It was over the Tea Party being, in his opinion, against union workers. He said, "President Obama, this is you army, we are ready to march. Let's take these sons of _____ out and give America back to America where we belong!

 

Obama was present for this. Did he rebuke Hoffa? No. He just told how proud he was of him and of other union leaders.

 

Are we sure there wasn't some more context that shows what his point was?

 

Are you guys thinking that he was advocating violence?

 

How do you know he wasn't talking about voting them out?

Edited September 6, 201115 yr by Clyde

Context doesn't matter in Hoffa's case as the original post just mentioned him calling the Tea Partiers sons of ________. He did. It was at a rally for Labor Day. Nothing was mentioned about violence in the original post since I don't think anyone believes he's advocating violence against the Tea Party.

It was over the Tea Party being, in his opinion, against union workers. He said, "President Obama, this is you army, we are ready to march. Let's take these sons of _____ out and give America back to America where we belong!

 

Obama was present for this. Did he rebuke Hoffa? No. He just told how proud he was of him and of other union leaders.

 

Come on now, maybe the president thinks that is being civil.

Context doesn't matter in Hoffa's case as the original post just mentioned him calling the Tea Partiers sons of ________. He did. It was at a rally for Labor Day. Nothing was mentioned about violence in the original post since I don't think anyone believes he's advocating violence against the Tea Party.

 

To be clear, we're mad about the language? I didn't get that impression from the earlier posts. I read that people believe Hoffa Jr was advocating violence. (See post 28)

 

The TP also released a statement decrying his call for violence.

Here's the Fox News video of the Hoffa speech.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6gHfhwShhA

Here's the full quote (ie unedited like the above Fox News video)?

 

HOFFA: Everybody here's got to vote. If we go back and keep the eye on the prize, let's take these son of a Word Filter ViolationWord Filter ViolationWord Filter ViolationWord Filter ViolationWord Filter Violationes out and give America back to America where we belong! Thank you very much!

 

 

Civil? No.

 

Advocating violance as BB claimed? Uh, no.

 

The point seemed simple to me: Let's vote these "folks" out . This is no different than Sen McConnell saying he wants to make President Obama a one-term President.

 

Salty language doesn't do much to my attention or to get me upset as long as it's not racial or aimed at a particular ethnicity/religion. Generic cussing like this doesn't even get my attention.

 

However, if you're the POTUS and you've called for civility then you need to make sure that you are consistent.

 

Note: The POTUS , despite previous claims, was not present when this was said. That came from the Fox News reporter onsite.

To be clear, we're mad about the language? I didn't get that impression from the earlier posts. I read that people believe Hoffa Jr was advocating violence. (See post 28)

 

The TP also released a statement decrying his call for violence.

 

I was talking about the first post mentioning the rant.

 

Here's the DNC chair doing a little back peddling on civility.

 

http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2011/09/06/dnc-chair-hoffa-are-you-kidding-me-0#ixzz1XAsjqMaj

 

I just wonder why the president didn't use this opportunity to strengthen his call for civility? Seems like it would have been a great chance.

I was talking about the first post mentioning the rant.

 

Here's the DNC chair doing a little back peddling on civility.

 

http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2011/09/06/dnc-chair-hoffa-are-you-kidding-me-0#ixzz1XAsjqMaj

 

I just wonder why the president didn't use this opportunity to strengthen his call for civility? Seems like it would have been a great chance.

 

Good question.

 

The sad but not shocking aspect of this is how it's being reported ie call for violence.

Good question.

 

The sad but not shocking aspect of this is how it's being reported ie call for violence.

 

I haven't been on much today but the only one I saw was the expected Drudge headlines about a call to war. Didn't see anything on Fox, MSNBC or Yahoo saying it was a call for violence but the day is young.

I haven't been on much today but the only one I saw was the expected Drudge headlines about a call to war. Didn't see anything on Fox, MSNBC or Yahoo saying it was a call for violence but the day is young.

 

Even MSNBC said it was over the top yet didn't mention that it was in reference to voting.

 

It's the world we now live in.

Are we sure there wasn't some more context that shows what his point was?

 

Are you guys thinking that he was advocating violence?

 

How do you know he wasn't talking about voting them out?

Given how many on this board reacted to Palin's cross-hairs, I'm surprised you're asking me these questions.

Given how many on this board reacted to Palin's cross-hairs, I'm surprised you're asking me these questions.

 

To 99.9% of us neither were calls to violence. However, splitting hairs, at least this comment came with context (ie voting them out) for the 0.1% to understand that it wasn't a call to arms.

To 99.9% of us neither were calls to violence. However, splitting hairs, at least this comment came with context (ie voting them out) for the 0.1% to understand that it wasn't a call to arms.

 

I have no problem with Hoffa's comments other than the name calling as it was obvious to me he was talking about voting.

Amazing how people defend the Chief of so called civility when his cohorts produce the highest levels of uncivilty. It is just another example of the hypocrits on the left.

Call people out on an issue, then do it theirselves and try to defend it. That is what was being pointed out, but there was an effort to divert their hyprocisy into something else and blame it on the other side.

Amazing how people defend the Chief of so called civility when his cohorts produce the highest levels of uncivilty. It is just another example of the hypocrits on the left.

Call people out on an issue, then do it theirselves and try to defend it. That is what was being pointed out, but there was an effort to divert their hyprocisy into something else and blame it on the other side.

 

When you understand the real issue (hint: it's not what you thought it was) then we can have a debate.

 

I've already stated that the POTUS needs to address it in order to be consistent. You ignored that(shocking).