Don't tear your hair out over it guys, this is their side's definition of debate.
Shooting throws spotlight on state of U.S. political rhetoric
- Thread starter QueEx
- Start date
Don't tear your hair out over it guys, this is their side's definition of debate.
<font size="3"> Or,
you're standing in front of a mirror ! ! !
</font size>
Or you guys are looking for someone else to blame than the one responsible.
Thats your template.
He still won't address the quote from Angle literally calling for taking up arms against elected officials.
Gunner: Can you post any quotes from anyone other than those on the right calling for the actual and literal use of force against elected officials?
Last edited:
Re: Shooting throws spotlight
"While it is now known that Loughner worked for Gifford's election campaign in 2007, that Gifford subscribed to Loughner's website since Oct. 25, 2010, suggests the two may have been in contact more recently."
http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=249381#ixzz1AemSbdMt
My question is, what is the Media's agenda?
Ever since Obama has won the election they have made it their duty to highlight, not the tea party members that arent racist and can actually intelligently and successfully justify why they dislike the Obama admin, but instead they highlight the ignorant White folks that dislike Obama just because he's Black.
Instead of highlighting Republicans that ARENT talking nonsense and putting cross hairs on Democratic politicians pictures, they instead highlight capitalist like Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, Glen Beck, etc.
Now dont get me wrong, Im not stating that people like Rush, Glen etc. arent having an negative effect of weak minded, territorial & racist White people, but what I am stating is the fact that the media is just as guilty/ignorant as the people that they and many of the Obama supporters are attacking i.e. Sarah Palin.
This BS that the Media is currently trying to pull kinda reminds me of that video that the showed a year ago of that guy that brought the AR-15 to one of Obama's rallies. Instead of zooming out and showing that the guy was actually Black, they instead focused on the gun and allowed the programed Americans to think that the guy was some Racist White guy that wanted to assassinate Obama. I know many Obama supporters on BGOL fell for the BS.
The media is there to help the Obama Admin divide the country and build unnecessary tension. On one hand the Obama Admin states that they want to join with the Repubs and other foes and work together...but then they come on TV and talk about how middle class and rich people dont wanna share their money with poor people.
The idiocy of the Black voters and other voters that continue to support Prez Obama just because he's an African American or because he's a Democrat are doing nothing but adding fuel to the fire. Thats why this country is gonna continue to go down the drain until it completely implodes. Americans are just as programed and politically unsophisticated as Prez Obama.
As a Black Man whenever I look at Prez Obama I say to myself, Damn! Is this the best that we could do?
"While it is now known that Loughner worked for Gifford's election campaign in 2007, that Gifford subscribed to Loughner's website since Oct. 25, 2010, suggests the two may have been in contact more recently."
http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=249381#ixzz1AemSbdMt
My question is, what is the Media's agenda?
Ever since Obama has won the election they have made it their duty to highlight, not the tea party members that arent racist and can actually intelligently and successfully justify why they dislike the Obama admin, but instead they highlight the ignorant White folks that dislike Obama just because he's Black.
Instead of highlighting Republicans that ARENT talking nonsense and putting cross hairs on Democratic politicians pictures, they instead highlight capitalist like Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, Glen Beck, etc.
Now dont get me wrong, Im not stating that people like Rush, Glen etc. arent having an negative effect of weak minded, territorial & racist White people, but what I am stating is the fact that the media is just as guilty/ignorant as the people that they and many of the Obama supporters are attacking i.e. Sarah Palin.
This BS that the Media is currently trying to pull kinda reminds me of that video that the showed a year ago of that guy that brought the AR-15 to one of Obama's rallies. Instead of zooming out and showing that the guy was actually Black, they instead focused on the gun and allowed the programed Americans to think that the guy was some Racist White guy that wanted to assassinate Obama. I know many Obama supporters on BGOL fell for the BS.
The media is there to help the Obama Admin divide the country and build unnecessary tension. On one hand the Obama Admin states that they want to join with the Repubs and other foes and work together...but then they come on TV and talk about how middle class and rich people dont wanna share their money with poor people.
The idiocy of the Black voters and other voters that continue to support Prez Obama just because he's an African American or because he's a Democrat are doing nothing but adding fuel to the fire. Thats why this country is gonna continue to go down the drain until it completely implodes. Americans are just as programed and politically unsophisticated as Prez Obama.
As a Black Man whenever I look at Prez Obama I say to myself, Damn! Is this the best that we could do?
Re: Shooting throws spotlight
You didn't cite very much credibility when you referenced WND.
Why use such in incredulous source to make such an important point where the credibility of the source weighs so strongly on the truth of the matters asserted ???
But you are admitting, are you not, that Rush, Glen, etc., are having a "negative effect of weak minded, territorial & racist White people" ???
Is that some kind of intentional conspiracy (to divide the country and build unnecessary tension) ???
Interesting point. What are the specific alternatives ???
QueEx
You didn't cite very much credibility when you referenced WND.
Why use such in incredulous source to make such an important point where the credibility of the source weighs so strongly on the truth of the matters asserted ???
But you are admitting, are you not, that Rush, Glen, etc., are having a "negative effect of weak minded, territorial & racist White people" ???
Is that some kind of intentional conspiracy (to divide the country and build unnecessary tension) ???
Interesting point. What are the specific alternatives ???
QueEx
Re: Shooting throws spotlight
Are you serious with this???
You use a link from WorldNetDaily and then ask about a media agenda? Your source has been shown to have a blatant anti-progressive, anti-Obama, anti-middle and working class, anti-truth agenda.
WorldNetDaily???
It's one thing to have policy or ideological disagreements but this is just a lie. The one thing the Obama Administration has not done is try to divide the country or build up tension. He gets criticized heavily from the Left for trying too hard to work with Republicans and Conservatives.
And no one is accusing the middle class of "not wanting to share their money with poor people". That's just nonsense and another lie. How many tax cuts and incentives can Obama give to the middle/working classes and small businesses before that lie dies?
He ran in an election with at least 10 other people at one point. So the answer is "Yes". Now when you can point out that perfect politician, have at it.
When your criticism is this bias and factually incorrect, the question is "What's your agenda?"
Are you serious with this???
You use a link from WorldNetDaily and then ask about a media agenda? Your source has been shown to have a blatant anti-progressive, anti-Obama, anti-middle and working class, anti-truth agenda.
WorldNetDaily???
It's one thing to have policy or ideological disagreements but this is just a lie. The one thing the Obama Administration has not done is try to divide the country or build up tension. He gets criticized heavily from the Left for trying too hard to work with Republicans and Conservatives.
And no one is accusing the middle class of "not wanting to share their money with poor people". That's just nonsense and another lie. How many tax cuts and incentives can Obama give to the middle/working classes and small businesses before that lie dies?
He ran in an election with at least 10 other people at one point. So the answer is "Yes". Now when you can point out that perfect politician, have at it.
When your criticism is this bias and factually incorrect, the question is "What's your agenda?"
Re: Shooting throws spotlight
Have you ever asked your self that question when a "white" president is in office?
Have you ever asked your self that question when a "white" president is in office?
Re: Shooting throws spotlight
Do you not see anything ironic about questioning the intelligence and sophistication of black voters and then posting a link from Worldnet Daily?
If black voters only support Obama because he's black, Palin supporters only support her because she is an uneducated white. You do realize that unlike her supporters, Palin was previously in favor of both "cap and trade" as well as the bailout.
Do you not see anything ironic about questioning the intelligence and sophistication of black voters and then posting a link from Worldnet Daily?
If black voters only support Obama because he's black, Palin supporters only support her because she is an uneducated white. You do realize that unlike her supporters, Palin was previously in favor of both "cap and trade" as well as the bailout.
Re: Shooting throws spotlight
So called conservatism has really taught Black folk to hate themselves!
Do you not see anything ironic about questioning the intelligence and sophistication of black voters and then posting a link from Worldnet Daily?
So called conservatism has really taught Black folk to hate themselves!
Re: Shooting throws spotlight
Seriously. He is questioning black voter intelligence when there are several books dedicated entirely to examining the stupidity of white voters. I guess he has never heard of "What's the matter with Kansas?"
Seriously. He is questioning black voter intelligence when there are several books dedicated entirely to examining the stupidity of white voters.
I guess he has never heard of "What's the matter with Kansas?" 
Re: Shooting throws spotlight
Survival of the fittest...
"better adapted for immediate, local environment",
<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/gRSgUTWffMQ?fs=1&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/gRSgUTWffMQ?fs=1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>
Survival of the fittest...
"better adapted for immediate, local environment",
<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/gRSgUTWffMQ?fs=1&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/gRSgUTWffMQ?fs=1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>
Re: Shooting throws spotlight
Ill admit that I just posted what popped up. I actually first heard what I posted on a CNN radio station earlier Wednesday night. Just did a search, couldnt find much on what I posted.
My apologies.
For posting that link/story without the proper facts to back it up....I now temporarily fall in the same idiotic category as the OP and many others that basically dont have the facts and are posting speculations drawn up by the media when it concerns the Arizona shootng.
....lol
Lies???
i see you have problems deciphering the subliminal messages thats being given to you.
.....Dave needs a mental upgrade.
...lol
Timothy Geither said a while back that as far as President Obama and the rest of his administration is concerned, the tax cuts enforced by former President George W. Bush would be extended except for the ones made for the richest people in America. Not long ago the president said he wanted low and middle class families to keep the so-called Bush tax cuts, but he wants taxes to go up for individuals making more than $200,000 and two-earner married couples making more than $250,000.
I dont know where you live or how much you make....but depending on where you live $200,000 - $250,000 a year aint a lot of money...especially during a recession.
A lot of those people making that 200+ annually are small business owners. Those tax hikes along with the steady rise in employer health care premiums i.e. those Health Care premiums that the Obama Admin folded on...will put many of those people in messed up situation.
Meanwhile....in another world....all the people making much less than 200k were happy with Obamas proposed tax plan. Many of these people never accumulated 200k in their lives nor did they understand that Obamas proposed tax plan wasnt gonna give much of shit to begin with felt that people making 200+ a year are making too much and need to give more.
Il agree that the right has been waging class warfare for 30+ years. But the fact that the Obama Admin and Democrats keep surrendering rather than fight and also wont consider the recession, health care premiums, unemployment numbers etc. before they start taking peoples monies makes them just as guilty as the Repubs IMO.
Instead of raising taxes....how about doing a couple of audits, eliminating wasteful spending, getting rid of those that mismanaging the extra income that the government accumulates via taxes. The government along with the Obama admin exploits the oppressed...and helps divide the oppressed. The Obama Admin nor the rest of the Dems wouldnt dare go after those that really control "the machine".
You cant lump people in one category. All people that make millions arent evil people that dont wanna "give". I guess you feel people that make $200k+ a year should just change their way of life in order to deal with the tax increases.
Question.....
Do you own a business?
If so how do you feel when everytime you make extra money people always wanna go in your pockets and take your money out? Especially considering the fact that most of our tax dollars are being mismanaged via wars, bailouts and other BS.
So basically what you two are saying is you all voted for Obama because you had no other choice?
i voted for him because I was stupid and believed in the words he spoke out of his mouth. That was my mistake.
As for my agenda. My agenda is to educate myself the best that I can on how things work within this country. ya know...learn how to play the game so i wont have to live in a tent city. In the process I want to educate others....especially the Black voter...i.e. the voter the votes based off superficial BS like skin color, religion, etc.
Im not some militant sitting behind my PC all day. Im young, but I work with legit politicians and community activist in Chicago. While working in Chicago and owning a business I see the effects of what our government does and cosigns. I know that Obama isnt thee problem, but he is a problem. From what Ive seen not much has changed for the better since Prez Obama has been in office. But much of the blame should be put on us because we tolerate the BS.
Ill admit that I just posted what popped up. I actually first heard what I posted on a CNN radio station earlier Wednesday night. Just did a search, couldnt find much on what I posted.
My apologies.
For posting that link/story without the proper facts to back it up....I now temporarily fall in the same idiotic category as the OP and many others that basically dont have the facts and are posting speculations drawn up by the media when it concerns the Arizona shootng.
....lol
Lies???
i see you have problems deciphering the subliminal messages thats being given to you.
.....Dave needs a mental upgrade.
...lol
Timothy Geither said a while back that as far as President Obama and the rest of his administration is concerned, the tax cuts enforced by former President George W. Bush would be extended except for the ones made for the richest people in America. Not long ago the president said he wanted low and middle class families to keep the so-called Bush tax cuts, but he wants taxes to go up for individuals making more than $200,000 and two-earner married couples making more than $250,000.
I dont know where you live or how much you make....but depending on where you live $200,000 - $250,000 a year aint a lot of money...especially during a recession.
A lot of those people making that 200+ annually are small business owners. Those tax hikes along with the steady rise in employer health care premiums i.e. those Health Care premiums that the Obama Admin folded on...will put many of those people in messed up situation.
Meanwhile....in another world....all the people making much less than 200k were happy with Obamas proposed tax plan. Many of these people never accumulated 200k in their lives nor did they understand that Obamas proposed tax plan wasnt gonna give much of shit to begin with felt that people making 200+ a year are making too much and need to give more.
Il agree that the right has been waging class warfare for 30+ years. But the fact that the Obama Admin and Democrats keep surrendering rather than fight and also wont consider the recession, health care premiums, unemployment numbers etc. before they start taking peoples monies makes them just as guilty as the Repubs IMO.
Instead of raising taxes....how about doing a couple of audits, eliminating wasteful spending, getting rid of those that mismanaging the extra income that the government accumulates via taxes. The government along with the Obama admin exploits the oppressed...and helps divide the oppressed. The Obama Admin nor the rest of the Dems wouldnt dare go after those that really control "the machine".
You cant lump people in one category. All people that make millions arent evil people that dont wanna "give". I guess you feel people that make $200k+ a year should just change their way of life in order to deal with the tax increases.
Question.....
Do you own a business?
If so how do you feel when everytime you make extra money people always wanna go in your pockets and take your money out? Especially considering the fact that most of our tax dollars are being mismanaged via wars, bailouts and other BS.
QueEx said:
So basically what you two are saying is you all voted for Obama because you had no other choice?
i voted for him because I was stupid and believed in the words he spoke out of his mouth. That was my mistake.
As for my agenda. My agenda is to educate myself the best that I can on how things work within this country. ya know...learn how to play the game so i wont have to live in a tent city. In the process I want to educate others....especially the Black voter...i.e. the voter the votes based off superficial BS like skin color, religion, etc.
Im not some militant sitting behind my PC all day. Im young, but I work with legit politicians and community activist in Chicago. While working in Chicago and owning a business I see the effects of what our government does and cosigns. I know that Obama isnt thee problem, but he is a problem. From what Ive seen not much has changed for the better since Prez Obama has been in office. But much of the blame should be put on us because we tolerate the BS.
