• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Good shot, Senator

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
251,152
Reaction score
75,621
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Anti-Gun Senator Shoots Intruder

Not sure what to say here. Happy that he was able to defend himself? Angry that he feels he is above laws he would enact?
Lots of gun banning dems have guns themselves. They don't hate guns-they hate gun owners who don't vote for socialists and liberals
 

Woodman909

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 28, 2013
Messages
1,285
Reaction score
565
Location
Southwest AZ
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Anti-Gun Senator Shoots Intruder

Not sure what to say here. Happy that he was able to defend himself? Angry that he feels he is above laws he would enact?
I bet he gets his gun back before Zimmerman gets his. I also await AG Holder's speech to charge him with a civil rights violation. Yeah... that will happen.
 

Goshin

The Hammer of Chaos
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 16, 2009
Messages
45,510
Reaction score
50,093
Location
Dixie
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
One law for the common man, another for the elite. Shocking huh.
 

notquiteright

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 20, 2012
Messages
16,843
Reaction score
5,819
Location
okla-freakin-homa
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
snopes.com: Anti-Gun Senator Shoots Intruder

I googled the case because the source seemed fishy. This apparently happened 4 years ago, and the guy isn't as anti-gun as the OP claims.
Just goes to show how knee jerk, low information some self proclaimed 2nd A advocates are and how quick they are to believe whatever dribble comes across the interwebz.

State Senator Soles has received an NRA B rating til 2002 and then A's til 2008. More than not as anti-gun nut as the OP claims, he got a pretty damn good rating.

Well ok, maybe not, I just looked up Willard, he got a B rating as well and signed the Mass AW ban rewrite in 2004. :shock: Firingline website.
 

Anagram

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2011
Messages
8,856
Reaction score
5,411
Location
St. Louis MO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
snopes.com: Anti-Gun Senator Shoots Intruder

I googled the case because the source seemed fishy. This apparently happened 4 years ago, and the guy isn't as anti-gun as the OP claims.
I thought I remembered hearing something like that awhile ago, and it turned out to misrepresent what the real views were.

Whether or not this particular person was a hypocrite though does not change whether or not it any gun control policy is good or bad.
 

Republic Now!

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 3, 2012
Messages
2,671
Reaction score
1,075
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Just goes to show how knee jerk, low information some self proclaimed 2nd A advocates are and how quick they are to believe whatever dribble comes across the interwebz.
Um, that tendency applies to everyone.

State Senator Soles has received an NRA B rating til 2002 and then A's til 2008. More than not as anti-gun nut as the OP claims, he got a pretty damn good rating.

Well ok, maybe not, I just looked up Willard, he got a B rating as well and signed the Mass AW ban rewrite in 2004. :shock: Firingline website.
I'll have to look into this senator more.

I thought I remembered hearing something like that awhile ago, and it turned out to misrepresent what the real views were.

Whether or not this particular person was a hypocrite though does not change whether or not it any gun control policy is good or bad.
True. Its speaks to the character of the individual person, not the argument they make.
 

notquiteright

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 20, 2012
Messages
16,843
Reaction score
5,819
Location
okla-freakin-homa
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Um, that tendency applies to everyone.
Laffin, not everyone, perhaps every partisan hack... ;) but it is fun to watch the Pavlovian response, ring the dinner bell and the usual suspects start drooling. Almost template in the responses- elite hypocrites, gun grabbing socialists and the like.

So much for heeding the sage advice of the Patron Saint of the new GOP coalition- trust but verify. guess there is no need to verify something you want so deeply to be true.... :peace
 

Anagram

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2011
Messages
8,856
Reaction score
5,411
Location
St. Louis MO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Laffin, not everyone, perhaps every partisan hack... ;) but it is fun to watch the Pavlovian response, ring the dinner bell and the usual suspects start drooling. Almost template in the responses- elite hypocrites, gun grabbing socialists and the like.

So much for heeding the sage advice of the Patron Saint of the new GOP coalition- trust but verify. guess there is no need to verify something you want so deeply to be true.... :peace
I've seen people of either side doing this sort of thing. When someone posts something on this site, unless the claim is extremely outlandish, its generally believed to be true until somebody posts something refuting it, especially by the side of the original poster. I think that's just a human trait, finding it much easier to accept something we want to be true, and holding it against one group is following a similar strand of logic.
 

Republic Now!

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 3, 2012
Messages
2,671
Reaction score
1,075
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Laffin, not everyone, perhaps every partisan hack... ;) but it is fun to watch the Pavlovian response, ring the dinner bell and the usual suspects start drooling. Almost template in the responses- elite hypocrites, gun grabbing socialists and the like.

So much for heeding the sage advice of the Patron Saint of the new GOP coalition- trust but verify. guess there is no need to verify something you want so deeply to be true.... :peace
Well, I should modify to say there are people who are quick to accept false information in all circles. The McConnell misquote about Obama being a one-term president has been brought up a thousand times on this forum despite how easy it is to refute.
 

Republic Now!

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 3, 2012
Messages
2,671
Reaction score
1,075
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I've seen people of either side doing this sort of thing. When someone posts something on this site, unless the claim is extremely outlandish, its generally believed to be true until somebody posts something refuting it, especially by the side of the original poster. I think that's just a human trait, finding it much easier to accept something we want to be true, and holding it against one group is following a similar strand of logic.
OR accepting something that is in line with what we believe. Confirmation bias is both very common and very dangerous.
 

SMTA

Ketsu no anna
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 22, 2012
Messages
32,670
Reaction score
7,752
Location
OH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Hypocrisy transcends time.
 

notquiteright

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 20, 2012
Messages
16,843
Reaction score
5,819
Location
okla-freakin-homa
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
I've seen people of either side doing this sort of thing. When someone posts something on this site, unless the claim is extremely outlandish, its generally believed to be true until somebody posts something refuting it, especially by the side of the original poster. I think that's just a human trait, finding it much easier to accept something we want to be true, and holding it against one group is following a similar strand of logic.
Well let's see, the OP was at 8:02 and by 8:10 the 6th post was a snopes report by of all things a conservative. the report wasn't outlandish, just the pavlovians dogs heard their dinner bell and came a barking the usual crap, elite this and Holder that... :roll:

And the next time I jump on a topic without checking it out first, by all means do remind me of this. it was just very amusing to me that some who claim great intelligence, education and debate training bit so hard, a reflex action, without thought.

Allow me my moment... :peace
 

notquiteright

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 20, 2012
Messages
16,843
Reaction score
5,819
Location
okla-freakin-homa
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Well, I should modify to say there are people who are quick to accept false information in all circles. The McConnell misquote about Obama being a one-term president has been brought up a thousand times on this forum despite how easy it is to refute.
Well how much the Senator McConnell quote is a misquote or a letting the cat out of the bag can be debated (I recall watching his stuttering attempt to extend and modify his comments)- the OP that started this was just flat out crap on a cracker. Perhaps we can agree in this case the usual suspects proved your theory to a 'T'.
 

Republic Now!

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 3, 2012
Messages
2,671
Reaction score
1,075
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Well how much the Senator McConnell quote is a misquote or a letting the cat out of the bag can be debated (I recall watching his stuttering attempt to extend and modify his comments)- the OP that started this was just flat out crap on a cracker. Perhaps we can agree in this case the usual suspects proved your theory to a 'T'.
Well, considering the quote is cut and taken out of context, removing speech around it that completely refutes the point that is trying to be made with the quote, I'd say the only people who "contest" the misquote are one's who have fallen into the same trap as the OP.

Or who want to be dishonest for the sake of partisan hackery.
 

notquiteright

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 20, 2012
Messages
16,843
Reaction score
5,819
Location
okla-freakin-homa
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Well, considering the quote is cut and taken out of context, removing speech around it that completely refutes the point that is trying to be made with the quote, I'd say the only people who "contest" the misquote are one's who have fallen into the same trap as the OP. Or who want to be dishonest for the sake of partisan hackery.
Of course I have to disagree, you are stretching to try and make these two things similar- I suspect the Mitch muttle is a favorite talking point of yours.

Fact, Mitch did in fact say exactly that- your best comparison is BrietBart highly edited Shirley Sherrod speech about her race moment. Both said a lot more, the rest of the story is left off. As I read the definition of misquote I'd say it wasn't a misquote, he did say that exactly, it was however taken out of context.

THIS however is yet another complete can of crap spam e-mail that gets drug in here from time to time without any fact checking. Not a too tight quote of the state senator, but a deliberate lie. What amused me was the self proclaimed 'x-spurts' on the 2nd A whipped out their usual lines about liberal elites and gun grabbers wanting to strip everyone but themselves.... yada yada yada. :roll:

It can and does happen in here, I just amused and had to point out how little some 'X-spurts' research the topic at hand and just wing it. For all some 'X-spurts' claim others are ill informed, knee jerk reactionaries, Pavlovian in fact- it did my heart good to see this thread unfold, then crash and burn. :peace
 

Republic Now!

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 3, 2012
Messages
2,671
Reaction score
1,075
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Of course I have to disagree, you are stretching to try and make these two things similar- I suspect the Mitch muttle is a favorite talking point of yours.
What talking point?

Fact, Mitch did in fact say exactly that-
No, he did not. He said the words, but the meaning is lost when you cut out the rest of the content, especially since what they're implying he meant by the words is completely refuted by the surrounding statements

your best comparison is BrietBart highly edited Shirley Sherrod speech about her race moment.
I have no idea what that is.

Both said a lot more, the rest of the story is left off. As I read the definition of misquote I'd say it wasn't a misquote, he did say that exactly, it was however taken out of context.
Alright, fine. His quote was taken out of context with the intention to deceptively misrepresent his comments, and many people, to this day, believe the deception, despite how east a refutation is to find on the internet.


THIS however is yet another complete can of crap spam e-mail that gets drug in here from time to time without any fact checking. Not a too tight quote of the state senator, but a deliberate lie.
It's a deliberate lie. Sorry, but when you cut out the bits that show that he meant something completely different and then say it's what he meant, it's a lie.

What amused me was the self proclaimed 'x-spurts' on the 2nd A whipped out their usual lines about liberal elites and gun grabbers wanting to strip everyone but themselves.... yada yada yada. :roll:
Yes, people tend to do that. Has nothing to do with being pro-2nd amendment. I'm pro-2nd amendment and I was the first to point out that the story was bogus. I also agree that many in power aren't against self defense for themselves (seeing that most have private security), they're only against self defense for the common folk.

It can and does happen in here, I just amused and had to point out how little some 'X-spurts' research the topic at hand and just wing it.
I don't think they researched this particular quote that well.

For all some 'X-spurts' claim others are ill informed, knee jerk reactionaries, Pavlovian in fact- it did my heart good to see this thread unfold, then crash and burn. :peace
Well, most pro-gun control people are ill informed, which is demonstrated by them continuously making points for which the evidence shows the opposite. If they don't like they're misinformed status to be pointed out to them, they should educate themselves on the reality, or, stop pushing for large reform which would impact millions of individuals.
 

MaggieD

Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,659
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
Just goes to show how knee jerk, low information some self proclaimed 2nd A advocates are and how quick they are to believe whatever dribble comes across the interwebz.

State Senator Soles has received an NRA B rating til 2002 and then A's til 2008. More than not as anti-gun nut as the OP claims, he got a pretty damn good rating.

Well ok, maybe not, I just looked up Willard, he got a B rating as well and signed the Mass AW ban rewrite in 2004. :shock: Firingline website.
Here's his rating from the NRA:

Snopes Senator Soles.jpg
 

Gonzo Rodeo

better late than pregnant
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 30, 2011
Messages
4,161
Reaction score
1,373
Location
Here
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Private
The snopes article also says he pleaded to misdemeanor assault. If he did nothing wrong, why didn't he let the court process see it all the way to the end? This also precipitated his resignation. Legislators resign to leave the scrutiny of the public eye.

I wonder what the full story is.
 

notquiteright

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 20, 2012
Messages
16,843
Reaction score
5,819
Location
okla-freakin-homa
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
What talking point? No, he did not. He said the words, but the meaning is lost when you cut out the rest of the content, especially since what they're implying he meant by the words is completely refuted by the surrounding statements I have no idea what that is. Alright, fine. His quote was taken out of context with the intention to deceptively misrepresent his comments, and many people, to this day, believe the deception, despite how east a refutation is to find on the internet. It's a deliberate lie. Sorry, but when you cut out the bits that show that he meant something completely different and then say it's what he meant, it's a lie. Yes, people tend to do that. Has nothing to do with being pro-2nd amendment. I'm pro-2nd amendment and I was the first to point out that the story was bogus. I also agree that many in power aren't against self defense for themselves (seeing that most have private security), they're only against self defense for the common folk. I don't think they researched this particular quote that well. Well, most pro-gun control people are ill informed, which is demonstrated by them continuously making points for which the evidence shows the opposite. If they don't like they're misinformed status to be pointed out to them, they should educate themselves on the reality, or, stop pushing for large reform which would impact millions of individuals.
The talking point is your favorite cannonball about the tight quote of Mitch which is taken out of context. you seem to have it polished well but it doesn't fit this cannon. A better match for mitch is Sherrod. Not all lies are the same. Mitch and Sherrod are out of context lies. The spam email is an outright fabrication. Both Mitch and Sherrod said the words in the quotes, the state senator has always had a B or better NRA rating, he is not virulent anti-'gun'.

See the difference. examples should be a bit tighter to be used as models. now for the spam email crap about the state senator something like the email going around claiming President Obama is a Muslim would work. Those are total fabrications vs taking what was said out of context.

I didn't wish to imply the 2nd Amendment makes sane men crazy. I too believe in the right to keep and bear. I do keep and bear. But there is a distinct pro 2nd A cliche here that is almost as rabid as a skunk walking down Main Street at high noon. These 'X-spurts' rise to the bait without a second thought and start whipping out 'elite' this and hypocrite that...

Now here we disagree- I'd say few 'in power' are against self defense, but self defense doesn't include the arsenal some of the more , ummm let's just call them ardent 2nd A promoters, claim they want/need/desire for self defense.

But again this isn't about the 2nd A debate but rather a classic spam lie brought in here without the OP checking for accuracy and the knee jerk response from a few 'x-spurts'. I understand the 'they do it too' spin to deflect, but tell ya what, when a 'gun' grabber brings a complete lie spam email in - have at 'em Sir, have at 'em! :peace
 

Republic Now!

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 3, 2012
Messages
2,671
Reaction score
1,075
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
The talking point is your favorite cannonball about the tight quote of Mitch which is taken out of context.
Huh? Okay, since it's my favorite, show me other times that I've used it. Maybe just one more. I brought it up because this thread reminded me of it. The only other time I've ever mentioned it was when I refuted the initial quote because after doing some minor research it became extremely obvious how deceptive the quote was.

you seem to have it polished well
Oh yeah, I talk about it every day. I have an entire notepad about the issue, which I'm obsessed with. I spent every waking hour thinking about the McConnell quote. It's really my entire life.

but it doesn't fit this cannon.
Sure, it's an easily falsifiable lie which a large group of people choose to believe.

A better match for mitch is Sherrod.
I still don't know what that is, likely because it's not referenced repeatedly by people like the McConnell one is. I don't even know who Sherrod is.

Not all lies are the same. Mitch and Sherrod are out of context lies. The spam email is an outright fabrication.
The narrative created by the McConnel quote is a fabrication. You're grasping at straws, for seemingly no reason.

Both Mitch and Sherrod said the words in the quotes, the state senator has always had a B or better NRA rating, he is not virulent anti-'gun'.
McConnel never said making Obama a one-term president was his only goal, that is a lie that is fabricated by the people who continuously quote it. If you can't see the parallels between the two then I can't help you.

See the difference. examples should be a bit tighter to be used as models. now for the spam email crap about the state senator something like the email going around claiming President Obama is a Muslim would work. Those are total fabrications vs taking what was said out of context.
I get it. You can't stand that people on your side engage in an activity you don't like. I'm sorry, but it's the same in the relevant context. It being spam email is not relevant, it's grasping at straws because you want to make this a right-wing issue. The OP wasn't even a spam email, it was some guy's site.

I didn't wish to imply the 2nd Amendment makes sane men crazy. I too believe in the right to keep and bear. I do keep and bear. But there is a distinct pro 2nd A cliche here that is almost as rabid as a skunk walking down Main Street at high noon. These 'X-spurts' rise to the bait without a second thought and start whipping out 'elite' this and hypocrite that...
Do you think those who push to take away your right to self defense will willingly give up their private security teams on the same ethic?

Now here we disagree- I'd say few 'in power' are against self defense, but self defense doesn't include the arsenal some of the more , ummm let's just call them ardent 2nd A promoters, claim they want/need/desire for self defense.
You can't arbitrarily restrict the 2nd amendment and reasonably call it a right. It has nothing to do with "needing" certain weapons, it has to do with justifying taking them away. What's a right if you can't at least expect a rational justification for it's restrictions? We may as well say "You don't NEED anti-American speech for the first amendment. Now, I'm a pro-first amendment person. I say political things like 'god bless the USA' all the time, but I don't agree with these nuts who say you have to be able to disagree with me in order to have free speech! There's still some things you can say!"

But again this isn't about the 2nd A debate but rather a classic spam lie brought in here without the OP checking for accuracy and the knee jerk response from a few 'x-spurts'. I understand the 'they do it too' spin to deflect, but tell ya what, when a 'gun' grabber brings a complete lie spam email in - have at 'em Sir, have at 'em! :peace
Well, I already presented an example that applies to the other side. You grasp at straws to refute it, saying it only counts if its a spam email. I can point to plenty of lies the pro-gun control people constantly go to, such as the notion that America has the highest crime rate of the 1st world, but that doesn't matter I guess because it wasn't EMAILED to them. Or maybe it was. I don't know. I don't get a lot of political spam.
 
Top Bottom