Let’s Not Be Civil
Moderator: Super Moderators
Joolz wrote: Just quoting this for the sake of preservation. Ignoring a poster on the internet is neither passive aggressive nor hostile. "Ignore" is a standard feature of most message boards, and is perfectly acceptable. Calling out other posters by name and harassing them, especially for things that happened on another thread, is, however, unacceptable behavior on most message boards. That said, I'm gone.
Well gee, Joolz, I'm just trying to be REAL....
But a couple points.
Rumike's passive-aggressive style precedes his use of the 'ignore' function, which, as I expressed earlier, I'm perfectly ok with.
I had imagined that you in particular would be sensitive to 'armchair psychology' of the sort Rumike issued against me. Strange.
Secondly: like 'trolling,' 'calling out' and 'harassing' are subjective terms, and I submit I did no such thing...but, I will grant you this is an arguable perspective.
Having said that, I'm edified to remember all the times you defended, say, Cherry Kelly against the degrading insults routinely issued by, say, Rombaldi. That was impressive because it showed that you were capable of defending someone you otherwise disagreed with, because, by your own standards, it was the right thing to do.
Oh, wait....
Last edited by HB3 on 04-20-2011 02:46 PM, edited 1 time in total.
Kaztronic wrote: It amazes me that the partisan fog, which so many people find themselves enveloped in, totally prevents them from seeing that BOTH sides say the exact same thing on this particular issue of "compromise". I tend to think they are willfully closing their eyes to reality. Neither party (nor their supporters) have been interested in compromise, (much less civility) for quite some time.
I guess that's true, but I don't see the Repubs as really fighting much. Did McCain fight? Do they do protests like Madison?
Joolz wrote: Just quoting this for the sake of preservation. Ignoring a poster on the internet is neither passive aggressive nor hostile. "Ignore" is a standard feature of most message boards, and is perfectly acceptable. Calling out other posters by name and harassing them, especially for things that happened on another thread, is, however, unacceptable behavior on most message boards. That said, I'm gone.
But once again, I'm sorry for being uncivil in a thread about how we aren't supposed to be civil.
Interesting poll out today.rumike wrote: I agree, SL. We need to learn to take the numbers which are on our side and press them. The GOP never misses a chance to do that. We had the numbers for a public option and should have used them. Now is our chance, and at least this time Obama is starting from that position it seems. Obama does his best work when playing to the base when it leads to real policy
Poll: 70% Of Tea Partiers Oppose Cuts To Medicare, Medicaid
Tea partiers were not alone in opposing Medicare and Medicaid cuts. An overwhelming 80% of all respondents said they opposed such cuts, with a majority of every demographic measured in the survey lining up against them.
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011 ... dicaid.php
Last edited by SETIsLady on 04-20-2011 02:37 PM, edited 1 time in total.
Yup. Thanks SL (and HI to Jules!!!!)
Yunno one thing I've been really happy about? Strangely enough, the last couple weeks - since Obama flushed out Ryan (more on him later...) and exposed him for the crook and liar that he is, the MSM has oddly been running with a few progressive memes for a change. For instance, taxing the rich is all over the place and feeling a lot of media love, as is actual journalism into Ryan and his crazed attack on our civic responsibility to our elderly and young.
Yunno one thing I've been really happy about? Strangely enough, the last couple weeks - since Obama flushed out Ryan (more on him later...) and exposed him for the crook and liar that he is, the MSM has oddly been running with a few progressive memes for a change. For instance, taxing the rich is all over the place and feeling a lot of media love, as is actual journalism into Ryan and his crazed attack on our civic responsibility to our elderly and young.
Anchors Aweigh!
- Raggedyann
- Pirate
- Posts: 5250
- Joined: 08-22-2006 04:50 PM
For sure Kaz, Obama has not lived up to his promises and he may never live up to them. Let's just say then, that a vote for him in 2012, would mean there will be somewhat of a buffer between the people and complete right wing lunacy.Kaztronic wrote: Sorry to disrupt the Obama love-fest, and GOP Neighborhood Watch here at the forum with a dose of unfortunate reality, but President Obama lacks a certain amount of credibility when it comes to making an actual stand on tough issues when push comes to shove.
Raggedyann wrote: For sure Kaz, Obama has not lived up to his promises and he may never live up to them. Let's just say then, that a vote for him in 2012, would mean there will be somewhat of a buffer between the people and complete right wing lunacy.
