re: #301 Talking Point Detective

So - thanks for the definition. So my usage was very precisse.

Here’s my take.

(1) You are assuming the injured cops had honorable intentions.
(2) You are unconcerned about unjustified injuries to any OWS protestors.
(3) You have an anti-OWS agenda, and feel that injured cops “vindicates” your perspective.

Now I could be generalizing a bit - but earlier today it was explained to us that if someone puts themselves in a position to get injured, whether they were doing something directly that resulted in their injury, it is to be expected. It’s the risk they take, and thus unconcerning.

Look - I’m not saying that you’re glad that cops got injured. I’ll leave such ridiculous arguments for the hippie-obsessed.

I’m saying that you’re more than happy to exploit the injuries to cops for partisan purposes.

No different than those who have exploited anything negative they could find about OWS for partisan purposes.

No different than what happened with the Tea Partiers, btw.

indeed

we could be talking about the OWS agenda, and socioeconomic issues in this country that they are trying to highlight, but instead we are made to be fixated on reports of violence