XPost: alt.politics.usa, msnbc.breakingnews, rec.arts.tv
XPost: alt.politics.obama
From: damnthetorpedoes@duck.com
On Wed, 16 Oct 2013 07:50:37 -0700, BTR1701 wrote:
>In article ,
> Ubiquitous wrote:
>
>> BY: Washington Free Beacon Staff
>>
>> MSNBC anchor Thomas Roberts and Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R., Tenn.) had a
>> testy exchange Tuesday on MSNBC Live, starting with Roberts asking
>> Blackburn a loaded question about whether she "hated Obamacare" more than
>> she loved the country.
>>
>> Roberts also continued to use Democratic talking point language, asking
>> Blackburn if she thought it was inappropriate to take Americans "hostage"
>> and push them over the cliff, similar to rhetoric used by President Obama
>> and other Democratic leaders castigating Republicans over the shutdown.
>>
>> Blackburn chastised him for his loaded questions.
>>
>> "Listen to yourself," she said. "Just listen to the way you’re sounding,
>> my goodness. We didn't want a government shutdown. We don't want a
>> government default. We in the House are continuing to work through this."
>>
>> THOMAS ROBERTS: Congressman, let me ask you, when it comes to
>> Obamacare, do you hate Obamacare more than you love your country?
>>
>> MARSHA BLACKBURN: I've got to tell you something. I think that
>> comments like that that you are making are just incredibly
>> inappropriate. What we have to realize--
>>
>> ROBERTS: You don't think it's incredibly inappropriate to shut
>> down our government and take all the hostages of Americans that
>> you've taken? No, no, no, it's not inappropriate because you've
>> taken the government hostage through a shutdown and all the
>> American people, you're now walking them to a cliff, the economy,
>> and you're going to push them over one by one based on the fact
>> that you don't like the ACA. That's all it is. You don't like
>> the Affordable Care Act.
>
>This is so strange. These are the same people who told us that
>incendiary political language like this is what drove Loughner to shoot
>Gabrielle Giffords, and that people who use such language are directly
>responsible for the actions of anyone who is motivated by it. We were
>told we need a "new tone" and a "new civility" in politics.
>
>Now those same people are using terms like "hostage-takers", "ransom",
>and "jihad" to describe their political opponents.
>
>I'm confused as to the rules for this "new civility". Are we now allowed
>to use loaded language that hints at violence in politics again? Or is
>it only liberals who are allowed to do it?
Liberals generally maintain a 'self-righteous' manner and demeanor
that clears them of any responsibility for inflammatory language or
accusations.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
