• 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!

Finally a Crack in the GOP Partisan Armor

THEN:
" Bush Lied about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq"
" Ummm the CIA said Iraq had weapons ofmass destruction"
" Cant trust the CIA!!! ...cherry picking!!! .. Politicized!!!"

NOW:
" The CIA said Russia hacked the elcetion"

" show me"
" Unpatriotic!!! Must trust CIA!!!"
 
Ikari said:
Enough with the "Hillary Did It!" excuse, damn the Republocrats are so annoyingly hypocritical. Hillary isn't President and just because she did bad things doesn't mean that bad things are now excused for everyone else. This is the problem, really. The Republicans or the Democrats do something wrong or unethical, the first response isn't to own up to it and attempt to change the behavior. Your first response is to point your finger at the other side and say "Well they did it too!". It's pathetic partisanship and one of the main reasons the Republic has fallen apart to the point where we stand.
Click to expand...

Hillary is now a footnote. I didn't offer an excuse. I offered a glaring example of selective outrage for partisan purposes. Hacking is a problem, but not a new one. It's telling that it's only now, when their candidate of choice and their party suffers that they choose to raise the issue and sound the alarms. I suppose it's vaguely satisfying to claim that both sides are dastardly, which naturally allows you to point to all others as the cause for dissolution. That very conveniently allows you to portray yourself as among the few rational in a sea of partisan nuts. I'm not buying it.
 
humbolt said:
Hillary is now a footnote. I didn't offer an excuse. I offered a glaring example of selective outrage for partisan purposes. Hacking is a problem, but not a new one. It's telling that it's only now, when their candidate of choice and their party suffers that they choose to raise the issue and sound the alarms. I suppose it's vaguely satisfying to claim that both sides are dastardly, which naturally allows you to point to all others as the cause for dissolution. That very conveniently allows you to portray yourself as among the few rational in a sea of partisan nuts. I'm not buying it.
Click to expand...

I'm not asking you to buy it, partisans won't buy it because they see their side as the right side and can only point to the other side and say "They did it too!" much like you just previously. We've been talking about this for some time, and if this were reversed, if this were Hillary under the accusation, not Trump, the D instead of the R, all the arguments would reverse. That's how I know the standard Republocrat mantra is full of ****. It's just pretend. None of you care about actually policing the system, you'll just point at the other side and cry about how they're doing it too. But Hillary...but Hillary....but Hillary. We get it. Hillary sucked. Doesn't mean that we overlook everyone else who sucks. We cannot allow this sort of ignorant, blind partisanship further erode the Republic.

So sit there and don't buy it, but your arguments prove my point.
 
Ikari said:
I'm not asking you to buy it, partisans won't buy it because they see their side as the right side and can only point to the other side and say "They did it too!" much like you just previously. We've been talking about this for some time, and if this were reversed, if this were Hillary under the accusation, not Trump, the D instead of the R, all the arguments would reverse. That's how I know the standard Republocrat mantra is full of ****. It's just pretend. None of you care about actually policing the system, you'll just point at the other side and cry about how they're doing it too. But Hillary...but Hillary....but Hillary. We get it. Hillary sucked. Doesn't mean that we overlook everyone else who sucks. We cannot allow this sort of ignorant, blind partisanship further erode the Republic.

So sit there and don't buy it, but your arguments prove my point.
Click to expand...

My point, since you obviously either missed it or choose to ignore it, is that the hacking was well known long before the election and the democrats were the target. We have gone from Obama announcing it wasn't an issue to it now dominating the narrative. The Clinton campaign has gone from accusing Comey for their loss to accusing unknown Russians. Maybe Comey and the Russians conspired with Assange. Who knows what they'll come up with next. I can't say whether or not the claims would be the same if the shoe was on the other foot, but I don't doubt it. Hacking is a serious problem, but it's simply not credible to raise the issue now, after the election, when it's been a problem for years and years, whether government sponsored or independent. When the Chinese produce a stealth fighter aircraft that has an uncanny resemblance to our state of the art equipment, one would've thought we'd have taken it more seriously - because if they can penetrate that level of security, they can penetrate the DNC, the RNC and everything else of significance. So if I mention Hillary, you react as if it's purely partisan. It's your schtick. Sorry, but that happens to be the current example, and the changing narrative I mentioned above is a prime example and is indicative of purely partisan manipulation at the expense of the public, and not a partisan driven effort on my part. I'm simply offering a rational point.
 
humbolt said:
My point, since you obviously either missed it or choose to ignore it, is that the hacking was well known long before the election and the democrats were the target. We have gone from Obama announcing it wasn't an issue to it now dominating the narrative. The Clinton campaign has gone from accusing Comey for their loss to accusing unknown Russians. Maybe Comey and the Russians conspired with Assange. Who knows what they'll come up with next. I can't say whether or not the claims would be the same if the shoe was on the other foot, but I don't doubt it. Hacking is a serious problem, but it's simply not credible to raise the issue now, after the election, when it's been a problem for years and years, whether government sponsored or independent. When the Chinese produce a stealth fighter aircraft that has an uncanny resemblance to our state of the art equipment, one would've thought we'd have taken it more seriously - because if they can penetrate that level of security, they can penetrate the DNC, the RNC and everything else of significance. So if I mention Hillary, you react as if it's purely partisan. It's your schtick. Sorry, but that happens to be the current example, and the changing narrative I mentioned above is a prime example and is indicative of purely partisan manipulation at the expense of the public, and not a partisan driven effort on my part. I'm simply offering a rational point.
Click to expand...

Oh no, someone made a political hack issue out of something serious? Say it's not so!

You were not offering a "rational point", not buying it. You were just saying "But...but....but....Hillary!!!!"

I know both sides are political hacks, only willing to push something should it happen to benefit their Party Power, and the rest of the time deflect along partisan lines. It's been going on for quite some time. However, there seems that in this case there is legitimate concern for a proper investigation, I said the same thing about Hillary's e-mails. In order to control the government we must watch and investigate legitimate concerns.

Russia's hacks into our political systems is a legitimate concern. Perhaps it wasn't enough to sway an election, perhaps it was, regardless it needs to be investigated. Gaps in security must be plugged, and if anyone was complacent in the foreign hack, they need to be fired and/or punished as law allows. It was credible to raise the concern before, and it's credible now since the dynamic is still the same. It's just partisan BS to say it's not "credible now because the election over", it doesn't matter if the election is over or not. Sure, it should have been investigated seriously much earlier, but that doesn't mean that now it's over and we shouldn't look into it. We should, if it was a problem before and it hasn't been addressed, then it's still a problem and still needs to be investigate and if anything is discovered, that still needs to be fixed. Nothing has been addressed or fixed, so if there is a true problem it is still needed to be addressed.

You may not like the political timing of things, but it doesn't mean that somehow the problem magically resolved itself and we don't actually need to investigate. We do.
 
Ikari said:
Oh no, someone made a political hack issue out of something serious? Say it's not so!

You were not offering a "rational point", not buying it. You were just saying "But...but....but....Hillary!!!!"

I know both sides are political hacks, only willing to push something should it happen to benefit their Party Power, and the rest of the time deflect along partisan lines. It's been going on for quite some time. However, there seems that in this case there is legitimate concern for a proper investigation, I said the same thing about Hillary's e-mails. In order to control the government we must watch and investigate legitimate concerns.

Russia's hacks into our political systems is a legitimate concern. Perhaps it wasn't enough to sway an election, perhaps it was, regardless it needs to be investigated. Gaps in security must be plugged, and if anyone was complacent in the foreign hack, they need to be fired and/or punished as law allows. It was credible to raise the concern before, and it's credible now since the dynamic is still the same. It's just partisan BS to say it's not "credible now because the election over", it doesn't matter if the election is over or not. Sure, it should have been investigated seriously much earlier, but that doesn't mean that now it's over and we shouldn't look into it. We should, if it was a problem before and it hasn't been addressed, then it's still a problem and still needs to be investigate and if anything is discovered, that still needs to be fixed. Nothing has been addressed or fixed, so if there is a true problem it is still needed to be addressed.

You may not like the political timing of things, but it doesn't mean that somehow the problem magically resolved itself and we don't actually need to investigate. We do.
Click to expand...

Yeah, yeah, yeah. Everybody's a hack except libertarians. I do apologize for the "Schtick" comment. That was unfair and below the belt. I'll go stand in the corner in a minute. My point, again, was that Hillary's server was almost certainly hacked, and there wasn't any hue and cry about that. It was only after the election was lost that such concerns rose, but not over that particular event. Nope. As long as it didn't cost her the election, it was fine. If mentioning that fact is hackish in your mind, so be it. I've never claimed to be non-partisan. That's my story, and I'm sticking to it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom