Jim in Anchorage Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 Yeah, you're not the one defiling anything with comments like "Whens the keg party where you drink beer out of her nine year old skull, you !@#$ing cretins?" Don't blame me for your low class posts. You might as well join Fred Phelps, maybe help him and his group create some signs. I have been saying ALL ALONG that I think everyone needs to tone it back. If you can't read or understand that then you need to go back to school. Don't get me going with the left as a whole using this for political gain crap. The right has been using the deaths of THOUSANDS on 9/11 FOR YEARS!!!! Funny how your dumbass can't see or hear that. You are a !@#$ing hypocrite, low class, piece of garbage. Glad people can see you for what you truly are. On going national security threat= lone crazed gunman? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 On going national security threat= lone crazed gunman? Political gain based off of the death of the innocent is wrong no matter how you look at it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Caveman Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 I'm sick of the right-tards always crying foul except when they use a horrible event for political gain. To set the record straight, ANYONE using this for political gain is an a-hole. That being said, anyone on the left or right that says the rhetoric needs to be toned back is completely right. Maybe I wasn't clear. I'm sick of people using the terms left-tard, lib-tards, etc.... And right-tard isn't helping. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 Political gain based off of the death of the innocent is wrong no matter how you look at it. Maybe you are unclear about the meaning of the word "ongoing" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 Maybe I wasn't clear. I'm sick of people using the terms left-tard, lib-tards, etc.... And right-tard isn't helping. My apologies. Maybe you are unclear about the meaning of the word "ongoing" No. My stance is firm on this issue. One can discuss National Security without bringing up 9/11. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Miner Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 No. My stance is firm on this issue. One can discuss National Security without bringing up 9/11. You've missed it again Skippy. Linking national security to 9/11 isn't the issue. The issue would be politicizing 9/11 to make one political party look good or bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 You've missed it again Skippy. Linking national security to 9/11 isn't the issue. The issue would be politicizing 9/11 to make one political party look good or bad. uhhh actually I did not miss the point dude. A party constantly using 9/11 to make themselves look better for not only the National Security issue but others is a problem. Point is that no one needs to even mention 9/11 when discussing National Security. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Miner Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 uhhh actually I did not miss the point dude. A party constantly using 9/11 to make themselves look better for not only the National Security issue but others is a problem. Point is that no one needs to even mention 9/11 when discussing National Security. Does 9/11 have to be mentioned with national security? No Is it necessarily wrong or bad if it is? No But you're an idiot and can't draw a proper distinction on what the actual problems are. Using 9/11 for political gain - bad Using 9/11 to have a national security discussion not based on fear - not bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 Watch for people calling for people on message boards and chat rooms to turn in people posting crazy ****. If that were to happen in one week this would be the new PPP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ieatcrayonz Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 Watch for people calling for people on message boards and chat rooms to turn in people posting crazy ****. If that were to happen in one week this would be the new PPP It sounds like someone put a stethoscope up to Ricky Gervais' noggin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 It sounds like someone put a stethoscope up to Ricky Gervais' noggin. Now that would probably be funny if I had any idea who he was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 Does 9/11 have to be mentioned with national security? No Is it necessarily wrong or bad if it is? No But you're an idiot and can't draw a proper distinction on what the actual problems are. Using 9/11 for political gain - bad Using 9/11 to have a national security discussion not based on fear - not bad. So enlighten me on what the actual problems are? In regards to 9/11, it was used based on fear and for political gain - both bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 I totally disagree and your post is why we are going to hell in a handbasket. When is it time to call things as they are and put away the conciliatory BS the left engages in more than the right?... Let's call it as it should be. The left can't just always lay down like they did with the wars... Yet, the right would love nothing more than the usual conciliatory acts the left engages in... Business as usual! What is with the name-calling, things must be getting to you??? On the namecalling front: NEWSFLASH: Anti-gov't was the cornerstone of this guy's beliefs... Who is spreading that load of crap in our society? Let's call it what it is. Who did he attempt to kill? A Congresswoman... Or in your speak a CongressCRITTER. Why is it so hard for some to realize he went "critter hunting" and did collateral