Rachel Maddow Incites Violence.
7 comments so far (is that a lot?)
Written by Tabitha Hale on March 26, 2010
The FreedomWorks press dept. recently received this call from an “anonymous source”, if you will.
Sheer brilliance. Click to listen. Do it. Now.
Some money quotes:
“Be careful what you wish for – the right to bear arms means that everyone can bear arms.”
“We will be fighting you to the death.”
“I’m so glad that I saw Rachel Maddow. She’s brilliant. She’s absolutely fantastic. And her diagnosis of the ills of the American right are so right on. I mean, basically, what you’re doing is just saying no. You’re like belligerent children. You have no concept of how hard people have worked to get this together, and to make sure that we win. We WILL win, and will continue. That’s why Obama got elected.”
“We are now organized. We will show up at your town meetings, and your town halls, and trust me, it’s a force to be reckoned with.”
Sounds pretty threatening to me… but will Rachel condemn this? I’m sure she won’t. How about any of these phone calls, posted back in August?
I’ll be the first to say that the calls to violence that are floating around both sides are inappropriate. It’s not productive, and makes everyone look bad. The media isn’t helping the situation by feeding stories that may or may not (and are most likely not) true from last weekend’s Tea Party rallies in Washington, and downplaying Cantor’s office being shot up on Monday.
Can we all just agree that shooting people is bad? No one is supporting those that are throwing bricks through windows or anything else. But Ms. Maddow, consider that the hatred runs from your side as well. Words matter, and apparently your words are inciting threats from your listeners. How’s that for hate speech?
Maybe a word about that on tomorrow’s show to condemn the hatred of fellow human beings? I won’t hold my breath.
Related Articles
Maddow Calls Potential GOP Majority a Result of “Buyer’s Remorse”
|
Tags: Rachel Maddow
This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.
Comments (7)
Joseph Lonata
March 26th, 2010 at 3:52 pm
While Rachel Maddow is annoying and lame, I don't see how that block quote shows she is inciting violence.
Ian Curtis
March 26th, 2010 at 3:59 pm
The caller is obviously crazy but the block quote has no relation to the other quotes. From what I read, it just indicates that the caller listens to Rachel Maddow, but that isn't anywhere close to incitement under Brandenburg, which is the prevailing standard in the United States for violent incitement to action. Read this – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburg_v._Ohio – or the case itself.
steven rippsburgh
March 26th, 2010 at 4:04 pm
Have you guys ever watched her show? She is egging on leftist activists to react to the crap that the media made up about violence from the right. her show is making people act out, violently and she's clearly loving it.
rob
March 26th, 2010 at 4:05 pm
guys, learn how to think critically. she's been playing one side of this violent game and she's inciting it on her side. geesh, not that hard to see.
Tweets that mention Rachel Maddow Incites Violence. | Parcbench -- Topsy.com
March 26th, 2010 at 3:51 pm
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Kellen Giuda. Kellen Giuda said: RT @Parcbench: Updated: Rachel Maddow Incites Violence. http://is.gd/b0tQA [...]
Ian Curtis
March 26th, 2010 at 8:15 pm
Rob, you are applying extra-textual analysis when the article clearly highlights a block quote from a single instance. Your global thesis may be correct, but it is improper within the context of the text above. The liberals always list a litany of Rush quotes to condemn him. An article condemning Rachel Maddow on a general level would include such a list and references to dates when the comments were made. Within the "four corners" of what is written above, there is no incitement as the article was supposed to demonstrate.
Steve Hansmann
April 1st, 2010 at 9:51 am
I try, but truly fail to understand you guys. You can apparently ignore that literally all of the political violence since 1971; Gordon Kahl machine-gunning federal marshals, Posse Comitatus gunplay with police officers, armored car robberies finished with summary slaughter of all drivers and guards, G.Gordon Liddy telling listeners to his radio show to always "aim for the head, federal law enforcement always have the best body armor", to the recent murders of Unitarians by a piece of genetic garbage who had Hannity's books, and a tome by O'Reilly, to the perfect, patriotic, perfection of Oklahoma City, has been to the right of center. The body count for the right far exceeds, multiple times, the injury and deaths from all combined '60's radicals. Yet you take this benign quote from Maddow, and equate it to your side's frothing, ignorant incitements. Pathetic. And you wonder why most Americans don't take you seriously. And please, look up the definition of fascism. The perfect union of government, corporate interests, and a state religion hardly fits liberalism.
Leave a reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.