One of the President's core...

[Yonivore]

...constituents.

wFHBGGvuQhA

The new civility. This is who Michelle's date, Trumpka, and Barack's emcee, Hoffa, represent.

[Yonivore]

My two favorite lines...

Cameraman: "You're not on the PR staff, are you?"

Longshoreman: "My name is Fuck You, Cocksucker!"

[Yonivore]

So, let's see if I have this right...

A U. S. Congressman can make up a story about being spat upon and called ###### -- without out any proof -- and it will pretty much run on the news, nonstop, for days.

The President of the AFL-CIO can introduce the President of the United States by imploring him to go to war with Republicans and offering to "take the sons of bitches out," and, then 500 members of that union can invade a port facility, take hostages, and vandalize the place and it will barely get mentioned, if at all.

Got it.

[Winehole23]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/09/business/union-dispute-near-seattle-turns-violent-and-idles-ports.html

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-union-protest-20110909,0,2369812.story

http://www.seattlepi.com/local/article/Seattle-Tacoma-longshoremen-return-to-work-2162730.php

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/09/09/nlrb-investigates-longshoremen-union-for-strike-gone-wrong/

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904836104576560803555401160.html?m od=googlenews_wsj

http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9PKFFHG0.htm

[Winehole23]

Plus 140 or so other MSM hits on Google.

[Winehole23]

It's a media conspiracy!

[Winehole23]

Don't be fooled by all the follow up stories -- they buried it!

[Yonivore]

Don't be fooled by all the follow up stories -- they buried it!
Not one mention of Obama's buddies Trumpka and Hoffa or their violent rhetoric.

Some nut, totally unrelated to politics, opens fire at a Democrat Congresswoman's constituent meeting and the media falls over itself making a connection between the nut and the Tea Party, Governor Palin, in particular. Then they spent days and weeks whoring the angle.

Yeah, no bias here...

The first video I posted and the one below are the ugly face of Obama's core constituency yet, you can't get the national media to connect a few dots.

yHER0CP2fHs

The President goes on national television and calls for civility in the wake of Congresswoman Giffords shooting, and, yet, can't be bothered to comment on the actions of those with whom he shares the stage and allows to sit by his wife.

No, no bias...

[Winehole23]

Fake outrage is still fake.

:sleep

[Yonivore]

Fake outrage is still fake.

:sleep
President Barack Obama is in bed with unions and this is what they represent. You're okay with that?

Who's faking outrage? This President has been one outrage after another.

[Winehole23]

The longshoremen fucked up. Not sure what that has to do with Obama or Trumka.

Did anyone get shot?

[Winehole23]

The attempt to link Palin to the Gifford shooting was lame and I said so here. Just as lame as your attempt to link Obama to the longshoremen's riot. Weak sauce is still weak.

[Yonivore]

The longshoremen fucked up. Not sure what that has to do with Obama or Trumka.
The longshoreman's union is headed by a vitriolic thug that is imploring the President of the United States to use them as an "army" to "take the sons of bitches out." There's your connection. Hoffa says they'd like the gig. 500 of his thugs prove they're a violent group, beyond anything the media has ever imagined or shown from a Tea Party supporter.

A crazed gunman shot a Congresswoman. Not sure what that has to do with the Tea Party or Sarah Palin. Yet, the media pretty much tortured reasonableness to sell the idea there was.


Did anyone get shot?
Has anyone ever been taken hostage, or shot, by anyone associated with the Tea Party?

[Yonivore]

The attempt to link Palin to the Gifford shooting was lame and I said so here. Just as lame as your attempt to link Obama to the longshoremen's riot. Weak sauce is still weak.
Well, we're not talking about you, are we?

[Winehole23]

A crazed gunman shot a Congresswoman. Not sure what that has to do with the Tea Party or Sarah Palin. Yet, the media pretty much tortured reasonableness to sell the idea there was.You're doing exactly the same thing. It's just as pathetic.

[Winehole23]

Well, we're not talking about you, are we?Your sauce is weaker than usual, bro. That's what I meant to emphasize.

[Yonivore]

Your sauce is weaker than usual, bro. That's what I meant to emphasize.
I think the way media frames stories is significant.

There is more of a connection between President Obama and Union violence than there is between the Tea Party and Sarah Palin and any of the violence the media has gone overboard to connect to them.

Remember the SEIU violence during the Obamacare debate? Ken Gladney does.

[Winehole23]

I think the way media frames stories is significant.Your media analysis is trite and you ape what you abhor.

[Yonivore]

You're doing exactly the same thing. It's just as pathetic.
I'm not the media.

[Winehole23]

Rhetorical gambit is the same. You not being the media doesn't make it any more credible.

[Winehole23]

The lame remains the same.

[Yonivore]

Rhetorical gambit is the same. Not being the media doesn't make it more credible.
With very disparate results.

Media fabricates a connection between Tea Party and Giffords shooting, whores in the news cycles for weeks and ignorant knuckle-draggers believe the Tea Party is a violent movement -- even in the absence of any credible evidence to support the hypothesis.

Media is faced with competing stories of a Union President offering to "take the sons of bitches out" for the President of the United States and stories of a large mob of thugs, from that very same Union, taking hostages and vandalizing a port and, hmmm..., no one, in the media, thinks the two could possibly be related.

[Winehole23]

No one? Don't Drudge and Breitbart count as media?

[Yonivore]

No one? Don't Drudge and Breitbart count as media?
Actually, I believe they're both news aggregators. But, they're not ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, or FOX.

[Winehole23]

I forgot how horrible you are at this. Really, truly, abysmally bad. It's hard for me to conceive how anyone could be so preposterously wrong, nonstop, without trying to. Must come naturally.

[Yonivore]

I forgot how horrible you are at this. Really, truly, abysmally bad. It's hard for me to conceive how anyone could be so preposterously wrong, nonstop, without trying to. Must come naturally.
So, the country is being treated to a non-stop barrage of how the President's Union buddies are a violent bunch of thugs?

[Winehole23]

On Fox? Sure.

[Yonivore]

On Fox? Sure.
Not that I've seen.

[ElNono]

One would argue that you see what you want to see

[Wild Cobra]

Well...

Proof on camera that union members include and support the lowest common denominator.

He was a great example!

[cdcast]

WC, ever google "tea party violence"?
Your people doing the same shit.

[Wild Cobra]

WC, ever google "tea party violence"?
Your people doing the same shit.
I'll bet if you found some statistics, you would find far less who call themselves Tea Party members than Union members.

Every family has a black sheep or more.

[scott]

I'll bet if you found some statistics, you would find far less who call themselves Tea Party members than Union members.

Every family has a black sheep or more.

I'll bet if you found some statistics, it would be the first time you actually researched one of your asinine statements.

[Winehole23]

Not that I've seen.They couldn't shut up about SEIU. Where'd you get your marching orders this time?

[boutons_deux]

The difference between pissed off Dem working class and pissed off Repub working class is that the Dems know they are getting screwed and vote against getting screwed, while the duped and/or faux Repug bubbas keep voting Repug and screw themselves harder and deeper.

[Winehole23]

Has anyone ever been taken hostage, or shot, by anyone associated with the Tea Party?http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01954/Anders-Behring-Bre_1954262b.jpg

[Yonivore]

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01954/Anders-Behring-Bre_1954262b.jpg
Can you find an American Tea Party member, on this continent?

