Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

Riddikulus!

OT Partisanship

  • Please log in to reply
94 replies to this topic

#41 Hambil

Hambil
  • Islander
  • 5,492 posts

Posted 25 August 2004 - 10:49 AM

Ogami, on Aug 25 2004, 08:46 AM, said:

Ro wrote:

I couldn't take time to add it up, but financial disclosure filings for W sure make him look pretty flush with assets. As does Former Halliburton CEO and current VPOTUS Dick Cheney.

Kerry and Edwards have a far wealthier combined wealth than Bush and Cheney.

Oops, did I include Tereza's total in that as well? Or did she tell her widow-chaser: "Hands off my money!"

Enquiring minds want to know.

-Ogami
Rich is rich when it comes to this kind of money and accusations about being 'out of touch' with the common man. Your point, is pointless.

#42 Ro-Astarte

Ro-Astarte

    goddess of love and blowing things up

  • Islander
  • 3,842 posts

Posted 25 August 2004 - 10:52 AM

Ogami, on Aug 25 2004, 10:46 AM, said:

Kerry and Edwards have a far wealthier combined wealth than Bush and Cheney.

Oops, did I include Tereza's total in that as well? Or did she tell her widow-chaser: "Hands off my money!"

Enquiring minds want to know.

-Ogami
So you consider 7 mil closer to the earth, so to speak, than 10 mil? (Note, I'm pulling numbers out of the air here, I haven't added up anybody's net worth rpts)

That seems a distinction that makes no difference to me.

By your reckoning, the only people who don't talk down to the poor are other poor people. That is, frankly, ludicrous.  

BTW, I was assuming that Kerry's figure was based on a joint reporting. Why would you assume otherwise and why does it bug you so much that she's wealthy in her own right? Would you say the same of Laura Bush's millions (if she had them)?

Ro

#43 Hambil

Hambil
  • Islander
  • 5,492 posts

Posted 25 August 2004 - 10:55 AM

I would also point out that Edwards earned his fortune. Cheney, Bush, and Kerry inherited theres. I know some will say (without backing it up) that Edwards is an ambulance chaser (derailing the topic and avoiding my claim), but, he has a better argument for being in touch with the common man than either Bush or Cheney.

#44 Drew

Drew

    Josef K.

  • Islander
  • 12,191 posts

Posted 25 August 2004 - 11:00 AM

Hambil, on Aug 25 2004, 10:39 AM, said:

And, to put the shoe on the other foot: Would anything I could say on Ex Isle between now and November change your vote?
I can't foresee it. I didn't like Bush in 2000, preferring McCain. (Which caused some friends to label me a "liberal." Heh.) But I came to like him rather quickly. In the Democratic primary, I thought Kerry was the lesser of 12 evils, but I've grown to dislike him more since he was selected. Although I think there's much to dislike about Kerry, I think Kerry is also a victim of the DNC's mad quest for power at any cost. That makes it hard for me to really hate the man.

I though Glenn Reynolds' "alternate universe Kerry campaign" was enlightening.

Quote

Democratic Presidential nomineee John Kerry laughs when told that most voters don't realize that he served in Vietnam, winning three purple hearts, a bronze star, and a silver star.

"Why should they? That's several wars ago," Kerry laughs. "Old stuff. I'd much rather people be talking about my detailed plan to rebuild Iraq, using an oil trust mechanism that would give the Iraqi people a stake in reconstruction. That's why I focused on that in my acceptance speech at the Democratic Convention. What was I going to do, rehash events from 35 years ago?"

Kerry's friends say that, like other veterans, he's been known to tell a few tall tales about his service over beers with others who served, but that he seldom talks about his combat experience otherwise. "He's put that behind him," says his wife Teresa. "And he thinks it would be unbecoming to make a big deal about his service when others, like [Senator] John McCain or [former P.O.W.] Paul Galanti went through so much more."

"I would have invaded Iraq regardless of the WMD issue," Kerry observes. "Saddam Hussein was a threat, and a menace to his own people. And a free, democratic Iraq will be the first step toward addressing the 'root cause' of terrorism -- despotic Arab regimes that spew hatred to distract their people from their own tyranny. But as I said last year, the reconstruction needed more resources. That was why I voted for the $87 billion in reconstruction money, but urged the Bush Administration to ask for more, to do it right."

Kerry also takes a dim view of leftist filmmaker Michael Moore. "I think that his film 'Fahrenheit 9/11' was scurrilous and dangerous to the morale of our troops. That's why I asked that he be excluded from the Democratic Convention, despite Jimmy Carter's wishes. And that's why he wasn't seen there. In a time of war, we don't need guys like that. We can win this campaign based on our ideas, not propaganda films. That's also why I told Chris Matthews to 'stuff it' when he tried to make an issue out of President Bush's National Guard service."

Kerry's detailed plans for Iraq, and for carrying the war on terror to Al Qaeda and its backers elsewhere, seem to have left the Bush Administration floundering. Sources close to the Bush campaign say that some Bush operatives are considering an attack on Kerry's Vietnam record, but many are skeptical. "I don't think that'll work," says cyber-pundit Glenn Reynolds, who calls Kerry's Iraq plan promising. "Most voters have no idea Kerry was even in Vietnam. He never talks about it, so where's the traction? It's ancient history."

Others are even harsher. "They can't attack the message," says Matthew Yglesias of The American Prospect, a liberal publication. "So they're attacking the messenger. That's because they don't want to talk about Kerry's real accomplishments, the ones Kerry touted at the Convention, like his role in busting BCCI, the terrorists' money laundry. Kerry's talking about that, and his plans for Iraq, and they're talking about Vietnam? Who cares about that? Pathetic."

Unfortunately, all Kerry and his supporters could talk about at the convention was how evil the President was and how Kerry was in Vietnam.

So while I feel sorry for John Kerry in some respects, I also see that he only has himself to blame for the way he's being perceived.
"Someone must have slandered Josef K., for one morning, without having done anything wrong, he was arrested."

#45 prolog

prolog

    The Merry Programmer

  • Islander
  • 1,062 posts

Posted 25 August 2004 - 11:05 AM

Hambil, on Aug 25 2004, 01:51 PM, said:

Everytime a rational post I make is countered with partisan spew, I am going to respond with RIDDIKULUS! and link this thread. I see no other way to deal with the issue, based on the last few days.
Or better yet, just walk away.  But then, I think that's counter to what you want to accomplish.

#46 Drew

Drew

    Josef K.

  • Islander
  • 12,191 posts

Posted 25 August 2004 - 11:07 AM

prolog, on Aug 25 2004, 11:03 AM, said:

Or better yet, just walk away.  But then, I think that's counter to what you want to accomplish.
Are you suggesting what I think you're suggesting?  :wideeyed:
"Someone must have slandered Josef K., for one morning, without having done anything wrong, he was arrested."

#47 Hambil

Hambil
  • Islander
  • 5,492 posts

Posted 25 August 2004 - 11:08 AM

prolog, on Aug 25 2004, 09:03 AM, said:

Hambil, on Aug 25 2004, 01:51 PM, said:

Everytime a rational post I make is countered with partisan spew, I am going to respond with RIDDIKULUS! and link this thread. I see no other way to deal with the issue, based on the last few days.
Or better yet, just walk away.  But then, I think that's counter to what you want to accomplish.
What is it you think I want to accomplish?

#48 Ro-Astarte

Ro-Astarte

    goddess of love and blowing things up

  • Islander
  • 3,842 posts

Posted 25 August 2004 - 11:12 AM

prolog, on Aug 25 2004, 11:03 AM, said:

Or better yet, just walk away.  But then, I think that's counter to what you want to accomplish.
Then again, that advice cuts both ways.

Ro

#49 Ro-Astarte

Ro-Astarte

    goddess of love and blowing things up

  • Islander
  • 3,842 posts

Posted 25 August 2004 - 11:13 AM

Drew, on Aug 25 2004, 11:05 AM, said:

prolog, on Aug 25 2004, 11:03 AM, said:

Or better yet, just walk away.  But then, I think that's counter to what you want to accomplish.
Are you suggesting what I think you're suggesting?  :wideeyed:
I hope not, because it's trite and boring.

*yawn*

Ro

#50 StarDust

StarDust
  • Islander
  • 1,155 posts

Posted 25 August 2004 - 11:16 AM

Drew, on Aug 25 2004, 11:34 AM, said:

I think the problem is that "Bush Hatred" is a sort of religion, and to attempt to dialogue with Bush-haters (as opposed to dialoging with someone who really has an open mind) is like attempting to convince a True Believer of the wrongness of his faith. Bush-hatred has been bubbling over for four years, beginning with catchphrases like "selected, not elected" and continuing onward to "Bush lied, people died." (Never mind that both these things are demonstrably false.) It will require quite a bit of time for reprogramming.
Exactly.  Most of what I've heard from people has nothing to do with specific topics, they don't have specific.  It's inuendo, paranoia, and the "we should have won" rant.  That's it.  One of the reasons I won't be voting Democrat this time, there is no substance.  I don't vote for whiners and paranoid conspiracy theorists.  

t's funny, I could probably give a better disertation on why someone should vote for Kerry than any Democrat I've met has been able to.  Just like the anti-war protesters on TV. Several people I know, including left leaners, commented on how ignorant they were.  Most of them couldn't form coherent  sentence, nevermind arguements. I was totally for the war, but I could have come up with 100% better arguments against it than any I saw. It caused several discussions about the demise of the educational system and the obvious lack of even expository writing 101 in high school. What was extremely distressfull was one was a NYC teacher, and what she said was so illogical. Everyone knows when something makes sense or not, whether it's a logical argument, regardless whether you agree or not.

Comments made elsewhere that Bush will lose in a landslide are evidence about how out of touch with reality some people are.  Who ever wins, it is going to be another statistical tie.  That is just the way it is.   And for one side to say "the people" are being picked on or whatever, are ignoring half the people. Probably more, because if you removed the divisive hot topics of abortion rights and gay rights, even more are probably otherwise on the side of the republicans.  It's even funny to hear some Democrats saying that the Republicans are dividing the country, when from everything I've seen it's the Democrats that are doing it with their sour grapes, nstead of just dealing and moving on.  Nothing is discussed on merit, it's a matter of "We hate Bush, so everything he does is wrong.  Everything anti-Bush people do must be right".  No matter how much you like someone, they are not always right. No matter how much you dislike someone they are not always wrong. It's that kind of thinking that has caused me to do a total 180 in the last year or so.  Illogical is illogical.  The more I pointed out how ridiculous some of these statements where, the more I had to reassess my own opinions and positions on the matter.

On the NH evening news last night they were discussing how much time the candidates are spending in NH.  This often happens for the primaries, but not after. However, this time around every vote counts even more than last time, and NH is a battleground state.

Anyways, they were stating that manyof the battle ground states are republican leaning.  And due to increases in population in those states, if the states vote the same as last time, Bush will have 10 more electoral votes than last time.  A very clear winner. Hence all the time Kerry is spending here. Plus, we know Kerry's antics going way back. You can't live in New England and not know all about Massachussetts politics. It's annoying in a way because you kind of feel like they overwhelm everything else. Regardless, it puts someone running from Massachussetts in a precarious position .

So anyone stating absolute victory, or landslides, or anything else, is living in an alternate reality, is showing they are out of touch with what is really happening, and anything else they say is subject to the same doubt. Making outlandish statements only loses you the argument.  

Comparing Bush to Hitler, Saddam, and any other ridiculous statements shows several things about the speaker.  They have no comprehension of how terrible and evil those people were and how people suffered because of them.  Either they are ignorant or incapable of understanding. It also shows a total lack of balance, perspective, relativity, and so forth.  It also shows them likely to make outlandish statements, negating most if not all of their other statements.

#51 prolog

prolog

    The Merry Programmer

  • Islander
  • 1,062 posts

Posted 25 August 2004 - 11:18 AM

Ro-Astarte, on Aug 25 2004, 04:11 PM, said:

Drew, on Aug 25 2004, 11:05 AM, said:

Are you suggesting what I think you're suggesting?  :wideeyed:
I hope not, because it's trite and boring.

*yawn*

Ro
So why don't we all just do the right thing, and walk away from this thread?

#52 QueenTiye

QueenTiye

    Behavior is not reproducible over multiple trials.

  • Islander
  • 24,300 posts

Posted 25 August 2004 - 11:18 AM

Hambil, on Aug 25 2004, 10:08 AM, said:

I understand where you are coming from Chistopher. I wish it could be that way. But, I believe (solely my belief) that this kind of thinking has lost us the presidency and control of the congress, and nearly control of the senate. I can't be a passive Democrat any longer.
Interestingly, this is partisan spew... (in my opinion)...

HM07

Een Draght Mackt Maght


#53 Hambil

Hambil
  • Islander
  • 5,492 posts

Posted 25 August 2004 - 11:25 AM

Handmaiden07, on Aug 25 2004, 09:16 AM, said:

Hambil, on Aug 25 2004, 10:08 AM, said:

I understand where you are coming from Chistopher. I wish it could be that way. But, I believe (solely my belief) that this kind of thinking has lost us the presidency and control of the congress, and nearly control of the senate. I can't be a passive Democrat any longer.
Interestingly, this is partisan spew... (in my opinion)...

HM07
Okay. But I don't understand. We (Democrats) lost the presidency. We lost control of congress. We nearly lost control of the senate. That's all true. The rest is simply my belief that the cause of this is not being aggressive enough in response to Republican campaign tactics. So please (seriously) explain how else I could phrase what I've said?

Edited by Hambil, 25 August 2004 - 11:25 AM.


#54 QueenTiye

QueenTiye

    Behavior is not reproducible over multiple trials.

  • Islander
  • 24,300 posts

Posted 25 August 2004 - 11:29 AM

you couldn't.

In context of THIS thread, you've said that its only the poor democrats who are being picked on etc., etc., while the over-aggressive republicans have trampled all over them... and in context of THIS thread, which is supposed to exist to counter unfair partisan spew... apparently in your mind that can only come from the other side.

HM07

Een Draght Mackt Maght


#55 Ogami

Ogami
  • Islander
  • 2,976 posts

Posted 25 August 2004 - 11:30 AM

Hambil wrote:

Rich is rich when it comes to this kind of money and accusations about being 'out of touch' with the common man. Your point, is pointless.

You are aware of the title of this thread? Now that's just plain weird, Hambil.

-Ogami

#56 Ro-Astarte

Ro-Astarte

    goddess of love and blowing things up

  • Islander
  • 3,842 posts

Posted 25 August 2004 - 11:31 AM

prolog, on Aug 25 2004, 11:16 AM, said:

Ro-Astarte, on Aug 25 2004, 04:11 PM, said:

Drew, on Aug 25 2004, 11:05 AM, said:

Are you suggesting what I think you're suggesting?  :wideeyed:
I hope not, because it's trite and boring.

*yawn*

Ro
So why don't we all just do the right thing, and walk away from this thread?
If I agreed that was the right thing, I would, as I have in the past.

You were the one advising walking away. I just noted that it was a reflexive principle.

Ro

#57 Ro-Astarte

Ro-Astarte

    goddess of love and blowing things up

  • Islander
  • 3,842 posts

Posted 25 August 2004 - 11:32 AM

Ogami, on Aug 25 2004, 11:28 AM, said:

Hambil wrote:

Rich is rich when it comes to this kind of money and accusations about being 'out of touch' with the common man. Your point, is pointless.

You are aware of the title of this thread? Now that's just plain weird, Hambil.

-Ogami
You read the first post, right?  Not just the title. :p

Ro

#58 Ogami

Ogami
  • Islander
  • 2,976 posts

Posted 25 August 2004 - 11:38 AM

Ro asked:

So you consider 7 mil closer to the earth, so to speak, than 10 mil?

Kerry and Edwards are making the usual class warfare statements that Bush and Cheney do not make under any circumstances and any context.

It's rather weird for the Democrat ticket to constantly invoke their "unique appeal" to the poor when neither of them have anything in common with the poor.

-Ogami

#59 Hambil

Hambil
  • Islander
  • 5,492 posts

Posted 25 August 2004 - 11:41 AM

Handmaiden07, on Aug 25 2004, 09:27 AM, said:

you couldn't.

In context of THIS thread, you've said that its only the poor democrats who are being picked on etc., etc., while the over-aggressive republicans have trampled all over them... and in context of THIS thread, which is supposed to exist to counter unfair partisan spew... apparently in your mind that can only come from the other side.

HM07
In the last election the Democratic candidate won the popular vote.

Does that mean the election was invalid? No, of course not. Bush won the electoral college, and a legitimate presidency. So, what is my point?

My point is, more people voted democrat, and the race was extremely close over all. That means, that the Republicans aren't gaining control of the country by numbers. They must be doing it some other way. That way, is better politicing. Better and more effective tactics.

I don't like many of those tactics, but, I really don't like the way things are headed. So, I (and many other Democrats) are adopting different and more aggressive tactics - Michael Moore is one example. MoveOn.org is another example.

This is not my first choice of how to do things. If I thought there was another way, I'd take it, but I don't.

I understand that you might not agree with a number of points I've made here, but they are thought out points, that I've backed up with some logic, so they are hardly partisan spew. They are certainly open for debate.

#60 QueenTiye

QueenTiye

    Behavior is not reproducible over multiple trials.

  • Islander
  • 24,300 posts

Posted 25 August 2004 - 11:49 AM

Well, that seems quite a topic shift in my view.  But if that was your intent, I stand corrected.  I will attempt again to frame what I saw...

You started a thread with the express purpose of rebutting "partisan spew" with a blanket response of "Riddikulus."  Fair enough, although some people objected to the idea.  I'm not voicing my opinion on the idea one way or the other - just stating my understanding of the purpose of this thread.

When someone protested your idea, you replied that you were tired of being a passive Democrat.  

I repeat - in context, that's making the Democrats the victim in need of this thread as a tactic.  And on this board, I would submit that that's unfair. Both sides have their share at partisan spew, and not really listening to, or responding fairly to the other side - so this thread should be aimed at whoever is doing the spewing.  But your subsequent post shows that it is clearly itself a partisan thing.  

HM07

Een Draght Mackt Maght




Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: OT, Partisanship

0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users