AJC.com > Opinion > Woman to Woman > Archives > 2008 > July > 18 > Entry
Do public displays of Ten Commandments require equal displays from other religious groups?
Shaunti Feldhahn, a right-leaning columnist, writes the commentary this week and Andrea Cornell Sarvady, a left-leaning columnist, responds.
Commentary
The latest Ten Commandments controversy is whether public grounds allowing any private religious or ideological displays must be open to all of them.
The Supreme Court will soon hear cases involving Ten Commandments displays on public grounds in Utah. The Summums, a religious group, want a similar monument of their “Seven Aphorisms.” The U.S. Court of Appeals ruled that public officials must allow it or tear down all others.
I am sympathetic to the Summums’ “it’s-only-fair” argument. Government isn’t supposed to establish or favor one religion or ideology over another. The problem is that in real, messy life the government has no choice but to exercise ideological judgments and set priorities for the use of limited public space. The American Center for Law and Justice represents the Utah officials, and as chief counsel Jay Sekulow pointed out by phone, there is such a thing as “government speech” versus “private speech.”
For example, suppose your public park has a Ten Commandments monument, then later accepts monuments with quotes from Mohammed, Confucius, Jesus and Martin Luther King. It’s getting crowded. Then the local Ku Klux Klan wants its own shrine to white supremacy. Does it have to be allowed, “to be fair?” Of course not.
As part of “government speech,” we want officials to set standards for using limited public space. As part of private free speech, the park may have to allow KKK rallies. But they don’t have to erect a monument.
The only alternative to allowing such “government speech” is to eliminate all monuments - the very positive, historical touchstones we should want to preserve! Sekulow pointed out that some government agencies have done exactly that. But, he emphasized, “Government has a role in preserving the heritage of our country.”
Agreeing on that role isn’t easy, even among conservatives. The Rutherford Institute worries that endorsing government speech will eventually lead to infringement of private speech. This is a legitimate concern. But the reality is that government has to set priorities and standards of some kind.
Ultimately, the government must be allowed to preserve our religious and ideological heritage. As Sekulow put it, “Can you imagine if beside World War II hero monuments we had to put up counter monuments for Nazis?” No, nor do I want to.
Rebuttal
I’m sure that my colleague doesn’t want images of Nazi monuments in public parks cluttering her psyche. I’m equally sure, however, that she wants you to hold such images in your mind when you think of the Summums, a religious community wishing to erect their monument alongside the Ten Commandments. It’s a great trick of the far right—create a short walk from a little known religion to the Ku Klux Klan and in no time, fear clouds our understanding of church and state issues.
What we’re looking at here isn’t protecting citizens, it’s protecting the superior status of a 1970’s era Ten Commandments monument over other religious installations. Pat Robertson’s American Center for Law and Justice defends the city’s decision, claiming that it’s discretionary “government speech”.
It’s not a bad tactic. Government speech needn’t be content-neutral under the law. For instance, a town can erect a statue honoring veterans without permitting a nearby statue honoring the enemy they fought.
Yet a permanent installation of the Ten Commandments carries its own challenges. Even followers of its timeless laws should ask ourselves: is this powerful but undeniably Judeo-Christian tablet something our government should be preaching? Tell us not to litter, invite us to an annual festival, but it’s a dark day when a public park warns visitors of all faiths that “you shall have no other gods before me.”
There are far better solutions to this issue than beleaguered fundamentalists envision; a little Church and State dust-up doesn’t lead to a bunch of heathens sandblasting the words “God Almighty” off the Jefferson Memorial. In the Utah case, I can see why the U.S. Court of Appeals offered up an “all-or-nothing” scenario. Another famous case in Texas started with a request to remove the Ten Commandments from a public spot, and there the monument stayed. This is merely a reasonable request by another group for inclusion.
Do you think Robertson’s group would be so concerned about “monument clutter” if the Summums’ gift had been accepted first, and it was the Ten Commandments waiting to be added to the mix? Would we then be just a short skip and a jump away from encroachment by the Nazis and the KKK? I didn’t think so.
.JPG)
-1.JPG)
Services »
Comments
Commenting is now closed for this entry.
By Gale
July 18, 2008 8:34 AM | Link to this
My knee jerk reaction was: No, no religious document should be displayed in a public place. Then I thought: Maybe, if all religions were invited to display a small example of their most deeply held tenets right next to, and the same size as all the others, maybe we would gain an appreciation for how alike most of us really are in our beliefs. Naive? Yes, probably.
By Copyleft
July 18, 2008 9:08 AM | Link to this
So equal treatment is too expensive and therefore unreasonable. Tell it to the folks in wheelchairs waiting for their ramps, Shaunti.
By JokesOn
July 18, 2008 9:12 AM | Link to this
Haven’t we discussed this enough?!?
By USinUK
July 18, 2008 9:18 AM | Link to this
ladies and gentlemen, I think we can safely close the nomination process because I think we have a winner for the Most Ludicrous Straw Man of the Year award …
“Can you imagine if beside World War II hero monuments we had to put up counter monuments for Nazis?”
yes, because those Norcross Nazis are really out there in the streets, demanding to be recognized and commemorated.
By Mike K.
July 18, 2008 9:26 AM | Link to this
“Ultimately, the government must be allowed to preserve our religious and ideological heritage.”
Ironic coming from a conservative. Why does the government have to do this when we have a church on every street corner? Why isn’t it enough that families and churches can teach religious tenants?
By GOB
July 18, 2008 9:29 AM | Link to this
USinUK - Nothing new though. Both sides have been doing it for years. The idea that if you dont agree with us, you are like the Nazis is still pretty common in politics.
By BKB
July 18, 2008 9:30 AM | Link to this
I have to invoke Godwin’s Law here. Sorry, you both loose. If you cannot debate the topic without resorting to such extremely prejudicial comparisons you don’t need to debate at all.
