Gabby Giffords Turns Slimewad

[Pogo]

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 the partisan hack who thinks people should use their own tragic experiences to gain a political advantage.

You are the partisan hack who defended the lies Giffords' PAC told.

You are the partisan hack who denies that Gabby Giffords played any role in those vile attack ads.

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 the partisan hack who doesn't see that this disgusting behavior is all being done to garner votes.

You are the partisan hack who doesn't see that there is no real concern for the victims in those ads; nor that they are simply pawns in a cruel game.

You are the partisan hack who resorts to name calling and shaming when your argument is finished.

You are the partisan hack who dodges and evades the facts.

You are the partisan hack who has to correct grammar and spelling when your position has been taken out.

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.

I don't know who half that drivel is even addressed to, but credit where due, you are the onanist who sits on the sideline wanking off to other people's squabbles and then jumps in going rah rah rah, always stone cold predictably on the same partisan-hack side. No wonder you don't get the attention you obviously crave -- you're boring.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Well, I guess Pogo has me on ignore now. Oh well, I can't do anything about that. It only tells me he has no willingness to listen to the truth.

When you're ready for the truth, I'll give it to you. Again, I can't spend 24/7 on this board; I have an income that comes from what is called a "job", which takes time.

Seriously? You must understand that I was posting truth in this thread since it started. Do you care to point out what 'truth' you posted on this thread? Really, playing the job card has no real bearing on this discussion. It proves that you have no argument. So predictable you are.

 

[TemplarKormac]

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 defended the lies Giffords' PAC told.

You are the partisan hack who denies that Gabby Giffords played any role in those vile attack ads.

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 the partisan hack who doesn't see that this disgusting behavior is all being done to garner votes.

You are the partisan hack who doesn't see that there is no real concern for the victims in those ads; nor that they are simply pawns in a cruel game.

You are the partisan hack who resorts to name calling and shaming when your argument is finished.

You are the partisan hack who dodges and evades the facts.

You are the partisan hack who has to correct grammar and spelling when your position has been taken out.

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.

I don't know who half that drivel is even addressed to, but credit where due, you are the onanist who sits on the sideline wanking off to other people's squabbles and then jumps in going rah rah rah, always stone cold predictably on the same partisan-hack side. No wonder you don't get the attention you obviously crave -- you're boring.

I was addressing you, smart alec. I don't want attention, Pogo. You want people to submit to your version of events. Calling me 'boring' makes it purely evident you lost this debate a long time ago. Hey, don't tell me to whom I can address on this board. When you post a response, no matter who it is addressed to, you open yourself up to other responses. You are fair game, your opinions are likewise open to critiques. No wonder you are so thin skinned.

 

[Pogo]

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.

Perhaps if she had security at her events, it would not have happened:

Giffords Shooting The Security Problem Phoenix New Times

-- 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.

Latest developments in Arizona shooting - CNN.com

It is (or was) a common practice for lawmakers not to hire security for town hall events:

Gabrielle Giffords shooting Lawmakers averse to hiring security

The partisan hack (not you Peach, the partisan hack TK) is correct here, and his links here all bear out, that Congressional Representatives don't normally tote goons with guns around and prefer to be accessible to their constituents without that wall of class stratification. It's standard procedure for them, and it is after all their job; they're not supposed to be some kind of elite and inaccessible Duke/Duchess who's audience we have to beg while kissing their ring. And it's not unusual for them to get death and violence threats, especially with rhetorical flamemongers running around inciting violence with "break their windows, break them now" and "if ballots don't work, bullets will".

But it's worth noting, Peach, that by taking this despicable partisan-hack tactic of blaming the victim for 19 people shot, you yourself are fueling the same rhetoric. So you're basically part of the problem. In effect your attempt to foist responsibility for Giffords' head wound into "she was asking for it" is a cowardly act of trying to excuse away your own part in the rhetoric that shot her.

Thanks a lot for that, asshole.

Nice, you totally spun my links. The fact she never had security (armed with guns no doubt) in the first place was the reason she was shot, and 18 others were killed. She wouldn't need a gun if she had had armed security that day. It is still teaching a valuable lesson to all existing congressmen and women to have security present at their events. It was a false sense of security that got those people killed. No, she doesn't have to 'point a gun at the crowd.' People were or are put in routine danger when lawmakers don't employ security at their events.

Oh thank you, that's the point I forgot.
For Peach -- none of TK's three links there back up your fable of Giffords telling police to stay away. So your record as a fiction writer remains unsmudged.

Thanks for that heads-up, Tempartisan Kormhack.

 

[TemplarKormac]

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.

Perhaps if she had security at her events, it would not have happened:

Giffords Shooting The Security Problem Phoenix New Times

-- 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.

Latest developments in Arizona shooting - CNN.com

It is (or was) a common practice for lawmakers not to hire security for town hall events:

Gabrielle Giffords shooting Lawmakers averse to hiring security

The partisan hack (not you Peach, the partisan hack TK) is correct here, and his links here all bear out, that Congressional Representatives don't normally tote goons with guns around and prefer to be accessible to their constituents without that wall of class stratification. It's standard procedure for them, and it is after all their job; they're not supposed to be some kind of elite and inaccessible Duke/Duchess who's audience we have to beg while kissing their ring. And it's not unusual for them to get death and violence threats, especially with rhetorical flamemongers running around inciting violence with "break their windows, break them now" and "if ballots don't work, bullets will".

But it's worth noting, Peach, that by taking this despicable partisan-hack tactic of blaming the victim for 19 people shot, you yourself are fueling the same rhetoric. So you're basically part of the problem. In effect your attempt to foist responsibility for Giffords' head wound into "she was asking for it" is a cowardly act of trying to excuse away your own part in the rhetoric that shot her.

Thanks a lot for that, asshole.

Nice, you totally spun my links. The fact she never had security (armed with guns no doubt) in the first place was the reason she was shot, and 18 others were killed. She wouldn't need a gun if she had had armed security that day. It is still teaching a valuable lesson to all existing congressmen and women to have security present at their events. It was a false sense of security that got those people killed. No, she doesn't have to 'point a gun at the crowd.' People were or are put in routine danger when lawmakers don't employ security at their events.

Oh thank you, that's the point I forgot.
For Peach -- none of TK's three links there back up your fable of Giffords telling police to stay away. So your record as a fiction writer remains unsmudged.

Thanks for that heads-up, Tempartisan Kormhack.

No-go doing his best Jake Starkey impression.

 

[turtledude]

This is how they beat you down

they use this woman's injuries to guilt you into shutting you up of your opinions

it's a classic tactic used by the left/dem/progressive/commies

by responding to an OP calling her 'slime' for having her opinion?


isn't the OP beating Gabby down? what about a bullet to the face..??

yeah, that was a clever TACTIC. good Lord.

Isn't Gabby the one using a bullet to the face as a political tool? Pretty clever indeed. She is most certainly entitled to her opinion, not her own facts.

I can't believe what slime you have become

The woman took a bullet to the head and is doing everything in her power to prevent it from happening to someone else

No she isn't. she is pretending she is doing something so she can receive adulation from low wattage Whankers like you. She' not doing anything useful

 

[rightwinger]

It takes a really sick slimewad to call someone like Gabby Giffords a slimewad.

Its almost as bad as giving her a pass for trying to deprive citizens of their constitutional rights by using her status as a victim to override rational thought

You have no constitutional right to protect you from background checks

STFU moron, you have no clue about constitutional law.

what part of the constitution actually gives congress such a power

I need a good laugh-your understanding of the constitution is akin to a wombat understanding chemotherapy protocols for brain cancer

Afraid I do

There is nothing in the constitution prohibiting background checks

 

[rightwinger]

The woman took a bullet to the head and is doing everything in her power to prevent it from happening to someone else

She is trying to disarm the lawful gun owner which empowers it happening to someone else.

How does a background check disarm you?

 

[Lakhota]

It takes a really sick slimewad to call someone like Gabby Giffords a slimewad.

Its almost as bad as giving her a pass for trying to deprive citizens of their constitutional rights by using her status as a victim to override rational thought

Why did Sarah Palin target Gabby Giffords? Who has more right than Gabby to advocate for universal background checks?

 

[Pogo]

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.

Perhaps if she had security at her events, it would not have happened:

Giffords Shooting The Security Problem Phoenix New Times

-- 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.

Latest developments in Arizona shooting - CNN.com

It is (or was) a common practice for lawmakers not to hire security for town hall events:

Gabrielle Giffords shooting Lawmakers averse to hiring security

The partisan hack (not you Peach, the partisan hack TK) is correct here, and his links here all bear out, that Congressional Representatives don't normally tote goons with guns around and prefer to be accessible to their constituents without that wall of class stratification. It's standard procedure for them, and it is after all their job; they're not supposed to be some kind of elite and inaccessible Duke/Duchess who's audience we have to beg while kissing their ring. And it's not unusual for them to get death and violence threats, especially with rhetorical flamemongers running around inciting violence with "break their windows, break them now" and "if ballots don't work, bullets will".

But it's worth noting, Peach, that by taking this despicable partisan-hack tactic of blaming the victim for 19 people shot, you yourself are fueling the same rhetoric. So you're basically part of the problem. In effect your attempt to foist responsibility for Giffords' head wound into "she was asking for it" is a cowardly act of trying to excuse away your own part in the rhetoric that shot her.

Thanks a lot for that, asshole.

Nice, you totally spun my links. The fact she never had security (armed with guns no doubt) in the first place was the reason she was shot, and 18 others were killed. She wouldn't need a gun if she had had armed security that day. It is still teaching a valuable lesson to all existing congressmen and women to have security present at their events. It was a false sense of security that got those people killed. No, she doesn't have to 'point a gun at the crowd.' People were or are put in routine danger when lawmakers don't employ security at their events.

How exactly is non-existent security "armed with guns no doubt"?

Those reading comp lessons are not going well . Zut alors.

No, senses of security do not kill anyone. Bullets do though. And it's fascinating, strictly from a psychiatric point of view, how far some of y'all are willing to bend the light rays of reality through your paritsan-hack prism so you can rationalize a ludicrous scenario that blames the victim with "she was asking for it".

Y'all are just flat-out stone cold sick.

 

[turtledude]

It takes a really sick slimewad to call someone like Gabby Giffords a slimewad.

Its almost as bad as giving her a pass for trying to deprive citizens of their constitutional rights by using her status as a victim to override rational thought

You have no constitutional right to protect you from background checks

STFU moron, you have no clue about constitutional law.

what part of the constitution actually gives congress such a power

I need a good laugh-your understanding of the constitution is akin to a wombat understanding chemotherapy protocols for brain cancer

Afraid I do

There is nothing in the constitution prohibiting background checks

actually if you understood the constitution it would be the tenth amendment. There is nothing in the constitution-not even the FDR mutated Commerce Clause that empowers the federal government to regulate INTRASTATE second hand sales.

The purpose of this stupid law is as follows

1) since it cannot be enforced without registration-it is being proposed as a stalking horse for gun registration

2) most people won't bother to comply with it and then the gun hating assholes can try to charge them with being "FELONS"

3) and finally politicians pander to morons like RW who soils himself over this issue

Its designed to placate the garment voiding idiots who NEED something TO BE DONE

 

[Pogo]

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 defended the lies Giffords' PAC told.

You are the partisan hack who denies that Gabby Giffords played any role in those vile attack ads.

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 the partisan hack who doesn't see that this disgusting behavior is all being done to garner votes.

You are the partisan hack who doesn't see that there is no real concern for the victims in those ads; nor that they are simply pawns in a cruel game.

You are the partisan hack who resorts to name calling and shaming when your argument is finished.

You are the partisan hack who dodges and evades the facts.

You are the partisan hack who has to correct grammar and spelling when your position has been taken out.

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.

I don't know who half that drivel is even addressed to, but credit where due, you are the onanist who sits on the sideline wanking off to other people's squabbles and then jumps in going rah rah rah, always stone cold predictably on the same partisan-hack side. No wonder you don't get the attention you obviously crave -- you're boring.

I was addressing you, smart alec. I don't want attention, Pogo. You want people to submit to your version of events. Calling me 'boring' makes it purely evident you lost this debate a long time ago. Hey, don't tell me to whom I can address on this board. When you post a response, no matter who it is addressed to, you open yourself up to other responses. You are fair game, your opinions are likewise open to critiques. No wonder you are so thin skinned.

Hard to follow then, since I never posted on half that shit.

Say, aren't you the self-appointed Lord God of the Internets who tried to kick me out of the thread?
How'd that work out for ya?

 

[OODA_Loop]

The woman took a bullet to the head and is doing everything in her power to prevent it from happening to someone else

She is trying to disarm the lawful gun owner which empowers it happening to someone else.

How does a background check disarm you?

"Assault Weapon" bans, concealed carry bans and handgun bans disarm me.

 

[turtledude]

It takes a really sick slimewad to call someone like Gabby Giffords a slimewad.

Its almost as bad as giving her a pass for trying to deprive citizens of their constitutional rights by using her status as a victim to override rational thought

Why did Sarah Palin target Gabby Giffords? Who has more right than Gabby to advocate for universal background checks?

in what sort of acid induced stupor do you come up with such a stupid charge?

 

[Lakhota]

It takes a really sick slimewad to call someone like Gabby Giffords a slimewad.

Its almost as bad as giving her a pass for trying to deprive citizens of their constitutional rights by using her status as a victim to override rational thought

Why did Sarah Palin target Gabby Giffords? Who has more right than Gabby to advocate for universal background checks?

in what sort of acid induced stupor do you come up with such a stupid charge?

Rep. Gabrielle Giffords blood is on Sarah Palin's hands after putting cross hair over district - NY Daily News

So sad...

 

[turtledude]

It takes a really sick slimewad to call someone like Gabby Giffords a slimewad.

Its almost as bad as giving her a pass for trying to deprive citizens of their constitutional rights by using her status as a victim to override rational thought

Why did Sarah Palin target Gabby Giffords? Who has more right than Gabby to advocate for universal background checks?

in what sort of acid induced stupor do you come up with such a stupid charge?

Rep. Gabrielle Giffords blood is on Sarah Palin's hands after putting cross hair over district - NY Daily News

So sad...

what is said is how hysterically false that charge is. why would a LEFT WING LOSER follow a right wing partisan like Moose Mama? OH BTW the loser also killed A REPUBLICAN FEDERAL JUDGE. DID PALIN PUT A CROSSHAIR ON HIS HONOR?

grow up Chief. You type with forked tongue

 

[peach174]

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.

Perhaps if she had security at her events, it would not have happened:

Giffords Shooting The Security Problem Phoenix New Times

-- 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.

Latest developments in Arizona shooting - CNN.com

It is (or was) a common practice for lawmakers not to hire security for town hall events:

Gabrielle Giffords shooting Lawmakers averse to hiring security

The partisan hack (not you Peach, the partisan hack TK) is correct here, and his links here all bear out, that Congressional Representatives don't normally tote goons with guns around and prefer to be accessible to their constituents without that wall of class stratification. It's standard procedure for them, and it is after all their job; they're not supposed to be some kind of elite and inaccessible Duke/Duchess who's audience we have to beg while kissing their ring. And it's not unusual for them to get death and violence threats, especially with rhetorical flamemongers running around inciting violence with "break their windows, break them now" and "if ballots don't work, bullets will".

But it's worth noting, Peach, that by taking this despicable partisan-hack tactic of blaming the victim for 19 people shot, you yourself are fueling the same rhetoric. So you're basically part of the problem. In effect your attempt to foist responsibility for Giffords' head wound into "she was asking for it" is a cowardly act of trying to excuse away your own part in the rhetoric that shot her.

Thanks a lot for that, asshole.

Nice, you totally spun my links. The fact she never had security (armed with guns no doubt) in the first place was the reason she was shot, and 18 others were killed. She wouldn't need a gun if she had had armed security that day. It is still teaching a valuable lesson to all existing congressmen and women to have security present at their events. It was a false sense of security that got those people killed. No, she doesn't have to 'point a gun at the crowd.' People were or are put in routine danger when lawmakers don't employ security at their events.

Oh thank you, that's the point I forgot.
For Peach -- none of TK's three links there back up your fable of Giffords telling police to stay away. So your record as a fiction writer remains unsmudged.

Thanks for that heads-up, Tempartisan Kormhack.

I never said she told police to stay away. You said that.
She had several incidents happen before that shooting and she should have listened to her staff and should have had a couple of cops there.

 

[Lakhota]

It takes a really sick slimewad to call someone like Gabby Giffords a slimewad.

Its almost as bad as giving her a pass for trying to deprive citizens of their constitutional rights by using her status as a victim to override rational thought

Why did Sarah Palin target Gabby Giffords? Who has more right than Gabby to advocate for universal background checks?

in what sort of acid induced stupor do you come up with such a stupid charge?

Rep. Gabrielle Giffords blood is on Sarah Palin's hands after putting cross hair over district - NY Daily News

So sad...

what is said is how hysterically false that charge is. why would a LEFT WING LOSER follow a right wing partisan like Moose Mama? OH BTW the loser also killed A REPUBLICAN FEDERAL JUDGE. DID PALIN PUT A CROSSHAIR ON HIS HONOR?

grow up Chief. You type with forked tongue

The federal judge and others were collateral damage. The shooter was after Gabby.

 

[Lakhota]

NaziCon gun nutters like Palin and Nugent give responsible hunters and gun owners a bad name. I am thankful that a responsible, respectable advocate like Gabby Giffords is standing up for reasonable gun control measures that will help make us safer and protect our gun rights into the future.

Like Joe Scarborough said: Joe Scarborough: Extremism From The Survivalist Wing Of The NRA Is The Greatest Danger To Gun Rights

 

[Vandalshandle]

How does a background check disarm you?[/QUOTE]

"Assault Weapon" bans, concealed carry bans and handgun bans disarm me.[/QUOTE]

Can't pass a background check, huh?

Bummer.