# Republican Candidate Welcomes Obama To Tennessee By Showing Picture Of



## LightyKD (Oct 4, 2012)

On September 27th, Brad Staats, who is running for congress in Tennessee’s 5th district, thought it would be a smart idea to post a picture of his handgun on his facebook page with the message, “Welcome to Tennessee Mr. Obama.” While he was not saying this in a manner which was a direct threat to the president, when asked about it, Mr. Staats’ given reasons do not bode much better, as this report from News 2 WKRN Nashville shows...

_SOURCE: http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/10/03/republican-showing-his-gun/_


----------



## Sterling (Oct 4, 2012)

A politician being stupid again is not USN worthy. I vote for GOT placement. Anyway, like I said, it's not as if this is surprising. A politician running off at the mouth is pretty common.


----------



## LightyKD (Oct 4, 2012)

Sterling said:


> A politician being stupid again is not USN worthy. I vote for GOT placement. Anyway, like I said, it's not as if this is surprising. A politician running off at the mouth is pretty common.



It's one thing to trash talk but what he did was virtually brandish his gun at the President and a threat to any President of this country is a Federal offense. It's about time the Secret Service started making examples out of some of these right-winged extremeist wackos.


----------



## blahkamehameha (Oct 4, 2012)

" Welcome to Tennessee Mr. Obama, where we appreciate our 2nd Amendment rights and the Constitution that was wisely given to us by our founding fathers."There's the full quote. I probably would have added a Bible and "document of negative liberties" (as stated by Obama, referring to the Constitution) in the pic as well had it been me, but to each his own.


----------



## tueidj (Oct 4, 2012)

LightyKD said:


> It's about time the Secret Service started making examples out of some of these right-winged extremeist wackos.


> calls other people "extremeist wackos"
> suggests they be executed
'MURICA FUCK YEAH


----------



## blahkamehameha (Oct 4, 2012)

For the hell of it, here is the entire facebook post: "Many people in Tennessee keep asking me about my opinion on Second Amendment rights. Apparently Tennesseans are part of that crazy crowd that Obama says "cling to their religion and guns." Well, then I must be part of that crazy crowd. Here is something that I usually have with me. Welcome to Tennessee Mr. Obama, where we appreciate our 2nd Amendment rights and the Constitution that was wisely given to us by our founding fathers."

Funny how the only thing in the post mentioned is the gun and "Welcome to Tennessee Mr. Obama". Just a taaaad misleading. So sick of Obama's BS as well as the Media's twisted reporting of things like this, I welcome President Romney next year as my new president.


----------



## KingVamp (Oct 4, 2012)

blahkamehameha said:


> For the hell of it, here is the entire facebook post: "Many people in Tennessee keep asking me about my opinion on Second Amendment rights. Apparently Tennesseans are part of that crazy crowd that Obama says "cling to their religion and guns." Well, then I must be part of that crazy crowd. Here is something that I usually have with me. Welcome to Tennessee Mr. Obama, where we appreciate our 2nd Amendment rights and the Constitution that was wisely given to us by our founding fathers."
> 
> Funny how the only thing in the post mentioned is the gun and "Welcome to Tennessee Mr. Obama". Just a taaaad misleading. So sick of Obama's BS as well as the Media's twisted reporting of things like this, I welcome President Romney next year as my new president.


I understand that statement towards the Media since it well... the Media, but this isn't Obama fault.


----------



## blahkamehameha (Oct 4, 2012)

KingVamp said:


> blahkamehameha said:
> 
> 
> > For the hell of it, here is the entire facebook post: "Many people in Tennessee keep asking me about my opinion on Second Amendment rights. Apparently Tennesseans are part of that crazy crowd that Obama says "cling to their religion and guns." Well, then I must be part of that crazy crowd. Here is something that I usually have with me. Welcome to Tennessee Mr. Obama, where we appreciate our 2nd Amendment rights and the Constitution that was wisely given to us by our founding fathers."
> ...


Well, I find it interesting you somehow read my post and took it as I said it was his fault. But if you need an example of Obama's BS I'm tired of, the "negative liberties" comment will suffice.

And the media better give Romney this treatment. If Romney receives any "alleged threat" it better have it's own article.


----------



## BenRK (Oct 4, 2012)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2VCwBzGdPM


----------



## BlueStar (Oct 4, 2012)

blahkamehameha said:


> the "negative liberties" comment will suffice.



Wait... What?  Do you think that term means that the liberties given in the constitution are 'negative' or 'bad' things?  I've heard Conservatives (unsurprisingly) have issues with the other things he said in that little soundbite, but I've not heard this term in isolation thrown around as some kind of proof Obama is the antichrist.


