More of the new "civility" from the Left---> Death Threats against Republicans.

[BT]

My entire point in this entire thread  reduced to  bumper sticker simple is:

Buyer beware.

With all due respect....that's kind of a given.  And still doesn't get you off the hook of jumping in with a defensive posture for Xo, when he was justifying the threats with his Walker started it crud

Where did i agree with XO about Walker?

[sirs]

I didn't say agree, I said took a defensive posture.  Specifically here, when I was concurring with C on Xo's use of rhetoric, in justifying the threats

[BT]

defensive posture?

What the hell does that mean?

Replying to a post of yours now assumes a defensive posture aligned with someone else.

Please.

this is what i took issue with:

Are you justifying threats, intimidation, vile signs,
and uncivil tactics because someone has a different
opinion?

It was bolded and everything.

[sirs]

defensive posture?

What the hell does that mean?

It means precisely what it ways.....you immediately jumped in, defending Xo's justyfying death threats

this is what i took issue with:

Are you justifying threats, intimidation, vile signs,
and uncivil tactics because someone has a different
opinion?

It was bolded and everything.

Exactly.  You're catching on finally.  If Xo hadn't of claimed "Walker started it", and continued to opine along those lines, then you'd have a rhetorical leg to stand on.  THAT was the point C & I were referencing.  THAT was the point you jumped in.  NOT that we had some inner knowledge that these threats were 100% factually emminating from the left.  I'd even go so far as to guess that C, like me, wouldn't support such rhetoric if it was coming from the right, aimed at Dem congresscritters that supported & passed Obamacare, regardless if Obama/Pelosi/Reid "started it"

[BT]

So the bolding to clarify what i was taking issue with was just so much crayon markings on a wall?

And i never jumped in justifying death threats. I simply stated we did not know who was making the email death threats from the information provided.

And we still don't.

[Christians4LessGvt]

And we still don't.

"we"?

You may not know, but I do....I cant prove it....but I know.

Just like I can't "prove" I love someone, but I do.

[sirs]

So the bolding to clarify what i was taking issue with was just so much crayon markings on a wall?

Are you PURPOSELY avoiding the point? being obtuse?, or being a twit just for the sake of being a twit?  Your "taking issue with what was bolded" is precisely why you're getting raked over the coals, on this issue

And i never jumped in justifying death threats.

You jumped in almost directly following my concurrence with C of how Xo was justyfying them

I simply stated we did not know who was making the email death threats from the information provided.....And we still don't.

Which is AGAIN IRRELEVENT to the point of the threats being justifyed in the 1st place, regardless of the who

[Plane]

  I think it best be clear that" our " side doesn't employ or accept unfair threats.
   It should be clear that the truth is "good " for being told.
   And lies , however clever, not.

  That is more important even than fingerpointing after the threat is made.

    I wonder what Twana Brawley thought she was accomplishing, when she made herself infamous, I don't really know but I would like to.

[BT]

Where did XO justify threats?

Walker started this crap.

Anyone with a computer can send e-mail, and it is every bit as likely that this was done by some demented rightwing asshole as by anyone on the left.

No justification that i can see.

And where did i defend him for justifying threats. .

And though both you and CU want to think you know who sent the email, you really don't, you simply have your suspicions.

So unless you can show where he justified threats i have no choice but to question your honesty or your reading skills.

[Plane]

  Should there be someone in charge of repudiating threats?

    Ought to be on officer of each party. Master at arms or something.

[sirs]

Where did XO justify threats?

Walker started this crap.

No justification that i can see.

You're apparently blinded, as you just answered your own question.  By choice or by ignorance, that remains to be determined

Anyone with a computer can send e-mail, and it is every bit as likely that this was done by some demented rightwing asshole as by anyone on the left.

The trailing Xo commentary was his recognition that he got caught, but apparently ego was too great to correct the "Walker started it" justification

And where did i defend him for justifying threats. .

By jumping in precisely as that point was being made

And though both you and CU want to think you know who sent the email, you really don't, you simply have your suspicions.

Yea....and??  Irrevelent to the justifying of death threats

So unless you can show where he justified threats i have no choice but to question your honesty or your reading skills.

Did so....adnauseum.  Your choice to ignore is yours alone

[BT]

Saying Walker was responsible for the conflict does not justify threats.

Any more than the dems passage of ObamaCare would justify a Tea Partier hurling racial epithets at John Lewis.

or are you now claiming otherwise.

[sirs]

Saying Walker was responsible for the conflict does not justify threats.

The hell it doesn't.  It was in direct response to the threats being made.  If it was stated at some other time, in some other contect, then yea, perhaps.  But that's not when it happened or when it was said.  This need to disagree with sirs for the sake of disagreeing with sirs is getting pretty ridiculous

Any more than the dems passage of ObamaCare would justify a Tea Partier hurling racial epithets at John Lewis.

It doesn't justify it there either, even if it did happen, precisely as Lewis alledged. 

[BT]

Saying Walker was responsible for the conflict does not justify threats.

The hell it doesn't.  It was in direct response to the threats being made.  If it was stated at some other time, in some other contect, then yea, perhaps.  But that's not when it happened or when it was said.  This need to disagree with sirs for the sake of disagreeing with sirs is getting pretty ridiculous

Oh cry me a river. Mommy Mommy BT is picking on me. Wah wah. What i am pointing out is your serious deficiencies in reading for content and context.

Any more than the dems passage of ObamaCare would justify a Tea Partier hurling racial epithets at John Lewis.

It doesn't justify it there either, even if it did happen, precisely as Lewis alledged.

Exactly. and nowhere in the statement that XO made did he claim it did.

CU was the first to bring up justifying threats.

BTW did Walker and the GOP initiate the legislation that brought the unions to the Capitol?

Do the unions have a right to assembly and to protest government actions?

What they don't have a right to do is take the law into their own hands, and i don't see where XO said they did.

[sirs]

Saying Walker was responsible for the conflict does not justify threats.

The hell it doesn't.  It was in direct response to the threats being made.  If it was stated at some other time, in some other contect, then yea, perhaps.  But that's not when it happened or when it was said.  This need to disagree with sirs for the sake of disagreeing with sirs is getting pretty ridiculous

What i am pointing out is your serious deficiencies in reading for content and context.

Pot, see kettle

Any more than the dems passage of ObamaCare would justify a Tea Partier hurling racial epithets at John Lewis.

It doesn't justify it there either, even if it did happen, precisely as Lewis alledged.

Exactly. and nowhere in the statement that XO made did he claim it did.

CU was the first to bring up justifying threats.

And Xo IMMEDIATELY responded to CU's reference with Walker started it, thus justifying it.  It's a timing thing Bt.  If you can't grasp that, I can't help you.  And I never claimed that Xo brought it up, merely that his immediate comments justifyed the acts.  So why you had a need to provide yet another deflection effort demonstrates the straws you are continually grasping at

BTW did Walker and the GOP initiate the legislation that brought the unions to the Capitol?

yea....and?  IF Xo was responding to THAT and not responding to threats being made, then you'd have that proverbial rhetorical leg to stand on. 

What they (unions) don't have a right to do is take the law into their own hands, and i don't see where XO said they did.

Of course you don't.  You can't.  Sirs & Cu4 said he did, and sirs must be wrong.  Walker having started it was never really said....yea, thats it, it never happened.  Its a figment of all our imaginations.