• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Hillary sparks a furor

ludahai said:
it isn't poor wording... she is going out of her way to attempt to make a point...
Click to expand...

You don't have any way of knowing that (neither do I obviously). My point is that people attacking her are just as guilty for politicizing multiple murders (making it about political correctness in this case).
 
Sean_H said:
You don't have any way of knowing that (neither do I obviously). My point is that people attacking her are just as guilty for politicizing multiple murders (making it about political correctness in this case).
Click to expand...

Except that she is a political official of the United States of America who is politicizing this even outside the United States... pretty pathetic if you ask me... (and even if you DON'T ask me.. )
 
ludahai said:
Except that she is a political official of the United States of America who is politicizing this even outside the United States... pretty pathetic if you ask me... (and even if you DON'T ask me.. )
Click to expand...

Then you need the context of what she's saying, it definately doesn't have anything at all to do with the tea party.
 
Many of this guys ideas are more extreme than your average American. I think the umpire can call safe on that. But instead of ramping up against extreme people and censoring jerks we should be putting the most of our effort into good creation. Have you not heard the wise words of the young victims father?

I could not listen without tears: Father of slain 9 year-old Christina Green sets the standard for*Americans - Home - The Daily Bail

If he can show such absolute solidarity to humanity right after such a tradegy then what excuse do some hate spewers have with no immediate relations? We do not need to be throwing this crap around on TV scaring everyone into accepting freedoms skirted on the losers or loners of society. But, if someone wants to its up to you to argue, not stop them.

Ms. Clinton's speech seems like her attack on alternative views.

To Rev:

Well he thinks someone is reseting history by bumping B.C. up.
He thinks every American can make new legal scrip as currency. (To anyone who would accept it at least)
Burns flags (I think that was him in the video at least)
And thinks that shooting non-violent people is a cure.
At least slighty extreme when compared to your normal person.
 
Last edited:
ReverendHellh0und said:
So let me see if I understand this thinking here....


ft. hood shooter, not an extremist
dc snipers, not extremist...


schizophrenic nut bag? Extremist...



Can someone explain this logic to me here? :lamo
Click to expand...

An extremist and a crazy person are the same thing; both are incapable of putting the lives and free will of others ahead of their own vision of right and wrong. Pick out all the political extremists of history and you'll discover they all say crazy things.

Even if you don't agree they are concretely the same thing, the resemblance is strong enough that it isn't much of a leap.
 
Last edited:
Red Crow said:
I wish I'd be able to explain the logic to you Reverend, but I can't because I am not a Democrat. Sorry. :wink:
Click to expand...

Since your average every day Democrat wouldn't see the logic in this, either, your OWN logic just failed.
 
One, I'd say people are reading too much into poor wording on Hillary's part.
Two, yes, people on every side of this are making it into a political thing.
Click to expand...

One, I’d say that Hillary’s job is all about “wording”. She has had her whole life practicing for this moments and she said exactly what she meant. Two, people on the left are the only ones making this about the shooters politics and what they are saying is false. The shooter is insane, not an extremist. Hillary knows that and used the killing of six people to make progressive points.

those people were extremists but that wasn't known right away.
Click to expand...

Now I’m suspecting extreme trolling. The tea party people are extreme???

My point is that people attacking her are just as guilty for politicizing multiple murders
Click to expand...

Why do so many of the liberal horde on this board hide their “Lean”? Is because they are so far left that they are prone and pointing west? This statement is just about as far left as a statement can get. To object to Hillary making political points on the day of the nine year old’s funeral is sick and to ask me to just bit my tongue and shake my head is a little insane.

We do not need to be throwing this crap around on TV scaring everyone into accepting freedoms skirted on the losers or loners of society. But, if someone wants to its up to you to argue, not stop them.
Click to expand...

Can you remember what you posted about the people who made the movie about killing President Bush? “Great Movie”?

At least slighty extreme when compared to your normal person.
Click to expand...

Eating goats eyes is a little extreme in this country but Hillary was talking about political extremism. Not the shooter’s insane rantings.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Since your average every day Democrat wouldn't see the logic in this, either, your OWN logic just failed.
Click to expand...



I agree.... stupid is stupid.... hillary was pretty stupid on this one......


I think I heard palin do some stupid today as well.... Let me try to find that one....
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
really, so your biggest issue with this, is the thread title? :roll:
Click to expand...

It does remind me a bit of a thing Jon Stewart did on the daily show. People come up with these silly misleading titles to put on stories or video clips that are detached from reality. He criticized Rachael Maddow or someone and then on the HuffPo they put up "Jon Stewart eviscerates Maddow!" and he did a long speil on stuff like that and I think he had a good point, but who can blame a website for trying to attract readers...

I think the title is stretching it but the comparison she made didn't make any sense regardless. Nothing that I would get worked up over though.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
really, so your biggest issue with this, is the thread title? :roll:
Click to expand...

Yes. It's over the top. Reading it alone, you'd think think that Hillary said something outrageous like she was glad Giffords was shot. Then, when reading the story, one can't help but feel it's not a big deal. The Huffington Post is king at doing this, BTW.

Funny how Sarah seems to get much less scorn from her faux-pas from you. Why is that?
 
Last edited:
All I can say is that we can always try moving to some hellhole of a place where mass murder ISN'T considered all that extreme.
 
Gardener said:
All I can say is that we can always try moving to some hellhole of a place where mass murder ISN'T considered all that extreme.
Click to expand...



one is action

One is ideology


ms. clinton was infering that this extreme action of a nutbag had to do with his extreme religious/political views, or ideology....


two different things.
 
Middleground said:
I don't think so. I love how you start off:

She is right, absolutely on the money but with her criticism but a "blood libel"?

Pleeeeeease.

I have little doubt that if Hillary said the same thing, you wouldn't have been so kind.
Click to expand...



oh lets make it about the Good Reverend again.... don't you have any other tactics other than your partisan hackery?


I actually agree with you that "furor" was silly and over the top, but your too busy giving me **** to have an intelligent conversation with me. I mean really, what have you said about hillary trying to link idealogical and action "extremism" with islamic extremism....

NOTHING...


Again, please stop failing.




btw.... feel free to go into that thread and state where other than palin being an idiot with the rhetoric, her commenarty is factually wrong, like hillary;s is here.....
 
Last edited:
Middleground said:
I don't think so. I love how you start off:

She is right, absolutely on the money but with her criticism but a "blood libel"?

Pleeeeeease.

I have little doubt that if Hillary said the same thing, you wouldn't have been so kind.
Click to expand...

Just a recommendation. Complaining about someone not attacking someone on their side of the aisle quite as hard as they attacked someone on the other side is pretty pointless. Most times people are unwilling to even admit someone they agree with did anything wrong at all. It's kind of like punishing your dog for laying down when you told it to sit. Just be happy the dog ain't humping your leg.
 
roughdraft274 said:
Just a recommendation. Complaining about someone not attacking someone on their side of the aisle quite as hard as they attacked someone on the other side is pretty pointless. Most times people are unwilling to even admit someone they agree with did anything wrong at all. It's kind of like punishing your dog for laying down when you told it to sit. Just be happy the dog ain't humping your leg.
Click to expand...



Especially when you (MG) never critisize your own side.... I said of her long ago, if a car went off the road, her helping the crash victims would depend on whether or not there was a bush sticker on the back...... I still think that's the case.


I've critisized palin plenty, heck anyone who calls me a palin fan would be a moron. She is not "my side". I get no credit from her because I am not a left winger. period.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
So let me see if I understand this thinking here....


ft. hood shooter, not an extremist
dc snipers, not extremist...


schizophrenic nut bag? Extremist...



Can someone explain this logic to me here? :lamo
Click to expand...

Did she really say that the Ft. Hood shooter and DC snipers weren't extremists? :shock:
 
Tucker Case said:
Did she really say that the Ft. Hood shooter and DC snipers weren't extremists? :shock:
Click to expand...



I don't think she said anything about them actually.... Point being, real examples existed. we get told "not to jump to conclusions" etc. and on and on, and here she is, being an opportunist for her ideology and agenda.


there was more from here that the az shooter was a right wing extremist as far as my research has gone, than that these two, were extremists.... That's sad.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
I don't think she said anything about them actually.... Point being, real examples existed. we get told "not to jump to conclusions" etc. and on and on, and here she is, being an opportunist for her ideology and agenda.


there was more from here that the az shooter was a right wing extremist as far as my research has gone, than that these two, were extremists.... That's sad.
Click to expand...

I firmly believe that this whole ****storm regarding blame falls squarely on the shoulders of that incompetent, unproffesional sheriff. The main difference between Ft Hood and this situation is that when Ft Hood happened, we had Generals and army officials who we would consider to be "in the know" regarding the circumstances and possible motivations urging caution.

With this example, we have this asshole sheriff, whom one would consider to be "in the know" regarding the circumstances and possible motivations talking about how the rhetoric is to blame for the situation. It is not unreasonable to take his statements as being somewhat authoritative and actually based on what was learned from the shooter who was in custody. Then he admits that he just made it all up because he's a ****ing douchebag. At that point, people who jumped on it should admit their error in believing this douche and stop pushing the agenda crap.

Now, If Barney Fife had come out urging caution instead of jumping to conclusions and making it seem as though he had learned this based on the investigation, I don't think this would have spiraled out of control as it has.

Now, I do believe that there should be a discussion about the type of rhetoric being employed by both sides, and that toning it down would be benficial to the nation as a whole, but as this has progressed, I do see that this is not the correct time or climate for such a discussion because it's ending up way to one-sided with the liberals pretending to be above the fray (as though the **** said about Bush wasn't absurdly out of line).
 
Last edited:
Tucker Case said:
I firmly believe that this whole ****storm regarding blame falls squarely on the shoulders of that incompetent, unproffesional sheriff. The main difference between Ft Hood and this situation is that when Ft Hood happened, we had Generals and army officials who we would consider to be "in the know" regarding the circumstances and possible motivations urging caution.

With this example, we have this asshole sheriff, whom one would consider to be "in the know" regarding the circumstances and possible motivations talking about how the rhetoric is to blame for the situation. It is not unreasonable to take his statements as being somewhat authoritative and actually based on what was learned from the shooter who was in custody. Then he admits that he just made it all up because he's a ****ing douchebag. At that point, people who jumped on it should admit their error in believing this douche and stop pushing the agenda crap.

Now, If Barney Fife had come out urging caution instead of jumping to conclusions and making it seem as though he had learned this based on the investigation, I don't think this would have spiraled out of control as it has.

Now, I do believe that there should be a discussion about the type of rhetoric being employed by both sides, and that toning it down would be benficial to the nation as a whole, but as this has progressed, I do see that this is not the correct time or climate for such a discussion because it's ending up way to one-sided with the liberals pretending to be above the fray (as though the **** said about Bush wasn't absurdly out of line).
Click to expand...




I think krugman of the NY times was first though. 2 hrs after I believe.


oh and certain media outlets, giving the asshole sherrif an unabated platform didn't help either.
 
Last edited:
ReverendHellh0und said:
I think krugman of the NY times was first though. 2 hrs after I believe.
Click to expand...

Then he's another asshole who needs to tone down his hateful rhetoric.


oh and certain media outlets, giving the asshole sherrif an unabated platform didn't help either.
Click to expand...

I can't really blame the media for doing it's job, in this case. People wanted to hear form him under the assumption he was giving an authoritative opinion. They should have challenged him on whether or not his statemtns were a comment on the results of the pending investigation or just his own agenda-driven nonses, though. I'll criticize them for not pushing that clarification.
 
Tucker Case said:
Then he's another asshole who needs to tone down his hateful rhetoric.




I can't really blame the media for doing it's job, in this case. People wanted to hear form him under the assumption he was giving an authoritative opinion. They should have challenged him on whether or not his statemtns were a comment on the results of the pending investigation or just his own agenda-driven nonses, though. I'll criticize them for not pushing that clarification.
Click to expand...


katie curic gave the sherrif an open mike on the nightly news.

It's one thing to report what the dooshbag says its another to give him an open forum....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom