Is Arizona the nation's capital for hate, anger, rhetoric and vitriol?

[Bill Koonce]

None of those describe official misconduct.

Really? I thought that "official misconduct" was very self-explanatory. If I'm wrong here, please justify your claim by telling us how official misconduct is somehow not official misconduct. :bwahaha:

...they're definitely not against any code of conduct. Civil servants are sworn to uphold the Constitution...

Precisely what are you referring to with "they're"? Who precisely is "they"? And FYI, Sharron Angle is not a public servant; she lost the election, remember? :smack:

I could apply "trash talking, racism, and blaming the media" to Obama; so, if its official misconduct, we should proceed with an impeachment trial.

Oh, I get it now! You're trying to make up a straw man argument. You failed. Better luck next time. Or better yet, learn to present an honest position.

The (alleged) poor (alleged) shooter never stood a chance in this (allegedly) unjust, allegedly) violent world where scary housewives make (allegedly) vaguely suggestive PowerPoint presentations that could incite nothing less than vigilante style homicide. He must have felt alone knowing that nobody else around him saw the call to arms as he did.

IIRC quite a large number of people noticed Ms. Angle's provocative (possibly seditious) rhetoric. As for your allegations, I can cite conspiracies ranging from the George Wallace Governorship to the Ku Klux Klan as examples of southern bigotry and intolerance. Can you cite a single modern-day so-called "progressive" example of reactionary bigotry?

Now the poor guy is facing charges for something he had ZERO control over. Give me a break.

Give WHO a break??? You don't seem much the victim that you pretend to be!!!!



The insanity defense rarely works, Counselor. If you want to practice law in this matter, you might at least be honest with your "client".

Be sure we know who is being used as a scapegoat. Hint: they've been mentioned, but it's not the murderer.

Well that's a mighty cynical approach! First you defend the murderer apparent, then you turn on him like a low-life scumbag. Bully for you, asshole. Shine us all on. But one day you will pay the piper...

 

[Bill Koonce]

I live in AZ.

And that gives you what special privilege? Did living in Tora Bora Give Osama bin Laden a magic soapbox?

We are not the Capital for hate, anger, rhetoric and virtriol. And certainly not because one nut case shot a bunch of people.

Let it be noted that in Arizona, loyalty among fellow citizens is not a priority. Mighty white of y'all...



I suppose that it would be a non-issue if not for the inconvenient truth that Arizona has left a legacy of bigotry, racial hatred, anti-Constitutionalism and other High Crimes and Misdemeanors amongst the elected officials of The People of Arizona. Here is your chance to defend your collective actions. The Big Question is do you have any defense? America is waiting...

We were a bunch of racists...

Please, tell us all...what has changed.

I would also note that Sarah doesn't hold any public office so she is not an official using cross-hairs.

Sarah who?



Sarah Palin? Do you mean the quitter who abandoned her sworn responsibility (amidst many political and criminal charges) to escape prosecution and become a multi-millionaire? Do you mean that"Sarah"? Do you mean to say that private citizen Palin had a greater right to aim a weapon at duly elected, currently serving and scandal-free public servants than a sworn official? Do you really see a rationale in that kind of lunacy?



I'm not going to respond to the remaining allegations because they can't be verified. Needless to say, untempered extremism without any regard to reality is a poison. IMHO this poison should be left in the hands of moderate and scientific people who do not seek to weaponize this poison.

 

[Robert Thomas]

Is Arizona the nation's capital for hate, anger, rhetoric and vitriol?

To me this seems like a fairly simply question with a fairly simple answer.



NO



The Nations Capital for hate, anger, rhetoric and vitriol is Washington, DC.



:banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead:

 

[Thomas Rogers]

TrainTrac,



I was talking about Jesse the Gov, not the recent version.

 

[H D]

I thought that "official misconduct" was very self-explanatory. If I'm wrong here, please justify your claim by telling us how official misconduct is somehow not official misconduct.

The rest is just ramblings so, I'll answer the one that poses a real question. You are wrong. Malfeasance, or "official misconduct" is very clearly defined and it only applies to those in public office.

