Read the article.
I did Op2, sorry...didn't catch the humor she sees. You did?
Read the article.
OK, I'm agreeing with you on that just for the sake of argument here.
You still haven't explained to me what she found so "funny" about the attempted assassination of one of her colleagues?
He wasn't laughing about it.
I did Op2, sorry...didn't catch the humor she sees. You did?
Dah......What the hell does that have anything to do with her hateful comments? Quit playing stupid.....You know better. Words have consequences....correct?Was she watching the attempted assassination of the Congressman when she said that?
I did Op2, sorry...didn't catch the humor she sees. You did?
You're either stupid or lying, take your pick. Seriously. What she did is very poor taste and the locals there can deal with her but to anyone who can read and comprehend the English language, she's addressing the reactions of others to the shooting and makes a negative statement about NRA supporters. It's pretty simple.LOL. Another lie. She thought the assassination attempt was funny. Can't get around that. Is this an accurate expression of liberal values? Did you think it funny?
Why are the Dems asking for her resignation?
Are you still beating your wife?
You can see the humor or not see it but regardless the article makes clear what the generated the humor and it wasn't Scalise being shot.
There, you finally admitted your mistake, now was that so hard?She thought those crying while describing the assassination attempt of Scalise and others was funny.
She said the shooting was "so funny." Hard to spin this one.
Dah......What the hell does that have anything to do with her hateful comments? Quit playing stupid.....You know better. Words have consequences....correct?
There, you finally admitted your mistake, now was that so hard?
He is making a distinction without a difference. She thought those crying while describing the assassination attempt of Scalise and others was funny.
If she is watching X and says it's funny then she finds X funny. That means she's not referring to anything in the "Not X" category.
If she is watching X and says it's funny then she finds X funny. That means she's not referring to anything in the "Not X" category.
But Scalise shooting was in category X. Hard to separate the shooting from what she felt was funny.
Very difficult to make anything relating to the incident as being funny. And it is difficult to split hairs enough to make something positive about anything suggesting anything is funny.Seriously now. She did not say the shooting was funny. She said the Republican reaction to the shooting was funny, as in strange. Poor choice of words on her part. Even realizing what she actually said, she still picked a poor topic to get into in this situation. But, in all fairness, in the article she did not say the shooting itself was funny. There is plenty to criticize in politics and journalism without needing to misstate what someone said. Unfounded sensationalism by either CNN or message board artists is not helpful to moving the country, or worthwhile discourse, forward.
But Scalise shooting was in category X. Hard to separate the shooting from what she felt was funny.
I thought we'd make progress today but no. You've got issues and much more work to do.No, I am pointing out the ridiculous distinction without a difference.
Very difficult to make anything relating to the incident as being funny. And it is difficult to split hairs enough to make something positive about anything suggesting anything is funny.
Getting shot was not funny, but crawling for his life was if you were there to see it??? Sick ***** world when someone is shot in an open field because of his politics. If you must make a comment, how about, it was gut wrenchingly funny to watch the SOB shooter sucking for air before he died.
The Scalise shooting would be in the X category if she was watching the Scalise shooting. But she was not watching the Scalise shooting.
I thought we'd make progress today but no. You've got issues and much more work to do.
No, she was watching those describing the Scalise shooting. My God, this is not hard. They were describing the shooting and she thought it was funny.
Even her fellow Dems see the problem, but not you.
I feel like I'm in a "Who's On First" routine. What is the point of this?
Hard for you, easy for the rest of world.But Scalise shooting was in category X. Hard to separate the shooting from what she felt was funny.
Hard for you, easy for the rest of world.
I feel like I'm in a "Who's On First" routine. What is the point of this?
We ALL have issues just like YOU DO.I thought we'd make progress today but no. You've got issues and much more work to do.
Hard for you, easy for the rest of world.
No, she was watching those describing the Scalise shooting. My God, this is not hard. They were describing the shooting and she thought it was funny. Maybe the part she found funny is when Scalise was crawling to the outfield to try and save his life? Or maybe the part where the man was shot in the chest. Or the man that dove in the dug out with a bullet wound. Hilarious.
Even her fellow Dems see the problem, but not you.
It seems most on this threat agree with me. It seems her fellow Dems agree with me. It must be lonely being wrong so often.
I don't even see what the issue is? Getting shot at while someone is trying to kill you IS NOT FUNNY!!!!!!!!
lol smhIt seems most on this threat agree with me. It seems her fellow Dems agree with me. It must be lonely being wrong so often.
lol smh
Friends, we all do realize that frequently one person may furnish the body and the editor applies the headline? Doe s that make two sick people?
That's why it's the responsibility of the person linking to the article to make sure the article says what the headline says it says instead of just blind linking.
Ill bet you she is related to American Fatbutt....that is typical of it's kind of trash.....cowards ...every one of themNew Civility: Nebraska Democrat Doubles Down on Saying Republicans Getting Shot "Was Funny"
![]()
Katie Pavlich
|
Posted: Jun 16, 2017 11:15 AM
Omaha-World Herald:
A Nebraska Democratic Party official has refused calls to resign her volunteer position after calling reactions to this week’s shooting of a high-ranking Republican member of Congress “so funny” on social media.Chelsey Gentry-Tipton of Omaha said in statement that she will not resign as chairwoman of the party’s Black Caucus, saying her post was taken out of context by party officials.The Nebraska party’s leadership asked Gentry-Tipton to step down Wednesday, several hours after she wrote, in a Facebook thread about the shooting at in Alexandria, Virginia, “Watching the congressman crying on live tv abt the trauma they experienced. Y is this so funny tho?”Later, in the same thread, she stated, “The very people that push pro NRA legislation in efforts to pad their pockets with complete disregard for human life. Yeah, having a hard time feeling bad for them.”
The question now is, what does the DNC have to say about this? Will newly minted Chairman Tom Perez, who said at a recent rally that Republicans "don't give a damn about people," step in? Or will he allow her to continue in her position as a representation of the Democrat Party?