I have to castigate Ms. Sarvady a little extra, however. At least Ms. Feldhahn didn’t attempt to read her opponents mind and place into text her perception of Ms. Sarvady prejudices. That is very poor skill. Argue the merits of the case, not what you think someone is thinking. Frankly I get a headache just thinking about it.
By kimberly
July 18, 2008 9:32 AM | Link to this
More fodder for Fundies. Don’t you just love being told exactly what your problem is? Stay tuned. Here it comes!
Meanwhile, on the channel you’re not watching, the one that’s filled with static (don’t touch that dial!), your government is dumping billions of dollars a week (now borrowed with interest from freedom haters) into NOT catching Bin Laden, NOT getting the truth about Pat Tillman, NOT developing new forms of clean, renewable energy, NOT upholding the bill of rights, NOT forcing our financial institutions to be accountable for their corrruption, NOT auditing the private companies in Iraq who’ve pocketed our entire treasury, NOT taking care of returning wounded veterans and their families, and NOT devising meaningful solutions to our crumbling infrastructure, unsecured borders and ports, unstable job markets, abysmal graduation rates, widespread pollution, or our sinking standard of living caused by stagflation. Oh, they’re still collecting our tax money to NOT do these things, however. (Where DOES it all go?)
But never you mind that! Keep watching here so the fundies can explain to you how evil you are and why everything is YOUR fault, you low-life, lefty, monument-hating libruls.
‘scuse me while I fetch some popcorn.
By Copyleft
July 18, 2008 9:32 AM | Link to this
No, they’re on the Opinion Talk blog, complaining about illegal immigrants “bringing crime and trash into our neighborhoods.”
By Mara
July 18, 2008 9:33 AM | Link to this
JokesOn - Haven’t we discussed this enough?!?
Yes, we have discussed this…AD NAUSEAM!
Gale - Maybe, if all religions were invited to display a small example of their most deeply held tenets
that’s exactly what Shaunti is arguing against.
By Mara
July 18, 2008 9:49 AM | Link to this
*Even followers of its timeless laws…”
I’d like to point out to Andrea that most of the “commandments” are not “laws” and none of them are “timeless”.
By USinUK
July 18, 2008 9:52 AM | Link to this
GOB -
The idea that if you dont agree with us, you are like the Nazis is still pretty common in politics
yep. that’s me. just like the Nazis. except for that killing the Poles / racial supremacy / killing the gays and disabled thing … and blondeness/blue-eyed-ness … and, unfortunately, I seem to have misplaced my Panzer Division … and I’m really not a huge fan of DoodleBugs (they seem to be bad sportsmanship)
other than that. yep. that’s me. :::heavy, heavy sigh:
By Curious
July 18, 2008 9:53 AM | Link to this
GOB-
Seriously, are you going to pick apart everyone’s examples everytime they have one… No where in that article did I see her saying if you don’t believe in the Commandments, you are a Nazi.
I think the point she is trying to make is that if you allow everyone to display, then you are going to have people coming out of the woodworks for EVERYTHING….including those who praise Hitler. There are people who do, so why shouldn’t they have the same “right” to display their beliefs?
YOU are the one that is attacking people…she didn’t call anyone a Nazi just because they didn’t believe.
Get over it.
By USinUK
July 18, 2008 9:55 AM | Link to this
Mara and Jokes-y …
JokesOn - Haven’t we discussed this enough?!? … Yes, we have discussed this…AD NAUSEAM!
who wants to change the subject???
Fannie/Freddie bailout?
Off-shore drilling?
Cloning?
Peanut butter - plain vs. chunky? (like that should even be open to debate … hellloooooo, Jiff Extra Chunky!)
criminey. anything is better than this week’s topic.
By Mara
July 18, 2008 9:58 AM | Link to this
Copyleft - there’s a reason it’s called illegal immigration and they’re not talking criminal aliens over at OpinionTalk, they’re discussing the proposal to build a new library downtown.
By Gale
July 18, 2008 10:00 AM | Link to this
Kimberly, ::clapping hands::
Mara, and I guess Shaunti, even Nazis had some good ideas. But the issue is religion, not political groups. I think rational (key word) people would be able to read the bullet points on each religion and recognize that they say a lot of the same stuff. Take away the dogma and stories and boil it down to ten bullet points, and what does your religion really teach? Likely we would see some odd ones. But how many religions can really sustain themselves teaching evil?
By USinUK
July 18, 2008 10:02 AM | Link to this
Curious -
No where in that article did I see her saying if you don’t believe in the Commandments, you are a Nazi.
that’s not what he said … what he said was if you don’t agree with us, you’re like the Nazi’s …
and by including this quote:
“Can you imagine if beside World War II hero monuments we had to put up counter monuments for Nazis?”
she is, in fact, comparing anyone who else who wants their religion to be recognized along side the 10 Cs to the Nazis in question.
By GOB
July 18, 2008 10:09 AM | Link to this
Curious - perhaps you havent followed politics much in the past, oh 50 years, but it is a very common tactic, on both sides, to imply that those that dont agree with them are like the Nazis. The point is to create negative associations with those that they disagree with. If we say something about our opponent, and then in the same speech/article mention the Nazis enough times, the association may just stick with some people. It isnt really a complicated strategy, and as I have now said 3 times, both political parties use this stuff all the time.
This is nothing new, although there has been less of it lately. Now the implication is more likely that you are a terrorist, not a Nazi.
There was no attack on anyone in my post. Please reread it if you are confused.
By Gale
July 18, 2008 10:10 AM | Link to this
I agree with US in UK, change the subject. I vote for chunky, but any brand but Jiff.
