OK, how about I phrase my point without that nasty ol’ sarcasm which hurts your widdle feelings so terribly.
I believe the actions of one staffer are his alone and are entirely irrelevant to the important policy considerations which should drive our political decision making. Further, I find that your choice of title for this topic is partisan to the point of absurdity.
How’s that, babykins?
Wow, I can smell the desperation. I did not say nor imply any such thing. In fact, I asked SPECIFICALLY what this should mean for Meehan. The fact that you contort my OP with your poor reading and seemingly completely ignore my further explanation in Post 35 demonstrates that you are simply choosing to be a dick.
Well, all that practice you must have been doing has paid off handsomely.
No, a thug is a young black male wearing a hoodie. This guy’s just a douche, at worst.
Is he a democrat? Is he a thug? There ARE republican thugs, I guess. Show me one who throws someone to the ground and I’ll describe him and his actions as such. This really isn’t that difficult.
Yee-hah!
Because it’s false, and because I don’t believe you’re so unintelligent that you have forgotten what you wrote an hour ago in the OP. There are a couple of people here who are clever enough to be kind of successful with this kind of nonsense, but you’re not one of them.
There’s no shortage of partisanship in Great Debates, that’s for sure. But your thread and your title were both ludicrous and I don’t believe you thought there was any kind of serious debate about what should happen in this case. You were looking for a cheap political score. You can get that in the Pit if you like, but it’s not a debate.
Curses, foiled again! Wait a minute, maybe magellan01 will hand me a lifeline…
Who is the Boston democrat?
And if you wanted to engage in a spectacularly naked and ineffective bit of partisan hackery, you would have… started this thread, complete with “democrat” in the title.
Hmmm…defending journalistic integrity to get my attention! Do you have a little crush on me?.
ps. Also, remind me where it says that political candidates are obliged to answer questions on the street.
I can’t find any such AP story. I do find one that says he fell. Can you provide a link?
Also, I find it interesting that we both agree that you can’t see McCormack being pushed in the video, but Fox has the storywith this headline:
And the story links to the exact same video but says this:
Man you’re an ass. YOU make a ridiculous statement in an attempt to paint me as extreme. I point out your stupidity, you acknowledge it while trying to hide behind hyperbole, which if you do so, means you had nothing to say in the first place.
Now you offer your opinion on a tangent, which is basically the same as what I said it Post 35, but completely ignore the question that WAS asked in the OP, i.e., “what should happen to Meehan?”
I see that you find this whole debate thing difficult, and that’s okay. But you simply must try harder.
ahem
Not a conservative poster. A stupid, knuckle-dragging coward who views the world through a rigid partisan lens and then is unwilling to be enough of a man to stand by his bullshit assertions.
Kicking a foot back and pointing at your chin with a “who, little-old-me?” isn’t fooling anyone. If you want to act like a moron don’t feign indignation when someone points it out.
Why is your thread title “Democrat thuggery” as opposed to “Meehan thuggery”?
Well, I’d expect them to say the same thing I’d say if the tables were turned. The thug should be arrested and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. As I offered in my OP, which most people haven’t bothered to answer. (Which I find thoroughly sad, if not entertaining.)
It almost sounds like something from a Chinese restaurant menu. “You want Democwat thuggewy? Boston style or Kowloon style?”
Since there’s no evidence that he actually committed a crime, he shouldn’t be arrested.
But instead you got what you wanted … all the mean old liberals pissing on your obvious partisan hackery.
Win - win, I guess.
Can you show us evidence that would point to the need for his arrest?
We were too polite to mention it, but, yes, your Huggies could use changing.
You really are an jerkoff with zero self-awareness. You continuously hurl ad hominems on these boards, calling people dumb, stupid, moronic, knee-jerk, etc., etc. As if you think you’re Stephen Hawking. But I can only assume you’re an imbecile, because I can’t recall you contributing to debate, just resorting to sticking your tongue out and spewing insults at posters. This is what you do. Are you truly not aware of it. Are you that far gone?
Either way, that is why you can string together an insult of Proustian length and it wouldn’t matter. Because you are what you profess to despise.
And that is just so fucking righteous. The fact that you’re so unaware of it is just the cherry on top. Keep up the good work.
Sigh. From the OP: (bolding added)
We’re not the detectives on the case, we’re a bunch of people on a debate board. We deal in the conditional all the time.
Actually, just one win: another piece of evidence as to how left-partisan so many on these boards are. I guess there is probably another win. That being that lurkers will see how a pretty simple question in an OP that makes a democrat look bad gets responded to.
So, I guess you’re right: win-win.
Assuming things are as they appear, he still shouldn’t be arrested, since we have no evidence that a crime was committed.