----------



## yuyuyup (Oct 4, 2012)

tueidj said:


> LightyKD said:
> 
> 
> > It's about time the Secret Service started making examples out of some of these right-winged extremeist wackos.
> ...


LightyKD certainly did NOT suggest anyone be executed.  Where are YOU from so we can overgeneralize and lie about YOUR entire population ?




blahkamehameha said:


> For the hell of it, here is the entire facebook post: "Many people in Tennessee keep asking me about my opinion on Second Amendment rights. Apparently Tennesseans are part of that crazy crowd that Obama says "cling to their religion and guns." Well, then I must be part of that crazy crowd. Here is something that I usually have with me. Welcome to Tennessee Mr. Obama, where we appreciate our 2nd Amendment rights and the Constitution that was wisely given to us by our founding fathers."
> 
> Funny how the only thing in the post mentioned is the gun and "Welcome to Tennessee Mr. Obama". Just a taaaad misleading. So sick of Obama's BS as well as the Media's twisted reporting of things like this, I welcome President Romney next year as my new president.


Typical repub, co-signing on the lie (refering to you "liking" tueidj's lie.)  Even within context, this is still wildly inappropriate and a blatant threat.  This dumbass fear mongering redneck made this post because he somehow thinks the UN Small Arms Treaty has a DAMN thing to do with the 2nd amendment, or a DAMN thing to do with Obama himself.  Doing so, he's stirring up a bunch of paranoid dipshit coward gun nuts.  But you don't care, as long as you have your pea shooter handy, the big bad govt could NEVER mess around with YOU, right ?  Yeah, I'm sure you could take down the god damn Marines.


----------



## Sterling (Oct 4, 2012)

*snip


----------



## BlueStar (Oct 4, 2012)

I still don't see where anyone has called for anyone to be executed.  Seems like it's people with a chip on their shoulder trying to play the victim by putting words in other people's mouths.


----------



## Qtis (Oct 4, 2012)

blahkamehameha said:


> And the media better give Romney this treatment. If Romney receives any "alleged threat" it better have it's own article.



You do realize that Obama is the current president and there are certain things that are made to keep the president safe? I don't even live in the US, but regardless of the situation that any country is in (elections at the moment or not), threatening a president isn't really smart in any sense. I'd assume that roughly the same could be applied to candidates running for presidency. 

Not saying that it was a direct threat in this situation, but it's plain simple that it wasn't a smart move. Similar situations have happened in many other countries too and the outcomes have varied from doing a so called political suicide to actually getting sued in court (more severe cases where the offense was easy to point out)..


----------



## Sterling (Oct 4, 2012)

*snip


----------



## BlueStar (Oct 4, 2012)

Sterling said:


> BlueStar said:
> 
> 
> > I still don't see where anyone has called for anyone to be executed.  Seems like it's people with a chip on their shoulder trying to play the victim by putting words in other people's mouths.
> ...



No it isn't.  There's no indication that it doesn't just mean legal proceedings.  Look at the people who have actually threatened to kill, or plotted to kill the president, that the secret service have investigated.

http://en.wikipedia....st_Barack_Obama

How many of those people have been summilarly executed or 'disappeared'?  And yet suggesting the secret service should 'make an example' of someone who seems to be making a veiled threat is asking for them to be murdered, even when it says 'arrest him' in the subject?  Come on.


----------



## Sterling (Oct 4, 2012)

I'm just going to retract my previous statements. I totally missed the subtext under the title line. My bad LightyKD.


----------



## Sterling (Oct 4, 2012)

Yeah I got you, forget what I said. I messed up. 

EDIT: What I said was that they had the power. It's not something they'd publicize if it were done too. So if you can document the undocumented cases, I'd appreciate the number and address of the store where you bought your crystal ball.


----------



## yuyuyup (Oct 4, 2012)

Entire comment dumped and new one re-written to reflect edited comment


Sterling said:


> Yeah I got you, forget what I said. I messed up.
> 
> EDIT: What I said was that they had the power. It's not something they'd publicize if it were done too. So if you can document the undocumented cases, I'd appreciate the number and address of the store where you bought your crystal ball.


Of course there are abuses of power, unfortunately, when REPUBS are in charge, they seem to not give a shit.  Or have you forgotten the Bush years ?  I remember Repubs hooting and hollering about how it's just fine that the President can spy on you, read your mail, etc.  Pay no attention to illegal detainees, etc.  And when Obama wanted to actually prosecute terror suspects in Gitmo, it was the REPUBLICANS that cried "NOOO they need to continue to be illegally detained."  So honestly, Repubs do not have a leg to stand on.  I could go on and on and on and on about how Repubs just LOOVE the govt when they have their guy in charge, and how we MUST stand by our president in a time of war (aren't we still in a war ?)


