The Dedgradation of the American Dialogue

[Riot]

Death at the Holocaust Museum and the Degradation of the American Dialogue
By Michael Rowe June 11, 2009

Ann Coulter, the self-described "conservative Christian" right-wing talking head, is much on my mind as I contemplate the horrifying images that came out of Washington from the Holocaust Museum, where white supremacist James von Brunn opened fire in an attempted mass-murder of Jews. His killing spree was cut short by security guard Stephen Tyrone Jones who put himself in the line of fire and died so others might live.

I am remembering an October 2007 segment of the Donny Deutsch Show where Coulter asserted that America would be better off if everyone was Christian and that "the Jews" merely needed to be "perfected" through conversion.

Coulter has made her fortune by generating, fanning, and nurturing hatred and contempt for a variety of people, including liberals, Democrats, gays, foreign nationals, 9/11 widows, feminists, single mothers, Muslims, and any other group she could throw to her disenfranchised readership as shark bait.

To Coulter, referring to Jews as "imperfect" on a talk show hosted by an observant Jewish host must have seemed like just another day at the office. Coulter shook her blond hair and tittered, as though waiting to be found witty, charming, and adorably irascible. Oh Ann, you minx! You're just pushing everyone's buttons, aren't you? Shame on you, you dead-sexy fascist pin-up. Stop teasing. You don't really mean that. I mean, not really, right? Right?

Deutsch, clearly appalled, pointed out that the comment was not only patently absurd, but also hateful. Coulter giggled. A gold crucifix gleamed against her bony clavicle. "No," she said, "it's not hateful at all."

This week, nearly two years later, James von Brunn, driven by his own twisted version of Coulter's publicly-proclaimed perspectives regarding the "imperfection" of Jews, entered the Holocaust Museum in Washington and put them into action, with tragic and deadly consequences.

Much the same thing happened on May 31st when Scott Roeder entered the Reformation Lutheran Church during Sunday services and slaughtered abortion provider provider Dr. George Tiller. Media analysts continue to explore a possible continuum between Tiller's murder and FOX host Bill O'Reilly's well-documented on-air tirades against the doctor, whom he repeatedly called "Tiller the Baby Killer." O'Reilly broadcast his vendetta to millions and millions of FOX viewers already infected with evangelical superstitions and a horror of science, especially science as it applies to a woman's right to choose.

If O'Reilly had been a serious journalist or broadcaster instead of a sclerotic, chronically-aggravated right-wing rage pimp, he might have had the professional self-awareness or ethical sense to realize that he was putting George Tiller's life in danger over the more than 28 broadcasts in which he used Tiller's name. But O'Reilly, like, for Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage, and indeed Coulter herself (to name only the gratin of that particular food chain) is neither of those things.

As a group, they are the pop culture equivalent of necrotic carrion beetles, crawling with insectile determination from one infected open wound in the American psyche to another. The wounds include fear of race, fear of foreigners, fear of sexuality, fear of difference, hysterical religious fundamentalism, violent nationalism, and paranoia. They lay their eggs in the infected abrasion, then scuttle away. When the eggs hatch, disgorging rage and discontent, they start counting money.

When challenged on the inherently destructive nature of their enterprise, they invariably claim that their First Amendment right to free speech is being abrogated. Or, like Ann Coulter defensively does in those instances, they cite their place on the New York Times bestseller list. Or the ratings. In other words, since people buy it, watch it, or listen to it in huge numbers, it must have merit, and it must be right.

The difference between John McCain and Sarah Palin became clearest to me in the middle of the campaign last summer.

At a town hall meeting, McCain was confronted by an elderly woman who told McCain that she was a supporter of his because Obama was "an Arab." McCain was clearly uncomfortable, and it was patently obvious why. It had nothing to do with McCain's feelings about Arabs. It had to do with an old-school Republican accidentally moving the rock, and coming face to face with what actually lived beneath it. He recognized that the woman was making an unambiguously racist statement about his opponent, and he was mortified to be asked to answer it. Even though McCain famously and horribly bungled his answer ("No ma'am, he isn't. He's a decent family man.") I knew when he meant. He was addressing the intended racial slur and disavowing it, however badly.

In that moment, I felt deeply for my Republican friends who, on some level, must also be experiencing the embarrassment and discontent of recognizing that their party had been hijacked by racists and religious fanatics who derided education and achievement as "elitist."

Sarah "Screw the Political Correctness" Palin, on the other hand, seemed right at home. She marched into those same crowds grinning and winking, and "Yoo betcha-ing" like she was onstage at the Miss Alaska pageant. While her supporters waved watermelon slices and stuffed monkeys, Palin talked about who the "real Americans" were, and who was "palling around with terrorists." She refused to address the blatant racism of her fans, or address the obvious exploitation of Obama's middle name, Hussein, and the implication she herself was making with her "terrorist" comments.

She was, after all, playing to the accurately-named Republican "base," the same crowd to whom George Bush had sold his second presidential term by pandering to their darkest and most cowardly aspect. This time out it was fear of gay marriage and adoption, carefully tended fear of another 9/11, fear of more fallout from a war they still didn't believe he'd lied about.

One can almost appreciate the horrible honesty of the racists among the McCain-Palin supporters who were able to admit what the others obfuscated: that they didn't want a black man in the White House. Certain videos from their rallies are deeply disturbing. They showcase the seething racism of her most ardent followers.

History has already recorded their obsession with Obama's origins, his religious background, and his citizenship, which remains an obsession among them today.

Obama's citizenship was reportedly also something of an obsession for von Brunn, and likely very much on his mind when he walked into the museum and opened fire to make a statement about what "his" America ought to look like. I have no trouble imagining which radio stations he listened to, or which pundits best represented his baseline political ideology. And why. Even FOX's Shep Smith has said he's disturbed by the escalating virulence and menace of the anti-Obama emails the station is receiving.

There was a time when decency, even honor, was an essential part of the American dialogue in its most ideal form, and part of its very identity. There was a time when our culture would have recoiled in horror at the vituperation flowing unchecked from radios, televisions, and the Internet, instead of applauding it as "common sense," "free speech," or "mavericky," or "a spin-free zone."

There was a time when intellectual honesty was not considered unpatriotic; when compassion for, and understanding of, your fellow man was a sign of strength, not weakness. There was a time when the phrase Have you no shame? meant something, and the First Amendment was not used as toilet paper to wipe up the excremental verbal degradation of vulnerable segments of the American population. A time when it was expected that citizens would understand the difference between free speech and irresponsible speech.

There is no Environmental Protection Agency to measure hate pollution in national dialogue, and no mechanism in place to warn us when the poisonous rage spewed into the national consciousness by shock-jocks, poisonous television pundits, megachurch leaders, and oh-so-subtle politicians, has reached dangerously toxic levels.

No, there is only the result: widows, orphans, collective grief, and an absolute refusal on the part of our loudest, coarsest voices to take any responsibility for their part in the carnage.

[Cannon Shell]

Seriously, a deranged 80 year old guy shoots a security guard and it Ann Coulter or Sarah Palins fault? What about Bush? Doesnt he also have something to do with it too? Did they start the KKK too? Typical liberal bs trying to blame someone else for the issues of the accused.

[gales0678]

chuck i 'll tell you it's bad , i asked my aunt who has transformed herself into a liberal what happened to al queda after 9/11 - i asked her did they go into retirement or was it something that GWB did to slow them down / prevent future attacks ... her answer (probably derived from some ny times story ) was that it had nothing to do with bush going after them , they weren't in retirement either , they just out of the goodness of there heart decided to suspend operations against the US because the saudi king warned them he would take away osma's $$$ from the oil rigs in Saudi Arabia that he collects

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by gales0678

chuck i 'll tell you it's bad , i asked my aunt who has transformed herself into a liberal what happened to al queda after 9/11 - i asked her did they go into retirement or was it something that GWB did to slow them down / prevent future attacks ... her answer (probably derived from some ny times story ) was that it had nothing to do with bush going after them , they weren't in retirement either , they just out of the goodness of there heart decided to suspend operations against the US because the saudi king warned them he would take away osma's $$$ from the oil rigs in Saudi Arabia that he collects

This is a particularly ridiculous line.

Obama's citizenship was reportedly also something of an obsession for von Brunn, and likely very much on his mind when he walked into the museum and opened fire to make a statement about what "his" America ought to look like

So he knows what was on this nuts mind?

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

This is a particularly ridiculous line.

Obama's citizenship was reportedly also something of an obsession for von Brunn, and likely very much on his mind when he walked into the museum and opened fire to make a statement about what "his" America ought to look like

So he knows what was on this nuts mind?

"The Holocaust is a lie. Obama was created by Jews. Obama does what Jew owners tell him to do. Jews captured America's money. Jews control the mass media. The First Amendment is abrogated -- henceforth. ...," an excerpt said.

Found in his car..and probably on his mind I would think.

[timmgirvan]

the article was a degradation of American dialogue! The premise is ridiculous. but par for the course with the lunatic left media. Come on,Riot, I thought you were all about ...... integrity?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by GBBob

"The Holocaust is a lie. Obama was created by Jews. Obama does what Jew owners tell him to do. Jews captured America's money. Jews control the mass media. The First Amendment is abrogated -- henceforth. ...," an excerpt said.

Found in his car..and probably on his mind I would think.

What does his citizenship have to do the rantings of a madman? Did Fox news make this guy insane? Is the right now denying the Holocaust too? Irans president has many times in public forums so maybe he should take some of the blame too, though I doubt he would mind. This is a clear case of the sensationalistic "journalism" the writer is complaining about. Tying the views of nutjobs to political pundits is a stretch. Free speech is fine unless you dont agree with it? It is a real stretch to say that psychos are killing people because of Bill O'Reilley. Nutcases have been killing people long before Foxnews came about. Just think of the reaction that JFK's death in modern terms would have caused? Surely Rush would have been to blame for inciting Oswald.

[Antitrust32]

While you cant blame people who speak on the radio for someone elses radical actions, is it disgusting the hate that is purged from the mouths of people like Coulter, and Rush, etc.

Why shouldnt Coulter be held responsible for saying that jews need to be perfected by being Christians... That shouldnt even be allowed to be said on the radio, its pure hate and disgusting, and should make all decent human beings feel sick.


the Grand Ol' Party will never be accepted like it used to inless it looks like a party that is accepting of all people. Not just rich white people. That might have been okay years and years ago when hate was acceptable, but thankfully the younger generation, at least.. is beyond all that.

And its quite ashame because the BLUE party is the other option and that is just

[ArlJim78]

Its really pathetic how some people jump at the chance to try to score political points, even on the back of a tragedy. that piece below is not even worth replying to it is so dishonest and full of holes and inconsistencies. America does have issues with the degradation of the dialogue, and intellectual honesty, but the piece by Mr Howe is a perfect example of what IS wrong.

the 89 year old nutcase who murdered the guard yesterday, among many other paranoid ideas, spoke out against Fox News, Bill O'Reilly, Rupert Murdoch, was obviously anti-semetic, felt George Bush was in on the 9/11 conspiracy, apparently had the address of the conservative Weekly Standard on him, and felt socialism was the best form of government; and this somehow makes him a product of the the right wing, Ann Couter, and Sarah Palin? That is pretty sad.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

While you cant blame people who speak on the radio for someone elses radical actions, is it disgusting the hate that is purged from the mouths of people like Coulter, and Rush, etc.

Why shouldnt Coulter be held responsible for saying that jews need to be perfected by being Christians... That shouldnt even be allowed to be said on the radio, its pure hate and disgusting, and should make all decent human beings feel sick.


the Grand Ol' Party will never be accepted like it used to inless it looks like a party that is accepting of all people. Not just rich white people. That might have been okay years and years ago when hate was acceptable, but thankfully the younger generation, at least.. is beyond all that.

And its quite ashame because the BLUE party is the other option and that is just

The media has painted this picture of all republicans being radicalized and polarizing figures and it simply isnt true. There is no doubt that the mainstream media will do whatever it can to hold onto the ideological advantage that they now maintain with liberal control of the govt. Rush and Coulter and Hannity and the rest are simply playing to their rather sizable audiences. They aren't political commentators as much as "entertainers". The former President was called far worse things by Olberman and crew. He was and continues to be brutalized in the media yet because it falls under similar political leanings of the majority of the media that is simply brushed aside. There is no doubt that the Liberals here HATE George Bush far more than most Conservatives dislike Obama. But that isn't the sexy argument.

[gales0678]

don't forget the republican party sent the 1st african american to the supreme court and attempted to send the 1st hispanic to the dc court of appeals (2nd highest court in the coutry) and the democrtic party the part of the people didn't even give miguel a vote ...talk about being out of touch

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

The media has painted this picture of all republicans being radicalized and polarizing figures and it simply isnt true. There is no doubt that the mainstream media will do whatever it can to hold onto the ideological advantage that they now maintain with liberal control of the govt. Rush and Coulter and Hannity and the rest are simply playing to their rather sizable audiences. They aren't political commentators as much as "entertainers". The former President was called far worse things by Olberman and crew. He was and continues to be brutalized in the media yet because it falls under similar political leanings of the majority of the media that is simply brushed aside. There is no doubt that the Liberals here HATE George Bush far more than most Conservatives dislike Obama. But that isn't the sexy argument.

thats an interesting thought. Im not sure if i agree or disagree with it either. You should put that out as a seperate topic but use the public as a whole.

There is no liberal on this website that hates bush as much as Dellinger63 or Timmig hates obama.

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

What does his citizenship have to do the rantings of a madman? Did Fox news make this guy insane? Is the right now denying the Holocaust too? Irans president has many times in public forums so maybe he should take some of the blame too, though I doubt he would mind. This is a clear case of the sensationalistic "journalism" the writer is complaining about. Tying the views of nutjobs to political pundits is a stretch. Free speech is fine unless you dont agree with it? It is a real stretch to say that psychos are killing people because of Bill O'Reilley. Nutcases have been killing people long before Foxnews came about. Just think of the reaction that JFK's death in modern terms would have caused? Surely Rush would have been to blame for inciting Oswald.

Especially this guy. He goes way back. I read where in 1981 he tried to kidnap the members of the Federal Reserve board of governers. there was no Fox, Palin, O'Reilly, Coulter, etc back then. who do we blame for that? Walter Cronkite, David Brinkley?

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by gales0678

don't forget the republican party sent the 1st african american to the supreme court and attempted to send the 1st hispanic to the dc court of appeals (2nd highest court in the coutry) and the democrtic party the part of the people didn't even give miguel a vote ...talk about being out of touch

Clarence Thomas? LOL.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by timmgirvan

the article was a degradation of American dialogue! The premise is ridiculous. but par for the course with the lunatic left media. Come on,Riot, I thought you were all about ...... integrity?

What do you think the premise is?

I think it's that rabid, inflammatory talk has consequence.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

The media has painted this picture of all republicans being radicalized and polarizing figures and it simply isnt true. There is no doubt that the mainstream media will do whatever it can to hold onto the ideological advantage that they now maintain with liberal control of the govt. Rush and Coulter and Hannity and the rest are simply playing to their rather sizable audiences. They aren't political commentators as much as "entertainers". The former President was called far worse things by Olberman and crew. He was and continues to be brutalized in the media yet because it falls under similar political leanings of the majority of the media that is simply brushed aside. There is no doubt that the Liberals here HATE George Bush far more than most Conservatives dislike Obama. But that isn't the sexy argument.

I dont think ALL republicans are radical... but I wouldnt be shocked to hear that 15% of conservatives are radical right wing holier than tho people.

And that includes Coulter and Rush.. the people who are being heard the most. And it spreads a terrible message.

Shoot I go and read the politics section of Pace Advantage... my lord I'm conservative and i'd get ripped to shreads if I posted there. Very anti-anyone who isnt Christian. The people who post comments on the Foxnews website are the same way. Its actually quite scary and sick.

There are a ton of very stable & open minded - accepting and loving Republicans out there... thats just not what is being heard on the radio and such, the nutjobs have the loudest voices. And I feel its a big problem.

And I do have a HUGE problem with someone like Coulter saying Jews need to be perfected by becoming Christians. It makes me physically ill. Shouldnt even be allowed to be said under the first amendment. She should get charged with a hate crime for that.

Just because Liberals bashed Bush over everything, doesnt mean Repubs need to attack Obama PERSONALLY... personal attacks are "he's a muslim" "he's not born in the USA", "he's a terrorist" stuff like that should be off limits. It makes us look just plain stupid.

Its fine and dandy to verbally disagree with his policies, just like dem's did with Bush... but the conservatives are just out of hand right now.. and a small percentage of them are making the entire group look bad. Kind of like Muslims, (a small percentage makes the whole society look bad) just A WHOLE LOT LESS EXTREME.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Riot

What do you think the premise is?

I think it's that rabid, inflammatory talk has consequence.

This may be the first and last time you hear this Riot, but I 100% agree.


I mean Coulter and such are not directly reponsible for anything that happened yesterday... but when popular people are throwing out the same opinions that go along with psycopath's opinions like this guy yesterday, it throws oil on the fire.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Seriously, a deranged 80 year old guy shoots a security guard and it Ann Coulter or Sarah Palins fault? What about Bush? Doesnt he also have something to do with it too? Did they start the KKK too? Typical liberal bs trying to blame someone else for the issues of the accused.

Maybe you could not view it in such a superficial, knee-jerk, black-white/right-left/blame point of view?

I think alot of that article is a bit exaggerated, but the part below is right on, and is the reason why I posted it.

What do you think about the below, the POINT of the article?

"There was a time when decency, even honor, was an essential part of the American dialogue in its most ideal form, and part of its very identity. There was a time when our culture would have recoiled in horror at the vituperation flowing unchecked from radios, televisions, and the Internet, instead of applauding it as "common sense," "free speech," or "mavericky," or "a spin-free zone."

"There was a time when intellectual honesty was not considered unpatriotic; when compassion for, and understanding of, your fellow man was a sign of strength, not weakness. There was a time when the phrase Have you no shame? meant something, and the First Amendment was not used as toilet paper to wipe up the excremental verbal degradation of vulnerable segments of the American population. A time when it was expected that citizens would understand the difference between free speech and irresponsible speech. "

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

thats an interesting thought. Im not sure if i agree or disagree with it either. You should put that out as a seperate topic but use the public as a whole.

There is no liberal on this website that hates bush as much as Dellinger63 or Timmig hates obama.

I know that those guys dont like Obama but the libs here hate Bush. The hatred for Bush by some people was as intense as I have ever seen for a public figure not named Howard Cosell.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

Clarence Thomas? LOL.

Is he not black?