Obama, This is Your Army - We Will Win That War!
POSTED BY: AnthonyT
UPDATED: Monday, September 12, 2011 16:54
VIEWED: 3837
PAGE 1 of 1
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2011/09/05/bts-hoffa-take-ou
t-gop.cnn?hpt=hp_t2
"Let's take these son of a bitches out!"
Hello,
With rhetoric like this, this man is becoming a parody of his own enemy. He is doing nothing to help the party he claims to serve.
--Anthony
Edit: I realized the initial subject line implied Obama was saying these words, and edited with a comma.
_______________________________________________
“If you are not free to choose wrongly and irresponsibly, you are not free at all”
Jacob Hornberger
“Freedom is not worth having if it does not connote freedom to err. It passes my comprehension how human beings, be they ever so experienced and able, can delight in depriving other human beings of that precious right.”
Mahatma Gandhi
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I am no longer able to watch any person speaking into a microphone from a lectern addressing a crowd: you can bet 100% that what they say means absolutely nothing and will have no effect on anything. I was flipping through the channels and S. Palin was on - same thing. Obama - same thing - rhetoridiculousness.
Ok - graduation speeches can be cool, but otherwise politics-wise, nada.
Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
" 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. "
- Barack Obama, Arizona Memorial Speech, 2011.
" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
This was fun. I checked out the story rather than the video, 'cuz my computer's slow this morning. I'd have to say I take this in context; while I definitely abhor the use of violent rhetoric, I think it's a mountain-out-of-a-molehill situation. There's a difference between gun, crosshair and "second amendment" language and something which both previous statements AND the "everyone here's got a vote" just before it; this was intended, given what he said directly before, to mean "let's vote them out.”
I tend to agree with this:Quote:
That article is about Wasserman-Schulz being "interviewed" (reads "gone after") by Ms. Fair-and-Balanced Carlson, and I have to admit, I was much more curious to watch the latter try to goad the former, and being frustrated in her attempt. But my computer is being such a piece of shit I can't get the video from THAT, either! So here's their take:
Some have reasonably argued that the alleged incendiary portion of the comment (the “take these sons of bitches out”) was prefaced with “everybody here has a vote,” which seems to add up to the more common phrase of voting someone out of office. But that’s not the convenient nor conflict-based meme that makes for a sexy (and dumbed down?) news narrative. The takeaway from the weekend? Hoffa said “let’s take these sons of bitches out,” or a declaration of war on the Tea Party movement. http://www.mediaite.com/tv/gretchen-carlson-and-wasserman-shultz-spar-
over-hoffas-take-them-out-remark/ Quote:
Ooo, wait, I got it. It's as entertaining as expected.
Cut to this morning’s appearance by the DNC chair on Fox and Friends. When challenged to rebuke Hoffa’s comments, Wasserman-Shultz punted, refusing to speak about the comments directly, staying focused on the economic woes that her constituents and most American’s are currently facing. This line of defense seemed to exasperate Carlson, who, when challenged by the DNC about violent Tea Party rhetoric, defended her fair and balanced approach by her central position on the Fox and Friends “curvy couch.”
Apparently Wasserman-Schulz had been speaking about jobs, when Carlson leads in with: "It seems one of the plans of the President is to go all out in force of the unions. Yesterday he did that in Detroit. He, his introductory speech was by Jimmie Hoffa Junior. He attacked the Tea part with what one peep...with what some people are saying is not very civil discussion. Listen to this..."
{they played the tape, STARTING with "we keep the eye on the prize. Let's take these sons-of-bitches out, etc."--leaving out the "everyone here has a vote" immediately before it, of course, being FauxNew}
Carlson: "Some people are saying that's kind of violent language for someone, the White House REFUSING to RESPOND to that..." As Head of the DNC, what's YOUR official RESPONSE to that today?"
Shulz: "My official response is that we need to make sure we focus on the middle class and working families, and that we bring everyone in this country from both sides of the aisle to focus like a laser on continuing to get this country turned around, that...
Carlson: "Wait a minute..."
Schulz: "...should be our priority...That's the priority of President Obama."
Carlson (talking over her): "But wait a minute. Jimmie Hoffa Jr. says 'let's take these sons of bitches out, and give America back to America where we belong. And THAT's your response to it?!?"
Schulz (waited for her to finish): "My response is that we should be working together and focused on creating jobs and, you know, when I'm home, I was just home in South Florida, before we were coming back to session this week, and what people talk to me about in the town hall meetings that I held were "Debbie, we need you to focus on job creation, we need to be sure.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hello,
One of the trends I see as most regrettable is the reticence to speak out against our 'friends' when they take actions that we find abhorrent in our 'enemies.'
If our enemies do it, it is terrible, incendiary language that brings down the level of debate to its basest level while creating an unnecessarily antagonistic political atmosphere.
If our friends do it, then it is 'regrettable' and 'they did it first.'
It makes it very hard to take either side seriously when the highest aspiration of a political party is to duplicate the worst trends of their opposition without getting in trouble for it.
--Anthony
_______________________________________________
“If you are not free to choose wrongly and irresponsibly, you are not free at all”
Jacob Hornberger
“Freedom is not worth having if it does not connote freedom to err. It passes my comprehension how human beings, be they ever so experienced and able, can delight in depriving other human beings of that precious right.”
Mahatma Gandhi
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hey Anthony,
What you say is, of course, true and sound and appropriate, but...
I think there's a serious cultural divide that goes a long way toward rendering the argument moot. The right will never get its collective panties in a bunch over violent rhetoric coming from the left--the right will only laugh. Meanwhile, the left making a big show of "policing its own" and condemning this Union Guy's "take the s.o.b's out" matters not at all to anyone but dyed in the wool lefties.
The right mythologizes violence and unreservedly reveres violent men who share their ideology. While the left does some mythologizing of its own, for the most part the left will nuance their sanction of violence out of existence, or at least to the point where the right will laugh at them anyway. (And just to be clear, if anyone who's reading this abhors violence and self identifies as "right," in my book, you're just not, sorry. In other words, you're not part of the group I identify in this post as "the right." You may have some right-leaning notions and such, but you are not "the right." You are not what our friend Frem would call "a jackboot." I'm talking about the jackboots.)
Barack Obama could go to war with Libya, Iran and Syria to boot, and the right would still consider him a pansy. The left will never be able to harness violent rhetoric, or even violent action, the way the right does for political gain.
With a turn of phrase like we're talking about here, where a possibly violent image is embedded in an otherwise thoroughly inoffensive (tired) speech, we're dealing with dog whistle politics. The problem is, there are just not enough mad dogs on the left to make anyone worry about who is hearing that whistle. I'm sorry, no right winger is going to be scared by this guy's speech. Ever. It is politically irrelevant.
