I'm curious. Which "hardcore leftists" (plural) are supporting her? In this thread, at least, I see one person supporting her, several people saying it's not a big story and poking fun at the righties trying to make it one, some people (myself included) saying what she did was inappropriate, and the rest are those hardcore righties piling on to Cad's daily dose of feigned outrage.
Um, what? Did you have an actual point there comrade, or was that just talking in commie tongues? Sadly I am not real conversant with ancient Marxist tongues so I missed the gist of that.Intelligent people tend to have this odd aversion to bullshit. If folks tried not being such conspiracy trafficking numbskull's other people will not get pissed because their time is being wasted with the cult nonsense made to suck in the lowest common denominator of ignorant people in this country.
Trying to talk sense to a con is like trying to argue with a 9/11 truther, except conservatisms conspiracy mongering goes back 30 years of stupid.
Any rational person has only so much patience for garbage.
Her response was to the Republicans' existence. Nothing about the Republican mailer was in any way offensive, and in fact was probably very, very similarly worded to mass mailers that she herself has sent out.Sadly, I'm not at all surprised you'd choose such a dishonest way to characterize her response. It was not "Republicans' existence" that set her off. She responded to the distinctly offensive (from her perspective) spam they sent her. Did she overreact? Yes, I already said she did. Was it merely due to "Republicans' existence?" Hardly, that's a purely partisan lie.
OK, fair enough. I certainly agree both sides often fail at basic civility. I do think there are a good number of right-wing personalities whose full-time jobs seems to be fanning the flames of hatred, but they don't have a monopoly on it.The professor was who I was thinking of. Sorry, but cad has a point that there's hypocrisy on the left when they claim Republicans are the ones making the national debate uncivil. (You know, like when people were suggesting Palin and radio personalities were a cause of the Arizona shooting.)
But I don't want to seem like I'm letting any of the forum posters off the hook. They are plenty of rabid partisans on this board. The only difference is P&N posters aren't newsworthy.
Wait - I have objective moments? Who'd a thunk it.Indeed. Republicans have "existed" for this woman's entire life. If it was their mere existence which provoked her to a momentary fit of rage, one would think she would have been running around "f-youing" daily for decades now. Ah Werepossum, not one of your more objective moments.
- wolf
Um, what? Did you have an actual point there comrade, or was that just talking in commie tongues? Sadly I am not real conversant with ancient Marxist tongues so I missed the gist of that.
His words were perfectly clear. While I don't agree with all of them -- I know many conservatives who can engage in intelligent discussion; we just rarely see them here -- there was nothing confusing about what he wrote. Perhaps you should look into Remedial English?Um, what? Did you have an actual point there comrade, or was that just talking in commie tongues? Sadly I am not real conversant with ancient Marxist tongues so I missed the gist of that.
That is simply false. You are now digging in and compounding your dishonesty rather than manning up and admitting, "Yeah, I went over the top with that one." If you bother to read the articles, she explained exactly what she found so offensive and why. That you refuse to acknowledge it does not reflect well on you, whether you agree with her or not.Her response was to the Republicans' existence. Nothing about the Republican mailer was in any way offensive ...
Anybody really buying the idea that being homosexual on a college campus today is accepted less well than being a conservative?
Yet another "CAD is butthurt" thread.
Lefties in full divert mode here.
lol
(You know, like when people were suggesting Palin and radio personalities were a cause of the Arizona shooting.)
They get sent all the time from all sorts of groups. They must be approved though and this one certainly was.
Yea, what she did was obviously un-professional and should be at worst scolded for not using her personal email account to do this but other than that, it's not a big deal. She's an adult and if she chooses to use offensive language to express her anger at a political party or group that's her call.
Lefties in full divert mode here.
lol
"F#@$ YOU REPUBLICANS" - Isn't that the common response from a Liberal once they have been hung out to dry? Maybe she had her funding cut for studying bacterial growth in her vagina.
Someone in her organization approved political troll spam being sent to her email account. That was unprofessional. The reply was perfectly fitting.
Who? Who approved anything?
I didn't say anything about the reply, learn to read before you post.
Those officials who approved political troll spam to be sent to the entire university should face consequences. There is no educational value to this spam that would justify allowing it to be sent to the entire campus. A professor who says FVCK off to such spam should not.The College Republican email, which was sent to the entire University of Iowa Community, had been approved by a number of university officials before being sent out.
Yet another "CAD is butthurt" thread.
Sadly, I'm not at all surprised you'd choose such a dishonest way to characterize her response. It was not "Republicans' existence" that set her off. She responded to the distinctly offensive (from her perspective) spam they sent her. Did she overreact? Yes, I already said she did. Was it merely due to "Republicans' existence?" Hardly, that's a purely partisan lie.