DNC Continues To Blame Tea Party For Giffords Shooting

[Fern]

Just worth a thought, but what if you're the one trying to score political points by discounting a valid concern about the tone of the debate? I can't be the only person who's noticed that you don't have to look very far to find instances of Obama being described as "destroying America". You can't quite blame just the Tea Party...but I don't think it's unreasonable to ask some questions about the tone of the discussion.

Were you looking when GWB was President?

If so, then you know this has been going on a long time now. Somehow I don't remember Wasserman-Shultz (sp?) speaking up back then.

Fern

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Were you looking when GWB was President?

If so, then you know this has been going on a long time now. Somehow I don't remember Wasserman-Shultz (sp?) speaking up back then.

Fern

You'll have to remind us all who called GWB a liar during a State of the Union address.

 

[BoberFett]

Threads like this are truly amazing. To see an entire group of people contract selective amnesia covering the exact span of a specific adminstration is some kind of medical mystery.

 

[BoberFett]

You mean one like the DLC used in 2004?

The Democrats used dots that looked like targets, not crosshairs. It's completely different.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Threads like this are truly amazing. To see an entire group of people contract selective amnesia covering the exact span of a specific adminstration is some kind of medical mystery.

"Why do you hate America?" You remember that little nugget from the Bush years? It wasn't the lefty's flinging that poo.

 

[monovillage]

Threads like this are truly amazing. To see an entire group of people contract selective amnesia covering the exact span of a specific adminstration is some kind of medical mystery.

I don't mind that they have very selective recall, but i do hate it when posters like Gonad flat-out lie about it and then act butt hurt when they get called on it.

 

[xBiffx]

You'll have to remind us all who called GWB a liar during a State of the Union address.

Nice troll post but exactly where is the call for violence in that? Plenty of people talked about doing some not so legal things to Bush back in the day or wishing violently for his sudden demise. Calling someone a liar hardly fits within the discussion. Oh yeah, and I noticed how some Dem's took so much offense for the liar comment that they went and shot someone.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

I don't mind that they have very selective recall, but i do hate it when posters like Gonad flat-out lie about it and then act butt hurt when they get called on it.

What are you saying I lied about?

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Nice troll post but exactly where is the call for violence in that?

It specifically reflects to what Schultz refers to in the video.

 

[irishScott]

"Why do you hate America?" You remember that little nugget from the Bush years? It wasn't the lefty's flinging that poo.

So far your only general defense has been "but the other guy is doing it worse!", which is debatable depending on context. Frankly if you were an example of the typical Democrat you'd serve to demonstrate a large degree of moral bankruptcy on the part of the left. Fortunately you aren't.

 

[cybrsage]

Sharon Angle's made a comment about when she was running against Harry Reid while talking about the 2nd Amendment was:
"Well it's to defend ourselves. And you know, I'm hoping that we're not getting to Second Amendment remedies. I hope the vote will be the cure for the Harry Reid problems".
So she was indicating that should she not win over Harry Reid that the remedy would include the 2nd Amendment. However, in the GOP's defense (which I will almost never do), you can't judge an entire party by what was arguably its worst member.

This quote lead me to search for what she really said. I have found a youtube video of her saying things, but they are not this. The video is obviously chopped off at the end so they can take what she said out of context, but what they do have her saying is:

"If this Congress keeps going the way it is, people are really looking towards those second amendment remedies and they are saying My Goodness, what can we do to turn this country around. And I will tell you, the first thing we need to do is take Harry Reid Out..."

That is where they cut her off in mid sentence. It is obvious they did, for you can hear the beginning of the rest of the sentence. My guess is she was going to say:

"And I will tell you, the first thing we need to do is take Harry Reid Out of office."

Does not sound like what you said. Do you have a link to it? Not saying you are lying, just saying I do not trust most sites with regards to a democrat or republican saying things like this.

 

[monovillage]

What are you saying I lied about?

You asked.

Link it. Link to any Democratic candidate or elected official outright calling for violence against Bush or Republicans. This is exactly the type of incident the right was inciting, regardless if they directly incited this one or not.

It was answered. This and others by cybersage.
http://pjmedia.com/eddriscoll/2011/1...rida-governor/

If you think finding occasional examples of inciteful Democratic rhetoric win the argument against consistent recurring Tea Party calls for violence you're a fool. And damn right a threat of violence by some right wing gun hoarder is more credible than than some angry 80 year old.

Then you blow it off and keep lying.
Both the left and the right have a history of excess rhetoric, don't pretend it's all one sided.

 

[UberNeuman]

In the end - attacks like these are wanted by the fringe...

Not only wanted. Devoured. Embraced.

 

[monovillage]

In the end - attacks like these are wanted by the fringe...

Not only wanted. Devoured. Embraced.

Good point and one I agree with completely, from both the right and the left.
In this particular case it was the DNC chair though, Wasserman-Schultz should have known better.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

So far your only general defense has been "but the other guy is doing it worse!", which is debatable depending on context. Frankly if you were an example of the typical Democrat you'd serve to demonstrate a large degree of moral bankruptcy on the part of the left. Fortunately you aren't.

I'm not defending either side. One side is doing it worse. Clearly.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

You asked.


It was answered. This and others by cybersage.
http://pjmedia.com/eddriscoll/2011/1...rida-governor/



Then you blow it off and keep lying.
Both the left and the right have a history of excess rhetoric, don't pretend it's all one sided.

I'm not pretending it is one sided, I am pointing out it's lopsided. And if you want to go throwing the word "lie" around you should toss it towards the title of this thread.

 

[cybrsage]

I'm not defending either side. One side is doing it worse. Clearly.

If by "worse" you mean "not as effectively", then I agree with you. Republicans are not nearly as effective with their calls for violence against democrats as democrats are with their calls for violence against republicans.

If you mean "less than", then you are completely wrong.

 

[WackyDan]

Honestly I have a hard time seeing how he can use a computer as blind as he is.

Don't worry about him... If you do a bit of research on him, you'll find enough about him online... the other forums he trolls etc... to realize that he has nothing better to do. He is a web forum space heater for what he thinks is his own cause.

Has he threatened to ignore you yet? The Omnipotent Craig will strike you down with that... be warned... to be put on Craig's ignore list is supposedly punishment... Punishment for calling him on his shit, proving him wrong... It is his way of burying his head in the sand - internet style.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

If by "worse" you mean "not as effectively", then I agree with you. Republicans are not nearly as effective with their calls for violence against democrats as democrats are with their calls for violence against republicans.

If you mean "less than", then you are completely wrong.

Yeah, clearly this guy was motivated by all the leftwing baby killer talk.
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1902189,00.html

Speaking of baby killer, remember this little gem?
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0310/34782.html

Probably another lefty.

 

[cybrsage]

Yeah, clearly this guy was motivated by all the leftwing baby killer talk.
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1902189,00.html

Speaking of baby killer, remember this little gem?
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0310/34782.html

Probably another lefty.

Those guys are the wrong age to be used as examples and none of them have pikes of assault rifles under their beds. Do you have any actual examples?