HKCavalier
Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
The problem is, there are just not enough mad dogs on the left to make anyone worry about who is hearing that whistle.
Which is kinda sad in a way, cause I can foam at the chops pretty convincingly if I want to..
Since this thread is pretty absurd anyway, lemme share something tossed at me via a discussion on Anarchy somewhere else earlier today - although I don't think hysterical laughter was the intended effect when it was sent to me by someone calling Anarchism inherently unjust...
http://www.wallout.com/liberty_screwing_justice
Once I got done laughing my ass off, in retrospect it made me feel kinda patriotic, actually.
-Frem
I do not serve the Blind God.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Niki2 wrote:
Tuesday, September 06, 2011 11:04
This was fun. I checked out the story rather than the video, 'cuz my computer's slow this morning. I'd have to say I take this in context; while I definitely abhor the use of violent rhetoric, I think it's a mountain-out-of-a-molehill situation. There's a difference between gun, crosshair and "second amendment" language and something which both previous statements AND the "everyone here's got a vote" just before it; this was intended, given what he said directly before, to mean "let's vote them out.”
Of COURSE you'd claim it's a mountain out of a mole hill. Duh ! It completely blows apart any logical claim of moral high ground by the Left, and you simply can NOT have any of that! Sons of bitches, going to war, fighting...that's far and away more antagonistic and confrontational than some silly 'target' on a map. Please, it's not even worth debating. Even Anthony can see this, why can't you?
" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Maybe they should start putting targets on maps and raffle off some guns.
I've been assured that these kinds of actions in no way can be viewed as any kind of bad thing.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Of COURSE you'd claim it's a mountain out of a mole hill. Duh ! It completely blows apart any logical claim of moral high ground by the Left, and you simply can NOT have any of that! Sons of bitches, going to war, fighting...
" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "
Hello,
I applaud you, Raptor, for being brave enough to state the truth about this foul Democratic speech. It's wrong! It's terrible! Shame on this Democrat for using this sort of divisive, antagonistic speech!
And now, please join me in condemning this same rhetoric that commonly comes from the GOP and the Tea Party.
Let us be bold enough to call it wrong even then! I'll start!
It's wrong! It's terrible! SHAME on the GOP and the Tea Party for using just such rhetoric in the past!
Your turn.
--Anthony
_______________________________________________
“If you are not free to choose wrongly and irresponsibly, you are not free at all”
Jacob Hornberger
“Freedom is not worth having if it does not connote freedom to err. It passes my comprehension how human beings, be they ever so experienced and able, can delight in depriving other human beings of that precious right.”
Mahatma Gandhi
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
What rhetoric are you speaking of, specifically?
Sarah Palin's innocuous cross-hairs image on her Facebook page ?
That was neither the GOP or TEA Party's doing, and quite frankly, is completely different than the vitriol spewed by Hoffa.
" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Meanwhile, one of the Koch brothers was caught on tape speaking to a "secret" meeting of GOP lawmakers he sponsors, referring to President Obama as "Saddam Hussein" and pledging "the mother of all wars" against him...
"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Rep. Allen West (R-FL) urged Tea Partiers to use "muskets and bayonets" to defeat Democrats in his campaign speeches.
I recall no outrage from FauxNews or from Rappy, no condemnation of such language.
Sharron Angle (R-NV) once threatened to "use Second Amendment remedies" (what does the Second Amendment talk about, exactly?) to "take out" Harry Reid.
No condemnation was forthcoming from Rappy.
When Sarah Palin put crosshairs on Gabby Giffords and others and told her followers "Don't retreat. Reload!", again no condemnation of her violent rhetoric was forthcoming, even after Giffords was shot and several others were killed.
And hell, according to some, it would be perfectly normal and rational for James Hoffa to now raffle off some guns as a way to raise funds with which to "take those sons-of-bitches out".
"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Anthony, you're right and I agree. I just saw this as a "gotcha", given he had said similar things previously, CLEARLY connected to "voting" them out, and that he'd said "we've each got a vote" immediately preceding the remark in question. I didn't see any such material which would mitigate (in essence, I forget the exact wording): "If we don't get what we want, we're going to resort to second-amendment remedies" and the ad running around with the Founding Fathers urging violence. Those were, to me, pretty obviously overt THREATS; this was not. I nonetheless think it was wrong if for no other reason than it COULD be misconstrued, and it DOES fan the flames of divisiveness. Definitely. I guess I see the others as less deliberately threatening than this one; deliberately INTENDED to be threatening.
At the bottom of it all, your statement is right on point; people should CARE what they're saying, not toss stuff out to inflame their audience which will increase the extremely deep divide in America today. Those in the public eye should think about what they're saying; the momentary riling up of a crowd fades; the media splurge over the wording goes on for days, and isn't forgotten soon.
ETA: Ooops, I just saw your response to Raptor. Almost spit out my ice tea. He didn't get your initial statement, did he? Wonderful!
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off 
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Cav...sigh...as usual, you are right on point, in my opinion, and, as is too often the case, it saddens me to recognize it. I've known it for years, but I try not to think about it. The fact is, the right is much better at getting down in the gutter EFFECTIVELY, and always will be, and the left is far better at snatching defeat out of the jaws of victory, and being wooses, and always will be. Sad fact of life.
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Mike: Excellent, thank you for the examples. In any of those examples, were references made to VOTING as a way to "take them out", I wonder? And you forgot the beautiful Rick Barber ad:
Man, it don't get NO more direct than that! I don't recall anyone on the right saying anything negative about that one, and gosh, what does "gather your armies" in response to Barber's rant mean, I wonder? Armies of voters? 
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The Dems are the angry, violent, gutless rabble they try to paint the TEA party movement folks as being, and it's not even close.
Quote:
Longshoremen storm Wash. state port, overpower guards, dump grain
Labor dispute spreads to Seattle, Tacoma ahead of court hearing
LONGVIEW, Wash. — Hundreds of Longshoremen stormed the Port of Longview early Thursday, overpowered and held security guards, damaged railroad cars, and dumped grain that is the center of a labor dispute, officials said.
The International Longshore and Warehouse Union dispute spread to Seattle, Tacoma, Everett and Anacortes ports ahead of a court hearing scheduled for 1:30 p.m. Thursday in Tacoma, where a judge is expected to consider alleged union violations of a previous restraining order.
