450 posts IS a worse crime than wanting to kill us .
POSTED BY: AURaptor
UPDATED: Friday, May 22, 2009 14:59
VIEWED: 29463
PAGE 23 of 46
For example ... ?
***************************************************************
Silence is consent.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
One thing that comes to mind is when John Murtha called the Marines in a certain altercation in Iraq (I can not remember the name, so forgive me for the mind-slip) "cold blooded murderers". This was before the trial even took place for these soldiers. When the trial was over and the soldiers were vindicated, Murtha did not apologize for his comments to my knowledge. Do ALL Democrats think soldiers are cold blooded murderers? Of course not, but the majority did not denounce his comments either.
But I'll be completely honest here, Rue. You ask for examples as if you can not think of a single one from the Democratic side and yet you can site example after example from the Repulican side. And YOU KNOW it happens on both sides of the aisle which is all I was looking for agreement on - a bipartisan agreement on what goes on in general on both sides.
Zoe: "Get it running again."
Mal: "Yeah"
Zoe: "So not running now"
Mal: "Not so much"
- Out of Gas
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Several generalizations and a few errros of fact which confuse your own argument - (Haditha, btw)
"When the trial was over and the soldiers were vindicated ..."
Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich and Lt. Col. Jeffrey Chessani still face courts martial, and have not been acquitted.
"When the trial was over ..."
This is what Murtha said:
"There was no IED that killed these innocent people. Our troops overreacted because of the pressure on them and they killed innocent civilians in cold blood. And that's what the report is going to tell…"
This is what a 'defense official' said:
"A U.S. defense official said on Wednesday, however that evidence indicates Marines deliberately shot to death unarmed civilians."
"Do ALL Democrats think soldiers are cold blooded murderers?"
You make the jump from those at Haditha to ALL soldiers. Murtha did not do that, I did not do that - YOU did that.
If you wish me to address this specific incident involving Murtha, I suggest you make your argument more accurate.
***************************************************************
Silence is consent.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"You ask for examples as if you can not think of a single one from the Democratic side ..."
Actually - I can't. Not from Reid or Pelosi or Franken. Nothing racist, nothing violent. Sure, I think Pelosi is a skank politician. But that's a different issue for me than being an inflamatory bigot.
***************************************************************
Silence is consent.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
You're just trying to argue, which I guess is what makes you happy. YOU are the one wanting an example. I gave you one, granted with a few errors because of the lapse of time since the actual event. But my arguement holds true that he called the Marines cold blooded killers (killing in cold blood is the same thing just worded differently) before the trial and NO Democrat to my knowledge condemned his statements. Going by YOUR statements, that makes HIS comments the defacto statement of the entire party since no one spoke out against what he said.
Seriously. If you can't bring yourself to agree with me on the general fact that BOTH sides are guilty of this, just say so. I won't hold it against you. But then you will, in effect be staying silent on it, which I believe you say is constant. If it goes against everything you stand for to agree with a guy like me, then more power to ya.
I make no claims that Republican/Conservatives have NEVER said controversial or inappropriate things. Everyone does at some point or another. That's what makes us human.
Zoe: "Get it running again."
Mal: "Yeah"
Zoe: "So not running now"
Mal: "Not so much"
- Out of Gas
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"But my argument holds true that he called the Marines cold blooded killers (you originally said "cold blooded murderers") before the trial and NO Democrat to my knowledge condemned his statements. Going by YOUR statements, that makes HIS comments the de facto statement of the entire party since no one spoke out against what he said."
I'll nit-pick here just a bit.
Murtha was, and is, VERY careful with his words. He didn't say they were murderers as you claim he did. To be called a murderer, you have to go on trial for murder and be found guilty of murder.
What he said was that the REPORT on the incident would find that marines killed innocent civilians in cold blood. Indeed, that is what the report found. The report was done by Bargewell. (I couldn't find a link.) But the various news stories indicate that is what the report found.
"Three separate groups of U.S. military personnel visited the scene of a shooting that killed 24 apparently innocent Iraqi civilians never reported it up the chain of command, according to an Army general's new report.
A Navy bomb squad, a Marine intelligence team, and a Marine foot patrol failed to properly report the killing of civilians in the Iraqi town of Haditha on Nov. 19, 2005, according to the findings of Maj. Gen. Eldon Bargewell, which he has submitted to the U.S. commander in Iraq.
In the initial incident, a squad of Marines shot and killed 24 Iraqi civilians, including 11 women and children. Most were shot inside four houses. Five Iraqi males were shot after they got out of a taxi cab."
Did Murtha unfairly malign those men ? Not according to a court of law which dismissed the libel suit one of the men brought against Murtha.
In the end, Murtha made a factual statement that was well-supported at the time about THOSE men and THAT incident and what the REPORT would show. He did not go further than the facts allowed. He did not say all soldiers. He did not say all marines. He did not call them murderers.
Is THAT what you want me to criticize ?
***************************************************************
Silence is consent.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
I don't think you meant me there, Kwickie, but I'll respond anyway.
You're right - I didn't. I meant to address that to Jongsy, and screwed it up. My deepest apologies to both of you!
Carry on.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
What I would appreciate, Rue, is a concession that ALL people say regrettable, stupid things from time to time from both sides of the aisle and those people are not always denounced by their own party. That's all. Is that so hard?
Can't you agree to that one little, itty bitty point? You seem to be really struggling with that. You have this incredible urge to nit-pick and that's fine. That's your thing and I won't try and stop you. Maybe I should have brought up the whole Perez Hilton thing (his incredibly crude and vulgar blog about Miss California). I don't know. But you're missing the finer point and you're grasping at straws to avoid answering the basic gist of my question. If you simply can't bring yourself to do so, fine. I won't hold a grudge and hope you don't either.
But you're thereby saying that no Democrat or Liberal has ever, ever said anything derogatory or mean-spirited and that if they did, their party or group quickly stood up and denounced it and chastised them for doing so. And THAT, my friend, is highly unlikely.
I'll add this one little thing. You guys have been good to me for the most part and I appreciate that. But in one particular thread ("Auraptor, I have a question") the instigator of that thread posed the question and then disappeared for two weeks. She then came back 200 posts later after having NO input whatsoever, called him a few names and called an end to the thread. I posted that I thought her behavior was a little silly. I didn't call her names or anything. She responded with a VERY derogatory comment about me. And the response from the rest of you? Silence. So DID I automatically take it that ALL of you thought that way because you didn't denounce her comments? Of course not. I could have, but I didn't because I know you are all basically descent people. But that COULD be a microcosm scenario of something offensive and derogatory said by YOUR side that went unanswered and not condemned by her peers.
Zoe: "Get it running again."
Mal: "Yeah"
Zoe: "So not running now"
Mal: "Not so much"
- Out of Gas
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"... ALL people say regrettable, stupid things from time to time from both sides of the aisle ... Can't you agree to that one little, itty bitty point?"
Sure --- just not the example you picked - Murtha's comment specifically. Because it wasn't stupid. It was the truth. It may have been a truth you didn't like to hear, it may have been hard, it may have been carefully crafted to use exact words with exact meanings, but that doesn't make it any less valid.
"Maybe I should have brought up the whole Perez Hilton thing (his incredibly crude and vulgar blog about Miss California)."
In this case, I suspect that the silence you were hearing had to do with a big collective yawn of people who realized this was a non-item ! Because who takes him seriously ? 
"But you're thereby saying that no Democrat or Liberal has ever, ever said anything derogatory or mean-spirited ..."
You brought up Pelosi, Reid and Franken. Then you brought up Murtha. While I'm sure they've said their share of politically motivated drivel, I honestly can't think of them saying anything equivalent to the hate-filled bile that spewed out of Bush and spews out of Rush and his followers.
I asked you for examples. I was serious. Please come up with a few for me to consider.
"She responded with a VERY derogatory comment about me. And the response from the rest of you? Silence. So DID I automatically take it that ALL of you thought that way because you didn't denounce her comments? Of course not."
Now that's an interesting question.
Speaking as a person who's had my patriotism, my morals, my intelligence and pretty much everything else attacked over the last 8 years - with NO ONE from your side coming to my defense either generally or specifically that I've noticed - and that attack being originated by Bush on down (you're either with us or you're with the terrorists) - I'd have to say I'm not Mother Teresa. But yes, I can pretty much trace it to your party, your president, your spokespeople. I'm not amiss in making that connection. And yes, while it may not be 100% of all repubicans, given the authority from where it comes, the scope and the volume, it does seem to be generally representative of the ever-shrinking group of people who call themselves repubicans.
I have nothing against you, personally - indeed, many good feelings instead - and I hope you have nothing against me. I do look forward to your posts. I truly hope we will continue to have many interesting and fruitful discussions - and perhaps even friendly ones ! That is my hope, anyway.
***************************************************************
Silence is consent.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Until the majority of the party disavows those statements, they can be taken as representative of the party.
You just said all Muslims are terrorists.
H
"Hero. I have come to respect you"- Chrisisall, 2009.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME