Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F.
Her article proposed that the shooter was influenced by a viewpoint that is held by very few as opposed to something broadcast on Fox, called as such by Trump in rallies time after time.
This sentence is incoherent.
It begins by trying to compare different things--being influenced by a viewpoint, and by the source of a (the same?) viewpoint. Possibly being influenced by the actual rhetoric is one thing. Attributing the source of the rhetoric as influence is another thing. Coulter addressed the rhetoric and action itself--the source being those who actually said or wrote or did it.
If your saying that the shooter would be influenced, not by the rhetoric, but by the source (Fox News), that is a different argument which Coulter did not address.
If your saying that the "viewpoint" of the Mexican supremacists is held by very few because it wasn't on Fox News and therefor it would not be effective in influencing the shooter, that would be assuming something you don't know, as well as being irrelevant, and even more it would be misleading since the "viewpoint" actually has been broadcast or written in main stream media, including the NYT and other main print and television media other than Fox.
Keep denying, perhaps you actually believe that Trump’s speech has no effect and he is using those words to join people together to solve a problem.
|
And then you end by bringing in Trump, totally ignoring the distinct possibility that the shooter was influenced by the actual massive illegal immigration and the verbal threats of Mexican Supremacists that have been going on for a long time and are fully explicated rhetoric, not just single words, or supposed "code" or "dog whistles."
As you say, keep denying.
I don't deny that some crazy might take any word, no matter how legitimate or pertinent, and go off on a killing spree. But I'm going to point the finger on the shooter. That we cannot use legitimate language to describe events because some crazy may go batchit is ridiculous.
You seem to want to deny that rhetoric from the left can be effective enough to cause violence. The leftist media and politicians are fairly quiet about the possibility that their rhetoric, which is more direct and explicit, not just dog whistle stuff, influenced the Dayton shooter, who was a Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren fan. But boy, are they going hyper over the El Paso shooting because they somehow conclude that it's Trump's fault.