"malfeasance is the doing of an act which an officer had no legal right to do at all and that when an officer, through ignorance, inattention, or malice, does that which they have no legal right to do at all, or acts without any authority whatsoever, or exceeds, ignores, or abuses their powers, they are guilty of malfeasance." -Daugherty v. Ellis

Maybe official misconduct wasn't the phrase you were looking for. If you were to say this person acted in a way that is against your personal values, I can grant you that. Official misconduct, no.



I provided you with a simple definition as given by our courts. I never called you names and I will not ever respond to another of your posts. I have debated with other people on this board and nobody has lowered themselves to that level. I do not personally attack people for holding different views from my own, I try to pull out of them "why" they hold those views so that I may compare my own beliefs and values and decide whether I should keep those, or start afresh. I never call them names or try to belittle them because I am so unsure of why I hold my own values. I am done with you. I will not respond so targeting anything my way will be a waste of your time. I would hope others on this board would not allow this type of incivility to continue. "Civility", that's the new craze, right? Kind of the point of this thread, right?



God bless you Bill.

 

[Thomas Rogers]

Yes, Hugh! The main point I was trying to further in the tread is a call towards calm, towards civility, towards constructive discourse. Towards that end there is expected to be differences, and even some harsh words. However, there is no need to censor, and there is no need to take back or back-peddle if people would simply speak responsibly, respectfully, mean what they say, say what they mean, and keep am open mind with the main objective to get past or at least understand and appreciate our differences.



TJR

 

[Bill V]

To me this seems like a fairly simply question with a fairly simple answer.



NO



The Nations Capital for hate, anger, rhetoric and vitriol is Washington, DC.

That's only because we've become a nation of hate, anger, rhetoric, and vitriol; and we send to Washington people who represent us. In this instance, they're doing so rather accurately.

 

[Bill Koonce]

The Nations Capital for hate, anger, rhetoric and vitriol is Washington, DC.

As a frequent visitor and occasional resident of the District of Columbia, I must heartily disagree with the statement above. People in the District get along quite well, actually.



Pay close attention to the news. Take note of where the GOP's inflammatory "tea party" rallies took place. Not in D.C.!!! No, they were staged out in isolated rural areas and smaller cities across America. Also note that when Sarah Palin went out to promote her book, she too avoided centers of culture and education.



Arizona has emerged as one place where the worst in people is considered a virtue. No doubt it started when wealthy northern WASPs sought out an alternative to Florida, where they didn't have to rub elbows with so many "coloreds" and Jews. The gated community of Sun City stands out as the first large-scale example of Apartheid in America. Since then, Arizona has made news with Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, who publicized and profited from cruel and unusual punishment and other civil rights violations. Then there's the vigilante groups who literally hunt people "to protect our borders", crackpot politicians like Sharron Angle and the perennial John McCain.



And then came the tea-baggers.



No, Washington D.C. is very much like any other American city. It has its problems, and it has its shining moments of greatness. And although GOP talking points would lead you to believe that D.C. is a modern-day Sodom and Gomorrah, you might notice that those very same Republicans are doing anything and everything to get to D.C. and claim their piece of the corruption pie that they rail against from the other side of their mouths.

 

[Bill Koonce]

The rest is just ramblings...

Although you obviously don't have the courage to admit it, what you're saying in essence is that you're choosing to run away from all topics that you can't win. Duly noted.

...so, I'll answer the one that poses a real question. You are wrong.

That's not a question, that's a claim. And I will gleefully point out that you have failed utterly and completely to justify that claim.

Malfeasance, or "official misconduct" is very clearly defined and it only applies to those in public office.

No sale. Now you're trying to conjoin two completely separate offenses, one from tort law and the other from criminal law. Wow...just wow...



I don't know if you simply don't know what you're talking about, or if you're making a cynical and calculated attempt to muddy the waters and further the cause of hate, anger, rhetoric and vitriol. But you sure are wildly successful at injecting tons of bulls*** into what could be a productive discourse. And for that I say SHAME ON YOU!



