« Dancing in the blood Part One | Main | "Red Storm Rising" »

December 15, 2012

Comments

Rivrsis

Regarding Obama "dancing in the [children's] blood". First of all, that's a much too inflammatory statement. Inflammatory statements are a large part of the bigger problem. And second, you are ignoring Obama's statement that this is not the time to have that discussion, but a time to mourn. How do you know he was thinking about gun control - perhaps he was thinking about better security, better mental healthcare. It was the media which eventually, as the long sad day wore on, brought up the "gun control" bugaboo. And today that's even more so. I didn't watch Fox News for most of my information about the event (much of which was incorrect), but after reading some of your impassioned writings I did check Fox out, and rather than being fact-oriented (at least at that moment) it was all inflammatory, highly emotive stuff. Is that where the phrase and notion of "dancing in the blood" came from? Murdoch's empire thrives on arousing emotions - anger, sadness, lust, confusion. Not factfinding. [Makes me think of the pre-election statement on Fox that "we're not going to let factcheckers run our campaign".]

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad