How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 The Alley
 Peace Loving Progressives in Action   [ Page: 1  2  3  ]
 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

Peace Loving Progressives in Action

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


50 posted 02-08-2011 09:39 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Very well, Bob. I will address your points, which you claim you stick to the facts and the issues. I didn't respond before because it will simply turn into anther culebra (Spanish for soap opera) in which you will respond, I will respond to your response, you will respond to mine and, when one doesn't continue the responses, the other will say "Why aren't you responding to my responses?"


With regards to the New Yorker,Bob, that was simply my comment, my opinion to something that was brought up by someone else. Why should I want to waste my time discussing it with the New Yorker? If you were to express an opinion that Lady Gaga had a lousy voice, does that mean you would want to hop a plane so you could tell her directly? I really don't care what the New Yorker has to say. I'm free to read it or ignore it, as I choose.

I understand that you might have found my comments unsatisfactory in some way, but suggesting that I had some sort of personal flaw did not, to me, seem like a response that actually addressed the nature of the discussion. Actually, it seemed to address what you dislike about liberal politics and perhaps about me.

I'msorry, Bob, but I don't follow that. I said nothing about a personal flaw in you...actually, I've done my best (and fairly well, I think) not making my comments too personnel. I did say that I couldn't understand your way of thinking. Is that the flaw you refer to?

I tried my best to offer the sort of examples that you'd specifically asked for, and I notice that you haven't responded to my attempt to carry on that thread of the conversation. Your really did quite literally ask for the response, so I'm puzzled why you haven't responded to the response that was offered. Did you find the responses offensive in some fashion — I made every attempt to keep them factual and well modulated.

Very well, Bob, I will be happy to do so and let's discover together how factual and well-modulated they are...

Former Governor Palin published a hit list of people whom she thought should be voted out of office. Her rhetoric on the subject was very inflammatory. She characterized these folks as targets. I do think she was somewhat taken aback when a psycho with no discernable party affiliation started to open fire on the congresswoman in Arizona, but I also believe her rhetoric was not helpful.

What rhetoric do you refer to as being "very inflammatory"? Produce it, please, and show me one that can match "If they bring a knife, you bring a gun." The bullseyes were used by democrats before Palin was even in the public eye....and I feel confident you know that they mean nothing having to do with violence. When a psycho..., you say? Exactly right...a psycho, and having nothing to do with Palin's comments, which almost everyone from the left from the President down has acknowledged...with the exception of a few far left wackos looking for any excuse to sling mud.

In fact, the notion that the president is not a citizen is in itself a notion that is designed to de-legitimize the government, isn't it?, though it's presented in terms that are difficult to disallow in any open-minded discussion.

No, it is a notion to de-legimitize Obama. Open-minded discussion? Sure, bring it on. So many people saying a birth certificate exists and so many people not being able to produce it...sure seems a little strange that a little certificate can be so elusive, doesn't it? But that doesn't matter to me? Am I a birther? Maybe, if I thought about it lonf enough but it's not going to get Obama out of office so why bother? The major conservative talk show hosts treat it the same way, as a basic non-issue.

The entire notion of the tea party harks back to the basic metaphor of the Boston Tea Party, doesn't it? Lest it escape notice, this was one of the initial violent acts that led to the Revolution. That is the metaphor that the right wing of the Republican Party has been using for at least the past two years.

Since the original Tea Party had violence in it, then it is not suitable to be used as a metaphor? Really....?

On your second point, regarding the second amendment, we are in agreement on much of it. I, too, would like to see illegal arms off the streets. I would like to see automatic weapons gone, too, includine Ouzis and AR-15's, along with the rest. It's simply a question of how and who is pulling the trigger (pun). Therein lies the rub. Many people do not trust giving that right to the government of the moment (any moment).

The demonstration last year, I believe, in Washington by ome of the tea party folks has to be rescheduled mto Virginia because of the Washington firearms laws. That suggests that there were several people with guns. That's one example.

Guns and political events are probably not a great combination. Guns and booze are not a great combination. Guns and adreneline should probably be avoided as well, even with experienced shooters.

I think that's what you may be talking about, but I'm not certain.


Thisis your comment, Bob...I simply want to try to keep this about the facts and the issues....and then you refer to what something "suggests" to you. I see nothing in the above comment that is factual, only what is suggestible. I contend that what is suggestible to you is whatever supports what you would like for it to suggest. There have been no issues about guns at tea-party rallies, no shots fired, no massacres, no threats. Just as stating that palin using bullseyes "suggests" to you that there could be a connection with the Tucson shooting, it is without fact or merit.

