Who is to blame for the ballfield shooting?

[Whythink]

Failure, or perhaps unwillingness, to acknowledge the genesis of our current state of affairs, leaves your effort to excuse rather short of the mark.

Political mudslinging probably occurred when man first gathered into villages.

What we have today is not some fringe group making noise from the sidelines. We have a MSM type beheading an effigy of the President, completely clueless to how it would be reacted to.

We have the losing candidate in the last Presidential Election calling anyone who doesn't support them irredeemably deplorable.

We have supporters of a political ideology who have embarked on campaigns to personally destroy anyone who doesn't subscribe to their rules.

If you are blind to that tone, where it began, and the continued effort, then you remain part of the problem, rather than open to solution.

If you are blind to the fact that this tone is a two way street, that is a huge part of the problem.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[ocean515]

You need to take your own advice, here.



I can agree with that.



All of this, with the exception of Hillary's comment and Kathy Griffin's stupid act, applies to your side for the past 8 years. If you are blind to that, where it began, and it's continued effort, then YOU remain part of the problem rather than being open to the solution.

You should consider a concept called equivalence. There is a difference between disagreement over policy, and attacking.

Any disagreement over EX President Obama's policies was met with all sorts of accusations, including racism, bigotry, and xenophobia.

That is not debate, that is character assassination. The left engaged in it from day one.

It's ramped up today by multiples of 10. If you refuse to accept that fact, then your opinion is of little consequence.

 

[ocean515]

If you are blind to the fact that this tone is a two way street, that is a huge part of the problem.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

I have not argued it's not a two way street.

I reject the notion the "right" needs to accept equal ownership to the acidic level of discord that permeates the population.

This call to accept equal blame is like telling the person who got attacked they should apologize for fighting back.

That ignores who started the problem in the first place, and who is doubling down on the activity today.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

You should consider a concept called equivalence. There is a difference between disagreement over policy, and attacking.

Any disagreement over EX President Obama's policies was met with all sorts of accusations, including racism, bigotry, and xenophobia.

That is not debate, that is character assassination. The left engaged in it from day one.

It's ramped up today by multiples of 10. If you refuse to accept that fact, then your opinion is of little consequence.

Perhaps you should take your own advice. Most of the disagreements towards Trump are in regards to policy... healthcare, taxes, immigration. The "attacks" that you bring up, come from the fringe... as opposed to the right's attacks on Obama which weren't from the fringe at all. During the 8 years of Obama's Presidency, we saw constant attacks on Obama and his family. Disrespected in Congress, attacked and insulted by every right wing pundit in the worst possible way. That's not debate. That's character assassination and the right engaged in it from day one. If you can't see it and refuse to admit it, then what you say is completely worthless.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

I have not argued it's not a two way street.

I reject the notion the "right" needs to accept equal ownership to the acidic level of discord that permeates the population.

This call to accept equal blame is like telling the person who got attacked they should apologize for fighting back.

That ignores who started the problem in the first place, and who is doubling down on the activity today.

Your "rejection" that the right deserves equal ownership in the discord in the US is nothing but blind partisanship. Doing so ignores the attacks and insults from your side. It's like saying, "well, YOU guys are doing it now, so what happened in the last 8 years is meaningless".

 

[Quag]

I have not argued it's not a two way street.

I reject the notion the "right" needs to accept equal ownership to the acidic level of discord that permeates the population.

This call to accept equal blame is like telling the person who got attacked they should apologize for fighting back.

That ignores who started the problem in the first place, and who is doubling down on the activity today.

Stolen from the political cartoon thread.

 

[ocean515]

Perhaps you should take your own advice. Most of the disagreements towards Trump are in regards to policy... healthcare, taxes, immigration. The "attacks" that you bring up, come from the fringe... as opposed to the right's attacks on Obama which weren't from the fringe at all. During the 8 years of Obama's Presidency, we saw constant attacks on Obama and his family. Disrespected in Congress, attacked and insulted by every right wing pundit in the worst possible way. That's not debate. That's character assassination and the right engaged in it from day one. If you can't see it and refuse to admit it, then what you say is completely worthless.

I've already determined your words on this topic are worthless, so I guess we've reached a consensus and can move on.

eace

 

[ocean515]

Your "rejection" that the right deserves equal ownership in the discord in the US is nothing but blind partisanship. Doing so ignores the attacks and insults from your side. It's like saying, "well, YOU guys are doing it now, so what happened in the last 8 years is meaningless".

