RE: Just out of curiousity

RE: Just out of curiousity (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

kittinSol -> RE: Just out of curiousity (1/21/2009 8:06:43 AM)
You finally got it, Merc. Bush leaving has made patriotism acceptable again.

Mercnbeth -> RE: Just out of curiousity (1/21/2009 8:17:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth Until yesterday - criticizing the US, the Country's policies, and calling the US President names was accepting and encouraged; as of yesterday it is not! Now it's all about 'wait & see', 'give him a chance', 'he needs time' and 'why can't we all get along'. What a difference a day makes! Excuse me - what a difference agenda and personal prejudice makes. We now have 'good intent' as reason enough to chastise any dissension; and facts, especially negative ones, should be ignored in order to let that 'good intent' feeling linger. All that transpired before yesterday, by definition and party, had 'bad intent', 'hidden agenda', and was the work of 'insiders' - all gone in one day, by one man! What a difference a day makes indeed! quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol You finally got it, Merc. Bush leaving has made patriotism acceptable again. I'm so pleased that you identified with my post and hope it was a learning experience for you. Keep it in mind over the next few months and perhaps you'll learn more. I've gotten it for a long time, not once can you point to any personal attack on any individual CM or politically. Now that '*Change-Fest-2009*' is over - maybe you'll take that 'good intent' suggestion from President Obama and live it too. Yes - kitty, I LOVE pointing out anyone's blatant hypocrisy, please continue to post daily. You have a unique perspective kittin, and I for one enjoy your form of entertainment which doesn't require any deep thinking to appreciate. Thank you - again.

subtee -> RE: Just out of curiousity (1/21/2009 8:22:51 AM)
~FR Some of the posts here are disgusting to me, some very disappointing. I'm sickened not only that another human being could wish for another or a similar--however you want to characterize it--9-11 attack, but that other human beings would agree. Because of Bush and his administration's outrageous hubris in deciding that his powers as chief executive could trump the other branches of government in absolute, flagrant discord with the expressed intent of the Constitution, 9-11, and so many other events over the last 8 years will be dissected, discussed, reviewed and commented on...as well they should be.

Marc2b -> RE: Just out of curiousity (1/21/2009 8:28:44 AM)
Bush bashing will eventually fade away (how often do you hear Nixon bashing, nowadays?) but not significantly. It will be a few years before that happens. The Obamamaniacs will trot out Bush to “explain” any and all failures of the Obama administration just as Clinton was (and is still) trotted out to “explain” Bush’s failures and just as Bush the Elder and Regan were trotted out to “explain” Clinton’s failures. I have no doubt in my mind that, during Thomas Jefferson’s administration, when somebody criticized him somebody else said, “well, if it wasn’t for that asshole Washington…” The question isn’t whether we will see an end to Bush bashing but whether we will see an end to political bashing. The answer is no. The human animal, unfortunately, has a need for ego gratification and bashing (verbally and/or physically) an enemy/opponent is all too easy a method. Those who continually bash the other side (whoever the other side happens to be) are not really concerned about matters of policy. They may believe they are on a conscious level but the underlying, sub-conscious (instinctual) motive is the need to feel superior. Victory is more important than results. This is why the political pendulum keeps swinging back and forth with few, if any, tangible results. The Democrats have been swept into power to save us from the Republicans who had been swept into power to save us from the Democrats. Eight to twelve years from now the Republicans will again be swept into power to save us from the Democrats. Bashers on both sides will be loud and nasty all the way and each will be convinced that they are on the side of the angels. The whirly-gig goes on.

kittinSol -> RE: Just out of curiousity (1/21/2009 8:30:07 AM)
Let's see if this works (I've made a bet): "reward of failure".

Mercnbeth -> RE: Just out of curiousity (1/21/2009 8:30:16 AM)
quote: Because of Bush and his administration's outrageous hubris in deciding that his powers as chief executive could trump the other branches of government in absolute, flagrant discord with the expressed intent of the Constitution, 9-11, and so many other events over the last 8 years will be dissected, discussed, reviewed and commented on...as well they should be. FANTASTIC as long as simultaneously and with equal venom and disgust we comment on the funding source of those policies - Congress. Without whose titular funding approval, rationalized by agenda based 'pork spending', there would be no troops in Iraq to send home now. Who turned a collective blind eye and accepted the break down of Constitutional Law while individually expressing their disdain. Who was responsible for the oversight which may have prevented the current financial crisis. Who approved the financial institution bail out without accountability. Who sees rewarding failure as a path to outline success. Who was, and is, on the payroll of EVERY special interest group - right or left wing. YUP - Those things should never be forgotten regardless of the figurehead living in the White House.

kittinSol -> RE: Just out of curiousity (1/21/2009 8:31:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth Who sees rewarding failure as a path to outline success. [sm=rofl.gif]

Owner59 -> RE: Just out of curiousity (1/21/2009 8:35:34 AM)
Merc,kindly don`t mistake bush with America.Substitute bush for US in your rant and you will have exactly what President Obama is about. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Your guy bush looked looked like roadkill there,didn`t he?.And your hero cheney in the wheelchair,.. holy shit what a metaphor.That was spooky in a Strangelove kinda way.[:D] I`ve never seen anyone booed at an inauguration before.They were firsts,for me. But the booing was just a flutter for a second or two. What dominated that humongous crowd of Americans when they were announced,...........was silence.Almost complete silence. If that`s not the worst insult a president can get,I don`t know what is. Wow.. President Obama graciously thanks bush for his service,... and then repudiated almost everything about bush policy,point after point after point,... to his face and to millions of Americans. This is going going to be an interesting next 8 years.

philosophy -> RE: Just out of curiousity (1/21/2009 8:36:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 If that`s not the worst insult a president can get,I don`t know what is. ....a silently thrown shoe?

Owner59 -> RE: Just out of curiousity (1/21/2009 8:42:31 AM)
That`s not an insult in the middle east.It`s a farewell kiss......[:D]

LaTigresse -> RE: Just out of curiousity (1/21/2009 8:47:32 AM)
In that case, I've got a few "kisses" in the back of my closet...........

philosophy -> RE: Just out of curiousity (1/21/2009 8:53:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LaTigresse In that case, I've got a few "kisses" in the back of my closet........... ...well come out of the closet LaT...you'll feel so much better, especially if you emerge well armed, or well heeled at any rate.

subtee -> RE: Just out of curiousity (1/21/2009 8:56:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth quote: Because of Bush and his administration's outrageous hubris in deciding that his powers as chief executive could trump the other branches of government in absolute, flagrant discord with the expressed intent of the Constitution, 9-11, and so many other events over the last 8 years will be dissected, discussed, reviewed and commented on...as well they should be. FANTASTIC as long as simultaneously and with equal venom and disgust we comment on the funding source of those policies - Congress. Without whose titular funding approval, rationalized by agenda based 'pork spending', there would be no troops in Iraq to send home now. Who turned a collective blind eye and accepted the break down of Constitutional Law while individually expressing their disdain. Who was responsible for the oversight which may have prevented the current financial crisis. Who approved the financial institution bail out without accountability. Who sees rewarding failure as a path to outline success. Who was, and is, on the payroll of EVERY special interest group - right or left wing. YUP - Those things should never be forgotten regardless of the figurehead living in the White House. Reminds me of "the creature" (my ex) and how he found blame for me when he was shtupping his secretary while we were married. I will accept that though, after all, I wasn't her, was I? I love the word "shtupping." Just saying. So often a counter-argument is "well they did it too!" It seems so weak... There is one who comes to mind that is not on the payroll of every special interest group...Obama. Oh wait, he's just a figurehead.

ALAstella -> RE: Just out of curiousity (1/21/2009 9:29:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MissSepphora1 I can only hope Obama has another crisis like 9/11. And then we'll see if he cowars like Clinton did. Edited before my ass gets handed to me This is one of the most offensive postings I have ever read on these boards. For the US servicemen while separated from their families and loved ones and serving, this is offensive. For those who have died and those who are grieving the loss of those who have died, this is offensive. For every decent, law-abiding Muslim who has faced persecution, prejudice and attack since 9/11, this is offensive. For those journalists and the media who have been sent and assigned to report on such events, also risking their lives, this is offensive. This includes the journalists and photographers who have been killed, maimed, wrongfully imprisoned and attacked. From my perspective far too many people have already died, too many people have had their lives shattered and have had to cope with terrible injuries, too many people are serving in hostile or dangerous circumstances. Too many people are worried sick about loved ones who are serving in such places. We don't need any more.

Mercnbeth -> RE: Just out of curiousity (1/21/2009 10:03:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol Let's see if this works (I've made a bet): "reward of failure". kitty, obviously you have a problem with this concept and it disturbs you. In the cooperative spirit of Day 1 of the OE, I'm going to try and help you and put it in terms you may understand. Growing up, a child is often given rewards by their parents for making good grades. I, for one was; a $1.00 for every A, 50 cents for a B. It was long ago, and a $1 was actually meaningful to get and very motivating. Now here we have companies who instead of getting rewards for their achievements, profitability, growth, and expanding markets substituted for A's and B's, are getting their dollars by bringing home 'Fs' to their 'guardians' (President & Congress) instead of being punished. Conceptually it has the same effect motivating and example providing incentive for any 'brothers and sisters' as if my $1 was to me. Understand? Did you get a reward for failing? Are you a millionaire? quote: Reminds me of "the creature" (my ex) and how he found blame for me when he was shtupping his secretary while we were married. I will accept that though, after all, I wasn't her, was I? I love the word "shtupping." Just saying. So often a counter-argument is "well they did it too!" It seems so weak... There is one who comes to mind that is not on the payroll of every special interest group...Obama. Oh wait, he's just a figurehead. Sorry to hear about your private life and I have no idea why it's germane to this discussion. Whether he blamed you appropriately or not is a matter of perspective and details that are not obvious. However, I made no "well they did it too!" argument. There is no disproportionate or selective blame. The 'they' is a reference to responsibility. You selectively choose to ignore it. It has nothing to do with your husband finding a better "shtupping" partner. In the cases referenced Congress and the President were/are 'gang banging' us, to use your terms. quote: ORIGINAL: Owner 59 Merc,kindly don`t mistake bush with America.Substitute bush for US in your rant and you will have exactly what President Obama is about. Your guy bush looked looked like roadkill there,didn`t he?.And your hero cheney in the wheelchair 59, Your mistake is disassociating the Country from the Presidency - selectively at that. President Bush was your President as well as mine. You can't disassociate your tactics from that reality, although I can understand under current circumstances why you find it necessary to do so, and hope others follow. However, fear not, I will not stoop to that level regardless of what comes. President Obama and the USA will be my country and have my loyalty until they aren't. And what I saw of the public reaction given President Bush, pales in comparison to the public disrespectful reaction that President Carter received from his fellow Democrats, one in particular who snubbed a handshake of the man whose office he shared. But I'm sure you'll rationalize a reason for that too.

MissMorrigan -> RE: Just out of curiousity (1/21/2009 10:10:52 AM)
I can't say for certain and do not know the person that posted the comment, but sometimes we have a knee jerk reaction and respond without truly thinking of what we are advocating. I doubt the person posting wishes there to be another 9/11 or similar catastrophe (which will have lifelong effects on many, even down the line to some of those in the emergency services whose healthcare insurances will not cover the resultant COPD they incurred doing their jobs), but was pondering, albeit misguidedly, at how Obama would fare in a crisis - I hope the US never finds out. Perhaps MS could interject and clarify this for us.

subtee -> RE: Just out of curiousity (1/21/2009 10:30:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth Sorry to hear about your private life and I have no idea why it's germane to this discussion. Whether he blamed you appropriately or not is a matter of perspective and details that are not obvious. However, I made no "well they did it too!" argument. There is no disproportionate or selective blame. The 'they' is a reference to responsibility. You selectively choose to ignore it. It has nothing to do with your husband finding a better "shtupping" partner. In the cases referenced Congress and the President were/are 'gang banging' us, to use your terms. You're right; sorry for the references to my private life. I mentioned it because it occurred to me and I thought it was funny. You're also seeming snide to me. Do you mean to be? The subject of the post was regarding "Bush Bashing"; you pointed out that Congress bears responsibility also. I don't know how that isn't "they did it too"...? I didn't "selectively ignore" anything, the above was how I commented on what you said.

Mercnbeth -> RE: Just out of curiousity (1/21/2009 11:01:49 AM)
quote: You're also seeming snide to me. Do you mean to be? No - My apologies if you took it that way. I appreciate the polarization of the past 8 years. Were I more of a conspiracy theorist I'd suggest it was deliberate and necessary to achieve the results we are experiencing. The post was strictly to point to the impossibility of separating the complicity of Congress from the ideas of the President. They may have been ideas coming from the White House, but the actions could not have occurred without funding. The only source of that is Congress. In my opinion, the most important thing we can do is to keep that in mind. It will serve to eliminate the polarization, IF, appropriately big, personal agenda and politics is left out of the equation. Any disdain anyone feels about the last 8 years must be shared with their local Congress representatives. Only the last 2 had Democratic majority, but if you look at the individual voting records, as I do, there is really no change in the agenda or the results. More money was allocated for 'pork spending' then there was for the 'bail-out' when that foolhardy Bill was passed prior to November's elections. Each and every person up for reelection brought home 'pork' which went a long way to insure their reelections. Based upon results - more time was spent insuring those were in the Bill versus putting in any accountability language. Blame President Bush for the concept - but each and every time you read and get frustrated by 'Where did the money go?' type questions - point to Congress as the reason nobody knows. And just because I'm sadistic and because of it I like to point things like this out just because they annoy some - a DEMOCRATIC majority Congress. (Truth is-I don't think it mattered.) Can that status quo change under President Obama? Sure - But only if he's willing to stand up to them, their agendas, and their PAC paymasters. The worry that I or other naysayers aren't giving him the chance is immaterial. More important are the people who have the money and resources to support such an initiative. That is why I was concerned about yesterday's Stock Market results. It shouldn't have happened. Should President Obama come directly to the people and use us, and the obvious popularity mandate he has to reign in Congress; he'll not only be my favorite President of all time, but I'll hang a poster sized picture in my office (my first Presidential picture) and give him an equally large in scale donation for his reelection.

subtee -> RE: Just out of curiousity (1/21/2009 11:44:08 AM)
Gotcha! [;)]

hizgeorgiapeach -> RE: Just out of curiousity (1/21/2009 11:52:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subtee quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth Sorry to hear about your private life and I have no idea why it's germane to this discussion. Whether he blamed you appropriately or not is a matter of perspective and details that are not obvious. However, I made no "well they did it too!" argument. There is no disproportionate or selective blame. The 'they' is a reference to responsibility. You selectively choose to ignore it. It has nothing to do with your husband finding a better "shtupping" partner. In the cases referenced Congress and the President were/are 'gang banging' us, to use your terms. You're right; sorry for the references to my private life. I mentioned it because it occurred to me and I thought it was funny. You're also seeming snide to me. Do you mean to be? The subject of the post was regarding "Bush Bashing"; you pointed out that Congress bears responsibility also. I don't know how that isn't "they did it too"...? I didn't "selectively ignore" anything, the above was how I commented on what you said. To use your analogy, subtee - Bush was the former spouce - congress was the secretary he started fucking behind your back. That's not a "they did it to" - that's a "they were both equally responcible for YOU getting shafted." Just because you formerly Liked "the girlfriend" or even perhaps Still like "the girlfriend" or have significantly more bitterness towards "the ex" in relation to "the girlfriend" - doesn't mean they aren't Both responcible.

Page: << < prev 5 6 [7] 8 9 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875