I, like most people on this board, are not going to “shut the fuck up.”
Dubya is the most ignorant, evil asshole who has ever held the office of President of the United States. I listened to asshat Republicans bitch and moan about a fuckin’ Oval Office blow job for four years…you sure as hell are going to hear about a dickhead who lead us into a needless, useless war and and is trying to re-write the Constitution.
You don’t like to read it? Then do what most Republican fans of Dubya do, and while your head is up there, check to see if you have any polyps in your colon.
I never watch Fox Noooze, but in the documentary Outfoxed it was pointed out quite clearly that “Some people say” is their phrase to use when they want to be nasty or snarky and plant lies, but have to make it look like it’s not coming from their own mouth. There was a long montage of practically everyone at the channel using it. What they’re saying doesn’t have to be true, but it plants the seed in people’s brains.
Some people say Squink is a lying douchbag pedophile goat-felcher. What do’ya say to THAT?
It’s a nasty technique.
(I don’t really think you’re a lying douchbag pedophile goar-felcher)
So, “there are those who” and “Some people say” are buzz-phrases. Maybe I should start a thread about this because I’m sure there are many more.
What the FUCKING HELL are you talking about? You want sources that aren’t available to all Americans? How, pray tell, would we Americans get sources that aren’t available to us? You really need to cut down on the crack smoking.
BTW, there are plenty of government documents involved in these stories. Maybe you ought to actually read some of the evidence people are presenting, rather than crying, “Waaaaah! It’s not fair to say bad things about Bush.”
You didn’t say who weren’t what?
By pointing out that the Bush threads often contain a lot of evidence, I have confused you with someone who thinks he’s great? That makes no sense.
HUH? What on Earth are you talking about? You said this:
And I said
Then your response completely changed the subject, so I reiterated what it was that we were talking about. Lose the whining accusations that I misquoted you, because that is utter horseshit. If you are trying to claim that the phrase “That suggests a few things to me” is equivalent to “I don’t really mean what I said”, then you are out of your mind.
Oh, geez - this is pathetic. You implied it, and now you are furiously backpedaling to pretend that’s not what you said. Give me a fucking break.
I’ve said all I want to say (for now) on this subject here. And it certainly has nothing to do with me being a Republican or anything. And while I realize that my old OP may have boiled down to a “shut up,” I prefer to think we could accomplish the same thing by consolidating threads and not having GDs whose topic lines sound like Pit titles.
And FWIW, I certainly don’t think we need this many threads on THIS subject either. All of this could’ve been said in one (say, the first). But then, since I believe I started this whole mess, mebbe I’m biased.
You weren’t quite clear on that at all, as blowero has spent more time than I’m willing to in pointing it out.
We’re all pretty familiar with this game anyway.
“Star-bellied sneeches are hateful and smug!”
“Uh, dude, that’s racis…”
“No no, you dumbass, I was talking only about those particular star-bellied sneeches which suck.”
I don’t know what the hell you’re talking about here. All I am saying is that you don’t have to read anything you don’t want to read. Being a free country, you can’t tell people to shut up, but you can enjoy the freedom not to read them.
But to this degree? I’ve been voting for over 30 years, and don’t recall such furious animosity since the Vietnam War split this country so grievously. Dissent and disagreement, yes, of course they’ll arise, but for most of my adult life the civil discourse has been, well, pretty much civil. As skutir said:
I agree. Whatever policy disputes the left would have with McCain – and there would certainly be plenty – would, I firmly believe, be argued with much greater respect and honest give-and-take, on both sides.
Well of course the Bush Bashing threads are a waste of time. They certainly are doing a minimal job of converting the Bush Aligned, but they do give those of us who think that the future of the Republic may well turn on getting this bunch of economic imperialists and authoritarians and moralists out of office a way of letting off steam and refining our thoughts and arguments.
