+- MacResource (https://forums.macresource.com)
+-- Forum: My Category (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: 'Friendly' Political Ranting (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Thread: McCain camp on the defensive re: Troopergate (/showthread.php?tid=62253)
Re: McCain camp on the defensive re: Troopergate - karsen - 09-17-2008
Lux Interior wrote:
[quote=karsen]
As for why the tasering incident wasn't reported for 2 years and was first brought to light in divorce procedures that seems fairly obvious to me. Either the wife didn't want to upset her husband by reporting the incident (if the guy is tasing children I hate to imagine the other abuses going on in that household), or she was using it as leverage in the divorce. Likely both.
Wow. You know a lot about this case. It's fairly obvious that you have some inside source.
Don't you have anything better to do than attack me all day long?
Re: McCain camp on the defensive re: Troopergate - Lux Interior - 09-17-2008
karsen wrote:
Don't you have anything better to do than attack me all day long?
Did I attack you personally? I apologize if I did.
hiner:But otherwise, if you keep throwing out your opinion "...seems fairly obvious to me" with nothing to back it up, then I will attack that. :turbo:
Re: McCain camp on the defensive re: Troopergate - Black Landlord - 09-17-2008
[quote karsen]
Heck, read the Constitution for several references to God.
.
Re: McCain camp on the defensive re: Troopergate - Black Landlord - 09-17-2008
Lux Interior wrote:
[quote=karsen]
Don't you have anything better to do than attack me all day long?
Did I attack you personally? I apologize if I did.
hiner:But otherwise, if you keep throwing out your opinion "...seems fairly obvious to me" with nothing to back it up, then I will attack that. :turbo: And you will get put on ignore, and then everyone else, until he's only reading swampy's and decocritter's posts.
I wonder if that feature could be enabled with one click?
"ignore non-right wing content."
Re: McCain camp on the defensive re: Troopergate - Bill in NC - 09-18-2008
Even Mike Gravel thinks the guy should have been gone - his opinion was that if the union couldn't get off their butts, somebody needed to.
I can't believe anyone would be unwise enough to try and use this for political gain - once a voter hears "child was Tasered" the effort to smear her boomerangs (or continues to distract everyone even in the face of a 1000 point loss in the DJIA)
Re: McCain camp on the defensive re: Troopergate - Black Landlord - 09-18-2008
Bill in NC wrote:
Even Mike Gravel thinks the guy should have been gone - his opinion was that if the union couldn't get off their butts, somebody needed to.
I can't believe anyone would be unwise enough to try and use this for political gain - once a voter hears "child was Tasered" the effort to smear her boomerangs (or continues to distract everyone even in the face of a 1000 point loss in the DJIA)
"For political gain?"
Scrutiny of a potential government leader's past actions is not optional.
Get over it.
(besides which Palin's camp is claiming the the firing of the commisioner was =unrelated= to the trooper-- but I don't see how you couldn't already know that, since it's been explained patiently about 8 times in this thread).
Re: McCain camp on the defensive re: Troopergate - Bill in NC - 09-18-2008
C'mon BL, nobody believes that.
This can only hurt the Democrats.
"the firing of the commisioner was =unrelated= to the trooper"
Re: McCain camp on the defensive re: Troopergate - Black Landlord - 09-19-2008
Bill in NC wrote:
C'mon BL, nobody believes that.
This can only hurt the Democrats.
"the firing of the commisioner was =unrelated= to the trooper"
Are you trying to be funny? This is verbatim from the article linked above. Palin's camp's stance is that the commish was fired due to other. . . wait, why am I basically reading the article to you? Is it your bedtime?
Dear Bill in NC, please read the damn article before trying to participate in a thread discussing the content of an article.
Re: McCain camp on the defensive re: Troopergate - MacMagus - 09-19-2008
> Palin's camp's stance is that the commish was fired due to other.
Yeah, but he had a spotless record. No complaints until after Troopergate hit the news.
As a general rule, one makes a case for firing a person in a high management position before firing him.
Re: McCain camp on the defensive re: Troopergate - Bill in NC - 09-19-2008
Like I said, not even Gravel believes that.
But even he (no friend of Palin) agreed the guy needed to go.
Black Landlord wrote:
[quote=Bill in NC]
C'mon BL, nobody believes that.
This can only hurt the Democrats.
"the firing of the commisioner was =unrelated= to the trooper"
Are you trying to be funny? This is verbatim from the article linked above. Palin's camp's stance is that the commish was fired due to other. . . wait, why am I basically reading the article to you? Is it your bedtime?
Dear Bill in NC, please read the damn article before trying to participate in a thread discussing the content of an article.