Bridgegate vs Benghazi

[rightwinger]

public safety was jeopardized? by cramming and slowing down traffic?

Yep

I win the argument two to one

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Christie Derangement Syndrome

Dems have Gephyrophobia

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Jeopardizing public safety for a political agenda

public safety was jeopardized? by cramming and slowing down traffic?

Yep

So when the president flies into Hawaii, and security for his motorcade slows down H1 from a crawl to a snail trail for the entire afternoon, is he also committing an act of terrorism? Or since he's only there to visit, is it okay to jeopardize everyone's safety, because of course your intent was only to visit?

In other terms, if I emptied a clip out of a handgun into a crowd of random people because I knew one of them voted for someone different than who I voted for, that would be a horrible act and I would deserve the death penalty.

However, if I emptied a clip out of a handgun into a crowd of random people only because I had wanted to shoot the gun in that particular direction in the first place, and the fact that there was a crowd of people there was purely incidental, this would be okay, right?

 

[rightwinger]

public safety was jeopardized? by cramming and slowing down traffic?

Yep

So when the president flies into Hawaii, and security for his motorcade slows down H1 from a crawl to a snail trail for the entire afternoon, is he also committing an act of terrorism? Or since he's only there to visit, is it okay to jeopardize everyone's safety, because of course your intent was only to visit?

In other terms, if I emptied a clip out of a handgun into a crowd of random people because I knew one of them voted for someone different than who I voted for, that would be a horrible act and I would deserve the death penalty.

However, if I emptied a clip out of a handgun into a crowd of random people only because I had wanted to shoot the gun in that particular direction in the first place, and the fact that there was a crowd of people there was purely incidental, this would be okay, right?

If the president did it in a deliberate attempt to punish the people of Hawaii, you might have a point

 

[Trajan]

Yep

So when the president flies into Hawaii, and security for his motorcade slows down H1 from a crawl to a snail trail for the entire afternoon, is he also committing an act of terrorism? Or since he's only there to visit, is it okay to jeopardize everyone's safety, because of course your intent was only to visit?

In other terms, if I emptied a clip out of a handgun into a crowd of random people because I knew one of them voted for someone different than who I voted for, that would be a horrible act and I would deserve the death penalty.

However, if I emptied a clip out of a handgun into a crowd of random people only because I had wanted to shoot the gun in that particular direction in the first place, and the fact that there was a crowd of people there was purely incidental, this would be okay, right?

If the president did it in a deliberate attempt to punish the people of Hawaii, you might have a point

maybe one day someone will teach you how to think- the event in either case does not constitute a danger, the REASON is the issue, not the event in and of itself , ala being a danger.

 

[blackhawk]

By my count it took about 235 Republicans to shut down the government. Terrorism or extortion?

You make the choice

The correct answer is neither. That is simply how Washington works or does not work depending on your point of view the fact you don't like it does not make it terrorism or extortion. Some feel the way Obamacare was pushed through on a party line vote using
Parliamentary procedure tricks is terrorism and or extortion as well that also is wrong it is simply another example of how Washington does or does not work.

And some think that the Republican Taliban whimpering about monuments closing down when the shutdown was impacting food programs for the poor was extremism at its worst

I see your in full partisan idiot mode tonight get back to me if and when you make your way back to rationale.

 

[Trajan]

Yep

I win the argument two to one

yes, you certainly do.....

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Very true....

They live in their own little world unconcerned about anything other than their twisted agenda.....

I'm talking Republicans not AlQaeda

You're fucken nuts too.

Republicans are the closest thing we have to an American Taliban

They inflict their twisted dogma on the local population

The democrats do the same. Children are being prosecuted now for online bullying (read, exercising their 1st amendment rights. I'm not talking about slander suits, I'm talking about bullying). Why? Because it's WRONG for people to be saying lots of mean stuff to each other.

Obamacare was passed because it's "not right" that people who have the resources to pay for someone else's medical care aren't paying for other peoples' medical care. Why? Because it's WRONG to let someone die when something could have been done.

Democrat state govts have started banning e-cigarettes from public use. There's no health risks, you're blowing out water vapor, nobody else has to suffer. Too bad, though. Seeing or smelling that sorta thing might offend people, and it's WRONG to offend people.

Speaking of WRONG to offend people, make sure you aren't praying on the steps of a monument building or wearing clothing that touts your Christianity to public school. Not that allowing you to do so would be anything close to congress hindering anyone's ability to practice. . . simply because it might offend someone. And it's WRONG to offend someone.

Sorry, but if you want to talk dogmatic value dictating policy, the Democrats are as guilty as anyone. The fact that standard Democrat dogma doesn't include a God figure doesn't make it any more logical, any more proveable, or any less dogmatic than Republican dogma.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Yep

So when the president flies into Hawaii, and security for his motorcade slows down H1 from a crawl to a snail trail for the entire afternoon, is he also committing an act of terrorism? Or since he's only there to visit, is it okay to jeopardize everyone's safety, because of course your intent was only to visit?

In other terms, if I emptied a clip out of a handgun into a crowd of random people because I knew one of them voted for someone different than who I voted for, that would be a horrible act and I would deserve the death penalty.

However, if I emptied a clip out of a handgun into a crowd of random people only because I had wanted to shoot the gun in that particular direction in the first place, and the fact that there was a crowd of people there was purely incidental, this would be okay, right?

If the president did it in a deliberate attempt to punish the people of Hawaii, you might have a point

So it's all about intent, then? Gotcha. So if I empty a clip into a crowd of people, as long as I only did it because I wanted to fire my gun and I wasn't actually trying to hurt anyone, that makes it okay, right?

Intent dictates right and wrong. Good to know.

Seriously, Rightwinger, I get that Christie is a prominent Republican who might be your candidate's opponent come general election, and I understand what a rabidly partisan Democrat you are and how badly you want this traffic jam to be as bad as the holocaust. Something that ends Christie's campaign chances. Hell, I want Christie's campaign chances ended, too. If he's the only alternative to Hillary, I fuckin quit America.

Nevertheless, a traffic jam is only a traffic jam. It's not as bad as bombing someone and it is not an act of terrorism. Why? Terrorism is the use of tactics that cause fear in order to coerce people. Two vital elements are missing here for what the Christie administration did to be accurately called terrorism. They weren't using tactics designed to inspire terror, and they weren't using tactics designed to coerce. They were being spiteful faggots and trying to majorly inconvenience a political opponent who wouldn't give them their way, but if you believe that they had any thought that causing someone to be stuck in traffic would scare them into going along with the Christie agenda, you're seriously blowing blue smoke up your own ass.

 

[rightwinger]

The correct answer is neither. That is simply how Washington works or does not work depending on your point of view the fact you don't like it does not make it terrorism or extortion. Some feel the way Obamacare was pushed through on a party line vote using
Parliamentary procedure tricks is terrorism and or extortion as well that also is wrong it is simply another example of how Washington does or does not work.

And some think that the Republican Taliban whimpering about monuments closing down when the shutdown was impacting food programs for the poor was extremism at its worst

I see your in full partisan idiot mode tonight get back to me if and when you make your way back to rationale.

Republican Taliban views on government

Government shutdown resulting in suffering for the poor.....GOOD
Government shutdown closing a monument.......BAD

 

[rightwinger]

So when the president flies into Hawaii, and security for his motorcade slows down H1 from a crawl to a snail trail for the entire afternoon, is he also committing an act of terrorism? Or since he's only there to visit, is it okay to jeopardize everyone's safety, because of course your intent was only to visit?

In other terms, if I emptied a clip out of a handgun into a crowd of random people because I knew one of them voted for someone different than who I voted for, that would be a horrible act and I would deserve the death penalty.

However, if I emptied a clip out of a handgun into a crowd of random people only because I had wanted to shoot the gun in that particular direction in the first place, and the fact that there was a crowd of people there was purely incidental, this would be okay, right?

If the president did it in a deliberate attempt to punish the people of Hawaii, you might have a point

So it's all about intent, then? Gotcha. So if I empty a clip into a crowd of people, as long as I only did it because I wanted to fire my gun and I wasn't actually trying to hurt anyone, that makes it okay, right?

Intent dictates right and wrong. Good to know.

Yep

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

If the president did it in a deliberate attempt to punish the people of Hawaii, you might have a point

So it's all about intent, then? Gotcha. So if I empty a clip into a crowd of people, as long as I only did it because I wanted to fire my gun and I wasn't actually trying to hurt anyone, that makes it okay, right?

Intent dictates right and wrong. Good to know.

Yep

Wow, thanks for that.

I've heard my pops, who's pretty republican, say that one of the big problems with democrats is that they want to judge potential leaders by their good intent, not by the results they achieve. I was always skeptical when I heard this, I didn't think anybody could be that stupid. I was wrong. I'ma have to let him know I found the Democrat he was talking about lol.

 

[Dot Com]

even the news sees the rw deflection: Republicans defend Christie on 'bridgegate' by invoking Benghazi, IRS scandals

 

[rightwinger]

So it's all about intent, then? Gotcha. So if I empty a clip into a crowd of people, as long as I only did it because I wanted to fire my gun and I wasn't actually trying to hurt anyone, that makes it okay, right?

Intent dictates right and wrong. Good to know.

Yep

Wow, thanks for that.

I've heard my pops, who's pretty republican, say that one of the big problems with democrats is that they want to judge potential leaders by their good intent, not by the results they achieve. I was always skeptical when I heard this, I didn't think anybody could be that stupid. I was wrong. I'ma have to let him know I found the Democrat he was talking about lol.

Complete ignorance of the American judicial system

Typical of the Taliban

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Christie should have the Duck Dynasty guy do a commercial for him, like "Get the **** over it, Liberal Sissies"

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Yep

Wow, thanks for that.

I've heard my pops, who's pretty republican, say that one of the big problems with democrats is that they want to judge potential leaders by their good intent, not by the results they achieve. I was always skeptical when I heard this, I didn't think anybody could be that stupid. I was wrong. I'ma have to let him know I found the Democrat he was talking about lol.

Complete ignorance of the American judicial system

Typical of the Taliban

Not a Republican. Thanks for assuming, though

And wtf? Ignorance of the American Justice System? Even in American Justice intent doesn't dictate legality. If you murder someone to make the world a better place, you still get tried for murder, dummy.

On top of that, we weren't talking what's legal or illegal. We were talking about right and wrong. If the American Judicial System decides right and wrong, then you must be all for the Citizens United decision, yes? How could it be wrong if the American Judicial System says its okay?

Holy shit, every time you post you lower the bar. I have to keep adjusting my perceptions to account for the fact that you're way dumber than I gave you credit for.

 

[rightwinger]

Wow, thanks for that.

I've heard my pops, who's pretty republican, say that one of the big problems with democrats is that they want to judge potential leaders by their good intent, not by the results they achieve. I was always skeptical when I heard this, I didn't think anybody could be that stupid. I was wrong. I'ma have to let him know I found the Democrat he was talking about lol.

Complete ignorance of the American judicial system

Typical of the Taliban

Not a Republican. Thanks for assuming, though

And wtf? Ignorance of the American Justice System? Even in American Justice intent doesn't dictate legality. If you murder someone to make the world a better place, you still get tried for murder, dummy.

On top of that, we weren't talking what's legal or illegal. We were talking about right and wrong. If the American Judicial System decides right and wrong, then you must be all for the Citizens United decision, yes? How could it be wrong if the American Judicial System says its okay?

Holy shit, every time you post you lower the bar. I have to keep adjusting my perceptions to account for the fact that you're way dumber than I gave you credit for.

Taliban thinks for a while and comes up with.......

You are Stoopid

 

[TemplarKormac]

Ever since the bridgegate story broke, Republicans have been trying to deflect with Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi....

So let's look at the similarities and differences between the two

Well, both happened in September, I guess that is the same

With Benghazi, Obama claimed it was caused by a anti Islam film.......Republicans claim he lied
With Bridgegate, Christie claimed it was caused by the Mayor of Ft Lee not endorsing him.......Democrats claim he lied

In Benghazi, AlQaeda were the terrorists
In Ft Lee, Republicans were the terrorists

 

[Shrimpbox]

Thank you Temp. That is what I call succinct!

 

[TemplarKormac]

Ever since the bridgegate story broke, Republicans have been trying to deflect with Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi....

So let's look at the similarities and differences between the two

Well, both happened in September, I guess that is the same

With Benghazi, Obama claimed it was caused by a anti Islam film.......Republicans claim he lied
With Bridgegate, Christie claimed it was caused by the Mayor of Ft Lee not endorsing him.......Democrats claim he lied

In Benghazi, AlQaeda were the terrorists
In Ft Lee, Republicans were the terrorists

With Benghazi, Obama claimed it was caused by a anti Islam film.......Republicans claim he lied

And he did. Even the State Department agrees with them.

With Bridgegate, Christie claimed it was caused by the Mayor of Ft Lee not endorsing him.......Democrats claim he lied

The mayor wasn't even aware that Christie tried to contact him. Or did you leave that little detail out?

In Benghazi, AlQaeda were the terrorists

Contrary to what Obama said.

In Ft Lee, Republicans were the terrorists

Interesting, you kept calling them terrorists during the shutdown, and you folks were the ones busy making an 18% shutdown look worse than it was.

In the IRS scandal, Democrats resorted to mob tactics during the elections.

In the spying scandal, they treated everyone like a common criminal.

And let's not get started on gun control. You guys want to go door to door and confiscate guns if you could.

So, who are the "terrorists" now, you freaking partisan hackjob?