Former MSNBC personality David Shuster was kind enough to host fanatical anti-gun professor Erik Loomis on his lightly watched Internet talk show today. The interview was nothing special, although it’s worth watching just for the shockingly bad graphics employed by Shuster’s “Take Action News.”
A bit more interesting, however, was Shuster’s subsequent dialog with National Review’s Greg Pollowitz on Twitter. Apparently, Shuster is totally fine with the use of the phrase “head on a stick” as a metaphor, whereas the rest of us find it disturbing, disgusting and vulgar — even as a metaphor. He also seems to think the Right has a monopoly on idiots who call in death threats.
@DavidShuster and saying his head should be on a stick doesn't get a nut job rating?
— Greg Pollowitz (@GPollowitz) December 31, 2012
.@GPollowitz Greg, you know it's a metaphor. "Head on a stick" ended 400 years ago. Death threats by RWNJs were real. Big difference.
— David Shuster (@DavidShuster) December 31, 2012
Apparently Mr. Shuster has never visited certain parts of the world where people’s heads are indeed still put on sticks, but we’ll digress on his insulated and callous disregard for those nations.
@DavidShuster I'm all for an end to the word police – I even defended your use of pimp – but the left is held to a diff standard
— Greg Pollowitz (@GPollowitz) December 31, 2012
Exactly. Would Shuster be defending Loomis if he had used a map with crosshairs? The sort of thing that had people accusing Sarah Palin of resorting to “violent rhetoric”? You bet he would, and all 25 viewers of his show would be cheering behind him.
.@GPollowitz Perhaps. But shouldn't there be different standards for "metaphors" on twitter and actual death threats/calls delivered?
— David Shuster (@DavidShuster) December 31, 2012
Recommended
We condemned any threats against Loomis in pretty harsh terms here. However, if anyone thinks that public figures on the right don’t get death threats every day because of dehumanizing left-wing rhetoric from people like Loomis, they’re nuts.
.@GPollowitz You see the difference between controversial words and threatening actions, don't you? It's not a left/right issue.
— David Shuster (@DavidShuster) December 31, 2012
@DavidShuster i totally agree on death threat issue, but it's bipartisan. Both sides throw around rhetoric and hide behind anonymity
— Greg Pollowitz (@GPollowitz) December 31, 2012
.@GPollowitz That's not the issue here. @erikloomis used a metaphor. RNWJs responded with death threats. And U called Loomis nuts. Dumb.
— David Shuster (@DavidShuster) December 31, 2012
Really, David? You really don’t think the anonymous knuckleheads on your side don’t call in death threats? I’m sure Sarah Palin (and Mitt Romney, and Ann Romney, and Wayne LaPierre, and Scott Walker, and Rick Snyder, and George Zimmerman) would probably disagree with you on that one.
@DavidShuster if Sarah Palin, ie, said I want Obama's head on a stick, you're reply would be_______?
— Greg Pollowitz (@GPollowitz) December 31, 2012
@DavidShuster no. I was making the pt that if someone in the rt said that about Obama, left wld be in full meltdown mode
— Greg Pollowitz (@GPollowitz) December 31, 2012
.@GPollowitz No, your original point was about @erikloomis. Then, realizing your dumb tweet, you subsequently tried to make this re left.
— David Shuster (@DavidShuster) December 31, 2012
@DavidShuster BS. I wrote, adking you: "and saying his head should be on a stick doesn't get a nut job rating?"
— Greg Pollowitz (@GPollowitz) December 31, 2012
.@GPollowitz I said those making death threats @erikloomis were "nut jobs." You made a false equivalency about Loomis. Stop digging, Greg
— David Shuster (@DavidShuster) January 1, 2013
No, David, you stop digging. You’re getting yourself tied in one of the ugliest logical knots we’ve seen — and we catalog Twitter rants for a living!
@DavidShuster I just said you were right. And now I get to add "head on a stick" to my list of liberal approved, non nutjob sayings.
— Greg Pollowitz (@GPollowitz) January 1, 2013
I want to see Nancy Pelosi's HEAD ON A STICK! cc @DavidShuster
— Greg Pollowitz (@GPollowitz) January 1, 2013
You can guess what happens next, right?
No equivalency between LaPierre and Pelosi. But, interesting metaphor. @GPollowitz
I want to see Nancy Pelosi's HEAD ON A STICK!— David Shuster (@DavidShuster) January 1, 2013
Of course there’s an equivalency! Only real difference is ideology and elected office. Both are public figures and boogeymen du jour for their opponents.
. @DavidShuster huh? Elected officials are exempt from "head on a stick" references? This is too confusing.
— Greg Pollowitz (@GPollowitz) January 1, 2013
https://twitter.com/PatrickRomSim/status/285902398239694850
You took the bait, Patrick. Well done!
@PatrickRomSim @DavidShuster see David? Now I hate women for using your approved metaphor.
— Greg Pollowitz (@GPollowitz) January 1, 2013
https://twitter.com/PatrickRomSim/status/285904019992494080
No you isn’t. You ain’t got no proper English, neither.
.@GPollowitz No Greg. @PatrickRomSim said you are "threatened by strong women." Patrick never said you "hate" them. Try again.
— David Shuster (@DavidShuster) January 1, 2013
Excuse us while we repeatedly bang our heads against our keyboards. Is this man really splitting hairs between various accusations of chauvinism, yet defending a head-on-stick reference? Thank goodness he’s no longer on actual television.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member