Open Chat... All Day, Every Day! Express Your Views, Debate, and Challenge the Views of Others!

In order to keep up with the nature of free, spirited debate, I wanted to place the chat feature at the top of the homepage. This ensures people can come here and share their views on anything they wish and not have it be related to any specific discussion. Here, people can share ideas, links, and views "unmoderated" and an their own pace. To me, this makes The Elephant in the Room blog truly a place for debate.

Tuesday, September 11, 2012

September 11, 2012 - Morning Headlines

- Though they are technically political foes, Paul Ryan has said publicly that he stands with Rahm Emanuel with regards to the teacher's strike in Chicago (CNN):

- For the first time since the tragedy, elected officials will not be speaking at a ceremony at ground zero (CBS News):

- Senator Rand Paul has promised to stall business on the Senate floor if the case of Pakistani doctor Shakil Afridi is not addressed in session (Fox News):

In spite of our political divide, we hope that all Americans come together to remember those who lost their lives on September 11th, 2011, and we'd like to honor the first responders who worked so diligently to rescue the victims we're thankful to have today 


  1. **
    Best wishes to all those lost on 9/11 and the wars that followed, as well as their friends and families. Hope to a better future.


    This sort of political toxicity is a major part of what's damaging the country's political atmosphere. It's shameful, embarrassing, unpatriotic and unacceptable.

    I'll always be the first to say there are of course examples of this on both sides, but needless to say one side is oft represented much more than the other here so I tend to try to compensate for that.

    But, in any case my point is simply that this type of behavior is exactly what is warned against by the phrase "United we stand, divided we fall." We can all disagree and debate until we're blue in the face over our different views, philosophies, and ideals for the many aspects of how this country is ran... but at the end of the day we're all still Americans, that all deserve to be treated with same basic respect, dignity, and courtesy as anyone else regardless of political affiliations. And that idea seems to become more and more diluted with time (particularly lately), where it's more about division, lies/deceit, and painting anyone taking an opposing side as the villain as opposed to merely a different point of view.

    And this goes for all sides, not just one; who does it more isn’t really the issue as much as the fact that both still encourage it, participate in it, and thrive off of it. The rest is simply a distraction from those facts.

    I just hope enough people can realize this, and strive to do and be better. I preach this just the same to the left.

    1. Good afternoon RKen. I guess I must be missing something from the story you linked to. I see the words "Angry Republicans" and I see a couple of comments about "business suicide" and "books in the red" but I don't see "shameful, embarrassing, unpatriotic and unacceptable" statements or actions. I didn't even see any evidence of "angry Republicans" in the short article.

      Many on the left that oppose Super PAC’s because they want to know who contributed to those PAC’s. The reason they want to know is so they can avoid doing business with people they disagree with. I guess somehow that is a little more righteous since they are Democrats.

      You mentioned people being “painted as enemies” (in your reply to MN4Rick). This story is trying to that very thing. They mention “angry Republicans” and as evidence they have a couple of quotes that aren’t even “angry comments”. The word angry is a “code word” for anti-0bama.

      As far as the “death to 0bama” thing you mention. Who said that? That is the kind of comment that would earn you a visit from the Secret Service. I can dig you up a video of a Democrat delegate that said she would like to kill Romney, but I have not heard of any of the people you mentioned (in your reply to MN4Rick) wishing “death to 0bama”. I am not saying it wasn’t said, I simply am looking for a clarification. I am thinking that a statement like that would not be swept under the rug or die down in a day or two.

      I don’t see the problem as what is said but more of a problem with thin skinned liberals who can dish it out like it is nobody’s business but think other peoples freedom of speech ends when they (liberals) are offended. Same way for boycotts.

    2. Boycotting a store for nothing more than having an owner that gave President Obama a hug, is the problem. That's the kind of behavior I'm referring to. Certainly there are much much worse examples than that (which admittedly is almost comical), but the line of behavior is the same and that's my point.

      The reason for the call in transparency of Super PACs isn't so people know who to boycott; that's silly. Maybe for some, but the main idea is for full disclosure, which governs plenty of aspects of our law, government, and politics and is ridiculous not to apply likewise to all (and not just some) aspects of running for presidency. Full disclosure laws and those related to them are far more than 'just laws that tell you who to boycott.'

      And again I never disagreed in that both sides do it, in fact I made a point to be the first to say it.

