*This Women Didn't Deserve This: Gifford*

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,


1. In my opinion Rep Gabrielle Gifford didn't deserve this, all the politcal hay being made over her shooting.
2. There she is laying in the hospital holding onto life, while the liberal media drags her through the mud, using her shooting as a political football, stomping all over her while she clings to life, smashing her face into mud holes as they constantly attack the Republicans over her peril, her life is in the balance, and her party is on the war path using her limp body as a pole to ram the doors at the gates of the Republican Party, smashing her limp head into the Republican Castle, relentlessly hammering her head into the doors.
3. The memory of those who died is pointless now, with all the hay being made about Rep Gabriellle Gifford.
4. The left has made such a huge deal about Rep Gabrielle Gifford being shot in the head, that those others who died mean nothing to them, in the final outcome of this tragic event.
5. Constant attacks on Sarah Palin, Rush, and the Republican Party has over shadowed this shooting.
6. To the liberal media, Sarah Palin pulled the trigger, and Rush was there too, telling her which ones to shoot.
7. No one can refute this, this is a *CHECKMATE* OP post, no other need apply.
8. *CASE CLOSED*.


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

 

[Madeline]

Nobody has forgotten the people who died and their families, Jimmy. Nice try at demonizing the left, though.

I wish just ONE of you on the right would say "I hope we will be more civil in future" or "I am so sorry this happened".

 

[Revere]

Nothing would be more civil than MSNBC going off the air for a week.

 

[RDD_1210]

Every time you post, an angel loses its wings.

 

[masquerade]

Nobody has forgotten the people who died and their families, Jimmy. Nice try at demonizing the left, though.

I wish just ONE of you on the right would say "I hope we will be more civil in future" or "I am so sorry this happened".

I am truly sorry this happened and every day I hope and pray for more civility in our future. But I can't do it alone. Thoughts such as these need to be from all Americans across the country and that just ain't gonna happen.

 

[Talismen]

Nobody has forgotten the people who died and their families, Jimmy. Nice try at demonizing the left, though.

I wish just ONE of you on the right would say "I hope we will be more civil in future" or "I am so sorry this happened".

I am truly sorry this happened and every day I hope and pray for more civility in our future. But I can't do it alone. Thoughts such as these need to be from all Americans across the country and that just ain't gonna happen.

The sad thing is....Politics has always been, at times, and to one degree or another, 'heated'. That doesn't mean it's always a bad thing, but, as society changes, the 'heat' intensifies.

What would've NEVER been acceptable as 'heated' years ago, is the norm today.

 

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,

Nobody has forgotten the people who died and their families, Jimmy. Nice try at demonizing the left, though.

I wish just ONE of you on the right would say "I hope we will be more civil in future" or "I am so sorry this happened".

1. Maddie, Maddie, this sin't about me deary.
2. This is all about the liberal media, please try to stay on topic there sweets.
3. You don't watch MSNBC much now do you?
4. CNN? doubt it!
5. ABC, CBS? anything that represents the liberal media???
6. I monitored them last night, and I can honestly say, it was biased political bashing, using Giffords as a ram.



Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

 

[Madeline]

Mebbe we can change what is "acceptable" by criticisizing our OWN public figures if they go off the reservation. And by guarding our own tongues.

 

[Truthmatters]

There she is laying in the hospital holding onto life, while the liberal media drags her through the mud, using her shooting as a political football, stomping all over her while she clings to life, smashing her face into mud holes as they constantly attack the Republicans over her peril, her life is in the balance, and her party is on the war path using her limp body as a pole to ram the doors at the gates of the Republican Party, smashing her limp head into the Republican Castle, relentlessly hammering her head into the doors



Fortunately it looks like she may be able to tell us what she thinks when she is recovered well enough.


She did ask for a better poltical dialogue before she was shot.

I think she will likely do the same after she recovers well enough.

Will you listen to her?

 

[Talismen]

Mebbe we can change what is "acceptable" by criticisizing our OWN public figures if they go off the reservation. And by guarding our own tongues.

While it's a noble idea, and one that would hopefully take root....WHO gets to define what is acceptable and what is not?

-Government?
-Political parties?

And how would that jive with the 1st amendment?

We can dislike the fact that BEFORE the kid pulled the trigger, he was merely a nutjob unto himself, who apparently plagued many with his insanity. But, there is no constitutional right to sanity. People can be as screwed up as they like, so long as they don't willfully cause harm to another. He did that, and that's where he went wrong.

And there's another good question....Who gets to decide what "harm" is?
Just because someone is offended, that doesn't mean they've been "harmed", despite what many lawyers and the general 'tone' of society would have us all believe. No one has a right to be offended. It is a choice.

 

[Talismen]

There she is laying in the hospital holding onto life, while the liberal media drags her through the mud, using her shooting as a political football, stomping all over her while she clings to life, smashing her face into mud holes as they constantly attack the Republicans over her peril, her life is in the balance, and her party is on the war path using her limp body as a pole to ram the doors at the gates of the Republican Party, smashing her limp head into the Republican Castle, relentlessly hammering her head into the doors



Fortunately it looks like she may be able to tell us what she thinks when she is recovered well enough.


She did ask for a better poltical dialogue before she was shot.

I think she will likely do the same after she recovers well enough.

Will you listen to her?

Let's hope EVERYONE listens to her, and also understands that mere differences DO NOT equal "course dialogue", "hate speech", "incivility" and the like. JFK himself said:

“So let us begin anew - remembering on both sides that civility is not a sign of weakness, and sincerity is always subject to proof”

We've somehow, all of us, been brought to a point in time when simple differences of opinion and policy equal absolute intolerance from many on the other side. Granted, I'm all for standing one's ground on that which they hold dear (for me, that would be maintaining things such as our constitutional republic, freedom & liberty). But, we get too bogged down in distasteful rhetoric. One side launches a charge at the other side...Then, if false, the other sides answers the charge and often times is critical of the other side for making such a charge. THAT scenario IS NOT a bad one. What is bad is when, 3 days later, after the charge has either been proven true or false, both sides continue to spew at each other in a heated fashion, and the argument grows out of control. It's kids on a friggin' play ground.

There are, understandably, MANY instances where the charge is so monsterous or the subject-matter so serious, that 'heated' rhetoric CANNOT be avoided. But, we would all do well to take a chill pill and remember that famous line from Will Smith in the first "Men In Black" movie:

"Don't start nothin'...Won't be nothin'".

We are humans. We are born with a natural reactionary and defensive instinct. When we feel threatened, we often times shoot from the hip (no pun intended). It's hard NOT to react. But, if we all claim we want more civility in politics, we'd better start thinking about NOT reacting.

 

[Jarhead]

Nothing will change if republicans dont tell their republican reps to stop with the rhetoric and spin and the democrats dont tell their democrat reps to stop the rhetoric and spin.

The people need to shut their own sides of the aisle up for them to take seriously the need to shut up

 

[Sallow]

Sorry bout that,


1. In my opinion Rep Gabrielle Gifford didn't deserve this, all the politcal hay being made over her shooting.
2. There she is laying in the hospital holding onto life, while the liberal media drags her through the mud, using her shooting as a political football, stomping all over her while she clings to life, smashing her face into mud holes as they constantly attack the Republicans over her peril, her life is in the balance, and her party is on the war path using her limp body as a pole to ram the doors at the gates of the Republican Party, smashing her limp head into the Republican Castle, relentlessly hammering her head into the doors.
3. The memory of those who died is pointless now, with all the hay being made about Rep Gabriellle Gifford.
4. The left has made such a huge deal about Rep Gabrielle Gifford being shot in the head, that those others who died mean nothing to them, in the final outcome of this tragic event.
5. Constant attacks on Sarah Palin, Rush, and the Republican Party has over shadowed this shooting.
6. To the liberal media, Sarah Palin pulled the trigger, and Rush was there too, telling her which ones to shoot.
7. No one can refute this, this is a *CHECKMATE* OP post, no other need apply.
8. *CASE CLOSED*.


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

Sorry 'bout that.

1. Your "monitoring didn't catch this..

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7046bo92a4[/ame]

2. Giffords already made political hay of this.
3. Checkmate.

Regards,
Sallow of the Wolf's Lair.

 

[Talismen]

Oh come on Sallow...that was pure politics there. And BEFORE the shooting.

 

[Talismen]

The interesting thing about the vid that Sallow posted....Giffords is poised and on-point. Granted, I would disagree with her vote FOR obamacare, but, she doesn't take the 'bait' the female MSNBC host dangles in front of her, early on.

She does make mention of the Palin "map", and the "crosshairs" (and although she makes no mention of DK using virtually the same "crosshairs" map), then goes on to say that she would not speak for Sarah Palin in terms of whether or not she really thought Palin meant for the "map" to be taken as an incitement to violence.

I know I would disagree with her on a few things but, she seems to be a rather poised individual. And she equally calls out the rhetoric and actions of extremists on the left, as she notes the same of extremists on the right.

The dumb thing is, a few days ago, when Palin's camp said they never intended for the "map" to be taken the way some are twisting it to mean....It wasn't enough for the left. They wanted an explanation, got it, and then rejected it. Predictable. But, THAT is the essence of rhetorical thinking.

 

[Truthmatters]

There she is laying in the hospital holding onto life, while the liberal media drags her through the mud, using her shooting as a political football, stomping all over her while she clings to life, smashing her face into mud holes as they constantly attack the Republicans over her peril, her life is in the balance, and her party is on the war path using her limp body as a pole to ram the doors at the gates of the Republican Party, smashing her limp head into the Republican Castle, relentlessly hammering her head into the doors



Fortunately it looks like she may be able to tell us what she thinks when she is recovered well enough.


She did ask for a better poltical dialogue before she was shot.

I think she will likely do the same after she recovers well enough.

Will you listen to her?

Let's hope EVERYONE listens to her, and also understands that mere differences DO NOT equal "course dialogue", "hate speech", "incivility" and the like. JFK himself said:

“So let us begin anew - remembering on both sides that civility is not a sign of weakness, and sincerity is always subject to proof”

We've somehow, all of us, been brought to a point in time when simple differences of opinion and policy equal absolute intolerance from many on the other side. Granted, I'm all for standing one's ground on that which they hold dear (for me, that would be maintaining things such as our constitutional republic, freedom & liberty). But, we get too bogged down in distasteful rhetoric. One side launches a charge at the other side...Then, if false, the other sides answers the charge and often times is critical of the other side for making such a charge. THAT scenario IS NOT a bad one. What is bad is when, 3 days later, after the charge has either been proven true or false, both sides continue to spew at each other in a heated fashion, and the argument grows out of control. It's kids on a friggin' play ground.

There are, understandably, MANY instances where the charge is so monsterous or the subject-matter so serious, that 'heated' rhetoric CANNOT be avoided. But, we would all do well to take a chill pill and remember that famous line from Will Smith in the first "Men In Black" movie:

"Don't start nothin'...Won't be nothin'".

We are humans. We are born with a natural reactionary and defensive instinct. When we feel threatened, we often times shoot from the hip (no pun intended). It's hard NOT to react. But, if we all claim we want more civility in politics, we'd better start thinking about NOT reacting.

Which is why I started my civility experiment yesterday.

I felt this was a game changer human event.

It was time to rip away the veils of insult and discuss like adults so we can end this tendency towards violence.

it doesnt belong in our poltical discourse.

 

[Jarhead]

The interesting thing about the vid that Sallow posted....Giffords is poised and on-point. Granted, I would disagree with her vote FOR obamacare, but, she doesn't take the 'bait' the female MSNBC host dangles in front of her, early on.

She does make mention of the Palin "map", and the "crosshairs" (and although she makes no mention of DK using virtually the same "crosshairs" map), but then goes on to say that she would not speak for Sarah Palin in terms of whether or not she really thought Palin meant for the "map" to be taken as an incitement to violence.

I know I would disagree with her on a few things but, she seems to be a rather poised individual. And she equally calls out the rhetoric and actions of extremists on the left, as she notes the same of extremists on the right.

What I noticed however...
She was asked whether or not she believed Palin intended it to incite violence.
I was disturbed with her answer...saying "I can not speak for Palin" does not answer the question of her opinion.....so an answer like that is the same as saying "yes, it is quite possible Palin intended to incite violence"
Otherwise, she would asnwer "of course not, but it doesnt mean someone may take it that way"
So I am curious as to whether she truly believes it was intended by Palin to incite violence.
If she did believe that, something is serious wrong.

 

[Sallow]

The interesting thing about the vid that Sallow posted....Giffords is poised and on-point. Granted, I would disagree with her vote FOR obamacare, but, she doesn't take the 'bait' the female MSNBC host dangles in front of her, early on.

She does make mention of the Palin "map", and the "crosshairs" (and although she makes no mention of DK using virtually the same "crosshairs" map), but then goes on to say that she would not speak for Sarah Palin in terms of whether or not she really thought Palin meant for the "map" to be taken as an incitement to violence.

I know I would disagree with her on a few things but, she seems to be a rather poised individual. And she equally calls out the rhetoric and actions of extremists on the left, as she notes the same of extremists on the right.

What I noticed however...
She was asked whether or not she believed Palin intended it to incite violence.
I was disturbed with her answer...saying "I can not speak for Palin" does not answer the question of her opinion.....so an answer like that is the same as saying "yes, it is quite possible Palin intended to incite violence"
Otherwise, she would asnwer "of course not, but it doesnt mean someone may take it that way"
So I am curious as to whether she truly believes it was intended by Palin to incite violence.
If she did believe that, something is serious wrong.

Um..she's laying in a hospital bed right now..

And all she was asking for was to tone down the rhetoric.

Maybe politicians could go back to using sports analogies..instead of gun analogies..to make points.

Much as it annoyed me..I now prefer that now.

 

[Jarhead]

The interesting thing about the vid that Sallow posted....Giffords is poised and on-point. Granted, I would disagree with her vote FOR obamacare, but, she doesn't take the 'bait' the female MSNBC host dangles in front of her, early on.

She does make mention of the Palin "map", and the "crosshairs" (and although she makes no mention of DK using virtually the same "crosshairs" map), but then goes on to say that she would not speak for Sarah Palin in terms of whether or not she really thought Palin meant for the "map" to be taken as an incitement to violence.

I know I would disagree with her on a few things but, she seems to be a rather poised individual. And she equally calls out the rhetoric and actions of extremists on the left, as she notes the same of extremists on the right.

What I noticed however...
She was asked whether or not she believed Palin intended it to incite violence.
I was disturbed with her answer...saying "I can not speak for Palin" does not answer the question of her opinion.....so an answer like that is the same as saying "yes, it is quite possible Palin intended to incite violence"
Otherwise, she would asnwer "of course not, but it doesnt mean someone may take it that way"
So I am curious as to whether she truly believes it was intended by Palin to incite violence.
If she did believe that, something is serious wrong.

Um..she's laying in a hospital bed right now..

And all she was asking for was to tone down the rhetoric.

Maybe politicians could go back to using sports analogies..instead of gun analogies..to make points.

Much as it annoyed me..I now prefer that now.

I am not attacking her. I listened to the clip that you furnished and I was taken aback by her answer....I am not criticizing her opinion...but if she truly believed Palin intended to incite violence, then we have a bigger issue in congress....it means what we are hearing is not spin...it is genuine evil thoughts of one party as it pertains to the personality and intentions of the other party.

Up until hearing that clip, I truly believed the politicians were capitalizing on questionable actions of the other party to make them look bad....both parties making the other party look bad...politics as usual....but not truly believing what they say....

 

[Talismen]

The interesting thing about the vid that Sallow posted....Giffords is poised and on-point. Granted, I would disagree with her vote FOR obamacare, but, she doesn't take the 'bait' the female MSNBC host dangles in front of her, early on.

She does make mention of the Palin "map", and the "crosshairs" (and although she makes no mention of DK using virtually the same "crosshairs" map), but then goes on to say that she would not speak for Sarah Palin in terms of whether or not she really thought Palin meant for the "map" to be taken as an incitement to violence.

I know I would disagree with her on a few things but, she seems to be a rather poised individual. And she equally calls out the rhetoric and actions of extremists on the left, as she notes the same of extremists on the right.

What I noticed however...
She was asked whether or not she believed Palin intended it to incite violence.
I was disturbed with her answer...saying "I can not speak for Palin" does not answer the question of her opinion.....so an answer like that is the same as saying "yes, it is quite possible Palin intended to incite violence"

True.

It leaves an "opening".

Otherwise, she would asnwer "of course not, but it doesnt mean someone may take it that way"
So I am curious as to whether she truly believes it was intended by Palin to incite violence.
If she did believe that, something is serious wrong.

I'm want to believe she knows the difference, and was merely taking a political pot-shot.
I mean, yes, I feel bad for her, and I'm so very thankful she's doing well, and I've prayed for her...But, she IS a politician, and they DO engage in pot-shots. It's just what they do. And I'd say that if she had an "R" behind her name.