On Thursday, six guards were held hostage for a couple of hours after 500 or more Longshoremen broke down Longview gates about 4:30 a.m. PT (7:30 a.m. ET) and smashed windows in the guard shack, said Longview Police Chief Jim Duscha.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44439782/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/
" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Isn't that, in the most literal sense of the phrase, almost an EXACT reenactment of the Boston Tea Party? Are you saying that these are indeed Tea Partiers?
Or are you saying that the instigators of the original Boston Tea Party (itself a terrorist act) were "angry, violent, gutless rabble"?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Nothing remotely like the original tea party, and you know it.
Now I know ( always have known, actually) that you're simply trolling, and have nothing of substance to say, what so ever, in the least.
" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
So anyone who disagrees with Rappy or Geezer is simply a troll.
Got it.
Troll is the new Godwin.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Your intentional distortion, tossing up red herrings and false analogies is what makes you and your ilk, trolls.
Not merely disagreeing w/ specific points, on merit or supported by evidence. You in particular run away from having adult conversations on ANYTHING.
No, instead you just post vulgar parody pics and mischaracterize what others say, and the positions they take as your means of 'debate'.
Instead of having to repeat the obvious, over and over again, " troll " applies, quite nicely.
" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Let's see...
What did John McCain say about Palin? Did he condemn her language? You betcha!
And you forgot Palin's "blood libel"
Good gawd, need we? Okay:
Michelle Bachman: She wants the residents of her state “armed and dangerous.”
"We're going to keep building the party until we're hunting Democrats with dogs." -- Senator Phil Gramm (R-TX)
Huckabee: Members of Congress "should be tarred and feathered as the original tea partiers would have done."
Ann Coulter: “My only regret with Tim McVeigh is that he did not go to the New York Times building”
Chuck Norris: "...when that time comes, will our leaders finally listen or will history need to record a second American Revolution?"
And let's not forget the Tree of Liberty...
(You can dismiss the following if you want, as they're talk radio/tv pundits, from whom we expect little else, be they right or left. But here are just a few examples--if I quoted Beck or Limbaugh, it would go on all night)
Glen Beck: “Hang on, let me just tell you what I’m thinking. I’m thinking about killing Michael Moore, and I’m wondering if I could kill him myself, or if I would need to hire somebody to do it. No, I think I could.”
Rush Limbaugh: “I tell people don’t kill ALL the liberals. Leave enough so we can have two on every campus–living fossils–so we we’ll never forget what these people stood for.”
Michael Savage: “I say round liberals up and hang em’ high. When I hear someone’s in the civil rights business, I oil up my AR-25.”
"We need to execute people like John Walker in order to physically intimidate liberals, by making them realize that they can be killed, too. Otherwise, they will turn out to be outright traitors." -- Ann Coulter
"I tell people don't kill all the liberals. Leave enough so we can have two on every campus - living fossils - so we will never forget what these people stood for." -- Rush Limbaugh
“I’ll tell you who should be tortured and killed at Guantanamo: every filthy Democrat in the U.S. Congress." -- Sean Hannity
Fox News contributor Dick Morris: "[t]hose crazies in Montana who say, 'We're going to kill ATF agents because the U.N.'s going to take over' -- well, they're beginning to have a case."
Radio talk show host Jim Quinn stated, "You have got to say no to this, and if they push this through, you need to riot in the streets. You need to riot in the streets." He further said, "Our country was built on revolution and it's about time we took it back....and if a revolution is what it takes, damn it, then that's what it's going to take."
Newsmax columnist John Perry: "There is a remote, although gaining, possibility America's military will intervene as a last resort to resolve the 'Obama problem.' Don't dismiss it as unrealistic."
Shall we go on? Cav is right; it's their stock in trade. Speaks to their base. It's effective.
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Huh. I posted SPECIFIC examples of exactly what this thread was supposed to be about (violent rhetoric and the calling out of it, or not calling out of it, as the case may be). You never responded on point, posted up some idiotic story, and then started calling others trolls.
Seems you're quite the troll here, by your own definition.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Your intentional distortion, tossing up red herrings and false analogies is what makes you and your ilk, trolls.
Not merely disagreeing w/ specific points, on merit or supported by evidence. You in particular run away from having adult conversations on ANYTHING.
No, instead you just post vulgar parody pics and mischaracterize what others say, and the positions they take as your means of 'debate'.
Instead of having to repeat the obvious, over and over again, " troll " applies, quite nicely.
" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "
Hello,
There are clear examples of divisive, hateful speech above. You still have not condemned them. Where is your commitment to a better way?
Does your discerning ear turn deaf to the bad actors in your own party?
Does your acute eye turn blind?
Join me in condemnation. Shame on the antagonizers within the GOP and Tea Party! Shame on the party for not speaking out against its own worst elements!
--Anthony
_______________________________________________
“If you are not free to choose wrongly and irresponsibly, you are not free at all”
Jacob Hornberger
“Freedom is not worth having if it does not connote freedom to err. It passes my comprehension how human beings, be they ever so experienced and able, can delight in depriving other human beings of that precious right.”
Mahatma Gandhi
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I, for one, am sure left-wing talk-show hosts and no doubt what's-his-name on the "Joe Show" or whatever it's called (I can never remember, dammit!) have used violent rhetoric, which is why I caveated the last quotes I put up. I'm sure some of those in office, candidates for same, or in the public eye have done so as well. And I condemn them ALL, left, right, middle, Tea Party, whoever. It gets attention, it gets media; it works. But it works wrongly, is always picked up and made hay of by the media, and it's wrong, whoever's mouth it comes from, as well as increasing the divide between people AND distracting from the actual, serious issues we face.
And I DEFINITELY condemn violent ACTIONS, such as the example above. We could get into that, too, the photo of the woman on the ground with a foot on her head, etc., etc., ad infinitum. Fact is THAT happens on both sides too, and is wrong for even more reasons.
Mike and Raptor: Back to your regularly-scheduled programming--have at one another. Neither of you makes sense.
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
A -
Quotes taken out of context don't constitute 'divisive, hateful' speech.
There is nothing to condemn.
Well, maybe not Michael Savage. His comments are probably in context, but hey...it's Michael Savage. Who's listening to him anyways ?
" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
What rhetoric are you speaking of, specifically?
Sarah Palin's innocuous cross-hairs image on her Facebook page ?
See guys? This is what I mean when I said that this is not a real brain worth trying to assess. This troll knows exactly what you mean Anthony, and he does indeed know know where his hypocrisy lies. "Innocuous crosshairs"? Come on. He says stuff like that on purpose. He likes playing ignorant, so you'll spend your hours explaining the obvious and getting flustered when he just won't *get* it.
