Republicans charging a fee to attend town hall meeting

So let me get this straight... just because Faux 'news' isn't reporting that Republicons are charging for questions at town hall meetings it isn't happening? This story is a lie and a liberal attack on teabaggers and their failed policies?

Are you on the radical right so brainwashed that you won't believe anything that goes against your perception of reality dished out by the corporate media?


"It's no secret why members of Congress would shy away from holding open town hall meetings — it's no fun getting yelled at by angry constituents or having an uncomfortable question become an unfortunate YouTube moment.

By outsourcing the events to third parties that charge an entry fee to raise money, members of Congress can eliminate most of the riffraff while still — in some cases — allowing reporters and TV cameras for a positive local news story...

Democratic Party of Wisconsin spokesman Graeme Zielinski said Ryan is scared to defend his record before his fellow citizens.

"Paul Ryan has had a hard time going before open crowds, and for good reason," Zielinski said. "I'm sure Ryan doesn't want to go before the public to explain while his extreme ideology caused Standard & Poor's to downgrade U.S. long-term treasury bonds. Beside, Ryan likes smaller settings — the kind where you can cozy up to a hedge fund manager and get a good $350 bottle of wine."

http://www.sodahead.com/united-stat...o-attend-town-hall-meetings/question-2086667/

"When (Ben) Quayle voted for [Congressman Paul] Ryan's plan to dismantle Medicare, he got an earful from his constituents back in May," Luis Heredia, Arizona Democratic Party executive director, says. "So now that he's decided to walk away from town halls, it's no shock that he wants a friendlier audience -- preferably one that will shell out campaign contributions."

Quayle is one of several members of Congress who've bailed on open town hall meetings -- Politico ran a story yesterday about Congressman Paul Ryan's decision to only host "pay-per-view" events for constituents to discuss Congressional issues.

Quayle also is scheduled to attend an August 23, luncheon hosted by the Arizona Republican Lawyers Association. The price tag (as determined by the ARLA): $35.

"Maybe he thinks if only those who can afford to pay will show up, he won't get asked why he voted to support the Tea Party agenda rather than our nation's economy," Heredia continues.

Quayle spokesman Richard Cullen declined to speak on the record about the congressman's decision to bail on town hall meetings."
http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2011/08/complaining_to_congressman_ben.php

The Republicons and their teabagger toadies are running scared and their time is growing short. At town halls people have given them hell for their radical anti-people agenda and they are running back to the money that got them elected. They don't want to hear from the people who voted for them. They don't represent them in Congress, they represent the interests of the money that paid for their election.

If you don't believe this then maybe you watch too much Faux 'news'.
 
Crashk said:
...Quayle also is scheduled to attend an August 23, luncheon hosted by the Arizona Republican Lawyers Association. The price tag (as determined by the ARLA): $35...
Click to expand...


LOL, Yurtroll pwned.


Will he claim that


It's the 'private organization' charging, not the Republican, or


ARLA is not a Republican organization?

 
So basically, Liberal Democrats intend to demagogue and lie from now until the election? Is that the plan? Everything CrashDummy posts is Liberal Propaganda... it's the stew they are boiling for the election... the one that tells you it was Republican's fault we were downgraded, because they wanted to cut spending and balance the budget, and if we had raised taxes on "the rich" and spent even more, we wouldn't have been downgraded. This is nothing more than an abject lie based on ignorance, and nothing more.

The same can be said for this silliness about Republicans "charging a fee" to ask questions at a "Town Hall Meeting." First of all, there is no Rule Book of Etiquette for Town Hall Meetings. If the holder of such event WANTS to charge a fee, there is no law which says they can't. In my opinion, this would disqualify the event as a "town hall meeting" and qualify it as a "fund-raising event" which is what this example was. But pinheads see a gathering of people at something political, and that's enough in their mind, to call it a "town hall meeting" and after all... it's exactly like the "town hall meetings" they are familiar with, where only their supporters show up and get to ask questions. So it's understandable how they might confuse a legitimate town hall meeting with a fund-raiser.
 
\(\(V\/V)/)/ said:
Cite.
Click to expand...

Since when do you need a cite to support common sense? Jeesh!

The phrase "Town Hall Meeting" indicates a gathering of townspeople which is open to the public and free of charge. If the event is, in fact, not open to the general public, and not free of charge, it can't be defined accurately as a "town hall meeting." You can call it that if you want to, but that's no longer what it is. To my knowledge, Obama has never attended a legitimate "town hall meeting" ...not by the criteria I mentioned at first. In every instance, his people have selected who gets to attend the "town hall" and who gets to ask the questions.
 
Dixie said:
Nonsense. You are making the claim I am lying... where's your cite?
Click to expand...

Poor Dixie.


Burden of proof

Burden of proof is a fallacy where a claimant asserts that he does not have to prove his claim, but that his opponent has to disprove it.

http://www.bcskeptics.info/resources/criticalthinking/irf.burden.html


You made this claim:


Dixie said:
... it's exactly like the "town hall meetings" they are familiar with, where only their supporters show up and get to ask questions. So it's understandable how they might confuse a legitimate town hall meeting with a fund-raiser.
Click to expand...


Your move.
 
Dixie said:
So you don't have a cite to prove I am lying, therefore, you must be lying.... you said that yourself. Checkmate.
Click to expand...

I provided a citation that establishes the burden of proof for your claim and identifies the fallacy you are lamely attempting to use.

So, do you have any evidence for your statement "... it's exactly like the "town hall meetings" they are familiar with, where only their supporters show up and get to ask questions. So it's understandable how they might confuse a legitimate town hall meeting with a fund-raiser."

Yes, or no?
 
\(\(V\/V)/)/ said:
I provided a citation that establishes the burden of proof for your claim and identifies the fallacy you are lamely attempting to use.

So, do you have any evidence for your statement "... it's exactly like the "town hall meetings" they are familiar with, where only their supporters show up and get to ask questions. So it's understandable how they might confuse a legitimate town hall meeting with a fund-raiser."

Yes, or no?
Click to expand...


"When you make a claim, you either back it up or you're lying." -YOU (circa 20 mins ago)

You claim I am lying, yet you gave no cite to support your claim... therefore, by your own criteria, you must be lying about me lying.
 
Dixie said:
"When you make a claim, you either back it up or you're lying." -YOU (circa 20 mins ago) You claim I am lying, yet you gave no cite to support your claim... therefore, by your own criteria, you must be lying about me lying.
Click to expand...

You failed to back your claim up, didn't you?

Therefore, you made it up.

Ergo, you are lying.


5. He who asserts must prove. In order to establish an assertion, the team must support it with enough evidence and logic to convince an intelligent but previously uninformed person that it is more reasonable to believe the assertion than to disbelieve it. Facts must be accurate. Visual materials are permissible, and once introduced, they become available for the opponents' use if desired.


http://homepage.ntu.edu.tw/~karchung/debate1.htm
 
\(\(V\/V)/)/ said:
You failed to back your claim up, didn't you?

Therefore, you made it up.

Ergo, you are lying.


5. He who asserts must prove. In order to establish an assertion, the team must support it with enough evidence and logic to convince an intelligent but previously uninformed person that it is more reasonable to believe the assertion than to disbelieve it. Facts must be accurate. Visual materials are permissible, and once introduced, they become available for the opponents' use if desired.


http://homepage.ntu.edu.tw/~karchung/debate1.htm
Click to expand...

Again, you must be lying, you have still failed to post a cite to prove me wrong. He who asserts must prove... you assert that I am a liar, yet continue to fail to prove it. Ergo, you are a habitual liar. It is impossible for you to post anything without a lie coming out. Furthermore, by your own criteria, any responding post you make at this point, short of a link to a cite proving I have lied, is also going to be considered a lie. You have quite the conundrum.
 
Dixie said:
l...it's exactly like the "town hall meetings" they are familiar with, where only their supporters show up and get to ask questions.
Click to expand...

There's you ASSERTING that the town halls and fund raisers are "exactly alike"...

Dixie said:
Again, you must be lying, you have still failed to post a cite to prove me wrong. He who asserts must prove... you assert that I am a liar, yet continue to fail to prove it. Ergo, you are a habitual liar. It is impossible for you to post anything without a lie coming out. Furthermore, by your own criteria, any responding post you make at this point, short of a link to a cite proving I have lied, is also going to be considered a lie. You have quite the conundrum.
Click to expand...


Now, either cite some evidence to PROVE your ASSERTION, or admit you were lying.
 
The wingnuts here will never admit that their side can no longer stand up to public scrutiny, that they are willing to represent corporate and their own personal profits over the well-being of the population. Dixie and his ilk can try to split hairs or change the subject or try to place blame on others, but the facts remain that Republicons and their teabagger toadies are trying to distance themselves from their constituency because people are angry at their ideology that is responsible for many of todays financial problems.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
There's you ASSERTING that the town halls and fund raisers are "exactly alike"...




Now, either cite some evidence to PROVE your ASSERTION, or admit you were lying.
Click to expand...

But I'm not lying, you and knothead are ASSERTING that I have lied when I haven't. You failed to back up your assertion with any cite, so by knothead's own criteria, you must both be LYING. Hey, I didn't make the rule, knothead did, I am merely applying it to your assertions which haven't been backed up with a cite. Now, if you two can stop running in circles, maybe one of you can redeem yourselves by posting something to support your assertion? Or maybe you want to admit you're lying?
 
yay...more obsessive groans from dune...just "tit for tat" huh liar....:rolleyes:

btw, care to explain how the OP is not a lie....are the reps charging or the private orgs? come on, debate for once instead of just insults and groans.
 
Dixie said:
But I'm not lying, you and knothead are ASSERTING that I have lied when I haven't. You failed to back up your assertion with any cite, so by knothead's own criteria, you must both be LYING. Hey, I didn't make the rule, knothead did, I am merely applying it to your assertions which haven't been backed up with a cite. Now, if you two can stop running in circles, maybe one of you can redeem yourselves by posting something to support your assertion? Or maybe you want to admit you're lying?
Click to expand...

But you were ASSERTING and unless you provide some citations to back up your assertion, then it proves you were lying...thank you for admitting as much.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top