Skip to main content

View Diary: Ted Nugent, stochastic terrorist (47 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  O'Reilley & Tiller (0+ / 0-)

    I find the connection there pretty weak -- I'm not aware that Roeder ever mentioned O'Reilley as an influence, and the antis have been rhyming "Tiller" with "killer" since probably the seventies.  Nobody even tangentially involved in the anti-choice movement needed Bill O'Reilley to whip up hatred for George Tiller; he'd been the highest-profile abortion provider in the country for years.

    •  that's the whole point (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      elwior

      deniable.


      still the inflammatory words, hang in the air.

      If Roeder never watched O'Reilly,

      I'd bet other in Operation Rescue, were aware of it.

      who repeated the phrase.


      What is necessary to change a person is to change his awareness of himself.
      -- Maslow ...... my list.

      by jamess on Fri Apr 20, 2012 at 11:04:02 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The point I was making... (0+ / 0-)

        ...is that Bill O'Reilley has no known connection to Scott Roeder.  And "Tiller the Killer" is not something O'Reilley made up, it's a fairly obvious construction that's been around since before anyone ever heard of Bill-O.  

    •  even if he had (0+ / 0-)

      so what?  What does it mean to hold O'Reilly responsible.  Not legally responsible, but morally responsible.  It's an argument that he shouldn't have said the things he said, at minimum.  But why not -- if I think Scott Walker is a baby killer for his budget cuts is whether that's acceptable dependent on whether or not someone misconstrues that meaning? (The definition of stochastic terrorism seems to want it both ways -- it's an argument against speech that could incite violence based on similarity to speech that has supposedly incited violence.  It commits the fallacy, as well, of saying if P then Q; Q, therefore P.)  

      I think the better approach is that arguments are either well-constructed or not.  A calm, measured argument that says "abortion is the greatest evil of our time, and in that circumstance in order to prevent it and to punish those who carry it out, an individual would be morally justified, if not legally justified, in killing an abortion practitioner" is in some way scarier because it isn't shouty.  And it's in bounds.  O'Reilly's problem, by contrast, is that he's an idiot.  The response to him is that even if one disagrees with Dr. Tiller's actions, the goal of debate is not to rhyme.  Ask him what he hopes to accomplish by name calling.  Let's see if he really wants to own "stop him by any means necessary."  

      I would posit the same question:  what is the goal of calling him or Nugent a terrorist, stochastic or otherwise?  

      The study of law was certainly a strange discipline. -- Yukio Mishima

      by Loge on Fri Apr 20, 2012 at 12:11:28 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site