If you want to defend Sarah Palin's crimes, then please start another thread. Otherwise please stick to the topic or STFU.



:back2topic:

 

[Robert Thomas]

Didn't mean to impugn the fine people of DC. Let me narrow it down. The people living and working at E.Capitol St. NE and 1st, and the individuals at 1600 Penn Ave.



:banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead:

 

[Bill Koonce]

So why did you help elect them? :cheeky:



Not one single elected official was born in-office. They were sent there by the actions (or more often, the inactions) of people like you. How often do you sit down, write a thoughtful letter to one of your representatives, senators or the President, put it in an envelope and mail it off to them? (No, quick 'n' dirty methods like e-mails and phone calls require more personnel than any MoC has.) That's a major part of your civic duty too, you know. If you're not doing your part, you haven't earned the privilege to complain.



(BTW, Washington D.C. is the Capitol.)

 

[Robert Thomas]

Hugh you are a true genius.



:haveabeer:

 

[H D]

Exactly TJR.

Its amazing that the point of the thread and the blame that was being passed around went so completely over the heads of some people. Blaming Palin for a shooting and cursing at other forum members in the same thread. Wow!



Thanks Redfish!

I don't think I'm a genius, but I do try to have civil discussions for MY OWN BENEFIT. I question my own beliefs daily and see how they logically stack up against others'. I don't post things to try to convince anybody that I found all the ultimate answers to every question. I honestly and truly DO NOT CARE what others hold as their values. If someone disagrees with me, fine, let me know why. I don't appreciate being called names or spat upon because my beliefs and values don't line up with another. It doesn't help me tear into my own beliefs and it doesn't help that person have a better grip on why they hold those beliefs. So, unless posts help me in my ultimate selfish goal of bettering myself as a Christian and as a citizen of the United States, I will not respond to such attacks.



This thread is probably dead anyhow. 90% of the posts remained civil, but it only takes a little ignorance and malice to ruin a whole discussion. As an experiment in maintaining civility, this thread has failed.

 

[WILL E]

Quote:



I live in AZ.



Mustang Guy: And that gives you what special privilege? Did living in Tora Bora Give Osama bin Laden a magic soapbox?



Quote:



We are not the Capital for hate, anger, rhetoric and virtriol. And certainly not because one nut case shot a bunch of people.



Mustang Guy: Let it be noted that in Arizona, loyalty among fellow citizens is not a priority. Mighty white of y'all...



I suppose that it would be a non-issue if not for the inconvenient truth that Arizona has left a legacy of bigotry, racial hatred, anti-Constitutionalism and other High Crimes and Misdemeanors amongst the elected officials of The People of Arizona. Here is your chance to defend your collective actions. The Big Question is do you have any defense? America is waiting...



Quote:



We were a bunch of racists...



Mustang Guy: Please, tell us all...what has changed.



Quote:



I would also note that Sarah doesn't hold any public office so she is not an official using cross-hairs.



Mustang Guy: Sarah who?



Sarah Palin? Do you mean the quitter who abandoned her sworn responsibility (amidst many political and criminal charges) to escape prosecution and become a multi-millionaire? Do you mean that"Sarah"? Do you mean to say that private citizen Palin had a greater right to aim a weapon at duly elected, currently serving and scandal-free public servants than a sworn official? Do you really see a rationale in that kind of lunacy?



I'm not going to respond to the remaining allegations because they can't be verified. Needless to say, untempered extremism without any regard to reality is a poison. IMHO this poison should be left in the hands of moderate and scientific people who do not seek to weaponize this poison.

Mustang Guy.





Your responses to my posting are interesting but a little hard to follow. This seems to be a common theme of yours so I don't take it personally.



I don't do the quote each sentence and pick it apart thing.



I offered up that I live in AZ as a point of reference. The thread being about AZ I thought the fact that I live here would have some relevance. You trounce on that with some kind of sarcasm and then later defend the People of D.C. because you have 'visited it a couple of times'. Please try to be consistent as it will help you argue a point.



