In this thread, rjung decided to ignore the premise of the thread to instead get in a cheap shot against Bush. As much as I agree with rjung, it’s fucking annoying and boring. To avoid hijacking that thread I will respond to rjung here instead.
It’s inappropriate because it’s off-topic (the Airman asks three specific questions, none of which have anything to do with Bush; you just leapt at the chance).
I am one of those who think that, I am further to the left than you are, and I hate Bush with a passion, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t fucking boring to have every single discussion derail into a shitty flameparty about Bush, especially when it’s completely pointless. Nothing new would have been said, no opinions altered. You’re harming our cause, not helping it.
Sorry, missed the bit in the forum description where it said Great Debates were only for petty snipefests about modern American politics. Could you point it out for me?
In light of all this, I propose a new rule: shut the fuck up about Bush if it isn’t specifically on-topic. You all know it’s a hot button, but you just won’t leave it alone. If the thread is about alcoholism, someone will say Bush is an alcoholic and someone else will dispute it, or someone will say he cured his alcoholism through faith and someone else will dispute it and off we go. If the thread is about ornithology, someone will say Bush’s environmental policies are making birds extinct and off we go. If the thread is about Andromeda, someone will give voice to their fears that Bush will go there to eradicate any terrorists living there and off we fucking go.
I hate him too, I’d like to see him and everyone like him removed from power, but he’s there and doing your best to turn this message board into a shitpile won’t change that. Just leave it the fuck alone, says this very leftist but also extremely bored poster.
Well, let’s see - milroyj hijacked a thread to beat on one of his pet peeves. But it wasn’t Bush-bashing, so…
rjung is a one-trick pony. I started a thread in Cafe Society about chilling last lines - the silly bastard tried to hijack that too with the same shit.
I doubt he has any political ideas beyond a knee-jerk * tu quoque* about Bush and the Iraq war. But by golly he gets about ten thousand miles of of that.
Because it fits in with my ultra-conservative, neocon, Bushista viewpoint, I’m going to see this as a pitting of rjung. A richly deserved and far overdue pitting. I’m not sure if what I’m about say violates Board rules, but he’s the only person I’ve ever considered putting on The List That Shall Not Be Named.
I don’t have a problem with people who don’t agree with my political leanings, but he just needs to give it a flippin’ rest already. When he’s not taking potshots at Bush, he’s taking them at Microsoft.
All in all, his two worst crimes are being predictable and redundant. We get it. No, really, we do. You dislike for Microsoft is only paled by your dislike for Bush.
in a cafe thread??? gotta link? (not that I doubt you, just wanna see how far he had to travel - I assume the thread wasn’t about the Michael Moore film, right? )
In a cafe thread should be an easy and obvious smack down. hopefully some one did.
in a GD thread, it’s more difficult, especially if the thread is about potential for nuclear war. I’d have a hellava difficult time voicing my thoughts about potentials for the future w/o bringing into the discussion how I think current events will effect them. So, yes, I would indeed be referencing BUsh. Be glad I haven’t been in GD for a while.
Did you read the thread? Airman Doors asked three very clear questions, none of which required a Bush reference to answer. rjung did it to stir up shit.
That I would have a difficult time responding to that thread (ie those questions) without discussing the current events. I wouldn’t have done it in the same way the rjung did, but rest assured that some mention of “premptive strike based on faulty intelligence claiming potential nuclear capability” would have been prominate in my response. Really I can’t see any way around talking about the issues raised by the Iraqi invasion to adequately respond to questions about possablities of future nuclear war. Which would require some mention of the Bush adminstration.
Now, if friend Shodan will bring in the link the the cafe society thread, I’d gladly issue my own condemnation of an irrelevant Bush Hijack. Or, if rjung had done some of the other things you put in your OP (the alcoholism one in particular) I’d gladly join in.
but discuss potential for future nuclear action somehow without talking about current events? can’t be reasonably done, IMHO.
Is Bush going to be in power 30-40 years from now? Is he part of the generation Airman Doors speaks of? No? Then what does he have to do with that question?
I see that JeffB has obliged. yep that deserves a smack down - did any mod come in and deliver it?
rjung - I don’t post often anymore, but others may perhaps remember that I’m quite left leaning, find it difficult to walk down the street that way, but there it is.
I believe the only hope we have for the future is for all of us, all of us to start remembering that we’re people. and that the similarities outweigh our differences (generally), that we want the best for our loved ones and our futures. We may, as adults disagree about what path is best for that, or what constitutes the ‘best’, but all in all, we can still find some topics to discuss rationally, or even playfully. What’s your favorite Simposon line, or favorite recipe containing apples shouldn’t be turned into the bitchfest that politics and other ‘heavy’ topics often turn into.
when you take the oppotunity to piss all over a thread where folks like Dio, and Shodan are enjoying each other’s thoughts, you’re (IMHO) encouraging strife, encouraging rifts, encouraging pointless dissention. IN short, (again, IMHO), doing everything I hate about closed minded folks on either side of the spectram.
I, for one, would be very grateful if you would knock it the fuck off. You see, when folks on my end of the argument do shit like that, it’s easier for the folks on the other side to dismiss any relevant point you may ever have, and relevant points others may “Oh, that’s just leftist nonesense” and all. And that bugs the shit out of me, makes my (liberal but not a fucking lunatic) job harder. Pretty please?
Criminey, Priceguy - Airman himself in his OP referred to his childhood recollections of bomb drills and so on effecting his outlook. No, Bush personally won’t be in charge in 30/40 years, but the kids of today (who **Airman ** was posting about) are spending their formative years NOW, hence my belief that their perceptions will be contoured by todays’ fucking events which of course includes the fucking Bush administration.
how on earth can you even answer the question about how “today’s youth” will behave when they’re in power in a few decades without reflecting on what they are living through now? The people who lived through the first stages of the “sex revolution” in the 70’s have radically different (from my personal experience/observation) views on sex than those who were reaching sexual maturity during the beginnings of the AIDS epidemic in the US, vs. young people of today. OF COURSE their personal experiences relative to the times will have an effect. OF COURSE it makes sense to take that into account when attempting to speculate on what course they will steer.
I aggree with you that rjung is capable of idiotic hijacks about BUsh. I agree that his wording wasn’t what I’d have used, but to attempt to claim that the realities of recent events have no place in a discussion about potential nuclear posturing 30/40 years from now is, IMHO, idiotic.
I don’t post in the pit often, I don’t enjoy the tone that often comes with being here.
But I wanted to say that in principle I agree with the OP. rjung, your presence on the board would be far more enjoyable if you could limit your Bush comments to the occasional pit rant. I have seen some of posts of yours that were quite witty and intelligent, showing that you are more than the embodiment of anti-Bush sentiments.
Don’t get me wrong, I don’t begrudge you your beliefs, but I would prefer you didn’t inject them into quite so many threads that have no relationship. Please, keep it in the pit and keep it in threads that are specifically about Bush.
)