Yeah, samclem pointed that out too, to which I responded, but go ahead and jump on me too if it makes you feel better. Some of us negligently kill a woman after a party and don’t call help for her, and some of us misread a post. We’re just “fallible”, after all.
hopefully y’all are also including Laura who, before her marriage to GWB, drove through a stop sign, and killed a young man she knew. She, also, wasn’t charged w/a crime regarding the death.
And Vince Foster has no comment, on this or anything else. Just saying.
: Raises hand : Then again I’m 22.
The older I get, the more convinced I become that the Innuit have it right, but they don’t go far enough. Everyone over the age of 45 should be put on an ice flo and set out to sea, sparing the younger generations their crap. Vietnam, Chappa-whatever, fuck it! Let’s worry about the here and now rather than re-fighting decades’ old bullshit on the young’ins back.
It’ll never happen. Fuckin’ young people don’t vote and the elderly have nothing better to do than to.
No, I’m not disenchanted with my government and fellow Americans. Why do you ask?
Ah, Grasshopper.
Quoth bibliophage in his Staff Report Did Eskimos put their elderly on ice floes to die?
Geez, you posted, what, five times in this thread before getting into the peckers and poo. Admirable restraint, for a sixth-grader.
Sorry, meant to say complete fuckin’ putz.
Wow, that’s insightful. Nigh but infallible, I’d say. Congrats.
Another lie! Will you never stop?
Your first post in this thread was post #33, which is the post i quoted.
Your response to Zoe was post #40.
Retract your lie, liar.
What do you mean “on this board”?
If you’re going to accuse people of double standards, it should be individuals. I’ve already challenged you to find a post by me, or by any of the other liberals who have contributed to this thread, that makes a gratuitous reference to GWB’s alleged AWOL.
The fact that other people might have made such references does not mean that we, the ones in this thread, have adopted double standards. I’ve said quite clearly that i think drive-by references to Bush’s AWOL are pointless. Exactly what double standard am i then guilty of, in your small mind.
If you actually had the brains to make a point, you might receive such a response on occasion, but you’re too busy jerking off over evil liberals to think straight.
Ah, the stupiddave mode of argumentation: “Only a deluded person would disagree with me.”
With every post you make on this board, it becomes clearer that only a deluded person would take anything you say at face value.
Never said you should defend it. Try to keep up, moron. I’m simply curious as to why someone like you, who constantly claims to oppose knee-jerk partisanship of all stripes, would take such effort to slam Kennedy while ignoring the kneejerk partisanship of the OP.
You claim to be a temperate moderate but, to make a geographical analogy, you’ll drive from Baltimore to California to take an unprovoked swipe at liberals, but you won’t cross the street to do the same to a conservative. As someone said earlier in the thread, if it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck…
You’re right that you never addressed the OP. I apologize.
I should have known by now that expecting you to address an issue that required actual thought rather than knee-jerk anti-liberalism would have been too much for you.
Tell me mhendo, do you actually foam at the mouth while you’re making these posts?
Well gee whiz RT, why don’t you comment on the spittle flected posts to which I am replying, hmm? Who exactly started in with insults and hysteria in this thread anyway? And yet, when I compare someone jumping up and down ranting incoherently, blatently breaking board rules to boot, to monkeys flinging poo, why, you feel that it is your duty to admonish me about it. Gosh gee wilikers, I guess there’s just no pleasing you chaps. Let me try to recall, did someone in this thread mention double standards…
Rassing-flassing… That’s it! You just jumped to the head of the ice flo line!
No one has to explain Chappaquiddick to me. I was twenty-six when it happened. In my opinion, Kennedy revealed to many that night that he had lost the right to be the president. I wish that we had continued to keep our standards high.
(I don’t mind my name or post being used as a reason to summarize what happened that night.)
But he didn’t lose the right to serve his country. The citizens of Massachusetts determine that. And again, in my opinion, he does that well – not perfectly, but very, very well. I am grateful that he continues to have that opportunity. I don’t expect Conservatives to agree with me. But I don’t expect intelligent Americans to think that political opponents to think that the opposition should roll over and withdraw from life when they make grievous personal mistakes that have terrible consequences for individuals.
Character does matter. Kennedy was never the president. But the people of Massachusetts elected him to the Senate based on what they believed to be true of him. The same is true of Gary Condit’s district in California. He probably had nothing at all to do with her disappearance, but there is some indication that he may have had a romance with her. The voters may have considered that. I really know nothing about him or what was on the mind of the voters. The decision was in the hands of the voters in both situations.
Actually, aren’t people claiming that he did mean to kill her when they say that he “murdered” her?
Is there not Any Possibility that Senator Kennedy shares some of the objections that others have to the windmill issue? (Those who don’t have pristine views of Nantucket Sound?) Has he ever taken up a cause that didn’t affect him directly? :rolleyes:
Funny, i was about to ask you exactly the same question. Every time you post about liberals. In just about any thread you enter.
But, leaving that aside for the moment, do you not even have the integrity to address the issue?
You said that the post i quoted was not your first one in this thread. I demonstrated very clearly that it was.
You assert that your main purpose in coming in here was to answer Zoe’s question, yet it is clear that your main purpose in your first post (#33) was actually to accuse liberals of double standards.
You accuse us of double standards, yet you have yet to demonstrate that anyone actually participating in this thread has such double standards. You accusation was some generic reference to “the boards,” but that sort of broad brush is completely inappropriate and disingenuous, as you are well aware. If you’re going to make accusations of double standards, you need to be able to demonstrate it for the specific people you are arguing with, not some hypothetical generic liberal.
Do have not even the slightest shame, the merest hint of embarrassment at how meager and specious your “arguments” are? Do you even remember, when you post your lies and your misrepresentations, that people can actually go back and read what you wrote in post 33?
I’m actually beyond any anger towards you, hence the lack of foaming at the mouth. I just pity you.
I did not brink up Sen. kennedie’s multitudinous failings, both moral and legal. the Chappaquiddick incident is in the past, and rightly or wrongly, has no bearing on the cape Wind Power issue. the facts are these Cape Wind Power has presented a proposal that has been vetted to death. the project would combine limited environmental damage with huge potential benefits (lower greenhouse gases, lower electric rates, local jobs generated, and less oil imported from hostile lands). Kennedy has opposed this project in an indirect way, trying to both portray himself as a liberal and "green’, while at the same time protecting the interests of the wealth landowners who live on nantucket Sound. Wht can’t he just isse and honest statement like : “I oppose cape Windfarms because I do not believe that the benefits will outweigh the destruction of the environment” Nope…he just lets other do the dirty work for him. Which is why he lambastes the Bush administration for not supporting alternative energy sources. Now, suppose we have a very cold winter next year, and oil prices climb past 4100/barrel-what will he say to his constituents? maybe “gee , I’m so sorry that your electric bills have tripled-but we REALLY need to wean ourselves off of oil!”-or something like that! 
I dream of a day when people actually read the dozens and dozens of posts made on this Board, mostly by me but also by others, asserting with links that oil is not a major contributor to the electrical generation of this country.
That day will never come, sadly. The SDMB more and more becomes what some have called a “giant anger blog”, where facts are occasionally posted. But just like the sprouts on a dinner plate they get pushed aside and forgotten, while people dig into the sweet, buttery mashed potatoes of ignorance. The pork chops of honest debate are fed to the dog under the table, and nobody wants the dessert of a more intelligent and well-rounded outlook on issues because they are too stuffed with mashed potatoes.
It’s true that you didn’t bring this up. It’s the one thing you got right in this thread.
What do you mean he’s “opposed this project in an indirect way”? I’ve already given a bunch of citations shows that he has been an open and vocal critic of the project of the past two and a half years. I also provided a quote from his spokesperson explicitly stating that Kennedy agrees with the bill amendment in question. How the hell is that “indirect” opposition.
You say that he “lets other do the dirty work for him.” Well, the bill in question, the Coast Guard’s budget and reauthorization bill, is coming out of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. The amendment has been slipped in by Committee Chairman Don Young (R-AK), the majority of the committee members are Republicans, and in the dozens of stories i’ve read on this issue not a single one has suggested that Ted Kennedy was the driving force, or that Kennedy placed pressure on Young to insert the measure.
Hell, why would a Republican congressman from Alaska do Ted Kennedy any favors anyway?
Not only that, but Young himself has close ties to a Washington, D.C., lobbyist by the name of Guy Martin, who has been hired by the Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound, a group opposing the Cape Wind project. According to this article:
Given all of these facts, i’m still wondering why the only object of your ire is Ted Kennedy. He’s not being underhanded—he opposes the wind farm openly and honestly.
In my opinion, the bigger issue here is the way that members of Congress—both Republicans and Democrats—subvert the spirit of the legislative process by slipping small amendments like this into large, complex bills, and hoping that they get by without being noticed. This sort of shit goes on all the time, and it allows the passage of many little pieces of legislation that would never pass if they were voted on as discrete items.
I want to know why you apparently have no concern over Congressman Young’s behavior here, and why Ted Kennedy, a Democratic Senator, is somehow responsible for an amendment crafted and inserted by a Republican Representative.
Damn, now I’m hungry. I’ll take the sprouts if no one else is having them.
Gotta admit, I overlooked any other poo-and-privates posts in this thread. Could you point out a for-instance?
Glad someone took it in the spirit in which it was intended. It was lunchtime when I posted, and I was hungry…and I do like the sprouts much more than the potatoes - fewer carbs.