Oh Democrats, You never fail to be exactly who I think you are

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from StalkingButler. Show StalkingButler's posts

    Oh Democrats, You never fail to be exactly who I think you are

    http://salem-nh.patch.com/groups/politics-and-elections/p/marilinda-garcia-attacked-in-adolf-hitler-facebook-hoax

    The 2014 race for the 2nd Congressional District hasn’t even really gotten started and it’s already getting nasty.

    In the latest dustup on social media, someone created a phony Facebook account late last month targeting state Rep. Marilinda Garcia, R-Salem, the latest candidate to enter the race.

    The site described Garcia as "a severe conservative" and offered a single picture of her at a recent graduation. When created on Nov. 25, the phantom host posted two quotes from Adolf Hitler and attributed them to Garcia.

    One stated, "'Do not compare yourself to others. If you do so, you are insulting yourself’ --- Words to live by!” The second said, "On foreign policy I believe my platform is best summed up by these words ‘If freedom is short of weapons, we must compensate with willpower.'"

     

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from andiejen. Show andiejen's posts

    Re: Oh Democrats, You never fail to be exactly who I think you are

    In response to StalkingButler's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    http://salem-nh.patch.com/groups/politics-and-elections/p/marilinda-garcia-attacked-in-adolf-hitler-facebook-hoax

    The 2014 race for the 2nd Congressional District hasn’t even really gotten started and it’s already getting nasty.

    In the latest dustup on social media, someone created a phony Facebook account late last month targeting state Rep. Marilinda Garcia, R-Salem, the latest candidate to enter the race.

    The site described Garcia as "a severe conservative" and offered a single picture of her at a recent graduation. When created on Nov. 25, the phantom host posted two quotes from Adolf Hitler and attributed them to Garcia.

    One stated, "'Do not compare yourself to others. If you do so, you are insulting yourself’ --- Words to live by!” The second said, "On foreign policy I believe my platform is best summed up by these words ‘If freedom is short of weapons, we must compensate with willpower.'"

     

    [/QUOTE]

    SB,

    Your post said "someone" did this. 

    So why is your headline "Oh Democrats, You never etc..."

    It seems nobody knows who did this. It could have been anothe Republican vying for the same seat.

    I certainly could have not been any candidate. None at all. 

    To blame it on the "Democrats" seems highly unfair and of course without any evidence whatsoever.

    If I posted this in reverse, I am sure the Republicans on this board would have been all over me.

     

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from DamainAllen. Show DamainAllen's posts

    Re: Oh Democrats, You never fail to be exactly who I think you are

    Considering she is in a primary race, her opponent is a republican, so as tends to be the case with primary sheninangans it was likely a republican on the attack.  

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re: Oh Democrats, You never fail to be exactly who I think you are

    In response to DamainAllen's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Considering she is in a primary race, her opponent is a republican, so as tends to be the case with primary sheninangans it was likely a republican on the attack.  

    [/QUOTE]

    Well she's already been gettng attacked public by a Dem

     

    http://www.unionleader.com/article/20131203/NEWS06/131209845

     

     

    NH GOP star shines for national media after her candidacy greeted with 'sexist smear'

    By JOHN DiSTASO
    Senior Political Reporter


    Republican congressional hopeful state Rep. Marilinda Garcia, R-Salem, received national conservative media attention Monday after a Democratic state lawmaker last week disparagingly compared her to reality television star Kim Kardashian.

    Manchester Democratic Rep. Peter Sullivan's Twitter posts critical of the latest GOP 2nd District U.S. House candidate resulted in an opinion piece Monday titled "The War on Conservative Minorities" by columnist John Fund on National Review Online.

    Shortly after Garcia announced her candidacy on Nov. 25, Sullivan posted on Twitter, referencing conservative state Reps. Al Baldasaro of Londonderry and William O'Brien of Mont Vernon, the former New Hampshire House speaker:

    "She's Al Baldassaro (sic) in stiletto heels, a lightweight and O'Brien clone."

