Liberal Activist Attacked by Zealous Conservative - Page 5

August · 10-27-10, 03:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

I don't care what she was doing. You don't beat someone for their political beliefs, no matter how obnoxious they are about it. The fact that this needs to be pointed out makes me shake my head.

That you ignore the fact that nearly everyone who has contributed to this thread has agreed that it was wrong makes me shake my head.

Again where is your outrage when the Black Panthers guard polling places? Where was your outrage when Union thugs beat up Tea Party protesters at Dem events?

I don't doubt your sincerity but I do see a double standard.

tater · 10-27-10, 03:32 PM

There is also the presumption on mookie's part that she was beaten up for her political beliefs.

I think her politics was incidental. She rushed a candidate. Try rushing Obama with an I love Obama shirt just to give him a hug—and a present your kid made him.

How will that work out for you? Think the Secret Service will see the Obama shirt, and ignore you rushing him?

Will they stomp your head? No. They are, OTOH, highly trained and deal with this sort of thing daily—unlike bystanders in the case of this incident.

mookiemookie · 10-27-10, 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by August

Again where is your outrage when the Black Panthers guard polling places?

Muddying the waters. Not even a comparable event. No one was assaulted.

Quote:

Where was your outrage when Union thugs beat up Tea Party protesters at Dem events?

When? Where?

AVGWarhawk · 10-27-10, 03:55 PM

Quote:

Muddying the waters. Not even a comparable event. No one was assaulted.

Nothing muddy about it. The comparison is in the volitale nutbaggers as complared to the volitale lovebaggers with clubs. For some reason and for some good reason the media paints teanutbaggers as 'volitale' yet we see the same volitility for the party of lovebaggers.

mookiemookie · 10-27-10, 04:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

Nothing muddy about it. The comparison is in the volitale nutbaggers as complared to the volitale lovebaggers with clubs. For some reason and for some good reason the media paints teanutbaggers as 'volitale' yet we see the same volitility for the party of lovebaggers.

Because the lovebagger's 08 campaign theme was:

The tebagger's campaign theme is:

There's an undercurrent of hatred and violence in the tea movement. This is just the latest example.

Aramike · 10-27-10, 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

Because the lovebagger's 08 campaign theme was:

The tebagger's campaign theme is:

There's an undercurrent of hatred and violence in the tea movement. This is just the latest example.

We like to call that "cherry picking".

You can't even TRY to see this for what it is?

mookiemookie · 10-27-10, 04:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aramike

We like to call that "cherry picking".

You can't even TRY to see this for what it is?

Yeah it's just those 1 or 2 or 10,000 loonies giving everyone a bad name.

tater · 10-27-10, 04:36 PM

Yeah, a couple hateful signs means that the the basic sentiment of the movement.

How about this. Most all the anti-war protests during the Bush years were sponsored by ANSWER. All anti-war people are therefore also communists (ANSWER is a communist group).

That's actually much more of a connection since the tea party stuff is not as top-down as ANSWER was.

I was at my dentist's office which was along a place here where the tea party people had their signs (a couple miles along Montgomery Blvd. in ABQ). In fact his officI drove right past them. there was a bit of a traffic jam, and I was stuck at a few lights. I saw no signs like those. Not one. Anecdotal? Sure, but I saw a LOT of signs, and 0% were hateful. Had they been common, or even slightly common I'd have seen some. Heck, I had enough time that geek I am I started counting people and then guestimating the number per 1/10th of a mile on my odometer.

For someone who claims not to have an affiliation, you certainly regurgitate talking points on the whole tea party thing. Lemme guess, you prefer the likes of Amy Goodman? (used to listen to her daily to get a feel what real whack-jobs thought)

Bottom line is that random people show up, and you can say very little about their actual beliefs short of doing real statistics on them. Internet pictures of a few signs is utterly meaningless, as is a single recorded assault (under circumstances that would likely remove it from violence considerations).

You'd need to scour police records and record reported violence during pure demonstrations. Do demonstrations by different organizations, then non-political events as a control. You can do the same with signs if you like.

There is a video posted a long time ago that someone made walking through that big tea party rally in DC. It;s several minutes. You could likely go through counting total signs, then count "offensive" signs, or signs that suborn violence, etc.

Would be a useful benchmark.

tater · 10-27-10, 04:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

Yeah it's just those 1 or 2 or 10,000 loonies giving everyone a bad name.

What % of all the signs were hateful. Be precise.

What does that % tell you about the other people there? That's right, nothing since there was zero control over who came.

I cannot tell you one way or another except I saw none when I left my tooth cleaning appt whenever the rally here was. Anyone claiming more than "I don't know" is as bad as some creationist. They've got no data.

Data matters.

gimpy117 · 10-27-10, 04:39 PM

a couple of hateful signs? its been more than that.

10-27-10, 04:43 PM

Its over. With a week to go even the B. knows it.

The question is will the sweeping probationary change give Obama the reason to change his agenda, or will a more permanant change be required?

tater · 10-27-10, 04:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gimpy117

a couple of hateful signs? its been more than that.

What is the %?

You've counted a statistical sample (random sample—so that means large group pics, otherwise the photographer's choice makes the sample not random), right, then determined this?

Without that simple (though time consuming) step, you can say exactly squat about the tea party based on signs.

You might be right, but without real data you are talking out your ***.

gimpy117 · 10-27-10, 04:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Third Man

Its over. With a week to go even the B. knows it.

The question is will the sweeping probationary change give Obama the reason to change his agenda, or will a more permanant change be required?

It's ironic that all Obama has done is basically continue programs you guys started. The stimulus? Bush's idea. The war? Bush's idea. Healthcare? They privatized it remember...so basically your idea. If anyone should be pissed it's us Dems.

SteamWake · 10-27-10, 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gimpy117

a couple of hateful signs? its been more than that.

No it hasent it really hasent. I know its hard to believe otherwise from what you hear but its true.

Id also be willing to venture that some of those were 'plants'.

There is an all out effort to portray the tea party as wackos 24/7.

I say go to a rally and judge for yourself.

mookiemookie · 10-27-10, 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gimpy117

It's ironic that all Obama has done is basically continue programs you guys started. The stimulus? Bush's idea. The war? Bush's idea. Healthcare? They privatized it remember...so basically your idea. If anyone should be pissed it's us Dems.

The healthcare bill is almost a carbon copy of the one the R's floated in response to "Hillarycare"

And you're right. I am pissed, and thus that's why I can;t call myself a Dem. They're not the party that's going to get real change done.

10-27-10, 04:39 PM	#70
gimpy117 Ocean Warrior Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Kalamazoo, MI Posts: 3,243 Downloads: 108 Uploads: 0	a couple of hateful signs? its been more than that. __________________ Member of the Subsim Zombie Army

10-27-10, 03:32 PM	#62
tater Navy Seal Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: New Mexico, USA Posts: 9,023 Downloads: 8 Uploads: 2	There is also the presumption on mookie's part that she was beaten up for her political beliefs. I think her politics was incidental. She rushed a candidate. Try rushing Obama with an I love Obama shirt just to give him a hug—and a present your kid made him. How will that work out for you? Think the Secret Service will see the Obama shirt, and ignore you rushing him? Will they stomp your head? No. They are, OTOH, highly trained and deal with this sort of thing daily—unlike bystanders in the case of this incident.

10-27-10, 04:36 PM	#68
tater Navy Seal Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: New Mexico, USA Posts: 9,023 Downloads: 8 Uploads: 2	Yeah, a couple hateful signs means that the the basic sentiment of the movement. How about this. Most all the anti-war protests during the Bush years were sponsored by ANSWER. All anti-war people are therefore also communists (ANSWER is a communist group). That's actually much more of a connection since the tea party stuff is not as top-down as ANSWER was. I was at my dentist's office which was along a place here where the tea party people had their signs (a couple miles along Montgomery Blvd. in ABQ). In fact his officI drove right past them. there was a bit of a traffic jam, and I was stuck at a few lights. I saw no signs like those. Not one. Anecdotal? Sure, but I saw a LOT of signs, and 0% were hateful. Had they been common, or even slightly common I'd have seen some. Heck, I had enough time that geek I am I started counting people and then guestimating the number per 1/10th of a mile on my odometer. For someone who claims not to have an affiliation, you certainly regurgitate talking points on the whole tea party thing. Lemme guess, you prefer the likes of Amy Goodman? (used to listen to her daily to get a feel what real whack-jobs thought) Bottom line is that random people show up, and you can say very little about their actual beliefs short of doing real statistics on them. Internet pictures of a few signs is utterly meaningless, as is a single recorded assault (under circumstances that would likely remove it from violence considerations). You'd need to scour police records and record reported violence during pure demonstrations. Do demonstrations by different organizations, then non-political events as a control. You can do the same with signs if you like. There is a video posted a long time ago that someone made walking through that big tea party rally in DC. It;s several minutes. You could likely go through counting total signs, then count "offensive" signs, or signs that suborn violence, etc. Would be a useful benchmark.

10-27-10, 04:43 PM	#71
The Third Man Stowaway Posts: n/a Downloads: Uploads:	Its over. With a week to go even the B. knows it. The question is will the sweeping probationary change give Obama the reason to change his agenda, or will a more permanant change be required?