Making Chicken Salad Out Of Chickens--t.

[Supsalemgr]

Well EXCUSE me about the terminology. It obviously was understood as Vrede even knew what I meant.

[Colonel Taylor]

It is so fricken amazing now that Obama has been reelected the mess he inherited is ALL GEORGIE'S fault. I figure it will be four more years of BLAME the other guy. I can see in 3.5 years they will still be BLAMING!

[Colonel Taylor]

As has been posted, most voters know where the roots of the recession and slow recovery lie. Colonel Taylor is on the excuse making fringe - BLAME anyone but the GOP culprits.

Nope it is OLD AS HELL that a grown man will still BLAME, he tried he failed. Now he will BLAME the next four years.
I figure if the economy keeps slipping and y'all can get another 5-6 % to freeload off the guvmit a lib will win next time also. Isn't that the plan to get as many as possible to rely on the guvmit?

Well EXCUSE me about the terminology. It obviously was understood as Vrede even knew what I meant.

Yes, "even" Vrede knows the difference between "fiscal" (government) and "financial" (private). "Even" Vrede also knows that Supsalemgr will always whine sarcastically rather than just being a man and posting, "Opps."

Lack of personal responsibility is a pattern with these two.

I think the biggest "crisis" about it for the GOP is not the potential effect on economic recovery. Rather, it's the cuts to their 5-sided sacred cow.

[Supsalemgr]

As has been posted, most voters know where the roots of the recession and slow recovery lie. Colonel Taylor is on the excuse making fringe - BLAME anyone but the GOP culprits.

Well EXCUSE me about the terminology. It obviously was understood as Vrede even knew what I meant.

Yes, "even" Vrede knows the difference between "fiscal" (government) and "financial" (private). "Even" Vrede also knows that Supsalemgr will always whine sarcastically rather than just being a man about it and posting, "Opps."

Lack of personal responsibility is a pattern with these two.

I think the biggest "crisis" about it for the GOP is not the potential effect on economic recovery. Rather, it's the cuts to their 5-sided sacred cow.

Enjoy it libs. You have to live with supporting this this jerk for the next four years. Which one of you all will be the first to admit you are a socialist/communist because that is what is necessary to totally align with Obama and Jarrett.

[Bungalow Bill]

Delusional before the election, delusional after the election. Still trying to sell
the socialist/communist thing, but nobody's buying it. The market has spoken.

[rstrong]

Delusional before the election, delusional after the election. Still trying to sell
the socialist/communist thing, but nobody's buying it. The market has spoken.

As John Cleese said about Sarah Palin:

Can they not see that she's basically learned certain speeches? ... It's like a nice-looking parrot because the parrot speaks beautifully and kind of says, "aw shucks" every now and again but doesn't really have any understanding of the meaning of the words that it is producing, even though it is producing them very accurately

This is Supsalemgr's role here. He constantly parrots the "socialist/communist" talking point, but when asked to clarify, he's utterly unable to provide an example of a socialist/communist Obama policy that doesn't also apply to the Republican Party or Ronald Reagan. The same goes for many other far-right talking points, long after they've been thoroughly debunked.

He's just parroting right-wingnuttery, with not even a hint of understanding.

[Bungalow Bill]

Yeah, other than the fact that there is no evidence that Obama is either a socialist or a
communist or anything even close, the nutters will still keep saying he is. After the election,
it's just getting silly. There is still no substitute for victory.

Speaking of Moose Breath, a short article on Palin's problems with Fux News. There being so
many media spots now, I'm sure she'll turn up somewhere, but I think the thrill is gone, probably
for good.


http://theweek.com/article/index/232699 ... 3-theories

[Stinger]

Lack of personal responsibility is a pattern with these two.

Well, it's someone else's fault.

I do think I remember Soupy admitting to an error once or twice. Low batting average, I know, but at least he's done it.

I've never seen Colon admit to anything.

Hey, Colon. You want to tell us again how "Pimp and Ho" is racist discrimination and how the Obamas were just dressed nicely for a special occasion?

That was precious.

[Supsalemgr]

Harry Reid and Obama did not respond to "America speaking" after the 2010 mid-terms.

[Stinger]

It'll be interesting to see whether and how the so-called fiscal "crisis" will be resolved. America has spoken, the GOP can either compromise or accept the blame.

From Paul Krugman:

And the looming combination of tax increases and spending cuts looks easily large enough to push America back into recession.

Nobody wants to see that happen. Yet it may happen all the same, and Mr. Obama has to be willing to let it happen if necessary.

Why? Because Republicans are trying, for the third time since he took office, to use economic blackmail to achieve a goal they lack the votes to achieve through the normal legislative process. In particular, they want to extend the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, even though the nation can’t afford to make those tax cuts permanent and the public believes that taxes on the rich should go up — and they’re threatening to block any deal on anything else unless they get their way. So they are, in effect, threatening to tank the economy unless their demands are met.

Mr. Obama essentially surrendered in the face of similar tactics at the end of 2010, extending low taxes on the rich for two more years. He made significant concessions again in 2011, when Republicans threatened to create financial chaos by refusing to raise the debt ceiling. And the current potential crisis is the legacy of those past concessions.

Well, this has to stop — unless we want hostage-taking, the threat of making the nation ungovernable, to become a standard part of our political process.

So what should he do? Just say no, and go over the cliff if necessary.

New York Times

[Stinger]

if a "conservative" started the thread, one can most certainly expect a rude tongue lashing peppered with language. Had ssm been a liberal, i'm sure he would have spelled out the word in full.

I don't yet recall where a liberal started a thread and received the same treatment from a conservative;
that is short of being accused of being someone else!

Have you seen where a liberal looks posted facts dead in the face and then maintains that his unsubstantiated knee-jerk conjecture is more valid than the facts?

Have you seen a liberal read verifiable proof of something and then maintain that what he JUST BELIEVES magically displaces reality?

Have you seen a liberal quoting from the credible and objective equivalent to Canada Free Press, Free Republic, Dick Morris, or Fox News?

Have you seen a liberal simply make stuff up and post it as fact?

Have you seen a liberal cut and run from an argument where his contentions are shot down, yet reappear later claiming "It has been proved" or "As has been said before"?

Have you seen a liberal cut and run and refuse to make a mistake?

If you do, let me know.

But claiming people who act like dumbasses shouldn't be called dumbasses is allowing that people shouldn't be held responsible for their own actions.

Blaming it strictly on the more liberal posters is ignoring the content of the forums. That's like saying "Because reality has a liberal bias, Fox is allowed to tell more lies." You create some sort of false-logic equivalency in message but ignore the truth.

[perspctv]

One can almost expect a fellow conservative to play the victim card.

Complaining that their 'opinion' should be treated with respect it isn't due.

[Stinger]

One can almost expect a fellow conservative to play the victim card.

Complaining that their 'opinion' should be treated with respect it isn't due.

Exactly.

I've never seen Mr. B play it personally, but he seems to be asking that others be treated with kid gloves.

[Stinger]

"Complaining that their 'opinion' should be treated with respect it isn't due."

So......what's wrong with anyone's opinion being treated with respect?

Some opinions don't deserve respect. If you wear tin foil hats and think Obama is some sort of gay Muslim communist Manchurian candidate, then neither your opinion nor your thinking processes deserve respect.

If you think Obama is a bad president, I can respect you and your opinion. If you try to follow it up with by posting your beliefs as fact when the facts point to the opposite, then your beliefs don't deserve respect.

I respect opinions. I respect people's religious beliefs . . . even Christians. There are liberals out there who think all Muslims are wonderful and deserve our understanding while all Christians are beneath contempt and deserve only derision. Those liberals are dumbasses, too.

As long as you don't try to inflict your religion or your false reality on me and others, I don't have a problem with you.


The liberal factions believe that anything a conservative says, regardless of the source, is "unsubstantiated knee-jerk conjecture", or that they "simply make stuff up and post it as fact."

Bullshit. Thanks for proving my point. Cons around here almost never support anything. Ask Butt Ugly. He's been running for over a year.

Rather than simply dispute their facts, respect for their opinions or research is tossed aside and they get hit with a barrage of childish names.

When their "facts" are fully discredited by the real facts and by hard data, and they dismiss the facts because the facts don't uphold the "religious" beliefs -- right-wing extremism being their "religion" -- and they keep ignoring the facts and insisting their poppycock is somehow valid, THEN they get hit with some accurate descriptions.

I think continuing to insist you're right when every shred of evidence proves you wrong is childish.

I think cutting and running is childish.

I think refusing to admit a mistake is childish.

That ain't what a forum is for.

Says you. Maybe you should start your own forum.

I say a forum is not for posting lies and distortions as fact -- and then whining when you get called out on it.

Unlike some of my posts in the past, for the most part I do try to leave the name calling out of my posts.

I know. I give you credit for walking the walk. I just don't agree with you.

".......he seems to be asking that others be treated with kid gloves."

Why can't we all treat each other with "kid gloves"?

Why should we? If someone wants to be treated as an adult, he should act with integrity, honest, and rational and logical thought.

[perspctv]

So......what's wrong with anyone's opinion being treated with respect?

Respect is earned ... not handed out to any goof who attempts to string some words together into a sentence.

The liberal factions believe that anything a conservative says, regardless of the source, is "unsubstantiated knee-jerk conjecture", or that they "simply make stuff up and post it as fact." Rather than simply dispute their facts, respect for their opinions or research is tossed aside and they get hit with a barrage of childish names.

Methinks you paint with an overly broad brush ... odd you think you can do what you claim others do, right?

There aren't separate facts ... any more than there is a separate realiy.

That ain't what a forum is for.

Unlike some of my posts in the past, for the most part I do try to leave the name calling out of my posts.

I am fine without name calling as well. But when one starts out calling President Obama, his administration, his supporters, the election results, executive orders, whatever "chickenshit" they have asked to be treated in kind all your blubbering aside.

Notably when he can't back his play.

Go tell it on the mountain.

[Leo Lyons]

Mr. B, just accept that the U.S. is full of liberal dumb-f**ks led by a dumb-f**k and go on.
You aren't going to change nothing with your Rodney "Can't We All Get Along" King approach.
Here in this forum, our liberal faction knows nothing about decency towards one another; so if it's in you, give it back to them.

I am fine without name calling as well. But when one starts out calling President Obama, his administration, his supporters, the election results, executive orders, whatever "chickenshit" they have asked to be treated in kind all your blubbering aside.

You poor widdle victim of your ignowance. Go get some titty, it'll be all right.

To quote another of our great philosophers: SSDD

[Stinger]

Mr. B, just accept that the U.S. is full of liberal dumb-f**ks led by a dumb-f**k and go on.
You aren't going to change nothing with your Rodney "Can't We All Get Along" King approach.
Here in this forum, our liberal faction knows nothing about decency towards one another; so if it's in you, give it back to them.

ROTFLMAO!!!! This from the poster who's too "Chickens--t" to actually discuss a topic.

Poor wittle Wyin' Weo can't keep up with the liberal dumb**ks, so he just cheers from the sidelines like his soulmate in incompetence, Butt Ugly.

If liberal dumb**ks run circles around you so that you can't even participate in a conversation, what does that make you?

A dumbestf**k.

[Leo Lyons]

If liberal dumb**ks run circles around you so that you can't even participate in a conversation, what does that make you? A dumbestf**k.

A dumbestf**k on an even keel with you. When I first posted in the TN forum, it was you that couldn't even participate in a conversation; you jumped my ass accusing me of being another poster because I wrote on a subject that the other poster had written about earlier. Personally, I don't give a flyin' frig who cusses who, I just consider their mentality level and that, like you, their veins are coursing with pink Kool-Aid. Your lame "conversations" don't interest me anyway.

[bannination]

"Complaining that their 'opinion' should be treated with respect it isn't due."

So......what's wrong with anyone's opinion being treated with respect?

The liberal factions believe that anything a conservative says, regardless of the source, is "unsubstantiated knee-jerk conjecture", or that they "simply make stuff up and post it as fact." Rather than simply dispute their facts, respect for their opinions or research is tossed aside and they get hit with a barrage of childish names.

That ain't what a forum is for.

Unlike some of my posts in the past, for the most part I do try to leave the name calling out of my posts.

".......he seems to be asking that others be treated with kid gloves."

Why can't we all treat each other with "kid gloves"?

MrB. I agree somewhat with what you have written. I do wish the name calling could be kept to a minimum, it loses it's bite when it's used all the time. In a true ideal debate we would simply have information being discussed in a scholarly manner, unfortunately when you have a group of people from many different walks of life, this is most likely not realistic.

Those that are going to be polite will continue to do so. I'd say that our resident Doctor Wneglia and O`Really would be good examples of this. Those that are more crass will continue to be so.... Tertius Supsalemgr or Stinger perhaps. I guess my point is you can't change people, but you can set a good example.

I disagree that "liberal factions believe that anything a conservative says, regardless of the source" is true. If some of the conservatives would post reputable sources for their information they might change peoples opinions about some things. In my opinion when some of the conservatives here are presented with factual information that disproves a particular assertion, they concede that thread and then bring up the same darn thing in another thread after it's been accepted as bonk. -- Remember how worn out Obama's birth certificate was? .. and how they didn't care a bit about Romney's?

Stinger is right, an opinion itself doesn't deserve any respect. When it's an unfounded opinion that clearly contradicts evidence, someone is probably going to be called an idiot. However, when you have an opinion based on at least some evidence, that's debate time and not name calling time.

With that in mind, Supsalemgr's opinion at the beginning of this thread was supported by zero evidence, and vague accusations of "damaging legislation".

Make no bones about it, I am very disappointed with the outcome of the presidential election. I am encouraged that NC continues to move toward more GOP influence. That being said, I heard an interview with Art Laffer that gave me some encouragement. I understand much damage will be done by executive order going forward, but I am hopeful the House of representaives can prevent any major legislative damage by the Obama administration. Mt. Laffer said he was very encouraged as the Obama administration will do so much damage to the economy that the 2014 mid-terms will be a disaster for the dems and by the 2016 the folks will be so fed up they will turn the them out.

TL;DR: Boys will be boys.

[Supsalemgr]

If you will reread my post I think one will see it was my feeling. If my lib friends don'r agree with it that is fine with me.