    "Bill O'Brien + Kim Kardashian = Marilinda Garcia"

    "She is a right-wing, homophobic, anti-worker shill for the Koch Brothers."

    He later wrote, "After careful consideration, I want to apologize to Kim Kardashian for comparing her to a right-wing extremist like Marilinda Garcia."

    The posts began a partisan war of words for a brief time on Twitter, and Garcia said in a statement, "To me, the most unfortunate byproducts of such personal attacks, negativity and vitriol are that they discourage good people from getting involved in politics, cause citizens to be disgusted at the political process, and tarnish the reputations of all elected officials just by virtue of association."

    Fund's opinion piece Monday brought national attention to Garcia, a 30-year-old four-term state representative.

    Garcia is a Boston native of Italian/Hispanic descent who has lived in Salem since childhood.

    Fund wrote that what he called Sullivan's "sexist smear" of Garcia received "virtually no" media attention in New Hampshire, "much less nationally." He compared it to the large amount of coverage some media outlets gave to Republican U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio taking a sip of water while delivering the GOP response to President Obama's State of the Union address last January.

    "Progressives often reserve their deepest hostility for conservative minorities such as Garcia because they are a threat to the notion that minorities should only think and vote only like leftists," Fund wrote.

    "As former secretary of state Condoleezza Rice, Justice Clarence Thomas, and former representative J. C. Watts can attest, people on the left reserve their harshest and most personal attacks for minorities who have the audacity to wander off the ideological plantation."

    Sullivan, responding to the Fund piece, wrote on his Facebook page:

    "I was just attacked by the National Review. My life is truly complete."

    He wrote that Fund "is smitten with Miss Marilinda, and is butthurt that the mainstream media hasn't sufficiently hounded me."

     

    Earlier Monday, Sullivan stood by his previous posts, writing on his Facebook page: 

    "Yeah, I said it, and I stand by it. The comparison is accurate. Garcia is a creepy pseudo-Christian right-wing extremist who gets a free pass because she doesn't look the part."

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from StalkingButler. Show StalkingButler's posts

    Re: Oh Democrats, You never fail to be exactly who I think you are

    andie, as massmoderatejoe has just pointed out... there's a history of Garcia being attacked viciously by a Democrat, a racist and misogynistic one at that. I'd be very surprised if the Facebook hoaxer turns out not to be a Democrat.

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from FortySixAndTwo. Show FortySixAndTwo's posts

    Re: Oh Democrats, You never fail to be exactly who I think you are

    "But since you don't know, and have absolutely no evidence of who it is, then by all means it's okay to just throw out some accusations."

     

     

    Says the king of sweeping generalizations....WOW

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Oh Democrats, You never fail to be exactly who I think you are

    Apparently, this is politics as usual in New Hampshire ...

    State Rep. Steve Vaillancourt, R-Manchester, used a Nazi salute during an interaction with William O’Brien, D-Mont Vernon, from the House floor last year. He later apologized for the outburst. A few days later, O’Brien was portrayed in a Concord Monitor, editorial cartoon as having a Hitler mustache

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from StalkingButler. Show StalkingButler's posts

    Re: Oh Democrats, You never fail to be exactly who I think you are

    By the way, conservatives generally don't go around calling each other Nazis. That particular brand of hatred is reserved for leftists on the attack.

     

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from andiejen. Show andiejen's posts

    Re: Oh Democrats, You never fail to be exactly who I think you are

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

    In response to DamainAllen's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Considering she is in a primary race, her opponent is a republican, so as tends to be the case with primary sheninangans it was likely a republican on the attack.  



    Well she's already been gettng attacked public by a Dem

     

    http://www.unionleader.com/article/20131203/NEWS06/131209845

     

     

    NH GOP star shines for national media after her candidacy greeted with 'sexist smear'

    By JOHN DiSTASO
    Senior Political Reporter


    Republican congressional hopeful state Rep. Marilinda Garcia, R-Salem, received national conservative media attention Monday after a Democratic state lawmaker last week disparagingly compared her to reality television star Kim Kardashian.

    Manchester Democratic Rep. Peter Sullivan's Twitter posts critical of the latest GOP 2nd District U.S. House candidate resulted in an opinion piece Monday titled "The War on Conservative Minorities" by columnist John Fund on National Review Online.

    Shortly after Garcia announced her candidacy on Nov. 25, Sullivan posted on Twitter, referencing conservative state Reps. Al Baldasaro of Londonderry and William O'Brien of Mont Vernon, the former New Hampshire House speaker:

    "She's Al Baldassaro (sic) in stiletto heels, a lightweight and O'Brien clone."

    "Bill O'Brien + Kim Kardashian = Marilinda Garcia"

    "She is a right-wing, homophobic, anti-worker shill for the Koch Brothers."

    He later wrote, "After careful consideration, I want to apologize to Kim Kardashian for comparing her to a right-wing extremist like Marilinda Garcia."

    The posts began a partisan war of words for a brief time on Twitter, and Garcia said in a statement, "To me, the most unfortunate byproducts of such personal attacks, negativity and vitriol are that they discourage good people from getting involved in politics, cause citizens to be disgusted at the political process, and tarnish the reputations of all elected officials just by virtue of association."

    Fund's opinion piece Monday brought national attention to Garcia, a 30-year-old four-term state representative.

    Garcia is a Boston native of Italian/Hispanic descent who has lived in Salem since childhood.

    Fund wrote that what he called Sullivan's "sexist smear" of Garcia received "virtually no" media attention in New Hampshire, "much less nationally." He compared it to the large amount of coverage some media outlets gave to Republican U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio taking a sip of water while delivering the GOP response to President Obama's State of the Union address last January.

    "Progressives often reserve their deepest hostility for conservative minorities such as Garcia because they are a threat to the notion that minorities should only think and vote only like leftists," Fund wrote.

    "As former secretary of state Condoleezza Rice, Justice Clarence Thomas, and former representative J. C. Watts can attest, people on the left reserve their harshest and most personal attacks for minorities who have the audacity to wander off the ideological plantation."

    Sullivan, responding to the Fund piece, wrote on his Facebook page:

    "I was just attacked by the National Review. My life is truly complete."

    He wrote that Fund "is smitten with Miss Marilinda, and is butthurt that the mainstream media hasn't sufficiently hounded me."

     

    Earlier Monday, Sullivan stood by his previous posts, writing on his Facebook page: 

    "Yeah, I said it, and I stand by it. The comparison is accurate. Garcia is a creepy pseudo-Christian right-wing extremist who gets a free pass because she doesn't look the part."

    [/QUOTE]

    mmj,

    "The posts began a partisan war of words for a brief time on Twitter, and Garcia said in a statement, "To me, the most unfortunate byproducts of such personal attacks, negativity and vitriol are that they discourage good people from getting involved in politics, cause citizens to be disgusted at the political process, and tarnish the reputations of all elected officials just by virtue of association."

     

    Garcia, IMO, is absolutely correct in the above quoted statement. 

    However, Garcia knew, going into politics, that personal attacks, negativity and vitriol are pretty much a given. Real life politics are not pretty. She is the candidate. Most people working on her campaign are unpaid volunteers. The majority of those volunteers tend to be women. 

    It can knock the idealism right out of you no matter how much you want the candidate you are volunteering your time for to get elected.  However, after a number of years, you decide you either keep swinging for who and what you believe in, OR you retreat to your nice comfortable home and just lead your life, vote, sign petitions and rationalize dropping out of active politics.

    I of course do not condone what her Democrat opponent said on the record. I further resent it as a women who happens to be of Italian descent...thoughnot a conservative nor a Republican.

    Often these attacks do blow up in the attackers face. Attacking a women is tricky. You can seem like a bully even more then when you attack a man. Esp. in a debate situation.

    All that said, the opening  post refers to an attack of unknown origin. I still maintain until and unless some good reporting can scope out the source, then it remains of unknown origin.

    As Damian posted, just as likely to be a Republican since she is in a primary.

     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from StalkingButler. Show StalkingButler's posts

    Re: Oh Democrats, You never fail to be exactly who I think you are

    There's always an outlier, sort of like finding an honest progressive.

     

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Oh Democrats, You never fail to be exactly who I think you are

    In response to StalkingButler's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    By the way, conservatives generally don't go around calling each other Nazis. That particular brand of hatred is reserved for leftists on the attack.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Or for rightists on the attack.

    Overall, I'd say the right edges out the left slightly in invoking the godwin rule.

     

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Oh Democrats, You never fail to be exactly who I think you are

    In response to StalkingButler's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    There's always an outlier, sort of like finding an honest progressive.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Or like finding a conservative with integrity.

     

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from andiejen. Show andiejen's posts

    Re: Oh Democrats, You never fail to be exactly who I think you are

    In response to StalkingButler's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    There's always an outlier, sort of like finding an honest progressive.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    SB,

    "....an honest progressive."

    Gee, SB. No (: after that statement? An omission or an on purpose? 

    If an "on purpose" then:

    I for one, believe you are an honest supporter of the Tea Party. We may not be in agreement about the Tea Party pretty much, but I do believe as I have read the posts you have put up, you, unlike some, truly believe everything you post regarding the Tea Party.

    If we are talking just about progressive posters on this message board, have you really decided that all of us are not "honest" in your opinion?

    And if so, in what way(s)?

     

     

     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from andiejen. Show andiejen's posts

    Re: Oh Democrats, You never fail to be exactly who I think you are

    1. S
      Internet rules and laws: the top 10, from Godwin to Poe The internet has matured into a world of its own, and like the real world, it obeys certain immutable laws. Here are 10 of the most important. The Shepard Fairey Barack Obama image with added swastika and Hitler moustache. Internet rules and laws: the top 10, from Godwin to Poe Godwin's Law in action  Photo: AP - SHEPARD FAIREY   Tom Chivers

    By Tom Chivers

    7:30AM BST 23 Oct 2009

    Comments146 Comments

     

    Any internet user will know that the web, like the outside world (or “meatspace”), follows certain rules.

    We take a look at 10, with the most well-known and widely used towards the top and some of the lesser lights lower down. If you know any more, let us know below.

    Equally, of course, if you have formulated one yourself, do likewise – but you might want to include your real name, not just a web pseudonym. Otherwise it will be known forever as Gherkin555’s Law, or whatever, and you will miss your shot at posterity.

    We should state that we are not endorsing these laws or the views they imply, merely reporting them.

    1. Godwin’s Law
    The most famous of all the internet laws, formed by Mike Godwin in 1990. As originally stated, it said: "As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1." It has now been expanded to include all web discussions.

    Related Articles

    It is closely related to the logical fallacy “reductio ad Hitlerum”, which says “Hitler (or the Nazis) liked X, so X is bad”, frequently used to denigrate vegetarians and atheists.

    Common Godwin's Law appearances include describing women's rights campaigners as “feminazis”, comparing the former US President George W Bush to Hitler, or saying Barack Obama's proposed healthcare reforms are the new Holocaust.

    In its broader sense it can be used to describe any situation where a poster loses all sense of proportion, for example describing New Labour as “Zanu-Labour” after Robert Mugabe’s Zimbabwean political party Zanu-PF.

    As well as the descriptive form, it can be used prescriptively: so if any poster does mention the Nazis in a discussion thread, Godwin’s Law can be invoked, they instantly lose the argument and the thread can be ended.

    If this is done deliberately to end the argument, however, it does not apply. This codicil is known as “Quirk’s Exception”.

    2. Poe’s Law
    Not to be confused with the law of poetry enshrined by Edgar Allan Poe, the internet Poe’s Law states: “Without a winking smiley or other blatant display of humour, it is impossible to create a parody of fundamentalism that someone won't mistake for the real thing.”

    It was originally formulated by Nathan Poe in 2005 during a debate on christianforums.com about evolution, and referred to creationism rather than all fundamentalism, but has since been expanded.

    Poe’s Law also has an inverse meaning, stating that non-fundamentalists will often mistake sincere expressions of fundamentalist beliefs for parody.

    Examples abound – one particularly difficult-to-judge site claims that “Heliocentrism [the belief that the Earth orbits the Sun, rather than the other way around] is an Atheist Doctrine”.

    One that must, surely, be a parody is sexinchrist.com (WARNING: link contains adult material), a site that offers Christians advice on the rights and wrongs of such activities as threesomes and pubic shaving, among much more.

    However, it is hard to be entirely certain, given the existence ofchristiannymphos.org (WARNING: link contains adult material), an apparently entirely serious site.

    Here is an example of a parody site that embodies both Godwin's and Poe's Laws.

    3. Rule 34

    States: “If it exists, there is porn of it.” See also Rule 35: “If no such porn exists, it will be made.” Generally held to refer to fictional characters and cartoons, although some formulations insist there are "no exceptions" even for abstract ideas like non-Euclidean geometry, or puzzlement.

    For obvious reasons it is not appropriate for lengthy discussion in a family newspaper, but the recent appearance of Marge Simpson on the cover of Playboy, pictured above, was a (very mild) example of the law in action, and going mainstream.

    The spread of fanficslash fiction and hentai around the internet, as well as the rise of furries, are making this law more and more accurate every day.

    The other 33 rules change frequently, except one and two, which are “Do not talk about /b/” and “Do NOT talk about /b/”, respectively, referring to a message board on the 4chan.org website.

    4. Skitt’s Law 
    Expressed as "any post correcting an error in another post will contain at least one error itself" or "the likelihood of an error in a post is directly proportional to the embarrassment it will cause the poster."

    It is an online version of the proofreading truism Muphry’s Law, also known as Hartman's Law of Prescriptivist Retaliation: "any article or statement about correct grammar, punctuation, or spelling is bound to contain at least one eror".

    Language Log quotes the following example, from Paul Ordoveza’s How Now, Brownpau? blog:

    "For too long, we linguistic pedants have cringed, watching this phrase used, misused, and abused, again, and again, and again. 'This begs the question...' [we hear], and we must brace ourselves as the ignoramii of modern society literally ask a question after the phrase."

    While Mr Ordoveza’s point is entirely valid (“begging the question” is a logical fallacy, meaning to "beggar the question", or assume your conclusion in your premise – not to raise the question), the plural of ignoramus is ignoramuses.

    It was apparently first stated by G Bryan Lord, referring to a user named Skitt, on Usenet in 1998.

    5. Scopie’s Law
    States: “In any discussion involving science or medicine, citing Whale.to as a credible source loses the argument immediately, and gets you laughed out of the room.” First formulated by Rich Scopie on thebadscience.net forum.

    This law makes little sense without a background knowledge of Whale.to, a conspiracy theory site which includes such items as the complete text of the anti-Semitic hoax Protocols of the Elders of Zion, as well as claims that Aids is caused by vaccination programmes, and that Auschwitz never happened.

    It has been expanded by posters on rationalwiki.com to include any use of Answers in Genesis in an argument about creationism and evolution.

    6. Danth’s Law (also known as Parker’s Law)
    States: “If you have to insist that you've won an internet argument, you've probably lost badly.” Named after a user on the role-playing gamers’ forum RPG.net.

    Danth’s Law was most famously declared in “The Lenski Affair”, between microbiologist Richard Lenski and the editor of Conservapedia.com, Andrew Schlafly, who cast doubt upon Prof Lenski’s elegant experimental demonstration of evolution.

