Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #331138

Re: OT: Conservative sexism

Newsgroups comp.os.linux.advocacy
From JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet>
Subject Re: OT: Conservative sexism
References (10 earlier) <shgmvkxi03.ap@rooftop.invalid> <D260450D.62CBC%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> <sehgu0of.a@rooftop.invalid> <D260F9AF.62D49%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> <a26bcfc1-0dbe-4792-b1e0-bfc4708330c0@googlegroups.com>
Message-ID <slrnn3nhvm.35q.jedi@nomad.mishnet> (permalink)
Date 2015-11-05 15:19 -0600

Show all headers | View raw

On 2015-11-05, Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, November 5, 2015 at 12:19:07 PM UTC-7, Snit wrote:
>> On 11/5/15, 11:51 AM, in article sehgu0of.a@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
>> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
>> 
>> > Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>> >> On 11/4/15, 10:31 PM, in article shgmvkxi03.ap@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
>> >> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
>> >> 
>> >> ... 
>> >>>> The accusation was Clinton lied by speaking of gun deaths and including
>> >>>> suicides... but as noted, in the context she was completely honest.
>> >>>> 
>> >>> 
>> >>> So you fear answering the question.
>> >> 
>> >> Nope. I am keeping the focus where it started. There was an accusation that
>> >> Clinton lied in a commercial. I showed the accusation had no basis.
>> > 
>> > No you didn't.
>> 
>> Sure I did. The claim was she inflated gun death numbers by including
>> suicides 
>
> In a discussion about "gun violence". While she'd be technically correct if 
> you confine the definition of the word "violence", she knows full well that 
> the term "gun violence" is  politically supercharged and it creates the 
> vision of people being senselessly murdered. 

    This is simply a problem with the Democrat position on gun control. You 
are not likely to find a Democrat that won't spin this subject in this way.

    There's probably a Republican equivalent but I can't think of it at the
moment. Doesn't mean there isn't one though. I would not use this as an example
of the accusation "Clinton lied".

[deletia]

Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: OT: Conservative sexism Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-11-04 12:17 -0800
  Re: OT: Conservative sexism owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-04 20:28 +0000
    Re: OT: Conservative sexism Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-11-04 15:42 -0500
      Re: OT: Conservative sexism Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-04 17:35 -0500
        Re: OT: Conservative sexism Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-11-04 17:38 -0500
        Re: OT: Conservative sexism Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-05 09:30 -0500
          Re: OT: Conservative sexism Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-11-05 09:39 -0500
          Re: OT: Conservative sexism Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-11-05 09:30 -0700
            Re: OT: Conservative sexism Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-11-05 11:47 -0800
    Re: OT: Conservative sexism owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-04 20:47 +0000
      Re: OT: Conservative sexism owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-04 21:57 +0000
        Re: OT: Conservative sexism Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-11-04 16:59 -0500
        Re: OT: Conservative sexism owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-05 04:06 +0000
          Re: OT: Conservative sexism Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-11-04 20:10 -0800
          Re: OT: Conservative sexism owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-05 04:33 +0000
            Re: OT: Conservative sexism owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-05 04:51 +0000
              Re: OT: Conservative sexism owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-05 05:31 +0000
                Re: OT: Conservative sexism Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-11-04 21:41 -0800
                Re: OT: Conservative sexism owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-05 18:51 +0000
                Re: OT: Conservative sexism Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-11-05 12:18 -0700
                Re: OT: Conservative sexism owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-11-05 19:24 +0000
                Re: OT: Conservative sexism Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-11-05 12:44 -0700
                Re: OT: Conservative sexism Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-11-05 12:32 -0800
                Re: OT: Conservative sexism JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-11-05 15:19 -0600
                Re: OT: Conservative sexism Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-11-05 13:54 -0800
                Re: OT: Conservative sexism GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-06 16:38 -0700
                Re: OT: Conservative sexism Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-11-06 15:48 -0800
                Re: OT: Conservative sexism GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-06 19:52 -0700
                Re: OT: Conservative sexism GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-06 19:51 -0700
                Re: OT: Conservative sexism Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-11-06 22:28 -0700
                Re: OT: Conservative sexism GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-11-07 12:45 -0700
              Re: OT: Conservative sexism Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-11-04 21:36 -0800
      Re: OT: Conservative sexism Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-11-04 14:53 -0800

csiph-web