Reposted by Bret Baier
Rapid Response 47
@RapidResponse47
·
253d
The statement engages in public discourse by addressing the issue of border security and immigration policy, critiquing political figures and their handling of the situation. It uses statistics to argue against the necessity of legislative action, attributing changes in border encounters to the current administration's policies.
- The statement uses strong language like 'obliterate' and 'fig leaf lie,' which could be seen as aggressive and potentially harmful, violating the principle of doing no harm. [-1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement does not engage in direct harassment or hate speech, but the tone is dismissive and could be seen as disrespectful towards political opponents. [-1]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, as it focuses on criticizing the opposition rather than fostering dialogue. [-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, as it uses a dismissive tone and does not address counterarguments or provide a nuanced analysis. [-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 exercises free speech but does so in a manner that lacks responsibility and integrity, as it focuses on attacking the opposition rather than contributing to a constructive debate. [-1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.