Or perhaps you are just wrong.
If you think that's what a follower is then you don't know the meaning of the word. Or do you seriously think that no one that believes in things that you don't can't think on their own?
As I said earlier, when the left stops using tragedies to advance thier anti-gun agenda's then I will stop doing so also. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
You're a follower of Alinsky's theory. It's kind of like saying those who support universal healthcare are socialists even if they don't actually support socialism.
And what is Alinsky's theory? Please provide quote and link please.
"Rule 10: The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative. Avoid being trapped by an opponent or an interviewer who says, "Okay, what would you do?"
This rule of Alinsky’s was paraphrased by the Obama’s Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, "never let a good crisis go to waste." Obama has used the oil spill crisis as an excuse to spew green rhetoric and promote his cap-and-trade bill.
Alinsky’s most useful tactic involves creating a good versus evil scenario. It is not about fixing the problem, it is about blaming someone -- in this case BP and their Chief Executive officer Tony Hayward. On June 12, Obama told British Prime Minister Cameron that BP would have to put $20 billion into an account to pay for "environmental and economic damages" caused from their spill. Less than a week later, Texas Rep. Joe Barton, of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, blasted Obama for forcing a private business to be the victim of a "$20 billion shakedown." Barton went on to say, "There is no question that BP is liable for the damages, but we have a due process system." Barton raises a good point but "due process" certainly would not have stopped Saul Alinsky and it will probably not stop Obama.
Saul Alinsky
You're an Alinskydrone if I've ever seen one. Your first reflex was to take advantage of the crisis.
A lot of people missed his point, he was pointing out what it looks like when someone jumps right out and makes a statement of that nature, it's a mimic technique. I see a lot of folks didn't like those statements, IOW, the point landed(I hope) with people who do make that statement when a politically charged issue goes straight to the gun control talking points. If I thought for a second that Kal was being serious with that statement I would be there with the people condemning it, as is I think people should take notice of the way it sounds when it comes from across the aisle to them.You're a follower of Alinsky's theory. It's kind of like saying those who support universal healthcare are socialists even if they don't actually support socialism.
A lot of people missed his point, he was pointing out what it looks like when someone jumps right out and makes a statement of that nature, it's a mimic technique. I see a lot of folks didn't like those statements, IOW, the point landed(I hope) with people who do make that statement when a politically charged issue goes straight to the gun control talking points. If I thought for a second that Kal was being serious with that statement I would be there with the people condemning it, as is I think people should take notice of the way it sounds when it comes from across the aisle to them.
When issued seriously, it's a God awful thing to say. As I've named it "dancing on the graves", and is the height of disrespectful.
A lot of people missed his point, he was pointing out what it looks like when someone jumps right out and makes a statement of that nature, it's a mimic technique. I see a lot of folks didn't like those statements, IOW, the point landed(I hope) with people who do make that statement when a politically charged issue goes straight to the gun control talking points. If I thought for a second that Kal was being serious with that statement I would be there with the people condemning it, as is I think people should take notice of the way it sounds when it comes from across the aisle to them.
When issued seriously, it's a God awful thing to say. As I've named it "dancing on the graves", and is the height of disrespectful.
If they are serious, you bet. I took his point as a "this is how you sound, please stop" example, and notably, a lot of people were PO'd, but the thing is, those same people dismissed it when it came from their side of the aisle. Using crises for political game is wrong, and it is in fact an Alinsky tactic.And I'm mimicking people who take advantage of a crisis to further a political stance. Aren't they called Alisnkyists?
If they are serious, you bet. I took his point as a "this is how you sound, please stop" example, and notably, a lot of people were PO'd, but the thing is, those same people dismissed it when it came from their side of the aisle. Using crises for political game is wrong, and it is in fact an Alinsky tactic.
If they were serious, yeah, you could call it an Alinskyite tactic, I didn't take that as the case this time.So every right winger who did it here is an Alinsky adherent? Or just the leftists that do it?
Then explain to me why there are people that want assisted suicide? Are you going to tell them that they are wrong also?
Sorry that I don't have as strong a reaction to what happened as you do. :shrug: I may feel sorry for the victims.....
What about the media? I was half joking in my OP about the TV Show the Following but in reality its a very violent show in which there are lots of mass stabbings. Do you think Western governments should regulate media more or is it the responsibility of the parents to make sure their kids are not watching these type of shows.
At least there was no armed security at the school. That would be evil and would take money from salary raises for the school administrators.
Just as surely as day follows night.... :lol:Well that didn't take long...:doh
Cool...you continue to demonstrate a similar mentality to a 3rd grader at recess going "I know you are but what am I" and I'll continue to show indignation towards people who from moment one of a tragedy attempt to manipulate and exploit the harm and death of children for the sake of their pathetic devotion to a political agenda regardless of their side. Whatever excuse you wish to tell yourself to convince yourself, wrongly, that you're any different than those on "the left" doing it "every single time a mass shooting happened" is up to you. And if you want to delude yourself into believing that makes you different, more power to you. If you want to think anyone else is buying your excuse as anything OTHER than an excuse, then you're going to need to create another lie in your head for you to believe.
These events are horrible, and there's absolutely discussions to be had on a multitude of issues in their wake...AND there's even plenty to talk about regarding thet REACTIONS people have to these horrible events in their wake as well. However, the pathetic slobbering need demonstrated by some on both the left and the right to attempt to strike when the emotional iron is hot and when people are at their lowest point of logical thinking due to that emotion is just disgusting in my mind. Not only is it disgusting, but it removes any legitimate ability to have reasonable, adult, logical conversations about the issues that may relate to this because before you get to a point where such is possible you already have both sides acting like monkey's in a zoo flinging poop at each other. Why? Becuase both sides have folks who can't contain the excitement of seeing some kids die so they can take up the battle flag for their particular side in this war and rush off to sling their sarcastic quips and stereotypes talking points.
The reality is, in many of these threads, sadly it's a coin flip as to which side is going to explode in macabre glee over the fact that they get to push their agenda. Neither side holds the higher ground on this, which is just a microcosm for the sickness that permeates our culture these days. I feel for these kids, as I did for many of the past victims of these mass forms of violence. Not only for the attrocity perpetrated against them today, but for the raping of their tragedy that people like you and others do in the name of your no-holds-barred devotion to a political agenda.
Sorry that I don't have as strong a reaction to what happened as you do. :shrug: I may feel sorry for the victims, but I'm not going to devote an entire thread on a debate site to nothing but "OMG I FEEL SOOO SORRY FOR THEM!". .
I'm surprised nobody overtook him sooner?!
I keeping seeing that this kid was referred to by other kids and adults at that schoolas being "shy" and "really shy" and he "always kept to himself".
Didn't people say the same thing about Lanza?
.
But you weren't making a valid point. You were mocking a different political view. You've even admitted this.You need to learn the difference between making a valid point vs de-railing a thread.
This thread was about the tragedy at a school. You de-railed it to score political points against an opposing view. I know exactly what derailing a thread is and I also know you did it intentionally.As I said earlier, when the left stops using tragedies to advance thier anti-gun agenda's then I will stop doing so also. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
But you weren't debating the topic, you were derailing it in order to worship at the alter of the firearm. You derailed it to mock an opposing viewpoint. Some might even question as to whether a rule was violated, given that you intentionally derailed a thread by mocking others. Now, given the fact you're a G-Mod and the rules claim you're held to a higher standard than others, I'm going to guess it wasn't, but some might still question.Particularly when it comes to a debate site like DebatePolitics.com. The very name of the forum should give you a clue as to the kind of posting style that is going to be focused on.
But your first post was not about the tragedy, your first post was about the firearm/mocking the gun control supporters. Here were your posts, in order:Incorrect statement since being pro-gun is specifically about the right to defend one self with guns.
Uh oh! Mass Stabbings! Better make reasonable laws on restricting kid's access to knives! I'd suggest requiring safes with biometric locks for all knives larger than 2 inches. Also they should ban all felons (violent or not) from owning any knives.
Prayers going to all families involved.
What?! I personally am just expressing the same type of concern for our children's safety that anti-gun folks exhibit in times of such horrid occurances.
A lot of people missed his point
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?