Town halls gone wild

[Lonestar_logic]

Ok, now you have got to be kidding. He talks about it before and guesstimates that it's gotta be at least 5,000 and then when on air he tries to inflate that number up threefold. So are you honestly trying to spin that he didn't do that??

Him admitting that he is not an expert is NO excuse for trying to dishonestly inflate the numbers like that.

Off air:

"...The cops aren’t going to tell us and we’ve been trying to get a hold of the PR person to give us the number, but… I think five thousand. You could say it’s… [inaudible]… ‘Starting at five thousand, and [maybe] more"

Anyone that believes any estimate a non-expert tells you, is a fucking idiot, especially after he tells you, "I'm no expert", therefore any number he throws up is a fucking GUESS!!!!

Bottom line here is, you're a fucking idiot!

FACT is that cavuto was given one estimate and actually repeated it and then when he went on air he increased that estimate. To do so was nothing more than spreading propaganda and trying to PROMOTE and talk up the event in a dishonest attempt to make it larger than it was.

Why else would he try to claim that it was three times higher than 5,000?? Using common sense what could be the reason behind him doing something like that??

Your spin is failing and nothing will change that FACT. LOL

You just shot your self in the foot.

"FACT is that cavuto was given one estimate"

Yes and anyone with half a brain knows that an esitmate is simply an educated guess and in that one estimate, you can see the person said I think five thousand and he went on to say "maybe more". So the fact is that person that gave Cavuto the five thousand number was guessing himself.

But hey, I can see how dumbfucks like you can take a non-experts estimate and make an issue out of it. You are too stupid for words.

 

[drsmith1072]

If so then it should be easy for you to produce advertisements to that effect. Show me any ad printed or aired that states Fox has or is sponsoring these events.

Just because Beck and Hannity exercised their constitutional rights and happen to be supportive of the cause and just so happens to work for a cable news outlet, doesn't mean the news outlet is the sponsor. You have failed in proving Fox sponsored any of these events.

WOW spin machine got a hold of you. LOL

Excercized their constitnutional rights?? It's funny how we have now made it full circle where previously the righties were arguing that they weren't part of the events but were only reporting on them to admitting that they in fact were a part of the events but that they were excercising their constitutional rights while using network funds and airtime to prop up and promote their cause. LOL
Are you missing the FACT that they HOSTED THEIR FOXNEWS PROGRAMS FROM THE EVENTS meaning that the network had to approve.

Using your logic, anyone reporting weeks in advance on any given topic is automatically a supporter of that cause. Which is ridiculous.

WOW another loser tries to dishonestly put words into my mouth. That is YOUR logic not mine so please keep your baseless moronic assumptions to yourself. My logic has to do with the fact that foxnews promoted the events, sent their people to host their shows from the events while providing entertainment and in hannity's case the event actually changes their schedule to suit his show.

Which is a far cry from merely reporting on an event. If you could be honest then you would admit that FACT.

Common sense? Common sense would tell you that if Fox was sponsoring the events they would have been participating in every single tea party, but the facts do not support your claim. Fact is there was only one tea party where Fox employees were participants.

WOW, you really are out there aren't you? That is not common sense that is your failing attempt to spin a justification for foxnews' propping up of the tea parties.

The FACTS show that foxnews was in fact promoting them when they sent out their employees to host their shows at the events as well as provide entertainment. That is undeniable and yet you are still trying to spin it. LOL

Why haven't you provided any evidence to support your claim?

You talk about facts, but yet you provide none. Fact is Fox presented a wide amount of coverage on these events. But reporting on an event or advancing the cause does not constitute sponsoring an event.

You talk about me spinning the facts, at least I'm consistent with my argument. you now are trying to exchange your accusation of Fox sponsoring an event to promoting an event. There's a distinct difference in the two. Shall I give you the definition of sponsoring as it pertains to this discussion?

Sponsor:
One that finances a project or an event carried out by another person or group, especially a business enterprise that pays for radio or television programming in return for advertising time.

Show me a Fow News advertisement where Fox is the sponsor, not to be confused by a promotional ad.

How many shows ( tea parties) did Fox employees host? How many tea parties were held?

And why do you keep repeating "events"? There was ONE event where Fox employees actively participated in, so it's not "events". You accuse me of spinning while you spew outright lies, well I'd rather be viewed as a spinner rather than a liar. But I guess that's the difference between you and I.

Proof has already been provided in this thread. If you missed it or ignored it that is not my problem.

And I keep saying EVENTS because foxnews had MULTIPLE events with beck, hannity, cavuto and van susteren where they hosted their shows from the events. I had to work during the daytime so I don't know what their daytime but If i had to guess I would say that it was probably the same unendning lovefest that their nighttime programs had for the events.

spon⋅sor
–noun 1. a person who vouches or is responsible for a person or thing.
2. a person, firm, organization, etc., that finances and buys the time to broadcast a radio or television program so as to advertise a product, a political party, etc.

Didn't foxnews give a TON of airtime to the events?? Didn't they promote the fact that their own programs would be broadcast from the events and there by promote the events?? Seems to me that fits the definition.

 

[drsmith1072]

Off air:

"...The cops aren’t going to tell us and we’ve been trying to get a hold of the PR person to give us the number, but… I think five thousand. You could say it’s… [inaudible]… ‘Starting at five thousand, and [maybe] more"

Anyone that believes any estimate a non-expert tells you, is a fucking idiot, especially after he tells you, "I'm no expert", therefore any number he throws up is a fucking GUESS!!!!

Bottom line here is, you're a fucking idiot!

FACT is that cavuto was given one estimate and actually repeated it and then when he went on air he increased that estimate. To do so was nothing more than spreading propaganda and trying to PROMOTE and talk up the event in a dishonest attempt to make it larger than it was.

Why else would he try to claim that it was three times higher than 5,000?? Using common sense what could be the reason behind him doing something like that??

Your spin is failing and nothing will change that FACT. LOL

You just shot your self in the foot.

"FACT is that cavuto was given one estimate"

Yes and anyone with half a brain knows that an esitmate is simply an educated guess and in that one estimate, you can see the person said I think five thousand and he went on to say "maybe more". So the fact is that person that gave Cavuto the five thousand number was guessing himself.

But hey, I can see how dumbfucks like you can take a non-experts estimate and make an issue out of it. You are too stupid for words.

So you are asked a simple question and and instead of answering this BS spin is the best sidestep you can come up with?? LOL

Face it, you blew it and your spin failed. None of your spin and dishoensty will change the FACT that foxnews promoting the events and helped do so by having their shows broadcast live from the events as well as provide entertainment at a couple of them

BTW I just love the fact that your constitutional rights BS spin was dropped after one post. LOL

trying to minimalize their involvement and claim that it was mere reporting FAILED

trying to spin that they were their exercizing their constitutional rights as an excuse for their involvement FAILED

trying to spin and claim that foxnews wasn't sponsoring/promoting the events when they gave them hours and hours of airtime FAILED

What else do you have left to offer?? LOL

 

[Lonestar_logic]

WOW spin machine got a hold of you. LOL

Excercized their constitnutional rights?? It's funny how we have now made it full circle where previously the righties were arguing that they weren't part of the events but were only reporting on them to admitting that they in fact were a part of the events but that they were excercising their constitutional rights while using network funds and airtime to prop up and promote their cause. LOL
Are you missing the FACT that they HOSTED THEIR FOXNEWS PROGRAMS FROM THE EVENTS meaning that the network had to approve.




WOW another loser tries to dishonestly put words into my mouth. That is YOUR logic not mine so please keep your baseless moronic assumptions to yourself. My logic has to do with the fact that foxnews promoted the events, sent their people to host their shows from the events while providing entertainment and in hannity's case the event actually changes their schedule to suit his show.

Which is a far cry from merely reporting on an event. If you could be honest then you would admit that FACT.

Common sense? Common sense would tell you that if Fox was sponsoring the events they would have been participating in every single tea party, but the facts do not support your claim. Fact is there was only one tea party where Fox employees were participants.

Why haven't you provided any evidence to support your claim?

You talk about facts, but yet you provide none. Fact is Fox presented a wide amount of coverage on these events. But reporting on an event or advancing the cause does not constitute sponsoring an event.

You talk about me spinning the facts, at least I'm consistent with my argument. you now are trying to exchange your accusation of Fox sponsoring an event to promoting an event. There's a distinct difference in the two. Shall I give you the definition of sponsoring as it pertains to this discussion?

Sponsor:
One that finances a project or an event carried out by another person or group, especially a business enterprise that pays for radio or television programming in return for advertising time.

Show me a Fow News advertisement where Fox is the sponsor, not to be confused by a promotional ad.

How many shows ( tea parties) did Fox employees host? How many tea parties were held?

And why do you keep repeating "events"? There was ONE event where Fox employees actively participated in, so it's not "events". You accuse me of spinning while you spew outright lies, well I'd rather be viewed as a spinner rather than a liar. But I guess that's the difference between you and I.

Proof has already been provided in this thread. If you missed it or ignored it that is not my problem.

And I keep saying EVENTS because foxnews had MULTIPLE events with beck, hannity, cavuto and van susteren where they hosted their shows from the events. I had to work during the daytime so I don't know what their daytime but If i had to guess I would say that it was probably the same unendning lovefest that their nighttime programs had for the events.

spon⋅sor
–noun 1. a person who vouches or is responsible for a person or thing.
2. a person, firm, organization, etc., that finances and buys the time to broadcast a radio or television program so as to advertise a product, a political party, etc.

Didn't foxnews give a TON of airtime to the events?? Didn't they promote the fact that their own programs would be broadcast from the events and there by promote the events?? Seems to me that fits the definition.

You have provided no proof that Fox sponsored the tea parties. Show me a money trail, show me an advertisement that states Fox as being the sponsor, show me anything other than a network that worked to advance a cause. Which is within their constitutional right to do so.

Using your logic, if I stand on a street corner and try to get people to attend a specific event that would make me a sponsor. Ridiculous.

On second thought, don't sweat it, it's obvious you can't provide the evidence to support your argument, so I'll let you off the hook. I hate to bully the mentally challenged or in your case the mentally deficient.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

FACT is that cavuto was given one estimate and actually repeated it and then when he went on air he increased that estimate. To do so was nothing more than spreading propaganda and trying to PROMOTE and talk up the event in a dishonest attempt to make it larger than it was.

Why else would he try to claim that it was three times higher than 5,000?? Using common sense what could be the reason behind him doing something like that??

Your spin is failing and nothing will change that FACT. LOL

You just shot your self in the foot.

"FACT is that cavuto was given one estimate"

Yes and anyone with half a brain knows that an esitmate is simply an educated guess and in that one estimate, you can see the person said I think five thousand and he went on to say "maybe more". So the fact is that person that gave Cavuto the five thousand number was guessing himself.

But hey, I can see how dumbfucks like you can take a non-experts estimate and make an issue out of it. You are too stupid for words.

So you are asked a simple question and and instead of answering this BS spin is the best sidestep you can come up with?? LOL

Face it, you blew it and your spin failed. None of your spin and dishoensty will change the FACT that foxnews promoting the events and helped do so by having their shows broadcast live from the events as well as provide entertainment at a couple of them

BTW I just love the fact that your constitutional rights BS spin was dropped after one post. LOL

trying to minimalize their involvement and claim that it was mere reporting FAILED

trying to spin that they were their exercizing their constitutional rights as an excuse for their involvement FAILED

trying to spin and claim that foxnews wasn't sponsoring/promoting the events when they gave them hours and hours of airtime FAILED

What else do you have left to offer?? LOL

I didn't answer your question because it was a stupid fucking question. I have no idea why he would estimate it the way he did. It could be he estimated it that way because he's "no expert".

My dishonesty? Show me where I was dishonest?

And talk about spin you went from Fox is sponsoring an event to promoting an event which are two different things altogether.

Fox news did not sponsor the tea parties, and you cannot prove they did. I have nothing to prove because a negative can't be proven. The burden of proof lies with you. And you continually fail to prove your case.

 

[drsmith1072]

Common sense? Common sense would tell you that if Fox was sponsoring the events they would have been participating in every single tea party, but the facts do not support your claim. Fact is there was only one tea party where Fox employees were participants.

Proof has already been provided in this thread. If you missed it or ignored it that is not my problem.

And I keep saying EVENTS because foxnews had MULTIPLE events with beck, hannity, cavuto and van susteren where they hosted their shows from the events. I had to work during the daytime so I don't know what their daytime but If i had to guess I would say that it was probably the same unendning lovefest that their nighttime programs had for the events.

spon⋅sor
–noun 1. a person who vouches or is responsible for a person or thing.
2. a person, firm, organization, etc., that finances and buys the time to broadcast a radio or television program so as to advertise a product, a political party, etc.

Didn't foxnews give a TON of airtime to the events?? Didn't they promote the fact that their own programs would be broadcast from the events and there by promote the events?? Seems to me that fits the definition.

You have provided no proof that Fox sponsored the tea parties. Show me a money trail, show me an advertisement that states Fox as being the sponsor, show me anything other than a network that worked to advance a cause. Which is within their constitutional right to do so.

Using your logic, if I stand on a street corner and try to get people to attend a specific event that would make me a sponsor. Ridiculous.

On second thought, don't sweat it, it's obvious you can't provide the evidence to support your argument, so I'll let you off the hook. I hate to bully the mentally challenged or in your case the mentally deficient.

Go back and read the thread there was evidence in the thread. If you missed it or IGNORED IT that is not my problem.

And once again you take YOUR lame logic and try to DISHONESTLY attribute it to me. I have already SPELLED out my logic and you IGNORED it and made up your own to try and attack me for something I never said or implied.

Face the FACTS, you tried to spin to cover for foxnews and FAILED. Game over and attacking me won't change that FACT. LOL

 

[drsmith1072]

You just shot your self in the foot.

"FACT is that cavuto was given one estimate"

Yes and anyone with half a brain knows that an esitmate is simply an educated guess and in that one estimate, you can see the person said I think five thousand and he went on to say "maybe more". So the fact is that person that gave Cavuto the five thousand number was guessing himself.

But hey, I can see how dumbfucks like you can take a non-experts estimate and make an issue out of it. You are too stupid for words.

So you are asked a simple question and and instead of answering this BS spin is the best sidestep you can come up with?? LOL

Face it, you blew it and your spin failed. None of your spin and dishoensty will change the FACT that foxnews promoting the events and helped do so by having their shows broadcast live from the events as well as provide entertainment at a couple of them

BTW I just love the fact that your constitutional rights BS spin was dropped after one post. LOL

trying to minimalize their involvement and claim that it was mere reporting FAILED

trying to spin that they were their exercizing their constitutional rights as an excuse for their involvement FAILED

trying to spin and claim that foxnews wasn't sponsoring/promoting the events when they gave them hours and hours of airtime FAILED

What else do you have left to offer?? LOL

I didn't answer your question because it was a stupid fucking question. I have no idea why he would estimate it the way he did. It could be he estimated it that way because he's "no expert".

It's ok keep running. LOL Your avoidance let's me know that I am correct.

My dishonesty? Show me where I was dishonest?

Already spelled it out to you when I exposed your lame an dishonest attempts to cover for foxnews and make lame excuses as to why they where there.

And talk about spin you went from Fox is sponsoring an event to promoting an event which are two different things altogether.

Fox news did not sponsor the tea parties, and you cannot prove they did. I have nothing to prove because a negative can't be proven. The burden of proof lies with you. And you continually fail to prove your case.

Actually I provided a definition that did apply you just chose to IGNORE it like you seem to do any and all FACTS that counter your OPINIONS. LOL

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Proof has already been provided in this thread. If you missed it or ignored it that is not my problem.

And I keep saying EVENTS because foxnews had MULTIPLE events with beck, hannity, cavuto and van susteren where they hosted their shows from the events. I had to work during the daytime so I don't know what their daytime but If i had to guess I would say that it was probably the same unendning lovefest that their nighttime programs had for the events.



Didn't foxnews give a TON of airtime to the events?? Didn't they promote the fact that their own programs would be broadcast from the events and there by promote the events?? Seems to me that fits the definition.

You have provided no proof that Fox sponsored the tea parties. Show me a money trail, show me an advertisement that states Fox as being the sponsor, show me anything other than a network that worked to advance a cause. Which is within their constitutional right to do so.

Using your logic, if I stand on a street corner and try to get people to attend a specific event that would make me a sponsor. Ridiculous.

On second thought, don't sweat it, it's obvious you can't provide the evidence to support your argument, so I'll let you off the hook. I hate to bully the mentally challenged or in your case the mentally deficient.

Go back and read the thread there was evidence in the thread. If you missed it or IGNORED IT that is not my problem.

And once again you take YOUR lame logic and try to DISHONESTLY attribute it to me. I have already SPELLED out my logic and you IGNORED it and made up your own to try and attack me for something I never said or implied.

Face the FACTS, you tried to spin to cover for foxnews and FAILED. Game over and attacking me won't change that FACT. LOL

You wouldn't know a fact if it bit you in your ass.

You have failed to prove that Fox sponsored these events.

The fact that Fox reported the events prior to, during and after, does not equate to sponsorship. The fact that Fox employees hosted their shows from an event does not constitute sponsorship.( if that was the case then I guess they sponsored both the democrat and republican conventions)

Your concession is duly noted.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

So you are asked a simple question and and instead of answering this BS spin is the best sidestep you can come up with?? LOL

Face it, you blew it and your spin failed. None of your spin and dishoensty will change the FACT that foxnews promoting the events and helped do so by having their shows broadcast live from the events as well as provide entertainment at a couple of them

BTW I just love the fact that your constitutional rights BS spin was dropped after one post. LOL

trying to minimalize their involvement and claim that it was mere reporting FAILED

trying to spin that they were their exercizing their constitutional rights as an excuse for their involvement FAILED

trying to spin and claim that foxnews wasn't sponsoring/promoting the events when they gave them hours and hours of airtime FAILED

What else do you have left to offer?? LOL

I didn't answer your question because it was a stupid fucking question. I have no idea why he would estimate it the way he did. It could be he estimated it that way because he's "no expert".

It's ok keep running. LOL Your avoidance let's me know that I am correct.

My dishonesty? Show me where I was dishonest?

Already spelled it out to you when I exposed your lame an dishonest attempts to cover for foxnews and make lames excuses as to why they where there.

And talk about spin you went from Fox is sponsoring an event to promoting an event which are two different things altogether.

Fox news did not sponsor the tea parties, and you cannot prove they did. I have nothing to prove because a negative can't be proven. The burden of proof lies with you. And you continually fail to prove your case.

Actually I provided a definition that did apply you just chose to IGNORE it like you seem to do any and all FACTS that counter your OPINIONS. LOL

Using your definition you still failed to prove that Fox SPONSORED the events.



Your concession is duly noted.

 

[Cold Fusion38]

Lone he took the "estimate" and increased it by a factor of THREE!!!

 

[Cold Fusion38]

You don't see anything suspect in that Lone?

 

[Cold Fusion38]

You can answer the question any time Lone.

 

[Liability]

When anybody opposed to the ideas, plots, plans and would-be "polisies" of the Obama Administration tries to use "freedom of speech" to express such opposition, the LMSM immediately denigrates it by suggesting that it is "organized" and thus unworthy of credibility.

That kind of thing is only ok when the left does it, don't ya know!

You really are not denying that this "opposition" has been orchestrated and that the Memo put out by the RNC on tactics to be used to disrupt the meetings is false?

The RNC has put out a memo now?

Do you have a link to it so I can see what it says as well?

Since PI2 is ignored, I only saw his silly question when it got quoted and I looked back in here a little while ago.

I'm not "getting" the import of that silly question.

I do not assume that the collective opposition to Obamacare is all the product of some orchestration by some anonymous "other" or "others." I see no evidence of that, in fact. Certainly, those who make the claim are pretty woefully unable to back it up.

But JUST for the sake of this discussion, let's pretend or let's assume that it is the case that the town hall meetings that have been heavily attended and covered and which have resulted in some sharp and pointed questions being put to the Congressmen and other Obamacare spokesmen are filled-up in that way by virtue of some background organization --

so what?

When the goonatics who MARCH and RALLY and PROTEST the political party conventions do that kinda thing, is the message they are shouting any less valid because it is organized?

How about when they flock to the G8 summits? If a product of some kind of organization, is the MESSAGE of whatever they are shouting about any less valid on that basis?

I say it's not. Their idiotic messages might be devoid of meaning, but if so, it's because they are lunatic incapable of producing any original or valid logical thought. It's not because of who sent them.

By contrast, the folks asking the hard questions about Obamacare have had a belly FULL of the new President's love-affair with socialism. President Obama's effort to meddle in health-Care and Health Insurance raises lots of perfectly valid questions -- and the validity of the questions remains regardless of how the folks came to be at those town halls.

 

[RadiomanATL]

You really are not denying that this "opposition" has been orchestrated and that the Memo put out by the RNC on tactics to be used to disrupt the meetings is false?

The RNC has put out a memo now?

Do you have a link to it so I can see what it says as well?

Since PI2 is ignored, I only saw his silly question when it got quoted and I looked back in here a little while ago.

I'm not "getting" the import of that silly question.

I do not assume that the collective opposition to Obamacare is all the product of some orchestration by some anonymous "other" or "others." I see no evidence of that, in fact. Certainly, those who make the claim are pretty woefully unable to back it up.

But JUST for the sake of this discussion, let's pretend or let's assume that it is the case that the town hall meetings that have been heavily attended and covered and which have resulted in some sharp and pointed questions being put to the Congressmen and other Obamacare spokesmen are filled-up in that way by virtue of some background organization --

so what?

When the goonatics who MARCH and RALLY and PROTEST the political party conventions do that kinda thing, is the message they are shouting any less valid because it is organized?

How about when they flock to the G8 summits? If a product of some kind of organization, is the MESSAGE of whatever they are shouting about any less valid on that basis?

I say it's not. Their idiotic messages might be devoid of meaning, but if so, it's because they are lunatic incapable of producing any original or valid logical thought. It's not because of who sent them.

By contrast, the folks asking the hard questions about Obamacare have had a belly FULL of the new President's love-affair with socialism. President Obama's effort to meddle in health-Care and Health Insurance raises lots of perfectly valid questions -- and the validity of the questions remains regardless of how the folks came to be at those town halls.

I don't care if their organized either. People are saying it like its a bad thing:

"Hey Bob, did you see that crowd over there?"

"Oh, Dave they just organized is all".

Its a typical misdirection. As if just because they organized themselves their points are invalid. Complete and utter bullshit.

I would just like to see the supposed memo that was put out by the RNC. No one can seem to produce one so far, so I'll continue to wait patiently.

 

[PI2]

OK so it wasn't the RNC directly but one of those other whacko right wing extremist organizations circulating the Memo for you ignorant hate filled morons to gobble and then to go and disrupt the discussions by shouting down the other participants.

 

[RadiomanATL]

OK so it wasn't the RNC directly but one of those other whacko right wing extremist organizations circulating the Memo for you ignorant hate filled morons to gobble and then to go and disrupt the discussions by shouting down the other participants.

Typical.

When called on bullshit, spew a bunch of crap and whine about how ignorant your opposition. Yeah. They're so ignorant they know that you're full of shit.

And calling them hate-filled? Priceless, especially considering the venom coming out of your post.

Go ahead and pull the other leg. It's got bells on it.

 

[PI2]

The RNC has put out a memo now?

Do you have a link to it so I can see what it says as well?

Since PI2 is ignored, I only saw his silly question when it got quoted and I looked back in here a little while ago.

I'm not "getting" the import of that silly question.

I do not assume that the collective opposition to Obamacare is all the product of some orchestration by some anonymous "other" or "others." I see no evidence of that, in fact. Certainly, those who make the claim are pretty woefully unable to back it up.

But JUST for the sake of this discussion, let's pretend or let's assume that it is the case that the town hall meetings that have been heavily attended and covered and which have resulted in some sharp and pointed questions being put to the Congressmen and other Obamacare spokesmen are filled-up in that way by virtue of some background organization --

so what?

When the goonatics who MARCH and RALLY and PROTEST the political party conventions do that kinda thing, is the message they are shouting any less valid because it is organized?

How about when they flock to the G8 summits? If a product of some kind of organization, is the MESSAGE of whatever they are shouting about any less valid on that basis?

I say it's not. Their idiotic messages might be devoid of meaning, but if so, it's because they are lunatic incapable of producing any original or valid logical thought. It's not because of who sent them.

By contrast, the folks asking the hard questions about Obamacare have had a belly FULL of the new President's love-affair with socialism. President Obama's effort to meddle in health-Care and Health Insurance raises lots of perfectly valid questions -- and the validity of the questions remains regardless of how the folks came to be at those town halls.

I don't care if their organized either. People are saying it like its a bad thing:

"Hey Bob, did you see that crowd over there?"

"Oh, Dave they just organized is all".

Its a typical misdirection. As if just because they organized themselves their points are invalid. Complete and utter bullshit.

I would just like to see the supposed memo that was put out by the RNC. No one can seem to produce one so far, so I'll continue to wait patiently.

Hate filled right wing morons screaming at the top of their lungs disrupting a meeting because they lost at the ballot box.

 

[PI2]

OK so it wasn't the RNC directly but one of those other whacko right wing extremist organizations circulating the Memo for you ignorant hate filled morons to gobble and then to go and disrupt the discussions by shouting down the other participants.

Typical.

When called on bullshit, spew a bunch of crap and whine about how ignorant your opposition. Yeah. They're so ignorant they know that you're full of shit.

And calling them hate-filled? Priceless, especially considering the venom coming out of your post.

Go ahead and pull the other leg. It's got bells on it.

Nice try, the anger and disinformation spread by the right, the fear mongering by Caribou Barbi, the Swastikas the SS runes on the signs are just people expressing themselves right?
You righties are a hoot.

 

[RadiomanATL]

Since PI2 is ignored, I only saw his silly question when it got quoted and I looked back in here a little while ago.

I'm not "getting" the import of that silly question.

I do not assume that the collective opposition to Obamacare is all the product of some orchestration by some anonymous "other" or "others." I see no evidence of that, in fact. Certainly, those who make the claim are pretty woefully unable to back it up.

But JUST for the sake of this discussion, let's pretend or let's assume that it is the case that the town hall meetings that have been heavily attended and covered and which have resulted in some sharp and pointed questions being put to the Congressmen and other Obamacare spokesmen are filled-up in that way by virtue of some background organization --

so what?

When the goonatics who MARCH and RALLY and PROTEST the political party conventions do that kinda thing, is the message they are shouting any less valid because it is organized?

How about when they flock to the G8 summits? If a product of some kind of organization, is the MESSAGE of whatever they are shouting about any less valid on that basis?

I say it's not. Their idiotic messages might be devoid of meaning, but if so, it's because they are lunatic incapable of producing any original or valid logical thought. It's not because of who sent them.

By contrast, the folks asking the hard questions about Obamacare have had a belly FULL of the new President's love-affair with socialism. President Obama's effort to meddle in health-Care and Health Insurance raises lots of perfectly valid questions -- and the validity of the questions remains regardless of how the folks came to be at those town halls.

I don't care if their organized either. People are saying it like its a bad thing:

"Hey Bob, did you see that crowd over there?"

"Oh, Dave they just organized is all".

Its a typical misdirection. As if just because they organized themselves their points are invalid. Complete and utter bullshit.

I would just like to see the supposed memo that was put out by the RNC. No one can seem to produce one so far, so I'll continue to wait patiently.

Hate filled right wing morons screaming at the top of their lungs disrupting a meeting because they lost at the ballot box.

Nice try, but no. As of last Tuesday only 42% of Americans approved of his plan. He won more than 42% of the popular vote. By a LOT more then 42%. Do I have to sll this part out for you and why the disparity is significant?

You can keep trying to demonize the opposition, hell you guys even learned it from the king toad himself Karl Rove. However I called jingoistic assholes on their bullshit during his reign and I ain't stopping now just cause some new party is in power.

 

[RadiomanATL]

OK so it wasn't the RNC directly but one of those other whacko right wing extremist organizations circulating the Memo for you ignorant hate filled morons to gobble and then to go and disrupt the discussions by shouting down the other participants.

Typical.

When called on bullshit, spew a bunch of crap and whine about how ignorant your opposition. Yeah. They're so ignorant they know that you're full of shit.

And calling them hate-filled? Priceless, especially considering the venom coming out of your post.

Go ahead and pull the other leg. It's got bells on it.

Nice try, the anger and disinformation spread by the right, the fear mongering by Caribou Barbi, the Swastikas the SS runes on the signs are just people expressing themselves right?
You righties are a hoot.

More petulance after being shown you are incorrect?

Dude, your best bet is to just STFU at this point.