Reply With Quote
I've yet to read anybody in here defending what that nutter in the first video did. Union or not union.
“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.
I've yet to read anybody in here defending what that nutter in the first video did. Union or not union.
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.
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 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.
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.
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.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.)
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.
Again, it's not my standard being discussed but, the media's. Why don't they treat the two similarly?
I've yet to hear Fox News comment on any of the Tea Party violence and rhetoric. Tea Partiers thrive on Fox propaganda.
What Tea Party violence?
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.
What bull . 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").
You know, that video of a Tea Partier yelling obscenities at a cameraman that got all that Leftist Media coverage.
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.
What bull . 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").
Link to what that violence had to do with.
Quotes from the shooter please.
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.
Apparently, not everybody does.
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'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.
Sure it did. It was definitely politically motivated.
It was insanity motivated.
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.
Your evidence?
So? The cameraman can sue for assault. That's how these things work.
You still haven't connected that nut to the President somehow.
Typical liberals, supporting criminals who hid under a union.
Sure, you need to be insane to attempt to murder somebody. He went after a political figure. He obviously didn't like Gifford.
Who is supporting criminals? Quote please.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