damage while not finishing off the "critter." Of course in your speak that is. NEWSFLASH 2: Dehumanizing anybody almost always has this effect somewhere down the line. Now of all people YOU want to humanize? Huh? This might be the dumbest post I've ever read, and that's a huge statement. The amount of thought you put into it is really astonishing. All I got out of this is you're a big lib who can't think outside of that prism, and in your little world, shrieking shrill left wing rhetoric is cool, but anything critical of the liberal ideology you blindly and faithfully follow is beyond the pale. Unlike Sunshine, I've been paying attention for more than 10 minutes so I can remember when this tone started, it was in 2000 and it was by the left wingers you idolize and defend. So can you please grow a set and stop whining like a kitty about the mean spirited nature of right wing radio. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 I'm not a fan of Sarah Palin, but I thought her response to the idiots on the left was pretty darn good. http://www.facebook....id=487510653434 America's Enduring Strength by Sarah Palin on Wednesday, January 12, 2011 at 3:52am Please click here to view the video of this statement. Like millions of Americans I learned of the tragic events in Arizona on Saturday, and my heart broke for the innocent victims. No words can fill the hole left by the death of an innocent, but we do mourn for the victims' families as we express our sympathy. I agree with the sentiments shared yesterday at the beautiful Catholic mass held in honor of the victims. The mass will hopefully help begin a healing process for the families touched by this tragedy and for our country. Our exceptional nation, so vibrant with ideas and the passionate exchange and debate of ideas, is a light to the rest of the world. Congresswoman Giffords and her constituents were exercising their right to exchange ideas that day, to celebrate our Republic's core values and peacefully assemble to petition our government. It's inexcusable and incomprehensible why a single evil man took the lives of peaceful citizens that day. There is a bittersweet irony that the strength of the American spirit shines brightest in times of tragedy. We saw that in Arizona. We saw the tenacity of those clinging to life, the compassion of those who kept the victims alive, and the heroism of those who overpowered a deranged gunman. Like many, I've spent the past few days reflecting on what happened and praying for guidance. After this shocking tragedy, I listened at first puzzled, then with concern, and now with sadness, to the irresponsible statements from people attempting to apportion blame for this terrible event. President Reagan said, "We must reject the idea that every time a law's broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions." Acts of monstrous criminality stand on their own. They begin and end with the criminals who commit them, not collectively with all the citizens of a state, not with those who listen to talk radio, not with maps of swing districts used by both sides of the aisle, not with law-abiding citizens who respectfully exercise their First Amendment rights at campaign rallies, not with those who proudly voted in the last election. The last election was all about taking responsibility for our country's future. President Obama and I may not agree on everything, but I know he would join me in affirming the health of our democratic process. Two years ago his party was victorious. Last November, the other party won. In both elections the will of the American people was heard, and the peaceful transition of power proved yet again the enduring strength of our Republic. Vigorous and spirited public debates during elections are among our most cherished traditions. And after the election, we shake hands and get back to work, and often both sides find common ground back in D.C. and elsewhere. If you don't like a person's vision for the country, you're free to debate that vision. If you don't like their ideas, you're free to propose better ideas. But, especially within hours of a tragedy unfolding, journalists and pundits should not manufacture a blood libel that serves only to incite the very hatred and violence they purport to condemn. That is reprehensible. There are those who claim political rhetoric is to blame for the despicable act of this deranged, apparently apolitical criminal. And they claim political debate has somehow gotten more heated just recently. But when was it less heated? Back in those "calm days" when political figures literally settled their differences with dueling pistols? In an ideal world all discourse would be civil and all disagreements cordial. But our Founding Fathers knew they weren't designing a system for perfect men and women. If men and women were angels, there would be no need for government. Our Founders' genius was to design a system that helped settle the inevitable conflicts caused by our imperfect passions in civil ways. So, we must condemn violence if our Republic is to endure. As I said while campaigning for others last March in Arizona during a very heated primary race, "We know violence isn't the answer. When we 'take up our arms', we're talking about our vote." Yes, our debates are full of passion, but we settle our political differences respectfully at the ballot box – as we did just two months ago, and as our Republic enables us to do again in the next election, and the next. That's who we are as Americans and how we were meant to be. Public discourse and debate isn't a sign of crisis, but of our enduring strength. It is part of why America is exceptional. No one should be deterred from speaking up and speaking out in peaceful dissent, and we certainly must not be deterred by those who embrace evil and call it good. And we will not be stopped from celebrating the greatness of our country and our foundational freedoms by those who mock its greatness by being intolerant of differing opinion and seeking to muzzle dissent with shrill cries of imagined insults. Just days before she was shot, Congresswoman Giffords read the First Amendment on the floor of the House. It was a beautiful moment and more than simply "symbolic," as some claim, to have the Constitution read by our Congress. I am confident she knew that reading our sacred charter of liberty was more than just "symbolic." But less than a week after Congresswoman Giffords reaffirmed our protected freedoms, another member of Congress announced that he would propose a law that would criminalize speech he found offensive. It is in the hour when our values are challenged that we must remain resolved to protect those values. Recall how the events of 9-11 challenged our values and we had to fight the tendency to trade our freedoms for perceived security. And so it is today. Let us honor those precious lives cut short in Tucson by praying for them and their families and by cherishing their memories. Let us pray for the full recovery of the wounded. And let us pray for our country. In times like this we need God's guidance and the peace He provides. We need strength to not let the random acts of a criminal turn us against ourselves, or weaken our solid foundation, or provide a pretext to stifle debate. America must be stronger than the evil we saw displayed last week. We are better than the mindless finger-pointing we endured in the wake of the tragedy. We will come out of this stronger and more united in our desire to peacefully engage in the great debates of our time, to respectfully embrace our differences in a positive manner, and to unite in the knowledge that, though our ideas may be different, we must all strive for a better future for our country. May God bless America. - Sarah Palin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RkFast Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 (edited) Political gain based off of the death of the innocent is wrong no matter how you look at it. What "political gain" has the right obtained by conjuring up 9/11? To be honest, I was expecting something far more shrill from Palin. But damn...that was pretty good. I didnt know she had it in her. Edited January 12, 2011 by RkFast Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 (edited) I'm not a fan of Sarah Palin, but I thought her response to the idiots on the left was pretty darn good. http://www.facebook....id=487510653434 America's Enduring Strength by Sarah Palin on Wednesday, January 12, 2011 at 3:52am Please click here to view the video of this statement. Like millions of Americans I learned of the tragic events in Arizona on Saturday, and my heart broke for the innocent victims. No words can fill the hole left by the death of an innocent, but we do mourn for the victims' families as we express our sympathy. I agree with the sentiments shared yesterday at the beautiful Catholic mass held in honor of the victims. The mass will hopefully help begin a healing process for the families touched by this tragedy and for our country. Our exceptional nation, so vibrant with ideas and the passionate exchange and debate of ideas, is a light to the rest of the world. Congresswoman Giffords and her constituents were exercising their right to exchange ideas that day, to celebrate our Republic's core values and peacefully assemble to petition our government. It's inexcusable and incomprehensible why a single evil man took the lives of peaceful citizens that day. There is a bittersweet irony that the strength of the American spirit shines brightest in times of tragedy. We saw that in Arizona. We saw the tenacity of those clinging to life, the compassion of those who kept the victims alive, and the heroism of those who overpowered a deranged gunman. Like many, I've spent the past few days reflecting on what happened and praying for guidance. After this shocking tragedy, I listened at first puzzled, then with concern, and now with sadness, to the irresponsible statements from people attempting to apportion blame for this terrible event. President Reagan said, "We must reject the idea that every time a law's broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions." Acts of monstrous criminality stand on their own. They begin and end with the criminals who commit them, not collectively with all the citizens of a state, not with those who listen to talk radio, not with maps of swing districts used by both sides of the aisle, not with law-abiding citizens who respectfully exercise their First Amendment rights at campaign rallies, not with those who proudly voted in the last election. The last election was all about taking responsibility for our country's future. President Obama and I may not agree on everything, but I know he would join me in affirming the health of our democratic process. Two years ago his party was victorious. Last November, the other party won. In both elections the will of the American people was heard, and the peaceful transition of power proved yet again the enduring strength of our Republic. Vigorous and spirited public debates during elections are among our most cherished traditions. And after the election, we shake hands and get back to work, and often both sides find common ground back in D.C. and elsewhere. If you don't like a person's vision for the country, you're free to debate that vision. If you don't like their ideas, you're free to propose better ideas. But, especially within hours