----------



## Sterling (Oct 4, 2012)

Oh for fuck's sake people. I missed the title subtext. Please don't get so uptight. Also, I'd appreciate your editing my removed quotes. Common courtesy and whatnot.


----------



## Foxi4 (Oct 4, 2012)

_



			“Many people in Tennessee keep asking me about my opinion on Second Amendment rights,” (...) “Apparently Tennesseans are part of that crazy crowd that Obama says ‘cling to their religion and guns.’ Well, then I must be part of that crazy crowd. Here is something that I usually have with me. Welcome to Tennessee Mr. Obama, where we appreciate our 2nd Amendment rights and the Constitution that was wisely given to us by our founding fathers.”
		
Click to expand...

_That's not threatening. That's not even agressive, if anything, it may be patronizing. Somebody must've put a lot of effort into reading to misinterpret a quote like that. He's writing about the appreciation of the 2nd Amendment and then has to dodge a barrage of accusations because some reporters have reading disabilities and only quote a part of the post that's completely out of context.


----------



## BlueStar (Oct 4, 2012)

Sterling said:


> Yeah I got you, forget what I said. I messed up.
> 
> EDIT: What I said was that they had the power. It's not something they'd publicize if it were done too. So if you can document the undocumented cases, I'd appreciate the number and address of the store where you bought your crystal ball.



And if Mitt Romey had hired mercinaries who are going around killing people who disgaree with him, they wouldn't publicise that.  But if I want to start making claims like that, it's up to me to prove it, not you to disprove it.


----------



## Foxi4 (Oct 4, 2012)

Sterling retracted his previous statement and there's absolutely no reason why anyone should be on his back right now. The thread officially moved from the subject at hand to "pestering Sterling further", I'm afraid that I had to report it. Sterling's case aside, the thread is based on a bias source which purposely omitted certain vital parts of the original statement, making it sound like a threat for publicity's sake. There's simply no point in dwelling on the subject.


----------



## Sterling (Oct 4, 2012)

yuyuyup said:


> Entire comment dumped and new one re-written to reflect edited comment
> 
> 
> Sterling said:
> ...



For the record, I hate both parties. Bush was just as bad as Obama (if not worse) now that I sit back and do a bit of reflection. I wish Clinton had been elected for a second term too.


----------



## yuyuyup (Oct 4, 2012)

Sterling said:


> yuyuyup said:
> 
> 
> > Entire comment dumped and new one re-written to reflect edited comment
> ...


He was.


----------



## The Catboy (Oct 4, 2012)

This may not have been made as a threat, but the picture of the gun was a bit much. He could have made the same post without the gun and still gotten the point across without sounding threatening.

Edit: this thread was at one point moved to the EoF, please ignore my earlier post.


----------



## Foxi4 (Oct 4, 2012)

The source article clarifies that the statement was not of malicious intent (although with their editing it does seem like it) and carries on spouting baseless accusations making a storm in a glass of water and an issue out of a non-issue. The headline is structured to misguide - they sure know that 99% of people won't bother with the rest of the article and they sure succeeded in misguiding the OP. Arrest him? For what, voicing out his opinion about weapon ownership? The whole piece lacks substance and does not deserve attention.


----------



## The Catboy (Oct 4, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> -snip-


This was in the EoF at the time I made that post. I will edit it.


----------



## Gahars (Oct 4, 2012)

Facebook and Politicians do not a good pair make.


----------



## MelodieOctavia (Oct 4, 2012)

Play nice, ladies!


----------



## LightyKD (Oct 4, 2012)

First off, let's get something straight! I am NOT calling for mass executions of people. Hell, I'm against the death penalty (unless for an extreme situation or self appointed by the accused criminal who would rather die than face prison). I was and still am against Obama signing the NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act), I'm against the Patriot Act and STILL believe in the first Amendment and the fact hat people have the right to talk shit about all of the elected "leaders". The fact is, over the past four years, the constant threats, the increase in hate groups (which were decreasing during Bush 1, Clinton and Bush 2 and have skyrocketed under Obama), the shooting of congresswoman Gabby Giffords, the Batman shooting and the shooting at the Sikh temple are prime reasons why the Secret Service and Justice Department needs to start cracking down on these dickwads

I am getting tired of the fucking right wing acting like a bunch of victims while holding the damn country hostage with those Tea Party douche-bags  The republican party needs to realize that they are irrelevant and frankly these muthafuckas need to go with the dinosaurs and GTFO! For the first time in a long time, we have a real chance to progress towards the future. Romney (during the debate) bitches about the president giving clean energy 90 years worth of subsidies. DUH muthafucka! Fossil fuels are almost gone! Do you really want a national energy crisis? it's like sucking up the Wii Remote batteries without having a charged pair on standby. Do you really think that people will be happy if they have to spend a few months or years with no energy because we depleted all the god damned oil without a backup plan??? Let's use our brains here. Republicans talk about how the media is liberal and is twisting things, "You cant twist facts muthafucka, facts are facts!" Maybe if you had a platform that actually made sense then people would stop looking at you like you're a bunch of idiots.

Rant over, nuff said... I have a full plate of stuff to do today.


----------



## Foxi4 (Oct 4, 2012)

LightyKD said:


> -stuff-


The entire idea of the U.S government is based on binary oposition - you need to have Republicans to have Democrats, you need to have Conservatives to have Liberals. Neither faction represents ideas that are perfect for the entirety of the population, they represent two extreme ends of politics. The fatal flaw of this system is that neither will ever satisfy the needs of all states, and given the general attitude towards the "sweet spot", also known as Independent Candidates, which in the case of America is "Make up your mind, which party are you closer to?", you always end up with a choice between those two extreme ends.

That said, both are necessary, and depending on the times the country finds itself in and its political as well as economical status, either option could be beneficial for a myriad of reasons. Your duty as a citizen is to determine which political party has a better plan for the upcoming years and choose the direction for the country to progress in.

In any case, my point is that in your system, you cannot ask one party to "GTFO", as you put it, because without it, you would not have a reference to the other.


----------



## LightyKD (Oct 4, 2012)

Foxi you are right... logically. The major issue with the Republican party is that their platform comes from the 1950's it's out dated and takes no heed to the needs of the poor, minorities or women. The only people the Republican party likes are rich Caucasian men, fuck everybody else but wait... if there's a fetus involved, they want to protect it but say fuck it when it develops into a human beign. It would be one thing if they were actually the party of fiscal responsibility and defense (like they claim they are) but that is not the case. They just want to take away minority rights, womens rights, voting rights, arrest everyone or turn the damn country into corporate slaves all while cramming Christianity down people throats in a country where we have "religious freedom".


----------



## yuyuyup (Oct 4, 2012)

It is incredibly ridiculous if this topic was actually moved to the EoF rather than at least the Blog or Off Topic section where it wouldn't get absolutely buried.  I don't care if this is off topic, go ahead and burn my comment/up my warning/etc


----------



## blahkamehameha (Oct 4, 2012)

BlueStar said:


> blahkamehameha said:
> 
> 
> > the "negative liberties" comment will suffice.
> ...


Well...yeah. If someone says "negative liberties", I mean I guess...they mean 'negative' or 'bad' things....

Again, this entire thread is pretty much a waste. Anyone who feels he was actually threatening the president's life had to completely disregard the rest of his facebook post to do so. But that was the point of this thread, it was to make a threat out of a nonthreat. That's how come only the "Welcome to Tennessee Mr. Obama" and the gun part made it.

To me, saying the Secret Service should make "examples" out of people like this is by far more threatening.


----------



## Foxi4 (Oct 4, 2012)

LightyKD said:


> Foxi you are right... logically. The major issue with the Republican party is that their platform comes from the 1950's it's out dated and takes no heed to the needs of the poor, minorities or women. The only people the Republican party likes are rich Caucasian men, fuck everybody else but wait... if there's a fetus involved, they want to protect it but say fuck it when it develops into a human beign. It would be one thing if they were actually the party of fiscal responsibility and defense (like they claim they are) but that is not the case. They just want to take away minority rights, womens rights, voting rights, arrest everyone or turn the damn country into corporate slaves all while cramming Christianity down people throats in a country where we have "religious freedom".


_Which is why you have the counterweight of the opposing_ party to stabilize that. Besides, you're dramatizing. _They're not planning to take away anyone's voting rights or arrest anyone, calm down._ They represent _the other axis of power in your country_ which is perhaps_ less beneficial to you_, but do note, _yours may be less beneficial to others_. In the end, the entire society becomes _the equalizer of the situation by means of voting_.

Do you think that thrusting _your _beliefs down someone's gullet is perfectly fine _just because you find them more just?_ If that's the case, what makes you _better then them?_ I'll save you the effort and answer _"nothing", because Conservatives as well as Liberals are equally relentless in pushing their policies_ onto the nation - it's merely a matter of who's in charge at any given time.


----------



## mthrnite (Oct 4, 2012)




----------



## LightyKD (Oct 4, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> *Snip*
> 
> _They're not planning to take away anyone's voting rights or arrest anyone, calm down._
> 
> *Snip*



Bullshit! This whole year, the Republican party has been trying to put new voter laws on the books to disenfranchise Minority and Democratic voters, essentially stealing the damn election. The funny part is that they have been touting these laws under the guise of "trying to stop voter fraud" only to be caught red handed doing exactly what they claim to try to stop. One of their major voter registration partner companies was caught throwing away Democratic voter registration forms in favor of republican ones, which is a federal Offense

Source: http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2012/09/28/14138942-rnc-caught-up-in-election-fraud-controversy?lite

Source with video: http://www.examiner.com/article/video-republicans-caught-committing-voter-fraud-only-registering-romney-voters

I understand that my country's two party system is supposed to be like yin and yang with both halves serving to help the greater good but when the yang is so damn corrupt, one can't help but to b frustrated.


----------



## Foxi4 (Oct 4, 2012)

LightyKD said:


> Bullshit! _This whole year, the Republican party has been trying to put new voter laws on the books to disenfranchise Minority and Democratic voters, essentially stealing the damn election._ The funny part is that they have been touting these laws under the guise of "trying to stop voter fraud" only to be caught red handed doing exactly what they claim to try to stop. One of their major voter registration partner companies was caught throwing away Democratic voter registration forms in favor of republican ones, which is a federal Offense
> 
> I understand that my country's two party system is supposed to be like yin and yang with both halves serving to help the greater good but when the yang is so damn corrupt, one can't help but to b frustrated.


The way I see it,_ both are corrupt to an extent_. Show me a source about the laws in question. All you found is a black sheep among the herd and some voter registration fraud, which isn't nation-wide and can be connected to the individual, not the party.


----------



## blahkamehameha (Oct 4, 2012)

LightyKD said:


> Foxi4 said:
> 
> 
> > *Snip*
> ...




I'm frustrated as hell with the Yin, my good sir. And if the debates continue to be this much of a bloodbath, the Yin will easily win. It was nice watching Obama get a few lessons on the economy last night. Very refreshing. Hell, pretty  much all the media is saying he lost the debate, liberal and conservative alike.

Notice instead of making eye contact with Mitt, he was looking down jotting notes the whole time. If he wins re-election, hopefully he will use the notes he took from Professor Mitt.


----------



## mthrnite (Oct 4, 2012)

Try to keep in on topic, read the first post if you need to, and dispense with the blustering my dad can beat up your dad bullshit please. Otherwise, lock.


----------



## Foxi4 (Oct 4, 2012)

mthrnite said:


> Try to keep in on topic, read the first post if you need to, and dispense with the blustering my dad can beat up your dad bullshit please. Otherwise, lock.


There is no "topic" mthrnite - the OP misinterpreted the source article by _*not reading it*_, he wants the politician in question arrested for, as he calls it, _"brandishing a weapon againts the president"_ wheras in fact, he was merely _showing his personal firearm to accompany his paragraph about the appreciation of the 2nd Amendment in his area_. In other words, there's nothing to speak of - no research whatsoever went into the creation of this thread. LightyKD noticed a catchy headline and BAM! Thread.

No offense, LightyKD - that's just my opinion.


----------



## LightyKD (Oct 4, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> mthrnite said:
> 
> 
> > Try to keep in on topic, read the first post if you need to, and dispense with the blustering my dad can beat up your dad bullshit please. Otherwise, lock.
> ...



Foxi I'll refer to this quote.



mthrnite said:


>


----------



## mthrnite (Oct 4, 2012)

@[member='Foxi4']

Somehow despite all that, I understood what he was getting at. While I don't think I should be arrested for posting an image of me targeting Mitt with my Nerf gun last night, I think a politician should be held to a higher standard than a citizen fucking around in his living room. Make no mistake, mine was a dog whistle too, but I'm not running for office to presumably represent 100 percent of my constituents either.

Also, I wasn't really talking to you, you're fine.



Spoiler


----------



## blahkamehameha (Oct 4, 2012)

LightyKD said:


> Foxi4 said:
> 
> 
> > mthrnite said:
> ...


----------



## Foxi4 (Oct 4, 2012)

LightyKD said:


> In this country the right wing tends to use a lot of dog whistles and while the president was not directly threatened  YES that post the politician made was a low brow made to entice the "Kill Obama" crowd and that is disrespectful. Even worse, we had a similar situation happen just recently when Sarah Palin and other right wingers were posting maps with Democratic localities and targets over the pictures of Democatic politicians (on the map). That map eventually fueled the fire that got Congresswoman Gabby Giffords shot. There's a huge "read between the lines" situation here. -just saying.


_OR _you didn't read the source quote _at all _and now you're using a comment _that conveniently protects you_ from ridicule wheras in fact, _reading your original post makes it obvious that you judged the man by the headline_, not the complete quote _which was not agressive or threatening at all. _I'm inclined to believe in the latter, thank you very much.

But let's play your little game - if it is a Dog Whistle, why did you want this man arrested? Did he do anything illegal? Did he, or did he not threaten the president? He didn't, you just didn't know that because you only skim-read the article and focused on the headline - that's the way the article is structured. It shows you a nice, clear headline, a nice, big photo of a gun... except it doesn't contain anything else worth noting.

I especially like how it says that since this man disagrees with the latest weapons trade-related agreements, he must be a supporter of terrorism - pure conjuncture and bullshit made up by the reporters to make the article look more edgy. He never said that - the fact that he doesn't like certain parts of a treaty doesn't mean that he disagrees with its entirety. Nobody ever asked him "are you supporting terrorists?" and yet, the article seems to know the answer. The piece is poor and bias, and you had no idea what you were writing about. You don't have to admit it, it's sort of obvious anyways.


----------



## Foxi4 (Oct 4, 2012)

mthrnite said:


> @[member='Foxi4']
> 
> Somehow despite all that, I understood what he was getting at. While I don't think I should be arrested for posting an image of me targeting Mitt with my Nerf gun last night, I think a politician should be held to a higher standard than a citizen fucking around in his living room. Make no mistake, mine was a dog whistle too, but I'm not running for office to presumably represent 100 percent of my constituents either.
> 
> ...


Sounds fair, but I think a lot of you misinterpret why he posted the photo in the first place. He says it quite clearly - he wants to show the weapon he usually carries around thanks to the rights secured by the 2nd Amendment. It's not threatening in any way - it's an example, and an example that speaks to the people of Tennessee at that.


----------



## mthrnite (Oct 4, 2012)

@blahkamehameha be civil or be out. Calling people morons don't fly, even if it isn't me.

Also, I live pretty deep within the Kill 'im" crowd. Gun culture is thick in my part of the country. Yeah, it's rhetoric, it's hyperbole, but I didn't present it as anything other than that. Is it dangerous rhetoric? Yes, I think so.


----------



## DiscostewSM (Oct 4, 2012)

So Democrats think everything Republicans say is against them, and vice versa. Am I getting the general idea here?


----------



## yuyuyup (Oct 4, 2012)

DiscostewSM said:


> So Democrats think everything Republicans say is against them, and vice versa. Am I getting the general idea here?


False equivalency, you don't see dems making violent dog whistle threats against repubs.  If I'm wrong, please let me know with an example.


----------



## Foxi4 (Oct 4, 2012)

yuyuyup said:


> DiscostewSM said:
> 
> 
> > So Democrats think everything Republicans say is against them, and vice versa. Am I getting the general idea here?
> ...


Your statement would be so funny if only it was true. Both parties hate eachother's guts.

TL;DR and Don't Want To Click Links Version is _"I don't like you because you're a Jew."_

*EDIT:* What I'm trying to say is that if you dig deep enough (or in this case, scrape the surface), you'll find dirt on both parties, so the Good/Evil dualism doesn't apply here - there will always be a few black sheep and a few extremists in every party you analyze.


----------



## leic7 (Oct 4, 2012)

Ha. This one made me laugh. I gotta say, that's a pretty sophisticated interpretation of that facebook thingie...might've overestimated, or underestimated (depending), the author a bit.


----------



## yuyuyup (Oct 4, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> yuyuyup said:
> 
> 
> > DiscostewSM said:
> ...


OK well I clicked that link and read the article (of course from the bipartisan, credible, and NEVER seeped in scandal BREITBART website,) and I read absolutely zero example of violent dog whistle tactics.  Furthermore, there wasn't one single solitary quote from the man the article is attacking.  Not even one.  Hey, here's an interesting quote from your beloved Casino Mogul Sheldon Adelson:

*“I am not Israeli. The uniform that I wore in the military, unfortunately, was not an Israeli uniform. It was an American uniform, although my wife was in the IDF and one of my daughters was in the IDF … our two little boys, one of whom will be bar mitzvahed tomorrow, hopefully he’ll come back– his hobby is shooting – and he’ll come back and be a sniper for the IDF.”*

Wow, regretful of wearing the American uniform.  Well that's fantastic.


----------



## Foxi4 (Oct 4, 2012)

yuyuyup said:


> -stuff-


You didn't read the source links _like I hinted you should_.


> “The Adelson money has effectively sealed the capitulation of Mr. Boteach to the right wing and *Islamophobes in the Republican Party*, and their financiers,* Boteach has sold his soul *and I am afraid no higher authority can redeem it. "


Yup. Totally doesn't make it sound like the Republican Party consists entirely of Islamophobes.

I'd also like to mention that I don't support either side, so "beloved" probably isn't the most fitting word. I was merely pointing at a mechanism.


----------



## yuyuyup (Oct 4, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> yuyuyup said:
> 
> 
> > -stuff-
> ...


At any point could you please let me know of the violent dog-whistle examples I've asked for?  Are you actually trying to tell me there AREN'T Islamophobes in the Republican Party?  Would you like me to dig up five hundred examples of Islamophobia from Repubs ?  What point are you trying to make ?


----------



## Foxi4 (Oct 4, 2012)

yuyuyup said:


> At any point could you please let me know of the violent dog-whistle examples I've asked for?  Are you actually trying to tell me there AREN'T Islamophobes in the Republican Party?  Would you like me to dig up five hundred examples of Islamophobia from Repubs ?  What point are you trying to make ?


The point I'm trying to make is that digging up dirt on either party is not a massive undertaking - they can be easily found, so presenting either in a "brighter" light is pointless as it's entirely subjective.

I could also dig up five hundred other links that would show the Democratic party in a bad light, except I won't because it's a barren discussion that has zero relevance to actual politics.


----------



## yuyuyup (Oct 4, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> yuyuyup said:
> 
> 
> > At any point could you please let me know of the violent dog-whistle examples I've asked for?  Are you actually trying to tell me there AREN'T Islamophobes in the Republican Party?  Would you like me to dig up five hundred examples of Islamophobia from Repubs ?  What point are you trying to make ?
> ...


I have YET to hear a single example from you of something so flagrantly threatening as the original thinly veiled dog whistle facebook post.  Let alone any example of so-called "dirt" on Democrats.  Here's a tip: try to provide examples from something other than a crazed right-wing blog like Breitbart.  They are WELL known for obliterating the context from quotes, conveniently chopping off parts to fit their narrative.  I will gladly provide MANY examples of this upon request.


----------



## Foxi4 (Oct 4, 2012)

yuyuyup said:


> I have YET to hear a single example from you of something so flagrantly threatening as the original thinly veiled dog whistle facebook post.  Let alone any example of so-called "dirt" on Democrats.  Here's a tip: try to provide examples from something other than a crazed right-wing blog like Breitbart.  They are WELL known for obliterating the context from quotes, conveniently chopping off parts to fit their narrative.  I will gladly provide MANY examples of this upon request.


I on the other hand don't see any thinly veiled dog whistles in the facebook post - I see a person who's adamant on misinterpreting what he read. On the other hand, I find accusing someone of being an Islamophobe on the basis of him being jewish as racist at the very least. As I said, the discussion is barren.

http://www.wmur.com/...l?absolute=true
http://www.washingto...essional-races/

...and many more. DCCC is known to release "Anti-Campaigns", which in many countries, including mine, is in fact illegal. They're not_ showing why their candidate is "good"_ -_ they're poking holes in the opposing candidates_. Rather than showing their candidates in a good light,_ they use cheap tactics_ to show the opposing candidates in a bad one.

What to see the full scale of their _Anti-Campaigns? Sure!_

http://www.youtube.com/user/DCCCVideo2012


----------



## yuyuyup (Oct 4, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> yuyuyup said:
> 
> 
> > I have YET to hear a single example from you of something so flagrantly threatening as the original thinly veiled dog whistle facebook post.  Let alone any example of so-called "dirt" on Democrats.  Here's a tip: try to provide examples from something other than a crazed right-wing blog like Breitbart.  They are WELL known for obliterating the context from quotes, conveniently chopping off parts to fit their narrative.  I will gladly provide MANY examples of this upon request.
> ...


According to you and your precious Breitbart, Assaf accused Adelson of Islamophobia JUST because he's JEWISH.  Oh wait, 5 seconds of Googling indicates actual evidence of Islamophobia.

COPYPASTA:
Addressing a Hanukkah celebration for hundreds of youths visiting Israel as part of the Taglit Birthright program on Sunday, Adelson said, “Read the history of those who call themselves Palestinians, and you will hear why [Newt] Gingrich said recently that the Palestinians are an invented people. There are a number of Palestinians who will recognize the truth of this statement.”

BIPARTISAN SOURCE:
http://www.haaretz.c...people-1.403671

Adelson saying "ALL TERRORISTS ARE ISLAMS" @ 2:21


That Ad for Guinta is an example of what ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?  It's hardly an attack ad at all.  Of course, let alone ANYTHING CLOSE to a violent dog whistle.
Another negative ad.  SOOOO ? ? ? ? ?

Look man, I gotta go to work, when I get back I'll respond to whatever other examples of HORRIBLE DIRT from the Democratic side you apparently think is equivalent to a violent dog whistle.


----------



## Foxi4 (Oct 4, 2012)

yuyuyup said:


> ~More Stuff~


Someone's getting a bit upset here. I'm merely underlining that the style of politics based on "don't vote for those people, they're totally naughty because they did this and that! Well, I suppose that you gotta vote for the only alternative then." is perhaps fitting for a playground or a sandbox - this is how children hold their debates. Why are those ads not showing the actual programme of the corresponding Democrat candidates? Why do they have to resort to attacking the opposing party, as if they had nothing to offer?

All I see is an entire channel dedicated to how the Republican party is naughty - an entire channel full of ads that are specifically aimed againts very specific people for the benefit of the Democratic party. But of course, you won't accept that due to your party affiliation, one which I fortunately don't have as I don't support either side of the conflict.

*EDIT:* And just to end this silly and off-topic discussion, I will conclude by saying that those DCCC adverts are sewn with threads thicker than shoelaces and you can see the subliminal messages in them even if you're standing on the face of the moon - they're the lowest of low possible political plays - when you put focus on what your oponent does wrong rather than on what your candidate does right, all you're doing is showing to the world how little you have to offer yourself.

_"Someone voted for controlled abortions? Well, clearly he is againts family planning then - why else would he do that! Why would you vote for someone who's againts family values?" - _not a Democratic version of a whistle? Perhaps for you, I'm not that blind. These are all _attacks _directed againts specific people rather than actual advertisements of the Democratic political programmes, plain and simple.


----------



## Hanafuda (Oct 5, 2012)

LightyKD said:


> The fact is, over the past four years, the constant threats, the increase in hate groups (which were decreasing during Bush 1, Clinton and Bush 2 and have skyrocketed under Obama), the shooting of congresswoman Gabby Giffords, the Batman shooting and the shooting at the Sikh temple are prime reasons why the Secret Service and Justice Department needs to start cracking down on these dickwads



Waaaaaaay more people getting killed in Chicago by gang violence. Let's crack down on those dickwads, then we can crack down on your dickwads.


----------



## mthrnite (Oct 5, 2012)

Let's get a little trickle-down lovenomics. It might not help Chicago, but it wouldn't cost nothin' and it damn well couldn't hurt.


----------



## leic7 (Oct 5, 2012)

Foxi4 said:


> yuyuyup said:
> 
> 
> > ~More Stuff~
> ...


I don't think you actually understand what a "dog-whistle" is... Attack ads are not dog whistles, partisan biases are not dog whistles. mthrnite gave a pretty succinct description of what it's supposed to do, you might wanna go back and reread it.

The examples of "Democrats can be equally dirty, too" that you've provided are not even on the same level of "dirty" as the examples yuyuyup gave. Do you have no sense of scale? Just because there are less-than-classy moves by both parties doesn't mean all less-than-classy moves by everyone are *equally* distasteful. Some things are on a whole other level than others.


----------



## Haloman800 (Oct 5, 2012)

Proud to live in Tennessee.

God Bless America!


----------



## BlueStar (Oct 5, 2012)

blahkamehameha said:


> BlueStar said:
> 
> 
> > blahkamehameha said:
> ...



Well then you've completely misunderstood then, haven't you.

http://en.wikipedia....egative_liberty



> *Negative liberty* is freedom from interference by other people. Negative liberty is primarily concerned with the possession of sociological agency and contrasts with positive liberty (an individual's freedom from inhibitions of the social structure within the society such as classism, sexism, or racism).



What Obama said


> generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can’t do to you. Says what the Federal government can’t do to you, but doesn’t say what the Federal government or State government must do on your behalf,



Negative liberties is a principle of just that, that it's liberties saying what the government CAN'T do to you (imprison you without trial, take your guns, whatever) as opposed to 'positive liberties', which would be laws saying what the government HAS to do for you (protect you from criminals, make sure you have a chance of an education etc).

Seems you were quite keen to believe something bad about Obama before even finding out what it meant.


----------

