News Roundup - Hour 1
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2011-01-14/news-roundup-hour-1
President Obama appeals for national unity at a memorial for shooting victims in Tucson. Debate heats up over political rhetoric and gun control. And former House leader Tom Delay is sentenced to three years in prison. A panel of journalists joins Diane for analysis of the week's top national news stories.
Guests
John King
anchor of CNN's John King, USA, and chief national correspondent.
Sheryl Gay Stolberg
White House correspondent, The New York Times.
John Dickerson
chief political correspondent for Slate.com and CBS political analyst and contributor. Author of "On Her Trail: My Mother, Nancy Dickerson, TV News' First Woman Star."
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
Today in our local paper, the Democrat and Chronicle the photograph used to illustrate the article on President Obama's Tucson memorial speech was one in which it looked like the President was grabbing Mike Kelly by the lapel and threatening him. I had no idea what it was about until I read the caption. Given the number of photographers that were present, it is clear that the visual message of the President as thug was intended.
This is a recent example of the media choosing images which create or uphold stereotypes or prejudice. If, as we have been told all week, what is seen and what is heard doesn't influence people, why are the images distributed by the media so biased?
Open Letter to Diane:
Dear Diane,
I am begging you ... please please please ... assign an intern to look into what the fight is about WTC #7
And then please invite Architect Richard Gage and change this world. As a journalist, it is your job to cover 9/11 Truth Movement. It is all about WTC #7. We are not going away. Please stop being part of the cover up by ignoring the Collapses that happened on 9/11.
The bottom line is that the owner of World Trade Center #7, has said: "We decided to bring down the building with Controlled Demolition, and we watched the building come down."
Any other questions?
Unity? Is that even possible? I thought President Obama showed extrordinary leadership, compassion, and vision in his speech. It brought me to tears thinking about the loss, and yet it wasn't 24 hours before Republicans like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and others were complaining about the "pep rally atmosphere". And that beautiful monster, the ex governor of Alaska, found a way to make it worse? How can we have unity when one side won't hear of it? Isn't it time to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine before we tear ourselves apart?
Please discuss the tragedy in Tucson as further evidence of a failed healthcare system AND confirmation that we are still a warring people. If we spent the money this nation spends on weaponry, on healthcare education, research and services, perhaps someone would have been able to get this young man's mental condition assessed and managed. Perhaps those who have ramped up the atmosphere of hate, fear and violence could get help too.
From his writings and videos now emerging, it appears the shooter was dramatically more left than right. That fact makes many of the points made here and in the blogosphere less than relevant. However, the concept of not using rhetoric to incite violence is still a good one.
Personally I believe the incident has less to say about politics and more to say about the tragedy of progressive mental illness in an age of unquestioned personal freewill. I am disgusted by politicians, political commentators and message board posters trying to use the events to serve their own biases.
Attacking someone as a beautiful monster and then asking for unity is typical of the ignorance on display. Fairness to them appears to be living in an echo chamber of their own irrationality.
We in Arizona are going through the grieving process. On Wednesday evening, President Obama brought us just what we desperately needed. LEADERSHIP! In his own heartfelt words, he expressed and helped to soothe raw emotions and reminded us that we are not alone in our grief.
We are constantly bombarded with hateful, angry rhetoric and, I have to admit, I sometimes get caught up in the nasty dialogue. By his own example, President Obama reminded me of the fact that CHANGE, HOPE, PEACE begins with ME.
I am so sorry for what happened in Tucson this week – another black page in history. I watched Obama's tribute to the memorial meeting, which gave me goose flesh. And tears.
Somehow the American Dream has become a dream about America itself...isn't the America he spoke of, the America that not only you but the whole world is craving for?
Lili
the Netherlands
Sarah Palin's use of the term "blood libel" was absolutely correct. The idea is an unfair accusation of heinous behavior. Was that not EXACTLY what liberals did with the shooting in Arizona? Even when faced with the facts that the gunman had NO connection to Palin, she is still being blamed. And then liberals have the audacity to complain about her defense of herself? We truly do inhabit different Americas. Some of us inhabit the real world while liberals inhabit an alternate reality where being a conservative is prima facie evidence of culpability.
I would say that Sarah Palin's pronouncement has succeeded as she remains in the headlines. As a result, both she and Obama look presidential as they strive for media attention.
Your panel exaggerates the meaning and impact of this event, as terrible as it was. People are murdered everyday (over 18,000 in 2009 see CDC,) multiple murders are also not uncommon. This will pass and Americans' short memories will be distracted by something else equally heinous.
I'm sorry, was the memorial a political event, should all politicians have shown up? I think we've seen enough false displays of emotion and enough politicians capitalizing on these events.
There are RIGHT answers to major issues that confront us, but with all the distortion that occurs, America collectively hobbles along half-blind- the big picture lost in the rabble. Anyone with any courage can look with 20/20 hindsight to see what policies worked in past, and use to guide us forward. (for example -Want jobs? want deficit reduction? Set political affiliation aside and examine past to determine policies in place in “better” times- don’t reinvent the wheel). Unfortunately in the land of sound bites, very little thinking seems to occur. Obama is left to act like a parent to try and pacify disobedient children (Dems and Reps) to accomplish anything.
One thing that would help pacify some hateful debate is if word liberal was stricken from English language. To some, liberals represent drug influenced, soldier hating, baby killing, city dwellers of questionable sexual orientation. Dems would do well to point out that without progressives, women wouldn’t vote, minimum wage would be $2.50 an hour, recently millions of auto-related jobs would have been lost, there wouldn't be Social Security or Medicare, slave ownership would be alive and well, and we'd remain a colony of Great Britain. Most economists seem to agree that recent progressive policies likely staved off 2nd Great Depression (although if it had occurred after 8 years of W, I'm sure Dems would still somehow be blamed). We went to war against terrorists in Iraq, when at the time there were none. Progressive means PROGRESS. We can't afford to be stagnant. Country must progress or we will be left behind, to repeat long drawn out process of following footsteps of the Romans.
All commentators say that there is no direct connection between incendiary language and violence, and that this was only a crazy person acting from other longer seated motives.
Doesn't anyone remember the Rawandan radio announcers that called Tutsis "cockroaches" an told the Hutus to take up arms and kill them.
And what about Nazi propaganda? Do you think all those German citizens just woke up one morning independently and said "let's start a genocide?"
Of course words have impact and can incite violence. Ask a pyscholinguist.
It does not change the tone to refer to Sarah Palin as "that beautiful monster". Is that a respectful way to speak of another human being. I find her actions reprehensible at times, but we ALL need to change our choice of language.
Sharon 52 missed the point, I fear. Sarah Palin is certainly entitled to her opinion, to defend herself, and to do it publicly. The criticism she is getting is because of how, when, and why she spoke when she did. This tragedy was NOT about Sarah Palin. The memorial was about the people who lived and died. Sarah Palin could have responded before or after, but why does she always think that she is the center of every situation?
I work in an ED and see a lot of psyc patients. You have to be very careful when you talk about psyc evals. A lot of people we (us normals) think have problems are simply people who think different than us. The man who killed these people is crazy and it sounds like there were a lot of signs indicating that he was mentally unstable but we cant pass laws that restrict people just because they are not normal. We have to be VERY careful. Think the Patriot act.
Either Arny is too cynical or I am not cynical enough. If the memorial helped people in any way, what could possibly be the harm? I am only sorry that it didn't seem to help Arny in any way at all.
Shame on this show and all of NPR. I hear them talk about no jobs daily, but this show (and every news program on NPR) refuse to talk about a simple easy solution that suggests some corporate responsibility, a solution that's not from the government, or from corporations. That why it can't be considered? Time to cover all the jobs issue from all sides, including all reasonable solutions.
Though the news media has yet to talk about it - National Hiring Day is coming. This is a day that corporations are encouraged to hire new employees. The day suggested is Wednesday JANUARY 19, 2011. Corporations are called on to put patriotism ahead of excess profits and help their country in hard times. Those corporations that cannot hire, are asked to stop firing for that month.
There has never been a time In American History where it is less difficult for Corporations to hire, and more helpful to all Americans if they did.
This may help us all.
Don't turn the Tucson tragedy into a political analysis of Democrats versus Republicans.
In talking about the President's speech regarding how to "lower the tone" of politicial discourse, one of Diane's guests mentioned the need for us to determine what kind of speech "crosses the line."
Although we do have consensus about what constitutes the *worse* of public dialogue, we do NOT have consensus about what does, and does not, "cross the line".
Due to that lack of consensus, we are beginning to have a discussion about how to improve public discussion but, ironically, some people are saying uncivil things but they don't even realize they've "crossed a line."
It's a fledging organization, but I suggest that one organization attempting to find consensus on what "crosses the line" can be found at http://www.NoLabels.org
I'm fine with a memorial service that's not a political event.
I agree that the alleged shooter needed mental health care, however, there are many obstacles to getting it. If one has insurance there is often not coverage. Public mental health is often available only with a prolonged wait because of the scarcity of providers and lack of funding. In addition parents of anyone over 18 years old have difficuly "forcing" a child into care and HIPAA laws do not allow providers to share info with parents. This whole tragedy is a huge wake-up call to these issues.
I agree that Sara Palin is not to blame and she is right when she says it is irresponsible for people to blame her on this incident.
The reason she is right is because people saying that may inspire some crazy person against Palin thus it is a safety issue.
Clearly she and Beck see it that way as Beck recommended she get more security over this issue.
So if they both understand that what people say on TV might inspire some crazy person why do they adamantly deny that possibility when speaking from their own megaphones. Its like if some crazy person commits a crime that might be inspired by their own words its not their responsibility the criminal acts on his own. But if people are saying bad things about them true or not its irresponsible and promoting violence.
Seems like quite a double standard,everyone else should be responsible with their speech but somehow not Palin, anything she says is just free speech. Do they not understand that safety matters to everyone including their political opponents.
Please discuss this if possible. It seem the whole blood libel thing has distracted everyone from this even more basic hypocrisy.
Please comment on the effects of the huge cuts in mental health funding on events like the tragedy in Arizona.Thanks,k
Quick thought -- don't jump to conclusions about shooter's lack of political views. His goal didn't have to be attacking the opposition to his views or even identifying with any particular party. If he had a personal issue with Congresswoman Giffords, the common imagery and rhetoric about guns and violence related to politics might have abetted his misguided motivations. It's clearly mainly about his mental state, but we shouldn't be too quick to rule out the political atmosphere or the issue of gun control and mental illness.
Also, about that last tie, it's not about whether anyone should have done something. They shouldn't given the existing norms, but maybe we should ask for additional duty/responsibility from social institutions that interact with people, like community colleges. That is, those institutions should in the future be trained and asked to involve law enforcement and mental health services, and those services should be required to react.
Silota said, "The criticism she is getting is because of how, when, and why she spoke when she did. This tragedy was NOT about Sarah Palin. The memorial was about the people who lived and died. Sarah Palin could have responded before or after, but why does she always think that she is the center of every situation?"
Sarah Palin was supposed to respond before the attack? Or before the memorial? The fact is, she didn't respond to the disgusting attacks on her right away and there were stories about how she was "ducking" the issue. So, when she does respond, now she's "making it about her." Seems like if you're Sarah Palin, you're damned if you respond and damned if you don't. If you believe the tragedy wasn't about Palin, then stop blaming her for it.
The media, rhetorical and Internet pattern in targeting and assassinating doctors who work at abortion clinics is suspiciously similar to the pattern in the Tuscon shooting.
All Republicans are not to blame, but there are some extremists following and promoting the pattern even when they know the result makes assassination more likely. Guns are not a form of free speech and should not be present in any social or political discussion or political forum. I for one refuse to debate or discuss with armed people. How about a truce?
As a Family Therapist, the argument of “Hate filled violent rhetoric has no impact on crazy people” or “The shooter was upset with Giffords in 2007 before Palin became a national figure” both miss the point of dealing with some who have mental health problems. It’s analogous to handing a mentally unstable person a set of directions of how to act out on his or her demons.
For example, if the young man had been upset with Giffords a few years ago, those of you who don't live in Arizona (I do) may be unaware of the specific "shoot/kill" atmosphere of a state that recently passed a law allowing individuals to bring their guns into places where alcohol is served. Immediately after the assassination attempt, gun sales in Arizona jumped 60% from last year. Tucson radio station KNST from Clear Channel just pulled down their billboard for Rush Limbaugh, labeling him a "straight shooter" with images of bullet holes to emphasize the point. If you listened to the Pima County Sherriff’s remarks immediately after the shooting, he made reference to the local talk shows that have been extreme in their attacks on Congresswoman Giffords...much more so than Palin's PAC "targets."
I’m also struck that those who make the argument heated rhetoric will not inflame “ordinary people “to violence are often the same ones who assume violent extremists in the Muslim world will “make” ordinary Muslims kill Americans.
I'm really very saddened by the fact that in the wake of such a remarkable speech given by the President, we continue to focus on Sarah Palin's video. That isn't meant as a critism of the video itself, only the context of the conversation surrounding it.
I was so moved by the President's words. They really forced me to look at myself and the way I listen and speak to others who disagree with me politically. I wanted so much to share in that overwhelming sense of self reflection and contemplation, yet when I started flipping through the channels hoping to share in this renewed sense of unity, all I found were critisms and comparisons between Obama and Palin. Lets be clear, he is the President of the United States and she is (at this point) essentially a professional political fund raiser. Ideology aside, we will never heed the words of Mr. Obama until we take a close look at our own words and the forums through which we choose to inform ourselves.
Remarkable, I'm not sure. Seems like pundits are driving the context of this event, and politicians are seizing on the opportunity to burnish their public images.
This was not a memorial in the sense of celebrating the lives of those lost. Instead, it seemed like it was orchestrated for opportunistic publicity.
It reminds me of those photo ops where politicians show up at some national disaster, forcing resources to be wasted or distracting those trying to get work done; all so they can get on the 11 o'clock news and in tomorrow's papers.
Horray! My federal payroll tax cut is in effect.
Boo! My state raised income taxes wiping out the tax cut.
Week in the news:
While suggesting seating mingled by party (not a bad idea, seat them alphabetically or by seniority) guest Sheryl Gay Stolberg asserted that someone had shouted, “You lie!” during Pres. Obama’s State of the Union address. The response by one of the other guests that it was a “health care” speech was inadequate. Emphatically, although the speech was to a joint session, it was not a State of the Union address. It had solely to do with “health care” and was not “last year”. Over the last 17 months numerous DR show guests have incorrectly chaqracterized the speech.
I found Pres. Obama referring to Rep. Griffords as “Gabby” last Saturday afternoon objectionable. Where I his respect?
He also could have gone to Tucson and said nothing. That would have shown real respect to the victims.