# New rule: shut the fuck up about Bush **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [May 16, 2005, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-rule-shut-the-fuck-up-about-bush/304125 "2005-05-16T20:29:06Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2005, 3:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-rule-shut-the-fuck-up-about-bush/304125/81 "2005-05-17T15:02:14Z")
thanks to **LHOD** for coming up with the source of **rjung’s** askingforsmackdown hijack of **Shodan’s** Cafe thread. as for **rjungs’** specific reply to me (on first page) wherin he points out that the source of the quote wasn’t named, nor did he specifically name Bush, so what? One doesn’t have to invoke the name to make the message clear. “current administration” works, for example. and, more specifically, way to ignore the point. If _even people who agree with the fundemental message_ are saying “that’s really annoying and pointless” **and** , as I noted (which you apparently ignored) your tactic _hurts_ our cause 'cause it gives the other side the opportunity to dismiss **all** of us 'cause of your patterned responses, a mature person would possibly be inspired to say, “maybe it **is** me”. There’s about 2 or 3 folks that I personally would think of as folks prone to unnecessary hijacking to Bush bash. The conservatives lost one of their main ‘unnecessary politico hijackers’ recently. so the fact that we have so many tends to make us look even worse. Please stop. all of you. It really is as annoying as Ann Limbaugh. (now **there’s** an image to creep y’all out) ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2005, 3:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-rule-shut-the-fuck-up-about-bush/304125/82 "2005-05-17T15:03:21Z")
> [@Desmostylus](#): > > I should expand on this a bit. If you try to play to the “center”, what’s most likely to happen is that _everyone_ is going to think that you’re an unprincipled asshole. And that’s what I think you are: an unprincipled asshole. I don’t think he’s an unprincipled asshole. I suspect that you’ll find a number of people think he’s quite the principled non-asshole, if you want to run this as a popularity contest. The fact that he’s willing to call out people on his own “side” of the issues (in quotes because that’s a simplistic way of viewing things) is not a sign that he’s playing to the center: it’s a sign that he’s got principles. What you see as not playing to the center looks to me like jingoism, like “Our party, right or wrong.” And **that** is what, in my opinion, reflects a lack of principles. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2005, 3:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-rule-shut-the-fuck-up-about-bush/304125/83 "2005-05-17T15:09:49Z")
> [@Desmostylus](#): > > I should expand on this a bit. If you try to play to the “center”, what’s most likely to happen is that _everyone_ is going to think that you’re an unprincipled asshole. No, not to everyone. Just to nimrod, kneejerk, partisan cocks like yourself. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2005, 3:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-rule-shut-the-fuck-up-about-bush/304125/84 "2005-05-17T15:18:32Z")
> [@Priceguy](#): > > I still think it’s a good example, but since everyone else seems to disagree I just wanted to get it out of the way. **Shodan** gave you one, [here’s another one](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=6094752&postcount=16) (which, of course, spawned a retort), [here’s a third one](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=6165219#post6165219), and [a fourth one](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=6111495&postcount=14). I don’t happen to share the outrage over **Shodan’s** example. And, apparently, neither did Shodan at the time. For as the OP of that thread he made no comment on the alledged hijack of same…and neither did anyone else. BTW, I say “alledged” for it was nowhere apparent in said OP that posters were constrainedto fictional literary works – in fact, rjung, asks as much and no one, including the OP, responds otherwise > [@rjung](#): > > If we’re not limiting ourselves to fiction, then I’ll toss out Lastly, I’ll also note that at least one [other poster](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=6165062&postcount=109) responded to rjung’s in the very spirit proposed by the OP, thus I fail to this as any kind of blatant example of a Bush hijack. As for the links you’ve provided, since they have nothing to do with **rjung** , question is, why is he being singled-out in your OP? So far all you’ve shown he’s done is bring Bush into a discussion of the likelihood of nuclear war, hardly a hijack for any number of reasons already listed, and one additional example, that I for one, find debatable. So, where’s the beef? Want to get rid of Bush’s references altogether if they don’t fit _your_ criteria of “proper” usage? How’s about I say “fuck Dear Misleader, that bumbling, egotistical fratboy motherfucker” right now? How’s that fit into your outrage meter? Worthy of another pit thread? Methinks you’re going to be quite busy for quite sometime if you do. Or else you can let the mods do what they are supposed to do. Just a thought ---
