Open thread: Outrage
Go Deeper.
Create an account or log in to save stories.
Like this?
Thanks for liking this story! We have added it to a list of your favorite stories.
[image]
It's probably just me but I'm trying very hard to keep separate two aspects of the Congressional Page Scandal of 2006 (not to be confused with the Congressional Page Scandal of 1983): the very real concern over protecting young people vs. the very real reality of attaining or holding onto political power.
Here's where I'm getting confused.
We've had news conferences and miles of type written in blogs and such; and justifiably so.
Turn Up Your Support
MPR News helps you turn down the noise and build shared understanding. Turn up your support for this public resource and keep trusted journalism accessible to all.
But...
There have been not one, not two, but three shootings in this nation's schools in the last week, the latest involving the executions of
four
five children ordered to stand at the blackboard at an Amish school in Pennsylvania.
I can't find a single candidate for Congress or a sitting member of the honorable House who seems to have stepped out into the fresh air to say a few words about it. Nothing (if you have a link, by all means please provide it)
So here's the question for discussion below: how do politicians decide what to be outraged about? How do we establish the life-and-death urgency of an issue?
I noted earlier that newspapers in Europe had front pages with the school killings. This country's newspapers featured the Foley case. Both legitimate stories, of course. (Disclaimer: I'm really torn up by the school shooting. I'm merely disgusted at the Foley affair.) Two cases. Both -- sort of -- about protecting kids. How do they choose?
But as Democrats issue their proclamations about Republicans and Republicans issue their proclamations about Democrats, I wonder if it's not worth taking a moment to step back from the emotion of politics for a look at ourselves. What do we see?
