By now, we all know of the Arizona shootings that took place on January 8th, 2011, in which a gunman killed six people and wounded thirteen others at an event for Representative Gabrielle Giffords. Representative Giffords survived a single gunshot wound to the head. At the time of this writing, it is reported that she is able to open her eyes, move both of her legs and one of her hands, however she has a long road of recovery ahead. One of her staffers, three retirees, a federal judge and a nine year old girl were all killed. The suspect, Jared Lee Loughner, was taken into federal custody at the scene, after being tackled by onlookers as he struggled to reload.
The attack raise questions about the tone of America’s political discourse. Sarah Palin has received a lot of heat after news outlets reported that she had targeted Gifford’s district using a crosshair image on her website. Representative Giffords had warned Palin that her use of violent imagery would have “consequences”. For her part, Palin issued a statement expressing sympathy for the victims and stating she does not condone violence and that “acts of monstrous criminality stand on their own”. She went on to say that “journalists and pundits should not manufacture a blood libel that serves only to incite the very hatred and violence they purport to condemn.” The term “blood libel” set off another firestorm of controversy with leaders from the Jewish community saying they found the use of the term offensive.
Now I am sure that Sarah Palin never intended for anyone to shoot Representative Giffords or anyone else for that matter. However, there is no denying that America’s political discourse seems to have taken a very nasty tone. It is one thing to disagree with someone and discuss why you disagree, in fact, having open political debate is one of the things that make our country so great but where do you draw the line? Is it acceptable to use violent imagery, threats and derogatory comments about people’s race, religion or gender? On the other side, when you start censoring people, or condemning people for every speech they make you take away the very liberties America stands for.
So my question to you this week is, “What do you think about the state of America’s political discourse? Do you think it’s acceptable for political leaders to say whatever they want about other candidates/ office holders? Should these people be censored in some way and if so, how should we go about it?” Answers are due no later than Tuesday, January 24th, 2011.
I believe that Americas political discourse has gone to extremes. There is nothing wrong with a good debate but when taken to unhealthy extremes it can become dangerous. Anything they say needs to be well thought through because people can go back and twist the words a little and make them look bad.
ReplyDeleteI think that truly honorable political leaders should not have to put down other candidates. The way I see it, is that if a political leader has to play dirty in a race they are not qualified to win. A good politician will have so many amazing things to bring to the table that they don't need to play dirty in order to pursuade the people to vote for them.
If they were to be censored in some way I think that a case by case trial would be a way about it. Every issue is a little different and to be completely fair I don't believe you coud just make one hard fast rule and that take care of the situation.
America's policital discourse seems to be running downhill fast. You would think politicians, who at some time in their political career, want the votes of the people would be more careful about what they say. Especially since everything they say about any topic or person will be held for public review for the rest of their life. Freedom of speech is guaranteed by our Constitution, but common sense says a politician needs to be careful in what they say, because politicians are held to high standards. There is no way to censor politicians, they should censor themselves or face career suicide.
ReplyDeleteI feel as though these people should be censored, however do feel like they have a right to say what they will. As a sense of balance I feel they should be allowed to post the comments on their own websites. In return they should realize that the news wont be reporting about the comments they make. Things that were said got out to the mass public and became known because after statements were said reports talked and reported about it. If the country makes it where news as well as radio personalities cant talk about comments that politicians make, it will be less drama from the statements they make. The public wont know as much their for their will be less effect.
ReplyDeleteI think they should be censored. They have no right to talk badly or use negative imagery towards other candidates. Political leaders should trust that society will be happy with them as long as they speak truthfully about themselves without comparing their positives to the negatives of others. Although we have freedom of speech there should always be a line between what is acceptable and what is not; and being cruel to others should absolutely be censored.
ReplyDeleteAS is says in the Bill of Rights, we have the right of freedom of speech. They can speak freely just as we do. And when the people hear these judgmental and violent remarks, they should realize the effect it could happen. I believe that Palin, and many people should think carefully about what they say or display. This comments could end their career,or create a negative view among the people.I just think it was a horrible judgement call. And I'm not sure how to handle the situation. Allison says they should be censored. I agree but I think it would be hard to accomplish, because the press can be greedy and cruel sometimes and still would publish these comments is they feel "its worth the read"
ReplyDeleteI'm not quite sure how I feel about the state of America's discourse. I've heard that it's been a little crazy, and somewhat more violent and harsh than before, but I don't know that I can say for sure.
ReplyDeleteI don't think they should be censored. That would be a violation of the first amendment, and would be taking away their civil liberties. I think that they should be able to say what they want, because in a way there will end up being censorship, no matter what. It won't come from the news or any higher up officials. Instead, it will come from the people. Representatives should see that uncensored behavior could get them thrown out of office or not voted in, and I would think/hope that others would learn from them. If they don't, then that's their problem. As long as they don't take it to the extent of going and attacking people physically, I think they should be free to say what they feel. If it's a slightly offensive, who cares! Whatever happened to the saying "sticks and stones break my bones, but words will never hurt me."?
I think that the Americas political discourse has gotten a little out of hand. It’s annoying that the candidates bash each other it’s difficult to tell who is telling the truth. But even if is annoying they still have the right to free speech, but they should be careful about what they say.
ReplyDeleteI think that everyone should be able to say whatever they want, but they should know that they may face a lot of criticism for what they say. Politicians should be able to say whatever they want because they will be judged by that, however I think that when they put down their opponents they are only making themselves look bad. They should practice some caution in what they say and talk only about the issues. I think dirty campaigns make people not care for either one of the candidates. Thats what bothers me about politics a lot, that politicians seem to care about being re-elected more than they care about the issues.
ReplyDeleteI'm going to have to agree with some of Nathasa said. I believe that everyone should be allowed to freedom of speech, but I believe their should also be some form of code of conduct. These are the people are suppose to be leading our country, and should be role models of how we should act.
ReplyDeleteI think the tone of politics is heading the wrong direction. When leaders bad mouth eachother it not only creates controversy, but it creates certain perceptions among the american people. I think this directly affects voting, because many people vote for a specific reason. Being in office and holding a position, I feel as if the tone should be respectful and professional. There will always be opposition, but our government invites that in allowing us the freedom to support one side or the other. It's sad to think these people we call leaders are so quick to point fingers and bad mouth one another when there are biggers issues at hand. It makes these individuals look immature and incapable of doing their job. I think there should be some censorship put into effect for the simple reason of this tradegy and for future issues that may arise. The bottom line is they have the job of handling our country and its issues, not bad mouthing one another to get publicity. To me, that is not a leader.
ReplyDeleteI believe that political leaders should be able to say whatever they want to an extent. I don't believe things should be censored because then that leads to the possibility of things that may need to to be heard, not being heard because it was censored. The politicians should be more selective as to what they are saying because it is going be heard and reviewed by many people that do listen. Some people may take what was heard incorrectly, or to an exaggeration.
ReplyDeleteMy first initial thought after reading the question was yes. But then I took a second to think about it. Now I think that people in politics should watch what they say to a certain extent. I believe that those who truly have bad intentions for their fellow officers/runners ect. need to be caught in the act. That way their supporters will really see them for what they are and can decide weather they want to keep supporting that person. I agree with most that all opponents should be professional toward one another. But at the end of the day, anything and everything will always be said weather its right or wrong. Its up to the people to decide who they want to support.
ReplyDeleteWe obviously have freedom of speech in America, but I would have to agree that a line needs to be drawn at some point. What happened to the "Golden Rule" where you do unto others as they would do to you? I realize that if you fully agree with freedom of speech you're gonna say whatever you want when you want.. but you also need to be able to take the heat if you're gonna dish it out too.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion Americas political discourse have really did nothing wrong. This has been going on during every election, both candidates talk bad about each other to make them selfs look better. If you took that right away it would take away are freedom of speech. Now Im not saying that i agree with it, but there is really nothing we can really do about it.
ReplyDeleteI believe in freedom of speech because that is what makes our country great. However there is a limit to what a person should say. This is just common sense. There is a difference between speaking your mind and bashing a person. The politicans take it too far from a simple rivarly debate. This promotes a bad image on our country, instead of being freedom of speech. It is more like freedom to bash in any method they chose. I think that a set of censor rules should be made. So that they can bring back order and safety.
ReplyDeleteTionda Burch
I think everyone should just say what they mean and mean what they say and when speaking of others whether it be good or bad say it in a way that you would like to spoken about or to
ReplyDeleteI don't believe it should be censored at all. People know when they have stepped the bounds of proper discourse. So if they are so out of line, then why do we elect these representives? In my belief, I want to hear the truth, and if these political figure heads are going to say anything else, then why do we raise them on a golden pedestal for all of the world to see. Although, at the same time, we are very censored (like with government business and such), which I personally would like to know about. I believe that they cover a lot of things we should know, and tell us a lot ot facts to incriminate others that shouldn't have even gone there. So to "fix" all of this, they should simple give out the truth and the whole truth, that would be used to benifit for a majority. . we don't need to know all the speeding tickets governor Deval Patrick has had.
ReplyDeleteFreedom of Speech shouldn't just be for specific people so I think that they should have the right to say what they want, when they want. They should also have some respect for themselves and others and not be so negitive towards other. "If you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all," however they are in politics so I don't think that the quote adheres to them. As far as having to censor them that goes back to Freedom of Speech so I do not think that would be an appropriate fix.
ReplyDeleteI do not follow what is said between candidates/office holders at all, but I do not think that these people should be censored. Instead, they should be respectful and professional in the way they word what they say. That is what should be expected from them anyway. It is not acceptable for such people to just say whatever comes to mind without thinking of the consequences or impact their words could have.
ReplyDeletePoliticians are, frankly, disappointing. Palin only makes a target of herself for people who are willing to load a gun and open fire. I think the political discord to be upsetting, and I think that it divides our nation instead of uniting it. I don't really think our forefathers would be very pleased if they saw what our nation had turned into.
ReplyDeleteThat said, I still don't agree with censorship. You can only take political correctness so far. If that is the politician's view, then that is their view. Lying to people has never solved anything and I don't think it ever will. I wish that people would be wiser about what they say, for their own safety and the safety of others, but I see no point in making a standardized thing across the board.
I think freedom of speech for everyone, however, know your boundaries. Sometimes things get taken overboard and that is uncalled for especially coming from politicians and people leading our nation. I don't think targeting someones campaign/district with cross hairs is okay at all. You just might attract the wrong attention and then something like this will happen. Did you know most people do not develop mental disorders until the age 18-25?...that is a prime time for most of us browsing the web learning about politics. Well you learn a little in high school but you cant actually vote until you are 18 so then you start doing research. A tiny chemical imbalance + a bad image = great idea. But then it comes down to who is to blame: the school? the parents? the media? A teacher and a classmate said while Loughner was in school they thought he may commit a shooting...hmm.
ReplyDeleteI feel that freedom of speech should not be limited to people in a higher position. I believe that it all comes down to the integrity of the politician in question. I feel that is completely unacceptable for our leaders to fight with and bash each other. We look to our leaders a role models and when we see them act this way it sends the message that it's okay.
ReplyDeleteI believe that candidates should be able to have healthy debate and respectful competition. Those are good characteristics in a political leader. There are some things that need to be censored. Being able to say harmful things is not was freedom and liberty in American is about.
ReplyDelete