Republicans in US House Demand Boston Bombing Be Politicized

[bripat9643]

Republicans in US House Demand Boston Bombing Be Politicized

Yes, we know.

We see examples of it in this very forum.

It’s both pathetic and reprehensible.

Yeah, why can't they be like Democrats who never politicize tragedies.

It's difficult to believe that libturds even have the chutzpah to post anything as idiotic and hypocritical as this.

 

[bripat9643]

If you can't refute political satire and commentary, how the fuck would you know what journalism is?

Dante doesn't watch Jon Stewart. The source video is from a web search. Try refuting the content and not the source

Oh yeah, you can't


sorry

Referring to yourself in the third person is normally a sign of mental illness.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

If you can't refute political satire and commentary, how the fuck would you know what journalism is?

Dante doesn't watch Jon Stewart. The source video is from a web search. Try refuting the content and not the source

Oh yeah, you can't


sorry

Referring to yourself in the third person is normally a sign of mental illness.

Normally, Dante doesn't patronize fools like you

Illeism

 

[KevinWestern]

can't expect people who live in a bubble to realize this kind of shit just isn't acceptable

Speaking of living in a bubble, are we going to also talk about how President Obama made no objection to huge, corporate pharmaceutical companies being allowed to draft giant swaths of the healthcare bill (conflict of interests, anyone?).

Are we also going to talk about how the Democrats held numerous secretive meetings regarding the Healthcare bill to the point that C-SPAN – a well-respected, non-partisan organization – had to call them out on it?

What were you saying about that bubble again?

Nope, because that has been spoken to before, by the left, some liberals, some conservatives and progressives who distrust Big Pharma. You'd know these facts if you stepped outside of the Right Wing World Bubble. and btw:

It is how legislation is written. There is NO conflict of interest although there may be an appearance of one to people as ignorant and foolish as you. Drafts are drafts. Congress gets to rewrite and debate bills in conference.

Secretive meetings that everyone knew about? Meetings behind closed doors? Maybe, but secret?

You are as shrill as the far left

Dante – Big Pharma is for profit. When you let a for profit entity draft legislation that mandates that we pay them, you have a very real conflict of interests on your hand. They (obviously) are going to push for legislation that makes them the most amount of money. This is what corporations do.

President Obama should have done a better job at not letting this happen. He failed us, and you will see just how big of a disaster Obamacare is in the next few years; just read what the doctors are saying!

And yes, secretive meetings in that folks knew they were occurring, just didn’t know what was being discussed. Legislation of this size should be discussed transparently (wasn't that an 08 Obama promise?) with everyone (not just Democrats) having a say in the discussion.

C-SPAN called them out on this in 2010. Don’t deflect and act like an idiot; you’re wasting our time.

Thanks again for the insult. Do you have any class?

.

 

[KevinWestern]

An asshole does not have to be arrested and charged and convicted to be proven an asshole.

This is a debate forum. If your point is to say a committee is going to be partisan because one guy is “an asshole”, then I think you need to go back to the drawing board and work on your ability to build a compelling argument.

Stating that Dick Cheney had good reason to push for a large and expensive Iraq War directly after leaving his post as CEO of a major war-profiting company IS a compelling argument.

Saying a committee can’t be trusted because one guy on it made a verbal comment you personally don't agree with two years ago on an obscure local lawsuit, lol, IS NOT a compelling argument.

I’m calling you out on lack of substance, and intentionally stirring the pot for no good reason.


.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Speaking of living in a bubble, are we going to also talk about how President Obama made no objection to huge, corporate pharmaceutical companies being allowed to draft giant swaths of the healthcare bill (conflict of interests, anyone?).

Are we also going to talk about how the Democrats held numerous secretive meetings regarding the Healthcare bill to the point that C-SPAN – a well-respected, non-partisan organization – had to call them out on it?

What were you saying about that bubble again?

Nope, because that has been spoken to before, by the left, some liberals, some conservatives and progressives who distrust Big Pharma. You'd know these facts if you stepped outside of the Right Wing World Bubble. and btw:

It is how legislation is written. There is NO conflict of interest although there may be an appearance of one to people as ignorant and foolish as you. Drafts are drafts. Congress gets to rewrite and debate bills in conference.

Secretive meetings that everyone knew about? Meetings behind closed doors? Maybe, but secret?

You are as shrill as the far left

Dante – Big Pharma is for profit. When you let a for profit entity draft legislation that mandates that we pay them, you have a very real conflict of interests on your hand. They (obviously) are going to push for legislation that makes them the most amount of money. This is what corporations do.

President Obama should have done a better job at not letting this happen. He failed us, and you will see just how big of a disaster Obamacare is in the next few years; just read what the doctors are saying!

And yes, secretive meetings in that folks knew they were occurring, just didn’t know what was being discussed. Legislation of this size should be discussed openly, with everyone (not just Democrats). C-SPAN called them out on this in 2010. Don’t deflect and act like an idiot; you’re wasting our time.

Thanks again for the insult. Do you have any class?

.

Big Pharma is not on my invitation list for a party of friends. But, Big Pharma has a constituency. All constituencies have historically been in on teh drafting of bills that concern them'

welcome to the real world. Who drafted the parts of the US Constitution that protected slavery? now calm down and try getting an education

President Obama should have done a better job? Wow! Obama does not pass legislation. And Big Pharma used Obama and the Right Wingers to further their own interests as they did with the GOP in control when they passed Medicare Part D. go figure. How unAmerican of them!

According to you, Legislation of a certain size may be kept secret but once it reaches a certain size the rules change?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Kevin, having 'class' and having 'manners' is a subjective thing. In the company we keep here, neither is warranted or needed

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Republicans in US House Demand Boston Bombing Be Politicized


Under the sleaze tactic of never letting a national tragedy to go un-politicized, the GOP led House will hold hearings.

wtf?



This Right Wing Piece of Shit, Michael Thomas McCaul, Sr. will hold hearings?

Controversy

In August 2011 AlterNet reported that McCaul, along with John Culberson and Ted Poe were attempting to remove the right of deceased soldiers families to choose which prayers, if any, were to be read at a soldiers funeral.

The three politicians were said to be attempting to impose Christian ceremonies on the military funerals of everybody who has served in the military, regardless of whether or not the deceased was Christian and with or without the consent of the family of the deceased.

The three politicians stated their demands were a response to Veterans Affairs (VA) banning Christian prayers at military funerals, however, VA state this claim is "blatantly false" as VA respects a families "rights to pray however they choose at our national cemeteries"

An asshole does not have to be arrested and charged and convicted to be proven an asshole.

This is a debate forum. If your point is to say this committee is going to be partisian because one guy is “an asshole”, then I think you need to go back to the drawing board and work on your ability to build a compelling argument.

Saying that it was highly questionable that Dick Cheney was pushing for an Iraq War right after he left his post as CEO at Halliburton IS a compelling argument. Saying a committee can’t be trusted because one guy on it made a verbal comment two years ago on an obscure local lawsuit, lol, IS NOT a compelling argument.

I’m calling you out on lack of substance, and intentionally stirring the pot for NO GOOD REASON.

Need to go back to work on those persuasive skills, bud, you’re sort of embarrassing yourself.

"This is a debate forum."
Score another one for Captain Obvious of Team Cueless

Dante's argument has been clear from the start. I posted it atop your post so as to assist you in figuring what it is the OP is about.

["Ultimately the investigation will assess how our efforts have evolved to meet the dynamic terrorist threat of foreign-inspired attacks on our soil, and what changes may be necessary to protect the homeland," Committee Chairman Michael McCaul said in a statement.] Congressional committee calls hearing on Boston bombings | Reuters

The Committee Chairman who made the statement has a record that says his word on a hearing being able to asses anything cannot be trusted, because the man travels in circles where myth and unfounded accusations pass for facts: Michael Thomas McCaul, Sr.

You may live in the Right Wing World Bubble where ignoring and denying things is acceptable, but when you step outside of that bubble into a debate with others, you come ill equipped and sorely lacking in facts.

It is sad how very little you comprehend, because the potential is there. I believe it is not all a matter of choice on your part. I believe you have actually been brainwashed

 

[KevinWestern]

The Committee Chairman who made the statement has a record that says his word on a hearing being able to asses anything cannot be trusted, because the man travels in circles where myth and unfounded accusations pass for facts: Michael Thomas McCaul, Sr.

You may live in the Right Wing World Bubble where ignoring and denying things is acceptable, but when you step outside of that bubble into a debate with others, you come ill equipped and sorely lacking in facts.

It is sad how very little you comprehend, because the potential is there. I believe it is not all a matter of choice on your part. I believe you have actually been brainwashed

So - Dante - what am I not comprehending? Let me lay it straight:

DANTE’S ONLY EVIDENCE backing up the claim that “this man cannot be trusted” is that he made a comment years ago at a local court case regarding prayer verbiage at a local VA cemetery. This I have comprehended.

But the problem is that’s it - you've got nothing else. This has been your ONLY evidence, and I'm calling it out as extremely weak. In fact, I've actually gone out and proactively looked for additional wrongdoing by this man and couldn't find it. He's actually a rather clean politician (compared to the rest of the lot). Can you find anything else?

Let's go , convince me he’s bad!

This should be easy because I DON'T LIKE the Republicans. In fact, I dislike the party and believe them to be as corrupt as the Dems (this is evident in my postings). But I'm not going to believe any willy nilly accusation you make without hard evidence that he can't be trusted.

This is literally one of the weakest arguments I’ve heard on USMB. Convince me I’m wrong.


.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

The Committee Chairman who made the statement has a record that says his word on a hearing being able to asses anything cannot be trusted, because the man travels in circles where myth and unfounded accusations pass for facts: Michael Thomas McCaul, Sr.

You may live in the Right Wing World Bubble where ignoring and denying things is acceptable, but when you step outside of that bubble into a debate with others, you come ill equipped and sorely lacking in facts.

It is sad how very little you comprehend, because the potential is there. I believe it is not all a matter of choice on your part. I believe you have actually been brainwashed

because the man travels in circles where myth and unfounded accusations pass for facts: Michael Thomas McCaul, Sr

Dante, do you know you’re an unreasonable and frustrating person to talk to?

What am I not comprehending? Let me lay it straight:

DANTE’S ONLY EVIDENCE backing up the claim that “this man cannot be trusted” is that he made a comment years ago at a local court case regarding prayer verbiage at a local VA cemetery. That’s it. Nothing else.

I mean, is there anything else? I’m the one waiting for YOU to convince me he’s bad. This should be easy because I don’t like many Republicans. I dislike the party and believe them to be as corrupt as the Dems.

This is literally one of the weakest arguments I’ve heard on USMB. Convince me I’m wrong.

try to make this simple. The man has a record of shit [House Homeland Security Chairman Michael McCaul (R-Texas) said Friday the "rush" to read Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev his Miranda Rights cost the U.S. government valuable intelligence. He suggested changing the law so American citizens accused of terrorist activity can be questioned for at least 48 hours. "Having been a federal prosecutor, I think this rush to Mirandize cost us valuable intelligence in terms of other plots that may be out there," McCaul told reporters on Capitol Hill. "Remember that before he's Mirandized, he does discuss the fact that he's going to Times Square... more »]

and the craziness of the past you belittle Texas Legislators and Christian Groups Fight to Insert God Into Vets' Funerals -- Against Families' Wishes | Alternet

there is more. you have not attempted to address or refute anything. You have attacked Dante, sources, the motivations of others...and I am starting to think you are so well brainwashed you actually don';t see what it is you do.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

This should be easy because I DON'T LIKE the Republicans. In fact, I dislike the party and believe them to be as corrupt as the Dems (this is evident in my postings). But I'm not going to believe any willy nilly accusation you make without hard evidence that he can't be trusted.

This is literally one of the weakest arguments I’ve heard on USMB. Convince me I’m wrong.

You see? You've done it again. Just pointing out the creep in question is a right wing asshole has you not hearing and seeing the argument. You get all caught up with a knee jerk reaction to defend the indefensible, I suppose because of a need to stick together lest your right wing world bubble deflate.

A man with a record of alarmist sentiments and beliefs that fly in the face of facts is an asshole. Is that what you want to be convinced of? Or do you believe the man is not alarmist and wrong on so much? You do know this strays a bit from the main points in the context of the OP? Of course it is what you do, maybe without being aware of it

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

there is a reason I usually link back or repeat the OP

It is frustrating when people want to stray from the arguments and the context of the OP

For Right Wing World this is considered trolling and spamming a thread.,



burp!

Republicans in US House Demand Boston Bombing Be Politicized


Under the sleaze tactic of never letting a national tragedy to go un-politicized, the GOP led House will hold hearings.

wtf?



This Right Wing Piece of Shit, Michael Thomas McCaul, Sr. will hold hearings?

Controversy

In August 2011 AlterNet reported that McCaul, along with John Culberson and Ted Poe were attempting to remove the right of deceased soldiers families to choose which prayers, if any, were to be read at a soldiers funeral.

The three politicians were said to be attempting to impose Christian ceremonies on the military funerals of everybody who has served in the military, regardless of whether or not the deceased was Christian and with or without the consent of the family of the deceased.

The three politicians stated their demands were a response to Veterans Affairs (VA) banning Christian prayers at military funerals, however, VA state this claim is "blatantly false" as VA respects a families "rights to pray however they choose at our national cemeteries"

 

[KevinWestern]

try to make this simple. The man has a record of shit [House Homeland Security Chairman Michael McCaul (R-Texas) said Friday the "rush" to read Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev his Miranda Rights cost the U.S. government valuable intelligence. He suggested changing the law so American citizens accused of terrorist activity can be questioned for at least 48 hours. "Having been a federal prosecutor, I think this rush to Mirandize cost us valuable intelligence in terms of other plots that may be out there," McCaul told reporters on Capitol Hill. "Remember that before he's Mirandized, he does discuss the fact that he's going to Times Square... more »]

and the craziness of the past you belittle Texas Legislators and Christian Groups Fight to Insert God Into Vets' Funerals -- Against Families' Wishes | Alternet

there is more. you have not attempted to address or refute anything. You have attacked Dante, sources, the motivations of others...and I am starting to think you are so well brainwashed you actually don';t see what it is you do.

I have not attempted to address or refute anything? I just spent the last 10 posts DIRECTLY addressing your only piece of “evidence” that this man was bad, saying that a single comment about a local court case doesn’t tell me squat about anyone. Ever hear the phrase “actions speak louder than words”? You’ve shown me not a single action this man has done while in office (or even outside of office) that would deem him not trustworthy.

Miranda rights? This is a mainstream and heavily debated issue. I’d say Americans are pretty close to split on “should terrorists be read their Miranda rights or interrogated without them”? He’s not taking a controversial stance, Dante. So evidence #2 is that he takes a stance that half the country agrees with? Is that strong evidence?

I’m trying to be reasonable, and you just keep responding with the same thing, over and over, and calling me an “idiot” at the end. It’s silly, man.

I’ve absolutely destroyed you on this topic, whether you’re willing to admit it or not.


.

 

[KevinWestern]

This should be easy because I DON'T LIKE the Republicans. In fact, I dislike the party and believe them to be as corrupt as the Dems (this is evident in my postings). But I'm not going to believe any willy nilly accusation you make without hard evidence that he can't be trusted.

This is literally one of the weakest arguments I’ve heard on USMB. Convince me I’m wrong.

You see? You've done it again. Just pointing out the creep in question is a right wing asshole has you not hearing and seeing the argument. You get all caught up with a knee jerk reaction to defend the indefensible, I suppose because of a need to stick together lest your right wing world bubble deflate.

A man with a record of alarmist sentiments and beliefs that fly in the face of facts is an asshole. Is that what you want to be convinced of? Or do you believe the man is not alarmist and wrong on so much? You do know this strays a bit from the main points in the context of the OP? Of course it is what you do, maybe without being aware of it

"A record"? One comment regarding a private lawsuit three years ago is a "record"?

You've not provided me with a "record"....

Obama - for instance - has a record of being pretty friendly with Monsanto. He appointed a former exec to a top spot in the FDA, and he recently signed the so called "monsanto protection act" without any protest. That's a record with specific evidence backing up my original claim.

Do you get where I'm going at?

.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

try to make this simple. The man has a record of shit [House Homeland Security Chairman Michael McCaul (R-Texas) said Friday the "rush" to read Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev his Miranda Rights cost the U.S. government valuable intelligence. He suggested changing the law so American citizens accused of terrorist activity can be questioned for at least 48 hours. "Having been a federal prosecutor, I think this rush to Mirandize cost us valuable intelligence in terms of other plots that may be out there," McCaul told reporters on Capitol Hill. "Remember that before he's Mirandized, he does discuss the fact that he's going to Times Square... more »]

and the craziness of the past you belittle Texas Legislators and Christian Groups Fight to Insert God Into Vets' Funerals -- Against Families' Wishes | Alternet

there is more. you have not attempted to address or refute anything. You have attacked Dante, sources, the motivations of others...and I am starting to think you are so well brainwashed you actually don';t see what it is you do.

I have not attempted to address or refute anything? I just spent the last 10 posts DIRECTLY addressing your only piece of “evidence” that this man was bad, saying that a single comment about a local court case doesn’t tell me squat about anyone. Ever hear the phrase “actions speak louder than words”? You’ve shown me not a single action this man has done while in office (or even outside of office) that would deem him not trustworthy.

Miranda rights? This is a mainstream and heavily debated issue. I’d say Americans are pretty close to split on “should terrorists be read their Miranda rights or interrogated without them”? He’s not taking a controversial stance, Dante. M

I’m trying to be reasonable, and you just keep responding with the same thing, over and over, and calling me an “idiot” at the end. It’s silly, man.

I’ve absolutely destroyed you on this topic, whether you’re willing to admit it or not.


.

What takes up huge amounts of time on FOX News is not mainstream. The framers of the US Constitution made it difficult to change laws by plebiscite for just such instances of public dementia as the right wing (and left wing) usually engages in. See? I used (left wing) that makes me Fair and Balanced. Get IT yet? Dante has never claimed to be anything but a liberal

You will rarely see Dante using the 'majority' opinion fall back argument on hysterical alarmist and controversial issues. It is sad to see you do so, considering what a high opinion you have of yourself and you abilities to argue.

You actually spent the last 11 posts(using your claim) DIRECTLY addressing your belief that there is only one piece of “evidence” backing up a claim. Usually when somebody makes a claim, I try and research it or else how can I argue it. In researching a claim I usually come across other ...what do you call it 'evidence'? LOL ... other things that refute and back up things, but reality always wins out.

A partisan ideologue is usually obvious to spot.

 

[KevinWestern]

try to make this simple. The man has a record of shit [House Homeland Security Chairman Michael McCaul (R-Texas) said Friday the "rush" to read Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev his Miranda Rights cost the U.S. government valuable intelligence. He suggested changing the law so American citizens accused of terrorist activity can be questioned for at least 48 hours. "Having been a federal prosecutor, I think this rush to Mirandize cost us valuable intelligence in terms of other plots that may be out there," McCaul told reporters on Capitol Hill. "Remember that before he's Mirandized, he does discuss the fact that he's going to Times Square... more »]

and the craziness of the past you belittle Texas Legislators and Christian Groups Fight to Insert God Into Vets' Funerals -- Against Families' Wishes | Alternet

there is more. you have not attempted to address or refute anything. You have attacked Dante, sources, the motivations of others...and I am starting to think you are so well brainwashed you actually don';t see what it is you do.

I have not attempted to address or refute anything? I just spent the last 10 posts DIRECTLY addressing your only piece of “evidence” that this man was bad, saying that a single comment about a local court case doesn’t tell me squat about anyone. Ever hear the phrase “actions speak louder than words”? You’ve shown me not a single action this man has done while in office (or even outside of office) that would deem him not trustworthy.

Miranda rights? This is a mainstream and heavily debated issue. I’d say Americans are pretty close to split on “should terrorists be read their Miranda rights or interrogated without them”? He’s not taking a controversial stance, Dante. M

I’m trying to be reasonable, and you just keep responding with the same thing, over and over, and calling me an “idiot” at the end. It’s silly, man.

I’ve absolutely destroyed you on this topic, whether you’re willing to admit it or not.


.

What takes up huge amounts of time on FOX News is not mainstream. The framers of the US Constitution made it difficult to change laws by plebiscite for just such instances of public dementia as the right wing (and left wing) usually engages in. See? I used (left wing) that makes me Fair and Balanced. Get IT yet? Dante has never claimed to be anything but a liberal

You will rarely see Dante using the 'majority' opinion fall back argument on hysterical alarmist and controversial issues. It is sad to see you do so, considering what a high opinion you have of yourself and you abilities to argue.

You actually spent the last 11 posts(using your claim) DIRECTLY addressing your belief that there is only one piece of “evidence” backing up a claim. Usually when somebody makes a claim, I try and research it or else how can I argue it. In researching a claim I usually come across other ...what do you call it 'evidence'? LOL ... other things that refute and back up things, but reality always wins out.

A partisan ideologue is usually obvious to spot.

First of all, it's your job to convince me; you're the OP.

Secondly, I did research this man and found no additional scandals, and he is not on any "watch lists".

Evidence to the contrary?

.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

This should be easy because I DON'T LIKE the Republicans. In fact, I dislike the party and believe them to be as corrupt as the Dems (this is evident in my postings). But I'm not going to believe any willy nilly accusation you make without hard evidence that he can't be trusted.

This is literally one of the weakest arguments I’ve heard on USMB. Convince me I’m wrong.

You see? You've done it again. Just pointing out the creep in question is a right wing asshole has you not hearing and seeing the argument. You get all caught up with a knee jerk reaction to defend the indefensible, I suppose because of a need to stick together lest your right wing world bubble deflate.

A man with a record of alarmist sentiments and beliefs that fly in the face of facts is an asshole. Is that what you want to be convinced of? Or do you believe the man is not alarmist and wrong on so much? You do know this strays a bit from the main points in the context of the OP? Of course it is what you do, maybe without being aware of it

"A record"? One comment regarding a private lawsuit three years ago is a "record"?

You've not provided me with a "record"....

Obama - for instance - has a record of being pretty friendly with Monsanto. He appointed a former exec to a top spot in the FDA, and he recently signed the so called "monsanto protection act" without any protest. That's a record with specific evidence backing up my original claim.

Do you get where I'm going at?

.

You obviously followed the Alternet link. You also must have come across a record. If not then shame on me for giving you the benefit of the doubt, and the credit given when dealing with people who research what they attempt to debate and refute.

An example was never meant to be a record, complete or not. What are you stuck on now that you have come out of the gear 'stupid'? Could it be 'deluded'?

Dante referred to a record. It is out there. He gave an example of that record. You attacked Dante and a few sources. Cool, it does not make you a good debater, it confirms your idjit-cy

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I have not attempted to address or refute anything? I just spent the last 10 posts DIRECTLY addressing your only piece of “evidence” that this man was bad, saying that a single comment about a local court case doesn’t tell me squat about anyone. Ever hear the phrase “actions speak louder than words”? You’ve shown me not a single action this man has done while in office (or even outside of office) that would deem him not trustworthy.

Miranda rights? This is a mainstream and heavily debated issue. I’d say Americans are pretty close to split on “should terrorists be read their Miranda rights or interrogated without them”? He’s not taking a controversial stance, Dante. M

I’m trying to be reasonable, and you just keep responding with the same thing, over and over, and calling me an “idiot” at the end. It’s silly, man.

I’ve absolutely destroyed you on this topic, whether you’re willing to admit it or not.


.

What takes up huge amounts of time on FOX News is not mainstream. The framers of the US Constitution made it difficult to change laws by plebiscite for just such instances of public dementia as the right wing (and left wing) usually engages in. See? I used (left wing) that makes me Fair and Balanced. Get IT yet? Dante has never claimed to be anything but a liberal

You will rarely see Dante using the 'majority' opinion fall back argument on hysterical alarmist and controversial issues. It is sad to see you do so, considering what a high opinion you have of yourself and you abilities to argue.

You actually spent the last 11 posts(using your claim) DIRECTLY addressing your belief that there is only one piece of “evidence” backing up a claim. Usually when somebody makes a claim, I try and research it or else how can I argue it. In researching a claim I usually come across other ...what do you call it 'evidence'? LOL ... other things that refute and back up things, but reality always wins out.

A partisan ideologue is usually obvious to spot.

First of all, it's your job to convince me; you're the OP.

Secondly, I did research this man and found no additional scandals, and he is not on any "watch lists".

Evidence to the contrary?

.

And therein lies your confusion

It is not Dante's job or for that matter anyone else's job to attempt convincing an ideologue that they are in denial in order to win an argument, or state opinions and truths asking people to look at them. That would be hitting ones head against the proverbial brick wall.

You do know the slimy shit he and others did concerning dead veterans and their families is not considered a 'scandal' by them and their fellow ideologues?

I have always considered Dennis Kucinich a left wing radical because of his record, not because of ideological differences I have had with him. I even helped his people do a few political outreach ads. I don't see Dennis' radical statements and actions as 'scandals' anymore than he does. \
\\
Get IT yet?

 

[KevinWestern]

What takes up huge amounts of time on FOX News is not mainstream. The framers of the US Constitution made it difficult to change laws by plebiscite for just such instances of public dementia as the right wing (and left wing) usually engages in. See? I used (left wing) that makes me Fair and Balanced. Get IT yet? Dante has never claimed to be anything but a liberal

You will rarely see Dante using the 'majority' opinion fall back argument on hysterical alarmist and controversial issues. It is sad to see you do so, considering what a high opinion you have of yourself and you abilities to argue.

You actually spent the last 11 posts(using your claim) DIRECTLY addressing your belief that there is only one piece of “evidence” backing up a claim. Usually when somebody makes a claim, I try and research it or else how can I argue it. In researching a claim I usually come across other ...what do you call it 'evidence'? LOL ... other things that refute and back up things, but reality always wins out.

A partisan ideologue is usually obvious to spot.

First of all, it's your job to convince me; you're the OP.

Secondly, I did research this man and found no additional scandals, and he is not on any "watch lists".

Evidence to the contrary?

.

And therein lies your confusion

It is not Dante's job or for that matter anyone else's job to attempt convincing an ideologue that they are in denial in order to win an argument, or state opinions and truths asking people to look at them. That would be hitting ones head against the proverbial brick wall.

You do know the slimy shit he and others did concerning dead veterans and their families is not considered a 'scandal' by them and their fellow ideologues?

I have always considered Dennis Kucinich a left wing radical because of his record, not because of ideological differences I have had with him. I even helped his people do a few political outreach ads. I don't see Dennis' radical statements and actions as 'scandals' anymore than he does. \
\\
Get IT yet?

Question: I stated that the Congressperson making a single comment three years ago is not sufficient evidence of proving "he's untrustworthy". How does that make me an ideologue?

Question: What actions did "the slimy shit" take against the VA families? All I can gather is that he made a verbal comment...


.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

First of all, it's your job to convince me; you're the OP.

Secondly, I did research this man and found no additional scandals, and he is not on any "watch lists".

Evidence to the contrary?

.

And therein lies your confusion

It is not Dante's job or for that matter anyone else's job to attempt convincing an ideologue that they are in denial in order to win an argument, or state opinions and truths asking people to look at them. That would be hitting ones head against the proverbial brick wall.

You do know the slimy shit he and others did concerning dead veterans and their families is not considered a 'scandal' by them and their fellow ideologues?

I have always considered Dennis Kucinich a left wing radical because of his record, not because of ideological differences I have had with him. I even helped his people do a few political outreach ads. I don't see Dennis' radical statements and actions as 'scandals' anymore than he does. \
\\
Get IT yet?

Question: I stated that the Congressperson making a single comment three years ago is not sufficient evidence of proving "he's untrustworthy". How does that make me an ideologue?

Question: What actions did "the slimy shit" take against the VA families? All I can gather is that he made a verbal comment...

IS shouting 'fire' in a crowded theater only a verbal comment? See? I can argue like you do.

You choose to focus on the single comment. Dante never said a single comment was what made the guy an asshole or untrustworthy, but if it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck...

You deny you are an ideologue?

Taking a comment out of context is a sure way of making it look like less or more than what it is depending on your ideologically based motive