On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 7:18 AM, Sam wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 12:52 AM, denstar wrote: >> Come now, you know as well as I that the Democrats haven't been as gun >> happy. Hell, that's one of the memes, right? The dems & libs will >> take your guns- we want you to bring them to rallies! (metaphorically, >> we meant!) > > That's pure bullshit and your a fool to say it. > Real threats have been coming from your side all along. And now, due > to the level of effort your side when through to blame Palin for this, > death threats to her have increased at unprecedented levels since the > shooting. Stop making shit up and presenting it as known fact.
Oh yeah, it was liberal radio host who gave out the home address of that guy that supported health care, and then the house was vandalized. Only it was the wrong address or something, right? Anyways, the left has comedians, and the right has, what, Rush and Beck? I wouldn't be surprised if most the threats are from conservatives. She seems to have a knack for screwing up her own "side". =) Do a google search for "brought guns to the political rally" and see if there's a lot of democratic party mentions. >> Don't go 'n' pull the JerryB card, where you equate 3% as being the >> same as 33% -- hey, they're both percents, right? "You do it too!" et >> al. > > I know you think facts suck but we like them. Where did you get the 3% number? You don't like facts, you like rhetoric. And apparently don't have a problem with rhetoric conveying connotations of violence-- unless, of course, you get called on it. Then it's all like, "you do it too! And it's been like this forever, anyways.". 3% vs. 33% is a generalization. >>> Pretty much. I know, the easiest way to back peddle here is to say >>> "taht's not what I meant by that." >> You say this because I don't blame Obama for the polarization? > > I say it because you're blaming Palin for the causing people to shoot > senators, but probably not this one. Unrelated topics sharing a > thread. Come on man, try to pay attention. I know you're not a stoner, so you don't really have an excuse. Where did I ever blame Palin for causing people to shoot senators? I do hold her accountable for contributing to the sorry state of our political affairs. Words mean things. >> I happen to believe that we are all connected, and thus, yes, have an >> effect on each other-- everyone, even. > > That's deep. But we're discussing a shooting. Are you now saying we > influenced this guy even though he didn't watch tv or listen to > politics? Are you saying the Dem that said to shoot the guy running > for Governor didn't effect him but Palins lock and load comment did? > Why are you sneaking in here disguised as a right wing issue when you > clearly know it is not? To your mind, it appears you see the exact same behavior on "the other side". Riddle me this: How many democratic rallies have had to say "we meant bring your guns in a metaphorical way"? And note, there are some bigwig Tea Party heads who are like, "there's nothing wrong with bringing guns to a political rally."-- which, while technically true, is still pretty lame. Especially this close to M.L.K. day. =)p >> How much is up for debate, but you cannot deny that there is some relation. > > I'm denying it. Who retaliated for what. Make that statement clear so > when you step back from it I can reference it. I said "relation", not "retaliation". Does that clear it up for you? Or are you really denying that people effect each other? >> Politicians -- *politicians!* -- capitalizing on an *armed* revolution >> -- and poor schmucks falling for it-- *stutter* -- while having the > > Who, what and where? Be specific. You're intentional vagueness comes > in handy down the road but I want to cut to the chase. Gee, I dunno. What could I be referring to? It's all so vague, and like, hazy. Hey, as an aside, it looks like people /do/ bring guns to democratic rallies! http://open.salon.com/blog/hal_m/2009/08/17/guns_rallies-just_because_you_can_doesnt_mean_you_should Only it doesn't seem to be the democrats bringing them. (I love the picture of Jesus with the rifle.) Reminds me of this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=taih2zUOmIM And this is pretty funny too: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obBX8vDUIHI >> nerve to knock "hope and change". *sigh* All this is lost on you >> though. You don't have a problem with politicians using fear as their >> tool. With leveraging our anger in some sorta Hitler-like way. It's >> all the same to you. Black and white, at the same time. Gray, I >> guess? > > Hitler like way? Are you still talking about lock and load or the > democrat and his firing squad. I need clarity. Lock and Load, "Take Back" America, The Government Needs more Power to Keep You Safe (well, that's a shared meme, but "your side" capitalized on the terror more than "mine"). "Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists" (well, technically, H.Clinton said it first). Hrm. Guess "my" side /does/ do similar stuff! Maybe not as much (or according to you, more), but still. Guess it's a good thing I condemn talk of that nature on general principle. Hey, yeah, I forgot! That was part of my point, even! "My side", "yer side"... what a bunch of malarkey! Maybe instead of trying to do this "tit for tat", "you do it too", "you started it" type bullshit, we should agree that some stuff is just lame, regardless? >> And I figure you'd say the same for the me. I was hoodwinked. How's >> that hope and change working out. Obama was the messiah! The One! >> Heh. Like living in a comic book. > > Whaaaa? You're on the wrong thread again. It's a magical tapestry, Life! ... > That's you bub. I want to look at facts and it seems this guy was a > nutter. You want to blame me, Palin and everyone on the right. I am > not responsible for what this guy did. > There I said it. Now you try. You want to look at facts? Hey, is it true that the Republicans bitch the most about welfare, and yet their constituents take advantage of it the most? That always kind of boggled my mind. And hey, are our taxes /really/ like the lowest they've been in more than 30 years or whatever? I'm not sure why you keep returning to this "you want to blame" theme. I've clearly stated that I don't hold you, or Palin, or The Right accountable for this guy's actions. If you cared about facts, or even just wanted to look at them, you'd be aware of that, no? >> You'd be nuts to think that what we say has no effect on one another >> though. Is that what you're saying? That "man is an island", so to >> speak? > > Yeah. You are living in a fantasy land. You don't own a gun, do you? ;)p In your reality, there's just action, eh? No reaction? Sounds fantastic! (Well, maybe "sound" is the wrong word, as sound basically requires action & reaction-- but you know what I meant) At least one man is an island, it appears. Bravo dude! You must feel *so* original! >> What, exactly, *are* you saying? > > Sometimes people lose it. It happens, pointing fingers at people you > disagree with does nothing to help, it only makes things worse. > Remember the Fort Hood shooting the first response was don't jump to > conclusions. Why didn't that happen this time? Remember the Kent State Shootings? Or massacre, if you prefer? =) It's not about pointing fingers, it's about civil discourse, and not preying on people's fear or anger. You probably see positive and negative reinforcement as about the same though. It fits. Do you enjoy confrontation more than compromise? Would you rather "Take Back" America than "Hope and Change" it? >> I'm not sure what you are getting at. Save threads? Do you see >> discussions on this list as some sort of binary battle? "There's only >> two things you can support, and they're both extremes!" "You're with >> us, or you're a terrorist!"... maybe you think my underwear is too >> old? (but it's so comfortable!) > > You're discussing to things, this shooting and violent rhetoric that > causes shootings. You then claim the two are not related but just > happen to be discussed in the same thread. I'm saying you're excuse is > you were to lazy to start another thread, which we both know is > bullshit. Is it not ironic, that you started out by accusing me of preconceptions, and not reading what you write, and yet here we are, with you *again* claiming I said something that I did not say? Even after I repeated myself a few times? Sam: You are not responsible for what this guy did. Feel better? :Den -- What must be the nature of the world... if human beings are able to introduce changes i ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:333415 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