By Truth
July 18, 2008 10:22 AM | Link to this
i want my own religion displayed. And since it would be almost impossible to find two people that completely agree on all aspects of every religion, everyone gets a display. That’s only 300,000,000 displays.
But as we all know: this is completely unconstitutional to display anything religious on public property. It’s all right there in the Bill of Rights:
Amendment 1: “Freedom of religion shall be restricted to silence if that freedom takes place on property owned by the government. Government property constitutes a variable form of freedom of religion. The religious rights of citizens are completely dependent on where that citizen is standing.
Amendment 2: “Freedom of religion is applicable if and only if no one’s feelings are hurt by observing another citizen worshipping in a public place.” if there is a chance that a single person is offended by the wishes of 230 million other people, that single person shall have the inalienable right to restrict those religious freedoms of those 230 million. The 230 million are ignorant bigots, anyway.
Shaunti, you ignorant conservatives make me sick. READ THE CONSTITUTION.
By Example
July 18, 2008 10:26 AM | Link to this
In response to a joke that the new Georgia law allowing us to carry weapons anywhere and everywhere would enable gay people to finally defend themselves against those who seek to deny their freedoms:
By chuck
July 14, 2008 4:51 PM | Link to this
{snip} That puts you right up there with Hitler, Mussolini and Stalin. You really should be ashamed of yourself.
By USinUK
July 18, 2008 10:27 AM | Link to this
Gale …
(gasping) not Jiff ???!!! thank god I was sitting down when I read that …
okay, big-time confession: one of my favorite kid foods is the “fluffernutter plus”: Peanut Butter, Marshmellow Fluff and … Bananas (on grain bread to make it healthy, hahaha)
By Curious
July 18, 2008 10:30 AM | Link to this
GOB-
Oh please….you are just looking for an argument for the sake of arguing. Unless you read “If you don’t believe this, then you are a Nazi”…you are just finding reason to argue.
That could have easily been used for the sake of putting up fairy monuments for those that believe in the tooth fairy.
I am not saying that “past politics” haven’t done it, but it isn’t doing that here. So wipe your feet, don’t bring in the mud.
By Truth
July 18, 2008 10:31 AM | Link to this
kimberly
Do you understand that Washington has been under the control of Democrats since they were elected in 2006?
So exactly who are you saying that is dumping billions of dollars a week (now borrowed with interest from freedom haters) into NOT catching Bin Laden, NOT getting the truth about Pat Tillman, NOT developing new forms of clean, renewable energy, NOT upholding the bill of rights, NOT forcing our financial institutions to be accountable for their corrruption, NOT auditing the private companies in Iraq who’ve pocketed our entire treasury, NOT taking care of returning wounded veterans and their families, and NOT devising meaningful solutions to our crumbling infrastructure, unsecured borders and ports, unstable job markets, abysmal graduation rates, widespread pollution, or our sinking standard of living caused by stagflation. Oh, they’re still collecting our tax money to NOT do these things, however.
Maybe that’s why Congress’s approval ratings are in single digits for the first time in recorded history. Let’s stop this nonsense and send the crooks and thieves and liars back home. I’m glad you are seeing what a mistake it was to put them there in the first place. Now imagine these same people having unbridled control of our government with a Democratic President.
By Mara
July 18, 2008 10:34 AM | Link to this
Gale, the issue isn’t really religeon per se. I don’t particularly care if Chik-fil-A wants to pass out a Bible with ever waffle fry, or if Mt. Paran Baptist wants to place a 20-ton carving of Jesus next to their doors. I don’t give a hoot if the congregation at Etz Chaim wants to erect a giant Torah at their synagog. The belief systems are irrelevant.
The issue is whether the government should be in the business of giving any one group access to public resources that they withhold from others. Are all citizens equal to the government, or are some groups more equal than others?
My opinion is that if we allow one group to put up monuments, we have to let all groups put up monuments. What makes the whole 10 Cammandments kerfuffle all the more irritating is that most of these displays are nothing more, or less, than Hollywood memorabelia circa 1958’ish. They’re promotional materials for DeMille’s movie.
By USinUK
July 18, 2008 10:34 AM | Link to this
Truth -
i want my own religion displayed.
I gotta ask … does your religion involve the Doobie Brothers?
By BKB
July 18, 2008 10:39 AM | Link to this
Truth:
And here I did not think the quality of the argument could be reduced. I love it when people just make up stuff and ascribe it to the Constitution. Thank you for reaffirming my faith in my fellow (hu)Man.
I love sarcasm, btw. If your post was an attempt at sarcasm, well you missed.
By Truth
July 18, 2008 10:41 AM | Link to this
U sinner U
Just a couple of them, BUT THAT IS MY BUSINESS!!!.
I have to work. Have a good weekend.
By Mara
July 18, 2008 10:46 AM | Link to this
USinUK and Gale - have y’all heard of Project Peanut Butter? It was started by a French humanitarian company. They use peanut paste (along with vegetable oil, milk powder, vitamins and minerals) to make a safe, clean, high-nutrient, easily transported food for starving Africans. The “Plumpy’Nut” product has literally saved hundreds of thousands of malnourished children.
Yay for the peanut!! :^)
By GOB
July 18, 2008 10:47 AM | Link to this
Curious - In your post, you showed that you actually do understand. If Shaunti werent trying to make the implicit connection between those that disagree with her and the Nazis, she could have used a monument to the tooth fairy as an example instead. I dont think that any of us have any really negative associations with that, but it is no more ludicrious.
Instead, she chose to go with the Nazis, the tried and true political attack.
Perhaps it is the fact that it is not stated directly that makes it so hard for you to understand. It is about creating negative associations with one’s political opponents. Not many people have said that Barack Obama hates white people, but FOX, and some other media outlets as well have certainly implied it numerous times with their coverage of the Rev. Wright situation.
Even the fist bump he did with his wife was used to create negative associations (“A terrorist fist bump?” - FoxNews)
By USinUK
July 18, 2008 10:47 AM | Link to this
Truth -
Just a couple of them, BUT THAT IS MY BUSINESS!!!
as long as it doesn’t involve trees … that’s all we ask …
By Mike K.
July 18, 2008 10:48 AM | Link to this
USinUK
unfortunately, I seem to have misplaced my Panzer Division
Is that a Luftwaffe squadron in you pocket or are you just happy to see us?
By Gale
July 18, 2008 10:50 AM | Link to this
USinUK “Peanut Butter, Marshmellow Fluff” Right with you. The wonder is that my mother kept buying the stuff.
Mara, I really agree and because of the fright scenarios posed, I would stand by my initial reaction; No Way. I have an idealistic nature that makes me think that somehow, unreasonable people may be brought to reason.
By USinUK
July 18, 2008 10:58 AM | Link to this
Mara -
USinUK and Gale - have y’all heard of Project Peanut Butter?
in fact, I have! there’s an ad campaign going on in the UK about the low-cost solutions to helping save children’s lives - it highlights the peanut butter program and mosquito nets as 2 things that could save millions of lives and they cost practically nothing.
By kimberly
July 18, 2008 10:59 AM | Link to this
Truth, the depth and breadth of my disappointment with the current Democratic leadership is too great to expound upon here. To be fair, the lack of a veto-proof majority has indeed made it impossible to enact the changes they promised to enact. However, I cannot excuse the lack of leadership exhibited by Pelosi and Reid.
They should have been clear and vocal in their opposition to these failed policies even when the votes to overturn them did not exist. Instead they have capitulated repeatedly, so often that nausea is welling up in my throat even as I type these words. Pelosi’s current rant about Bush being a total failure is, (in my opinon since I don’t claim to read minds like so many here), a lame attempt to divert our attention from the fact that she has, in many ways, been one of his biggest allies on Capitol Hill since becoming Speaker. Her breath would have been better spent standing up against all the things she’s been rolling over for. Kucinich has the testicular fortitude to come forth day after day and stand up for what’s right, and the “leadership” snubs him. They’re a disgrace, and I’m with you in wishing they would just shut up and go home.
NEVERTHELESS, if you are complaining about Congress, you’re complaining about a lack of action and a lack of change from the path the Republicans put us on for the 12 years of total control THEY enjoyed. Pot, kettle, fireplace poker, and all that’s dark & dirty…. Yuck.
By JokesOn
July 18, 2008 11:00 AM | Link to this
The Conservitive christian arguement:
There is a well established precedent of us getting preferential treatment. To go against this history would potentially unravel the space/time fabric of the universe and we will all be doomed! ….not to ignore the fact that my beliefs are fact because I believe them to be fact.
And another thing… If your stoopid democrats cannot fix in 1.5 years what took us conservatives 8 years to totally eff up, it just shows your incompetence.
By GOB
July 18, 2008 11:00 AM | Link to this
I have an idealistic nature that makes me think that somehow, unreasonable people may be brought to reason.
Unfortunately, this blog is a glaring testament to the inaccuracy of your idealism. Maybe one day though…
By JokesOn
July 18, 2008 11:00 AM | Link to this
The Conservative christian argument:
There is a well established precedent of us getting preferential treatment. To go against this history would potentially unravel the space/time fabric of the universe and we will all be doomed! ….not to ignore the fact that my beliefs are fact because I believe them to be fact.
And another thing… If your stoopid democrats cannot fix in 1.5 years what took us conservatives 8 years to totally eff up, it just shows your incompetence.
(re-post with corrections)
By Truth
July 18, 2008 11:01 AM | Link to this
BKB
Did you recently hear a quick, whistling sound go over your head?
it’s like the New Yorker cover. Sarcasm and lampooning is only allowed by liberals toward conservatives. Sometimes I forget. Sorry about that.
Did you just hear that sound go over your head again?
By Lily Toad
July 18, 2008 11:01 AM | Link to this
Why is religion brought up every week on this supposedly political forum. I mean by the writers, not the bloggers. No government property should have any religious propaganda. Get over the past, Shaunti, the Christians aren’t running the country any more. And Andrea, it’s Abrahamic religions, not Judeo-Christian. The Muslims believe in Moses, too, you know.
By USinUK
July 18, 2008 11:02 AM | Link to this
Mike -
Is that a Luftwaffe squadron in you pocket or are you just happy to see us?
you should see my Blitz, babbee!!!
By Joke Friday
July 18, 2008 11:08 AM | Link to this
“Is that a Luftwaffe squadron in your pocket or are you just happy to see us?”
neither. i just have a really big d-ck.
By Tifanni L'airetete
July 18, 2008 11:15 AM | Link to this
Oh, like all court houses should post “You create your own reality.” That’s the only Truth and Oprah knows The Secret.
By RF
July 18, 2008 11:19 AM | Link to this
Yay for the peanut!! :^)
And everyone thought Jimmy Carter wasn’t a smart man… ;-)
By JokesOn
July 18, 2008 11:22 AM | Link to this
Why is religion brought up every week on this supposedly political forum.
Maybe because the repubs have capitalized on polarizing the nation by recruiting the evangelical vote to secure their win? Now it will take the next 20 years to undo that mess.
Rabbit hole anyone? Alice is waiting…
By RF
July 18, 2008 11:24 AM | Link to this
Gale- No Jiff!!! You heathen, you! Chunky is better though.
USinUK- peanut butter and honey! My mom used to make the stuff by the jar full for me as a kid. The premixed junk you buy in the store nowadays isn’t worth eating. You have to mix it yourself. Or better yet, peanut butter and bananas on Wonder Bread. YUM!!
As to today’s topic—YAWN!! All or none seems easy to me. Religious displays, nothing political, and the problem is solved. The easiest way to handle it is to keep them all off. Then there’s not tax dollars spent, like there isn’t enough of a deficit now.
By USinUK
July 18, 2008 11:29 AM | Link to this
RF -
And everyone thought Jimmy Carter wasn’t a smart man… ;-)
I do believe you mean George Washington Carver
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeorgeWashingtonCarver
He wanted poor farmers to grow alternative crops as both a source of their own food as well as a source of other products to improve their quality of life. His most popular bulletin contained 105 existing food recipes that used peanuts. He also created or disseminated about 100 products made from peanuts that were useful for the house and farm, including cosmetics, dyes, paints, plastics, gasoline, and nitroglycerin.
George Washington Carver, saaaaaaaa-LUTE!.
By kimberly
July 18, 2008 11:31 AM | Link to this
I like creamy.
By USinUK
July 18, 2008 11:37 AM | Link to this
RF -
USinUK- peanut butter and honey! My mom used to make the stuff by the jar full for me as a kid. The premixed junk you buy in the store nowadays isn’t worth eating. You have to mix it yourself. Or better yet, peanut butter and bananas on Wonder Bread. YUM!!
to me, the only thing Wonder Bread is good for is Mater Sammiches with tomatoes freshly pulled off the vine, still warm from the afternoon sun … loads of mayo …
now, THAT is something I miss about the South.
As to today’s topic—YAWN!! All or none seems easy to me
serious yawn.
By Copyleft
July 18, 2008 11:45 AM | Link to this
But as we all know: this is completely unconstitutional to display anything religious on public property. It’s all right there in the Bill of Rights. Facetious, but erroneous. What the Constitution requires is equal treatment. When it comes to government endorsement/promotion of religious factions, that means “all, or nonse.” Nothing in between.
Which solution each level of government arrives at is, of course, up to them. But those are the options if you want to respect the Constitution.
Shaunti, you ignorant conservatives make me sick. READ THE CONSTITUTION.
Agreed, wholeheartedly.
By Archie
July 18, 2008 11:49 AM | Link to this
My answer to the topic question is yes. The Ten Commandments do not offend me but since government buildings are paid for with EVERYONE’S tax money then everybody needs their religious leanings considered. What I have found over the last week is that some people have a strange sense of fairness and they’re only concerned with it if it does involve someone that looks like them or thinks like them.
As a christian myself I am not going to force my opinions on someone else and I have enough sense to know I am not perfect but a lot of what happens with this situation is all about the superiority complex.
By Copyleft
July 18, 2008 11:58 AM | Link to this
Typo: That should read “all or NONE,” not nonse.
By Lily Toad
July 18, 2008 11:59 AM | Link to this
Let’s all suggest the question for next week should be: Is crunchy peanut butter better than smooth, creamy peanut butter? Let’s see Shaunti quote the Family Council on that one.
By Copyleft
July 18, 2008 12:04 PM | Link to this
Maybe James Dobson has a position on whether crunchy peanut butter is sinful…. Do any of the Teletubbies eat PBJ sandwiches?
By USinUK
July 18, 2008 12:08 PM | Link to this
Lily -
Let’s see Shaunti quote the Family Council on that one
haha … I’m sure Dr. Dobson would come up with something like “Anyone who likes crunchy peanutbutter is subversive to true family values. What has happened since the introduction of Crunchy peanut butter in the 1970s? The teen pregnancy rate has risen, the divorce rate has increased and the number one family pet has changed from dogs to cats. CATS! The devil’s housepet!! We need to get back to the family values of the 1950s, when my mommy made my pbj sammies on white bread with the crusts cut off, then let me sit on her lap and bury my head in her sweet bosom that smelled of lilac talcum powder … mmmmm … sweet mommy … oh, sorry, what were we talking about???”
By Truth
July 18, 2008 12:25 PM | Link to this
U sinner U
There’s an ex-slave that developed a kind of covered bridges that at one time dominated the southern landscape. His name was Horace King. He developed a weird kind of “woven” structure out of wooden beams. Several of the bridges are left around the state. There were huge floods, the water subsided and the old Horace King bridge would be setting there drying out.
The Georgia DOT has a list of remaining bridges, but just a couple of original Horace King structures are left. There’s a lot of good bridges left in Georgia. Most are tourist attractions in parks, but Concord Bridge was built in 1870 and has more traffic than all the other covered bridges in the state, combined. There’s a great story about Effy’s Bridge which was moved to stone mountain park.
Sorry, but they are fantastic subjects for photography. But Horace King came up with a lot of really innovative techniques for doing things. If I remember correctly, he also had a really interesting relationship with his last owner. I don’t remember the details and I don’t have time to look it up. Interesting reaeding, if you want to take the time.
By USinUK
July 18, 2008 12:42 PM | Link to this
Truth -
Sorry, but they are fantastic subjects for photography. But Horace King came up with a lot of really innovative techniques for doing things.
sounds like it! the woven beams sound like they’d make an amazing b/w pic! you’re in the biz - do you know any good still photographers?? you know who would have been a great person to research and write about them? Celestine Sibley (rest her soul) - Atlanta truly lost a great writer when she passed.
By Truth
July 18, 2008 1:11 PM | Link to this
USinUK
I have found that a really wide lens will do a lot. They sort of “bend” the picture and the lines of the bridge are exaggerated. There are all kinds of stories about the old bridges. Most were shored up with steel in the early 1900’s but there is one, (I can’t remember which, but it was a Horace King) that only has the original wooden frame and I believe that most of the wood is original, AND it is open to trafffic. Not a lot of traffic, but some.
B&W is pretty cool, but experiment with color and textures. Most of the bridges are surrounded with wild flowers and I have many shots of the wild flowers in the foreground, with a slightly out of focus bridge in the background. If you put a soft blend effect on that in Photoshop, it’ gits plum artsy. I have also used them just as a background. I love the contrast of a really slick car like a Ferrari and the roughness of the bridges.
The woven wood runs along the side of the bridges like the one at Stone Mountain, but that is not a Horace King. It made a bridges more flexable.
Do you know why they were covered?
By CatLover
July 18, 2008 1:21 PM | Link to this
CATS! The devil’s housepet!!
is that why they are way smarter than dogs?
By Truth
July 18, 2008 1:32 PM | Link to this
Catlover
Not smarter. Just smart in a different way. I have both.
By USinUK
July 18, 2008 2:18 PM | Link to this
Not smarter. Just smart in a different way.
yep. they could fetch, they just choose not to.
By Truth
July 18, 2008 2:28 PM | Link to this
USinUK
My cat fetches.
By Gale
July 18, 2008 2:46 PM | Link to this
How is this for a new topic? CNN reports three women are to be ordained Catholic priests in Boston this weekend and the Vatican is upset about it.
By CatLover
July 18, 2008 2:54 PM | Link to this
One of mine fetches.
By Gandalf, the Grey
July 18, 2008 2:56 PM | Link to this
Kimberly, please quit stealing our air!
I bet you like creamy, you little $lu7!
By CatLover
July 18, 2008 2:57 PM | Link to this
The ones who do not fetch are just too smart to be caught up in some stupid human game and besides, they don’t need our approval like stupid doggies do.
By Gandalf, the Grey
July 18, 2008 3:04 PM | Link to this
Cats. good targets for target practice..if your cat comes home with a bright green spot of paint, he’s been in my yard! :-)!!!!
By Truth
July 18, 2008 3:06 PM | Link to this
Catlover
Yea. That’s what we need. More self-centered creatures on this earth. Cats would be running the oil companies, if they could speak English.
Haven’t you ever watched the movie: Cats and Dogs? That movie shows who the good guys really are.
My dog and I let the cat stick around because he leaves the “catness” at the door.
By Gary Gibbs
July 20, 2008 9:41 AM | Link to this
We are a Christian nation and have always been a Chrictian nation. John Jay the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court stated on October 12, 1816:Providence has given to our people the choice of our rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privalege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.
George Washington, the nations first President on July 9, 1776 authoriized the Continental Army to provide chaplins for the troops and then issued the following general order to his troops, stating: The General hopes and trusts that every officer and man, will endeavor so to live and act, as becomes a Christian Soldier defending the dearest Rights and Liberties of his country. I’m leaving for Church and will spend some time with my wife who is in the hospital. If time permits I will sign on again when I return.
By h ryder
July 20, 2008 11:18 AM | Link to this
There is obviously a need for both writers to employ rigorous academic logical reasoning. Should this occur, internally opposing concepts presented on various topics in individual essays would in all probability cease. Thus, each writers stance could be ascertained with the reader then able to develop an appropriate reaction.
By Bored to tears Lyrazel
July 20, 2008 11:25 AM | Link to this
I am bored with religion as a topic.
Why not discuss debt and the fact the government is telling taxpayers to bail out companies that made usury loans yet have made billions in profits? Why not discuss ecological hypocrisy committed in going green by pretending that we can keep the same consumption level? Why not comment about how businesses hire illegals and our government will never be able to control it because these businesses give so much to campaign contributions? Why not yap about how elected candidates spend 75% of their time fundraising instead of working for their constituents? Why no discussion about the lack of doctors serving family practice, the lack of nurses, the lack of vaccines produced in America? Why no discussion about the divorce rate of US troops skyrocketing because of overextended deployments? Why no discussion about their own habitual method of defining conservatives as religious and liberals as godless just like on TV?
Why not give us topics of substance instead of balderdash? Both commentators really seem to have no understanding of the world around them except what they copy from TV pundits. It seems Shaunti is perpetually defending religious causes with her Shirley Temple tap dance. Andrea is stuck rebutting ludicrous balderdash week after week ad nauseam but does not seem able to justify her views when she has the floor. Both are privileged women pretending they are intellectual yet are so cloistered by their ivory towers they seldom seem to see life as it is and not as it is on TV.
This is a religious blog—why not say it—and put it into Faith & Values section.
By LeGrande Blount
July 20, 2008 11:48 AM | Link to this
When conservatives such as Shaunti Feldhahn suggest emblazoning their favorite 10 Jewish laws in every public square (woman to woman, 20 July) they forget that the full list of Mosaic laws include executing a rape victim Deuteronomy 22:23-24 for not crying out enough, executing belligerent sons Deurteronomy 21:18-21, and executing adulterers Leviticus 20:10. Cherry picking rules to emblazon in every public place could better be selected from nearly any other document and have fewer immoral encumbrances. Or does Ms Feldhahn really promote broadening our list of crimes to better conform to ancient Jewish sentiments?
By USinUK
July 20, 2008 4:42 PM | Link to this
Why not give us topics of substance instead of balderdash?
because balderdash is all Shaunti has … I have never seen her write anything of any substance - it’s all shock/horror and clutching at her pearls because of either something sexual (hotel porn,prostitution or A&F ads) or something religious (this week’s asinine topic or teaching creation - oops, sorry, “intelligent design” - in public schools) … although, to be fair, she did venture outside her comfort zone a few months ago to blame the media for the economy - she even extended so far as to quote the Heritage Foundation instead of Focus on the Family …
after such a stretch, I’m sure she needed to rest a spell on her fainting couch due to the exertion …
By Great Topic
July 21, 2008 9:35 AM | Link to this
tumbleweeds
By Archie
July 21, 2008 9:51 AM | Link to this
I am bored with religion as a topic. Me too, Lyrazel. I am interested in the divorce rate of troops deployed multiple times and that is a topic of substance. Two weeks ago Lyrazel said the customers should be arrested more when it comes to prostitution, well my question is who should be arrested more in the drug trade, the customer or the big-time dealer? I just saw “American Gangster” starring Denzel Washingon and the movie made me think about this drug war crap. I feel like Frank Lucas is a disgusting,disgusting human being but people made the choice to buy his drugs.
By USinUK
July 21, 2008 10:30 AM | Link to this
Archie -
I am interested in the divorce rate of troops deployed multiple times and that is a topic of substance.
I agree - I would love to see a discussion on how to better address the needs of our returning Iraq vets so that we would see fewer stories like this:
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/nation/stories/DN-enemy_21nat.ART.State.Edition2.4d70685.html
By GOB
July 21, 2008 10:41 AM | Link to this
USinUK - The problem is that it would require the Bush administration admitting that there actually is a problem, something they have not been to keen on in the past 8 years.
By Truth
July 21, 2008 10:46 AM | Link to this
I would love to discuss the flip flopping of the national presidential candidates, particularly the one that started far left and is now wanting faith based initiatives.
I would like to discuss how all the major networks have become the Obama propaganda arm. I tried to watch CNN the other night and it was a special about all the Caribbean bands that were writing songs about Obama. One song after another touting his praise. It was basically a 30 minute infomencial. That show was one of many excuses for interviewing people who love Obama. Pardon me for laughing at anyone who thinks FOX is biased and then watches that biased crap.
Letterman and Leno are both practically campaigning for Obama every night. Their monologues are so biased that it is as bad as any propaganda i have ever seen. Comedy Central is in full propaganda mode.
I wonder if Obama would have a prayer without all of this overt support from the major networks.
I just wonder how he is even challenged by McCain, considering the obvious bias against McCain in the media. Could it be that a lot of Americans aren’t sheep and actually look past the propaganda and actually see that Obama has never taken a stand in his life? .Could it be that some people have found that the ads he is running about providing housing for poor people was when he worked for a slum lord evicting people from their homes? He provided homes by kicking people out of homes.
There’s a lot we could talk about. We are about to elect the slickest politician I have seen in my lifetime. The fact he can make great speeches is apparently the only requirement that is required.
Sticking to his principles? What principles would those be?
By USinUK
July 21, 2008 10:54 AM | Link to this
GOB -
The problem is that it would require the Bush administration admitting that there actually is a problem, something they have not been to keen on in the past 8 years.
as much as it pains me to say this - this goes beyond the Bush Administration. Now, granted, they’re the ones who have been threatning vetoes over GI bills - not to mention, they were the ones who denied that there was a problem at Walter Reed until the WaPo did an in-depth series on it. BUT … this issue is also a community issue. treating PTSD effectively goes beyond what happens at Walter Reed - community hospitals need better training, local law enforcement needs better training, local treatment facilities need to have tailored outreach, local churches need to work with army chaplains to better understand the strains of separated couples so that they can more effectvely help counsel faltering marriages …
or, we can just slap a yellow ribbon on our car and say “mission accomplished”
By GOB
July 21, 2008 10:57 AM | Link to this
Letterman and Leno are both practically campaigning for Obama every night. Their monologues are so biased that it is as bad as any propaganda i have ever seen.
Really? Jokes about McCain being old and boring are as bad as the most biased propaganda you’ve ever seen? Really?
By GOB
July 21, 2008 11:05 AM | Link to this
USinUK - I agree completely that it is a much bigger issue, but it becomes very difficult to get community involvement (which is what is going to take to make any headway) when the Bush administration tells everyone that things are going ok, and pretends we dont have the problems we do.
It’s made even worse when you consider that such a huge portion of the military comes from the south, which is still relatively strong in their support of Bush. They tend to believe the administration more than those in other regions, so the help is even slower in the areas that need it most.
It certainly isnt just a Bush administration problem, but they seem to have gone out of their way to make it more difficult for the work that needs to be done to get started.
By USinUK
July 21, 2008 11:10 AM | Link to this
Truth -
Sticking to his principles? What principles would those be?
good thing McCain never changes his position … oh, waitaminnit, yes he does:
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/06/16/mccain-on-offshore-drilling-for-it-before-he-was-against-it-before-he-was-for-it-again/
(and, yes, I picked a rightie for you so that you couldn’t assail the source)
By Truth
July 21, 2008 11:12 AM | Link to this
GOB
Every night, the same talking points. It is called driving the issue home. It is so bad, that you knew exactly what I was talking about, didn’t you? And you don’t think that is bed? I’ve never seen it so constant and overt. Yes it is as bad as I have ever seen. Can you think of a campaign where it was this bad?
USinUK
I don’t know why you have such a problem with those yellow ribbons. The Atlanta Airport has become known for giving our soldiers a standing ovation when they walk through the terminal. Do you also have a problem with that? Or will you require anyone giving the folks a standing ovation that they live up to your standards before they are allowed to visibly support our soldiers?
I know how much liberals love to repeat lies, but the aircraft carrier that displayed the Mission Accomplished banner was heading home. Their mission was accomplished. But that doesn’t stop the constant references, does it?
Propaganda works.
By USinUK
July 21, 2008 11:18 AM | Link to this
GOB -
I agree completely that it is a much bigger issue, but it becomes very difficult to get community involvement (which is what is going to take to make any headway) when the Bush administration tells everyone that things are going ok, and pretends we dont have the problems we do.
yeah, I see where you’re coming from and agree that the fingers-in-ears-lalalalala approach exacerbates the problem …
you know what I wish we had seen back in the beginning of the war (which I think may have been a way to help the current problems the vets are having) - I wish there had been more of a call to sacrifice back in the aftermath of 9/11 and the beginning of the war. I wish the WH had done a series of ads similar to those done in WWII (“if you’re riding alone, you’re riding with Hitler” to encourage car pooling) - what did we get instead? go to Target and go shopping! gah.