It's pure made up BS. But by all means, argue with him. You're guaranteed to come out ahead, because you're honest and use logic, rather than emotionally manipulating posters for some obscure, unrelated purpose of your own.
-----------------------------------------------
hmm-burble-blah, blah-blah-blah, take a left
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Okay, now I don't feel so bad. Cav, you've been here I see, since 2005. I've only been here since July 2009...and it took me a year and a half to "get it". 'Cuz yeah, I got it all right. Just shook my head when I DID, thinking "why would anyone want to spend so MUCH time...?" But I got THAT much quicker. 
You might as well give up, tho, Cav. I've been trying to say this for a couple of months now, to no avail. Don't waste your fingers typing, they either don't care or can't seem to resist letting their buttons be pushed. It'll go on unchanged, just ignore it and talk to the adults rather than go away, puleeze? 
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Oh, and Raptor:
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Okay, now I don't feel so bad. Cav, you've been here I see, since 2005.
You mean me? I take that as a compliment. HKCav is quite cool.
Anyway, back to Anthony's point. I agree that the "take these SOB's out" wording was a stupid and careless choice.
On the other hand, the incomplete quote of it by Faux stinks of them once again doing all they can to justify prior statements from the right. I mean - being offended by this after the things they've defended? Puh-lease. I wish Stewart was on air right now to pull together an applicable series of Faux clips.
But we all know what Faux is, and what they do. Hoffa should have known better then to put such a statement out there for them to use. He should have said "vote" the SOB's out, not "take" them out. He should have made it impossible to edit into a different meaning.
If he worked for me, I'd fire him over it.
-----------------------------------------------
hmm-burble-blah, blah-blah-blah, take a left
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Yes, " innocuous " is exactly what describes Palin's FB page image of targeting certain seats. Nothing in the least bit wrong with her doing that, as such talk has been shown to pre exist in politics and other areas for years and years.
It's sad to see folks try to phony up anger and display mock indignation over something 100 % benign, and then turn around and try to defend what some gutless Democrats have said, not just thug union leaders.
" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Anyway, back to Anthony's point. I agree that the "take these SOB's out" wording was a stupid and careless choice.
According to Rappy, though, that was 100% benign, because such talk has been shown to be pre-existing in politics for years.
Seriously. He just said that.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Yes, " innocuous " is exactly what describes Hoffa's speech talking about "taking out" certain seats. Nothing in the least bit wrong with him doing that, as such talk has been shown to pre exist in politics and other areas for years and years.
It's sad to see folks try to phony up anger and display mock indignation over something 100 % benign, and then turn around and try to defend what some gutless Republicans have said, not just thug tea partiers.
Oh, look - it makes just as much sense that way!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:Quote:
Anyway, back to Anthony's point. I agree that the "take these SOB's out" wording was a stupid and careless choice.
According to Rappy, though, that was 100% benign, because such talk has been shown to be pre-existing in politics for years.
Seriously. He just said that.
No I didn't and no it hasn't. You're a 6 year old, and it shows.
" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:Quote:
Anyway, back to Anthony's point. I agree that the "take these SOB's out" wording was a stupid and careless choice.
According to Rappy, though, that was 100% benign, because such talk has been shown to be pre-existing in politics for years.
Seriously. He just said that.
Of course he did. Because saying something so obviously moronic and hypocritical guarantees that you'll reply and keep at it for a while.
-----------------------------------------------
hmm-burble-blah, blah-blah-blah, take a left
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"Quotes taken out of context don't constitute 'divisive, hateful' speech.
There is nothing to condemn."
Hello,
According to this guy, there's nothing to see here. Not from Democrats and not from Republicans.
Thread over, man. Thread over.
--Anthony
_______________________________________________
“If you are not free to choose wrongly and irresponsibly, you are not free at all”
Jacob Hornberger
“Freedom is not worth having if it does not connote freedom to err. It passes my comprehension how human beings, be they ever so experienced and able, can delight in depriving other human beings of that precious right.”
Mahatma Gandhi
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by mal4prez:Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:Quote:
Anyway, back to Anthony's point. I agree that the "take these SOB's out" wording was a stupid and careless choice.
According to Rappy, though, that was 100% benign, because such talk has been shown to be pre-existing in politics for years.
Seriously. He just said that.
Of course he did. Because saying something so obviously moronic and hypocritical guarantees that you'll reply and keep at it for a while.
-----------------------------------------------
hmm-burble-blah, blah-blah-blah, take a left
It is humorous - for all the talk between you and Niki about how far above it all you are, and how you would never get sucked into such a thing... here you both are. Responding, and chiding me for responding.
In another thread, I posted up a few specific examples of violent rhetoric by Republicans, to which Niki responded that I didn't make sense - and then she went and "wasted" her time typing up an ENORMOUS list of the exact same kind of right-wing comments.
So apparently it's silly and stupid if I post facts to refute Rappy's idiotic claims, but not when y'all do it. Cute trick, that.
Seriously, Niki spends as much time talking about how she's not paying attention to Rappy as I spend actually responding to him. I don't know why she or you think it's any better to respond to someone by insisting that you're not responding to them, rather than by just RESPONDING TO THEM directly.
I mean, really, it's the hypocrisy that grinds my gears. Do I needle Rappy? Of course. So does just about everyone here. But I'm not sitting around needling him by going "Nyaaahh-nyahhh - I'm not talking to you! I'm not talking to you" - which is, when you get right down to it, TALKING TO HIM. Instead of the passive-agressive bullshit, just address him directly. It's actually less annoying. Or ignore him completely. But y'all can't do that; instead, you'll complain that others aren't doing what you yourself aren't doing. Do as I say, not as I do, eh?
"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:It wasn't clear, but my frame of mind was not really chide-ish toward you. I was stating what was obvious to me, rather than taking a hook that Rappy's put out there many times before. I'm kind of tired of those hooks.
Originally posted by Kwicko:
It is humorous - for all the talk between you and Niki about how far above it all you are, and how you would never get sucked into such a thing... here you both are. Responding, and chiding me for responding.
Quote:I'm not posting facts, actually. I'm not interesting in debating this guy because yes, I think that's rather silly. (But not at all stupid. I can see the draw, and - in all seriousness - I think you handle him well. I have posted that about you, recently. I think that part of what's good about how you do it is that you damned well know it's silly.)
So apparently it's silly and stupid if I post facts to refute Rappy's idiotic claims, but not when y'all do it. Cute trick, that.
So, you ask, if I'm not interested, why don't I just stay out of the conversation and let you two go at it?
Mike, you ought to maybe step back a minute and consider what options there are for a person who likes RWED but is completely not interested in Rappy. I'd love to do nothing but ignore him, but it gets hard when every single thread is all about proving Rappy wrong.
So either I don't post here, or I find a way to deal with him. You have your way, Niki has hers, and I have mine. If you don't like my occasional indirect passive-aggressive needling, well hell. Quit letting Rappy take over every damned thread and I'll quit needling over it.
-----------------------------------------------
hmm-burble-blah, blah-blah-blah, take a left
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"If you don't like my occasional indirect passive-aggressive needling, well hell. Quit letting Rappy take over every damned thread and I'll quit needling over it."
Hello,
I think they call that a 'touch' in fencing.
--Anthony
_______________________________________________
“If you are not free to choose wrongly and irresponsibly, you are not free at all”
Jacob Hornberger
“Freedom is not worth having if it does not connote freedom to err. It passes my comprehension how human beings, be they ever so experienced and able, can delight in depriving other human beings of that precious right.”
Mahatma Gandhi
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by mal4prez:Quote:It wasn't clear, but my frame of mind was not really chide-ish toward you. I was stating what was obvious to me, rather than taking a hook that Rappy's put out there many times before. I'm kind of tired of those hooks.
Originally posted by Kwicko:
It is humorous - for all the talk between you and Niki about how far above it all you are, and how you would never get sucked into such a thing... here you both are. Responding, and chiding me for responding.Quote:I'm not posting facts, actually. I'm not interesting in debating this guy because yes, I think that's rather silly. (But not at all stupid. I can see the draw, and - in all seriousness - I think you handle him well. I have posted that about you, recently. I think that part of what's good about how you do it is that you damned well know it's silly.)
So apparently it's silly and stupid if I post facts to refute Rappy's idiotic claims, but not when y'all do it. Cute trick, that.
So, you ask, if I'm not interested, why don't I just stay out of the conversation and let you two go at it?
Mike, you ought to maybe step back a minute and consider what options there are for a person who likes RWED but is completely not interested in Rappy. I'd love to do nothing but ignore him, but it gets hard when every single thread is all about proving Rappy wrong.
So either I don't post here, or I find a way to deal with him. You have your way, Niki has hers, and I have mine. If you don't like my occasional indirect passive-aggressive needling, well hell. Quit letting Rappy take over every damned thread and I'll quit needling over it.
-----------------------------------------------
hmm-burble-blah, blah-blah-blah, take a left
Fair point(s).
And I'm not trying to attack you or Niki here, just point out that while I get called on the carpet for letting Rappy push my buttons, I'm far from the only one who responds to him.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Personally, I prefer to talk about rappy when I think about him at all. Most of his points are just right-wing provocation, and honestly not worth the time spent refuting them.
When (if) rappy actually chooses to engage in a factual discussion... brings facts and logic to the table ... then he will be worth talking to. But once he goes back to spouting "The earth is flat nyah nyah nyah I win!" he goes off the radar (again).
------------
Tony, that comment is so out of context it's stupid you should bring it up... speaking of not being even-handed because there are FAR too many examples of the right-wing saying the same or worse ... in context... and where were you?
What I think is stupid is volunteering to be part of "Obama's army". That's like following General Quisling.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"Tony, that comment is so out of context it's stupid you should bring it up... speaking of not being even-handed because there are FAR too many examples of the right-wing saying the same or worse ... in context... and where were you?"
Hello,
I'm not sure what you are saying here.
It sounds like you are saying I am stupid for mentioning something.
(What?)
And then you ask where I am when the right wing says something abominable.
(Here, usually?)
--Anthony
_______________________________________________
“If you are not free to choose wrongly and irresponsibly, you are not free at all”
Jacob Hornberger
“Freedom is not worth having if it does not connote freedom to err. It passes my comprehension how human beings, be they ever so experienced and able, can delight in depriving other human beings of that precious right.”
Mahatma Gandhi
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Starting a thread about the outrage of it all? Especially when it was so immediately shown to be out-of-context?
And then you ask where I am when the right wing says something abominable. (Here, usually?)
So, what do you think of labor throwing itself at Obama's feet?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:Quote:Starting a thread about the outrage of it all? Especially when it was so immediately shown to be out-of-context?
And then you ask where I am when the right wing says something abominable. (Here, usually?)
So, what do you think of labor throwing itself at Obama's feet?
Hello,
I am upset to see members of the Democratic party adopting the rather disgusting rhetoric of their opposition. The guy sounds like a Tea Partier of recent vintage. In any context, it makes me shake my head.
Do you enjoy this method of communication?
As for labor throwing itself at Obama's feet, I'd be happy to discuss how unions may have failed to pursue the best interests of their employees if you'd like?
--Anthony
_______________________________________________
“If you are not free to choose wrongly and irresponsibly, you are not free at all”
Jacob Hornberger
“Freedom is not worth having if it does not connote freedom to err. It passes my comprehension how human beings, be they ever so experienced and able, can delight in depriving other human beings of that precious right.”
Mahatma Gandhi
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Tony, I read a very interesting article of which I will quote parts..
Confessions of a GOP Operative Who Left "the Cult": 3 Things Everyone Must Know About the Lunatic-Filled Republican Party
Former GOPer: "If you think Paul Ryan and his Ayn Rand-worshipping colleagues aren't after your Social Security and Medicare, I am here to disabuse you of your naiveté."
Quote:
Barbara Stanwyck: "We're both rotten!"
Fred MacMurray: "Yeah - only you're a little more rotten." -"Double Indemnity" (1944)
Those lines of dialogue from a classic film noir sum up the state of the two political parties in contemporary America. Both parties are rotten - how could they not be, given the complete infestation of the political system by corporate money on a scale that now requires a presidential candidate to raise upwards of a billion dollars to be competitive in the general election?... But both parties are not rotten in quite the same way.
... To those millions of Americans who have finally begun paying attention to politics and watched with exasperation the tragicomedy of the debt ceiling extension, it may have come as a shock that the Republican Party is so full of lunatics....
I could see as early as last November that the Republican Party would use the debt limit vote... to concoct an entirely artificial fiscal crisis. Then, they would use that fiscal crisis to get what they wanted, by literally holding the US and global economies as hostages... lay[ing] off 4,000 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) employees, 70,000 private construction workers and ... forcing them to pay for their own work-related travel... in order to strong arm some union-busting provisions into the FAA reauthorization.
