Reposted by Bret Baier
The statement constitutes public discourse as it engages with public issues, specifically the rhetoric surrounding political figures and its potential consequences. The tone is critical and accusatory, suggesting that both politicians and the media have contributed to a dangerous escalation in rhetoric. The intent appears to be to highlight the perceived dangers of such rhetoric and to criticize those who engage in it.
- The statement partially violates this principle by using charged language ('reckless rhetoric,' 'rage rhetoric') that could contribute to further polarization and harm. [-1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement does not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech, but it does accuse others of contributing to a harmful environment, which could be seen as a form of indirect harassment.Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The statement does not promote understanding, empathy, or compassion; instead, it focuses on assigning blame and escalating tensions. [-1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement does not engage in constructive criticism or dialogue; it makes broad accusations without engaging in a nuanced discussion or offering solutions. [-1]Principle 4:I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
- The statement upholds the principle of free speech but does so in a way that may not be responsible or constructive, given its accusatory tone.Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.