Liberals here want to blame conservatives for Ariz shooting?

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

there is no evidence, none whatsoever, that the Tea Party supports the use of violence towards those with whom they disagree.

Have you been to a Tea Party event? I attended one last year (kind of by accident initially) because I agree with a lot of the principles that the Tea Party was initially founded on. However, the hours I spent there and many of the people I met provided a direct contradiction to your above statement. There was a ton of hate spewed, not by those on the stage, but by many people in the crowd.

The public perception of political groups (well, just about all groups) are defined by the loudest and most extreme in their ranks.

• Democrats are defined by far-left social liberals
• Republicans are defined by far-right religious conservatives
• Pro-choice means you want to slaughter babies
• Pro-life means you'll blow up Planned Parenthood locations
• Being a fisherman means you'll kill anything and everything that comes by
• Being vegetarian means you hug trees
• Don't like Unions? You must hate the little guy
• Part of a Union? "Is it time for you to take a break yet?"

The same has happened to the Tea Party. The group that initially stood for decreased government and fiscal responsibility are now defined by these people:

because they are the loudest and most extreme of the bunch.


You are probably the most guilty one here for assumptions and then extreme accusations. For instance:

So Johnny, if you think my question about Pelosi had no merit, can I assume that you do not think she was lying when she said that defecit reduction has been the mantra of Democrats? You think that was a truthful statement?

We all know what happens when you assume... and for the record, Pelosi is high up there on my "Politicians You're Most Disgusted By" list.

Hey Johnny D...if you're going to trash me, is it too much to ask that you trash me for things I actually said?

You should take your own advice. Especially since, putting words in someone else's mouth (or twisting them until they are far removed from the original meaning) and then providing two paragraphs on how your fabrications of what they said is wrong, doesn't count as "trashing me for things I actually said".

Since you don't remember relating Indiana Medicaid denying a baby a transplant and using that to defend Palin:
http://www.striped-bass.com/Stripert...th-panels.html

[scottw]

that sign is clearly photoshopped...good grief?

I was there...there was no hate spewed till JD showed up and started insulting everyone for being inbred rednecks....

[Jim in CT]

Johnny D..

"The public perception of political groups (well, just about all groups) are defined by the loudest and most extreme in their ranks."

If the "public", and you, wants to define an entire group by the actions of its most extreme members, that's their (and your) problem, and it's stupid. Rational, thoughtful people (and I am arrogant enough to include myself in that group) do not do that.

I have been to many tea party events. Never heard any support of violence. Are there extremists? Yes. Do they speak for everyone? Nope.

"Pro-life means you'll blow up Planned Parenthood locations "

Anyone who think sthat is an idiot, they just are. I'm pro-life, which necessarily means that I condemn the acts of anyone who would bomb planned parenthood. I have seen the lefty media try to lump all of us in with the tiny handful of folks who have killed abortionists, and it's stupid and dishonest.

Johnny, you said you didn't like my question about whether or not Pelosi was a liar or a lunatic, yet you also won't admit that you think she was telling the truth. It's kind of hard to figure out what you're saying, other than you keep telling me I'm wrong...

on the death panels thread...Palin was villified for referring to death panels...then in this case, the gov't denies life-saving treatment to a kid. You say the kid died because of Republican cuts? That may well be true, I never said otherwise. Either way, the gov't made a decision not to help this kid, which to me is equivalent to a death panel. See, you assume that if you show that it was a Republican that caused this kid's death, you are proving me wrong. Unfortunately for you, that's not the case. I'm opposed to the govt making those decisions, regardless of the political party affiliation of the politician in question. Party has nothing to do with it. I want doctors and families making those decisions, not the government. Am I going too fast for you?

[scottw]

one of the amusing components of hypocricy is that the hypocrit, who will point to their own informed intelligence, intellectual balance and perspective ....seldom shows the intelligence, intellectual balance and perspective to recognize their own glaring hypocricy.....

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Johnny D..

"The public perception of political groups (well, just about all groups) are defined by the loudest and most extreme in their ranks."

If the "public", and you, wants to define an entire group by the actions of its most extreme members, that's their (and your) problem, and it's stupid. Rational, thoughtful people (and I am arrogant enough to include myself in that group) do not do that. I have been to many tea party events. Never heard any support of violence. Are there extremists? Yes. Do they speak for everyone? Nope.

Oh really? Just like how everyone that doesn't agree exactly with your political ideology is a liberal moron with a mental disease.

"Pro-life means you'll blow up Planned Parenthood locations "

Anyone who think sthat is an idiot, they just are. I'm pro-life, which necessarily means that I condemn the acts of anyone who would bomb planned parenthood. I have seen the lefty media try to lump all of us in with the tiny handful of folks who have killed abortionists, and it's stupid and dishonest.

And I have seen the righty pro-lifers argue that all life is sacred while also supporting capital punishment. It's hypocritical.

Johnny, you said you didn't like my question about whether or not Pelosi was a liar or a lunatic, yet you also won't admit that you think she was telling the truth. It's kind of hard to figure out what you're saying, other than you keep telling me I'm wrong...

