Reply With Quote
It isn't all that hard to figure out. Palin meant the exact same thing Hoffa meant. There really is nothing to read into.
Sure. Plenty out there:
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:
It isn't all that hard to figure out. Palin meant the exact same thing Hoffa meant. There really is nothing to read into.
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?
From the perspective that Mr You didn't pull a gun, I think you're reaching.
Whatever she meant, she thought it was offensive enough to remove it all by her own.
And exactly how was Mr. 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.
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. You, when they stormed a port, took hostages, and vandalized the place.Sure. Plenty out there:
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:
Let me know when any Tea Party signs or words prompts an actual act of violence.
Well, do you know if Mr. 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.
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.
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 the guy in the video you posted prompts an actual act of violence.
Truther logic.
No reasonable non-shill, or non-pussy, would consider that violent.Do you not consider his grabbing the camera and threatening the cameraman a violent act?
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.
Yoni drags in more rat and makes into a mountain.
Yoni hates unions and hates Barry, yawn.
Totally agree here as well.
I mean if the point is that people like boutons and NBADan, and the bull blogs they dump all over the forum, spend too much time decrying the Tea Party as an inherently violent group... well, no !
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.
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.
Any videos of Tea Partyers physically striking anyone at a town hall meeting?
Was Mr. You with his 500 Union Brothers when they took the hostages and vandalized the port facility?
That's your characterization. I think she removed it to attempt to end the constant driveling over it.
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.
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.
I think they feed narratives of their own creation. Making up 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 ing time, cautioning against jumping to the conclusion it was what it turned out to be. A ing jihadist.
Times Square Car Bomb Suspect Faces Terrorism Charges After Admitting to Plot
I simply think you're wrong about the media's motives in their reporting and how they frame certain issues.
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.
How's that different from the Tea Potty signs?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.
Where's the violence there?
So the nut was arrested. Okay.
Where's the violence again? Certainly not in this video.
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:
I don't know. Was he? Do you know?
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.
Hoffa was talking about voting. You got fooled.
yoni can't get past the gas station.
Sure you do. You wouldn't be replying otherwise. You might not agree, but you certainly care.
The media's methods are not novel...
The Press: I'll Furnish the 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.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,...
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.
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.
So they're pretty much like you in this thread and every thread.
What is your complaint?
Who's the extreme left you speak of?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