      I'd take you up on finding that video. I've heard people wish harm/misfortune on Obama, particularly during the RNC rally I saw some particularly hateful/disturbing slogans/poster boards/interviews. But I again recognize you could likely find that on both sides, but at the same time I've never seen it quite comparable to things that those like Ted Nugent/Chuck Norris and others have said. But alas, this is all again subjective.

      Freedom of speech has nothing to do with my point though. I'm not offended by anyone's speech, but that doesn't mean I can't have a problem with our political atmosphere increasingly being governed by, and catered to, and encouraging the behavior of the extremists in both parties.

    3. The video is here:

      I think you would be surprised at how many liberals want "full disclosure" so they know where not to shop. I have seen the comments here on the Elephant in the Room even.

    4. Thanks for the video, I wasn't aware of that. Hope that something comes of it (in the investigation), that kind of rhetoric is again unacceptable.

    5. You're welcome, RKen. By chance do you have a link to the powerful/influential conservative that wished "death to 0bama"? I am unaware of that, other than your mention of it.

    6. I didn't keep the link, but I'll see if I can locate where I found it. I'll surely post it here if I do.

  2. ~ May all the victims of 9-11 rest in peace; may their families find solace in a nation that remembers and is humbled by their strength and courage ~


    I hadn't read the article about the pizza shop owner, but I did see posts on twitter that were basically - 'they' do it all the time (talking about the boycott)so why shouldn't 'we'.

    Really? We're ALL in a recession - EVERYONE is out there just trying to feed their families - and SOME 'people' have concocted this demented and destructive idea that staging a hate campaign to starve a business - and a family - would be a GREAT one. It's sickening - no matter WHO does it.

    Personally, I hate shopping at our Wal-Mart. Their shelves are never stocked, they never have any 'real' checkers and their 'self-check-out' makes me crazy with the annoying, never-ending 'put your item in the bagging area' chant of the stupid machine. In addition, when I require help, the manager is from India; his English is SO accented as to be barely understandable.

    They DO have the best prices on certain items that I MUST purchase every month, so I put up with them. That's MY choice. I don't display my displeasure by standing outside with picket signs or blogging about how ugly they are in an attempt to 'shut them down.'

    On those (rare:)days when I know MY OWN attitude sucks and I fear MY OWN behavior might become less than 'acceptable' in response to their incompetence, I simply go elsewhere and spend the extra money for the things I need.

    We should ALL hold ourselves to a higher standard - BOTH sides. Although 'we' can't control what other people do: Two wrongs do NOT make a right.

    1. Couldn't agree more, Dara. :)

      Two wrongs don't make a right, yet a lot of the worst political behavior seen today has that justification of "the other side has done it/worse, so why shouldn't we!?" That sort of attitude can spiral things into a worse state rather quickly, and doesn't help anyone.

      We can only hope that things get better.

  3. Nothing but love, thoughts, and prayers to the families, friends, and loved ones of the first responders, victims, and all those involved.

  4. And RKen, while it isn't justified to "do it because the other side does it" I'm sure you will admit that the left is much worse than the right on this?

    Just look at anything Joy Bahar, Bill Maher, Toure, Chris Matthews and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on say. Like I said, it's no justification for acting disrespectful on our side, but while you're good at pointing out the minutely insignificant issues like these by the right, it seems you overlook the disgusting hate and attacks spewed by the left. :-)

    It's definitely out of balance.

    1. I can list plenty on the right as well that have gone beyond excessive reasonability to paint the other side as enemies in various ways; Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Ann Coulter, Bill O'Reilly, Pat Robertson... and a near-limitless number of hateful 'Obama is a Muslim', 'Obama is a communist’, 'death to Obama', etc, rhetoric by not just the inconsequential but also even among some that hold a reasonable amount of political/influential power.

      Even McCain, whom I respect but disagree with, has come out against fellow GOP in the hateful rhetoric that has spiked particularly against Obama.

      But, as I originally said going back and forth like this doesn't really accomplish anything and just distracts from the issues. We could go back and forth all day, and at the end of it we both would have sufficient reasoning to support different conclusions, and no one is really ‘right’ as it ultimately would come down to perspective and opinion. There is no numerically accurate way to quantify these things.

      So again, this all mostly just distracts from the matter

    2. Good afternoon - I'm not big on the "I know you are but what am I" type of point. RKen does make a point; you can't truly quantify this as far as who does it how and at what severity. I'm HUGE into fact-based positions/arguments, and while I would side with MN 4 Rick in that the left, with the basis that they do have most of the media in their corner tend to do this "more" and "worse," there really is no quantifying it. It would be an argument that would and should be quickly abandoned, because, well... as RKen says... it's really a distraction.