Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Psienesis wrote: We just had six months of investigations and Congressional hearings into Planned Parenthood based on falsified, fraudulent videos where the agit-prop stated that Planned Parenthood was butchering babies like swine to sell their body parts on the organ markets.
Republicans, both in the citizenry and in Congress, swallowed these lies hook, line and sinker. The shooter has been reported to have screamed "No more butchered babies!" during the rampage.
Hell, Carly Fiorina doubled down on bs even when called on it. Whether it's that or the non-existent crowd of thousands of Muslims cheering on 9/11 in Jersey City, that's the new normal, I guess. That's what the base wants to hear, facts be damned.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/29 06:05:17
lord_blackfang wrote: Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote: The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
Ouze wrote: I wasn't hassling you, I swear And yes, I think it's clear no one here is calling anyone literally Hitler.
Although that would be handy because then I could ask who was making those films.
Dude, nice throwback to The Man in the High Castle thread!
10/10
d-usa wrote: "When the Internet sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending posters that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing strawmen. They're bringing spam. They're trolls. And some, I assume, are good people."
Ustrello wrote: What the violent rhetoric and silent approval from republicans led to this? Nooo
Violent rhetoric from Republicans? I don't pay a lot of attention to the abortion debate but I haven't heard this accusation leveled at the Republicans.
We just had six months of investigations and Congressional hearings into Planned Parenthood based on falsified, fraudulent videos where the agit-prop stated that Planned Parenthood was butchering babies like swine to sell their body parts on the organ markets.
Republicans, both in the citizenry and in Congress, swallowed these lies hook, line and sinker. The shooter has been reported to have screamed "No more butchered babies!" during the rampage.
6 months for a PP video, 13 bengazi hearings, yet for 9-11 it only took 1 hearing that only lasted a few hours to clear bush. (you're welcome Breotan, enjoy your bingo)
Why do republicans take such great interest in, and side with the pro lifers? it's their base, they're pandering to their christian right.
It starts with christian ideology, which many republicans believe in already, or pander to thus supporting that ideology.
But it's not one video that ends up being the "inspiration" for an attack, it's the years of indoctrination before it. hearing day after day how these people are providing breast exams, no err I mean killing babies, eventually someone is going to snap. And when they snap they've been programmed with a clearly "evil" target to go after. A target that must surely be evil as members of their faith, and even elected officials agree that what PP is doing is evil.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/29 13:34:02
A newly-released FBI Intelligence Assessment says, "it is likely criminal or suspicious incidents will continue to be directed against reproductive health care providers, their staff and facilities,"
The attacks and threats pre-dated the PP videos and the FBI said that they would continue. If these incidents were happening prior to the video then it cannot be said that they were happening because of the video. You are shaping the evidence to match your bias.
Dreadclaw69 wrote: Some basic information about the shooter is starting to appear;
- lived in a cabin in the woods with no water or electricity
And that's the point where I assume that this is less of a politically motivated killing, and more of just a crazy person doing crazy things.
That, the rambling patterns of speech, the cruelty to animals, and domestic violence do not paint a picture of someone in full control of their faculties.
Ouze wrote: So far as the right-wing incitement of violence against abortion providers, I give you Bill O'Reilly. Of course, you're going to say "well, he never told anyone to kill the guy", which is true, and also why there is no point in really continuing this argument; because you can lead a horse to water, but you can't explain the subtext behind "will no one rid me of this troublesome priest", as they say.
There was absolutely no incitement there and you know it. The troublesome priest comparison isn't even close either. The standard that you are proposing of holding people to re incitement will make a huge inroads into free speech and what may be punished by law. There was no direct incitement, there was nothing even close to a nudge-nudge-wink-wink. Your claim that this is incitement is no better than those calling for Obama's impeachment because of the IRS scrutiny of right leaning groups after he lamented tax provisions.
Psienesis wrote: Republicans, both in the citizenry and in Congress, swallowed these lies hook, line and sinker. The shooter has been reported to have screamed "No more butchered babies!" during the rampage.
And you're going to give me an example of the violent rhetoric that the Republicans used during the PP video discussions, right?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/29 15:01:49
Psienesis wrote: Republicans, both in the citizenry and in Congress, swallowed these lies hook, line and sinker. The shooter has been reported to have screamed "No more butchered babies!" during the rampage.
And you're going to give me an example of the violent rhetoric that the Republicans used during the PP video discussions, right?
Planned Parenthood directly compared to Iran's nuclear ambitions.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2015/11/29 15:11:46
I've never watched these videos because I thought it wasn't worth it. I already have my opinions on abortion and am in large part against it, with some exceptions.
I am curious, however about what she said about a fully formed fetus on the table with a pumping heart, etc. What was that all about. Is that something that was legitimate in the video or was it just theatre?
Relapse wrote: I've never watched these videos because I thought it wasn't worth it. I already have my opinions on abortion and am in large part against it, with some exceptions.
I am curious, however about what she said about a fully formed fetus on the table with a pumping heart, etc. What was that all about. Is that something that was legitimate in the video or was it just theatre?
I have only seen sanitized versions of the videos. I do know that her description of the video was called out as demonstrably inaccurate by the press.
CHUCK TODD: Let me start right in with the Planned Parenthood situation. At the debate -- the most recent debate -- you described the following scene, claiming it was on a tape: "A fully formed fetus on the table, its heart beating, its legs kicking, while someone says we have to keep it alive to harvest its brain." Since then, when asked about the claim, your campaign has attacked Planned Parenthood, but there is no tapes, there is no evidence that the scene you describe exists. Are you willing now to concede that you exaggerated that scene?
CARLY FIORINA: No, not at all. That scene absolutely does exist, and that voice saying what I said they were saying, we're going to keep it alive to harvest its brain, exists as well. Here's the thing. Yesterday, I was at a football game--
[CROSSTALK]
TODD: So you saw that moment on the tape? Because -- you saw that moment on the tape?
FIORINA: Yes, and I would challenge Planned Parenthood. Here's the deal. Yesterday I was protested by Planned Parenthood people who were throwing condoms at me. I don't know what that has to do with this. They're trying to distract the American people from the hideous reality that Planned Parenthood is aborting fetuses alive to harvest their brains and other body parts. That is a fact. Planned Parenthood will not and cannot deny this because it is happening. It is happening in this nation. And taxpayers are paying for it. Planned Parenthood desperately wants everyone to think this isn't going on because when Americans realize it is going on, whether they are pro-life or pro-choice, they are horrified. This goes to the character of our nation, and it must be stopped.
TODD: Well the footage you describe at best is a re-enactment. The videos -- even the people that made the videos admit it's stock footage, yet you went right along and said it's Planned Parenthood.
FIORINA: Chuck, Chuck, Chuck, Chuck, Chuck, do you think this is not happening? Does Hillary Clinton think this is not happening? So sad that you miss the opportunity to ask Mrs. Clinton why she said late-term abortions were only performed for medical purposes. That is patently false. This is happening in America today, and taxpayers are paying for it. That is a fact. It is a reality, and no one can run away from it.
TODD: But you are ducking the video, the specific of this question. And I guess I'm trying - because let me tell you what, The Washington Post--
FIORINA: I'm not -- I am not -- I am not ducking - I am not.
TODD: A Washington Post editorial this morning - a Washington Post editorial is calling it a full-fledged falsehood, Miss Fiorina. They said that it doesn't excuse your mistruths. They said, they understand you have a deeply held belief on abortion, but that you're exaggerating this specific claim.
FIORINA: No. Well, first of all, The Washington Post also claims that I am lying about being a secretary, so let's get real. I mean, I don't even know how to deal with that. I was a secretary, part-time to put myself through college and full-time after I graduated. The Washington Post gave me three Pinocchios for claiming that I was a secretary. So honestly, I don't think The Washington Post has a lot of credibility here. This is not about being pro-life or pro-choice. It is certainly not about birth control. It is not even about women's health. It is about the character of our nation. No one can deny this is happening because it is happening.
“ONE OF the benefits of a presidential campaign is the character and capability, judgment and temperament of every single one of us is revealed over time and under pressure.” Since presidential hopeful Carly Fiorina made that comment at the start of the second Republican debate, there have been some telling revelations about her character and her judgment. Caught making a false claim, she couldn’t just admit she made a mistake but instead doubled down and worsened the falsehood.
Arguing during the Sept. 16 GOP debate to defund Planned Parenthood, Ms. Fiorina offered this description of a disturbing scene that was supposedly captured on controversial undercover videos of the organization: “Watch a fully formed fetus on the table, its heart beating, its legs kicking while someone says we have to keep it alive to harvest its brain.” No such scene exists, as even some of her defenders have had to admit. Ms. Fiorina was challenged by Fox News Sunday anchor Chris Wallace to acknowledge “what every fact checker has found”: that the scene was only described by someone who claimed to have witnessed it but was not shown in the video.
Ms. Fiorina could have acknowledged her error while maintaining, fairly, that the tapes contain other disturbing images and language and while affirming her objections to Planned Parenthood. Instead she insisted: “No, I don’t accept that at all. I’ve seen the footage.” She went on the attack against the mainstream media, and her supporters concocted a video that splices video and audio from different places in an effort to buttress her claims. Most deceptive in the CARLY for America video is use of an image (also used in the videos produced by the Center for Medical Progress) of a fetus born prematurely, not aborted, at 19 weeks of development. The premature birth by a Pennsylvania woman had no connection to Planned Parenthood or to abortion. That, though, didn’t stop Ms. Fiorina’s supporters from using it — with the voice-over and caption of “Here’s a stomach, heart, kidney, and adrenal” — to support specious allegations of Planned Parenthood selling fetal tissue for profit.
Ms. Fiorina may have deeply felt objections to abortion. That doesn’t excuse her use of mistruths to justify her willingness to shut down the government, which by the way she seems to consider no big deal. “I’m not aware of any hardship to anyone, other than the veterans trying to get to the World War II memorial,” she said of the last shutdown. When it comes to character and capability, that kind of blithe ignorance is another worrying sign.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/29 15:23:06
It seems like the video is along the lines of, "Obama prays this secret of his past doesn't come to light", kind of nonsense that only true haters can swallow, then.
I really get sick of the sewage that passes these days for news that drowns out truth and turns the gullible into dribbling idiots.
jasper76 wrote: Planned Parenthood directly compared to Iran's nuclear ambitions.
I'm assuming you didn't watch the video because it doesn't say what you think it does. She did not compare PP to Iran's nuclear ambitions. What she said was that she wanted to discuss something that, in her words, affected the moral character of the US and something that affected the security of the US. There was no comparison.
d-usa wrote: Confusing pro-choice with pro-death is part of the problem.
One can be both pro-choice and pro-life.
Funny terms in any case, given that the pro-lifers kill the... pro-deathers but not the reverse.
A more accurate term would be pro-birth. They don't give two gaks about what happens after birth. All they care about is "punishing da dirty wimmins for having sex". It's all control. More unwanted children equals more crime. More crime equals more profit for prisons and other exploitive corporations. Why make money once by providing state abortions, when you could exploit the unwanted child for the rest of it's life?
Peregrine - If you like the army buy it, and don't worry about what one random person on the internet thinks.
d-usa wrote: Confusing pro-choice with pro-death is part of the problem.
One can be both pro-choice and pro-life.
Funny terms in any case, given that the pro-lifers kill the... pro-deathers but not the reverse.
A more accurate term would be pro-birth. They don't give two gaks about what happens after birth. All they care about is "punishing da dirty wimmins for having sex". It's all control. More unwanted children equals more crime. More crime equals more profit for prisons and other exploitive corporations. Why make money once by providing state abortions, when you could exploit the unwanted child for the rest of it's life?
That hits on a very true issue that undercuts a big part of , as you put it, the Pro Birthers. It's all well and good to sit on one's ass in the comfort of the living room and say, "Don't be a baby murderer". However if the words aren't backed by action, if someone isn't willing to shoulder some of the responsibility of helping that unwanted child grow, either through money, volunteer labor, adoption(the best option if able to do so) or some other means, then they could very likely be condemning that child to a slow death by other means.
Anyone that has worked child services can tell some pretty grim tales of some of these kids in this predicament.
jasper76 wrote: Planned Parenthood directly compared to Iran's nuclear ambitions.
I'm assuming you didn't watch the video because it doesn't say what you think it does. She did not compare PP to Iran's nuclear ambitions. What she said was that she wanted to discuss something that, in her words, affected the moral character of the US and something that affected the security of the US. There was no comparison.
There was also no violent rhetoric towards PP.
Her quote: "I'd like to link these two issues, both of which are incredibly important: Iran and Planned Parenthood."
I didn't link these two issues, I'm still not sure what the purported link is even after hearing her statement. Perhaps you can enlighten me here??
I'm assuming you didn't watch the video because it doesn't say what you think it does. She did not compare PP to Iran's nuclear ambitions. What she said was that she wanted to discuss something that, in her words, affected the moral character of the US and something that affected the security of the US. There was no comparison.
There was also no violent rhetoric towards PP.
Her quote: "I'd like to link these two issues, both of which are incredibly important: Iran and Planned Parenthood."
I didn't link these two issues, I'm still not sure what the purported link is even after hearing her statement. Perhaps you can enlighten me here??
You stated that she "directly compared" PP to Iran. Your video proves no such thing.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
sirlynchmob wrote: she wants to link in the solution to ISIS to include PP, bomb them out of existence, and kill them all.
She does? I didn't hear that in the video, when did she say such a thing? If she did in fact say that then obviously it is utterly reprehensible. If she didn't actually say it then the question must be asked why you would ascribe such an obviously false statement to her.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/29 20:07:53
I didn't think I could like her less, but.. here we are. I can only take solace in the fact that her presidential run, as with her previous enterprises, will remain unmarred by success.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/29 21:10:13
lord_blackfang wrote: Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote: The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
Ustrello wrote: What the violent rhetoric and silent approval from republicans led to this? Nooo
Violent rhetoric from Republicans? I don't pay a lot of attention to the abortion debate but I haven't heard this accusation leveled at the Republicans.
When you get republicans everyday calling PP terrible people etc I would called that violent rhetoric, and seeing how we have not seen a single condemnation of the shooter besides cruz saying he will pray for the victims.
Many are terrible. So are used car salesmen and librarians. Thats not violent rhetoric unless you live in make believe lala land.
Ustrello wrote: When you get republicans everyday calling PP terrible people etc I would called that violent rhetoric, and seeing how we have not seen a single condemnation of the shooter besides cruz saying he will pray for the victims.
You believe that calling people terrible is violent rhetoric?
In simple terms yes, when you have them saying that they are killing people and they deserve what is happening to them that is a passive violent rhetoric.
So then the entire Democratic party is violent, as they constantly are saying republicans are bad people. This definition is stupid.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/29 21:13:55
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
Jihadin wrote: For gawdsake...a "video". Last time a video was involved cause a shooting match at Benghazi. The riot/attack was inspired by a "video" on the US Consulate so sayeth Obama and HRC. Let's leave the....amateur BS video's out of this. One nutjob "inspired" by a video concerning PP and the other video with satire on Muslims "inspired" a bunch of individuals to kill a US Diplomat with security detail.
It's not just a video, it's how people treated that video. Remember the republican debate where everyone was talking about how awful it was, complete with blatant lying about its contents to make the pro-choice side look even more evil?
People are idiots Brother...both side....Hell in general everyone can be idiots. Is it confirmed this asshat was inspired by said video? I rather wait a few more days and see what comes up. For all we know he's using the video to say he was inspired to do it and later claim Insanity for defense during his trial. Religous insanity..(can't spell). His star witness to confirm his train of thought was the shape the mustard spread on his ham sammich. Cross Examination should be fun
Police are saying he's just kind of rambling.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
jasper76 wrote: Planned Parenthood directly compared to Iran's nuclear ambitions.
I'm assuming you didn't watch the video because it doesn't say what you think it does. She did not compare PP to Iran's nuclear ambitions. What she said was that she wanted to discuss something that, in her words, affected the moral character of the US and something that affected the security of the US. There was no comparison.
There was also no violent rhetoric towards PP.
Her quote: "I'd like to link these two issues, both of which are incredibly important: Iran and Planned Parenthood."
I didn't link these two issues, I'm still not sure what the purported link is even after hearing her statement. Perhaps you can enlighten me here??
From the video all I get are "these two issues..." I'd like to see what the question was she's responding to. Regardless of the question I'm not seeing any comparison between the two direct or otherwise.
"Holy Sh*&, you've opened my eyes and changed my mind about this topic, thanks Dakka OT!"
Here is the relevant portion of the transcript. Bash's question to Christie is in reference to shutting down the government over Planned Parenthood funding. Fiorina interjects, linking Iran to Planned Parenthood. Perhaps this is simply a rhetorical maneuver so she could display her hawkishness on Iran, but they'd been discussing Planned Parenthood for a while at this point in the debate. Still wondering what the link is...
CHRISTIE: No, no, it’s really important, Dana. We got to talk about what we would be willing to shut down for. Why don’t we put tax reform on this president’s desk, and make him veto it if that’s what he wants to do? Why haven’t we repealed and replaced Obamacare?
Make him veto if that’s what he wants to do.
BASH: We’re talking about Planned Parenthood right now.
CHRISTIE: And why don’t we do the same thing with Planned Parenthood?
BASH: Can you answer yes or no?
CHRISTIE: We elected a Republican Congress to do this. And they should be doing it, and they’re not. And they’re giving the president a pass.
FIORINA: Dana, I’d like to…
BASH: One more time. I’m sorry, I just want to get the answer.
CHRISTIE: I put it in the list, Dana. We should be doing these things and forcing the president to take action.
BASH: So you would support a shutdown.
CHRISTIE: Let’s force him to do what he says he’s going to do. Now I don’t know whether he’ll do it or not, but let’s force him to do it.
FIORINA: Dana, I would like to link these two issues, both of which are incredibly important, Iran and Planned Parenthood.
One has something to do with the defense of the security of this nation. The other has something to do with the defense of the character of this nation. You have not heard a plan about Iran from any politician up here, here is my plan. On day one in the Oval Office, I will make two phone calls, the first to my good friend to Bibi Netanyahu to reassure him we will stand with the state of Israel.
The second, to the supreme leader, to tell him that unless and until he opens every military and every nuclear facility to real anytime, anywhere inspections by our people, not his, we, the United States of America, will make it as difficult as possible and move money around the global financial system.
We can do that, we don’t need anyone’s cooperation to do it. And every ally and every adversary we have in this world will know that the United States in America is back in the leadership business, which is how we must stand with our allies.
As regards Planned Parenthood, anyone who has watched this videotape, I dare Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama to watch these tapes. Watch a fully formed fetus on the table, it’s heart beating, it’s legs kicking while someone says we have to keep it alive to harvest its brain.
This is about the character of our nation, and if we will not stand up in and force President Obama to veto this bill, shame on us.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/29 22:06:00
Ah, so she's linking them as issues that O is not being held to the fire over (in their opinions ). Yeah... your definition of "direct comparison " needs a bit of re-examining.
"Holy Sh*&, you've opened my eyes and changed my mind about this topic, thanks Dakka OT!"
SlaveToDorkness wrote: Ah, so she's linking them as issues that O is not being held to the fire over (in their opinions ). Yeah... your definition of "direct comparison " needs a bit of re-examining.
And yes, I think it's clear no one here is calling anyone literally Hitler.