of a tragedy unfolding, journalists and pundits should not manufacture a blood libel that serves only to incite the very hatred and violence they purport to condemn. That is reprehensible. There are those who claim political rhetoric is to blame for the despicable act of this deranged, apparently apolitical criminal. And they claim political debate has somehow gotten more heated just recently. But when was it less heated? Back in those "calm days" when political figures literally settled their differences with dueling pistols? In an ideal world all discourse would be civil and all disagreements cordial. But our Founding Fathers knew they weren't designing a system for perfect men and women. If men and women were angels, there would be no need for government. Our Founders' genius was to design a system that helped settle the inevitable conflicts caused by our imperfect passions in civil ways. So, we must condemn violence if our Republic is to endure. As I said while campaigning for others last March in Arizona during a very heated primary race, "We know violence isn't the answer. When we 'take up our arms', we're talking about our vote." Yes, our debates are full of passion, but we settle our political differences respectfully at the ballot box – as we did just two months ago, and as our Republic enables us to do again in the next election, and the next. That's who we are as Americans and how we were meant to be. Public discourse and debate isn't a sign of crisis, but of our enduring strength. It is part of why America is exceptional. No one should be deterred from speaking up and speaking out in peaceful dissent, and we certainly must not be deterred by those who embrace evil and call it good. And we will not be stopped from celebrating the greatness of our country and our foundational freedoms by those who mock its greatness by being intolerant of differing opinion and seeking to muzzle dissent with shrill cries of imagined insults. Just days before she was shot, Congresswoman Giffords read the First Amendment on the floor of the House. It was a beautiful moment and more than simply "symbolic," as some claim, to have the Constitution read by our Congress. I am confident she knew that reading our sacred charter of liberty was more than just "symbolic." But less than a week after Congresswoman Giffords reaffirmed our protected freedoms, another member of Congress announced that he would propose a law that would criminalize speech he found offensive. It is in the hour when our values are challenged that we must remain resolved to protect those values. Recall how the events of 9-11 challenged our values and we had to fight the tendency to trade our freedoms for perceived security. And so it is today. Let us honor those precious lives cut short in Tucson by praying for them and their families and by cherishing their memories. Let us pray for the full recovery of the wounded. And let us pray for our country. In times like this we need God's guidance and the peace He provides. We need strength to not let the random acts of a criminal turn us against ourselves, or weaken our solid foundation, or provide a pretext to stifle debate. America must be stronger than the evil we saw displayed last week. We are better than the mindless finger-pointing we endured in the wake of the tragedy. We will come out of this stronger and more united in our desire to peacefully engage in the great debates of our time, to respectfully embrace our differences in a positive manner, and to unite in the knowledge that, though our ideas may be different, we must all strive for a better future for our country. May God bless America. - Sarah Palin I am no fan of hers. But that was a nice well written piece. Only thing I disagree with is that acts as though things have not heated up with politics over the past few years. They have and politicians and their supporting cast need to act with a bit more class and be a bit more thoughtful about the statements they release. Knowing full well that some nut job can take it either out of context or won't be able to process it correctly. Doing that hurts no one and helps everyone. Civil discourse is something EVERYONE should strive for. Edited January 12, 2011 by pBills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 I am no fan of hers. But that was a nice well written piece. Only thing I disagree with is that acts as though things have not heated up with politics over the past few years. Only compared to the previous few years. The kind of vitrol in current politics is hardly unprecedented, though...off the top of my head, the 1850s, 1930s, the early 1800s (Palin's team's response - because let's face it, she didn't write that - refers to Hamilton-Burr). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 Stay classy Bernie. http://www.weeklysta...ers_533487.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 Only compared to the previous few years. The kind of vitrol in current politics is hardly unprecedented, though...off the top of my head, the 1850s, 1930s, the early 1800s (Palin's team's response - because let's face it, she didn't write that - refers to Hamilton-Burr). Not unprecedented.. but shouldn't go back to the style of politics used back in 1850s, 1930s or early 1800s. And if we know over the past few years it has become a bit out of control, shouldn't they at least attempt to tone it down? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 Watch for people calling for people on message boards and chat rooms to turn in people posting crazy ****. If that were to happen in one week this would be the new PPP TV, Radio commentary will all be gushy and happy like this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts