12 replies to this topic

[In the Corner]

Oklahoma City bombing: Is 1995 repeating itself today?
Americans observed the 15th anniversary of the Oklahoma City bombing Monday. Some believe that the extremist political climate in which the bomber, Timothy McVeigh, operated is resurging.

from The Christian Science Monitor

in remembrance: http://www.oklahomac...almemorial.org/

[trix]

Bill Clinton's Op-Ed in the New York Times: http://www.nytimes.c...tml?ref=opinion

I remember in the hours after the Oklahoma city bombing the reports that men of 'Middle Eastern appearance' had been seen in the vicinity, and my Indian housemate commenting that if he were in Oklahoma City he would not be going out on the street.  And then it turned out that it was a domestic terrorist, and my home state of Michigan was for a short time best known as the home of the 'Michigan Militia.'    The political climate actually seems worse to me now, but maybe that's just because I was an oblivious college student then.

Edited by trix, 19 April 2010 - 05:32 PM.

[In the Corner]

trix said:

Bill Clinton's Op-Ed in the New York Times: http://www.nytimes.c...tml?ref=opinion

I remember in the hours after the Oklahoma city bombing the reports that men of 'Middle Eastern appearance' had been seen in the vicinity, and my Indian housemate commenting that if he were in Oklahoma City he would not be going out on the street.  And then it turned out that it was a domestic terrorist, and my home state of Michigan was for a short time best known as the home of the 'Michigan Militia.'    The political climate actually seems worse to me now, but maybe that's just because I was an oblivious college student then.

Yes, I remember the media saying that about the Middle-Eastern-appearing men being seen in the vicinity.

I do agree that the overall political climate seems worse now and I'm a bit surprised we haven't seen more "domestic terrorism".  It could be that folks are just too plain fat and lazy now to actually do something; they prefer to scream and carry signs I guess.  Thank goodness.

[trix]

In the Corner said:

Yes, I remember the media saying that about the Middle-Eastern-appearing men being seen in the vicinity.

I do agree that the overall political climate seems worse now and I'm a bit surprised we haven't seen more "domestic terrorism".  It could be that folks are just too plain fat and lazy now to actually do something; they prefer to scream and carry signs I guess.  Thank goodness.

Fortunately domestic terrorism has been rare even during the most heated times.  And of course the government have made it a lot harder with more secure buildings, etc.  There was that guy who flew his small plane into an IRS building recently.

I remember not too long after Oklahoma city, on the X-files Mulder and Scully did something wrong, and as punishment got put on a detail where all day they phoned up farmers and asked questions to make sure their purchase of  x tons of fertilizer was legitimate and not for purposes of bomb making.

[stipeeyes]

The guy that did that was as American as me.  It's one thing that he hated this country and felt he needed to do something but did he have to blow up children like that?  Well he was put to death and even that didn't seem enough punishment for what he did.  I'll never forget that day or the lyrics to a song I heard on my walkman on my way to work and to me it really fit what had happened.

Here's part of it  

Cry to Heaven
Elton John Bernie Taupin

http://www.eltonogra..._to_heaven.html

I found a black beret on the street today
It was lying in the gutter all torn
There's a white flag flying on a tall building
But the kids just watch the storm
Their dirty faces pressed on the windows
Shattered glass before their eyes
There's a mad dog barking in a burned out subway
Where the sniper sleeps at night

[Aardwolves Lower]

I think right wing extremest talk show hosts like Glen Beck, Sean  Hannity, Bill O'Reilly and Rush Limbaugh are throwing gasoline on the  barbecue with their Obama bashing rhetoric and outright blatant lies  disguised as productive criticism...
it's pantomime to yelling Fire  in a crowded theater, in my opinion...that's all I have to say about  that!:mad:

[Kelly A]

A aardwolves B lower C me said:

I think right wing extremest talk show hosts like Glen Beck, Sean  Hannity, Bill O'Reilly and Rush Limbaugh are throwing gasoline on the  barbecue with their Obama bashing rhetoric and outright blatant lies  disguised as productive criticism...
it's pantomime to yelling Fire  in a crowded theater, in my opinion...that's all I have to say about  that!:mad:

Remember when every one of those people said it was traitorous to speak negatively of the President? That was funny.

I'm a big fan of free speech, but I'm surprised people listen to those hypocritical idiots. I do think things are worse now, primarily because the media are only covering "talking points" rather than real journalism. They make money off of starting fights. Fox Noise is especially bad with thier tea party, but MSNBC is no prize either. I want to go back to the way it used to be.

[wagtail]

Kelly A said:

Remember when every one of those people said it was traitorous to speak negatively of the President? That was funny.

I'm a big fan of free speech, but I'm surprised people listen to those hypocritical idiots. I do think things are worse now, primarily because the media are only covering "talking points" rather than real journalism. They make money off of starting fights. Fox Noise is especially bad with thier tea party, but MSNBC is no prize either. I want to go back to the way it used to be.

So true.  I posted a thread about 'trollumists' a while ago.  This idea that income generation/advertising revenue in new media is related to hits on a page, so you have opinion-based commentary deliberately trying to inflame and enrage people.  Internet polls that are designed to get hits by polling emotive topics.  It's such a cynical process.  

The classified pages in the newspaper used to be an annoying waste of paper, but if they generated the income that allowed for genuine journalistic reporting, it's infinitely preferable to what we have now.  

Oh and it's not just the right wing media.  Take a look at Huffington Post these days, it's friggin terrible, loads of leftie media has turned to crap.  Rachel Maddox [sp?] as funny and smart as she is, spends way too much time belittling the right, or at least that's the impression I got from a lot of her stuff when I was in the states.  I stand to be corrected, I may have just been there at a time when there were some local issues that caused her to be particularly pissed off.

[Aardwolves Lower]

you were close waggy, it's Rachel Maddow...
She's a Rhodes Scholar and did her postgraduate work at Lincoln College,  Oxford, completing her Doctor of Philosophy degree (DPhil) in politics  in 2001, from Oxford University...

I think she's actually embarrassed for the Bozo's on FOX News and  perhaps disappointed that they lack the 'tools' to actually debate any  real issues with her...
She has a beautiful mind...

I just wish people would stop referring to those talk show host  bootlickers like Sean Hannity --that are hired solely to push Rupert  Murdock's bureaucratic agenda-- as news anchors, or at least quit  calling the FOX channel a "News" station, because it has become nothing  but a 24/7  How-To-Prepare-For-Social-Upheaval-Because-Obama-Is-President-And-We're-All-Gonna-DIE!  infomercial targeted at some right-of-center cry babies and a paranoid,  well armed and rapidly growing lunatic fringe.

It's madness at it's finest moment...

[wagtail]

A aardwolves B lower C me said:

you were close waggy, it's Rachel Maddow...
She's a Rhodes Scholar and did her postgraduate work at Lincoln College,  Oxford, completing her Doctor of Philosophy degree (DPhil) in politics  in 2001, from Oxford University...

I think she's actually embarrassed for the Bozo's on FOX News and  perhaps disappointed that they lack the 'tools' to actually debate any  real issues with her...
She has a beautiful mind...

I just wish people would stop referring to those talk show host  bootlickers like Sean Hannity --that are hired solely to push Rupert  Murdock's bureaucratic agenda-- as news anchors, or at least quit  calling the FOX channel a "News" station, because it has become nothing  but a 24/7  How-To-Prepare-For-Social-Upheaval-Because-Obama-Is-President-And-We're-All-Gonna-DIE!  infomercial targeted at some right-of-center cry babies and a paranoid,  well armed and rapidly growing lunatic fringe.

It's madness at it's finest moment...

ah, yeah.  Maddow...I knew what I wrote didn't look right.  Thanks.  And yeah, I knew she was smart, I saw her do a few amazing interviews..but she was also so absurd and over the top in some of the right-bashing...I know it's part of the schtick, but I think she found it a bit too delicious, which is why I didn't think she was doing it as parody of the right-wing media, but as a genuine belittling of right-wing voters, and I don't think that's helpful when the main thing that needs to be countered is the divisiveness.


As for Murdoch, I've said this before here, but I don't think Murdoch  has a far right agenda at all - he's anti-regulation, pro-free-market, but that's hardly an inherently dangerous or controversial stance.  

I think he knows how to make money out of ignorant people better than he knows how to make money out of less-ignorant people -  I think he really is that scarily pragmatic about his business.  He knows Hannity and Beck are clowns, he more or less said so in an interview for Aussie TV, he just seems to think there is an insatiable appetite for that stuff in the US.  

BTW:  Murdoch papers in my home state [which was the home state of Rupert's company]  pretty much endorse the [supposedly] social-democratic government.  But they will try and get mileage out of any political stoush, doesn't matter what the nature of the stoush is.

[wagtail]

thorn plucker said:

pssst ... rebekah ... do you realize that you're rephrasing my art of communication argument.  well done young padawan.

oh boy.  You know, what's become apparent to me is that you are totally oblivious to how insulting some of your own comments can seem.  