**Author:** ![Excalibre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/898d66/32.png) [@Excalibre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Excalibre)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2005, 3:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-rule-shut-the-fuck-up-about-bush/304125/85 "2005-05-17T15:20:34Z")
> [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#): > > I don’t think he’s an unprincipled asshole. I suspect that you’ll find a number of people think he’s quite the principled non-asshole, if you want to run this as a popularity contest. Aww, you’re a sweetheart. 🙂 However, recent evidence seems to contradict you. If I can manage to be on you-know-who’s bad side while _simultaneously_ being on you-also-know-who’s bad side, I must be doing a pretty good job of pissing folks off. :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2005, 3:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-rule-shut-the-fuck-up-about-bush/304125/86 "2005-05-17T15:23:12Z")
> [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#): > > If **Diogenes** had started that Cafe Society thread, and **milroyj** \* had come in with some quote from Sean Hannity’s latest diatribe, would you consider that to be unacceptable behavior? Honestly, I don’t have a problem with it. If someone reads mostly non-fiction, quoting from non-fiction means they can participate. And if no one else makes a big deal about it, it doesn’t hijack anything. ---
**Author:** ![Clothahump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/51bf81/32.png) [@Clothahump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Clothahump)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2005, 3:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-rule-shut-the-fuck-up-about-bush/304125/87 "2005-05-17T15:24:07Z")
> [@duffer](#): > > Please post the last illegal war Bush started. If was more than a week ago, everything gets reset to zero. Didn’t you read the entire memo? Kinda hard to do that, **duffer.** He hasn’t started any illegal wars. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2005, 3:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-rule-shut-the-fuck-up-about-bush/304125/88 "2005-05-17T15:36:24Z")
> [@Clothahump](#): > > Kinda hard to do that, **duffer.** He hasn’t started any illegal wars. [Bush apologist](http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3661134.stm) make [me ill (mod note: graphic photos --Giraffe)](http://www.robert-fisk.com/iraqwarvictims_mar2003.htm). ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2005, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-rule-shut-the-fuck-up-about-bush/304125/89 "2005-05-17T15:43:04Z")
> [@RedFury](#): > > [Bush apologist](http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3661134.stm) make [me ill](http://www.robert-fisk.com/iraqwarvictims_mar2003.htm). Jesus, man, a little warning before you link to pictures of war dead? ---
**Author:** ![elfbabe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/b782af/32.png) [@elfbabe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elfbabe)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2005, 4:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-rule-shut-the-fuck-up-about-bush/304125/90 "2005-05-17T16:07:06Z")
> [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#): > > And **especially** don’t bring up the Democratic Party, the Republican Party, or George Bush, not even with your incredibly clever nicknames for them." Ooh, that reminds me! Other new rule: Stop spelling anything Microsoft-related with a $ in place of an s. They are big and evil and have money. We know. I quit doing that when I turned fifteen and stopped posting on Slashdot, because it’s _stupid_. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2005, 4:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-rule-shut-the-fuck-up-about-bush/304125/91 "2005-05-17T16:10:36Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > Honestly, I don’t have a problem with it. If someone reads mostly non-fiction, quoting from non-fiction means they can participate. And if no one else makes a big deal about it, it doesn’t hijack anything. Yeah, it takes two to hijack–but it only takes one person to start the hijack. And if it were a line from _The Secret Life of Bees_ or _A History of the Crimean War_ or _How to make Sweaters out of your Dog’s Fur_, then I wouldn’t have a problem with it: it’d fit. But that’s not what it was. It was a famously partisan poster coming into a nonpartisan thread started by another famously partisan poster and making a partisan comment. I’ve got a couple of cats, and they’re not always real fond of each other. They scuffle a lot. But they’re not always scuffling; sometimes they’ll just be hanging out in the room with us. And then one of the cats gets an evil look in her eye, and she’ll leap over and bite the other cat hard on the ass, and boom, it’s back to scuffling. I know that’s their nature, but goddammit, it’d be nice if they would put aside their squabbling every now and then and just chill in the same room together. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2005, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-rule-shut-the-fuck-up-about-bush/304125/92 "2005-05-17T16:20:11Z")
I’m suprised no one brought up starting a [thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=316879) with the purpose of annoying another poster, and then hiding behing a smiley so he’s not “technically” breaking a rule. That topic is old news, **rjung** , as evidenced by the lack of interest in people posting to the thread. The timing of that thread starting, and this thread, is too coincidental. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2005, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-rule-shut-the-fuck-up-about-bush/304125/93 "2005-05-17T16:26:07Z")
> [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#): > > Yeah, it takes two to hijack–but it only takes one person to start the hijack. That’s very true, but who is that person? If someone posts something on-topic, I can’t view it as a hijack. ---
**Author:** ![Revtim](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/revtim/32/1042_2.png) [@Revtim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revtim)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2005, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-rule-shut-the-fuck-up-about-bush/304125/94 "2005-05-17T16:29:40Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > I’m suprised no one brought up starting a [thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=316879) with the purpose of annoying another poster, and then hiding behing a smiley so he’s not “technically” breaking a rule. That topic is old news, **rjung** , as evidenced by the lack of interest in people posting to the thread. The timing of that thread starting, and this thread, is too coincidental. It seemed simply like a bit of attempted humor, to me. Looks like you’re digging for dirt against **rjung** as much as he digs for it against Bush. ---
**Author:** ![Excalibre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/898d66/32.png) [@Excalibre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Excalibre)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2005, 4:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-rule-shut-the-fuck-up-about-bush/304125/95 "2005-05-17T16:30:15Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > I’m suprised no one brought up starting a [thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=316879) with the purpose of annoying another poster, and then hiding behing a smiley so he’s not “technically” breaking a rule. That topic is old news, **rjung** , as evidenced by the lack of interest in people posting to the thread. The timing of that thread starting, and this thread, is too coincidental. Especially since he links to this thread. I think we can agree that it wasn’t a coincidence. Which just shows that **rjung** either (1) can’t tell the difference between **Priceguy** ’s exhortation about not hijacking perfectly good threads and starting an entirely _new_ thread (acceptable, even if **rjung** ’s threads are a little repetitive) or (2) is one of those bitter little posters who can’t tell the difference between expressing irritation at a behavior and an attack on him as a person, and just decided to camouflage his psychic angst with a smiley. I am not a fan of the smarmy little smiley trick, but I suppose it’s clear that **rjung** isn’t in this for popularity, or the respect of other posters, or anything like that. Incidentally, he told me he’s not out to win hearts and minds. Obviously he’s not swayed by the respect or disgust of others. So what’s left? Does this constitute a tacit acknowledgement that he’s just here to listen to his own voice? ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2005, 4:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-rule-shut-the-fuck-up-about-bush/304125/96 "2005-05-17T16:31:45Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > That’s very true, but who is that person? If someone posts something on-topic, I can’t view it as a hijack. That’s also true; however, as I see it, **rjung’s** action in that thread was probably a deliberate attempt to tweak **Shodan** : he was biting **Shodan’s** ass. Whether or not he was doing it with a technically on-topic post, he was attempting a hijack. Obviously I’m no mindreader, and perhaps **rjung** can explain his motives in a convincing manner; but that’s sure what it looked like ot me. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2005, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-rule-shut-the-fuck-up-about-bush/304125/97 "2005-05-17T16:59:13Z")
> [@Revtim](#): > > It seemed simply like a bit of attempted humor, to me. Looks like you’re digging for dirt against **rjung** as much as he digs for it against Bush. Well, the mods agree with me. That thread has been closed. ---
**Author:** ![Lord\_Ashtar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ea924/32.png) [@Lord\_Ashtar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lord_Ashtar)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2005, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-rule-shut-the-fuck-up-about-bush/304125/98 "2005-05-17T17:01:22Z")
> [@Reeder](#): > > Please post the the last time before today I bashed him. > > Thanks. Says the guy who is [specifically listed to one Bush bashing thread on the front page of the Pit](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=244716). ---
**Author:** ![Revtim](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/revtim/32/1042_2.png) [@Revtim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revtim)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2005, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-rule-shut-the-fuck-up-about-bush/304125/99 "2005-05-17T17:05:51Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > Well, the mods agree with me. That thread has been closed. True enough. I personally still would have taken it as a joke, though. I tend to give the benefit of the doubt. ---
**Author:** ![duffer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/duffer/32/1026_2.png) [@duffer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/duffer)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2005, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-rule-shut-the-fuck-up-about-bush/304125/100 "2005-05-17T17:07:41Z")
> [@Excalibre](#): > > Hmm? I’m not feeling sorry for myself here. I’m just recommending that you try to grow back the part of your brain you donated to science. I beleive that should read : _science fiction_ [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-rule-shut-the-fuck-up-about-bush/304125.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-rule-shut-the-fuck-up-about-bush/304125.md?page=6)