If we were not restrained by the rules of civility we would not be posting here, we would be part of a mob in front of the White House waiving pitchforks, scythes and torches, tearing up the paving to build barricades and baying for heads on pikes. That sort of thing is not socially acceptable so posting here is a passive-aggressive outlet for our rage over seeing our nation well on its way to Hell in a handbasket.
Others may see it differently. As impotence, perhaps?
But I did not SAY “xyz group” is hateful. I said Those that are being hateful, meaning those posts in which other posters say that those with an opposing viewpoint are stupid and so on, speaking specifically of those posts that HAVE done that. That is not saying that all of those in that group are doing that.
I would feel the same EXACT way if republicans were posting such to democrats. It’s the BEHAVIOUR I’m disagreeing with, not the subject matter.
The reason that democrats, or bushhaters are being discussed by me, is because it is within THOSE contexts that the insulting behavious is happening.
If it wasn’t clear before, I’ll say it again. It’s the BEHAVIOUR of some of those posting, NOT the subject. And second I do not read these threads, but the SUBJECT TITLES, those that show up when you open the page are THERE, and they frequently carry this same sort of “neenor, neenor, you bush supporters are idiots” type tone to them.
It is the smug and hateful TONE I’m objecting to, not that it’s about Bush. And once again, in case you missed it the first several times I said it. I do NOT like Bush. I can’t stand a lot of stuff about him. I can’t stand Kerry either. If I had my wish, they’d do as the Danish, and we could vote for “none of the above” until they gave us better choices.
What I’m talking about is that you didn’t read my posts, you got all mad thinking I was some rabid bush supporter (I’m not), and chewed me out in the “well it’s all YOUR fault” for supporting the guy" way, when the points of all of my posts have been that I disagree with the amount of these threads being made on the basis that we cannot avoid the nastily worded thread TITLES.
Yes, we can avoid the threads, and I do, but it gets very old to open up the Pit, and see 500 new threads all with the same “Ha ha, we told you so, this guy did ANOTHER thing” where thing is generally something not really his fault.
Those TITLES are right there on the page, and are worded generally ON PURPOSE to have this sort of “you people are idiots” tone to them. THAT is what I’m objecting to. And for the zilionth time, I would feel the EXACT same way if it were republicans bitching about some democrat.
I am NOT a democrat, and I’m DEFINITELY not a republican, I’m a “let’s do the HELL away with this archaic and moronic party system and vote for the man, and the issues, and NOT the party” whatever the hell kinda party that makes me, I don’t know. Revamp the whole damn thing party?
When I said “Have you met Americans? You’re going to get the exact opposite if you try to force your views down their throats”, YOU mistook that as me being on "their side. It was not. It was a statement designed to try to bring folks’s attention to the fact that this sort of hate campaign doesn’t work with Americans.
You tell 'em what to do, or insult them for being idiots, and they’re going to dig in and be TWICE as determined to do what it is they want (in this case voting for bush if they want).
Several people have bitterly complained that “well, if they hadn’t voted for him we wouldn’t BE in this mess, and we’re not going to stop bitching til he’s gone, becaues it’s ALL your fault” and so on.
I wasn’t supporting the bush side when I pointed out how silly a position this is given Americans’ stubborn “you can’t tell me what to do” attitudes. I was pointing out that all you’re “well I’m gonna bitch til I get MY way, and if they don’t like it don’t read it” complaints had nothing to do with why people were complaining about all the threads (and the secondary issue that complaining isn’t going to get people to switch sides) has NOTHING to do with why people are complaining about the vast number of posts each week.
Again, and for the zillionth time, you’d get this “JEEZ, cool it with all the XYZ threads already” reaction about ANY subject being done to death. And this subject IS being done to death. And human nature being what it is, several things are going to happen, both out here, and IRL.
First, people are going to be turned off by the tone, and not listen to the message. Second, people are going to feel like “methinks they doth protest too much” regarding the vast numbers of negative press, both here and IRL. Third, those being directly insulted for their views are going to dig in even harder.
Last, if someone believes in “their cause” whatever it might be, all the bitching and nastiness in the world isn’t going to sway them, in fact, it will backfire and do the opposite.
You know? I see this sort of attitude on political shows too. The “well if you’re on THAT side, you’re a moron”. And then the other side acts that way right back. Nothing gets solved, no information which COULD be of interest, were it delivered in a calm, reasoned, non-judgmental way can get through.
I’m pretty sure not all Americans are for bush, or for kerry. I’m sure there are a lot who are going “oh great, the fire or the frying pan”. You think that shoving a multitude of hatefully worded “WELL it’s all your fault, you voted for him last time!!!” type remarks are going to sway THEM to the kerry side?
I voted for Clinton damnit, and it turned out that he did a bunch of stuff I didn’t care for, but like most Americans I didn’t have ESP, so blaming people for how a president turned out is about the STUPIDIST thing anyone in this debate could do.
For the simple fact that all that’s going to do is bring out the stubborn in Americans. And I’m not just targeting you, as I said, in political debates, I see this sort of behaviour all the time.
Jeez, whatever happened to agreeing to disagree, or respecting someone else’s opinion even if you didn’t agree with it? And again, that was NOT a pro bush statement, I’m saying in general.
It seems as if, in this day and age, no one is allowed to have an opposing viewpoint without being insulted for it. And this tendency, not just here, but IRL has just begun to bug me more and more. THAT is the gist of my whole beef with this thing. NOT any great affinity for the bush administration.
It’s nice to see that some can disagree without ripping off someone’s head for them!
My answer to your question about 'As impotence perhaps?" is when, have we EVER had any potency regarding our government? Are we all ready to go back to the 60s? March on Washington? Leave our jobs and kids and take up a lifetime of protest to change things?
They say voting counts. I disagree, we get a choice of two crappy people who had the money to put up to campaign. What the hell way is that to choose the president? Then there’s all the archaic party system crap and so on.
We don’t have power at all, we get a choice between soggy potato chips, or moldy ones. And that’s not a “bush” or “kerry” thing either. Unless we’re all willing to completely give up our lives and protest this, it’s never going to change.
And there is no way that the dumber of bush’s choices, like the gay marriage thing, are going to come to fruition. I think that in a lot of these cases, people are allowing themselves to feel as if they’re getting duped out of something that we, as Americans haven’t really had a choice in for a long, long time.
I also think that people allow themselves to blame whoever is in charge for what is their own personal tribulation, such as unemployment. From what I’ve read, the current president has nothing to do with current economics, that economics go in waves and that what is happening to day is a result of policies made several years ago, in former admnistrations. But that is from a course I took in economics a long time ago, so I could be wrong on that.
So…you don’t read the threads, yet earlier you seemed quite sure that they are lacking crucial evidence. How, pray tell, would you know that if you didn’t read them?
Sigh. You know, you can debate and asd people questiions, or even to explain what they mean without having to constantly be so hostile.
Second, and you’d know this if you’d read all of what I’d posted previously, I said “of the few I had ventured into”.
Third, and I stated this in previous threads too, I’m NOT just talking of here, I’m talking in real life too. And I did NOT say “evidence” didn’t exist, crucial or otherwise. I said regarding what DOES exist, we all read the same news, and we all see the same articles, and that unless someone has insider information, it’s wrong to call those people who interpret this information DIFFERENTLY, stupid or evil.
One person can see a newscast, or read a “top secret” document online and see that as meaning something different than those who are opposed to it.
Not at all; at his current rate, Dubya is giving me enough new grist for legitimate bashing that I could write a thread every day without repeating myself between now and the election. I have no intention of stopping just because you weary of hearing the truth.
Watch out Fear Itself! milroyj’s just being agreeable so as to further his diabolical plan of tricking you and your liberal ilk into Reeder-like lockboxes.
You didn’t say who weren’t what?