So, kudos for demonstrating your relentless ability to entirely miss the  point.

Are you incapable of understanding the difference between art commentary and political commentary? Are you also oblivious to the power of the mass media; oblivious to the differing roles of a journalist as compared to an artist; oblivious to how essential the development of critical thinking is in a society;  incapable of genuinely understanding the role art can play in developing critical thinking; incapable of wanting to explore how people can honestly express dissent through art and in conversation?   Oblivious to how vacuous and stupid people can get when they don't take risks in conversation at the risk it might offend?  Oblivious to how it may bubble away until it expresses itself as something entirely the  opposite of civil and civic behaviour?  Oblivious to how mass media, from all 'sides', takes advantage of the tribalism that is a natural consequence of people who declare one side moral and just and the other side a bunch of loonies/extremists?

I don't think you really took in what I was trying to say in the other thread and, to be really honest with you, I'm just bored by your approach.  Truth is I've met so many people in my life that ride around on the coat-tails of artists, but who reveal themselves to be pretty much devoid of original or interesting thoughts.  Who exist in some subtly reactive state that requires someone else's initiative, someone else courage, and someone elses desire to give a flying fuck about trying to be inclusive.  It's really extremely parasitic.

Despite this forum really being a much freer place than you give it credit for, I've never actually seen you participate in many discussions that do happen to proceed, every day, on the kind of terms and following the kind of aesthetic that you suggest you like.  Instead you are buzzing around the place with your quiet expressions of indignation, nit-picking and grasping at some straw that affirms your view that polite blandness trumps all else in the communication stakes.

Edited by wagtail, 22 April 2010 - 06:39 AM.

[wagtail]

thorn plucker said:

i seem to have overestimated you once again.  i was arguing in favor of consciously choosing simple, respectful, and meaningful words in conversations so that members of this community could engage in discussions; not arguments.  you seemed comfortable using humor in the other thread; i thought you'd be comfortable if i used it here.

http://www.murmurs.c...ad.php?t=118346

as far as ...

I've never actually seen you participate in many discussions that do  happen to proceed, every day, on the kind of terms and following the  kind of aesthetic that you suggest you like ...

i read the entries in your blog (don't be paranoid - i read almost everything in every thread) and visit the tractor bar on a daily basis (and yes, i caught the conversation about aardie and me - fuckwit and analyzer indeed !).  you seem very comfortable in both places - and except for making one comment in your blog (i worried about you after you seemed to disappear for a bit) i chose not to participate - fearing that i might once again say something that for some reason would set you off and it would ruin the atmosphere for both you and the other participants.  the other discussions ?  well ...  i'm not really interested in anything related to Bill Miller - but truly -- if anyone reading this is interested or concerned about my behavior, they can certainly check my posting history and will see that what you've written isn't true.

yes.  i've overestimated you a second time.  i promise i won't do it a third.  sorry rebekah.


jodi

Oh, I knew you were attempting to be funny, I just don't think you have a great gift for it [without including some smug condescension].  

I don't care if you think you've over-estimated me or underestimated me. seriously, I REALLY don't care.  

It's patently obvious you read this entire forum, I wrote what I wrote in the Tractor Bar knowing you'd read it - you are really that painfully predictable - the way you dealt with what you read there was also painfully predictable.   [Once again kudos to Aardie for not buying into it].  

I'm bored by it - I'm bored by the way you use my posts as to rail against a culture that actually doesn't exist here anymore, when you show such little interest in genuinely participating in the culture that you say you favour.   At various times here you have called me both nice and nasty - you've been wrong on both occasions.  You have way too much faith in your ability to read people and understand their motives, and you overestimate your own skills as a communicator.  You can't do anything about me and my grossly inadequate communication skills, so why not do something about your own?  

Honestly, I've actually been trying to respect your contradictory sensibilities for quite some time by not telling you to fuck off. I know you've been waiting for it, because I'm pretty sure you would have had ample experience in pestering people for so long that they finally give up and give you the information you require to reinforce the prejudice that was driving your interaction with them in the first place - [witness the exchange with Leilani].  Like I said, it's just boring.

[Lake Huron Day]

There are alternatives to television!  

I find Harper's, The International Socialist Review and Z Magazine to be insightful for someone who can't find leftist voices at all in the popular broadcast medium.

I don't understand the mentality of right-wing radio listeners not being more critical of their sources of information either.  Sometimes I read Chomsky's books and don't concur with everything put forth.

As for the tragic Oklamhoma City bombing: Has any investigation led to an actual answer of why Oklahoma City was targeted by McVeigh?


-Ryan