PDA

View Full Version : “Civility” Defined…



Taxcutter
05-23-2013, 09:51 AM
…by rabid O-Bots.



http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2013/05/incivility-defined-it-means-criticizing-obama.html

(http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2013/05/incivility-defined-it-means-criticizing-obama.html)


quote:
“A government of, by, and for the people requires that people talk to people, that we can agree to disagree but do so in civility.”



“As Donna Brazille (http://us.cnn.com/2013/05/18/opinion/brazile-democracy-in-danger/) makes clear, "incivility" means criticizing the President or attempting to hold him accountable for missteps of those who report to him.”



“…everyone needs to shut up and take the word for two IRS officials that there is no scandal here…”



“…let's of course all be civil, and civility means calling folks criticizing a black President "lynch mobs."



Taxcutter says:
The O-Bots want to use confiscation to deny citizens their Second Amendment rights. They want to use their definition of “civility” to deny citizens their First Amendment rights.



I stay with my description of the Obama junta. Junta is as junta does.

truthmatters
05-23-2013, 09:52 AM
how did you feel about Bush cheating in elections and then having that discussed?

Taxcutter
05-23-2013, 09:53 AM
Red herring denied.

Take your trash talking points elsewhere.

truthmatters
05-23-2013, 09:54 AM
how uncivil of you

truthmatters
05-23-2013, 09:54 AM
Bush never won any elections without cheating.


that is a fact

Calypso Jones
05-23-2013, 10:09 AM
Bush never won any elections without cheating.


that is a fact

you wouldn't mind posting the links for that would ya?

truthmatters
05-23-2013, 10:12 AM
what do you know about floridas central file?

truthmatters
05-23-2013, 10:12 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_Central_Voter_File#James_Lee.27s_testimony


James Lee's testimony [edit (http://thepoliticalforums.com/w/index.php?title=Florida_Central_Voter_File&action=edit&section=3)]On 17 April 2001, James Lee testified, before the McKinney panel, that the state had given DBT the directive to add to the purge list people who matched at least 90% of a last name. DBT objected, knowing that this would produce a huge number of false positives (non-felons).[7] (http://thepoliticalforums.com/#cite_note-7)
Lee went on saying that the state then ordered DBT to shift to an even lower threshold of 80% match, allowing also names to be reversed (thus a person named Thomas Clarence could be taken to be the same as Clarence Thomas). Besides this, middle initials were skipped, Jr. and Sr. suffixes dropped, and some nicknames (http://thepoliticalforums.com/wiki/Nickname) and aliases (http://thepoliticalforums.com/wiki/Pseudonym) were added to puff up the list.
"DBT told state officials", testified Lee, "that the rules for creating the [purge] list would mean a significant number of people who were not deceased, not registered in more than one county, or not a felon, would be included on the list. DBT made suggestions to reduce the numbers of eligible voters included on the list". According to Lee, to this suggestion the state told the company, "Forget about it".
"The people who worked on this (for DBT) are very adamant... they told them what would happen", said Lee. "The state expected the county supervisors to be the failsafe." Lee said his company will never again get involved in cleansing voting rolls. "We are not confident any of the methods used today can guarantee legal voters will not be wrongfully denied the right to vote", Lee told a group of Atlanta-area black lawmakers in March 2001

truthmatters
05-23-2013, 10:13 AM
Bush won by a very small margin in florida in 2000.

Gore actaully won more votes than Bush nation wide.

It was decided by the SCOTUS

patrickt
05-23-2013, 11:25 AM
how did you feel about Bush cheating in elections and then having that discussed?

You mean President Bush paying ACORN for phony registrations? Do you mean President Bush handing out counterfeit voter registration cards? Do you mean President Bush making foreign criminals citizens just before the election so they could vote? Do you mean encouraging foreign nationals to vote? Perhaps you meant President Bush flooding nursing homes with thugs to coerce votes from old people? Or, perhaps you meant President Bush having dead people voting? Or, maybe you mean the media announcing the election was over while people were still voting?

That must be what you're talking about but you did make one tiny little error, Truthdoesntmatter. It wasn't Bush. It was Al Giore. Oh, wait, we forgot the hanging chads and having psychics decide that people who voted for Bush really wanted to vote for Al Gore.

Truthdoesntmatter, you are embarrassing yourself.

Agravan
05-23-2013, 11:35 AM
but, but, but boooooooosssshhhh!!!!!!!!!!

Peter1469
05-23-2013, 12:01 PM
Florida was not decided by SCOTUS. In fact Florida had already certified the vote count prior to the case, so there was no legal way to say that Gore won.

Also, the recounts typically turned out in Bush's favor. And after SCOTUS ruled, the press conducted their own recount and confirmed that Bush won. The NY Times wrote an article about it by didn't really make a big deal out of it. http://www.nytimes.com/pages/politics/recount/

Micketto
05-23-2013, 02:05 PM
Bush never won any elections without cheating.


that is a fact

Is it lying.... or just sheer stupidity.... when you type such blatantly wrong info. ?

Pick one.

Micketto
05-23-2013, 02:06 PM
Bush won by a very small margin in florida in 2000.

Gore actaully won more votes than Bush nation wide.

It was decided by the SCOTUS

So a close election is your proof of "Bush cheating".....

Go off yourself, ffs

Cigar
05-23-2013, 02:07 PM
So a close election is your proof of "Bush cheating".....

Go off yourself, ffs

... and Obama's victory is what in your eyes :)

Micketto
05-23-2013, 02:08 PM
... and Obama's victory is what in your eyes :)

Legitimate.

But devastating for the country.

Cigar
05-23-2013, 02:15 PM
Legitimate.

But devastating for the country.

You'll survive ... I did from Bush

Micketto
05-23-2013, 02:18 PM
You'll survive ... I did from Bush

I have no worries about surviving. I can afford anything that comes my way.
I would just like a stronger nation, with opportunity for our children and grandchildren.
Not bigger, and bigger government telling them what to think and feel, while they're working hard to pay off the debt caused by ridiculous spending, and gifts to the Muslim Brotherhood.

...for starters.

simpsonofpg
05-23-2013, 06:07 PM
how did you feel about Bush cheating in elections and then having that discussed?

Great, bring the proof of guilt and we can give it a whirl. I am pretty old so you had better hurry.

Taxcutter
05-24-2013, 09:43 AM
So why is criticizing Hussein Obama considered to be less than civil?

Agravan
05-24-2013, 10:48 AM
So why is criticizing Hussein Obama considered to be less than civil?

Because any criticism of Obama has got to be racist since his policies are all perfect.

patrickt
05-24-2013, 12:26 PM
You'll survive ... I did from Bush

Sadly, you did not survive intact. And President Bush had no desire to destroy you or to destroy America.

bladimz
05-24-2013, 01:36 PM
Red herring denied.

Take your trash talking points elsewhere.Your OP is a trash-talking blog. Why deny someone else's "trash-talking" reponse?

bladimz
05-24-2013, 01:47 PM
Legitimate.

But devastating for the country.
What i call devastating for the country is two major wars, both lasting the balance of his term(s). The Iraq war alone cost us more than 2 trillion bucks and maybe even as much as 6 trillion. That's devastating. What i call devastating is the implementation of the Patriot Act, 'enhanced interrogation", the handling of Katrina. But you know all of this. None of this did our country any good. Those wars will have a negative effect on this nation for years to come.

nic34
05-24-2013, 01:50 PM
I have no worries about surviving. I can afford anything that comes my way.
I would just like a stronger nation, with opportunity for our children and grandchildren.
Not bigger, and bigger government telling them what to think and feel, while they're working hard to pay off the debt caused by ridiculous spending, and gifts to the Muslim Brotherhood.

...for starters.

Sooooo you want a STRONGER nation.... but a smaller govt. No "ridiculous spending" but just enough to provide those opportunities ... for generations to come....

I suppose you want that and lower taxes too.

zelmo1234
05-24-2013, 01:55 PM
Bush never won any elections without cheating.


that is a fact

link please

zelmo1234
05-24-2013, 01:58 PM
Bush won by a very small margin in florida in 2000.

Gore actaully won more votes than Bush nation wide.

It was decided by the SCOTUS

You do realize the the electoral collage elects the President Not the popular vote? don't you?

Gore could have one the popular vote by 5 million and still lost the election? Now I think that it is time to change that law, but until they do it is about electoral votes

zelmo1234
05-24-2013, 02:00 PM
Sooooo you want a STRONGER nation.... but a smaller govt. No "ridiculous spending" but just enough to provide those opportunities ... for generations to come....

I suppose you want that and lower taxes too.

I think that the tax code needs to be totally scraped and re writen so a 5 year old can understand it!

But one would only lower taxes if they wanted to create jobs and increase revenue to the treasury! If you are not looking to do either fo those things, then you should riase taxes

zelmo1234
05-24-2013, 02:03 PM
What i call devastating for the country is two major wars, both lasting the balance of his term(s). The Iraq war alone cost us more than 2 trillion bucks and maybe even as much as 6 trillion. That's devastating. What i call devastating is the implementation of the Patriot Act, 'enhanced interrogation", the handling of Katrina. But you know all of this. None of this did our country any good. Those wars will have a negative effect on this nation for years to come.

Now I know that we are not done paying for the wars, and they will cost a tom of money, but currently you statemnet is a misleading at best

http://costofwar.com/

bladimz
05-24-2013, 03:56 PM
Now I know that we are not done paying for the wars, and they will cost a tom of money, but currently you statemnet is a misleading at best

http://costofwar.com/
Well you have your links; i have mine.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/29/us-usa-war-idUSTRE75S25320110629

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/14/iraq-war-cost-more-than-2-trillion_n_2875493.html

http://www.businessinsider.com/why-the-iraq-war-cost-2-trillion-2013-3

patrickt
05-24-2013, 04:13 PM
Wars have a cost and they have an end. Buying votes with taxpayer money has no end. The so-called entitlements have no end.

Agravan
05-24-2013, 06:25 PM
What i call devastating for the country is two major wars, both lasting the balance of his term(s). The Iraq war alone cost us more than 2 trillion bucks and maybe even as much as 6 trillion. That's devastating. What i call devastating is the implementation of the Patriot Act, 'enhanced interrogation", the handling of Katrina. But you know all of this. None of this did our country any good. Those wars will have a negative effect on this nation for years to come.And Obama has not ended Afghanistan in 5 1/2 years because...?