SarahPac Called for Ariz. Congresswoman to be 'Targeted'

reply to post by PurpleDog UK


Nothing because her crowd is not the violent type. The liberals are the ones who have an agenda.

reply to post by Rocky Black


Thankyou for your replies and being honest....

As I live in a once "great' UK nation I am not really aware of the USA political divides, genuinely....
For me what is the liberal Agenda ?
Please tell me as I would like to learn about the divide ..

Regards

PDUK

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
But it seems logical....all descriptions of him put him exactly counter to Tea Party beliefs.

You're making the same mistake that you're accusing everyone of making. And that is aligning him with some political position. There is NOTHING to indicate that Jared Lee Loughner was affiliated with anything political as far as I have seen. He was registered as a Republican at one point, but that's about all we know.

No, it isn't a mistake. Like i said, i read it. Being at work i don't have time to dig through all the sources i have looked at to find it.

Lets call it what it is: you omitted the first part of what i said and focused on the second part.

The stage for this was set right after she was shot, when her dad was asked if she had any enemies. He responded, "Yeah, the Tea Party." And the meme was born.

Well, perhaps he has an agenda. Giffords is fairly moderate, as far as I've found. A Blue Dog Democrat.

All of them have agendas. Anyone with an interest in the two party system of politics has an agenda. If you watch Glenn Beck or Olbermann, there is a good chance that you ignore logic and common sense to promote this agenda. Such is the shoddy state of US politics, i suppose.

And that is my issue with this conversation. It surrounds Palin, with lots of Palin bashing. Problem is, she is just 1 of many. Why do we ignore all the others?

Every time i see a "liberal" talking about politics, they are blaming either Bush or Palin for something.

You're losing me. Shall we talk about the "conservatives" who blame Obama for everything? Get off the political merry-go-round.

Absolutely. This is what i want. For us to quit blaming people for doing what everyone does. If you hold Palin in contempt, then you must hold Obama in contempt. They both are using the same imagery, and the same metaphors about guns.

Now, since i know you I know that your political views are a little more "left leaning" than mine. I am a hard core libertarian. I think the "left" and the "right" have lost their minds. So bear in mind, i am not defending Palin any further than to remind people that she had as much to do with this as any other person in the spotlight who has used the guns/war metaphor.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

 

Those are BULLS EYES over STATES, not cross hairs over people... Very different.

Seems like you are splitting hairs here. Being more permissive with one side of the aisle than the other. Bullseyes, crosshairs...they communicate the exact same thing: to shoot at the target.

When you discuss things like metaphors and analogies, it all kind of fits together.

This whole conversation will, if it ends in the way some want it to, have us in a nanny state worse than England. If it is about improving political discourse in America, that is simple: stop watching the "pundits", and stop donating to any of the current politicians.

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


BFT

Which way Now ?
To the Left where nothing is right or to the Right where nothing is left ??

PDUK

Originally posted by PurpleDog UK
reply to post by Rocky Black

 

Thankyou for your replies and being honest....

As I live in a once "great' UK nation I am not really aware of the USA political divides, genuinely....
For me what is the liberal Agenda ?
Please tell me as I would like to learn about the divide ..

Regards

PDUK

The liberal agenda is simple: it is an agenda by one side of the political spectrum to manipulate the voters so that they can gain political power, enabling them to draft legislation that benefits whatever groups have given them the most campaign money. For an example, see how many Finance leaders ended up in Obama's cabinet.

This is very similar to the conservative agenda, which is mostly to keep things as a status quo. They try to appease their donators, too (for an example, look at how many sweet jobs Bush gave to his cronies).

really, it is no different than politics elsewhere. Scumbags that lie to usurp control so that they can manipulate monetary gain from the national economy.

Originally posted by PurpleDog UK
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

 

BFT

Which way Now ?
To the Left where nothing is right or to the Right where nothing is left ??

PDUK

I lean in one direction: towards 1776. It is neither left nor right.

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


Her irritation was amusing for about 5 minutes for me, after that she just made herself look like an idiot. She was the reason I didn't vote republican in the Presidential election. Would I love to help elect the first female v.p or president? Absolutely.

However, it needs to be the right woman. If we go electing a fool, on the first time to bat God knows when the people will vote for another woman.

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


BFfT

I guess the question is

''How do we remove the inbread, ingrained political belief systems that pervade the masses"?

Any ideas as I would love to achieve this in the UK....
regards

PDUK

reply to post by searching4truth


Well, our current POTUS was a "first" as well. Did you apply the same logic? Because in the last election that I recall, the two candidates looked about like to polished turds. But they were both turds.

Originally posted by PurpleDog UK
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

 

BFfT

I guess the question is

''How do we remove the inbread, ingrained political belief systems that pervade the masses"?

Any ideas as I would love to achieve this in the UK....
regards

PDUK

I don't know what you guys in the UK could do. In the US, i would hope that more and more people begin to espouse the view of our nation that our founding fathers did.

Unbridled liberty. That is the only way.

reply to post by FlyersFan


I thought the animal killing/torture thing applied to serial killers not to random one time killer (however many they killed in the one instance) although I could be wrong.

reply to post by PurpleDog UK


Goolge Liberal AGENDA

Wealth redistribution. Recovery act
Healthcare reform.
Immigration reform. They want to give them the right to vote. WTF they aren't even citizens. Keep the policies going.
They wnat to go after 401k retiment investment accounts after the took all out social securities funds and bankrupted it.
No christmas trees in public class rooms. Lets have them call it tree day. Haloween thats offensive lets call it festival of fall.
Oh wait but the aclu will sue a school if muslim students want to pray in school.

Every way of like that we know of about being american they want to change.
One of their number 2 agend's is to disarm the american public. They tried once but they voted against it. Almost happened.

Fast food Mcdonals wendy's dunkin doughnuts.
That is bad for you so lets tax them if they eat it.

Ask a NY'r what they pay for taxes on cig's when I went to China they were just over a doolar a pack. Can a NY chime in here.

What happened to all the settlement mony from all the law suits. Thats right right into the campaign funds we will shut up now.


I can go on forever. Google it Read become informed. You notice that I said use to be GREAT. GREAT BRITIAN is still great my firend it is teetering on the edge. If they start allowing sharia law to try muslims them I would recommed you update your passport and come over the pond.

Stay alert
Stay alive.
Be safe

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


Idk Texan, it seems to me there is a big difference between placing a bulls eye over an entire state and placing the crosshairs on a specific person, along with their name and picture.

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

Unbridled liberty

= anarchy

Do you believe the unleashing of the ego in an unbridled manner is good? Perhaps what we should be aiming for is liberty in a nation of just laws where human rights are respected?

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by searching4truth

 

Well, our current POTUS was a "first" as well. Did you apply the same logic? Because in the last election that I recall, the two candidates looked about like to polished turds. But they were both turds.

Nope, didn't vote him either, had a lot of reasons for that as well (length of experience, potential cabinet officials, etc. I look at it all). I felt the exact same way as you, deciding between two piles of manure, so I went another route.

Originally posted by searching4truth
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

 

Idk Texan, it seems to me there is a big difference between placing a bulls eye over an entire state and placing the crosshairs on a specific person, along with their name and picture.

The hairs being split, however, are the fact that she was using a metaphor to begin with. Now, maybe they will all choose their words more carefully. However, for people to honestly believe that Sarah Palin called for this ladies death (which is what is happening, even if not in this thread) is beyond silly.

If the dialogue is how politicians should not use "fighting words" type metaphors, i am all about that. So instances like Palins, along with the one i showed, and then Obama saying he would bring a gun to a knife fight, they should all be portrayed negatively.

We can't wait until someone gets hurt, then try to blame the one person that the injured parties political cohorts decide to blame. And that is what this is: a politically motivated blame game.

Metaphors are metaphors, rhetoric is rhetoric. Sarah Palin is no more or less culpable than the DNC for using "target practice" metaphors to create political motivations.

Originally posted by Ilovecatbinlady
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

 

Unbridled liberty

= anarchy

Do you believe the unleashing of the ego in an unbridled manner is good? Perhaps what we should be aiming for is liberty in a nation of just laws when human rights are respected?

No, it does not. Anarchy means there is no law, no recourse.

But when you are free, living in a land of liberty, you are free to do whatever you want as long as it does not bring direct harm to another.

While i do see some benefits in anarchy, i also understand that there must be a recourse via laws to redress loss caused by another.

Just the way our Founding Fathers intended it.

reply to post by Rocky Black


Rocky Black

I see your thinking and I do feel some sympathy and actually agree that sometimes we lose our identities by 'accommodating' everything else...

There is a saying....

" If we always do what we have always done then we will always get what we have always got "

and if that is the case then our progress as a human race falters - the key to all this is a level of acceptance on ALL sides but Human and Religious behaviours do not allow for this....
Regards

PDUK

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


I think we're just gonna have to agree to disagree on that point, because I do feel that one is definitely more extreme and specific than the other.