    After what is widely held to be one of the greatest and most comprehensive put-downs in scientific argument from Prof Lenski, Mr Schlafly declared himself the winner.

    7. Pommer’s Law
    Proposed by Rob Pommer on rationalwiki.com in 2007, this states: “A person's mind can be changed by reading information on the internet. The nature of this change will be from having no opinion to having a wrong opinion.”

    8. DeMyer's Laws
    Named for Ken DeMyer, a moderator on Conservapedia.com. There are four: the Zeroth, First, Second and Third Laws.

    The Second Law states: “Anyone who posts an argument on the internet which is largely quotations can be very safely ignored, and is deemed to have lost the argument before it has begun.”

    The Zeroth, First and Third Laws cannot be very generally applied and will be glossed over here.

    9. Cohen’s Law 
    Proposed by Brian Cohen in 2007, states that: “Whoever resorts to the argument that ‘whoever resorts to the argument that... …has automatically lost the debate’ has automatically lost the debate.”

    Has also been stated in the much longer version, "Whoever resorts to the argument that 'whoever resorts to the argument that... 'whoever resorts to the argument that... 'whoever resorts to the argument that... 'whoever resorts to the argument that ... 'whoever resorts to the argument that... ...has automatically lost the debate' ...has automatically lost the debate' ...has automatically lost the debate' ...has automatically lost the debate' ...has automatically lost the debate' has automatically lost the debate."

    10. The Law of Exclamation
    First recorded in an article by Lori Robertson at FactCheck.org in 2008, this states: "The more exclamation points used in an email (or other posting), the more likely it is a complete lie. This is also true for excessive capital letters."

    It is reminiscent of the claim in Terry Pratchett's Discworld novels that the more exclamation marks someone uses in writing, the more likely they are to be mentally unbalanced.

    According to Pratchett, five exclamation marks is an indicator of "someone who wears their underwear on the out

     

     

     

     

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/6408927/Internet-rules-and-laws-the-top-10-from-Godwin-to-Poe.html

     

    I have to admit I had to look up the Godwin rule/law.

    While doing that I find this with the top 10 Internet rules and laws.

    The Godwin law mentioned above is the 1st law. If you read thru, you will probably recognize some other behaviour exhibited right here on this message board.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from doozy-day. Show doozy-day's posts

    Re: Oh Democrats, You never fail to be exactly who I think you are


    don't forget #11!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from andiejen. Show andiejen's posts

    Re: Oh Democrats, You never fail to be exactly who I think you are

    Not to mention #10.

    The Law of Exclamation.

    First recorded in an article by Lori Robertson at FactCheck.org in 2008, this states: "The more exclamation points used in an email (or other posting), the more likely it is a complete lie. This is also true for excessive capital letters.

    Judging by the enormous amount of exclamation points, well, vying for the lie of all time in this forum seems to be your goal. 

    Guess you are winning...as in Charlie Sheen "Winning".

     

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from andiejen. Show andiejen's posts

    Re: Oh Democrats, You never fail to be exactly who I think you are

    In Internet slang, a troll (/ˈtrl//ˈtrɒl/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people,[1] by posting inflammatory,[2] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a forum, chat room, or blog), either accidentally[3][4] or with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[5] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.[6]

    Nothing new from you. You have been told off before by other posters due to your disgusting posts. You then slunk away.

    Last time, you seemed to make an attempt to contribute something to this forum. My good sense told me to skip over you.

    This latest "drop-in" has proved my good sense to be correct. 

    If you were not a "drop-in" you would know that the regular members share their lives to a point with which they feel comfortable...including the poster who seems to have "inspired"you.

    But you are not a regular menber so you do not know that. And of course it is none of your business in any case. You are not the political forum police. 

    As I remember one of your posts, to paraphrase, you drop in here on occasion to see what is going on. What you always find is the same old same old...nothing worthy of your time. 

    I predict, as you are the embodiment of the above, you will find the majority will feel the same about you. We may disagree on issues, but we do not suffer trolls lightly.

     

Share