I disagree with just about everything Pelosi says and it continues to amaze me why she gets elected to party leadership positions. The reason your thread about Pelosi was on the list I made above (and also why after today I'll be going back to ignoring your posts) is that 75% of your posts are rants filled with insults, negativity and sensationalist talking points with the purposes of drumming up more hate and trying to piss off the people who don't perfectly align with your ideologies. Then, mix in your common pretentious tone while calling those who don't agree with you idiots.

on the death panels thread...Palin was villified for referring to death panels...then in this case, the gov't denies life-saving treatment to a kid. You say the kid died because of Republican cuts? That may well be true, I never said otherwise. Either way, the gov't made a decision not to help this kid, which to me is equivalent to a death panel. See, you assume that if you show that it was a Republican that caused this kid's death, you are proving me wrong. Unfortunately for you, that's not the case. I'm opposed to the govt making those decisions, regardless of the political party affiliation of the politician in question. Party has nothing to do with it. I want doctors and families making those decisions, not the government. Am I going too fast for you?

There's that arrogant prickishness again. If you're opposed to the government making those decisions, then you should start speaking out against Medicaid and Medicare. Unfortunately, if you can't afford your own health care, you won't be able to get the same care as someone that does pay for their own health insurance.

I guess this causes a bit of a predicament... do we remove all government sponsored health care(medicare and medicaid) so that politicians aren't making these decisions, or redistribute wealth so that everyone can get all the health care they need regardless of the costs to the taxpayer?

[scottw]

lots to ban in that post

there must be a program that would simply remove any term deemed unacceptable(which could be submitted to a master list at will, by anyone that found the term offensive) from any post submitted...that would probably fix everything....

[scottw]

As Jonathan Rauch wrote brilliantly in Harper's in 1995, "The vocabulary of hate is potentially as rich as your dictionary, and all you do by banning language used by cretins is to let them decide what the rest of us may say." Rauch added, "Trap the racists and anti-Semites, and you lay a trap for me too. Hunt for them with eradication in your mind, and you have brought dissent itself within your sights."


The#^&awesome stupidity of the calls to tamp down political speech in the wake of the Giffords shooting. - By Jack Shafer - Slate Magazine

[Jim in CT]

Johnny D-

"Just like how everyone that doesn't agree exactly with your political ideology is a liberal moron with a mental disease."

Please try to hold me accountable for what I actually say, not your interpretation of what I say. On many posts here, I have stated my position and said "reasonable people can disagree", so I don't besmirch everyone who doesn't agree with me on every issue. There are certain parts of liberal ideology that I do believe you have to have a screw loose to support (the notion that there's no such thing as too much spending, the notion that murderers have the right to live but not unborn babies, the notion that conservative economics caused the subprime mortgage crisis...)

"And I have seen the righty pro-lifers argue that all life is sacred while also supporting capital punishment. It's hypocritical."

First, I do not support capital punishment. However, there is NOTHING hypocritical about being against abortion and pro death penalty. An unborn baby is, by definition, innocent of any wrongdoing. Osama Bin Laden is not. In my opinion, there is a strong case to be made that killing Bin Laden is not morally equivalent to killing an unborn baby. If you cannot see a difference between an unborn baby and Osama Bin Laden, I cannot discuss anything with you.

What's completely absurd, totally devoid of any logic, is the liberal notion that it's OK to kill unborn babies, but wrong to kill a mass-murderer. That is an unsupportable position, it has no rational thought behind it. In any event, how many executions take place in this country? One a week? We slaughter 4,000 babies a day. Just to give you some perspective.

"75% of your posts are rants "

I support almost everything I say, with the logic behind my conclusions.

"filled with insults, negativity "

I plea guilty to that one...I have no more patience for folks, for example, who want to blame conservative ideology for what happened in Arizona. Anyone who would suggest that, deserves to be insulted. And at least, while I insult those, I explain why their position is absurd (as you attempted to do, although poorly IMHO)

As for the Pelosi thread, if she wasn't crazy for saying what she said, and she wasn't lying, then how do you explain what she said? In my opinion, the only 2 possibilities are that she's crazy or a liar. If there is an additional possibility, please enlighten me.

[scottw]

he's having a bad day

[buckman]

Let's not forget how JD was so appalled that everyone was jumping on the Fort Hood shooter and calling the "radical Islamic terrorist" what he was.

JD clearly hates women who are taller then himself.

[JohnR]

Everyone back in their respective corners

Have a

And show your

How would we frame and honest, non-insulting discussion? Not afraid of hurting one's feelings, but more to have a respectful dialogue on a subject?

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by JohnR

How would we frame and honest, non-insulting discussion? Not afraid of hurting one's feelings, but more to have a respectful dialogue on a subject?

It's impossible. Even topics that have no partisan basis are almost immediately dragged through the sewers of political polarity. I'm quite surprised that one about Unions has made it this long.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by JohnR

Everyone back in their respective corners

Have a

And show your

How would we frame and honest, non-insulting discussion? Not afraid of hurting one's feelings, but more to have a respectful dialogue on a subject?

kinda like The VIEW..right? the "IGNORE" feature here is like when the two dingbats...OOPS..I mean... ESTEEMED LIBERAL THINKERS...acted indignant and strutted off stage...

the "sewers of political polarity"...that's funny...