Tragedy in AZ: God be w/Rep. Gabrielle Giiffords and others

by **conversationpc** » Fri Jan 14, 2011 10:42 am

Seven Wishes wrote:Yeah, it's much wose than Angle or Miller or Palin talking about getting "locked and loaded" and "ready start a revolution" if Democrats held the House and Senate.

Whatever.

Angle's comment was reprehensible. I'm not familiar with Miller's comment but Palin's had nothing to do whatsoever with taking up actual arms and committing actual violence.

by **slucero** » Fri Jan 14, 2011 10:45 am

Rockindeano wrote:If Hillary indeed said that about a General, that is not cool at all. She is better than that. If I recall correctly, did sahe say that as a Senator, and not Sec of State? Either way, she should be above that. He is only doing as instructed. If he is still there, and not doing a "good job," then this is on Obama.

I don't recall Hillary actually calling Patreus that... I do recall her round-aboutly calling him a liar during the hearings:

"I think that the reports that you provide to us really require the willing suspension of disbelief,"

She also would not vote for a Senate amendment condemning the MoveOn.org ad....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MoveOn.org_ad_controversy

On September 20, the Senate passed an amendment by Republican John Cornyn of Texas designed to "strongly condemn personal attacks on the honor and integrity of General Petraeus". All 49 Republican Senators and 22 Democratic Senators voted in support.[42][43] Democratic Presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Chris Dodd voted against the amendment while Barack Obama and Joseph Biden did not vote.[44] Obama issued a statement calling the resolution, put forward by Senator John Cornyn, Republican of Texas, "a stunt. By not casting a vote, I registered my protest against these empty politics."[44] The House passed an amendment to a continuing budget resolution which condemned the ad "in the strongest terms" by a 341-79 vote on September 26.[45][46][47]

At least Hillary stood her ground... Obama just opted out.

Voting "no".. or not voting at all... well that speaks for itself...especially in light of the recent call for a reduction in the "vitriolic rhetoric"...

It's a bit ironic (actually hypocritical) that the one who yesterday praised a 9 year old who died as a consequence of what he called "vitriol" is the same one who opted out of a vote essentially calling out vitriolic rhetoric.

:roll:

by **RedWingFan** » Fri Jan 14, 2011 10:46 am

Seven Wishes wrote:Dipshit. I specifically asked for you to find an example of a Democratic politician saying the same kind of incendiary things that Angle said - not just rhetoric, but actual threats.

Yeah, here you go you DNC ball licker. What do you have to say about this? Probably perfectly acceptable huh?
Wait let me guess, this is your response again right?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Xywqv1cDH8

Kudo's to FactFinder!

Fact Finder wrote:Pennsylvania Congressman Paul Kanjorski (D)..

10/23/2010
"That Scott down there that's running for governor of Florida," Mr. Kanjorski said. "Instead of running for governor of Florida, they ought to have him and shoot him. Put him against the wall and shoot him.

by **RedWingFan** » Fri Jan 14, 2011 10:50 am

Rockindeano wrote:
Fact Finder wrote:“To believe you would be to ignore the reality that the surge is going to work and everyone knows that it is a lie”.

NOOOOOO FF. That is not Hillary calling Petraeus a liar. She is calling the Administration a Lying entity, which they most certainly were.

Uh, Dean. The surge DID work. Petraeus nor the administration was lying. It was true.

by **S2M** » Fri Jan 14, 2011 11:01 am

RedWingFan wrote:
Rockindeano wrote:
Fact Finder wrote:“To believe you would be to ignore the reality that the surge is going to work and everyone knows that it is a lie”.

NOOOOOO FF. That is not Hillary calling Petraeus a liar. She is calling the Administration a Lying entity, which they most certainly were.

Uh, Dean. The surge DID work. Petraeus nor the administration was lying. It was true.

The longer Bin Laden is loose the longer the administration(Bush) can play the fear card....all Bush was interested in was another 4 fucking years. So actually, in his 8 years we got 2 'decent' presidential years, if that.....usually the first two years of a presidency you get the best work, followed by just before the next election....the last two years you get campaigning nonsense....and once into a 2nd term - since there is no 3rd term....the american people actually get nothing in that 2nd term.....quite pitiful, really.

by **slucero** » Fri Jan 14, 2011 5:14 pm

RedWingFan wrote:
Rockindeano wrote:
Fact Finder wrote:“To believe you would be to ignore the reality that the surge is going to work and everyone knows that it is a lie”.

NOOOOOO FF. That is not Hillary calling Petraeus a liar. She is calling the Administration a Lying entity, which they most certainly were.

Uh, Dean. The surge DID work. Petraeus nor the administration was lying. It was true.

I'm still waiting on the Patriot Act to get cancelled...

by **conversationpc** » Fri Jan 14, 2011 10:10 pm

slucero wrote:
RedWingFan wrote:
Rockindeano wrote:
Fact Finder wrote:“To believe you would be to ignore the reality that the surge is going to work and everyone knows that it is a lie”.

NOOOOOO FF. That is not Hillary calling Petraeus a liar. She is calling the Administration a Lying entity, which they most certainly were.

Uh, Dean. The surge DID work. Petraeus nor the administration was lying. It was true.

I'm still waiting on the Patriot Act to get cancelled...

Yeah, that law that Obama fought AGAINST when he was a senator yet allowed to become PERMANENT after becoming President. Funny how that worked.

by **conversationpc** » Fri Jan 14, 2011 10:27 pm

ebake02 wrote:After seeing Sarah Palin's little speech from the other day it become pretty obvious that she has no clue what blood libel really means. I wish that dumb broad would shut the f*ck up and stay away from the camera. I hope and pray that she doesn't run for president in 2012.

Actually, according to common accepted usage, she was using it correctly.

http://biggovernment.com/publius/2011/0 ... ood-libel/

by **Lula** » Sat Jan 15, 2011 4:13 am

conversationpc wrote:
ebake02 wrote:After seeing Sarah Palin's little speech from the other day it become pretty obvious that she has no clue what blood libel really means. I wish that dumb broad would shut the f*ck up and stay away from the camera. I hope and pray that she doesn't run for president in 2012.

Actually, according to common accepted usage, she was using it correctly.

http://biggovernment.com/publius/2011/0 ... ood-libel/

palin wasted the opportunity to show she can think beyond herself. her practice of blaming the media for anything said that is unfavorable is old and tired. she is a poor example of a compassionate human being. doesn't matter if she used the term correctly, it is offensive to so many and was a poor choice of words, not inlike her target map.

by **RedWingFan** » Sat Jan 15, 2011 4:33 am

Lula wrote:palin wasted the opportunity to show she can think beyond herself. her practice of blaming the media for anything said that is unfavorable is old and tired.

The NATIONAL media was trying to blame the slaughter of 6 human beings on her with NO evidence!!!

You blame her for pointing this out and defending herself?

My God, you leftists are just beyond belief!!!

by **Lula** » Sat Jan 15, 2011 5:25 am

funny.

giffords herself pointed out that she was on palin's targeted list... right, surveyor's map. i don't blame palin or any other person for the masacre other than the derranged shooter. i'm saying she always makes things about her and plays the innocent victim. i hope she has acted differently in private to the families of the true victims. for her to take the time to video tape and use a teleprompter to "address the nation" i expected more than the squandered the opportunity to be an example of a leader.

by **slucero** » Sat Jan 15, 2011 6:19 am

Lula wrote::lol: funny.

giffords herself pointed out that she was on palin's targeted list... right, surveyor's map. i don't blame palin or any other person for the masacre other than the derranged shooter. i'm saying she always makes things about her and plays the innocent victim. i hope she has acted differently in private to the families of the true victims. for her to take the time to video tape and use a teleprompter to "address the nation" i expected more than the squandered the opportunity to be an example of a leader.

About those "target maps"

The DLC (Democratic Leadership Council) did the "target map thing" in 2004.... oops.... :roll:

http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contenti ... &subid=171

So what do you think about this map? it’s on the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) website. They launched the site and the map on February 23rd of LAST YEAR, making it just over a YEAR old.

Each one of those red targets represents a “Targeted Republican” like this one:

There’s even a helpful legend that makes it clear that’s precisely what the little red targets represent:

"funny" the upstanding Dems would call Palin out... yet apparently forget they did it themselves.. and people BLINDLY believe in their party's honesty and follow it like lemmings.... :rolleyes:

Typical hypocritical...

The moral of the story?

People who don't know what they're talking about should shut the fuck up..

by **conversationpc** » Sat Jan 15, 2011 6:33 am

Lula wrote:
conversationpc wrote:
ebake02 wrote:After seeing Sarah Palin's little speech from the other day it become pretty obvious that she has no clue what blood libel really means. I wish that dumb broad would shut the f*ck up and stay away from the camera. I hope and pray that she doesn't run for president in 2012.

Actually, according to common accepted usage, she was using it correctly.

http://biggovernment.com/publius/2011/0 ... ood-libel/

palin wasted the opportunity to show she can think beyond herself. her practice of blaming the media for anything said that is unfavorable is old and tired. she is a poor example of a compassionate human being. doesn't matter if she used the term correctly, it is offensive to so many and was a poor choice of words, not inlike her target map.

As Slucero showed above, politicians use this kind of thing all the time. If you're going to call her out, call out your own as well. Otherwise, all it is is meaningless chatter.

by **Behshad** » Sat Jan 15, 2011 6:45 am

Fact Finder wrote:Slucero was dead on right...if you don't know what your talking about shut up already...

Yet you keep talking ! :lol:

and its you're

by **Lula** » Sat Jan 15, 2011 6:45 am

not a fan of the bullseye targets either. crosshairs, gunsites, reload, armed and dangerous, etc...., all of it makes me worry about the growing climate of hatred and divide in our country. all public discourse should be responsible and respectful in my mind. palin only made things worse for her by her actions. she is terribly self centered.

by **Seven Wishes2** » Sat Jan 15, 2011 6:52 am

It seems to me the jpeg targets and bullseyes have only come to the forefront because of this tragedy.

It's the rhetorical speeches with the constant references to "taking up arms" and "defending your liberty at all costs" that are incendiary.

That douchebag Democrat from Florida is just as guilty as Angle or Palin.

by **Ehwmatt** » Sat Jan 15, 2011 6:54 am

Seven Wishes wrote:It seems to me the jpeg targets and bullseyes have only come to the forefront because of this tragedy.

It's the rhetorical speeches with the constant references to "taking up arms" and "defending your liberty at all costs" that are incendiary.

That douchebag Democrat from Florida is just as guilty as Angle or Palin.

Political speech has been rife with such euphemisms, metaphor, and hyperbole since the beginning of time.

Good lord, have any of you buffoons on either the right or left even taken a high school level US history or government course?

Nuts will do what nuts do. Nothing Obama, Palin, Clinton, Pelosi, Boehner, Bush, Gore, JFK, or whoever the fuck else said "forces" these nuts to act.

by **Lula** » Sat Jan 15, 2011 7:00 am

thanks for the welcome back, ff

you know i'm no fan of palin. i don't blame her in any way for what happened in tucson. i don't like the political climate at all. though i mostly vote for dems (i have voted republican) i don't like it from anyone. palin is simply an idiot. she has her minions at fox, but you don't see prominent republicans speaking in her defense. i say run for president if she wants, i don't see her ever holding office again. heck, she can't even finish one term as gov. she's making a great living peddling her philosophy, but it won't last.

by **slucero** » Sat Jan 15, 2011 7:22 am

Seven Wishes wrote:It seems to me the jpeg targets and bullseyes have only come to the forefront because of this tragedy.

It's the rhetorical speeches with the constant references to "taking up arms" and "defending your liberty at all costs" that are incendiary.

That douchebag Democrat from Florida is just as guilty as Angle or Palin.

...and yet "lost" in all of this is the utter HYPOCRISY of both parties, and how they simply divide the country up and use rhetoric to pit Joe American against Joe American...

people need to wake up...

by **Seven Wishes2** » Sat Jan 15, 2011 7:31 am

Yes, they do.

But, no - people are more stupid than ever before, and between the polarization and the advent of contemporary mass media, these thinly veiled messages are getting out to everyone en masse. Things are FAR, far different than they were in the 18th century, or even in Kennedy's time.

by **slucero** » Sat Jan 15, 2011 7:38 am

I would use the word "anesthetized"... as mass media (and its use/abuse) only exacerbates the polarization, and anesthetization. Most of the folks I know who have finally "woken up".. get pretty pissed when they realize the degree of malfeasance that has occurred right in front of them

by **S2M** » Sat Jan 15, 2011 7:50 am

Seven Wishes wrote:Yes, they do.

But, no - people are more stupid than ever before, and between the polarization and the advent of contemporary mass media, these thinly veiled messages are getting out to everyone en masse. Things are FAR, far different than they were in the 18th century, or even in Kennedy's time.

Yes, but this is tied into the fallacy that if *I* am doing well then the country is....most republicans only care about themselves....Just because *I* was born into money don't put me down.....I haven't worked a day in my life. WOAH! Don't take more of my unearned money! :roll:

by **Seven Wishes2** » Sat Jan 15, 2011 7:54 am

The great empathy divide.

by **S2M** » Sat Jan 15, 2011 7:56 am

Seven Wishes wrote:The great empathy divide.

The Great Schism II....

by **Ehwmatt** » Sat Jan 15, 2011 8:02 am

S2M wrote:
Seven Wishes wrote:Yes, they do.

But, no - people are more stupid than ever before, and between the polarization and the advent of contemporary mass media, these thinly veiled messages are getting out to everyone en masse. Things are FAR, far different than they were in the 18th century, or even in Kennedy's time.

Yes, but this is tied into the fallacy that if *I* am doing well then the country is....most republicans only care about themselves....Just because *I* was born into money don't put me down.....I haven't worked a day in my life. WOAH! Don't take more of my unearned money!

You truly have some bizarre shit running through your head.

by **S2M** » Sat Jan 15, 2011 8:04 am

Ehwmatt wrote:
S2M wrote:
Seven Wishes wrote:Yes, they do.

But, no - people are more stupid than ever before, and between the polarization and the advent of contemporary mass media, these thinly veiled messages are getting out to everyone en masse. Things are FAR, far different than they were in the 18th century, or even in Kennedy's time.

Yes, but this is tied into the fallacy that if *I* am doing well then the country is....most republicans only care about themselves....Just because *I* was born into money don't put me down.....I haven't worked a day in my life. WOAH! Don't take more of my unearned money!

You truly have some bizarre shit running through your head.

They said the same thing to Galileo...

Spoken like a rank and file republican.... :roll:

by **lights1961** » Sat Jan 15, 2011 8:23 am

Seven Wishes wrote:Yes, they do.

But, no - people are more stupid than ever before, and between the polarization and the advent of contemporary mass media, these thinly veiled messages are getting out to everyone en masse. Things are FAR, far different than they were in the 18th century, or even in Kennedy's time.

go back and look at the cartoons and articles from the 1800's or before... YES THIS HAS BEEN GOING SINCE the beginning of politics...there has been cross hairs in politics since the begining of time... things ARE NO DIFFERENT that before... you just choose to close your eyes since now its against YOUR SIDE... go back the hatred of Nixon... Reagan and W...an even before that... WOW... the difference now is you have idiots like yourself on here 24/7 spouting hate and its PERSONAL hate of people... Palin specificlly... if something happens to her... will anyone go to her defense... are you kidding me... will the media blame themeselfs... will obama call for civility... hell f***ing no... you all who hate her will jump up and down and sing the song from the wizard of oz...

we on the right usually discusses the policies that we hate from the democrats who are in control... my dislike has nothing to do with people...but everything to do with GOVT policy and the billions and billions of dollars spent unwisely...
thats our main BEEF period... the intent is good... the way its managed sucks...

by **Melissa** » Sat Jan 15, 2011 9:00 am

S2M wrote:
Seven Wishes wrote:Yes, they do.

But, no - people are more stupid than ever before, and between the polarization and the advent of contemporary mass media, these thinly veiled messages are getting out to everyone en masse. Things are FAR, far different than they were in the 18th century, or even in Kennedy's time.

Yes, but this is tied into the fallacy that if *I* am doing well then the country is....most republicans only care about themselves....Just because *I* was born into money don't put me down.....I haven't worked a day in my life. WOAH! Don't take more of my unearned money!

Sorry but this is where libs are always so full of crap! :lol:

Most conservatives do NOT only care about themselves, please :roll:

And I'm sorry it burns you libs' asses so much that people who are born into money shouldn't have to GIVE it away to the freaking govt, only to give MORE hand outs to lazy ass libs who also "haven't worked a day in my life" :roll:

Sorry but there are WAY more libs who only care about themselves from what I've personally experienced. With that "me, me, me, it's not fair so I'm ENTITLED, so gimme, gimme, gimme" attitude :roll:

Oh and NO I don't come from any money, so that's NOT why I have these opinions. I work to pay for where I live, I work to take care of my kids, I work to pay for my healthcare, etc. It's quite a simple concept a lot of libs don't seem to be able to grasp!

You libs and your libberish :roll: