have seen on DU or anywhere
thank you Raschel
and peace,
kpete

[Raschel]

7. Thanks. Love and peace to you too.

I think we could all use one of these:
:hug:

[Kingofalldems]

3. K and R

[nannah]

5. if past behavior is any clue

the r's will come out fighting and blaming progressives. it's what they do. and it is easy when you are not hampered by the need to be honest.

and their clamor will drown out voices of reflection and reason because they own the airwaves.



.

[Blue Meany]

6. They can disavow the violence that results from their hate speech,

but the reality it is part and parcel of the movement of which they are a part. The lurking possibility of violence from the right is a form of terrorism and it works for them. It has been extremely effective at reducing the availability of abortions in many regions of the country. And it creates and environment in which liberals much have a lot of courage to stand up for their principals and become a target. You have to wonder if this is one factor in the gradual rightward shift of national politics.

Some of the Limbaugh's rhetoric is almost identical to the hate speech coming from militia leaders who are trying to incite violence while maintaining "plausible deniability." There have just been too many instances of right-wing violence to say these are an unintended consequences. They aren't. They are part of program. The spokesmen just don't want to get their own hands dirty or accept liability for what they have advocated. But they know their are unbalance people out there who will be spurred to action.

[Raschel]

9. So much ugliness since the President's election. Remember the chimp cartoon?

[tblue37]

10. Just think of the fact that many of us are afraid to put political bumper stickers on our cars,

because we know that it is likely to lead some angry RWer to at the very least key our car, but that it might also cause them to run us off the road or follow us home and attack us. We have heard of enough such incidents to be afraid of openly declaring our political affiliations and beliefs because we know they are capable of attacking us--and not just verbally.

That is the point of terrorism, after all--to make people afraid.

[blondeatlast]

8. "...demonization..." That one word is precisely what has gone so terribly wrong in this nation.

It's never "us" anymorenot for our leaders and representatives in Washington or in the media.

[EFerrari]

11. Not only "their most virulent supporters in the media" but also those

who work at the New York Times and minimize this situation, like David Brooks for example. No one would call him "virulent" but his justifications, like those of most of our media, are essential for this problem to exist and to continue.