[Yonivore]

They couldn't shut up about SEIU. Where'd you get your marching orders this time?
I guess you don't know the meaning of the word, "is."

Anyway, while the SEIU's crimes deserved coverage by all the networks, only FOX saw fit to give the atrocities the air time it deserved. However, and back to the original point, I don't recall FOX, or any other outlet, blaming the SEIU violence on Democrats or the President.

[Winehole23]

You don't recall. Strong.

[Yonivore]

You don't recall. Strong.
So, remind me.

I could post endless examples of random acts of violence being falsely associated with the Tea Party, by the major media outlets.

[Winehole23]

Can you find an American Tea Party member, on this continent?Ideology is global, no?

[Spurminator]

Such a victim. What a bunch of pussies you guys have become.

[Yonivore]

Ideology is global, no?
Your posting a picture of some Scandi loon that massacred a bunch of innocent people in Norway, as an example of a violent Tea Party member is testament to how far the Left and media will stretch to make the connection.

Fail.

Care to find an example on this continent? In this country? Someone who acted in response to their Tea Party ideals?

[Spurminator]

:cry Barack Obama represents people who put their hands in front of camera lenses and yell "fucking cocksucker!" :cry

[Yonivore]

:cry Barack Obama represents people who put their hands in front of camera lenses and yell "fucking cocksucker!" :cry
Unfortunately, he represents us all... :cry

But, worse than representing Mr. "My name is fuck you, cocksucker," he is their friend, their single most important benefactor. If not for Barack Obama, unions thugs would probably be out of work and their corrupt organizations busted. But, he keeps propping them up with the largess confiscated from taxpayers.

[Winehole23]

Your posting a picture of some Scandi loon that massacred a bunch of innocent people in Norway, as an example of a violent Tea Party member is testament to how far the Left and media will stretch to make the connection.I posted it as a parody of your logic. You're apparently too dense to get that you're doing the exact same thing.

(In the dedicated thread I spoke out against the connection b/w Breivik and the tea party, if you care to check.)

[Spurminator]

Yeah, it's been a great 2 1/2 years for unions. Thanks Obama!

[Yonivore]

Yeah, it's been a great 2 1/2 years for unions. Thanks Obama!
Been better for unions than the rest of us.

Starting with his gift of GM to the unions...completely negating bankruptcy law.

[Yonivore]

Yeah, it's been a great 2 1/2 years for unions. Thanks Obama!
Went to bat for them in Wisconsin.

[Spurminator]

http://www.pollsb.com/photos/o/46010-plastic_man.jpg

[ElNono]

Went to bat for them in Wisconsin.

How did that work out for the unions though?

[Spurminator]

If not for Barack Obama's friendship with the unions, we might be protected from videos of longshoremen saying "cocksucker" and union heads using harsh language that might be interpreted by stupid people as a call for violence.

[Yonivore]

How did that work out for the unions though?
Doesn't make Obama any less of a union shill, which is the point.

He's never condemned any union violence, and there are plenty of examples since he's taken office, with the same conviction with which he's condemned completely fabricated Tea Party violence.

[ElNono]

Starting with his gift of GM to the unions...completely negating bankruptcy law.

GM did go through Chapter 11. Not sure how that's negating bankruptcy law.
Also, it came back as the largest IPO in US history after the turnaround at 20+ billions.

But Yoni is for losing jobs.

[cdcast]

:cry Poor Yoni, his Tea Party isn't too popular here.

[Spurminator]

Doesn't make Obama any less of a union shill, which is the point.

He's never condemned any union violence, and there are plenty of examples since he's taken office, with the same conviction with which he's condemned completely fabricated Tea Party violence.

Do you think the President of the United States should condemn the actions of a longshoreman caught on tape using vulgar language and putting his hand over a camera lens? :lmao

[ElNono]

Doesn't make Obama any less of a union shill, which is the point.

No, the point is that it wasn't a great 2.5 years for unions. Sorry the point flew right over your head.


He's never condemned any union violence, and there are plenty of examples since he's taken office, with the same conviction with which he's condemned completely fabricated Tea Party violence.

What Tea Party violence did Obama condemn?

[Yonivore]

If not for Barack Obama's friendship with the unions, we might be protected from videos of longshoremen saying "cocksucker" and union heads using harsh language that might be interpreted by stupid people as a call for violence.
Your still missing the point.

The media has taken much more disconnected Tea Party activities and connected it with violence, completely fabricating the connection. How much more stupid is that than, say, pointing out the President of the United States is friend and benefactor to a thuggish and violent union movement.

Hoffa's harsh language is animated by the violence of his members' actions. Interpreting it as a call to violence is not such a big leap.

And, your characterization of union violence is superficial and disregards the hostage taking at the port, the threats in Wisconsin, and the near-fatal beating of Ken Gladney by SEIU thugs.

[Spurminator]

How much more stupid is that than, say, pointing out the President of the United States is friend and benefactor to a thuggish and violent union movement.

So you admit your whole point here is stupid.

Thanks.

[ElNono]

So was it the media or Obama?

And a few union nuts are entirely representative of the entire union population?

I'm still missing Obama advocating violence to resolve union conflicts.

[Yonivore]

No, the point is that it wasn't a great 2.5 years for unions. Sorry the point flew right over your head.
No, I got the point; it's just not the point of the thread. Just because the President isn't being successful in his support of unions, doesn't mean he isn't their biggest shill and benefactor.


What Tea Party violence did Obama condemn?
I stand corrected. There's been no Tea Party violence for Obama to condemn. The most he's been able to do is decry violent rhetoric when the media has completely embarrassed itself in their efforts to connect the Tea Party to violence.

But, ask him to decry union violence and, the White House has no comment.

[Yonivore]

So was it the media or Obama?

And a few union nuts are entirely representative of the entire union population?
You're starting to get he idea.

The media has had absolutely no problem characterizing the actions of a few (even when they're total fabrications - such as Laughner's massacre and the non-Tea Party spitting, ######-calling incident) as being representative of an entire political group. But, of course, it's a completely unreasonable leap of logic to connect the President's position with unions with their actual violence.


I'm still missing Obama advocating violence to resolve union conflicts.
I'm missing his condemnation of the violence being perpetrated by the members of his friends unions.

[Spurminator]

No, I got the point; it's just not the point of the thread.

The point of the thread is that some union guy was caught on tape using adult language. And if the President doesn't condemn that guy, then the media is sensationalist. Also, per Yonivore, it's a stupid point.

I think we get it now. What a waste of time, though.

[ElNono]

No, I got the point; it's just not the point of the thread. Just because the President isn't being successful in his support of unions, doesn't mean he isn't their biggest shill and benefactor.

Liking and supporting unions is not a crime. Much to your chagrin, unions are legal entities.


I stand corrected. But, ask him to decry union violence and, the White House has no comment.

Not sure what you want the WH to condemn? They have to draft a press release for every nut out there yelling at a camera?

Seeing they haven't condemned the Tea Party violent nuts, not sure why you want to hold them to a different standard when it comes to unions.

Wait, I do know why. Yoni is a shill.

[Yonivore]

The point of the thread is that some union guy was caught on tape using adult language. And if the President doesn't condemn that guy, then the media is sensationalist. Also, per Yonivore, it's a stupid point.

I think we get it now. What a waste of time, though.
No; the point of this thread is the media needs little encouragement to connect the Tea Party to any act of violence to advance the agenda they are a violent political group while, at the same time, ignoring every tangential connection between Democrats and their violent constituents, in an effort to insulate them against the same characterization.

On one side, you get endless debates about what marks on a campaign poster mean. On the other, you get ignorance over the actual violent acts of liberal groups lest they implicate a violent political movement.

[Spurminator]

I suppose we could comb through the comment sections on Yahoo News articles for evidence of an inherently violent rhetoric among anti-liberals, and claim that Republican congressmen should condemn those commenters lest they be seen as condoning such rhetoric, but that would be fucking stupid.

(Oops, sorry for the adult language)

Anyway I'm sure the media is already doing that. Like, all the time.

[Vici]

Interpreting it as a call to violence is not such a big leap.


Ya it most definitely is a big leap.

[ElNono]

The media has had absolutely no problem characterizing the actions of a few (even when they're total fabrications - such as Laughner's massacre and the non-Tea Party spitting, ######-calling incident) as being representative of an entire political group. But, of course, it's a completely unreasonable leap of logic to connect the President's position with unions with their actual violence.

A murder attempt on a Democratic might elicit questions about the vitriol used by the other party? Who would've thought?
Ultimately, it was determined he was a nut.

And Palin removed the crosshairs...


I'm missing his condemnation of the violence being perpetrated by the members of his friends unions.

Are you equating a man yelling at a camera to a murder attempt?

[Yonivore]

A murder attempt on a Democratic might elicit questions about the vitriol used by the other party? Who would've thought?
Ultimately, it was determined he was a nut.

And Palin removed the crosshairs...
More than questions. Sarah Palin was specifically blamed for the violence. And, she removed the surveyor's marks because of all the hyperventilating.


Are you equating a man yelling at a camera to a murder attempt?
First, the murder attempt -- and, the actual murders that took place that day -- have absolutely no connection to the Tea Party or Sarah Palin while, Mr. Fuck You, is a member of one of the Local AFL-CIO unions that participated in the violence, vandalism, and hostage-taking. A union, by the way, whose president introduced our President, at a campaign rally, by asking him to use them as an army to "take the sons of bitches out."

No, I'm not equating the two acts. They're not related. I'm comparing the media's response to the two acts.

[Yonivore]

A murder attempt on a Democratic might elicit questions about the vitriol used by the other party? Who would've thought?
Ultimately, it was determined he was a nut.
I almost missed another of your points.

Can you give me examples of Tea Party vitriol that even come close to rising to the level of the vitriol spewed by some of our Democrat elected officials, much less, America's unions?

Can you give me one act of violence that can be directly connected to any such vitriol? Or, better yet, any violence perpetrated by a group of Tea Party members?

[Vici]

A union, by the way, whose president introduced our President, at a campaign rally, by asking him to use them as an army to "take the sons of bitches out.".


What do you honestly believe he meant by that quote?

[ElNono]

More than questions. Sarah Palin was specifically blamed for the violence. And, she removed the surveyor's marks because of all the hyperventilating.

Nobody asked her to remove anything. But, for the casual observer, it's easy to see why she did remove them.


No, I'm not equating the two acts. They're not related. I'm comparing the media's response to the two acts.

So they're not two equal acts, but you want the WH to treat them equally.
That makes no sense. Does the WH has to put out a press release every time a Tea Potty puts up a sign that includes references to guns and killing, or yells at a camera? Those are easy to find too, you know?

[Spurminator]

lol goalpost moving. Classic Yonivore.

[Yonivore]

What do you honestly believe he meant by that quote?
I don't know. Unions are violent groups, as they have proven through the SEIU, during the Obamacare debate, Wisconsin public employee unions during their Governor's austerity campaign, and Hoffa's union during a protest at a port facility.

Maybe it's not what I think but, what his violence-prone members think. I think Mr. Fuck You is perfectly capable of taking Hoffa's statement as a call to arms and violence.

What do you honestly believe Sarah Palin's campaign meant by placing "crosshairs" on a map of political races being targeted for defeat?

[Yonivore]

lol goalpost moving. Classic Yonivore.k
I haven't moved anything.

[ElNono]

Can you give me examples of Tea Party vitriol that even come close to rising to the level of the vitriol spewed by some of our Democrat elected officials, much less, America's unions?

Sure. Plenty out there:
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/assets_c/2010/04/tea-party-gun-cropped-proto-custom_2.jpg

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-qrhGNthfZOo/TksWQtR7VjI/AAAAAAAAAUM/bZmdI2prR6M/s1600/tea-party-sign-toter.jpg

http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/TPV3/media/blogs/blog/24/tea_party_gun_nut.jpg


Can you give me one act of violence that can be directly connected to any such vitriol? Or, better yet, any violence perpetrated by a group of Tea Party members?

The problem is what you deem 'act of violence'. If yelling at a camera is an act of violence, then there's plenty of criminals on the Tea Potty side too.

Example:
VoCAbieZj1w

[Vici]

I don't know. Unions are violent groups, as they have proven through the SEIU, during the Obamacare debate, Wisconsin public employee unions during their Governor's austerity campaign, and Hoffa's union during a protest at a port facility.

Maybe it's not what I think but, what his violence-prone members think. I think Mr. Fuck You is perfectly capable of taking Hoffa's statement as a call to arms and violence.

What do you honestly believe Sarah Palin's campaign meant by placing "crosshairs" on a map of political races being targeted for defeat?


It isn't all that hard to figure out. Palin meant the exact same thing Hoffa meant. There really is nothing to read into.

[ElNono]

I don't know. Unions are violent groups, as they have proven through the SEIU, during the Obamacare debate, Wisconsin public employee unions during their Governor's austerity campaign, and Hoffa's union during a protest at a port facility.

Really? What type of acts of violence did Wisconsin experience?
What about during Obamacare?

Tea Potties hijacking town halls was not 'acts of violence' in the same vein? Why not?


Maybe it's not what I think but, what his violence-prone members think. I think Mr. Fuck You is perfectly capable of taking Hoffa's statement as a call to arms and violence.

From the perspective that Mr Fuck You didn't pull a gun, I think you're reaching.


What do you honestly believe Sarah Palin's campaign meant by placing "crosshairs" on a map of political races being targeted for defeat?

Whatever she meant, she thought it was offensive enough to remove it all by her own.

[Vici]

And exactly how was Mr. Fuck You violent and armed? He's an ass but there clearly was nothing violent about what he did... unless you consider getting yelled at violent lol.

[Yonivore]

Sure. Plenty out there:
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/assets_c/2010/04/tea-party-gun-cropped-proto-custom_2.jpg

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-qrhGNthfZOo/TksWQtR7VjI/AAAAAAAAAUM/bZmdI2prR6M/s1600/tea-party-sign-toter.jpg

http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/TPV3/media/blogs/blog/24/tea_party_gun_nut.jpg



The problem is what you deem 'act of violence'. If yelling at a camera is an act of violence, then there's plenty of criminals on the Tea Potty side too.

Example:
VoCAbieZj1w
Once again, you've failed to grasp the point. The 'act of violence' was perpetrated by the 500 members, some of whom belonged to the local represented by Mr. Fuck You, when they stormed a port, took hostages, and vandalized the place.

Let me know when any Tea Party signs or words prompts an actual act of violence.

[Yonivore]

And exactly how was Mr. Fuck You violent and armed? He's an ass but there clearly was nothing violent about what he did... unless you consider getting yelled at violent lol.
Well, do you know if Mr. Fuck You was present at the port violence?

Do you not consider his grabbing the camera and threatening the cameraman a violent act?

[Vici]

Well, do you know if Mr. Fuck You was present at the port violence?

Do you not consider his grabbing the camera and threatening the cameraman a violent act?

No, I don't consider grabbing someone violent but then again I'm not a pussy.

[ElNono]

Once again, you've failed to grasp the point.

No, I didn't. Don't move the goalposts now and try to redirect the conversation. You asked for examples of Tea Party promoted 'violence' and I delivered.

I take it you'll be walking away from that claim now.


The 'act of violence' was perpetrated by the 500 members, some of whom belonged to the local represented by Mr. Fuck You, when they stormed a port, took hostages, and vandalized the place.

Why didn't you post the YouTube video of that, then?

There's laws to deal with vandalizing a place. A WH memo isn't going to make a difference there.


Let me know when any Tea Party signs or words prompts an actual act of violence.

Let me know when the guy in the video you posted prompts an actual act of violence.

[Spurminator]

Well, do you know if Mr. Fuck You was present at the port violence?

Truther logic.


Do you not consider his grabbing the camera and threatening the cameraman a violent act?

No reasonable non-shill, or non-pussy, would consider that violent.

[Spurminator]

There could be an argument to be made that some in the media sensationalize the Tea Party. You're just not very good at making the point. The fact that you are trying so hard to convince people that the original video you posted represents proof of union violence severely undercuts your argument.

[ElNono]

There could be an argument to be made that some in the media sensationalize the Tea Party. You're just not very good at making the point. The fact that you are trying so hard to convince people that the original video you posted represents proof of union violence severely undercuts your argument.

Agreed. Not sure where Obama enters the picture either. But somehow in Yoni's world, he made it.

[boutons_deux]

Yoni drags in more ratshit and makes into a mountain.

Yoni hates unions and hates Barry, yawn.

[Vici]

There could be an argument to be made that some in the media sensationalize the Tea Party. You're just not very good at making the point. The fact that you are trying so hard to convince people that the original video you posted represents proof of union violence severely undercuts your argument.

Totally agree here as well.

[Spurminator]

I mean if the point is that people like boutons and NBADan, and the bullshit blogs they dump all over the forum, spend too much time decrying the Tea Party as an inherently violent group... well, no shit!

Most reasonable people would agree the average Tea Partier is not a violent threat. The only time that idea has gotten significant MSM play was in the aftermath of an attempted shooting. Most reasonable people came to the conclusion that it was an overreaction.

Next time there is a murder attempt on a Republican congressperson, I'm sure the media will dissect any supposedly violent rhetoric they can find from the left, including the Hoffa comments, which have already gotten significant coverage.

Because that's what the media does. It overreacts and sensationalizes and fills its 24-hour news cycle with hysteria. Thanks for the news flash. And for once again proving, by posting this thread, that you're no more reasonable than they are.

[Yonivore]

Really? What type of acts of violence did Wisconsin experience?
The unions occupied the capitol and threatened the lives of Republican members. Then there were the random acts of violence videotaped during the Wisconsing issue.

http://bigjournalism.com/files/2011/03/untitled.bmp

MjU8psjeHIQ

zm_Fl3AszuU


What about during Obamacare?

zrpXF4uoF0o

c02KupumNfo


Tea Potties hijacking town halls was not 'acts of violence' in the same vein? Why not?
Any videos of Tea Partyers physically striking anyone at a town hall meeting?


From the perspective that Mr Fuck You didn't pull a gun, I think you're reaching.
Was Mr. Fuck You with his 500 Union Brothers when they took the hostages and vandalized the port facility?


Whatever she meant, she thought it was offensive enough to remove it all by her own.
That's your characterization. I think she removed it to attempt to end the constant driveling over it.

[Yonivore]

I mean if the point is that people like boutons and NBADan, and the bullshit blogs they dump all over the forum, spend too much time decrying the Tea Party as an inherently violent group... well, no shit!

Most reasonable people would agree the average Tea Partier is not a violent threat. The only time that idea has gotten significant MSM play was in the aftermath of an attempted shooting. Most reasonable people came to the conclusion that it was an overreaction.
I couldn't care less what any of the members of this forum say. The point is the overreaction was carried out by the media. Something they're prone to do when it serves the narrative the Tea Party is violent and something they take pains to avoid when it would tend to characterize Democrats, leftists, or liberals in the same light.


Next time there is a murder attempt on a Republican congressperson, I'm sure the media will dissect any supposedly violent rhetoric they can find from the left, including the Hoffa comments, which have already gotten significant coverage.
God forbid it but, I think you're wrong. I think they would go to great lengths to immediately distance the act from any liberal ideological group or position.


Because that's what the media does. It overreacts and sensationalizes and fills its 24-hour news cycle with hysteria. Thanks for the news flash. And for once again proving, by posting this thread, that you're no more reasonable than they are.
I think they feed narratives of their own creation. Making up shit out of whole cloth to advance one while ignoring evidence to dispel another.

For example; when the jihadist attempted to set off the car bomb in Times Square, the media advanced the narrative proposed by Mayor Bloomberg, and others, that it might be a right-wing extremists while, at the same fucking time, cautioning against jumping to the conclusion it was what it turned out to be. A fucking jihadist.

Times Square Car Bomb Suspect Faces Terrorism Charges After Admitting to Plot (http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/05/04/pakistani-american-arrested-times-square-plot/)

I simply think you're wrong about the media's motives in their reporting and how they frame certain issues.

[Spurminator]

I'm not here to defend the commercial media. I think they're terrible.

Regardless of your opinion on their motivation, the fact remains that you took a meaningless video of an angry longshoreman and tried to connect it not just to union violence, but to the President of the United States.

So you're not against the media overreacting to benign incidents and painting entire ideologies with a broad stroke. You just want them to do it for your team and not the other. Sorry we're not more sympathetic to your cause.

[ElNono]

The unions occupied the capitol and threatened the lives of Republican members. Then there were the random acts of violence videotaped during the Wisconsing issue.

http://bigjournalism.com/files/2011/03/untitled.bmp


How's that different from the Tea Potty signs?



MjU8psjeHIQ
zm_Fl3AszuU

Where's the violence there?


zrpXF4uoF0o

So the nut was arrested. Okay.


c02KupumNfo

Where's the violence again? Certainly not in this video.


Any videos of Tea Partyers physically striking anyone at a town hall meeting?

The problem is that your standard isn't "physically striking", otherwise you just posted at least 3 irrelevant videos. If your standard is mob mentality and intimidation, then this is no different:

Dl5Jo0GnX-k


Was Mr. Fuck You with his 500 Union Brothers when they took the hostages and vandalized the port facility?

I don't know. Was he? Do you know?


That's your characterization. I think she removed it to attempt to end the constant driveling over it.

What do you mean 'constant driveling'? She took it down right after somebody pointed it out. The driveling about her sound decision making of having that there in the first place came afterwards.

[ChumpDumper]

So, let's see if I have this right...

A U. S. Congressman can make up a story about being spat upon and called ###### -- without out any proof -- and it will pretty much run on the news, nonstop, for days.

The President of the AFL-CIO can introduce the President of the United States by imploring him to go to war with Republicans and offering to "take the sons of bitches out," and, then 500 members of that union can invade a port facility, take hostages, and vandalize the place and it will barely get mentioned, if at all.

Got it.Hoffa was talking about voting. You got fooled.

[clambake]

yoni can't get past the gas station.

[ElNono]

I couldn't care less what any of the members of this forum say.

Sure you do. You wouldn't be replying otherwise. You might not agree, but you certainly care.

[Yonivore]

The media's methods are not novel...

The Press: I'll Furnish the War (http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,854840,00.html)


When Hearst Artist Frederic Remington, cabled from Cuba in 1897 that "there will be no war," William Randolph Hearst cabled back: "You furnish the pictures and I'll furnish the war." Last week the aging (84) Lord of San Simeon was out to prove that his hand had not lost its touch. This time it was not Spain but Russia on which Hearst had declared war,...
The media, while being driven by sensationalism, is in the unique position to shape any narrative they like by controlling what news you consume.

If they can sensationalize something that advances their political agenda...they will. If something sensational is counter to their political agenda, they downplay it...if they report it at all.

[Yonivore]

Sure you do. You wouldn't be replying otherwise. You might not agree, but you certainly care.
I care about the debate. It's the only reason I come here. I enjoy the back-and-forth and seeing what the extreme left is thinking. There are fewer of Obama's defenders in my real life anymore so, if I want to see it first hand, I have to come to places like this.

[ChumpDumper]

The media's methods are not novel...

The Press: I'll Furnish the War (http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,854840,00.html)


The media, while being driven by sensationalism, is in the unique position to shape any narrative they like by controlling what news you consume.

If they can sensationalize something that advances their political agenda...they will. If something sensational is counter to their political agenda, they downplay it...if they report it at all.So they're pretty much like you in this thread and every thread.

What is your complaint?

[ElNono]

I care about the debate. It's the only reason I come here. I enjoy the back-and-forth and seeing what the extreme left is thinking. There are fewer of Obama's defenders in my real life anymore so, if I want to see it first hand, I have to come to places like this.

Who's the extreme left you speak of?

[ChumpDumper]

“I am the No. 1 target for one more extremist group to defeat this November. We need to have your help for candidates like me. We need you to take out some of these bad guys.”

Is this violent rhetoric, yoni?

Yes or no.

[ElNono]

I've yet to read anybody in here defending what that nutter in the first video did. Union or not union.

[ElNono]

Heck, you have a tacit acknowledgment that certain media likes to spin the Tea Party in a negative way.

Doesn't sound extreme left to me.

[Yonivore]

I've yet to read anybody in here defending what that nutter in the first video did. Union or not union.
So?

I've yet to hear President Obama comment on any of the Unions' violence, violent rhetoric, or crimes. Instead, he lets their president emcee his campaign events; he invites their thuggish leaders to speeches and allows them to sit next to his wife.

[ChumpDumper]

“I am the No. 1 target for one more extremist group to defeat this November. We need to have your help for candidates like me. We need you to take out some of these bad guys.”

Is this violent rhetoric, yoni?

Yes or no.

[ElNono]

So?

I would expect the extreme left to justify that act. So if you're looking for extreme left POV, you probably came to the wrong place.


I've yet to hear President Obama comment on any of the Unions' violence, violent rhetoric, or crimes. Instead, he lets their president emcee his campaign events; he invites their thuggish leaders to speeches and allows them to sit next to his wife.

I've yet to hear President Obama comment on Tea Party violence, violent rhetoric, or crimes. Heck, I don't recall him commenting on Bohener "American people are going to hang her" (speaking about Pelosi) when that happened.

You still haven't answered why do you hold him to different standards when it's one party over the other.

[Oh, Gee!!]

yoni wants the "drudgeification" of the mainstream media whereby any local event that makes democrats, union members, black people, or hispanics look bad to be national news.

[Yonivore]

I've yet to hear President Obama comment on Tea Party violence, violent rhetoric, or crimes.
At a memorial for the victims of the Tuscon shooting, President Obama said this:


But at a time when our discourse has become so sharply polarized -– at a time when we are far too eager to lay the blame for all that ails the world at the feet of those who happen to think differently than we do -– it’s important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we’re talking with each other in a way that heals, not in a way that wounds. (Applause.)
In the surrounding climate that was still claiming Tea Party rhetoric was responsible for the shooting, this is a nod to the proposition that political ideology had something to do with the violence there when, in fact, we now know it didn't.


Heck, I don't recall him commenting on Bohener "American people are going to hang her" (speaking about Pelosi) when that happened.
Because people understand context and cliche and, there's absolutely no evidence anyone has ever acted violently in response to anything Boehner has ever said.


You still haven't answered why do you hold him to different standards when it's one party over the other.
Again, it's not my standard being discussed but, the media's. Why don't they treat the two similarly?

[cdcast]

So?

I've yet to hear President Obama comment on any of the Unions' violence, violent rhetoric, or crimes. Instead, he lets their president emcee his campaign events; he invites their thuggish leaders to speeches and allows them to sit next to his wife.

I've yet to hear Fox News comment on any of the Tea Party violence and rhetoric. Tea Partiers thrive on Fox propaganda.

[DarrinS]

I would expect the extreme left to justify that act. So if you're looking for extreme left POV, you probably came to the wrong place.



I've yet to hear President Obama comment on Tea Party violence, violent rhetoric, or crimes. Heck, I don't recall him commenting on Bohener "American people are going to hang her" (speaking about Pelosi) when that happened.

You still haven't answered why do you hold him to different standards when it's one party over the other.

What Tea Party violence?

[Yonivore]

yoni wants the "drudgeification" of the mainstream media whereby any local event that makes democrats, union members, black people, or hispanics look bad to be national news.
Equal treatment would be fine.

Which, if you ever follow Drudge, you would know is the case there. He doesn't link to stories about Tea Party violence because, they don't exist. Sorry the same can't be said of liberal violence.

[Spurminator]

At a memorial for the victims of the Tuscon shooting, President Obama said this:

In the surrounding climate that was still claiming Tea Party rhetoric was responsible for the shooting, this is a nod to the proposition that political ideology had something to do with the violence there when, in fact, we now know it didn't.


:lmao

What bullshit. I could just as easily claim Obama was speaking directly to the left "in the surrounding climate" of so many people claiming Tea Partiers were responsible.

The truth is, he was obviously, to anyone with a shred of intellectual honesty and common sense, speaking to people on both sides. And he would say the same thing at a memorial for a shooting that involved victims on the Right (yeah yeah, I know, you "disagree").

[Spurminator]

What Tea Party violence?

You know, that video of a Tea Partier yelling obscenities at a cameraman that got all that Leftist Media coverage.

[Yonivore]

:lmao

What bullshit. I could just as easily claim Obama was speaking directly to the left "in the surrounding climate" of so many people claiming Tea Partiers were responsible.

The truth is, he was obviously, to anyone with a shred of intellectual honesty and common sense, speaking to people on both sides. And he would say the same thing at a memorial for a shooting that involved victims on the Right (yeah yeah, I know, you "disagree").
The point being, the point had no place at the memorial because the shooting was not the result of political vitriol. That he chose to inject it at the memorial, when many were condemning the Tea Party and Sarah Palin for causing the violence and that he had never taken a similar opportunity, when given many, to make a similar charge in the face of Union violence speaks volumes, I think.

[ChumpDumper]

In the surrounding climate that was still claiming Tea Party rhetoric was responsible for the shooting, this is a nod to the proposition that political ideology had something to do with the violence there when, in fact, we now know it didn't.Link to what that violence had to do with.

Quotes from the shooter please.

[ElNono]

At a memorial for the victims of the Tuscon shooting, President Obama said this:

In the surrounding climate that was still claiming Tea Party rhetoric was responsible for the shooting, this is a nod to the proposition that political ideology had something to do with the violence there when, in fact, we now know it didn't.

I still don't read Tea Party there. Can you highlight Tea Party in that sentence?

A politically motivated murder attempt surely warrants that sentence.


Because people understand context and cliche

Apparently, not everybody does.


Again, it's not my standard being discussed but, the media's. Why don't they treat the two similarly?

Actually, your first post doesn't mention the media even once. That was after the goalpost move.

And 'the media' includes a portion that's just as one-sided to the opposite extreme, so I'm not sure what your complain is.

[ElNono]

What Tea Party violence?

I'm using Yoni's standards here. Apparently, yelling at a camera or mob tactics and intimidation is 'violence', at least when alleged union members do it.

See OP.

[ElNono]

The point being, the point had no place at the memorial

Sure it did. It was definitely politically motivated.

[Yonivore]

Sure it did. It was definitely politically motivated.
It was insanity motivated.

[Yonivore]

I'm using Yoni's standards here. Apparently, yelling at a camera or mob tactics and intimidation is 'violence', at least when alleged union members do it.

See OP.
Even in the opening post, while mild, the guy did put his hands on the camerman and threaten further violence.

You can't even find a video of a Tea Party member coming close to that.

[ChumpDumper]

It was insanity motivated.Your evidence?

[ElNono]

Even in the opening post, while mild, the guy did put his hands on the camerman and threaten further violence.

You can't even find a video of a Tea Party member coming close to that.

So? The cameraman can sue for assault. That's how these things work.

You still haven't connected that nut to the President somehow.

[Wild Cobra]

Typical liberals, supporting criminals who hid under a union.

[ElNono]

It was insanity motivated.

Sure, you need to be insane to attempt to murder somebody. He went after a political figure. He obviously didn't like Gifford.

[ElNono]

Typical liberals, supporting criminals who hid under a union.

Who is supporting criminals? Quote please.

[Yonivore]

So? The cameraman can sue for assault. That's how these things work.

You still haven't connected that nut to the President somehow.

I was responding to this statement.


I'm using Yoni's standards here. Apparently, yelling at a camera or mob tactics and intimidation is 'violence', at least when alleged union members do it.

See OP.
The overarching conversation is not about connecting union violence to the President but, about how the media chooses to frame events to feed a narrative they choose.

Even in this thread, people are arguing how some video demonstrate the Tea Party is just as violent as those portrayed in videos demonstrating the largely Democrat and liberal union members are violent. While I disagree with the comparison, it does speak to how the media relates these events to the public in their coverage.

Union violence is reported as union violence -- and rarely connected with the union leadership.

A mouthy Tea Partyer at a rally is held up as all that is the Tea Party.

[ElNono]

The overarching conversation is not about connecting union violence to the President

The thread opens with "One of the President's core constituents".

Are you sure that's not the conversation?

I mean, the whole thing I disagreed with here is that the WH seemingly has different standards for the Tea Party and Unions.

[ElNono]

As far as the media is concerned, change the channel if you don't like what you see. There's something for everybody out there.

If anything, we already covered that topic with this statement, which most people agreed with here:


There could be an argument to be made that some in the media sensationalize the Tea Party. You're just not very good at making the point. The fact that you are trying so hard to convince people that the original video you posted represents proof of union violence severely undercuts your argument.

[Vici]

Typical liberals, supporting criminals who hid under a union.

Who is supporting criminals? What are you talking about? Did you even read a post or did you just decide to randomly say something stupid?

[Wild Cobra]

Who is supporting criminals? What are you talking about? Did you even read a post or did you just decide to randomly say something stupid?
OK...

Ever try to cross a picket line?

[ElNono]

:lol what does that have to do with this thread?

You don't like getting yelled at, it's your choice

[Vici]

OK...

Ever try to cross a picket line?

What? Was once not enough?

[Wild Cobra]

What? Was once not enough?
How often does violence occur if someone tries to cross a picket line?

[Vici]

What picket line? What the hell does a picket line have to do with this thread? Are you being serious?

[baseline bum]

Sure, you need to be insane to attempt to murder somebody. He went after a political figure. He obviously didn't like Gifford.

No you don't; you just have to be pissed off and have the sociopath mentality where nothing else matters but you.

[baseline bum]

For instance, I don't consider Wild Cobra insane even though he said he personally wants to shoot Mexicans at the border with his own rifle. He's a sociopath tbh.

[ElNono]

For instance, I don't consider Wild Cobra insane even though he said he personally wants to shoot Mexicans at the border with his own rifle. He's a sociopath tbh.

The difference is that WC is too chickenshit to carry out what he says. It's more like a wet dream of a sick person. To actually carry out that you need the cross the line to being insane, IMO.

[Yonivore]

I still don't read Tea Party there. Can you highlight Tea Party in that sentence?

A politically motivated murder attempt surely warrants that sentence.
A shooting motivated by partisan rhetoric, maybe. But this wasn't a shooting motivated by the political climate being spoken of, by President Obama. In fact, Loughner's focus on Giffords started years earlier and was related to some perceived slight she committed against him personally. So, I don't think it can even be considered a politically motivated shooting at all.

As I said, it was an insanity motivated shooting. He's a sick fuck.


Apparently, not everybody does.
Including you, apparently.


Actually, your first post doesn't mention the media even once. That was after the goalpost move.

And 'the media' includes a portion that's just as one-sided to the opposite extreme, so I'm not sure what your complain is.
I guess you've never heard of setting up a premise. I knew if I went with the typical, "If this were a Tea Party member, the media would be blasting Sarah Palin and the culture of violence she's fomented," other posters wouldn't have stepped so deep in the pudding.

And, it's not a complaint but, an observation. The media establishes narratives to which they tailor their "news" reporting. It's that simple.

[ElNono]

A shooting motivated by partisan rhetoric, maybe. But this wasn't a shooting motivated by the political climate being spoken of, by President Obama. In fact, Loughner's focus on Giffords started years earlier and was related to some perceived slight she committed against him personally. So, I don't think it can even be considered a politically motivated shooting at all.

So he didn't single out the Tea Party. I didn't think he did.
Why are you bitching again?


I guess you've never heard of setting up a premise.

I heard of pulling a strawman, then moving the goalposts, and still not having a point.

You bitch about the media doing what you're doing. So what exactly are you bitching about?

[Yonivore]

So he didn't single out the Tea Party. I didn't think he did.
Why are you bitching again?
Who's bitching? I'm just making observations. You're the one getting your panties all in a wad.


I heard of pulling a strawman, then moving the goalposts, and still not having a point.

You bitch about the media doing what you're doing. So what exactly are you bitching about?
Even if you didn't understand the point in the OP, you know it now. Why do you continue to insist I'm not making one. I've explicitly told you the point of this thread in more than one post.

The media plays favorites. I think the way they treat the Tea Party (and the political party most associated with it) and Unions (and the political party most associated with them) is a good illustration of that bias.

[ElNono]

Who's bitching?


The new civility. This is who Michelle's date, Trumpka, and Barack's emcee, Hoffa, represent.


Even if you didn't understand the point in the OP, you know it now.

The OP made no point.
When you were called to say when Barry called out the Tea Party, you folded and ran with the media story.

You're still bitching about it.

[Yonivore]

The OP made no point.
When you were called to say when Barry called out the Tea Party, you folded and ran with the media story.

You're still bitching about it.
:lmao So, you've got nothing on the point of the thread. Got it.

[Yonivore]

Look, Nono, there's no shame in just admitting you've got nothing to add to a debate but personal attacks on the posters. Really, it's okay.

[ElNono]

:lmao So, you've got nothing on the point of the thread. Got it.

The thread made no point.

And you're still bitching about it :lmao

[ElNono]

Look, Nono, there's no shame in just admitting you've got nothing to add to a debate but personal attacks on the posters. Really, it's okay.

I called you out on Barry saying anything about the Tea Party.

You folded, and you're still bitching :lmao

[Yonivore]

I called you out on Barry saying anything about the Tea Party.

You folded, and you're still bitching :lmao
If it makes you feel better to avoid the topic, no problem.

Barry inserted the topic of political rancor into a memorial service for people not killed due to political rancor. The only political rancor being discussed at the time of the shooting was the totally fabricated link between Tea Party rhetoric and the Giffords shooting. If you can't do the math, connect the dots, use simple deductive reasoning, I can't help you.

[ElNono]

If it makes you feel better to avoid the topic, no problem.

I didn't avoid the topic. I asked you point blank and you folded.

What's your point Yoni?

[Yonivore]

I didn't avoid the topic. I asked you point blank and you folded.

What's your point Yoni?
Do you just read every third post or something?

[Yonivore]

Nono, go read Post #3. It's were I explicitly establish the topic of this thread. I then continue to restate it in multiple posts thereafter.

Check out #13, and #18. Two other examples...

Hell, search for the word "media" in this thread.

[ElNono]

Nono, go read Post #3. It's were I explicitly establish the topic of this thread. I then continue to restate it in multiple posts thereafter.

Check out #13, and #18. Two other examples...

Hell, search for the word "media" in this thread.

Go read post #1. You wrote it. If that's not the topic, what's you point, Yoni?

[ElNono]

Page 4:


There could be an argument to be made that some in the media sensationalize the Tea Party. You're just not very good at making the point. The fact that you are trying so hard to convince people that the original video you posted represents proof of union violence severely undercuts your argument.

What are you still bitching about, Yoni?

[Yonivore]

Go read post #1. You wrote it. If that's not the topic, what's you point, Yoni?
I've already answered that question in several posts, to your direct question. I've established it in several more before you got on this jag about interrogating me over what is the point of this thread.

You're either stupid or being deliberately obtuse. Which is it?

I would lay money Mr. Fuck You is a staunch Democrat who voted for Barack Obama for President. Mr. Fuck You is a core constituent of Barack Obama's. How do we know this? Barack Obama is a butt boy to the Unions. His Presidency is pregnant with Union influence and involvement.

The media has never, ever made the connection between union violence -- and there have been countless incidents from the SEIU during Obamacare, the Public Employees in Wisconsin, and the Longshoremen in this latest incidence -- between Unions (a core constituency of the Democrat Party) and the Democrat Party and it's leaders.

Jared Loughner was a nut who killed and injured due to an insanity motivated by a perceived slight dealt him by Congresswoman Giffords. He's not a Tea Party member, we don't even know if he votes or identifies with a political ideology. But, from the moment he pulled the trigger, the media went to great lengths to paint this as violence instigated by the Tea Party vitriol. Then they spend days and weeks feeding that narrative...even after it was determined to have no role in the shooting.

Georgia Congressman John Lewis claims he was called a ###### and spat upon while walking through a Tea Party protest. The media pounced. When several video recordings of the event pretty much proved it never took place, there were no retractions...in fact, I'll bet many believe it still happened even though some of the original claimants have backed away from the claim.

The media plays favorites. That's been my point this entire thread.

Clear enough?

[Yonivore]

Page 4:

What are you still bitching about, Yoni?
You don't think the video, in the opening post, is representative of the violence in unions?

Perhaps you need it put in context.

Mr. Fuck You belongs to a local that had -- earlier that day -- participated in a violent act involving the taking of hostages and vandalism.

Not only that, there have been several other videos posted demonstrating union violence.

Where's the counter? Where are the videos of Tea Party violence? And, why are they consistently portrayed as a violent movement by the media?

[ElNono]

The media has never, ever made the connection between union violence and the Democrat Party and it's leaders.

Why don't you call Fox and tell them to do it? I'm sure they'll be glad to get your input.

[ElNono]

You don't think the video, in the opening post, is representative of the violence in unions?

Not really, no. I don't think all unions members are like that at all.

You still haven't proven that either.

[ElNono]

Mr. Fuck You belongs to a local that had -- earlier that day -- participated in a violent act involving the taking of hostages and vandalism.

Where's the video of that, Yoni?

[ElNono]

Are they still translating the documents?

[Yonivore]

Where's the video of that, Yoni?
You doubting it happened?

[Yonivore]

Are they still translating the documents?
Who's changing the subject? Who's moving the goalposts?

[ElNono]

You doubting it happened?

Yes. Where's the video of that guy at wherever you said he was?

[ElNono]

Who's changing the subject? Who's moving the goalposts?

I'm talking about the report of this guy doing the kidnapping you said he did.

Where is it?

[Yonivore]

Yes. Where's the video of that guy at wherever you said he was?
Okay, you have a hard time with relationships.

The news reported approached that local union because they had been involved in the port violence. I don't find it hard to believe Mr. Fuck You was involved. But whether he was or not, I think he's presents an accurate representation of those of his violent union brothers that did participate.

My point does not depend on whether or not Mr. Fuck You was directly involved -- even though I think it's possible -- but on being able to reasonably conclude they're a violent bunch of pricks. They invade a port and then send Mr. Fuck You out to deal with the media with threats and shoving...I can see it.

But, back to my point, because you have trouble staying on topic; if this had been a Tea Partyer shoving the cameraman around and spewing profanity-laced threats at the news reporter, I have no doubt Sarah Palin's name would have somehow been invoked by the media.

You can disagree but, I think precedent is on my side here.

[ElNono]

Okay, you have a hard time with relationships.

I have no problems with relationships. Where's the video of that guy doing kidnapping and whatever else you claim he did?

[ElNono]

So you don't know he did anything you claim he did? :lmao

No surprises there, Yoni.

I could just as easily say you were there too.

[Yonivore]

So you don't know he did anything you claim he did? :lmao

No surprises there, Yoni.
I'd have to go back and read my posts but, I'm not sure I ever said Mr. Fuck You was personally involved in the violence at the port. Additionally, it's not the point of this thread but, you seem intent on not addressing the real point of the thread so why do you continue to post?


I could just as easily say you were there too.
You could but, that'd make about as much sense as saying Sarah Palin was responsible for Congresswoman Gifford's being shot.

Supposing Mr. Fuck You was at the port, on the other hand, is a completely reasonable proposition.

Therein lies the difference between you and I; reasonableness.

[ElNono]

I'd have to go back and read my posts but, I'm not sure I ever said Mr. Fuck You was personally involved in the violence at the port

How could you possibly make that claim if you don't know that he was?


Supposing Mr. Fuck You was at the port, on the other hand, is a completely reasonable proposition.

Not really, no. That guy is a douche regardless. But far from being representative of the union population. 12% of the workforce is unionized in the country. You would think you'll see more than a YouTube or two if this would be the endemic problem you claim it is.

[Yonivore]

How could you possibly make that claim if you don't know that he was?
I'm not sure I made the claim. But, if I did, so what? I still think it's reasonable.


Not really, no. That guy is a douche regardless. But far from being representative of the union population. 12% of the workforce is unionized in the country. You would think you'll see more than a YouTube or two if this would be the endemic problem you claim it is.
Back to the point of the thread, there are exponentially more YouTube videos of Union violence than there are of Tea Party violence (In fact, there are none of Tea Party violence) yet, the media will jump to feed the narrative the Tea Party is violent and paint prominent Tea Party members as instigating that (non-existent) violence while, at the same time, report on Union violence -- some of which is instigated by partisan politics such as in Wisconsin and with Obamacare -- and never track that back to prominent Democrats?

Once again, I've restated the point of this thread.

[ElNono]

I'm not sure I made the claim. But, if I did, so what? I still think it's reasonable.

No, it's not reasonable at all. How is it reasonable if you don't know he was there?


Back to the point of the thread, there are exponentially more YouTube videos of Union violence than there are of Tea Party violence

Are there? You went fishing and found just one. ONE. And the guy ended up in jail. What's the problem, Yoni? Justice was served.

[Yonivore]

No, it's not reasonable at all. How is it reasonable if you don't know he was there?
We disagree.

In your world, every act will have to be videotaped to be convincing. In my world, it's reasonable to assume someone as exercised as Mr. Fuck You was involved with the rest of his local union brothers in the incident.

I can live with the disagreement.


Are there? You went fishing and found just one. ONE. And the guy ended up in jail. What's the problem, Yoni? Justice was served.
I think I've posted more than one. But, however many there are, it would be that number more than videos of Tea Party violence.

Again, you're attempting to divert from the main topic which, of course, you've yet to even address. And, that is -- once more time for Slow ElNono -- the media has not taken any examples of union violence and tied them back to partisan rancor from the left (even in the face of overwhelming examples of Democrat politicians egging on the unions -- particularly in the Wisconsin situation) when the media has no problem with ascribing acts with unknown motives with political rancor from the right, if it fits a narrative, (i.e., the Gifford's shooting.).

[ElNono]

I think I've posted more than one. But, however many there are, it would be that number more than videos of Tea Party violence.

Only one with violence on it. Unless you consider intimidation and mob mentality violence, in which case the Tea Party has it's own video too.

The fact is that isolated, rare incidents by nuts are that. Isolated and rare. There's probably more union members than Tea Party members and neither really has violence as a trait. That's probably why it rarely, if ever, make the news. I'm sure Fox would be on top of it if union members on their vast majority a violent faction.

But you don't see it, because it only happens in your senile head.

[Capt Bringdown]

Went to bat for them in Wisconsin.

How exactly? Obama hasn't even set foot in Wisconsin since Walker started his war against working people, although he promised to walk the picket line if collective bargaining was threatened.

[Yonivore]

Only one with violence on it. Unless you consider intimidation and mob mentality violence, in which case the Tea Party has it's own video too.

The fact is that isolated, rare incidents by nuts are that. Isolated and rare. There's probably more union members than Tea Party members and neither really has violence as a trait. That's probably why it rarely, if ever, make the news. I'm sure Fox would be on top of it if union members on their vast majority a violent faction.

But you don't see it, because it only happens in your senile head.
Okay, let's see if I can use this to get you to finally address the actual topic.

So why did the media find it so easy to jump to the conclusion there was a connection between the Tea Party and Giffords shooting but can't seem to see a similar connection between the words of Democrat leaders and the violent acts of Unions?

[Yonivore]

How exactly? Obama hasn't even set foot in Wisconsin since Walker started his war against working people, although he promised to walk the picket line if collective bargaining was threatened.
DNC playing role in Wisconsin protests (http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0211/DNC_playing_role_in_Wisconsin_protests.html)


The Democratic National Committee's Organizing for America arm -- the remnant of the 2008 Obama campaign -- is playing an active role in organizing protests against Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker's attempt to strip most public employees of collective bargaining rights.
Surely, you're not going to pretend Obama has no influence over his campaign organization, are you?

[ElNono]

So why did the media find it so easy to jump to the conclusion there was a connection between the Tea Party and Giffords shooting but can't seem to see a similar connection between the words of Democrat leaders and the violent acts of Unions?

What words of what Democrat leaders? Which Democrat leader was inciting violence? I already asked you for this a couple of times and you always come back empty.

And putting crosshairs in a map where a murder attempt happened, then removing them as soon as they're found certainly points to sending the wrong message. And don't come back to me with the 'survey markers', both you and I know those were crosshairs.

Answer me this while you're at it: How many union members open carry on a political rally? What message is that guy sending? Peace and love?

[ElNono]

“I am the No. 1 target for one more extremist group to defeat this November. We need to have your help for candidates like me. We need you to take out some of these bad guys.”

Is this violent rhetoric, yoni?

Yes or no.

[Wild Cobra]

For instance, I don't consider Wild Cobra insane even though he said he personally wants to shoot Mexicans at the border with his own rifle. He's a sociopath tbh.


The difference is that WC is too chickenshit to carry out what he says. It's more like a wet dream of a sick person. To actually carry out that you need the cross the line to being insane, IMO.
LOL...

You two, and others, love to misread and misstate my posts.

Can either of you show where I said I want to shoot Mexicans with my rifle?

Go back and review my words and the context. Until then, you are both ankle biters. Then this crap with Yoni. He restates his position, yet you wont let go of your original problem with how he said it. Ankle biters with jaws that lock!

[ElNono]

We read just fine.

[Wild Cobra]

We read just fine.
Yes, but your comprehension is colored by your bias.

[ElNono]

Yes, but your comprehension is colored by your bias.

Not the only one that understood you perfectly. Perhaps you need to think what you want to say before actually typing it. Context has nothing to do with it.