Does the left wing encourage people to show up to demonstrations carrying firearms?

Does the right wing? If so, please show me where. Once again, you are producing something non-factual.

As far as the tapes, it is very interesting that, in issues involving the right, you want to see proof. In issues involving the left, you don't, such as the infamous spitting incident, an issue that not one of hundreds of reporters saw, no one video taped and was never proven, along with the racial slurs that no one heard. You were satisfied that all those things happened, without any verification at all. Yet, in this video, you do an about-face and condemn it as having the possibility of being non-factual....nice to have it both ways.

I am still shaking me head at, in a thread showing lefties yelling to kill a supreme court justice and his family, string up or send the black man back to the fields where he belongs, and other comments of violence and crimes, you bring up issues trying to portray how violent the right is. I would think it would have been simple, and proper, to say something like, "If the video is valid, then these people were out of line". Neither of you could even say that.....and, to me, that says it all.

Have a nice day....

Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


51 posted 02-08-2011 06:11 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     I did go back and look at the initial video you wanted folks to see.  I didn't like people talking about their violent fantasies on camera that way, and I can tell you didn't either.  I don't particularly like my own violence and my need to deal with that either.

     What you see in these tapes, however, is what a psychologically savvy viewer would call "pulling for the negative transference."  That is, the interviewer is looking to find and to get the client to vent feelings of anger, though, in the psychiatric interview, the interviewer often directs the feeling  toward him/herself.  The idea is to give the client some relief against their own attacks against themselves.  These often show up as depression.

     One of the ways you can tell the same technique, or one close to it, was being used was by watching what happened in this case once the folks being interviewed were able to vent some of their helplessness and rage by  sharing the angry fantasies.  In all cases that I recall, each of the folks laughed, and their mood shifted and got lighter.

     In each case, the interviewer was encouraging the folks to express a "What if" scenario, and not to talk about what the really sought or what their plans were or what their hopes were.  When assessing for violence clinically, you'd want to look for some of these factors.

     You'll notice in at least one or two of the interviews that the folks had no wish to express these thoughts and did so only after being pushed into doing so.

     This doesn't mean that the peace loving progressives didn't or don't have angry or violent parts to their personalities; almost everybody does.  It does mean that these parts were not there on the surface, ready to be expressed spontaneously, at the drop of a hat, which is the way that it appears to me that you were presenting them.

     This is in contrast with the spontaneous appearance of these thoughts and feelings in the last Republican Senatorial candidate from Nevada, who spoke frequently of "Second Amendment remedies," and in contrast to the folks being interviewed in the video clips at the beginning of the thread, grew very silent and closed mouthed when asked to expand upon what she meant.

     Spontaneous emergence of violent material is somewhat different than its emergence when being probed for.  Emergence of the material after being probed for following a quick burst of relief, signified by the laughter, suggests that the material was being integrated in a reasonably healthy fashion.  The dead silence and the refusal to allow exploration or resolution is suggestive of a somewhat different structure.

     You should not take my word for this.  I am simply giving you a somewhat professional response; I am not trying to sell you on it.  

     As I recall, your request was for, however, examples of provocative and somewhat violent elements in Republican campaigning during the last election cycle.  I am repeating and amplifying myself by bringing up the "second amendment solutions" in this little comment, since I brought them up before.

     You wished me to be more specific about Ms Palin:
 http://www.businessinsider.com/sarah-palin-has-not-deleted-reload-tweet-or-facebook-note-2011-1
http://firedoglake.com/2011/01/08/giffords-opponent-jesse-kelly-held-june-event-to-shoot-a-fully-automatic-m16-to-get-on-target-and-remove-gabrielle-giffords/


     These are only in reference to the most recent stuff with Ms. Palin, since that seems to be what google is clotted with right now.  If you'd like to look further back, you might try that yourself, since I regard the material she spoke about during the presidential election as pretty much a given and fairly well established by now.  At the time, the presidential candidate was forced to try to clean up after some of her comments.  Isn't that part of where she got her reputation for going Rogue?  She actually glories in being outrageous.  My current thrill about her use of the term "Blood Libel" is on the muted side.

     The attempts for Ms. Gifford's Republican rival for the congressional seat seemed provocative to me as well; fund-raising by offering to shoot a fully automatic weapon with the candidate seems to me to be in less than a bipartisan tradition.  It doesn't seem to argue for a Kinder, gentler and less violent society.  I'm a guy who'd actually like to do some shooting from time to time, to see if my regular tremor has gotten any better, and to endanger paper targets.  I'd feel that paying to shoot an assault rifle with a candidate might be sending something of a dangerous message in as uncivil an age as ours.  I'm just saying.  I also suspect that there have been an occasional pro-violence provocative message being sent in the ranks of the Right that you'd be more aware of than I would be.

     Respectfully, Bob Kaven
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


52 posted 02-08-2011 08:41 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Very interesting, Bob, and I appreciate your taking the time and effort to try to explain in layman's terms. I would certainly not try to debate this clinical analysis, being a sometimes poet who kills bugs and hits golf balls and not a professional in the field, as you are. There are a couple of points that put questions in my mind, however.

If I were to interview you and try to get you to acknowledge that you hate your father or have dreams of raping your neighbor, how much luck would I have? Not much, I'll wager, if those thoughts were never in your mind, even as fantasies. The interviewer was certainly trying to goad them a bit, I'll agrree, but he didn't say things like "Would you like to kill Clarence Thomas?" They themselves brought up that scenario. Another fellow chimed in to add andother supreme court justice and the woman jumped in to say she wanted the same thing to happen to Thomas's wife. Obviously these feeling had to be present somewhere in whatever they call a mind. Another fellow said, "Send Clarence Thomas back to the fields where he belongs." I don't see how there is any doubt that that remark is racial and the man is a bigot. I can't buy it, Bob. If they were to respond with, "kick them all out of office" or something like that, I'd go along with you....but murder them? If that thought were never in their mind, how did it come out?

Emergence of the material after being probed for following a quick burst of relief, signified by the laughter, suggests that the material was being integrated in a reasonably healthy fashion

Excuse me? They spoke of murdering a man and his wife and it was excusable because they did it in a healthy  fashion? I must be misinterpreting your thoughts there. Yes, they giggled like schoolchildren because they knew they were being naughty like schoolchildren. Are they a good representation of liberals....people who walk around with fantasies of murder and giggle after admitting it? I must say I find it interesting that when liberals speak of committing atrocities you call them "sharing angry fantasies". Do you do the same for conservatives? Not from what I have seen, sir.

As far as Palin's comments are concerned, I see nothing new in your link, except it is from a liberal rag aiming it's rhetoric at like-minded souls. Did you read the comments under the article? If those are the types of people you like to be linked with, then good for you. There is nothing nefarious about using terms like targeting or aiming, unless you want to twist it to mean what you want it to mean. As I said, the targets were used by democrats before Palin got into town. How do you feel about that? For that matter, how do you feel about fans who scream "Kill the ump!"? Should they be arrested and charged with attempting to incite murder?

I also suspect that there have been an occasional pro-violence provocative message being sent in the ranks of the Right

You suspect, Bob? So you have gone from fact to suspicion?  Or perhaps that is some attempt to justify the comments in the video? Sorry...in my book, there is no justification, as there was no justification in the "Kill Bush" signs that were prevalent in liberal rallies during Bush's term. I would say the same about any conservative who spoke of killing Obama.

Sorry, but I see your analysis as an attempt to justify the unjustifiable.

Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


53 posted 02-08-2011 10:52 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     I like that you don't take my word for it, Mike.  I would hope that you wouldn't, and it would be unfair for me to expect that you would.  I can't offer this stuff as an attempt to  tell you the way things are.  It's a discussion, and in a discussion we should be talking on equal footing.

     I appreciate your willingness to think about the material I laid out, and to play with it in a thoughtful way.  More than that is an unfair call upon your good will, and I won't ask that of you.

     The notion that everybody is trying to deal with this sort of material much or most of the time is difficult for many people to tolerate, in the same way that some of the basic Freudian material about about sexual impulses can be difficult to tolerate....

     I did explain the difference between more or less healthy and more or less unhealth ways of processing this material.  At no point did I suggest that it was likely that folks wouldn't have the material to deal with, and that it wasn't something the people have ongoing concerns with.  Folks with solid religious faith frequently have a bit of an advantage in processing this sort of thing; it's one of the things that religion is excellent in helping us tolerate and process.  

     While I don't have that sort of faith myself, I like to encourage it becauser it hel[ps people navigate the stresses that we must navigate in order to deal with our violent impulses  in reasonably straightforward ways.

     I did mention some of the Republican canidates and their reasonably well reported direct and indirect appeals to violent impulses.  "Second Amendment Solutions" were widely reported, and you should not be a stranger to the term or the the reportage about them.  

    

    
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


54 posted 02-08-2011 10:56 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     I am glad to see you would be upset by any right wing person who would suggest killing the president, left or right.  I believe we are in agreement on this, no matter which wing the president represented.  Out of such agreements, much can grow.
oceanvu2
Senior Member
since 02-24-2007
Posts 1007
Santa Monica, California, USA


55 posted 02-21-2011 02:17 PM       View Profile for oceanvu2   Email oceanvu2   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for oceanvu2

Well then, three cheers for Jan Brewer.  She no only says what she means, no satire or obfuscations, and her policies actually do kill people. Hurrah for integrity in government!

Best, Jimbeaux
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


56 posted 02-21-2011 04:09 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     Is there some policy of Ms. Brewer's you think I am supporting here, Jim?
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


57 posted 02-21-2011 04:11 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

her policies kill people....brilliant statement.
oceanvu2
Senior Member
since 02-24-2007
Posts 1007
Santa Monica, California, USA


58 posted 02-21-2011 04:29 PM       View Profile for oceanvu2   Email oceanvu2   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for oceanvu2

Hi Deer --  I only make brilliant statements, but thanks for noticing Oh, and I was referrinng to her support for letting transplant patients die as a cost cutting measure.

Hi Bob:  Nah, I wasn't referring to any particular remark of yours.  Sometimes I just get annoyed at the general lunacy that crops up in these forums.  Pure Alice in Wonderland stuff. Or maybe it's just the shoot first ask questions later approach.

Jimbeaux

Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


59 posted 03-18-2011 05:13 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/262428/death-threats-dozens-deroy-murdock?page=1


.
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


60 posted 03-18-2011 07:10 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

Lovely civilized people.
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


61 posted 03-18-2011 07:44 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=267389
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


62 posted 03-19-2011 03:19 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     Gotta say, I don't care who makes death threats, they're still wrong.  If a liberal makes a death threat, it's as wrong as a conservative making a death threat.  

     Considering that I'm the only poster to have addressed that directly and I can only guess that this might be the issue that John and Denise are trying to talk about in this revitalized thread, I point out that the comments made in one of the columns suggest that liberals don't care about repayment of debt.  I'd like to point out that I made several comments about this very issue when the debt was being run up in the Bush administration.  I said that it would have to be repaid and that the longer we waited, the more unpleasant it would be.  I got nothing but disagreement for my troubles.

     I would also like to point out that the first order of business in Wisconsin after the seating of the Republican majority was to pass a tax cut for businesses and the very very wealthy amounting to about a billion and a half dollars, putting the state into a severe deficit.  All the various cuts they have been attempting to pass since have not even begun to pay for it, and have come out of the pockets of the poor and the middle class.  The Union busting is merely another attempt to dismantle middle and working class protections against the depredations of the super rich whose lickspittles the Republicans appear to be in this case.

     Much the same is happening in Michigan, except the funding for the tax cuts to corporations and the very very very rich are being funded by tax increases on the poor and on the elderly, and by an attempt to take the right of voter self determination away from any municipality that the governor deems financially in difficulty.  The criteria for that are in the governor's hands.

     While I condemn death threats, I believe that the cost of cream pies ought to be lowered or even subsidized in these states, and classes in cream pie flinging ought to be encouraged.

     I want to know where the Tea Party indignation is about this bushwa.  I want to know why honest Republicans think that this sort of thing  makes any sense at all?
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


63 posted 03-20-2011 09:45 AM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.


"While I condemn death threats, I . . ."


I condemn death threats.


.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


64 posted 03-20-2011 07:07 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     Thank you, John.  Sometimes the rhetoric gets in the way of basic agreement and underlying humanity.  It's good to see that confirmed.

     Coconut cream?  Banana Cream?
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


65 posted 03-20-2011 07:31 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

I understand your meaning, John.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


66 posted 03-21-2011 09:53 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     But do you join him, Mike?
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


67 posted 03-21-2011 10:25 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

In believing that the phrase "I condemn death threats" should not be preceded by a conditional word?

Absolutely.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


68 posted 03-22-2011 04:45 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



quote:

Gotta say, I don't care who makes death threats, they're still wrong.

 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> The Alley >> Peace Loving Progressives in Action   [ Page: 1  2  3  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors