Lookin' For That Apology...

[The T]

That's a fair post.

The reason I like it is that it means that the battles here on the USMB can go on ad infinitum,

and I believe that the 'market place of ideas' will ultimately provide the truth.

"truth"? As in absolute truth? Wouldn't that be grand. I suspect the 'truth' has been found over and over again, don't you? Always however to be challenged by an antithesis resulting in a synthesis of ideas (at least in the mainstream). Fringe ideas appear and disappear with much regularity, their 15 minutes of fame fade quickly.
Rather than adopt an ideology I much prefer the pragmatic approach. Sometimes it works and sometimes it 'don't'.
I still subscribe to a few immutable truths, the Golden Rule in life and in politics, looking for solutions and ignoring blame, and always questioning - asking why and why not. Of course human nature is human nature (yes, such a premise says nothing, yet so much) and there is much evidence in my own written words to suggest I don't always practice what I preach.

The truth, in this case, writ large is the competence of this President.

And as to the Competence of Obama? He's had to bring in a former occupant to rescue him...and a poor example at that.

 

[The T]

What you wish is of no consequence to me. My desire is that somehow one or two or a dozen of the millions that are being destroyed by your kind see these words and have a heads up on a worthy target picked out to take out thier hatred and revenge on. I'm just here to help them choose wisely. You didn't really do anything but parrot the vermin that are responsible. Being stupid isn't really a crime. Neither does it get reward.

So kind of you to help educate me,

I wonder if I could impose on said kindness just a bit further...It is my impression that males who use the kind of vulgar jargon to which you often feel obliged, are fearfully anxious about their viriltiy, and attempt to hide this disquiet behind what they incorrectly see as masculine vernacular.

Is this nail-on-head?

As you know I seldom attack you or your posts. It was your primary insult of the OP which brought out my venom. I usually wait to see if a stupid arrogant asswipe of a thread takes before responding. I didn't just "pop up" with my sentiment. I feel those words as I have all along. Your idiotic insult of a thread is getting what it deserves as should those of whom you parrot for recieve my perscription..

And what is that prescription HuggyBub? bend over...you'll drive?

 

[PoliticalChic]

What you wish is of no consequence to me. My desire is that somehow one or two or a dozen of the millions that are being destroyed by your kind see these words and have a heads up on a worthy target picked out to take out thier hatred and revenge on. I'm just here to help them choose wisely. You didn't really do anything but parrot the vermin that are responsible. Being stupid isn't really a crime. Neither does it get reward.

So kind of you to help educate me,

I wonder if I could impose on said kindness just a bit further...It is my impression that males who use the kind of vulgar jargon to which you often feel obliged, are fearfully anxious about their viriltiy, and attempt to hide this disquiet behind what they incorrectly see as masculine vernacular.

Is this nail-on-head?

As you know I seldom attack you or your posts. It was your primary insult of the OP which brought out my venom. I usually wait to see if a stupid arrogant asswipe of a thread takes before responding. I didn't just "pop up" with my sentiment. I feel those words as I have all along. Your idiotic insult of a thread is getting what it deserves as should those of whom you parrot for recieve my perscription..

Actually, I seldom kill folks, but if I did, I doubt that frequency would be an acceptable defense.

I'm going to suggest that you re-read the OP more carefully, as there seems to be no "primary insult of the OP " nor any "idiotic insult of a thread."

In point of fact, it is your posts that more fully conform to these appellations...

Let's review: the OP is in three parts

1. I remind Obama voters that the right warned against this candidate.

2. I include an interview that took place after the election, between Charlie Rose and Tom Brokaw, admitting that they neglected to properly vet the candidate, and knew nothing about him....pretty much the opposite of the office of the fourth estate.

3. Third part, was a quote by a Democrat member of the House of Representatives stating the same about the President.

Clearly, you'd be hard pressed to point out either a "primary insult of the OP " or any "idiotic insult of a thread."

At least, none by me...

Is it possible that you are unaware of the meaning of the word 'insult'?

 

[daveman]

Your post is mentally retarded. You say all the lefties while talking to a lefty who is unequivocally opposed to this budget busting tax bill.

No one who supports this can call themselves a fiscal conservative. You can justify supporting in any way you want, but you are not a fiscal conservative if you support this.

Goodness, but you're not very bright. I didn't say "all the lefties"...I said "all the lefties who condemned Bush's deficit spending".

Feeling your toes stepped on? Yeah, I expect you are.

Bernie Sanders spoke for 8 HOURS yesterday against this budget busting bill. Is he lefty enough for you?

Did he oppose Bush's deficit spending then excuse Obama's?

 

[daveman]

Your post is mentally retarded. You say all the lefties while talking to a lefty who is unequivocally opposed to this budget busting tax bill.

No one who supports this can call themselves a fiscal conservative. You can justify supporting in any way you want, but you are not a fiscal conservative if you support this.

Goodness, but you're not very bright. I didn't say "all the lefties"...I said "all the lefties who condemned Bush's deficit spending".

Feeling your toes stepped on? Yeah, I expect you are.

Do you even have a position on this tax bill?

It's a start. Spending has to be cut, too.

 

[SFC Ollie]

Unfortunately the "empty suit" is your analogy

Obama has accomplished more in his first two years than any president in recent memory. I have listed his major accomplishments......very impressive

History will rank Obama as a top 10 president after his second term is over

I can picture you and the other little kiddies lying on the floor pounding your little fists, kicking your little feet, shouting out this post..over and over and over....

History will show that this President has not the characater, the experience, the knowledge or the vision necessary for the office, and that folks like you refused to judge his as you would any othe candidate...

and chose to judge his oratory skills, an see the opportunity to cast a historical vote for the first black to attain that office.

It is understandable...

what is less understandable is that some folks, usually intelligent folks, pen posts such as yours.

Where is your "empty suit" apology PC...Facts have obviously proved you wrong

Obama delivered what he said he would

1. Entering office in the midst of the worst recession in 70 years, Obama passed TARP and Stimulus bills that reversed a stock market collapse, ended a financial panic, added 3 million jobs to the economy, saved the banks and saved the auto industry.

2. Obama redirected the war on terror back to where it belonged...Afghanistan. He partnered with Pakistan to increase strikes against Taliban/AlQaida strongholds in northern Pakistan. He increased drone strikes to kill key terrorist leaders and drive them underground.

3. He passed the first comprehensive healthcare bill in 100 years of trying and ensured that 30 million Americans who had been ignored were able to obtain coverage

4. He negotiated a START treaty with the Russians to reduce worldwide weapons stockpiles and continue inspections

Obama's first two years were outstanding. History will judge them as such.

The right wing obstructionists such as yourself will prove to be on the wrong side of history once again

1.Right off the get go you are wrong. Tarp was not passed by Obama. Though he did sign the spendulus Bill. 3 million my ass; unemployment is still climbing. And since when does the President fire a civilian CEO?

2. Obama pretty much followed the time table that Bush had already agreed to in Iraq and the Military had to beg and embarrass Obama to get more troops into Afghanistan.

3. The Healthcare bill that they lost site of the objective and went after control instead of lowering the costs?

4. I would comment on START but I haven't read enough about it yet.

 

[Wry Catcher]

That's a fair post.

The reason I like it is that it means that the battles here on the USMB can go on ad infinitum,

and I believe that the 'market place of ideas' will ultimately provide the truth.

"truth"? As in absolute truth? Wouldn't that be grand. I suspect the 'truth' has been found over and over again, don't you? Always however to be challenged by an antithesis resulting in a synthesis of ideas (at least in the mainstream). Fringe ideas appear and disappear with much regularity, their 15 minutes of fame fade quickly.
Rather than adopt an ideology I much prefer the pragmatic approach. Sometimes it works and sometimes it 'don't'.
I still subscribe to a few immutable truths, the Golden Rule in life and in politics, looking for solutions and ignoring blame, and always questioning - asking why and why not. Of course human nature is human nature (yes, such a premise says nothing, yet so much) and there is much evidence in my own written words to suggest I don't always practice what I preach.

The truth, in this case, writ large is the competence of this President.

What is written large is the Republican Party - under whatever name they call themselves - wanting Obama to fail. They have partially succeeded in doing so with your help and the help of the echo chamber here and elsewhere. Reactionary forces, the New Right and holders of the anachronistic ideology of Objectivism revere avarice as the greatest good, and the rights they enjoy in our society are for them, not necessarily for anyone else to enjoy.

 

[The T]

Goodness, but you're not very bright. I didn't say "all the lefties"...I said "all the lefties who condemned Bush's deficit spending".

Feeling your toes stepped on? Yeah, I expect you are.

Do you even have a position on this tax bill?

It's a start. Spending has to be cut, too.

It's always with the Statist..."How are you gonna pay for tax cuts..?" with no forethought into budget cuts.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Goodness, but you're not very bright. I didn't say "all the lefties"...I said "all the lefties who condemned Bush's deficit spending".

Feeling your toes stepped on? Yeah, I expect you are.

Do you even have a position on this tax bill?

It's a start. Spending has to be cut, too.

Then why won't you oppose tax cuts unless they are accompanied by spending cuts? You know they'll never make the cuts. No tax cut in the past 30 years has ever been followed up with proportionate spending cuts, and every tax cut in the past 30 years has been accompanied by some promise of some sort of 'future' cuts.

You are an accomplice to the tax cut death spiral. You are a fiscally irresponsible enabler.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

A Part-Time Senator and "Community Organizer" does not a President make. I'm looking for my apology too.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Do you even have a position on this tax bill?

It's a start. Spending has to be cut, too.

It's always with the Statist..."How are you gonna pay for tax cuts..?" with no forethought into budget cuts.

The GOP isn't even asking that question, let alone offering an answer.

You CANNOT let politicians do the easy and merely promise, someday, to do the difficult. They will NEVER do the latter.

Plus, Americans as a whole, left right and center, are fiscally irresponsible. So they elect fiscally irresponsible politicians.

 

[The T]

Do you even have a position on this tax bill?

It's a start. Spending has to be cut, too.

Then why won't you oppose tax cuts unless they are accompanied by spending cuts? You know they'll never make the cuts. No tax cut in the past 30 years has ever been followed up with proportionate spending cuts, and every tax cut in the past 30 years has been accompanied by some promise of some sort of 'future' cuts.

You are an accomplice to the tax cut death spiral. You are a fiscally irresponsible enabler.

It's Dave's fault now?

What a rube.

 

[NYcarbineer]

This tax cut and spend plan is nothing more than a second Keynesian stimulus bill. It is astounding that almost the entire right opposed the first stimulus bill, and then insisted it did not work,

and NOW want it repeated.

It is beyond astounding. What's the next word up in degree from 'astounding'? PC, get your thesaurus!

 

[NYcarbineer]

It's a start. Spending has to be cut, too.

Then why won't you oppose tax cuts unless they are accompanied by spending cuts? You know they'll never make the cuts. No tax cut in the past 30 years has ever been followed up with proportionate spending cuts, and every tax cut in the past 30 years has been accompanied by some promise of some sort of 'future' cuts.

You are an accomplice to the tax cut death spiral. You are a fiscally irresponsible enabler.

It's Dave's fault now?

What a rube.

It's the fault of anyone here who doesn't care that this bill will force us to borrow hundreds billions more from the Chinese and the rest of our enemies to pay for it.

 

[HUGGY]

So kind of you to help educate me,

I wonder if I could impose on said kindness just a bit further...It is my impression that males who use the kind of vulgar jargon to which you often feel obliged, are fearfully anxious about their viriltiy, and attempt to hide this disquiet behind what they incorrectly see as masculine vernacular.

Is this nail-on-head?

As you know I seldom attack you or your posts. It was your primary insult of the OP which brought out my venom. I usually wait to see if a stupid arrogant asswipe of a thread takes before responding. I didn't just "pop up" with my sentiment. I feel those words as I have all along. Your idiotic insult of a thread is getting what it deserves as should those of whom you parrot for recieve my perscription..

Actually, I seldom kill folks, but if I did, I doubt that frequency would be an acceptable defense.

I'm going to suggest that you re-read the OP more carefully, as there seems to be no "primary insult of the OP " nor any "idiotic insult of a thread."

In point of fact, it is your posts that more fully conform to these appellations...

Let's review: the OP is in three parts

1. I remind Obama voters that the right warned against this candidate.

2. I include an interview that took place after the election, between Charlie Rose and Tom Brokaw, admitting that they neglected to properly vet the candidate, and knew nothing about him....pretty much the opposite of the office of the fourth estate.

3. Third part, was a quote by a Democrat member of the House of Representatives stating the same about the President.

Clearly, you'd be hard pressed to point out either a "primary insult of the OP " or any "idiotic insult of a thread."

At least, none by me...

Is it possible that you are unaware of the meaning of the word 'insult'?

You would be hard pressed to find "An Apology" I would not find offensive. Primary..as in first..as in The Title.

If you had worded your Title differently I would have taken no notice and offered no complaint or opinion. The gaul of you people mealy mouthing the word apology makes me want to think in terms of cheerleading some retribution for the acts of treachery already imposed on our country by you worthless fucks. I am fully aware words and deeds have consequence...are you?

 

[boedicca]

This tax cut and spend plan is nothing more than a second Keynesian stimulus bill. It is astounding that almost the entire right opposed the first stimulus bill, and then insisted it did not work,

and NOW want it repeated.

It is beyond astounding. What's the next word up in degree from 'astounding'? PC, get your thesaurus!

Only a True Statist would equate letting people keep more of the money they earned with taking money away from them to give to others.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Goodness, but you're not very bright. I didn't say "all the lefties"...I said "all the lefties who condemned Bush's deficit spending".

Feeling your toes stepped on? Yeah, I expect you are.

Bernie Sanders spoke for 8 HOURS yesterday against this budget busting bill. Is he lefty enough for you?

Did he oppose Bush's deficit spending then excuse Obama's?

I do. Bush borrowed to prosecute a war of choice. Obama borrowed to save jobs. The former cost us lives and treasure, and the financial cost of the war will be on-going well into this century.
Jobs created by Obama reap tangible benefits, roads, bridges and tax revenue; deaths and injuries created by Bush reaped costs - in life, limb and treasure.

 

[boedicca]

That sounds good, except for the fact that Obamanomics has destroyed more than 3 million jobs instead of saving or creating any.

 

[The T]

Then why won't you oppose tax cuts unless they are accompanied by spending cuts? You know they'll never make the cuts. No tax cut in the past 30 years has ever been followed up with proportionate spending cuts, and every tax cut in the past 30 years has been accompanied by some promise of some sort of 'future' cuts.

You are an accomplice to the tax cut death spiral. You are a fiscally irresponsible enabler.

It's Dave's fault now?

What a rube.

It's the fault of anyone here who doesn't care that this bill will force us to borrow hundreds billions more from the Chinese and the rest of our enemies to pay for it.

Ahhh----! NOW you guys care about our banker?

Too rich!

 

[daveman]

"truth"? As in absolute truth? Wouldn't that be grand. I suspect the 'truth' has been found over and over again, don't you? Always however to be challenged by an antithesis resulting in a synthesis of ideas (at least in the mainstream). Fringe ideas appear and disappear with much regularity, their 15 minutes of fame fade quickly.
Rather than adopt an ideology I much prefer the pragmatic approach. Sometimes it works and sometimes it 'don't'.
I still subscribe to a few immutable truths, the Golden Rule in life and in politics, looking for solutions and ignoring blame, and always questioning - asking why and why not. Of course human nature is human nature (yes, such a premise says nothing, yet so much) and there is much evidence in my own written words to suggest I don't always practice what I preach.

The truth, in this case, writ large is the competence of this President.

What is written large is the Republican Party - under whatever name they call themselves - wanting Obama to fail.

That's because Obama failing is what's best for America.

They have partially succeeded in doing so with your help and the help of the echo chamber here and elsewhere. Reactionary forces, the New Right and holders of the anachronistic ideology of Objectivism revere avarice as the greatest good, and the rights they enjoy in our society are for them, not necessarily for anyone else to enjoy.

Which particular The Man is keeping you down?

I keep asking you class-warfare morons that question. None of you ever answers.