Those type of arguments don't tend to work in elections. They didn't work for McCain (coming from the other direction).
- Raggedyann
- Pirate
- Posts: 5250
- Joined: 08-22-2006 04:50 PM
Oh come on. I'm speaking English, aren't I?
Right-wingers weren't enthusiastic about McCain, and one of the things they tried saying to each other was, "We have to vote for McCain, otherwise we'll get 4/8 years of left-wing lunacy!"
How'd that work out?
And of course, this was only worsened by the 8 years of GWB. But that's somewhat analogous, too, to "Obama fatigue," even among the faithful.
Well, some of the faithful, anyway.
Right-wingers weren't enthusiastic about McCain, and one of the things they tried saying to each other was, "We have to vote for McCain, otherwise we'll get 4/8 years of left-wing lunacy!"
How'd that work out?
And of course, this was only worsened by the 8 years of GWB. But that's somewhat analogous, too, to "Obama fatigue," even among the faithful.
Well, some of the faithful, anyway.
With A Stroke Of His Pen Obama Strikes Back At Citizens Unit
A little over a year ago the Supreme Court of the United States made a controversial ruling that says corporate funding of independent political broadcasts in candidate elections cannot be limited. The case known as Citizens United v Federal Election Commission allows corporations to use their general funds to buy campaign ads that was prohibited under federal law, and opened the door for unlimited contributions by corporations as well as unions. The high court cited the 1st Amendment’s guarantee of the right of free speech, and it was the first time a corporate entity was treated like a person. Detractors of the ruling cried foul and correctly pointed out that, “The Supreme Court has handed lobbyists a new weapon. A lobbyist can now tell any elected official: if you vote wrong, my company, labor union or interest group will spend unlimited sums explicitly advertising against your re-election.” The ruling also opened the door for foreign governments to affect the outcome of United States elections.
Snip..
On Wednesday it was reported that President Obama was drafting an executive order that would require companies pursuing federal contracts to disclose political contributions that have been secret under the Citizen’s United ruling. A senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation, Hans A. von Spakovsky, lambasted the proposed executive order saying that, “The draft order tries to interfere with the First Amendment rights of contractors.” Mr. von Spakovsky dutifully made all the right-wing, neo-con arguments including bringing Planned Parenthood and unions into the discussion. The draft order did not exempt any entity from disclosure rules and presents a reasonable requirement on contractors seeking government contracts. Several states have similar “pay to play” laws to prevent businesses from using unlimited donations to buy lucrative state contracts from slimy legislators. Thus far the only legislator who has railed against the proposed order was Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY). McConnell called the proposal an “outrageous and anti-Democratic abuse of executive branch authority,” and went on to say, “Just last year, the Senate rejected a cynical effort to muzzle critics of this administration and its allies in Congress.”
http://www.politicususa.com/en/obama-citizens-united
Re: With A Stroke Of His Pen Obama Strikes Back At Citizens
SETIsLady wrote: http://www.politicususa.com/en/obama-citizens-united
Anchors Aweigh!
Shazam wrote: Obama=Anti Christ if he can`t win he cheats.....
The use of an executive order is hardly cheating, it is a legal option which belongs to the President and has been used by all Presidents in this manner - both Democrats & Republicans.
Btw Shazam, what little credibility you had as a poster is quickly evaporating as your recent posts go further and further off the rails.
"You'll get used to my babbling, all the others have." - Anna Madrigal from "Tales Of The City" by Armistead Maupin
Kaztronic wrote:
The use of an executive order is hardly cheating, it is a legal option which belongs to the President and has been used by all Presidents in this manner - both Democrats & Republicans.
Btw Shazam, what little credibility you had as a poster is quickly evaporating as your recent posts go further and further off the rails.
Im like Ozzy on the Crazy Train Baby......but for the record I neither want nor seek approval for the things I post...Citizens United beat BO`s brains in now he is trying to side step it by executive order.....dems would choke and have sizeurs if the next Conservative President just executive ordered Obama care out of existence.....I truly despise the man I wont hide it Im am as vitriolic about him as I have seen posts on here about GWB....He is the worst President of my nearly 4 decades on this plane of existence..... the quicker he gets sent back to private life and lecturing circuit the better for the United States AND the world....