Your challenge is trying to figure out how deeply your own partisanship is distorting history, and what you should do about it.

Did the losing candidate in 2008 start a dark money PAC to attack the President with? Did they call for the Nation to join a Resist movement? Did the President of the previous administration go on the attack against the person voters elected to follow him in office?

Did main stream talking heads, and celebrities go on record calling for Obama's impeachment?

You're extreme partisanship has destroyed your credibility on this issue. As I wrote in a separate response, I view your words as pointless and worthless.

Since you view mine in the same manner, we've nothing more to accomplish.

eace

 

[ocean515]

Stolen from the political cartoon thread.
View attachment 67219096

Political cartoons for the simple minded are rarely sufficient replacements for facts.

 

[bubbabgone]

Perhaps you should take your own advice. Most of the disagreements towards Trump are in regards to policy... healthcare, taxes, immigration. The "attacks" that you bring up, come from the fringe... as opposed to the right's attacks on Obama which weren't from the fringe at all. During the 8 years of Obama's Presidency, we saw constant attacks on Obama and his family. Disrespected in Congress, attacked and insulted by every right wing pundit in the worst possible way. That's not debate. That's character assassination and the right engaged in it from day one. If you can't see it and refuse to admit it, then what you say is completely worthless.

If I read you right, your distinction between approaches by critics of Obama and of Trump (and Republicans) is that one was personal and the other is about policy.
I'm not sure that examples of each would be conclusive.

But let's say that attacks on Obama were predominantly of a personal nature, like his past associations were/are far Left.
While attacks on Trump and Republicans are predominantly about policy, like Obamacare replacement.

Is that pretty much what you're suggesting?

 

[Quag]

Political cartoons for the simple minded are rarely sufficient replacements for facts.

So you deny that Trump questioned Obamas nation of Birth, called for the imprisonment of Clinton or claimed there is a witch hunt against him?

 

[ocean515]

So you deny that Trump questioned Obamas nation of Birth, called for the imprisonment of Clinton or claimed there is a witch hunt against him?

No I don't deny that. Obama's actions opened the door to all sorts of conspiracy theories. He could have cleared that up rather quickly. It's the same thing as the Presidents tax returns. Can't have it both ways.

If Hillary weren't, well Hillary, she would likely be facing jail time for her actions, so I don't see the President's statement of fact to be a problem.

As to Witch Hunt, given Comey's revelations about the media, it's use of "sources" and the left's obsession with impeachment, the word fits.

Next?

 

[Quag]

No I don't deny that. Obama's actions opened the door to all sorts of conspiracy theories. He could have cleared that up rather quickly. It's the same thing as the Presidents tax returns. Can't have it both ways.

If Hillary weren't, well Hillary, she would likely be facing jail time for her actions, so I don't see the President's statement of fact to be a problem.

As to Witch Hunt, given Comey's revelations about the media, it's use of "sources" and the left's obsession with impeachment, the word fits.

Next?

Exactly you cant have it both ways.
When Republicans are in the white house Democrats throw mud, when Democrats are in the white house Republicans throw mud.
You wrote

I reject the notion the "right" needs to accept equal ownership to the acidic level of discord that permeates the population.

This call to accept equal blame is like telling the person who got attacked they should apologize for fighting back.

As if this id some schoolyard and your defence of Republican mudslinging is they threw mud first.
Thats pure BS both sides are to blame.

 

[ocean515]

Exactly you cant have it both ways.
When Republicans are in the white house Democrats throw mud, when Democrats are in the white house Republicans throw mud.
You wrote

As if this id some schoolyard and your defence of Republican mudslinging is they threw mud first.
Thats pure BS both sides are to blame.

I have not denied both sides are throwing mud. I have rejected the effort by the bully's on the left to lower the responsibility for their behavior.

Did Republicans riot after the election of Obama?

Did Republicans attack and violate the constitutional rights of Democrats after Obama was elected?

Did Republicans seek to destroy liberals livelihoods because they didn't share the same views?

I'm aware the level of discord has reached incredible levels, and I'm aware the language and tactics being used by both sides now follows the same pattern.

However, as I've written, the effort to assign identical blame is ridiculous.

The left, and their leadership, both inside the beltway, and by those pulling the strings outside the beltway, need to accept responsibility for their tactics and the fall out.

Reacting in kind does not equate to equal guilt.

When I'm told, effectively to my face, that I'm irredeemably deplorable, people shouldn't question how I choose to respond to that astonishing insult.

 

[Quag]

I have not denied both sides are throwing mud. I have rejected the effort by the bully's on the left to lower the responsibility for their behavior.

Did Republicans riot after the election of Obama?

Did Republicans attack and violate the constitutional rights of Democrats after Obama was elected?

Did Republicans seek to destroy liberals livelihoods because they didn't share the same views?

I'm aware the level of discord has reached incredible levels, and I'm aware the language and tactics being used by both sides now follows the same pattern.

However, as I've written, the effort to assign identical blame is ridiculous.

The left, and their leadership, both inside the beltway, and by those pulling the strings outside the beltway, need to accept responsibility for their tactics and the fall out.

Reacting in kind does not equate to equal guilt.

When I'm told, effectively to my face, that I'm irredeemably deplorable, people shouldn't question how I choose to respond to that astonishing insult.

Sorry but Republicans were throwing mud long beofre Clinton made her stupid remarks

 

[ocean515]

Sorry but Republicans were throwing mud long beofre Clinton made her stupid remarks

:roll:

Can't blame someone for throwing back the mud that piled up at their feet.




And how did the EX President's administration treat these people he insulted on the campaign trail?

 

[Quag]

:roll:

Can't blame someone for throwing back the mud that piled up at their feet.




And how did the EX President's administration treat these people he insulted on the campaign trail?

So then you cant blame Democrats for thowing mud at Republicans.

 

[ocean515]

So then you cant blame Democrats for thowing mud at Republicans.

:shock:

Umm. I have been arguing I can, including providing evidence of where the mud first came from.

 

[Quag]

:shock:

Umm. I have been arguing I can, including providing evidence of where the mud first came from.

By ignoring everything that came before.
I can arbitrarily pick a starting point that showns it all to be Republican fault

For example, the Coffin Handbills by the John Adams administration attacked Andrew Jackson of marrying an adulterous woman and having a prostitute for a mother. Or the “Harry and Louise” which is a $20 million campaign that targeted President’s Bill Clinton’s healthcare plan in 1993.

Presidential mudslinging in the past – The Michigan Journal

 

[ocean515]

By ignoring everything that came before.
I can arbitrarily pick a starting point that showns it all to be Republican fault

Presidential mudslinging in the past – The Michigan Journal

Really?

I already acknowledged that political mudslinging is as old as mankind.

How about you quit dodging the facts and focus on the present?

 

[Quag]

Really?

I already acknowledged that political mudslinging is as old as mankind.

How about you quit dodging the facts and focus on the present?

You cannot have your cake and eat it too.

Umm. I have been arguing I can, including providing evidence of where the mud first came from.

 

[ocean515]

You cannot have your cake and eat it too.

So you attack Republican's because of what happened between Jackson and Adams?

Spare me.

 

[Quag]

So you attack Republican's because of what happened between Jackson and Adams?

Spare me.

So you dont think all things are connected?
Dems atttack Trump because Republicans attacked Obama Because Dems attacked Bush because Reps attacked Clinton because Dems attacked Bush and Reagan because Reps attacked Carter etc etc....
Its doenst end and YOU arbitrarily picking a random piece of mud coming from Dems as the start of it all and as an excuse for Republican mudlsinging is absured
Spare me your hyperpartisan BS

 

[ocean515]

So you dont think all things are connected?
Dems atttack Trump because Republicans attacked Obama Because Dems attacked Bush because Reps attacked Clinton because Dems attacked Bush and Reagan because Reps attacked Carter etc etc....
Its doenst end and YOU arbitrarily picking a random piece of mud coming from Dems as the start of it all and as an excuse for Republican mudlsinging is absured
Spare me your hyperpartisan BS

I have already stated that mudslinging is as old as rain.

I'm referring to the present. I'm referring to the volume which has been turned on high by the left.

Did Bush start a dark money organization and go public with attacks after Obama took office? Did McCain?

This is getting pointless.

I'm done.

eace

 

[Quag]

I have already stated that mudslinging is as old as rain.

I'm referring to the present. I'm referring to the volume which has been turned on high by the left.

Did Bush start a dark money organization and go public with attacks after Obama took office? Did McCain?

This is getting pointless.

I'm done.

eace

The present is conmencted to the past, clearly you do not want to understand that
You can take your hyperpartisan BS elsewhere