RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


tazzygirl -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (3/2/2011 6:29:35 AM)

We have all read the rhetoric.

We have also read the facts.

Still, did Palin intend these to be gun sights? The design is pretty simple, just two lines crossed in a circle, allowing some on the right to argue that these are surveyor symbols. Palin aide Mansour readily agreed with this notion when she was interviewed Sunday by conservative radio host Tammy Bruce.

But this seems like an after-the-fact excuse.

Would Sarah Palin, known for her love of guns, really instruct an advertising agency to place "surveyor symbols" on her map of political targets? On her March 23 Facebook posting that accompanied the map, Palin wrote: "We'll aim for these races and many others. This is just the first salvo in a fight to elect people across the nation who will bring common sense to Washington."

Certainly, Palin raised no public objection when people, including Giffords, at the time said they thought the map showed gun sights.

"We're on Sarah Palin's Targeted list," Giffords told MSNBC in March, after the door of her Tucson office was smashed after her vote in favor of the health care bill. "But the thing is the way she has it depicted, it has the crosshairs of a gun sight over our district and when people do that, they've got to realize there are consequences to that action." Giffords, however, demurred when the interviewer noted that such imagery has long been a staple of politics and asked whether Palin really meant it. "I can't say, I'm not Sarah Palin," Giffords replied.

Similarly, on "The View," co-host Elisabeth Hasselbeck--who campaigned with Palin in 2008--on March 25 labeled the map as "purely despicable." She added: "The names that are next to and being highlighted by those crosshairs, I think it's an abuse of the Second Amendment. I also feel as though every single person on here is a mother, a father, a friend, a brother, a sister, and to take it to this level is--it's disappointing to see this come from the Party, and I would hope that leaders like Sarah Palin would end this."

Finally, here's what Palin herself tweeted on Nov. 4 when the election results came in and all but two of those lawmakers on her list had either quit or been defeated: "Remember months ago "bullseye" icon used 2 target the 20 Obamacare-lovin' incumbent seats? We won 18 out of 20 (90% success rate;T'aint bad)"


She, herself, called them bulleyes.

Its a nice fantasy you have, Sanity. Sadly, it doesnt wash.




tazzygirl -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (3/2/2011 6:31:36 AM)

quote:

Whats really funny taz, is how you and your ilk are using the Giffords shooting to justify these tactics, after a supposed call for civility from Obama himself.

Seems like you would be first on the bandwagon condemning that sort of behavior, but instead you are championing it.



Show me where I have ever championed the use? I merely showed your own hipocracy.




Lucylastic -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (3/2/2011 6:32:52 AM)

he is a down and out liar Tazzy, not worth the effort. His justification has been proven false time after time.
Can you imagine his screeching if it had been a repub shot?




tazzygirl -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (3/2/2011 6:36:39 AM)

There would be no peace.




Sanity -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (3/2/2011 6:39:02 AM)


So you are condemning the union thug tactics used against Governor Walker then?

Its about time someone on the left did, good for you.

[sm=applause.gif]




DomYngBlk -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (3/2/2011 6:39:57 AM)

Fuck that drag that asshole out in the street and give him something to think about.




tazzygirl -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (3/2/2011 6:41:16 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


So you are condemning the union thug tactics used against Governor Walker then?

Its about time someone on the left did, good for you.

[sm=applause.gif]



Now which thug tactics would those be, Sanity?

The right to peacefully organize and protest?




Lucylastic -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (3/2/2011 6:41:31 AM)

bangs my head




DomYngBlk -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (3/2/2011 6:43:39 AM)

Oh lucy




Sanity -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (3/2/2011 7:05:55 AM)


Thanks dom

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomYngBlk

Fuck that drag that asshole out in the street and give him something to think about.


Your sense of timing is impeccable

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
Now which thug tactics would those be, Sanity?

The right to peacefully organize and protest?





tazzygirl -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (3/2/2011 9:39:08 AM)

Uh huh.... didnt think you could come up with one.




truckinslave -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (3/3/2011 6:39:46 AM)

Well, maybe; I don't know the details of their personal finances. Perhaps you do. One of them is pregnant...?




truckinslave -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (3/3/2011 6:42:58 AM)

quote:

How does one become a "professional agitator"?


One contacts his union rep, my man. Everybody knows that [;)]




truckinslave -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (3/3/2011 6:49:16 AM)

quote:

The majority at the outset said that they weren't interested in real debate they were going thru the motions and passing it on as is. 


The outrage!!!!
Who do they think they are, Dimocrats?????????
What do they think they're doing, passing 0bama0Care???????????




mnottertail -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (3/3/2011 6:50:25 AM)

specious argument, per usual.

http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy&hl=en&q=obama+meeting+with+republicans+on+healthcare&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.&fp=d3539bde5dec0acd




rulemylife -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (3/3/2011 6:54:01 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


So you are condemning the union thug tactics used against Governor Walker then?

Its about time someone on the left did, good for you.

[sm=applause.gif]



It's about time you showed us what these "union thug tactics" were.

The only thing I have seen were protests.




Sanity -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (3/3/2011 6:55:39 AM)


They probably have to pass it before they can find out whats in it, too. [:D]

quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave

The outrage!!!!
Who do they think they are, Dimocrats?????????
What do they think they're doing, passing 0bama0Care???????????




mnottertail -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (3/3/2011 7:00:29 AM)

Which reminds me, when are we going to see any bill of substance coming out of the house?




truckinslave -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (3/3/2011 7:01:44 AM)

That wasn't even window dressing; maybe windowpane dressing.
I'm sure Walker would be glad to let the Dims debate the bill, offer Amendments to the bill, meet with them to talk about the bill... and then ram it down their throats exactly as the Dims di 0bama0Care.
Notice i'm not demonizing the Dims for having done so- and I never did. I said there would be a price to pay for it; but the whole point of winning political power is to use it. Go too far, the public spanks you.
But at least the Republicans in DC had the guts to show up for work.

Recall efforts underway. signs the Dims are weakening.
Walker is gonna win, and its gonna be SWEET. The Money Laundering Division of the Dim Party is going to be weakened nationwide, this year.
Roosevelt was right. Public sector unions are intolerable.




mnottertail -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (3/3/2011 7:05:29 AM)

And Walker plainly said he did not offer amendments.  The democrats did on Obamacare, and the republicans refused.

Now, I should think that if the republicans offered a bill up on removing the requirement to purchase insurance, only, it would pass. 

Then they can offer up the next objection.

Let us try to be real as well as truthful here. 




Page: <<   < prev  36 37 [38] 39 40   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
1.017578