I can defend some of your allegations of "bigotry, racial hatred, anti-Constitutionalism and other High Crimes and Misdemeanors amongst the elected officials of The People of Arizona. " if you will provide some specific examples. Certainly our state is not without fault in it's elected officials but I don't think that makes us the Capital for hate, anger, rhetoric and vitriol. (You do know that is what the thread is about right?)



I have no idea what you meant about noting the loyalty among fellow citizens. I find it interesting that you use the term 'Mighty white of you'. It speaks volumes about you.



Regarding my comment that we 'were a bunch of racists'. I will re-review for you. Arizona had voted down a MLK holiday. This happened a couple of times. Each time we voted it down our state was declared 'a bunch of racists' but once we voted it in we were no longer ' a bunch of racists'. Overnight we went from one side to the other due to a vote. This is how we were portrayed by the people who were calling us racists. Oh, and since my original post I have confirmed that Arizona is THE ONLY STATE that voted in a MLK holiday.



Regarding Sarah, no one has a right to point an actual weapon at anyone. (I do like how you demonize Sarah and then make the elected official a saint). My point again is that Sarah is not an elected official but when you have people who are actual elected officials doing basically the same thing they get a free pass. And our elected officials should hold themselves to a higher standard.

Go ahead and respond to the rest of my allegations. The only allegation I actually made was that "There is no doubt that the media doesn't view the left's violent imagery the same. Who can forget the images of Bush being hung and what about the MOVIE about assassinating Bush?. " I think that is a fair statement.



You, sir, are the one making allegations.

 

[H D]

If union members start getting violent in Wisconsin, will all of you that jumped in this thread blaming Palin be willing to blame Mike Capuano for the violence?

Im proud to be here with people who understand that its more than just sending an email to get you going. Every once and awhile you need to get out on the streets and get a little bloody when necessary, Rep. Mike Capuano (D-Ma.) told a crowd in Boston on Tuesday rallying in solidarity for Wisconsin union members.

 

[Thomas Rogers]

Hugh,



It is unlikely that heads get cracked or knees smashed in all this (union and union busting tactics of the past) but if that does happen the the case "could" be made that Mike Capuano contributed to that.



Again, there is a difference between contributing to a climate that fosters some activities, and being directly responsible for the activities.



The greater question is, if violence is the result, would Mike C look back at and make a public statement regretting his words?



TJR

 

[Bill V]

Besides, Hugh, if Palin and her supporters can claim that the crosshairs weren't meant to instigate violence, or that they weren't even crosshairs at all, then Capuano can claim that his saying "get a little bloody" wasn't meaning to instigate or even participate in any physical violence, but to be willing to endure physical attacks from others. The blood in question was his own at the hands of others, not the other way around.



The claims about Palin's crosshairs were pure BS--and so are any claims about Capuano's coments...

 

[WILL E]

While I don't believe he was intentionally calling for violence, any more than when President Obama said "They bring a knife, we bring a gun", it certainly was a really bad choice of words. It has a much more direct meaning then the Presidents knife/gun, since no one seriously thought someone was going to show up with a knife, or Palin's 'crosshairs'.



Of the three I would say Mike C's comments, given the circumstances, the crowd, the moment, would have the best chance of causing a weak minded person to go out and commit violence.

 

[TrainTrac]

While I don't believe he was intentionally calling for violence, any more than when President Obama said "They bring a knife, we bring a gun", it certainly was a really bad choice of words. It has a much more direct meaning then the Presidents knife/gun, since no one seriously thought someone was going to show up with a knife, or Palin's 'crosshairs'.



Of the three I would say Mike C's comments, given the circumstances, the crowd, the moment, would have the best chance of causing a weak minded person to go out and commit violence.

Yes, it was a very poor choice of words, and given the long, documented history of violence at events involving unions, I think they should be taken somewhat more seriously than those said by the President or Sarah Palin. Recall that as recently as August 2009 SEIU thugs beat up a man at a town hall event in St. Louis.