Last edited:
Amusing to say the least; I see a pattern developing
'Some' posters on the board feel that if you don't agree with current policies, you do not have the ability to think for yourself! Not everyone is influenced by Palin or Beck
Thought.......you don't have to respond to post 63; I already know
'Some' posters on the board feel that if you don't agree with current policies, you do not have the ability to think for yourself! Not everyone is influenced by Palin or Beck
Thought.......you don't have to respond to post 63; I already know
Re: Tea Party to field candidate in battle for Harry Reid’s Senate seat
Uh, need to remind you that the Tea Party started under Bush because of his policies. They despised McCain as well.
Uh, need to remind you that the Tea Party started under Bush because of his policies. They despised McCain as well.
Re: Tea Party to field candidate in battle for Harry Reid’s Senate seat
All these cats know about is Beck & Palin. Somethin from the archives; [U]www.teaparty07.com[/U]
Then FoxNews hi-jacked the idea
All these cats know about is Beck & Palin. Somethin from the archives; [U]www.teaparty07.com[/U]
Then FoxNews hi-jacked the idea
Re: Tea Party to field candidate in battle for Harry Reid’s Senate seat
No, I wasn't speaking for a "You All" group and I don't see where I said who I voted for or why. In that regard, YOU were presumptive.
What I said was your point that, ”[a]s a Black Man whenever [you] look at Prez Obama [you] say to [your]self, Damn Is this the best that we could do?” was an interesting point. Not that I agreed or disagreed with that point.
Naturally and reflexively, I asked what specific alternatives do YOU see to such a woeful circumstance. I asked that because if one has taken the time to 'specifically' condemn, I was wondering whether one has, conversely, taken the time to think of and offer a better and 'specific' solution.
Now, I understand that generally you espouse better education of the black voter (another topic), but who right now should the better educated black voter go to the polls, this morning, and vote to replace Mr. Obama with; and why ???
QueEx
QueEx said:
So basically what you two are saying is you all voted for Obama because you had no other choice?
No, I wasn't speaking for a "You All" group and I don't see where I said who I voted for or why. In that regard, YOU were presumptive.
What I said was your point that, ”[a]s a Black Man whenever [you] look at Prez Obama [you] say to [your]self, Damn Is this the best that we could do?” was an interesting point. Not that I agreed or disagreed with that point.
Naturally and reflexively, I asked what specific alternatives do YOU see to such a woeful circumstance. I asked that because if one has taken the time to 'specifically' condemn, I was wondering whether one has, conversely, taken the time to think of and offer a better and 'specific' solution.
Now, I understand that generally you espouse better education of the black voter (another topic), but who right now should the better educated black voter go to the polls, this morning, and vote to replace Mr. Obama with; and why ???
QueEx
Re: Tea Party to field candidate in battle for Harry Reid’s Senate seat
If you're making 200k-250k and "just making it", you have bigger problems than your taxes going up 3%.
For ten years upper earners have raked it in in much greater proportion than everyone else. Now that it's time to pay the bill, everyone is supposed to share equally?
Those same earners did quite well under the tax rate Obama wanted while it was rate under Clinton.
A lot may be small business owners but most aren't. Most small businesses don't make 250k a year.
So far the health care reform is helping small businesses buy insurance for their employees when before they couldn't, I have a whole thread dedicated to this. While some people want to talk about what might happen, I have a post up that says what is happening.
Not about "giving more", it's about showing some fiscal responsibility, the thing the Right Wing has been crying for for the last two years.
You cry about the national debt and then be in favor of extending tax breaks that deepen it or repealing the health insurance reform, which would also negatively impact the debt.
Considering the recession is why he wouldn't risk Republicans' obstructionism ending all the tax breaks. From the first, as you pointed out, Obama was in favor of maintaining the middle and working class tax cuts. Keeping those while extending unemployment benefits and sending money to the states would help with the recession and unemployment because those measures would put money right into the system.
There's not enough fraud and waste cutting to balance the budget and pay off the debt. Taxes need to be raised. I'm actually for dumping all the Bush tax cuts. We can't afford them but Obama sees the bigger picture and thinks raising taxes on middle/working class people would do more damage than good. Getting rid of fraud and waste isn't an alternative to raising taxes, it's a complement.
I would never call someone "evil" because of how much money they have. C'mon man.
I think if you make 20k a year or 200k and you're having a hard time, you need to make life adjustments.
I do not.
I also don't believe in "extra money".
Our money was being mismanaged with those same things long before either of us were alive, with bailouts being an 80s creation.
Are you kidding me? How did you arrive at that? I voted for him because he was the best candidate in the field. He was better than Clinton and Edwards in the primary and he was much better than McCain in the general.
Then that's on you. I heard his words and could tell he was probably sincere but I knew once he got in the White House, he was going have to change up, at least a little.
That's a good thing, really. But before you go about trying to "educate" other people, get your stuff together. You aren't getting past talking points and base your rather strong opinions on misinformation and half truths.
And that's what most people are responding to. At this point, it doesn't matter where the Tea Parties originated from, it's what they've morphed into that people see and are responding to and that's their own fault. They allowed themselves to be co-opted by the Republican Party.
If you're making 200k-250k and "just making it", you have bigger problems than your taxes going up 3%.
For ten years upper earners have raked it in in much greater proportion than everyone else. Now that it's time to pay the bill, everyone is supposed to share equally?
Those same earners did quite well under the tax rate Obama wanted while it was rate under Clinton.
A lot may be small business owners but most aren't. Most small businesses don't make 250k a year.
So far the health care reform is helping small businesses buy insurance for their employees when before they couldn't, I have a whole thread dedicated to this. While some people want to talk about what might happen, I have a post up that says what is happening.
Not about "giving more", it's about showing some fiscal responsibility, the thing the Right Wing has been crying for for the last two years.
You cry about the national debt and then be in favor of extending tax breaks that deepen it or repealing the health insurance reform, which would also negatively impact the debt.
Considering the recession is why he wouldn't risk Republicans' obstructionism ending all the tax breaks. From the first, as you pointed out, Obama was in favor of maintaining the middle and working class tax cuts. Keeping those while extending unemployment benefits and sending money to the states would help with the recession and unemployment because those measures would put money right into the system.
There's not enough fraud and waste cutting to balance the budget and pay off the debt. Taxes need to be raised. I'm actually for dumping all the Bush tax cuts. We can't afford them but Obama sees the bigger picture and thinks raising taxes on middle/working class people would do more damage than good. Getting rid of fraud and waste isn't an alternative to raising taxes, it's a complement.
You cant lump people in one category. All people that make millions arent evil people that dont wanna "give". I guess you feel people that make $200k+ a year should just change their way of life in order to deal with the tax increases.
I would never call someone "evil" because of how much money they have. C'mon man.
I think if you make 20k a year or 200k and you're having a hard time, you need to make life adjustments.
I do not.
I also don't believe in "extra money".
Our money was being mismanaged with those same things long before either of us were alive, with bailouts being an 80s creation.
Are you kidding me? How did you arrive at that? I voted for him because he was the best candidate in the field. He was better than Clinton and Edwards in the primary and he was much better than McCain in the general.Then that's on you. I heard his words and could tell he was probably sincere but I knew once he got in the White House, he was going have to change up, at least a little.
That's a good thing, really. But before you go about trying to "educate" other people, get your stuff together. You aren't getting past talking points and base your rather strong opinions on misinformation and half truths.
And that's what most people are responding to. At this point, it doesn't matter where the Tea Parties originated from, it's what they've morphed into that people see and are responding to and that's their own fault. They allowed themselves to be co-opted by the Republican Party.
Re: Shooting throws spotlight
My point is that he never questioned the intelligent of white voters that elected GW and Sarah Palin. Black cons are always morally judging Black folk on their decisions, but have a million and one reasons why whites do things.
Seriously. He is questioning black voter intelligence when there are several books dedicated entirely to examining the stupidity of white voters.
My point is that he never questioned the intelligent of white voters that elected GW and Sarah Palin. Black cons are always morally judging Black folk on their decisions, but have a million and one reasons why whites do things.
Re: Tea Party to field candidate in battle for Harry Reid’s Senate seat
Huh? What is this, the Jedi Mind Trick? Isn't Palin the queen of the Tea Baggers?
This shit didn't begin under GW. It has it's roots during the Reagan administration. Reagan was the first president to have a $1 trillion debt, yet the philosophy of the Reagan Revolution is the basis for today's conservatives. So this indignation heaped on President Obama by the Tea Baggers is at it's base racist.
Huh? What is this, the Jedi Mind Trick? Isn't Palin the queen of the Tea Baggers?
This shit didn't begin under GW. It has it's roots during the Reagan administration. Reagan was the first president to have a $1 trillion debt, yet the philosophy of the Reagan Revolution is the basis for today's conservatives. So this indignation heaped on President Obama by the Tea Baggers is at it's base racist.
I can link you to Cheney's quote but please link to the Obama quote where he said this.
That was my thought.
The fact that Obama made it a priority that his health insurance reform be deficit neutral at worst and deficit reducing at best doesn't prove this out, even though many on the Left didn't like that or think it was necessary.
This is getting very childish on both ends.
I'm going to say this and be done with this subject. Conservatism does not teach hate. LET ME FUCKING REPEAT... CONSERVATISM DOES NOT TEACH HATE. I listen to talk radio EVERYDAY while at work *sports and politics respectfully*. I start knowing of Rush back during the 90's during his TV show that used to come on at 9 in Dallas. I promise you, *and I do not break promises* if Rush spewed hate, and called for people getting killed, I would be the loudest person here calling for Rush's firing. Same goes for Hannity.
It is very unfortunate that Congresswoman Gifford had to get shot by a derange lunatic. However, it's funny that the things he actually watched *loose change, zeigeist, ect* have not been mentioned ON THIS BOARD.
I bet he *derange dickhead that I choose not to use his name* would of agreed with Thoughtone's political outlook.
I'm going to say this and be done with this subject. Conservatism does not teach hate. LET ME FUCKING REPEAT... CONSERVATISM DOES NOT TEACH HATE. I listen to talk radio EVERYDAY while at work *sports and politics respectfully*. I start knowing of Rush back during the 90's during his TV show that used to come on at 9 in Dallas. I promise you, *and I do not break promises* if Rush spewed hate, and called for people getting killed, I would be the loudest person here calling for Rush's firing. Same goes for Hannity.
It is very unfortunate that Congresswoman Gifford had to get shot by a derange lunatic. However, it's funny that the things he actually watched *loose change, zeigeist, ect* have not been mentioned ON THIS BOARD.
I bet he *derange dickhead that I choose not to use his name* would of agreed with Thoughtone's political outlook.
What are you talking about? No one, not one reasonable person that I've seen, is equating what this lunatic did to conservatism itself (though you then decided he was a liberal but I'll let that inconsistency go).
The fact that in the wake of people going out and saying everyone should tamp down the rhetoric, only the most bellicose of right wing blowhards are bucking back: Limbaugh, Palin, Malkin et al. It's not the case where any connection is being or has been made that any particular person or idealogy provoked this guy but it is a fact that the overly heated, decidedly one-sided violence-endorsing remarks made such a thing predictable.
You're defending Limbaugh and the only person that's put him in this situation is himself. Again, I'm reminded of that old country saying "A hit dog will holla."
If you keep talking about people going for their guns if they don't get their way at the ballot box and you keep calling the opposition "traitors", "unAmerican" and saying their out to destroy America, not that they're policies will harm or set back America but that they literally want to destroy America, don't be shocked that someone gets shot and people look at you askance.
i just pissed off every English teacher I ever had with that runon sentence
Re: Shooting throws spotlight
I was agreeing with you. See my reference to What's the matter with Kansas.
I was agreeing with you. See my reference to What's the matter with Kansas.
Re: Tea Party to field candidate in battle for Harry Reid’s Senate seat
Could you show just where you get this little tidbit from?
And grow up. It is not just racism when somebody does not your golden boy. That line of thought is garbage, and demeaning to the cause of racial equality.
The left, under your pattern of thought, is far more racist, as it believes that the non-whites cannot make it without the white mans money. You guys are racist. You follow the white man in following Obama (he is as white as he is black). Why you worshiping the white man again?
Stop worshiping the white man.
Could you show just where you get this little tidbit from?
And grow up. It is not just racism when somebody does not your golden boy. That line of thought is garbage, and demeaning to the cause of racial equality.
The left, under your pattern of thought, is far more racist, as it believes that the non-whites cannot make it without the white mans money. You guys are racist. You follow the white man in following Obama (he is as white as he is black). Why you worshiping the white man again?
Stop worshiping the white man.
Re: Tea Party to field candidate in battle for Harry Reid’s Senate seat
White man's money? Since when is it the white man's money? White lobbyists go to Capital Hill and demand a return on their investments. Black folks just try and get a pittance of the tax money they pay to come back to them and the right call it the white man's money. I got news for you, Black folks have been, are and will continue to be American citizens.
The sad thing is you Black conservatives hate yourselves yet don't even realize it!
White man's money? Since when is it the white man's money? White lobbyists go to Capital Hill and demand a return on their investments. Black folks just try and get a pittance of the tax money they pay to come back to them and the right call it the white man's money. I got news for you, Black folks have been, are and will continue to be American citizens.
The sad thing is you Black conservatives hate yourselves yet don't even realize it!
Re: Tea Party to field candidate in battle for Harry Reid’s Senate seat
As usual, you dodge. And, look at the words you use - "White lobbyists", blacks "try" for a "pittance". Stop thinking so weakly.
Why don't you go blame your white Obama for not being able to convince the other white men about you needing pittances for survival.
You socialists act like you are thinking big, but you own language shows that you think small.
Maybe that is also why your kind is not as charitable as the conservitive side.
As usual, you dodge. And, look at the words you use - "White lobbyists", blacks "try" for a "pittance". Stop thinking so weakly.
Why don't you go blame your white Obama for not being able to convince the other white men about you needing pittances for survival.
You socialists act like you are thinking big, but you own language shows that you think small.
Maybe that is also why your kind is not as charitable as the conservitive side.
Re: Tea Party to field candidate in battle for Harry Reid’s Senate seat
QueEx
Not sure I understand the context for that
QueEx
Re: Tea Party to field candidate in battle for Harry Reid’s Senate seat
<font size="5"><center>
After Tucson shootings, Sarah Palin
isn't retreating, she's reloading</font size><font size="4">
In many ways, Sarah Palin mirrors the ethos of the gun-rights
movement she promotes: never back down. Criticized for
her rhetoric in the aftermath of the Tucson shootings,
she's since posted a combative defense on Facebook
and signed up to speak at a hunting and gun convention</font size></center>
This image taken from Facebook.com on Wednesday shows Sarah Palin's page. A nearly eight-
minute video was posted on her page early Wednesday, accusing journalists and pundits of
inciting hatred and violence in the wake of a deadly Arizona shooting that gravely wounded a
congresswoman. Facebook.com/AP
By Patrik Jonsson, Staff writer
January 14, 2011
Say one thing for Sarah Palin: She heeds her own advice.
Coming only days after Ms. Palin was drawn into the Arizona shooting drama, news that the former Alaska governor and potential presidential aspirant will headline a gun-friendly hunting convention Jan. 29 fits her famous stump phrase: "Don't retreat, reload."
It is a philosophy that defines Palin as a political figure and also points to how closely her own public persona echoes that of the American gun culture she promotes. Just as the gun-rights community has prided itself on not backing down from any challenge but rather thriving on adversity to win broader victories, Palin has once again answered her critics with confrontation this week.
To critics, it is one of the traits that makes Palin unlikely to succeed as a presidential candidate. To backers, however, it sets her apart.
For Palin, perhaps, it was only natural to envision 20 congressional districts ripe for a tea party takeover last November as targets marked by cross hairs. The fact that one of those targets was Arizona’s Eighth District, and the fact that the district’s Democratic representative, Gabrielle Giffords, was shot in an apparent assassination attempt Saturday, made Palin and her map a topic of debate only minutes after the shooting.
Palin acknowledged she had prayed about what happened in Tucson. But in taped remarks issued Wednesday on her Facebook account, she also lambasted her media critics for committing "blood libel" by making a "reprehensible" insinuation.
She might as well have taken a page from how the gun-rights movement has reacted to challenges against it during the past 20 years.
<font size="4">The gun lobby's relentless campaign</font size>
Despite mass-shooting tragedies like the one at Columbine High School in 1999 and Virginia Tech in 2007, for instance, the gun lobby and gun owners never paused in a concerted campaign to expand so-called "shall-issue" gun regulations, which mandate that states automatically have to approve a gun license if a person clears a background check.
In 1980, nine states had "shall-issue" laws; today, 37 do. [Editor's note: The original version of the last two paragraphs gave a wrong name for "shall-issue" gun regulations.]
Moreover, Palin’s use of Facebook to carve out her own narrative apart from the mainstream press is reminiscent of the strategy used by gun-rights advocates to turn the national momentum against gun control during the past two decades.
In the 1990s, gun-rights activists were among the early adopters and pioneers of blogs, online bulletin boards, and listservs, says Brian Anse Patrick, a gun-culture expert and author of "Rise of the Anti-Media.” Often ignored or ridiculed mainstream journalists, gun owners – not always in lockstep with the National Rifle Association – spread news, analysis, and philosophy across the Internet, posting items like “Gun news the media didn’t report today.”
Eventually, examples of such "antimedia" began competing, even toppling, traditional media narratives, not only clearing the way for more gun rights, but also providing a powerful template for political movements like the tea party and political outsiders like Palin, says Mr. Patrick, who is also a communications professor at the University of Toledo in Ohio.
"People are now interpreting their own reality, and Palin's been able to take advantage of that," he says.
<font size="4">Playing to a niche or nationally?</font size>
Within the gun-rights community, at least, Palin may be able to successfully reframe the charges against her as an attack on individualism by an group of elites – a refrain that American gun owners have used effectively to fight against stronger gun control laws.
"People in the gun culture thrive on adversity, and they're now facing a level of animosity where all of a sudden [critics] are attributing homicidal craziness to gun owners," says Patrick. "But the fact is, people in the gun culture are a pretty benevolent bunch who see gun ownership as part of individualism, and Palin understands that."
But can that translate into political success on a national stage? Some commentators suggest that Palin's defensive tone and inability to rise above the media fray signal problems for a potential presidential campaign.
"Doubtless there are conservatives who will thrill to Ms. Palin's pugnacity," writes columnist Doyle McManus in the Los Angeles Times. "But voters in the center, where presidential elections are won, don't like the idea of politics as a blood sport. They yearn for vision, stature, steadiness, a nod toward the ideal of bipartisan compromise and evidence of real competence – from conservative and liberal candidates alike. Ms. Palin has given them none of those things."
Americans seem split on the issue of sharp rhetoric and the violence in Tucson, Ariz. A CBS poll showed that 57 percent of Americans thought vitriolic rhetoric had nothing to do with the shooting. A subsequent Quinnipiac poll, however, found that 52 percent of respondents believed that "heated political rhetoric drives unstable people to commit violence," compared with 41 percent who don't see such a link.
<font size="4">No reason to back down on guns</font size>
But on Second Amendment issues especially – which are central to the tea party platform of "individual liberty" – Palin has little reason to back down, says Charles Franklin, a political scientist at the University of Wisconsin in Madison.
"For her to back off on gun rights in any way [at this point] would not be true to who she is and who her constituency sees her as being," says Mr. Franklin. "That's why it makes sense that whatever she would have said before the shooting in Tucson are the same things she would want to say after the shooting."
At the Safari Club International convention in Reno, Nev., Palin is expected to address "her past hunting experiences and how politics affects the current state of hunting and fishing."
Her speech is sold out.
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politi...-Sarah-Palin-isn-t-retreating-she-s-reloading
<font size="5"><center>
After Tucson shootings, Sarah Palin
isn't retreating, she's reloading</font size><font size="4">
In many ways, Sarah Palin mirrors the ethos of the gun-rights
movement she promotes: never back down. Criticized for
her rhetoric in the aftermath of the Tucson shootings,
she's since posted a combative defense on Facebook
and signed up to speak at a hunting and gun convention</font size></center>
This image taken from Facebook.com on Wednesday shows Sarah Palin's page. A nearly eight-
minute video was posted on her page early Wednesday, accusing journalists and pundits of
inciting hatred and violence in the wake of a deadly Arizona shooting that gravely wounded a
congresswoman. Facebook.com/AP
By Patrik Jonsson, Staff writer
January 14, 2011
Say one thing for Sarah Palin: She heeds her own advice.
Coming only days after Ms. Palin was drawn into the Arizona shooting drama, news that the former Alaska governor and potential presidential aspirant will headline a gun-friendly hunting convention Jan. 29 fits her famous stump phrase: "Don't retreat, reload."
It is a philosophy that defines Palin as a political figure and also points to how closely her own public persona echoes that of the American gun culture she promotes. Just as the gun-rights community has prided itself on not backing down from any challenge but rather thriving on adversity to win broader victories, Palin has once again answered her critics with confrontation this week.
To critics, it is one of the traits that makes Palin unlikely to succeed as a presidential candidate. To backers, however, it sets her apart.
For Palin, perhaps, it was only natural to envision 20 congressional districts ripe for a tea party takeover last November as targets marked by cross hairs. The fact that one of those targets was Arizona’s Eighth District, and the fact that the district’s Democratic representative, Gabrielle Giffords, was shot in an apparent assassination attempt Saturday, made Palin and her map a topic of debate only minutes after the shooting.
Palin acknowledged she had prayed about what happened in Tucson. But in taped remarks issued Wednesday on her Facebook account, she also lambasted her media critics for committing "blood libel" by making a "reprehensible" insinuation.
She might as well have taken a page from how the gun-rights movement has reacted to challenges against it during the past 20 years.
<font size="4">The gun lobby's relentless campaign</font size>
Despite mass-shooting tragedies like the one at Columbine High School in 1999 and Virginia Tech in 2007, for instance, the gun lobby and gun owners never paused in a concerted campaign to expand so-called "shall-issue" gun regulations, which mandate that states automatically have to approve a gun license if a person clears a background check.
In 1980, nine states had "shall-issue" laws; today, 37 do. [Editor's note: The original version of the last two paragraphs gave a wrong name for "shall-issue" gun regulations.]
Moreover, Palin’s use of Facebook to carve out her own narrative apart from the mainstream press is reminiscent of the strategy used by gun-rights advocates to turn the national momentum against gun control during the past two decades.
In the 1990s, gun-rights activists were among the early adopters and pioneers of blogs, online bulletin boards, and listservs, says Brian Anse Patrick, a gun-culture expert and author of "Rise of the Anti-Media.” Often ignored or ridiculed mainstream journalists, gun owners – not always in lockstep with the National Rifle Association – spread news, analysis, and philosophy across the Internet, posting items like “Gun news the media didn’t report today.”
Eventually, examples of such "antimedia" began competing, even toppling, traditional media narratives, not only clearing the way for more gun rights, but also providing a powerful template for political movements like the tea party and political outsiders like Palin, says Mr. Patrick, who is also a communications professor at the University of Toledo in Ohio.
"People are now interpreting their own reality, and Palin's been able to take advantage of that," he says.
<font size="4">Playing to a niche or nationally?</font size>
Within the gun-rights community, at least, Palin may be able to successfully reframe the charges against her as an attack on individualism by an group of elites – a refrain that American gun owners have used effectively to fight against stronger gun control laws.
"People in the gun culture thrive on adversity, and they're now facing a level of animosity where all of a sudden [critics] are attributing homicidal craziness to gun owners," says Patrick. "But the fact is, people in the gun culture are a pretty benevolent bunch who see gun ownership as part of individualism, and Palin understands that."
But can that translate into political success on a national stage? Some commentators suggest that Palin's defensive tone and inability to rise above the media fray signal problems for a potential presidential campaign.
"Doubtless there are conservatives who will thrill to Ms. Palin's pugnacity," writes columnist Doyle McManus in the Los Angeles Times. "But voters in the center, where presidential elections are won, don't like the idea of politics as a blood sport. They yearn for vision, stature, steadiness, a nod toward the ideal of bipartisan compromise and evidence of real competence – from conservative and liberal candidates alike. Ms. Palin has given them none of those things."
Americans seem split on the issue of sharp rhetoric and the violence in Tucson, Ariz. A CBS poll showed that 57 percent of Americans thought vitriolic rhetoric had nothing to do with the shooting. A subsequent Quinnipiac poll, however, found that 52 percent of respondents believed that "heated political rhetoric drives unstable people to commit violence," compared with 41 percent who don't see such a link.
<font size="4">No reason to back down on guns</font size>
But on Second Amendment issues especially – which are central to the tea party platform of "individual liberty" – Palin has little reason to back down, says Charles Franklin, a political scientist at the University of Wisconsin in Madison.
"For her to back off on gun rights in any way [at this point] would not be true to who she is and who her constituency sees her as being," says Mr. Franklin. "That's why it makes sense that whatever she would have said before the shooting in Tucson are the same things she would want to say after the shooting."
At the Safari Club International convention in Reno, Nev., Palin is expected to address "her past hunting experiences and how politics affects the current state of hunting and fishing."
Her speech is sold out.
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politi...-Sarah-Palin-isn-t-retreating-she-s-reloading