Posts: 711
Threads: 78
Joined: Feb 2008
Savita,
I have not met you or RJ, I responded to this topic as I felt it was started because of the angry comments by others, to your posts under the Big Island Circus thread.
My apologies, Tom if I misjudged your intent!
I also believed the topic Hawaii Island anti-vaccination policies under Puna Politics was the wrong forum. By posting here, I think this question should have been addressed to anyone who is running for office in the general elections. RJ was no longer a candidate for the council!
Since Rob locked the thread "Council candidate accused of voter fraud," I am posting this here.
No person, however much you disagree with their views on whatever topic, should be subject to these kinds of vitriolic attacks, it is beyond the pale!
hikatz quote:
"No person, however much you disagree with their views on whatever topic, should be subject to that kind of vitriolic attack, it was beyond the pale!"
hikatz, this is why so much wrong gets done in our community and in the world. People are afraid to take on bullies like Tiffany Edwards Hunt, Russell Ruderman, and Graham Ellis etc .
These folks don't play fair. They plot against you and they are not transparent esp. Mrs. hunt who claims to be a "newswoman" . She's not a newswoman, she's proven to be a foolish woman thinking she can get away with what she has done and get the community to accept it.
Any self respecting politician would have resigned by now if they could ever find themselves in this predicament.
Standing on a lie is like standing on an ice cube in the middle of the ocean. You're bound to fall off. How long do you thing Mrs. Hunt can tread water?
Posts: 11,065
Threads: 755
Joined: Sep 2012
quote:
Originally posted by Sativa
Standing on a lie is like standing on an ice cube in the middle of the ocean.
Unless Ms. Hunt is a polar bear in the Arctic Ocean.
"I'm at that stage in life where I stay out of discussions. Even if you say 1+1=5, you're right - have fun." - Keanu Reeves
Posts: 1,175
Threads: 12
Joined: Jun 2008
HOTPE:
a lot less ice much less ice cubes in the Arctic these days.
Posts: 348
Threads: 23
Joined: May 2012
Apparently the solution to global warming would be to shoot Al Gore.
Posts: 711
Threads: 78
Joined: Feb 2008
Sativa,
My remark was not just aimed at you, it was for everyone!
When a heated discussion gets so twisted and vitriolic, instead of focusing on the issue, all it does is detract and ends up destroying the credibility of topic!
You know hikatz it is what it is.
Taking out bullies doesn't come easy. You want the conversation to be pleasant, kind, nice and neat but the world ain't like that and neither is district 5 esp. since redistricting. What I did was take stupid and got stupider. Here we were discussing voter fraud and all they can do is discuss RJ's lack of teeth and bull crap about her. What would you do? I just responded in kind and I enjoyed myself. Pardon me. I basically did what any east coast girl would do that is start clowning on them and get the better of them till they scream to the moderator. I know it is not easy to see in print.
hikatz,
I surely appreciate your voice of reason.
Indeed, in this forum the topics should be place where the point is clear and discussion is on point. That would be my hope.
A basic premise of discussion or debate is that it's a weak rebuttal to turn the light on the personal motives of the person you disagree with.
Strong rebuttal is to stay in topic, which in the case of the locked topic would be to get at whether or not there was voter fraud, what chance is there of a case going forward, precedents, etc. Also the character of the candidate is always a fair issue because the underlying question is about the candidate's suitability.
Unfortunately, those in this forum who are extremely loyal to Tiffany, don't seem to have any real rebuttal on point. So their tactic is to drag the topic into the mud by attacking the people trying to discuss the issue. Making it about the character of the messenger.
What we need is for other voices to come in who at capable of discussing the actual issues and just ignore every personal insult. Really it is a sign of having no substance for any reply that would be persuasive and on point.
There's no reason why those of us who have ability to follow a logical thread can't just respond to each other and ignore the person who is essentially just the heckler in the room trying to disrupt before everyone figures out what the shady politician is trying to pull off.
Kathy
For the sake of clarity, I invite everyone to go back to the posts, start from the beginning, read what was said by whom and the premise for saying what was said and then determine for yourself who elevated it into "vitriolic attacks" and who began dragging someone thru the mud.
It all there. In chronological order.
For all to see, read, comprehend and grasp.
Now, go read it!
Posts: 4,261
Threads: 96
Joined: Mar 2014
quote:
Originally posted by KathyH
A basic premise of discussion or debate is that it's a weak rebuttal to turn the light on the personal motives of the person you disagree with.
Strong rebuttal is to stay in topic, which in the case of the locked topic would be to get at whether or not there was voter fraud, what chance is there of a case going forward, precedents, etc. Also the character of the candidate is always a fair issue because the underlying question is about the candidate's suitability.
Unfortunately, those in this forum who are extremely loyal to Tiffany, don't seem to have any real rebuttal on point. So their tactic is to drag the topic into the mud by attacking the people trying to discuss the issue. Making it about the character of the messenger.
What we need is for other voices to come in who at capable of discussing the actual issues and just ignore every personal insult. Really it is a sign of having no substance for any reply that would be persuasive and on point.
There's no reason why those of us who have ability to follow a logical thread can't just respond to each other and ignore the person who is essentially just the heckler in the room trying to disrupt before everyone figures out what the shady politician is trying to pull off.
Kathy
It has always been "Ken", aka Discuss_Truth's method. Since he cannot come up with valid reasons why Tiffany should be elected, he always starts with the personal attacks and insults and trying to change the topic of the discussion.
If "Ken" really is a friend of Tiffany's, then why would anyone want to vote for her, knowing that was the sort of person she likes to associate with.
I really do not why Rob has allowed him to come back to the forum?
|