Everyone knows that in a hostage situation, the reckless and amoral actor has the negotiating upper hand ... virtually every bill, every nominee for Senate confirmation and every routine procedural motion is now subject to a Republican filibuster. Under the circumstances, it is no wonder that Washington is gridlocked: legislating has now become war minus the shooting, something one could have observed 80 years ago in the Reichstag of the Weimar Republic.
... A couple of years ago, a Republican committee staff director told me candidly (and proudly) what the method was to all this obstruction and disruption. Should Republicans succeed in obstructing the Senate from doing its job, it would further lower Congress's generic favorability rating among the American people. By sabotaging the reputation of an institution of government, the party that is programmatically against government would come out the relative winner.
... There are tens of millions of low-information voters who hardly know which party controls which branch of government, let alone which party is pursuing a particular legislative tactic. These voters' confusion over who did what allows them to form the conclusion that "they are all crooks," and that "government is no good," ... This constant drizzle of "there the two parties go again!" stories out of the news bureaus, combined with the hazy confusion of low-information voters, means that the long-term Republican strategy of undermining confidence in our democratic institutions has reaped electoral dividends.
... Undermining Americans' belief in their own institutions of self-government remains a prime GOP electoral strategy.
... Among the GOP base, there is constant harping about somebody else, some "other," who is deliberately, assiduously and with malice aforethought subverting the Good, the True and the Beautiful: Subversives. Commies. Socialists. Ragheads. Secular humanists. Blacks. Fags. Feminazis. The list may change with the political needs of the moment, but they always seem to need a scapegoat to hate and fear.
... the deindustrialization and financialization of America since about 1970 has spawned an increasingly downscale white middle class - without job security (or even without jobs), with pensions and health benefits evaporating and with th
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Mike; it comes down to "I do what I feel like doing". Sometimes I refute Raptor 'cuz it's something so outrageous that it's easy to find stuff (especially clips) to do so, and it's fun. Sometimes I mock him, because that's fun too, and I know how much he hates my emoticons. Sometimes I totally ignore him. Sometimes I snark at you/others for letting him get to you...especially when threads turn into nothing BUT you and Raptor going at it. So sue me. 
But no, I don't spend nearly as much time/effort in responding to him that you do, and I don't get into back-and-forths that go on for post after post; I think that's what frustrates me. So I mention it whe it does, because it doesn't seem logical for someone who is actually intelligent to engage in the kind of silly stuff you stoop to sometimes. Again; sue me!
I'm not sure where I said you didn't make sense, I'd like to know--can you give me the link? Because I never think YOU don't make sense, just arguing with HIM doesn't make sense. It's definitely never the facts you present, it's more the "yes you did", "no I didn't" stuff that puts you right on his level which to me is senseless but, as I've said over and over, it's certainly your right to do so!
I didn't type the quotes, by the way, I lifted them from websites. If you google something like "examples violent Republican (Tea Party) rhetoric", you get tons and tons of hits. It was fun to show just how nasty they can get, and how many of them do it. Satisfying, if you will. I didn't even know about most of them.
I don't see my stuff as passive-aggressive, I see it as mocking. And I enjoy doing it, because refuting him with facts doesn't mean anything to HIM, and once done for others' information, repeating it just wastes my time. So I snark at him, pretty directly I believe. Yeah, the not-listening-to-you emoticon is childish, it's meant to be, a reflection of his own childishness. Sorry it annoys you, we're kinda even on that, since you and he going on and on for many threads annoys ME (obviously). As Anthony said, I hate seeing someone I respect stoop to Raptor's level, so I guess I take it too personally in a way. I shouldn't but there it is. It also annoys me that, just like this one, Raptor manages to get a thread to be all about him, when I'd rather discuss the actual issues.
Lastly no, I don't go on and on with him the way you do. I take a few swipes, then he gets boring and I move on or address someone else. Just a matter of quantity, no biggie. I remark on what a waste it is to engage him sometimes because I wish we could ALL ignore him...I heard it was done again and it would be great to see, but I don't expect it, I just remind people about it. And not hypocrisy, we all have our own styles, that's mine and this is why I do it, 'kay?
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"I don't enjoy it. I would frankly much rather have intelligent discussions about the GINI index and paths towards a sustainable and fair economy. But given the shrillness of rhetoric from the right- starting with Reagan... I think it's necessary and appropriate to offer similarly pointed rhetoric from the center and left."
Hello,
I think it is possible to use better language without using more aggressive language. The speech that spawned this thread was not using better, more effective language. It was just parroting aggressive elements of GOP/Tea Partier language to push the same buttons.
So I even think it will prove ineffective along with being lamentable.
"Only if we start first with how business has failed to protect workers' interests."
That's easy. Businesses are in the game only for themselves. If they can screw the employees and get away with it, they will. The bigger the business, and the wider its investor base, the more it cares about the bottom line and the less it cares about the individual worker.
Is this even in question?
I am not deceived into believing that corporations care about people. When they bend, it is because they perceive that bending is profitable somehow.
--Anthony
_______________________________________________
“If you are not free to choose wrongly and irresponsibly, you are not free at all”
Jacob Hornberger
“Freedom is not worth having if it does not connote freedom to err. It passes my comprehension how human beings, be they ever so experienced and able, can delight in depriving other human beings of that precious right.”
Mahatma Gandhi
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Sig, great article. Slanted, of course, but it pretty much mirrors what I've come to see myself. It sickens me, but it's been effective for them, so I guess it scares me, too. I wish there was a way to effectively fight back, but I can't think of one...they're pretty canny when it comes to manipulation and the libs are too dense to realize that explaining things to people as if they're educated, smart and THINKING people doesn't work, not to mention NOT wanting to be the "bad guys", something my mentality about Mike going at Rap the same way Rap goes after him pretty much illustrates. I want us to have the high ground, it's so easy, but in the end it doesn't counter the gutter methods, so I'm as dumb as the rest of the liberals in that way. I don't want us to BE like them, but it would no doubt be a more effective method, unfortunately.
Thanx for the article, I enjoyed it and in my opinion it is absolutely right on. That it comes from an ex-GOPer is particularly telling, to me; if anyone should know, it's someone who's "been there, done that"!Quote:
I agree, except that they're so practiced at it and have been doing it effectively for so long, I don't think anyone else could do it as well. Manipulation is their stock in trade, tough to beat them at their own game, especially as their base will only see it as a weapon to use, s they did Hoffa's statement.
I don't enjoy it. I would frankly much rather have intelligent discussions about the GINI index and paths towards a sustainable and fair economy. But given the shrillness of rhetoric from the right- starting with Reagan... I think it's necessary and appropriate to offer similarly pointed rhetoric from the center and left.
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Anthony, Quote:
That about says it, except that for them it WORKS, for him it only gave them fodder to get attention complaining about, and an example to bring up to show "Dems do it too".
With rhetoric like this, this man is becoming a parody of his own enemyQuote:
Me, too. But for one thing, he was speaking to HIS base and riling them up, which is what both parties do. And I have a suspicion that, by putting the "vote" stuff in there just before, he thought he could say that and have justification for his comments. Like I said in my other post, I don't think those on the left are nearly as adept at utilizing this tactic as those on the right are, so all it does is provide a weapon to use against them.
I am upset to see members of the Democratic party adopting the rather disgusting rhetoric of their opposition. The guy sounds like a Tea Partier of recent vintage. In any context, it makes me shake my head.
Of COURSE nobody else enjoys that kind of communication, but you can't argue that it HAS been immensely effective (look at the health care debate and how they managed to destroy any real communication at some of those town halls!). The problem with the high road when it comes to this is that it doesn't get you to the village with the ignorant members of the society as quickly. The article Sig put up shows why perfectly.
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"The problem with the high road when it comes to this is that it doesn't get you to the village with the ignorant members of the society as quickly. The article Sig put up shows why perfectly."
Hello,
This presumes that you can't have effective language that is also not aggressive language.
I disagree with that presumption.
In a recent meeting at my place of business, I was informed about a merger that would create a 'right size' for various departments. The merger will probably create 'efficiencies' in these departments. But no matter what the future holds, we can all be proud as we think back on our accomplishments.
So there will be a reduction in the department which will result in layoffs and therefore we may want to update our resumes.
But you will note that the language in the first paragraph holds only a hint of the depression and panic delivered by the second paragraph... at least amongst people who don't scratch past the surface.
I hate corp-speak, but I must admit that it is often effective at corralling the sheep until it is time for slaughter.
If the Democrats want to compete with the Republicans, they will need their language experts and speech-writers to create words and phrases that convey their intention better, not words and phrases that push Conservative power buttons.
The winner in the latter scenario is never going to be the Democratic party.
Better language. Not more aggressive language. Not the opponent's language.
--Anthony
_______________________________________________
“If you are not free to choose wrongly and irresponsibly, you are not free at all”
Jacob Hornberger
“Freedom is not worth having if it does not connote freedom to err. It passes my comprehension how human beings, be they ever so experienced and able, can delight in depriving other human beings of that precious right.”
Mahatma Gandhi
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Mal4, mea culpa. 
Yes, I did get you two confused...you are the two posters here I hold in the highest estimation, so it's akin to me confusing Wulf and Raptor in my head. Please forgive an old lady for her senility! 
And of course I recognized what FoxNoise did immediately, and it came as no surprise whatsoever. It's no more or less than I expected. Jon taking the whole thing on would have been funny, yes, I'd like to have seen that!
I wouldn't have fired him, but I think Wsserman-Schulz missed a chance to spit in their faces. I would have had a one-sentence remark in response to Carlson's needling, to the effect of "given the context, I think most people understood hew as talking about "voting" them out, but the wording was unfortunate, yes" and then ignored any further attempt to get into it. I think ASKING if anyone had refuted violent rhetoric from the right was a mistake; a short comment that nobody calls them on their many uses of visceral rhetoric would have been a better comeback, then again, going on to ignore Carlson's needling. Hindsight is always easier, but if it had been me, I'd have been expecting her to go there and would have been ready. She had to KNOW they were going to play that card for all they were worth!
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Anthony, I will happily agree with you that the Dems need to be better at their speech writing and use more effective language. What they do only enhances the claim of "elitism", and assumes a level of understanding not in keeping with what a lot of the population possesses. But I still believe when it comes to getting a reaction, the visceral will always work better--people remember bites and how those bites made them feel more than they do logic, sadly.
I also think, which seems like a dichotomy, that people know "corp speak" well enough to interpret that first paragraph quite clearly as BEING corp speak, and understand what it actually means. I'd like to think people would appreciate direct language more, but corp speak was created for a reason, and probably because it DOES get a better reaction--or used to, before we got so familiar with the buzz words that we interpret it now.
I don't think appealing to people's intelligence will ever have the impact visceral, emotional language ever will have. I wish it did.
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hello,
Sometimes I think back to great speech-makers like Martin Luther King, Jr. and see that you can have a visceral, emotional impact without taking an aggressive posture.
This is the kind of language that got Obama elected, incidentally. Positive emotional language. It won out over the other stuff.
--Anthony
_______________________________________________
“If you are not free to choose wrongly and irresponsibly, you are not free at all”
Jacob Hornberger
“Freedom is not worth having if it does not connote freedom to err. It passes my comprehension how human beings, be they ever so experienced and able, can delight in depriving other human beings of that precious right.”
Mahatma Gandhi
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
I think it is possible to use better language without using more aggressive language. The speech that spawned this thread was not using better, more effective language. It was just parroting aggressive elements of GOP/Tea Partier language to push the same buttons.
I find it a bit ironic that you don't see raffling off a Glock handgun as being an example of "more aggressive" language, or of being "lamentable" behavior. Such an action, in the very district where a Democratic congresswoman was shot in the head, and several others killed and wounded, seems a direct confrontation to me, and at best a veiled threat.
What would have made you find such actions lamentable or beyond the pale? If they engraved the handgun "For Gabby" ? If they included targets with her picture on them?
I find giving away Glock handguns after a woman is brutally attacked with a Glock handgun as being quite a crass action to take. Sorry, but I find such actions far more distasteful than a union leader saying that we can use our votes to take out the GOP SOBs.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
I think it is possible to use better language without using more aggressive language. The speech that spawned this thread was not using better, more effective language. It was just parroting aggressive elements of GOP/Tea Partier language to push the same buttons.
I find it a bit ironic that you don't see raffling off a Glock handgun as being an example of "more aggressive" language, or of being "lamentable" behavior. Such an action, in the very district where a Democratic congresswoman was shot in the head, and several others killed and wounded, seems a direct confrontation to me, and at best a veiled threat.
What would have made you find such actions lamentable or beyond the pale? If they engraved the handgun "For Gabby" ? If they included targets with her picture on them?
I find giving away Glock handguns after a woman is brutally attacked with a Glock handgun as being quite a crass action to take. Sorry, but I find such actions far more distasteful than a union leader saying that we can use our votes to take out the GOP SOBs.
Hello,
I'm afraid I don't see the raffle itself as aggressive language. I remember Bowling for Columbine tried to make a similar statement about Charleton Heston, the NRA, and the Columbine shooting. The movie was way off the mark, but the director succeeded in using the connection to push emotional buttons in his audience. The truth of the matter notwithstanding.
