You know, there’s nothing that really puts the shine on a nice snarky comment like having to explan it to a troglodyte. Thanks for the work-out.
Your opinion- not shared by the SecDef and others in the room at the time, including those who recommended a different tactic. Based on the fact that failed missions of this type have brought down presidents, Rumsfeld had a similar opportunity but chose not to go through with it, and that experienced foreign policy and military advisors advised against it at the time, it’s pretty damn easy to call this a tough call. Get over it- it was a difficult decision, and President Obama made it.
Look, son, when a piece of snark doesn’t work, it’s not the fault of the audience, it’s the fault of the author. Sure, your lame little remark will get by your brethren, but they aren’t the only one reading. When you are asked to explain it and it doesn’t hold up, you look stupid. Like you’re feeling a little right now.
Further, claiming you were employing sarcasm doesn’t mean that the point you were trying to make needn’t stand up to scrutiny. I had you explain yourself, and the two “facts” that your supposed sarcasm were based on were both revealed to be simple bullshit. So that makes your post simple bullshit. And that makes the further defense of said post a bullpen load of simple bullshit. Do you see a pattern here?
Don’t mention it. No charge. Fighting ignorance and all that…
Says the guy who asked me to explain what I thought his view would actually be if Obama strapped on a cod-piece and flew to an aircraft carrier to announce Mission Accomplished.
It’s not my fault you wouldn’t recognize rhetorical sarcasm if it crawled up your ass and tickled your sphincter.
Tsk, tsk, tsk. You’re still confusing sarcasm with factually inaccurate stupidity. You were wrong on BOTH counts. You MUST try harder.
You know, I see an interesting analogy in all this.
In the ‘anti-rich’ threads, we are informed by conservatives that the men at the top are the thing and the whole of the thing. The front-line grunt-workers don’t create the wealth; it’s the job creators’ vision and innovation and leadership that make it possible for the employees to do so. CEO salaries are entirely in proportion to their worth to the company; they just matter more.
And on this end of things, Obama’s decision was basically nothing, and it all came down to the SEAL team and the brave men and women on the front lines who pulled off the operation. Anyone could have made Obama’s call, and while he should certainly be noted as the person who said okay, he should get no more credit than that.
Funny, isn’t it?
Factually inaccurate stupidity? What, you think that I think that Obama would actually pull a stupid Bushian stunt like that? I think you need to go back and read the sarcasm link at Wikipedia.
Too tight. He needs a hypodermic needle for an enema.
And here the problem is revealed: you just don’t feel the need to follow things logically. Or can’t. Either way, this discussion has you spinning more wildly the longer it goes on. Now go back and see if you can the mistakes you made. I’ll even give you a hint: “assumptions can be very wrong”.
But if you prefer to continue in the nonsensical manner you have, to save time, here is my response to your next post:
You can say that again, Mr. Wigglesworth! Rodeo refrigerator very cleverly blue, give or take a toucan.
Well, to be fair, I don’t have my head constantly up my ass the way you do.
Ooooh, snap! Wilde?
No, I think we all now have a pretty good idea what factually inaccurate stupidity looks like.
Let’s face it, folks, we’re never going to get an intellectually honest answer out of magellan01. You can provide him with quotes from all sorts of people from both political parties, you can provide him with all the geopolitical analysis you like, and he’ll still come back with the rhetorical equivalent of “Nuh-uh.” Obama could have parachuted into Pakistan alone, defeated a squad of terrorist ninjas and personally killed ObL by driving his fist through bin Laden’s forehead and out the other side, and magellan01 would still be saying “Big deal - anyone can punch a guy in the face.”
Not to mention that given his previously-expressed views on SSM (which also basically boil down to “Nuh-uh - marriage is TOO a special thing”, I’m not surprised he’s doing his best to remake reality to fit the voices in his own head. Again.
Hmmm. Well, let’s do this the easy way. You seem to imply that there is something what you quoted from me that relates in some way to “factually inaccurate stupidity”. So, can you point to what I’ve said in the recent exchanges that qualify as factually inaccurate? I’ll leave the stupidity part aside, as I’m sure we probably agree that what each other says in near totality might be construed as “stupidity”. So, let’s concentrate on the objective part.
I’ll wait.
And thanks for using the “we” in your diatribe. As in you being too weak to stand alone so you instead seek the comfort, support and protection, of the crowd. Don’t feel too bad, there’s quite a bit of that around these parts.
No. Better. From here.
James Cagney. When he played George M. Cohan, he had to do a lot of song and dance routines. Even though you could tell he can’t dance, nonetheless in the spirit of showmanship he innovated some moves like: striding up to a wall and kicking it to propel himself backwards, in time to the beat. With a high enough level of energy that it passed for dancing well enough.
When I saw Roxy Music at a St. Louis club called Mississippi Nights, in “Remake/Remodel” during the solo instrumental breaks, Bryan Ferry didn’t have a piano handy to play his piano solo from the record, so instead he jumped off the low stage. And back up onto it. In time to the beat. Very minimalist. At a minimum, if you can just jump up and down with style, it can keep an audience feeling entertained for a while.
The only “persecution” the Mormons ever suffered was being driven out of Illinois and Missouri when they started their usual routines there of smashing the presses of non-Mormon newspapers and assaulting anti-Mormon speakers. Boo fucking hoo for them. Mormons are persecutors in America, not the persecuted, and “worthless” doesn’t even come close to a strong enough description on what their influence has been on the politics of this country.
Have any log cabin publicans public ally resigned over this statement? I can’t believe that trashing the pres statement is something that their membership unanimously agrees with? I’d even expect some to publicly switch parties over this.
To be fair, much of the political activism before the Civil War involved smashing other people’s printing presses and dumping them in the river, burning buildings and assaulting political opponents. Politics was definitely not bean bag.
Haven’t heard anything, but I’m not holding my breath. If Obama didn’t get their public support when he decided to not prosecute gays in the military, eliminated DADT, and tried to get gay federal employees spousal benefits, I doubt this will.
Why the fuck not?