Obama says polarized nation needs healing

Onceler said:
Kind of a predictable response. If your response for any quote I give is going to come from the extreme partisan point of view, there really isn't a reason to continue the discussion.

You can certainly try to defend the comment, but to argue that she isn't trying to be inflammatory, and that it isn't divisive, is ridiculous to the extreme.

She's a divisive figure; that's pure, 100% fact.
Click to expand...

Ayers made and blew up bombs in public venues. How is calling that type of activity "extreme partisan"?

Again, name one thing that Palin's said to justify your position, calling her "divisive".
 
Onceler said:
Are you chiming in w/ a "they do it too!" about Obama?

Man, is that a shocker...
Click to expand...

i'm just asking a question and trying to understand what kind of mentality you're saying palin has. is it just an us vs. them or is it more like an us. vs. our enemies mentality?

simple question really. and it would help clarify things for me as you are critical of palin for that mentality.

look forward to you answering the question.
 
Damn Yankee said:
Ayers made and blew up bombs in public venues. How is calling that type of activity "extreme partisan"?

Again, name one thing that Palin's said to justify your position, calling her "divisive".
Click to expand...

I did; no rational person would say that her comment wasn't divisive.
 
Yurt said:
i'm just asking a question and trying to understand what kind of mentality you're saying palin has. is it just an us vs. them or is it more like an us. vs. our enemies mentality?

simple question really. and it would help clarify things for me as you are critical of palin for that mentality.

look forward to you answering the question.
Click to expand...

It is what I said it is; when I hear Palin speak, it's us vs. them. Not necessarily "enemies," but more creating sides. She looks to appeal to that sense in people that are listening to her - whether it's their frustration with the media, or Washington, or particular individuals. She taps into that frustration not by trying to build bridges, but by creating confrontation with the object of frustration.

She's certainly not the only politician who does that. I'm just amazed that DY doesn't see her as divisive.
 
Onceler said:
It is what I said it is; when I hear Palin speak, it's us vs. them. Not necessarily "enemies," but more creating sides. She looks to appeal to that sense in people that are listening to her - whether it's their frustration with the media, or Washington, or particular individuals. She taps into that frustration not by trying to build bridges, but by creating confrontation with the object of frustration.

She's certainly not the only politician who does that. I'm just amazed that DY doesn't see her as divisive.
Click to expand...

I'm asking you for specific examples, not your "feelings" or what you choose to hear.
 
Onceler said:
It is what I said it is; when I hear Palin speak, it's us vs. them. Not necessarily "enemies," but more creating sides. She looks to appeal to that sense in people that are listening to her - whether it's their frustration with the media, or Washington, or particular individuals. She taps into that frustration not by trying to build bridges, but by creating confrontation with the object of frustration.

She's certainly not the only politician who does that. I'm just amazed that DY doesn't see her as divisive.
Click to expand...

so the us vs. them is a divisive tactic...? seems many politicians do this and some even take it to a higher level than palin, such as obama making not just them, but our enemies. many people did this during the bush years and i didn't approve of it then....we are all americans and we can have a difference of opinion without being "enemies"
 
Damn Yankee said:
I'm asking you for specific examples, not your "feelings" or what you choose to hear.
Click to expand...

I gave you a specific example; kind of reluctantly, I might add, since your response was pretty predictable.

It's a divisive comment; there isn't really any arguing that. You're an intense partisan, and one of the few on the board who actually things Palin should be Prez, so it really wasn't surprising that you tried to spin it.
 
Yurt said:
so the us vs. them is a divisive tactic...? seems many politicians do this and some even take it to a higher level than palin, such as obama making not just them, but our enemies. many people did this during the bush years and i didn't approve of it then....we are all americans and we can have a difference of opinion without being "enemies"
Click to expand...

Did you see where I said that she isn't the only politician to do this?

And yes - most do.
 
Liberals are the enemies of the Constitution though Yurt. You have to be honest with yourself if you are going to defeat them.
 
Onceler said:
I gave you a specific example; kind of reluctantly, I might add, since your response was pretty predictable.

It's a divisive comment; there isn't really any arguing that. You're an intense partisan, and one of the few on the board who actually things Palin should be Prez, so it really wasn't surprising that you tried to spin it.
Click to expand...

Again, telling the truth is divisive. Is that your position? A simple yes or no will suffice.
 
Damn Yankee said:
Again, telling the truth is divisive. Is that your position? A simple yes or no will suffice.
Click to expand...

If you want to argue the comment, I don't think it conveyed a truthful sentiment, and I don't think it was intended to. "Palling around with terrorists" certainly creates a different image in the head of the average listener than, say, "was acquainted with an individual who used to commit terrorist acts."

The first implies that he's hanging around with active terrorists, and not just one, but a group; it's meant to convey that he's really one of them.

I'm not going to get into a big back & forth with you on this. The idea that she's incredibly divisive isn't some fringe libbie belief.
 
Onceler said:
If you want to argue the comment, I don't think it conveyed a truthful sentiment, and I don't think it was intended to. "Palling around with terrorists" certainly creates a different image in the head of the average listener than, say, "was acquainted with an individual who used to commit terrorist acts."

The first implies that he's hanging around with active terrorists, and not just one, but a group; it's meant to convey that he's really one of them.

I'm not going to get into a big back & forth with you on this. The idea that she's incredibly divisive isn't some fringe libbie belief.
Click to expand...

No its far from fringe since a lot of folks got sucked in with the tactic. I'm simply insisting that you justify your position with logic and reason instead of giving me the excuse that you're just a sheep and following the herd.

The fact is that Ayers committed terrorist acts and has never made amends or even apologized for doing so. The other fact is that The Obama introduced his political career in Ayer's living room, and did so after the bombings. So saying that The Obama "pals around with terrorists" is entirely truthful and if telling the truth is divisive then I'm all for it.
 
Damn Yankee said:
No its far from fringe since a lot of folks got sucked in with the tactic. I'm simply insisting that you justify your position with logic and reason instead of giving me the excuse that you're just a sheep and following the herd.

The fact is that Ayers committed terrorist acts and has never made amends or even apologized for doing so. The other fact is that The Obama introduced his political career in Ayer's living room, and did so after the bombings. So saying that The Obama "pals around with terrorists" is entirely truthful and if telling the truth is divisive then I'm all for it.
Click to expand...

It's not entirely truthful; that's the point. It's a divisive comment, meant to appeal to people's emotion, and not their sense of reason. Your apologism for it is, as I said, predictable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top