Now yes, if you find GOP representatives somewhere making a connection between this raffle and some kind of negative statement about the victims of gun violence, I will see it as offensive to the max.
As it is, I think it was just a raffle. I don't think they were making a statement with the raffle beyond, "Look, 10 bucks for a chance to win a gun!"
There are lots of things the GOP and Tea Partiers say that leave me dismayed. Holding a gun raffle doesn't do it for me. My standards of proof are a bit higher, and I have seen nothing to indicate that the raffle was intended in the way you perceive it.
They added a second gun to the raffle, by the way, because it was proving to be such a success.
--Anthony
_______________________________________________
“If you are not free to choose wrongly and irresponsibly, you are not free at all”
Jacob Hornberger
“Freedom is not worth having if it does not connote freedom to err. It passes my comprehension how human beings, be they ever so experienced and able, can delight in depriving other human beings of that precious right.”
Mahatma Gandhi
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
As it is, I think it was just a raffle. I don't think they were making a statement with the raffle beyond, "Look, 10 bucks for a chance to win a gun!"
And I listen to Hoffa's speech and hear someone saying that we can take Republicans and teabaggers out of office with our vote. I fail to see how it's remarkable to say such a thing.
"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:Quote:
As it is, I think it was just a raffle. I don't think they were making a statement with the raffle beyond, "Look, 10 bucks for a chance to win a gun!"
And I listen to Hoffa's speech and hear someone saying that we can take Republicans and teabaggers out of office with our vote. I fail to see how it's remarkable to say such a thing.
"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill
Hello,
Well, then it seems we have some basic differences of opinion on this topic.
--Anthony
_______________________________________________
“If you are not free to choose wrongly and irresponsibly, you are not free at all”
Jacob Hornberger
“Freedom is not worth having if it does not connote freedom to err. It passes my comprehension how human beings, be they ever so experienced and able, can delight in depriving other human beings of that precious right.”
Mahatma Gandhi
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Fair point(s).
And I'm not trying to attack you or Niki here, just point out that while I get called on the carpet for letting Rappy push my buttons, I'm far from the only one who responds to him.
Hey Kwicko. I have this problem that I can't connect to this site at work, and by the time I get home there are so many posts that I'm overwhelmed. But I don't want to miss replying about this.
If it ever sounds like I'm getting down on you, that is purely bad communication. I think you do good things. Even when you're living up to being the angriest man on the interwebs, I don't mind you. You do angry in a charming way. Well, and I tend to agree with you on all the salient points. That helps.
I have also noticed Niki's tendency to get down on others who aren't in line with her current mood re: directly addressing he-who-shall-not-be-named. I think her heart's in the right place though, so I haven't wanted to call her on it. (Other than doing it indirectly here - sorry Niki.)
-----------------------------------------------
hmm-burble-blah, blah-blah-blah, take a left
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Anthony,
If I may digress a second, please bear with me...
Evolution is generally thought of as a ladder. Start with a pool of mud and gunk, and climb those rungs until you get to something higher and better. The monkey rising as it becomes a human.
This is bunk. Evolution is not about reaching upward, it is about surviving. I'd bet money that there have been plenty of brilliant, complicated, amazing life forms that didn't make it because the Earth just happened to get colder or hotter or richer in O2 or whatever. Sometimes the ugly, base form of life made it through, just because the roulette wheel chose it.
You see where I'm going, right? I don't like this rhetoric Hoffa used, I wish all this anger and separatism would just stop. But looking bigger picture: this is what works right now. This is what survives. And he did it without blatant reference to guns and second amendment. What he did was play to the emotions of the crowd in that instant of time, and if that is what it takes to counter this insanity of the right wing religious whacks...
Well, I still don't like it, and I'll still watch it closely because any real incitement to violence needs to be stopped. But playing up emotion? It ain't pretty, but it what needs to happen in order for sanity to survive. The left wing needs a backbone, needs to use the middle finger for a while. I'm all right with that.
Short of actual violent rhetoric, that is. "Fuck off" is one thing. Crosshairs are another.
-----------------------------------------------
hmm-burble-blah, blah-blah-blah, take a left
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Well, as usual, she's got it. The emotional-appeal speeches of the past were just that, "of the past". Times are different now, more people have lost hope, and the base of the right has been stirred up into such a frenzy, that no "gentle" emotional appeal will have any effect, in my opinion. Remember that when King spoke, we were at a time when we truly believed we could change the world for the better, so we listened to him. Now we're a mass of disenfranchised, first-time homeless, long-time unemployed, HUGE spread between rich and poor, and nothing looks to go in any other direction.
I wish all this anger and separatism would just stop. But looking bigger picture: this is what works right now. This is what survives. And he did it without blatant reference to guns and second amendment. What he did was play to the emotions of the crowd in that instant of time, and if that is what it takes to counter this insanity of the right wing religious whacks...
Yes, I'd like to see the Dems show some balls. But I also have qualms about whether they could even DO it right. They don't have the practice at hate speech the right does, and they haven't been what they DO have to effect the past couple of years. It's a time in our country's history, to me, when appeals to people's better nature fall on enough deaf ears not to be effective, fear and anger are more instinctive. It's kind of funny that so many bought into "hope and change" (especially given that's what every politician since Day One has promised). At that time, after eight years of Bush and war and bad economy and increased divide between rich and poor, I think people were ripe for hoping it could change. It's been proven that it's not been changed fast enough or well enough--it couldn't be unless Obama and the Dems stood up for what he SAID he believed in, and unless he/they fought back, instead of bowing down every damned time.
So now people are doubly angry, doubly fearful--especially as it's personal for more and more of them--and the Tea Party appeals to that anger and foments that fear, so they're effective enough to garner support enough to make them powerful. They are a danger to everything this country stands for, but people are too filled with anger/fear to see that...maybe they're just desperately hoping that, if fairness and "coming together" didn't change anything, hatred and anger WILL. If so, they're in for a helluva shock. It will get worse long before it gets better.
That's the point I would have made if it hadn't been made for me. Yes, emotional speech which calls for decency, etc., has worked in the past. But the times aren't only a-changing', they've changed; 9/11 changed us; BUSH changed us; the ultra-religious Tea Party changed us. Now hatred and fear appeal, that's the crux of it. Maybe someday we'll get back to the kind of things King said working--hopefully!--but it isn't this time in history. At this time, the angels of our better nature have been pushed to the back of many of our minds that those of us consumed by them are willing to think in terms of destroying rather than fixing.
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME