The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel Editorial Board has decided that linking contemporary politicians to Hitler is over the line.
That specific rhetoric is inappropriate - leave dead fascists out of the discussion.
Apparently, mocking an elected official's cancer, joking about possible side effects from her treatment, and making false and derogatory remarks about her sexual behavior is acceptable.
One might arrive at that conclusion given that the Journal Sentinel has refused to deal with a major controversy that has drawn the attention of the Republican Party of Wisconsin and the American Cancer Society.
In the aftermath of the tragic shootings in Tucson, Paul Krugman, the liberal columnist for The New York Times, wrote:
"Where's that toxic rhetoric coming from? Let's not make a false pretense of balance: It's coming, overwhelmingly, from the right."
Unlike Krugman, we haven't kept score. But we know this much: The trash talking has been coming from both sides. And both sides seem strangely enamored with Adolf Hitler.
Liberals have compared George W. Bush to Hitler, and later called tea partiers fascists. Conservatives have called Barack Obama a socialist and questioned his religion and birthplace. Glenn Beck, on his radio show, urged his listeners to read Hitler's book "Mein Kampf" in the context of a discussion about Obama and health care reform.
And a recent op-ed in The Capital Times of Madison, which also was published on a union website, made a connection between Gov. Scott Walker and fascists.
The authors, Mike Konopacki and Kathy Wilkes, argue that Walker's openness to "decertifying" state employee unions and the expected effort by Republican legislators to pass right-to-work legislation are reminiscent of moves by Hitler and Italian thug Benito Mussolini. A Konopacki cartoon depicted Walker decked out in a storm trooper outfit.
Konopacki and Wilkes defend their work. In an e-mail, Wilkes wrote: "Scott Walker is part of a national effort by the Republican Party to bust unions and demonize public workers. It's an old, worn out tactic based on a lie."
Wrote Konopacki: "I think we made our point clearly and humorously by ridiculing Walker as a petty economic dictator."
But linking Walker with Nazis is offensive and poisons the well of public discourse. This is persuasive how?
...Let's pledge to dig a little deeper into the rhetorical toolkit, past the knee-jerk comparisons to dead fascists, and make thoughtful arguments free of overwrought language. If those arguments are sound and persuasive, that should be enough.
I would like the Journal Sentinel to pledge to "dig a little deeper" and cover the story of Madison talk radio host "Sly" Sylvester mocking and degrading Wisconsin's Lt. Gov. Rebecca Kleefisch.
Good grief, the topic is political trash talking and overwrought language.
It's inexcusable for that story to be completely ignored by the Journal Sentinel. Comparisons to Hitler aren't the only examples of toxicity.
The newspaper is intentionally failing to inform the public of a significant story, the Left's disgraceful treatment of Kleefisch. Such silence is a display of tacit approval.
Selective outrage can be very revealing.
Silence can be toxic.
No comments:
Post a Comment