Peace loving Progressives

[thombergeron]

Remember all those batshit crazy leftists who were so pissed that George Bush was elected that the went out and shot people?

Oh, wait a minute:

Richard Popalowski

Joshua Cartwright

James Wenneker von Brunn

[onmyknees]

There you go lying again. Name calling is all you do. It's the only way to argue the lie that you start these threads with. As for political views: You don't know mine & I don't care about yours. You know absolutely nothing about me. Everything you think you know is just somebody elses opinion of what I should be thinking, based on some convoluted associative illogic. Like I said: No original thought. If you ever find a there there, let me know. In the meantime. I'm perfectly happy laughing at your gullibility.

I'm sorry, but I've read hippiefried's posts, and though I often agree with him, I rarely find them to be derivative of mine. Take this thread for example. Hippiefried is explaining that you haven't established any facts that warrant a lengthy response. That's pretty much the whole story. My responses on the other hand have been quite lengthy. So how is that parroting? Actually I think there's something else going on here.

Every time I read one of your posts, it's trish this and trish that. Even in your response to other people you want my attention. Try to pay some attention to what's being written and less to who writes it.

Which is it? Do I refuse to condemn, or do I condemn while pointing out distinctions? You have yet to show us exactly where my distinctions are inaccurate or irrelevant. Are you just complaining that I found distinctions to make?

WRONG. And I've been insistent on this point...NOT FIERY RHETORIC, BUT THE USE OF VIOLENT METAPHORS TO MOVE PEOPLE TO POLITICAL ACTION. There's distinction and it's not nuanced. I have yet to see a conservative speak against the latter. Why? Are they afraid it would be self-condemnation?

I just gave a nuanced analysis of Obama's "If they bring a knife,..." blunder. I condemned it. You didn't. You literally said: So is it dangerous or not? Am I too critical of liberal uses of violent metaphor because I condemn it and you don't. Or do I not sufficiently appreciate its dangerousness? You can't have it both ways.

"I'm sorry, but I've read hippiefried's posts, and though I often agree with him, I rarely find them to be derivative of mine. Take this thread for example. Hippiefried is explaining that you haven't established any facts that warrant a lengthy response. That's pretty much the whole story. My responses on the other hand have been quite lengthy. So how is that parroting? Actually I think there's something else going on here.

Every time I read one of your posts, it's trish this and trish that. Even in your response to other people you want my attention. Try to pay some attention to what's being written and less to who writes it.


Not sure how to respond to that....you don't like when I say you're getting in Palin's head, but you're trying to get into mine? More of the same from you! Not sure what you "think" is going on...but whatever it is..it's in your head only ! I want your attention ????? That's pretty lame ! LMAO...Wow...I mean really Trish ...get a clue girl ! Your condesending tone has been unchallanged for awhile now ...You're not schooling anybody here, and you're not the head mistress !!! You know what's going on here?? I don't back down and I'm not in the least intimadated or convinced by your arguments...that's what's going on. I read your opinions, and counter with my own, and state why I think you're wrong. If you're reading any more into that...well that's on you. And if I refer to you in other posts, it's because I use what you say as an example of, in my opinion the protoypical thinking, and in some cases the hypocracy of progressives. I guess you run the risk of being quoted as this is a public forum. So if I don't do that in the future, can we assume I'm no longer begging for your attention? LMAO

Now...back to substance...I asked you to supply proof of your statement yesterday of people being encouraged to attend tea parties all over the county armed. It seemed like the basis for your entire position. Please stop telling me to pay attention to the posts and trying to shrink me, and practice what you preach.............or don't...it really doesn't matter. .....I'm taking a blow from here for a couple days.

[thombergeron]

I asked you to supply proof of your statement yesterday of people being encouraged to attend tea parties all over the county armed.

Militia Groups Hold Armed Protest on Potomac

[thombergeron]

[thombergeron]

Which is not to say that the Tea Party is incapable of non-violent protest, like the guys who only spit on Emanuel Cleaver and merely called James Clyburn a nigger.

[Faldur]

Whaddya think we should to do those demonstrators then? Come on, give me a real answer. What should we do? What do they deserve? Come on. You can answer. What should we do to 'em? What should we do after that? Then what? That's not all is it? What else do we do to 'em? Huh? What else?

That answer is simple, we expose them for the vile racist/angry revolutionaries that they are. We don't continue to support a left leaning media that continually hides these kind of people, comments and gatherings.

Once that is done, we can line them all up against a wall and throw used condoms at them. (that more the response you wanted?, let me know i can edit it for you).

[Faldur]

Let me get this straight, saying "No" is violent? In case you didn't know, guns are legal in this country.

[thombergeron]

onmyknees doubted the veracity of reports of armed tea partiers and asked for evidence of said phenomenon.

And there 'tis. Enjoy.

Are going to take the position that carrying a firearm at a political protest is a nonviolent act? That the gentleman in this photo does not intend an "Or else!" coda to his demand that we end congess [sic] spending and replace the comunist [sic] in DC? That he's carrying a rifle just because he likes rifles?

Because I would call such as position disingenuous.

[trish]

I presume you don't require proof that guns were brought to town hall meetings all over the nation, nor that fellow healthcare protestors encouraged each other to bring them. Nor, I presume, do you require proof that plenty of encouragement was to be found on Fox Newsfotainment. If you need to find such encouragement coming from a representative try looking up Phil Gingrey.

[w1s2x3]

onmyknees doubted the veracity of reports of armed tea partiers and asked for evidence of said phenomenon.

And there 'tis. Enjoy.

Are going to take the position that carrying a firearm at a political protest is a nonviolent act? That the gentleman in this photo does not intend an "Or else!" coda to his demand that we end congess [sic] spending and replace the comunist [sic] in DC? That he's carrying a rifle just because he likes rifles?

Because I would call such as position disingenuous.

Our country was born of violence. We fought a war to stop slavery. Perhaps one to stop tax slavery is next?