I came across this is little story today, it's not breaking news. I suspect that a member of the housekeeping staff knows something about the bomb threat that required the sweep for weapons.
According to police in Secaucus, the bomb threat — which later was determined to be bogus — was called in to Hudson Regional Hospital on July 18. During a search, bomb detection dogs led investigators to an unlocked office closet containing dozens of firearms.
Among the weapons were 11 handguns and 27 rifles or shotguns, according to police. The closet also contained a .45 caliber semi-automatic rifle with a high-capacity magazine that was determined to be an assault rifle, and a 14-round high-capacity handgun magazine.
The arrested the guy the next day.
What the heck do you think this guy was doing? It sounds very ominous that he was keeping those weapons there.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
Roitrn said:
Pretty sure the member doesn't actually think they are an expert on weak liberals and such.
Sure. This member often has short comments and snips in their post Straight to the point. Instead of trying to make degrading comments disguised as intellectual discourse in long winded post that deflect every which way. Usually to Fox news and Trump.
I wouldn't say the same things in the way this member does but it serves as a entertaining addition from the obvious liberal majority on this thread.
Yeah... you don't know much about trolling. It's telling that you don't find that member's posts often do attempt to degrade and do try to disguise strawman arguments, hyperbole and misinformation as sincere debate. Yes, it's apparent that you are entertained by trolling... maybe you think that liberals are getting owned and that titilates you.
Personally, I come here to talk about current events but maybe your goals are different. Clearly trolls have a different set of objectives... they throw rhetorical darts and animus around rather than actually discuss topics... you call that getting straight to the point... unless a liberal does it.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
Roitrn said:
No. Not offended at all.
Right. It's perfectly acceptable to imply Fox as members "preferred media". But not you and cnn?
I'll watch it on a less bias media source. Not CNN. You can watch CNN and let us know.
Yep. Perfectly acceptable. That member could always decide to engage in actual discussion and offer citations but she's more interested in trying to get a reaction to her agitated comments.
I cite media other than CNN for content. You are welcome to ignore that like you ignore other evidence. Apparently you don't know the difference between using a video clip of a hearing to demonstrate something versus using created content from the media outlet. That would explain your confusion.
You're new here so you don't know that I haven't watched cable television in decades. I do review things that are broadcast on cable platforms. But cable television is not where people should be getting their facts about politics. You're so new here that you aren't aware of the FOX News nonsense that's been repeated in these threads as if it's conservative gospel. It's OK.
MaybeeRN said:
The problem is you don't provide any data to support your arguments. Yet you demand it from everyone else. When be it doesn't fit the narrative it's right wing talking points.
That's your problem... you ignore my citations before you claim that I don't use citations. Right wing talking points are easy to identify for people outside of that echo chamber.
Yeah... you don't know much about trolling. It's telling that you don't find that member's posts often do attempt to degrade and do try to disguise strawman arguments, hyperbole and misinformation as sincere debate. Yes, is apparent that you are entertained by trolling... maybe you think that liberals are getting owned and that titilates you.
Personally, I come here to talk about current events but maybe your goals are different. Clearly trolls have a different set of objectives... they throw rhetorical darts and animus around rather than actual discuss topics... you call that getting straight to the point... unless a liberal does it.
You're right, I do not know much about trolling. I never considered it a worthy idea to contemplate.
Well. I read your source about trolling. After I put aside my bias feelings about how ridiculous an entire study on trolls is, I found it quite informative. I would agree the member is exhibiting troll type behavior based on the characteristics described in the source.
I read them laugh and move on. I also notice the same type behavior but done in a more low key covert type of way. Or even disguised as intellectual discourse . Behavior such as making assumptions. Or making covert claims about people's emotions and media choices in an attempt to make them appear fooled or irrational. Instead of formatting a comment without this intergected.
So once again we are left with an idea that can be highly subjective and is poorly defined.
Yep. Perfectly acceptable. That member could always decide to engage in actual discussion and offer citations but she's more interested in trying to get a reaction to her agitated comments.
I cite media other than CNN for content. You are welcome to ignore that like you ignore other evidence. Apparently you don't know the difference between using a video clip of a hearing to demonstrate something versus using created content from the media outlet. That would explain your confusion.
You're new here so you don't know that I haven't watched cable television in decades. I do review things that are broadcast on cable platforms. But cable television is not where people should be getting their facts about politics. You're so new here that you aren't aware of the FOX News nonsense that's been repeated in these threads as if it's conservative gospel. It's OK.
That's your problem... you ignore my citations before you claim that I don't use citations. Right wing talking points are easy to identify for people outside of that echo chamber.
Then it's perfectly acceptable to call ypu on sourcing CNN. However I will not refer to you using CNN as a credible new source in attempt to discredit your opinion. Everytime I disagree with what you say. I'm confident that you will continue to exploit the Fox issue at every possible circumstance.
You might want to consider that not every conservative views Fox as "gospel". If you do not want to be considered as someone who watches cnn. It might help out with your "confusion ".
New York City has agreed to pay $21,500 to each of hundreds of demonstrators who were penned in by the police in the Bronx during racial justice protests in 2020, then charged at or beaten with batons, according to a legal settlement.
If a judge approves the settlement filed in federal court late Tuesday, the amount would be one of the highest ever awarded per person in a class action case of mass arrests, and could cost the city between $4 million and $6 million.
The case concerned roughly 300 people who were arrested on June 4, 2020, in the Mott Haven neighborhood of the Bronx during protests against the killing of George Floyd by Minneapolis police officers the week before. His death set off protests across the country, including in New York, where thousands of people demonstrated in May and June.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
Roitrn said:
You're right, I do not know much about trolling. I never considered it a worthy idea to contemplate.
Well. I read your source about trolling. After I put aside my bias feelings about how ridiculous an entire study on trolls is, I found it quite informative. I would agree the member is exhibiting troll type behavior based on the characteristics described in the source.
I read them laugh and move on. I also notice the same type behavior but done in a more low key covert type of way. Or even disguised as intellectual discourse . Behavior such as making assumptions. Or making covert claims about people's emotions and media choices in an attempt to make them appear fooled or irrational. Instead of formatting a comment without this intergected.
So once again we are left with an idea that can be highly subjective and is poorly defined.
No, we're just left with your characterisation that trolling is poorly defined and highly subjective. But, like you said, you don't know much about trolls or trolling so there's a reasonable probability that such a statement is born in that admitted ignorance.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
Roitrn said:
Then it's perfectly acceptable to call ypu on sourcing CNN. However I will not refer to you using CNN as a credible new source in attempt to discredit your opinion. Everytime I disagree with what you say. I'm confident that you will continue to exploit the Fox issue at every possible circumstance.
You might want to consider that not every conservative views Fox as "gospel". If you do not want to be considered as someone who watches cnn. It might help out with your "confusion ".
Sure... go for it. Of course, when you make claims about my relationship to CNN the long term members here will know that is a lie or misrepresentation. You do you.
You might want to consider that my comment didn't say or imply that every conservative views Fox as gospel. Are you employing a strawman argument or are you confused?
I do watch things on CNN sometimes, just like I watch things on Fox sometimes... YouTube is valuable in that regard. You'll just have to point out where you believe I've used CNN as a content citation rather than a source for a video clip. I read to inform myself, you know that because you asked me about my sources previously and I answered you. Maybe you didn't read my response, haven't looked at my citations or just don't believe the evidence. Shrugs
No, we're just left with your characterisation that trolling is poorly defined and highly subjective. But, like you said, you don't know much about trolls or trolling so there's a reasonable probability that such a statement is born in that admitted ignorance.
Sure... go for it. Of course, when you make claims about my relationship to CNN the long term members here will know that is a lie or misrepresentation. You do you.
You might want to consider that my comment didn't say or imply that every conservative views Fox as gospel. Are you employing a strawman argument or are you confused?
I do watch things on CNN sometimes, just like I watch things on Fox sometimes... YouTube is valuable in that regard. You'll just have to point out where you believe I've used CNN as a content citation rather than a source for a video clip. I read to inform myself, you know that because you asked me about my sources previously and I answered you. Maybe you didn't read my response, haven't looked at my citations or just don't believe the evidence. Shrugs
You do you
It's okay. If you don't use/watch cnn except this one time. And good. Everyone knows you don't like cnn in these threads. You really don't have to explain.
Just next time think before you throw shade or try to discredit someone because either you think/assume they watch Fox or even cite a video like you did.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
Roitrn said:
It's okay. If you don't use/watch cnn except this one time. And good. Everyone knows you don't like cnn in these threads. You really don't have to explain.
Just next time think before you throw shade or try to discredit someone because either you think/assume they watch Fox or even cite a video like you did.
However I do not want to troll so I'll go do me.
I think before I post each and every time. No, I don't have to explain to you but I do because I'm here to engage with others in an earnest fashion.
Members discredit themselves with childish, trolling or cult like repetition of lies or partisan animus that is based on right wing media programming. It's pretty assuming for the new member who doesn't know much about internet trolls or their tactics to try to lecture someone else on how to interact with internet troll behavior. IMV
Top McCarthy aide, House Oversight chair each met with Ashli Babbitt's mother
Scott MacFarlane
March 1, 2023, 8:11 am
A senior staffer to House Speaker Kevin McCarthy met this week with Micki Witthoeft, mother of Ashli Babbitt, the woman shot and killed by police as she breached a set of doors to the Speaker's Lobby on Jan. 6, 2021. The meeting occurred outside McCarthy's office, according to multiple sources.
Witthoeft also met briefly with House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, Republican of Kentucky, this week, Comer's office confirmed.
"Chairman Comer saw Mrs. Babbitt in the hallway yesterday after his testimony on the committee's budget with Ranking Member Raskin and was pleased for the opportunity to exchange hellos," Comer's spokeswoman said.
McCarthy isn't her representative, she lives in Texas, right? I wonder if these meetings are part of the conservative goal to make the dead insurrectionist into a martyr.
She's one of the victims of right wing propaganda. They should wake up and sue the propagandists.
toomuchbaloney
16,216 Posts
Yeah... you don't know much about trolling. It's telling that you don't find that member's posts often do attempt to degrade and do try to disguise strawman arguments, hyperbole and misinformation as sincere debate. Yes, it's apparent that you are entertained by trolling... maybe you think that liberals are getting owned and that titilates you.
Personally, I come here to talk about current events but maybe your goals are different. Clearly trolls have a different set of objectives... they throw rhetorical darts and animus around rather than actually discuss topics... you call that getting straight to the point... unless a liberal does it.