Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-06-2009, 09:27 PM
 
Location: North Cackelacky....in the hills.
19,567 posts, read 21,868,498 times
Reputation: 2519

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by MovingForward View Post
Nope, sorry. The AARP did the right thing. Those people tried to disrupt the meeting. They weren't the least bit interested in debating the issues. If they're going to prevent an open exchange of ideas, the meeting should be shut down.
The only ones I saw stifling the exchange of ideas were those who put the meeting on...perhaps you saw a different video...or of course oyu support Obama's plan.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-07-2009, 09:06 AM
 
Location: Wisconsin
37,971 posts, read 22,147,086 times
Reputation: 13801
Quote:
Originally Posted by plannine View Post
Although the video seems to have many edits where i guess she was interrupted by the same people and they have been removed in the convenience of tilting the story.

She told them they would have their chance to speak, but they decided to run the meeting themselves. So they left.
And they (the old folks in the audience) should give back all their socialist benefits that they currently get and go back to work.

Rude is rude, and these folks were just that.

And yes, I am a AARP member.
I'm not sure what your membership has to do with it. But, if you are sitting there, and the spokesperson starts telling falsehoods, or building a series of false premises, then people have a right to stop them, and correct their false or misleading statements, rather then let them mislead an entire audience for an hour, and then open the floor for discussion.

It makes it hard to refute lies when, after the speech, you have to say "45 minutes ago you said X which was false, and then 42 minutes ago you said Y which was also false". The woman did not want to debate, she just wanted to control the discussion, give her talking points, and state her false assertions without being called on them.

Right out of the box, she makes the declarative statement that "I think we can all agree that this system is a sustainable system. And I think we can all agree that....' (its unclear what she said here) What was clear, was she was making false assertions from the very beginning, and the people in the audience were not about to let her get away with it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2009, 09:22 AM
 
Location: Wisconsin
37,971 posts, read 22,147,086 times
Reputation: 13801
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovingForward View Post
Nope, sorry. The AARP did the right thing. Those people tried to disrupt the meeting. They weren't the least bit interested in debating the issues. If they're going to prevent an open exchange of ideas, the meeting should be shut down.
In other words, if the person is not allowed to present false assumptions and go completely unchallenged, then its just not fair.

If i'm correct, then that woman was from AARP, which makes her a paid representative of the people at that meeting, she works for them.

So when someone who works for you starts a presentation by making statements that create a false representation of your views, you should stop them and correct them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2009, 09:30 AM
 
35,016 posts, read 39,151,733 times
Reputation: 6195
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wapasha View Post
Those stupid old people!!

They had the audacity to interrupt that political hack when she distorted the truth or told lies, and told them to basically shut up and swallow the 0bama propaganda and lies she was spewing.

Were those people flown in or bussed, did they look like Brooks Brothers operatives for the Republican Party? Or were they just Americans who have had enough lies and patronizing pats on the head by politicians and 0bama hacks?
That woman was awful, but it's not that she was some kind of Obama shill. She was just a cold, incapable b*tch who NEVER should have had that job. I hope they fired her once they saw her in action in this video.

There's a legitimate complaint about this but it's nothing to do with Obama or even politics. Be honest.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2009, 09:34 AM
 
Location: Wisconsin
37,971 posts, read 22,147,086 times
Reputation: 13801
Quote:
Originally Posted by delusianne View Post
That woman was awful, but it's not that she was some kind of Obama shill. She was just a cold, incapable b*tch who NEVER should have had that job. I hope they fired her once they saw her in action in this video.

There's a legitimate complaint about this but it's nothing to do with Obama or even politics. Be honest.
Its only about 0bama in as much as he is the one pushing the health care that these people do not want.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2009, 09:37 AM
 
35,016 posts, read 39,151,733 times
Reputation: 6195
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wapasha View Post
Its only about 0bama in as much as he is the one pushing the health care that these people do not want.
Dont blame him for AARP's bad hiring decisions. "do not want": How do you know? There was the Hugo Chavez guy, but everyone else appeared eager to listen and consider. If they'd sent a better person out who would actually listen and be honest it would have been a different story.

I cant believe how bad she was. Did you hear her run through that introduction? How insulting. And still the people were polite to her.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2009, 11:27 AM
 
Location: Michigan
5,376 posts, read 5,345,971 times
Reputation: 1633
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wapasha View Post
I'm not sure what your membership has to do with it. But, if you are sitting there, and the spokesperson starts telling falsehoods, or building a series of false premises, then people have a right to stop them, and correct their false or misleading statements, rather then let them mislead an entire audience for an hour, and then open the floor for discussion.

It makes it hard to refute lies when, after the speech, you have to say "45 minutes ago you said X which was false, and then 42 minutes ago you said Y which was also false". The woman did not want to debate, she just wanted to control the discussion, give her talking points, and state her false assertions without being called on them.

Right out of the box, she makes the declarative statement that "I think we can all agree that this system is a sustainable system. And I think we can all agree that....' (its unclear what she said here) What was clear, was she was making false assertions from the very beginning, and the people in the audience were not about to let her get away with it.
First the video starts off with 3 edits in the first 20 seconds. Right there, you already don't know what has happened. There are a couple of voices that are always out in front all though the video.

Then she said "I think we call all agree that the system we have now is not sustainable". Even you played with the words to get what you wanted to believe.

More edits. More audience crap.

Her problem was she was trying to be nice, and got frustrated.
I would not have let the audience take over. (I am a big, big dark person, while the same age as some of them, they would have nightmares just thinking about meeting me outside in the dark)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:09 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top