How long is this going to take?

alfadriver wrote: Wow, considering the vitriol that was spewn when Obama was elected, and still flows, it's pretty funny how sensitive you critics of him are. Sad. But funny.

Uhhh, do you think that maybe 8 years of hearing exactly the same thing from the other camp, followed by a huge steaming pile of self-righteous holier-than-thou-ism, might have a little bit to do with why people are sensitive?

Seriously, if the Democrats and media had even remotely taken the high road while Bush II was in office, they would have some semblance of credibility and would have a defensible leg to stand on. Then the Republicans - ohh, wait, I mean the Repugs - would sound like the hysterical prigs they are.

Instead, the Democrats did what they did for 8 years, and now they just sound like whiny Bob Costases who can dish it out pretty freely but can't take it.

And remember - I'm not a Republican and I thought Bush was a bad president.

Duke wrote: Instead, the Democrats did what they did for 8 years, and now they just sound like whiny Bob Costases who can dish it our pretty freely but can't take it.

What did we do to deserve being called anti-american at every turn? Try to have rational discourses with people when they are telling you that you are not a real american because you don't come from the "heartland" or are citified or oppose wars.

Duke wrote: Uhhh, do you think that maybe 8 years of hearing exactly the same thing from the other camp, followed by a huge steaming pile of self-righteous holier-than-thou-ism, might have a little bit to do with why people are sensitive? Seriously, if the Democrats and media had even remotely taken the high road while Bush II was in office, they would have some semblance of credibility and would have a defensible leg to stand on. Then the Republicans - ohh, wait, I mean the Repugs - would sound like the hysterical prigs they are. Instead, the Democrats did what they did for 8 years, and now they just sound like whiny Bob Costases who can dish it our pretty freely but can't take it.

Who are "the Democrats"? You know for a fact that every Democrat, to a person, was unfair to Bush?

Okay, but let's assume they were. First of all. I don't hear "them" whining. I heard Obama today say he was responsable for their losses yesterday. That's not whining. I head a lot of speaches last night from Democrats who lost who said "the people have spoken" and got on with things.

All of that aside- does it make it okay for you to now do what you say was so terrible for "them" to do?

Hey, I'll play it either way; I don't care. But you can't have it one way when you're up to bat and then the other way when you're not. As long as it's the same on both sides, it's at least fair, if not constructive.

To quote a great man, "I can dig rappin'; I can dig scrappin'; but I don't dig that back-stabbin'."

Duke wrote: Hey, I'll play it either way; I don't care. But you can't have it one way when you're up to bat and then the other way when you're not.

I agree with you. I don't think people should have run Bush down the way they did and I'll admit I'm guilty of it. But you can't have it both ways either. You either think it's wrong or you don't.

fast_eddie_72 wrote:

carguy123 wrote: You can download and read the bills for yourself. I don't remember the exact count but of 1200+ pages of Banking reform only about 250 pages were banking reform (candy shell)

I've been curious about this - did the bills the Democratic Congress pass have a lot more, I don't know, "stuff" in them than the bills the Republican Congress before them passed? I honestly don't know. I just assumed when I heard them yacking about "you haven't even read it" that it was more political finger pointing. Do any of them read any of the bills all the way through? Hum. Have all the people opposed to the health care bill read it? How can you be opposed to it if you haven't even read it?

I've said for years now that if I had any authority there would be a state law passed requiring a radio channel devoted to the reading aloud of every single bill by the congressional members prior to them voting on it. You could tune in and listen to your senator reading aloud the health care bill before he votes on it. Wouldn't have to be live, just provably the real congressman's voice.

Kills three birds with one stone: forces them to actually read what they are voting on, allows us the opportunity to listen to the drivel they are making into laws before they become laws, and suggests to law-makers that they might want to keep things short, clear, and to the point, so they waste less time sitting in some room reading into a microphone.

I did read through the 1200 page health care bill one weekend, cover to cover, and I would say maybe 800 pages were actually health-care related. I think they skew the numbers more every time someone talks about it.

wbjones wrote: actually it's probably FDR's fault if truth be known....

Hey, someone is paying attention!

Fast Eddy said: We need jobs! OK, how about I try to keep major AMERICAN manufacturers alive and employing people?

Maybe I'm confused again, it happens.

I heard Obama wants to get out of Dodge after the election by flying to India. Some joked that he wanted to visit a Mosque, I dunno. I live hear the original General Electric site which is now a pretty big company, maybe you've heard of it. The talking head this morning said Mr. President was bringing with him to India 250 businessman and rattled off a few names including the head of GE.

I'm not a Democrat, I'm not a Republican, some times my medication doesn't kick in and a few times I have been "detained for my own safety" but what do you think about this?

Dan

Duke wrote:

alfadriver wrote: Wow, considering the vitriol that was spewn when Obama was elected, and still flows, it's pretty funny how sensitive you critics of him are. Sad. But funny.

Uhhh, do you think that maybe 8 years of hearing exactly the same thing from the other camp, followed by a huge steaming pile of self-righteous holier-than-thou-ism, might have a little bit to do with why people are sensitive? Seriously, if the Democrats and media had even remotely taken the high road while Bush II was in office, they would have some semblance of credibility and would have a defensible leg to stand on. Then the Republicans - ohh, wait, I mean the Repugs - would sound like the hysterical prigs they are. Instead, the Democrats did what they did for 8 years, and now they just sound like whiny Bob Costases who can dish it out pretty freely but can't take it. And remember - I'm not a Republican and I thought Bush was a bad president.

Duke- you constantly mock people who voted for Obama. So it's ok for YOU to mock us, but it's not ok to do it back?

It's perfectly fine for you to hand out childish statements, but when someone wants to mock your opinion, then it's a serious matter, which great fury must be brought down to correct them.

That's pretty funny. In more of a pathetic way, now.

ignorant wrote:

Duke wrote: Instead, the Democrats did what they did for 8 years, and now they just sound like whiny Bob Costases who can dish it our pretty freely but can't take it.

What did we do to deserve being called anti-american at every turn? Try to have rational discourses with people when they are telling you that you are not a real american because you don't come from the "heartland" or are citified or oppose wars.

and on the flip side, the race card is now just about worn out.
disagree with the president? you don't like him cause he's black.

don't want obamacare? you must be racist because you don't want all the poor minorities to have healthcare.

alfadriver wrote: Duke- you constantly mock people who voted for Obama. So it's ok for YOU to mock us, but it's not ok to do it back? It's perfectly fine for you to hand out childish statements, but when someone wants to mock your opinion, then it's a serious matter, which great fury must be brought down to correct them. That's pretty funny. In more of a pathetic way, now.

When did I ever say that? I couldn't agree less with your interpretation of my posts and I couldn't agree more with your point. I'm not quite sure how you got what you did out of it.

What I've been saying all along is that it's perfectly OK to mock your "opponent" - as long as you don't get all butt-hurt when you're mocked in return. I think that's what the generic "Democrats" are doing. They've spent the last 8 years being incredibly un-civil and downright insulting toward the Republicans and toward Bush Jr. in particular. Seriously, the man was directly compared to a retarded chimpanzee and came out the loser. He's been treated as barely human. Clearly that is hyperbole of the lowest order - yet when anyone who doesn't like Obama dares to criticize him, we get a bunch of static about that. "Every time you criticize Obama, God kills a kitten."

That's what I'm angry about - not that Bush was criticized in the first place, but that those harshest critics can't stand it when Obama is criticized in return.

And always remember that it's not even a matter of "my" candidate versus "yours" - I didn't vote for either of them, so I don't have a dog in this fight at all. I just find the insulted self-righteousness truly repulsive, following as it does directly after 8 years of completely unacceptable behaviour.

Duke wrote:

alfadriver wrote: Duke- you constantly mock people who voted for Obama. So it's ok for YOU to mock us, but it's not ok to do it back? It's perfectly fine for you to hand out childish statements, but when someone wants to mock your opinion, then it's a serious matter, which great fury must be brought down to correct them. That's pretty funny. In more of a pathetic way, now.

When did I ever say that? I couldn't agree less with your interpretation of my posts and I couldn't agree more with your point. I'm not quite sure how you got what you did out of it. What I've been saying all along is that it's perfectly OK to mock your "opponent" - as long as you don't get all butt-hurt when you're mocked in return. I think that's what the generic "Democrats" are doing. They've spent the last 8 years being incredibly un-civil and downright insulting toward the Republicans and toward Bush Jr. in particular. Seriously, the man was directly compared to a retarded chimpanzee and came out the loser. He's been treated as barely human. Clearly that is hyperbole of the lowest order - yet when anyone who doesn't like Obama dares to criticize him, we get a bunch of static about that. "Every time you criticize Obama, God kills a kitten." That's what I'm angry about - not that Bush was criticized in the first place, but that those harshest critics can't stand it when Obama is criticized in return. And always remember that it's not even a matter of "my" candidate versus "yours" - I didn't vote for either of them, so I don't have a dog in this fight at all. I just find the insulted self-righteousness truly repulsive, following as it does directly after 8 years of completely unacceptable behaviour.

Racist

I'm actually glad a black person got elected President, because now that tired old saw can get put back in the shed. At least it was someone reasonably intelligent and not a moron like Jesse Jackson, or (Odin protect us) Al Sharpton.

Duke wrote: ...now that tired old saw can get put back in the shed.

What have you got against old saws?

Ageist, that's what YOU are.......

D'oh! That's it! I'm holing up at Dr. Hess's place, with a quick stop at Wallyworld to stock up on ammo on my way down.

Bwahahahahahahaaaaa!!!

Duke, look at all the garage time you'll get!

Fast Eddy said: We need jobs! OK, how about I try to keep major AMERICAN manufacturers alive and employing people?

I didn't say that...

Duke wrote: What I've been saying all along is that it's perfectly OK to mock your "opponent" - as long as you don't get all butt-hurt when you're mocked in return.

I'm reasonably sure Republicans got "butt-hurt" when people made fun of W. In fact, I'm absolutely sure of it. I heard it over and over again. "Respect for the office" and all that. That's the joke I was making back on page one. Can't tell you how many times an angry Republican told me it was just fine to dislike the President, but I should have "respect for the office". Many of those same folks are now displaying their respect by hoisting signs with pictures of Obama made up like the Joker. And to a person they say "yah, but you made fun of W." Um, okay, but what about the "respect for the office"?

So, yeah, it's perfectly fine to tell me I should have "respect for the office" as long as you don't get all butt-hurt when I point out that you have no respect for the office.

This is a circular, waste of time. People say things about Politicians they don't like. It's not a good thing. We're all Americans and really, shouldn't stoop to name calling when we're talking about things we say are important issues.

But here's the worst part- the guy who comes up with the best school yard jab often wins. That's kinda crazy. Do we really like Obama because "you can put lip-stick on a pig"? That was a lame thing to say. It really was. Sarah Palin has plenty of things to dislike. I don't really need lipstick jokes to convinece me not to vote for her. Similarly, I don't need to see the President of the United States made up like the Joker to find things to criticize about him. Hell, I voted for the guy and I have pleny of things to criticize.

http://vodpod.com/watch/1362383-saturday-night-live-update-oscar-rogers

fast_eddie_72 wrote: People say things about Politicians they don't like. It's not a good thing. We're all Americans and really, shouldn't stoop to name calling when we're talking about things we *say* are important issues.

You could have helped reverse the trend - by never starting this thread. And yet, you did.....

The tit-for-tat playground antics are useless, unless one has an unlimited supply of tat.

Duke wrote: "Every time you criticize Obama, God kills a kitten."

I'm not a cat lover,but why does everything I do now involve God killing them

oldsaw wrote:

fast_eddie_72 wrote: People say things about Politicians they don't like. It's not a good thing. We're all Americans and really, shouldn't stoop to name calling when we're talking about things we *say* are important issues.

You could have helped reverse the trend - by never starting this thread. And yet, you did..... The tit-for-tat playground antics are useless, unless one has an unlimited supply of tat.

Well, maybe. I was trying to make a bit of a light hearted observation. I guess I should be clear- I don't really think the Republicans should have done something about the economy already. It was intended to be an observation about people's expectations. I think they can be a bit unrealistic.

It sure sounded like a "well, you got some of what you wanted, now shut the berkeley up because I'm going to give it back to you" kind of thing. I appreciate the intent but maybe it just didn't come across.

You know, this situation kind of reminds me of an ex-coworker/friend of mine. He was bipolar, among other things.

In his manic phase, he was a prankster. So he would prank me, or others. So then I'd prank him back, fair enough, a one-step exchange, we're even. Except, of course, he was manic, so he'd get pissed off that I had pranked him, and he'd retaliate against my retaliation.

It really sucked and that's part of why he's an ex-friend. Right now, I'd like to collectively take both sides of the aisle and bang their heads together and tell them to act their age.

fast_eddie_72 wrote:

Fast Eddy said: We need jobs! OK, how about I try to keep major AMERICAN manufacturers alive and employing people?

I didn't say that...

You're right, my apologies. It was Cone Junky at the top of page two.

The question still stands. Anyone?

Dan

oldsaw wrote: The tit-for-tat playground antics are useless, unless one has an unlimited supply of tat.

You forgot the w in tats. That way its a playground full of tits and... nevermind.