Daily KOS has a "TARGET LIST"
- Thread starter NOVA
- Start date
Right, because one side doesn't "poo-poo" movies created with imagery of political figures being shot while they are currently in office. Again, if you want to desperately believe that your "side" is better than the other you can use whatever excuse you will feel comfortable with.
The conversation is useless in this context though. This lunatic did what he did because his brain wasn't firing right and nobody had any plan to do anything about it. It has nothing to do with the "rhetoric" of politics.
Again, it is stupid to pretend they didn't list her name and that nobody would make that association.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
and once again, onceler goes on the defense of the left, must defend my party at all costs
never attacks them with the vigor he has for the right's speech, in fact he has never condemned a specific left wing hate speech, rather attacks the messenger....but always minimizes the left's speech. it false lip service to claim both sides do it, because you can't be that stupid to lie about that, but when everytime something from the left is shown to be violent rhetoric and you defend, minimize or attack the person who showed the left's violent imagery, that reveals your true feelings on the matter. not your empty generic, both sides do it as well.
You should look up Nigel's post about Fairness Doctrine enforcement on this board; it is hilariously on target about you.
You have very quickly become a complete parody of yourself....
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
nah, pointing out your hypocrisy on this issue obviously bothers you a great deal because you know its true...you desperately want to make this about me because you desperately need to defend your party
if you really cared about violent rhetoric, you would call out both sides, you don't, you attack anyone on the right who dares post left wing hate talk, you don't condemn it, you attack the person who posts it, calling them a hack, liar or whatever....and then at every chance you MINIMIZE the left wing vitriol rhetoric but not once in any thread posted about left wing rhetoric to specifically condemn that rhetoric, but you will, however, specifically condemn any right wing rhetoric....thats intellectually dishonest
its plain as day, except to a deluded hack like yourself
Your efforts to make this a 50/50 split over the past couple of days have been ridiculous. On virtually every issue, there are counter-examples from the "other side" to support a "they do it too!" You have ONLY ever cared that the left condemns those on the left for things they are criticizing the right for. It is your m.o., and everyone knows that.
In this case, I have argued why I think the right is at the forefront. I am not going to give "equal time" when I see the right as poisoning the atmosphere MORE than the left has, and they have since Obama was elected. Even SF stated that it has gone up more than usual over the past 2 years, and that the party out of power is generally the loudest voice.
Let me ask you this: do you think both sides are EQUALLY responsible for the downward spiral in tone & rhetoric since 2008? A true 50/50 split, where both the left & right are equally culpable?
W
WinterBorn
Guest
So as long as your side does it less than the other side, its ok?
And I said that...where again?
I'm tired of this shit. It's the same shit as reverse racism - YES, there are black people who hate white people, but BY FAR, racism in the other direction is worse & more problematic than that. So, I'm going to talk about that kind of racism; when I talk about that kind of racism, I'm not going to give "equal time" to the blacks who hate whites just to appease fools like Yurt, or try to show I'm "equally" concerned about both.
By FAR, the right has poisoned the atmosphere more than the left since Obama was elected, and I will argue that until the end. If you want to have this conversation 3-4 years ago, I wouldn't say that, at all - the opposite was true. But it is not true today, and some of what I have seen over the past few years - and from real LEADERS on the right, and not people at some rally holding a sign - has been unlike anything I have seen in politics in my lifetime.
The ugly rhetoric and violent imagery that followed most of Bush/Cheney for 8 fricking years seems to have escaped you-
That numerous posters on here are guilty of participating by either their silence or their cheers is well established. That in the last couple of days when it has been pointed out that Palins map had NO connection to this shooting and that indeed democrats have used the same gimmickry, lefties have spun it to be "not the same thing" or some other justification.
Move.on; Daily Kos; Msnbc; CBS et al are for the most part left leaning and have ignored liberal political hate-and often participate/promote it themselves
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
Exactly and if everyone was a sane rational person I guess that would be ok but that's not the case. There's a lot of nuts out there and and tihs kind of rhetoric feeds their violent behavior. It simply has to stop. Were mature adults and we can disagree on politics or our values but at the end of the day we all still have more in common then what differences we may have. There's no reason why this discourse cannot be civil. Though I probably didn't set a good example by losing my temper here. For that I apologise.
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
No he may not of but that's not the point. What if it did? This sort of language needs to stop, no matter who is using it.
Yeah your "teabaggers" haranguing feeds the hate. The use of targets and crosshairs by both sides has not been connected to any violence-even the hateful use of the term teabagger cannot, to my knowledge, be connected to any act of violence.
The reaction by myself over the issue has been at the blatant hypocrisy and seeming dishonesty over the issue of political hate speech....as if.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
Wait a minute... I have a problem with this because of how I have been treated over a comment I made to Jarhead, which pinheads are telling me, was a "threat."
My understanding of "threat" has always been, something actually has to be threatened, and it has to be specifically directed at an individual. But it appears there is some sort of mental difference between this, and what a pinhead considers a threat. Until we can all get on the same page with what would actually constitute a threat, and not rely on some pinhead interpreted threat, I wouldn't support what you suggest.
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
I don't think that's the issue here. Common sense tells us that violent rhetoric used to often may be a factor for someone on the lunatic fringe going over the edge and trageting innappropriate persons for violent attacks.
I can make my rhetorical points with out advocating or implying violence towards those I disagree with nor do I see the use of violent imagary, implied or otherwise, as being appropriate in civil discourse. In the future if I see anyone politician doing this, I will simply not vote for them. If I see them using angry and divisive rehtoric, I will not vote for them and if everyone does it, then I'll give up voting.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
absolutely both parties are responsible 50/50
see, this is your problem, when it was happening before obama was elected, there nary a peep from you about this at worst, at best it certaintly wasn't the vigor you display now. all you do now is MINIMIZE the left and claim that because it happened two years ago we shouldn't focus on it and instead should only focus on the right. that is such a naive and ignorant way of thinking.
of course its more vocal on the right since 2008 because your party is in power, who are you going to hate against? the reality, however, is the left will pick up right where they left off in 2008 if the pubs gain power. that is why you cannot ignore the left's vitriol hate. it still exists, it just isn't voiced outloud as much because there is no target to vent their hate towards. there is much vitriol against palin and she isn't even office. yet you woudl have us believe its more the right, it isn't, its just that your party holds the majority in the senate and has the WH.
further, i believe much of the vitriol from the right is a direct response to the vitriol from the left for 8 years under bush. you cannot deny that is a factor, so it is equally stupid to claim its not 50/50.
OH MY GAWD! Pure ridiculousness! What language was on Palin's map? The same language that has likely been used for decades-"target" "crosshair"? The fact of the matter is that the map was VERY CLEAR that "votes" were the weapon of choice!
It was liberal hypocrites who found the map to suggest its violence. Yet in the last two days we have been able to find and show that liberals have used the exact same language and imagery-
So is it the map that promotes violence or the idiot hypocrites who suggest it promotes violence that are guilty?
Last edited:
"Don't retreat, instead -- RELOAD" together with crosshairs and "We've diagnosed the problem . . . help us prescribe the solution." Nothing to suggest violence there.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
It is only 'different' to you. To any sane person, it is the same type of message politicians have been using for decades. To pretend that anyone meant people should literally go out and shoot the opponents is nothing short of partisan rhetoric.
You just WANT this to be 'different' because it paints the pretty 'Republicans are the evilzzz' picture you like so much.