Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Being irresponsible is not the same thing as being the actual murderer.
No. It doesn't."In context? State and federal legislatures through their penal codes, in conjunction with the court systems." (Shooter)
Well, then, it stands to reason that the same courts have the authority to deny the right for anyone to buy a firearm without a background check
The more conservatives talk, the better a recruitment tool they are for liberals.
Thank you, twisted conservatives. You have no idea how fucked up you sound to normal America.
Sure seems that way.
That's funny because you libs sound the same way to us conservatives.
Here is one of many reports that said she turned down security.
Rep. Giffords shot judge and 5 others killed at Tucson event
Karamargin said there was no warning, and said there had been no security at the event, although local law enforcement was typically notified of such town hall meetings.
When asked if there should have been more security at the community event, Karamargin said Giffords worked to be accessible to her constituents.
"She always prided herself on reaching out to the people who elected her and it would compound this tragedy if that were to change," he said.
Notice how the reporter turned what Karamargin said that there was no security and then wrote should have been more security.
There was none and she wanted it that way.
No commons sense what so ever Gabby.
I read the whole article -- nowhere does it say she "refused to have the police there" or "said no to the police being there".
You made that up.
But you know what it did say?
One sign read, "Don't make this about politics. Republicans and Democrats deplore this kind of hatred and violence."
And you want to accuse a victim of murder and try scoring political football points on the backs of nineteen people shot including an 8-year-old girl shot dead, on the basis that "she was asking for it" with orders you just made up.
This partisan bullshit makes me want to puke my guts out. You disgust me.
You don't like the idea of everyone using common sense in this nation.
You are the one who is using partisan bullshit.
Blowing it out of proportion like that makes you sound like a drama lama.
Common sense is our friend and we need more of it in this country.
From the drama mama who said Giffords murdered people. And then you act surprised when you're mocked.
Irony doesn't get any ironicaler.
At this point we're just watching you squirm.
I never said she did murder people.
I said she did not use some common sense and she should not have turned down the cops offer.
The left seem to be unable to comprehend this.
We sure would not want to be responsible for our actions eh?
Apparently I must be better at this internet thingy than you--
Gabby Giffords was my representative.
She was the one who was irresponsible and she got 18 people shot and 6 innocent people killed, all because she refused to have the police there at that meeting.
She knew that there had been several threats so she wanted to look like she trusted the people and said no to the police being there.
Had they been there, they would have stopped him and 6 people including a child would still be alive today.
Now she is promoting gun laws that will not work and lying to boot about it.
It's despicable politics at it's dirtiest.
Murder in large font; ipse dixit you can't document in purple; speculation fallacy in dark red.
We won't even go into the "lying" part in videos she's not even in. For now.
Here's an old Texas proverb you may find handy:
"When you find yourself in a hole, the first thing to do is quit diggin'"
Like I said you have a reading comprehension problem.
I also never put up any videos in this thread.
I assumed "lying" was a reference to the videos in the OP article. The ones the OP uses to slap "slimewad" on her even though she's not even in them?
Because -- what else is there? Something else you're making up like you made up the police orders?
As I said, we're not even going into that since you have enough problems to address. Starting with "she was asking for it".
If it's any consolation, I thought "commons sense" was a clever turn of phrase. But you have a looong way to go to pull this turd out of the toilet.
The more conservatives talk, the better a recruitment tool they are for liberals.
Thank you, twisted conservatives. You have no idea how fucked up you sound to normal America.
Sure seems that way.
That's funny because you libs sound the same way to us conservatives.
Here is one of many reports that said she turned down security.
Rep. Giffords shot judge and 5 others killed at Tucson event
Karamargin said there was no warning, and said there had been no security at the event, although local law enforcement was typically notified of such town hall meetings.
When asked if there should have been more security at the community event, Karamargin said Giffords worked to be accessible to her constituents.
"She always prided herself on reaching out to the people who elected her and it would compound this tragedy if that were to change," he said.
Notice how the reporter turned what Karamargin said that there was no security and then wrote should have been more security.
There was none and she wanted it that way.
No commons sense what so ever Gabby.
I read the whole article -- nowhere does it say she "refused to have the police there" or "said no to the police being there".
You made that up.
But you know what it did say?
One sign read, "Don't make this about politics. Republicans and Democrats deplore this kind of hatred and violence."
And you want to accuse a victim of murder and try scoring political football points on the backs of nineteen people shot including an 8-year-old girl shot dead, on the basis that "she was asking for it" with orders you just made up.
This partisan bullshit makes me want to puke my guts out. You disgust me.
You don't like the idea of everyone using common sense in this nation.
You are the one who is using partisan bullshit.
I ain't the partisan hack who invented police orders.
I ain't the partisan hack who blames a shooting victim for her own skull wound. And the shootings of 18 other people.
I ain't the partisan hack trying to score political points on the back of a dead 8-year-old.
And I ain't the partisan hack who then turns around and tries to blame somebody else for posting that bulllshit.
Check your mirror.
...squirm..... squirm.... squirm.....
You brought this suggestion up Peach. You're gonna have to either admit it's a lot of hooey or you're gonna have to live with it. You've already failed to document the police thing.
As I said -- that's gonna leave a mark. Try to foist responsibility off on somebody else all you like but you only deceive yourself. The Bubble is like that I understand.
Using emotions to take away Constitutional rights is like a parent caving in to a screaming child in the toy aisle as to avoid embarrassment.
sort of like Mittens accusing jeep of moving over to china fully and somehow that was obama's fault.Even though they never moved.
More like so what, your opinion does not make fact, show me why they where pulled.
Not really, since it wasn't a lie.
"Public expressed collective outrage"? That's essentially wishcasting on the part of PolitiFact, nor are they accurately representing what Mitt Romney said in the ad. In fact, here's PolitiFact's original "fact check" on the matter:
[Mitt Romney] Says Barack Obama "sold Chrysler to Italians who are going to build Jeeps in China" at the cost of American jobs.
Ok. Now here's what the Reuters reported earlier this week:
Fiat (FIA.MI) and its U.S. unit Chrysler expect to roll out at least 100,000 Jeeps in China when production starts in 2014 as they seek to catch up with rivals in the world's biggest car market. ...
"We expect production of around 100,000 Jeeps per year which is expandable to 200,000," [Chrysler CEO Sergio] Marchionne, who is also CEO of Chrysler, said on the sidelines of a conference, adding production could start in 18 months.
So, yes, it's confirmed that Jeep will be producing cars in China.According to theToledo Bladelast November:
Currently, Jeeps sell in more than 120 countries around the world, including China. They're nearly all built in factories in the United States.
By expanding Jeep production to China, instead of increasing Jeep production in the U.S., it's safe to say Jeep (or more properly, Fiat, which now owns Chrysler) is choosing to create more jobs overseas instead of in America where taxpayers bailed the company out.
um....no
um...yes
This is a fact: Fiat (FIA.MI) and its U.S. unit Chrysler expect to roll out at least 100,000 Jeeps in China when production starts in 2014 as they seek to catch up with rivals in the world's biggest car market. ...
By expanding Jeep production to China, instead of increasing Jeep production in the U.S., it's safe to say Jeep (or more properly, Fiat, which now owns Chrysler) is choosing to create more jobs overseas instead of in America where taxpayers bailed the company out.
We did this a million times over but --- there is no "instead of".
Chrysler actually started building Jeeps in China in January 1984 ---- thirty years ago --- just as everybody else does for that market. It's a ton cheaper than building them here and shipping them. No brainer. Their plan was to restart that production -- production which had been shut down after the 2008 economy collapse, and it's a testament to the company's financial health that it was able to make that plan.
Secondly, it was and is another testament to that financial health that the company simultaneously (even sooner actually) was adding jobs and shifts to Jeep and other production in Ohio and Michigan. That's why when Romney committed this gaffe --- in the state of Ohio --- voters there to whom it was local news knew the whole "moving to China" canard was bullshit. So did the voters in Michigan, his home state, who also got the benefit of added jobs, and both narrowly dumped him in the election, even after Rovian math. One has to conclude that it was one of the most shoot-self-in-the-foot gaffes in recent memory and arguably cost him both those states. No "instead of" involved; it was and is an "in addition to". They were expanding in both areas.
And thirdly-- in fact ironically when Jeep did set up China production in the early '80s it was a division of American Motors --- the same company Mitt Romney's dad was the President of.
How stupid is that....
It is not a suggestion.
It was a statement about using common sense which she did not do.
I put the link up where she did not want security at any of her town hall meetings.
You are the one who made it into a Parisian thing.
You seem to have such a problem with common sense you can't even spell it right. It is not commons sense.
No commons sense what so ever Gabby.
It is not a suggestion.
It was a statement about using common sense which she did not do.
I put the link up where she did not want security at any of her town hall meetings.
You are the one who made it into a Parisian thing.
Mais oui, I have made eet eento ... 'ow you say, ze Parisian thing.'Ow entairtanang zat you find ze keelang of an eight year old jeune fille ... 'ow you say, risible.
Sacre merde. Completement folle.
You seem to have such a problem with common sense you can't even spell it right. It is not commons sense.
Then I gave you too much credit. It's usually "common sense" but above you posted:
No commons sense what so ever Gabby.
-- which would have meant 'sense about the use of the (public) Commons', which would have nicely worked into the lame point you can't make because you have no source. It would have been at least a clever turn of phrase, but --- never mind.
It is not a suggestion.
It was a statement about using common sense which she did not do.
I put the link up where she did not want security at any of her town hall meetings.
You are the one who made it into a Parisian thing.
Mais oui, I have made eet eento ... 'ow you say, ze Parisian thing.'Ow entairtanang zat you find ze keelang of an eight year old jeune fille ... 'ow you say, risible.
Sacre merde. Completement folle.
You seem to have such a problem with common sense you can't even spell it right. It is not commons sense.
Then I gave you too much credit. It's usually "common sense" but above you posted:
No commons sense what so ever Gabby.
-- which would have meant 'sense about the use of the (public) Commons', which would have nicely worked into the lame point you can't make because you have no source. It would have been at least a clever turn of phrase, but --- never mind.
Yep I misspelled it. I do that sometimes.
Sorry that you did not like the link.
I see more clearly now why the left hate Fox News.
No. It doesn't."In context? State and federal legislatures through their penal codes, in conjunction with the court systems." (Shooter)
Well, then, it stands to reason that the same courts have the authority to deny the right for anyone to buy a firearm without a background check
In fact, there's no way you can soundly draw that conclusion from what I said.
The more conservatives talk, the better a recruitment tool they are for liberals.
Thank you, twisted conservatives. You have no idea how fucked up you sound to normal America.
Sure seems that way.
That's funny because you libs sound the same way to us conservatives.
Here is one of many reports that said she turned down security.
Rep. Giffords shot judge and 5 others killed at Tucson event
Karamargin said there was no warning, and said there had been no security at the event, although local law enforcement was typically notified of such town hall meetings.
When asked if there should have been more security at the community event, Karamargin said Giffords worked to be accessible to her constituents.
"She always prided herself on reaching out to the people who elected her and it would compound this tragedy if that were to change," he said.
Notice how the reporter turned what Karamargin said that there was no security and then wrote should have been more security.
There was none and she wanted it that way.
No commons sense what so ever Gabby.
I read the whole article -- nowhere does it say she "refused to have the police there" or "said no to the police being there".
You made that up.
But you know what it did say?
One sign read, "Don't make this about politics. Republicans and Democrats deplore this kind of hatred and violence."
And you want to accuse a victim of murder and try scoring political football points on the backs of nineteen people shot including an 8-year-old girl shot dead, on the basis that "she was asking for it" with orders you just made up.
This partisan bullshit makes me want to puke my guts out. You disgust me.
You don't like the idea of everyone using common sense in this nation.
You are the one who is using partisan bullshit.
I ain't the partisan hack who invented police orders.
I ain't the partisan hack who blames a shooting victim for her own skull wound. And the shootings of 18 other people.
I ain't the partisan hack trying to score political points on the back of a dead 8-year-old.
And I ain't the partisan hack who then turns around and tries to blame somebody else for posting that bulllshit.
Check your mirror.
You are a complete asshole for implying that Gabby Giffords had any role in her attackSure seems that way.
That's funny because you libs sound the same way to us conservatives.
Here is one of many reports that said she turned down security.
Rep. Giffords shot judge and 5 others killed at Tucson event
Karamargin said there was no warning, and said there had been no security at the event, although local law enforcement was typically notified of such town hall meetings.
When asked if there should have been more security at the community event, Karamargin said Giffords worked to be accessible to her constituents.
"She always prided herself on reaching out to the people who elected her and it would compound this tragedy if that were to change," he said.
Notice how the reporter turned what Karamargin said that there was no security and then wrote should have been more security.
There was none and she wanted it that way.
No commons sense what so ever Gabby.
I read the whole article -- nowhere does it say she "refused to have the police there" or "said no to the police being there".
You made that up.
But you know what it did say?
One sign read, "Don't make this about politics. Republicans and Democrats deplore this kind of hatred and violence."
And you want to accuse a victim of murder and try scoring political football points on the backs of nineteen people shot including an 8-year-old girl shot dead, on the basis that "she was asking for it" with orders you just made up.
This partisan bullshit makes me want to puke my guts out. You disgust me.
You don't like the idea of everyone using common sense in this nation.
You are the one who is using partisan bullshit.
I ain't the partisan hack who invented police orders.
I ain't the partisan hack who blames a shooting victim for her own skull wound. And the shootings of 18 other people.
I ain't the partisan hack trying to score political points on the back of a dead 8-year-old.
And I ain't the partisan hack who then turns around and tries to blame somebody else for posting that bulllshit.
Check your mirror.
You are the partisan hack who thinks people should use their own tragic experiences to gain a political advantage.
You are the partisan hack who defends the lies political PACs tell.
You are the partisan hack who denies that Gabby Giffords played any role in those vile attack ads.
You are the partisan hack who resorts to name calling and shaming when your argument is finished.
You are the partisan hack who ignores the fact that someone is using the death of a girl to shame a political opponent.
You are the partisan hack who approves of blaming someone of murder because they don't support gun control.
You are the partisan hack who ignores the hypocrisy a person demonstrates when she has a gun, her husband bought a gun, and yet she asks for 'sensible gun control.'
You are a partisan hack. It's time you owned up to it. You need to get your mirror back and take a good look.
Using emotions to take away Constitutional rights is like a parent caving in to a screaming child in the toy aisle as to avoid embarrassment.
What constitutional rights is she taking away?
And how does she have the power to do that?
She's not in congress anymore.
You know, Peach, If Gabby had been armed with a semi-automatic weapon that had a 30 round magazine, and was pointing it in the crowd, while she was speaking, maybe this would not have happened.
-- Before the event, she tweeted: "My 1st Congress on Your Corner starts now. Please stop by to let me know what is on your mind or tweet me later."
-- The attack happened about 10 minutes into the event.
-- Giffords did not have any security with her, said staffer Mark Kimble. "She wants to be as accessible to the people who elected her as possible," he said.
It is not a suggestion.
It was a statement about using common sense which she did not do.
I put the link up where she did not want security at any of her town hall meetings.
You are the one who made it into a Parisian thing.
Mais oui, I have made eet eento ... 'ow you say, ze Parisian thing.'Ow entairtanang zat you find ze keelang of an eight year old jeune fille ... 'ow you say, risible.
Sacre merde. Completement folle.
You seem to have such a problem with common sense you can't even spell it right. It is not commons sense.
Then I gave you too much credit. It's usually "common sense" but above you posted:
No commons sense what so ever Gabby.
-- which would have meant 'sense about the use of the (public) Commons', which would have nicely worked into the lame point you can't make because you have no source. It would have been at least a clever turn of phrase, but --- never mind.
Yep I misspelled it. I do that sometimes.
Sorry that you did not like the link.
I see more clearly now why the left hate Fox News.
I don't think Fox Noise has been involved here. I thought your link was a local TV station.
Anyway, having any kind of emotional relationship with a TV channel would be irrational. Don't think just because you do, others must feel a contrasting emotion. Be open to the possibility that others feel no emotion at all. You know, like a rational person.
