You-Gi-Owe wrote:In response to your 1st paragraph. Yes, there was a mixed response from the Republican side, 1/2 of which caved and 1/2 of which viewed that particular call for civility as an attempt to stifle free speech and criticism of the Administration's policies. Yet the Administration continued to call for civility without proof of overt violence. Then a madman went on a shooting spree in AZ and it was quickly linked to political rhetoric by the mainstream media and calls for civility continued. But there wasn't any link between the madman and the rhetoric. Now, as I am wishing that the Administration would call for civility, there have been actual death threats. I feel that there is a definate difference in the threat level, therefore I feel a call for civility is justified. Do you believe that the threat level was as high when the President was calling for civility then as now?
In response to your second paragraph, do you really and seriously think that Walker and the Wisconsin Republicans could withstand an investigation by the FBI about making a death threat hoax? I am not trying to link the Democrats and the Unions to the death threats, other than it is as likely that their supports are as responsible for their wing-nuts as others deem the Republicans and the Tea Party types should be responsible for those wing-nuts. I think, because of the severity of there being death threats that it would be very good if civility were called for.
The call for civility only gained any traction after the shooting, not before which even then is when the split occurred. As much to my knowledge no body has been shot yet in Wis. therefore why Dems should have to denounce their rhetoric and believe in civility when only half of reps needed an actually shooting to change their minds. Edited new info: Moreover, as mentioned there already has been denouncing of uncivil rhetoric by Wis. Democrats why should Obama has to be involved when the State leadership already has performed the job for him.
Secondly, what makes you think a Democrat or Union would seriously believe they could withstand an investigation by the FBI about making a death threat. Also, there is precedent of Republicans lying about attacks just remember the McCain supporter who made the false claim of being attacked by a Black Obama supporter because of McCain bumper sticker.
You-Gi-Owe wrote:But the 31% that you're citing isn't a majority, is it?
I said by around meaning that 31% more individuals supported the unions over walker. In that 61% of individuals supported the Unions to the 33% supporting Walker. Sorry if that was not clear.
*I candidly point to John McCain prior to the 2008 elections.*