I think that, if there was the “we’re all in this together” mentality, it would pave the way for more community services for Iraq/Afghanistan vest.
By Truth
July 21, 2008 11:21 AM | Link to this
GOB
So you believe that Bush has been telling everyone that the war is going OK? You really need to read something other than Salon.com.
Be careful about regional steriotypes. The South has been the primary source for our soldiers since the Spanish-American War. Were they all listening to Bush back then?
By Truth
July 21, 2008 11:33 AM | Link to this
USinUK
There was a huge call for personal sacrifice at the beginning of the war. The problem was that we started taking casualties and the spineless ones in Washington decided that it was much more politically expedient to be against the war. So all those people who voted to go, ran like the cowards they were. The rest is history and now we have perfectly good Americans complaining about other Americans putting yellow ribbons on their cars.
By USinUK
July 21, 2008 11:33 AM | Link to this
Truth -
I don’t know why you have such a problem with those yellow ribbons. The Atlanta Airport has become known for giving our soldiers a standing ovation when they walk through the terminal. Do you also have a problem with that? Or will you require anyone giving the folks a standing ovation that they live up to your standards before they are allowed to visibly support our soldiers?
I am very familiar with what goes on at Hartsfield - my dad is a member of the VFW and helps out a few days/month.
and, as nice as it is that people give Standing O’s to the returning/departing servicemen and -women, that isn’t what I’m talking about. I’m talking about communities coming together to HELP returning service folks, not just give them a pat on the back. I’m talking about helping police better spot domestic violence and alcohol/drug abuse, helping churches and the clergy support National Guard families that have been separated by repeated extensions of their tours, helping hospitals that treat-&-street vets who are treated for issues that are obviously related to PTSD.
applause and cookies are nice, but they’re not fixing the problems that the men and women who put their lives on the line are coming home to.
I know how much liberals love to repeat lies, but the aircraft carrier that displayed the Mission Accomplished banner was heading home. Their mission was accomplished. But that doesn’t stop the constant references, does it?
ohfercryingoutloud. put the koolaid down, and no one gets hurt …
1) The WH paid for the banner, not the ship
2) Mission Accomplished referred to the end of “major combat operations”
for more info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mission_accomplished
Subsequently, the White House released a statement saying that the sign and Bush’s visit referred to the initial invasion of Iraq. Bush’s speech noted:
“We have difficult work to do in Iraq. We are bringing order to parts of that country that remain dangerous.”
“Our mission continues…The War on Terror continues, yet it is not endless. We do not know the day of final victory, but we have seen the turning of the tide.”
However the speech also said that:
“In the Battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed.”
President George W. Bush on the Abraham Lincoln being saluted by the flight deck crewWhen he received an advance copy of the speech, U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld took care to remove any use of the phrase “Mission Accomplished” in the speech itself. Later, when journalist Bob Woodward asked him about his changes to the speech, Rumsfeld responded:”I was in Baghdad, and I was given a draft of that thing to look at. And I just died, and I said my God, it’s too conclusive. And I fixed it and sent it back… they fixed the speech, but not the sign.”
Bush reiterated a “Mission Accomplished” message to the troops at Camp As Sayliyah on June 5, 2003 — about a month after the aircraft carrier incident: “America sent you on a mission to remove a grave threat and to liberate an oppressed people, and that mission has been accomplished.”
so, spin all you like, my friend, but Mission Accomplished referred to Iraq, not the ship.
By GOB
July 21, 2008 11:42 AM | Link to this
Truth - I would say that the whole swift boats thing in 2004 was much more of a character assasination than anything that Leno or Letterman do. At least Leno and Letterman are comedy, and good lord, watch McCain, and you’ll see that they wouldn’t be doing their jobs if they didnt make the old and boring jokes.
This is no different than any other election year.
As, there was no stereotype about soldiers. It was about the south, and the reality is, the south still supports Bush at a much higher clip than most of the rest of the country. I also dont mean that Bush hasnt finally begun to conceed that there are issues with the war, but this administration has been so slow to admit any mistakes. That does have an effect on those who believe what the WH says without question.
To your point about the “Mission Accomplished” banner, surely you understand that it was propaganda as much as anything else, right? It wasnt as if Bush showed up and by chance was speaking in front of it. They were clearly trying to send a broader message to the American public, but as seems to be the norm, they bungled it quite nicely.
By GOB
July 21, 2008 11:50 AM | Link to this
USinUK - I couldnt agree more about the call for sacrifce at the beginning of the war. Instead we were told to go about our daily lives or the terrorists have won. Go drive your SUV 50 miles one way to work, go to Target and spend spend spend.
By Truth
July 21, 2008 11:56 AM | Link to this
USinUK
So who helps the soldiers? Churches once again step in when possible.
My Dad died in a VA hospital. That was in 1972. The VA sucked then and it sucks now. But it is better than it was. Pardon me for not believing that Democrats have done anything to help vets that was not a political stunt.
The White House bought the banner? Really? Somebody get a rope!!!! That doesn’t change the fact that their mission was accomplished. Rumsfield has never underestimated the treachery of the liberal media. He prides himself on that ability.
Seems that he was dead on, wasn’t he?
Imagine a banner on on the aircraft carrier that launched Doolittle’s raid on Tokyo. Could that banner had said: Mission Accomplished? They didn’t really destroy anything and they lost all the airplanes. Imagine what Harry Ried would have said about Doolitte’s raid?
Doolittle Does Little would be the headlines of the NYT.
Wars are made up of hundreds and thousands of missions. Imagine a political movement that has so much control of the national media that they were able to take a time honored celebration of our military in honoring their accomplishment of a single mission, and turn that statement around and use it to attack a setting president in a time of war.
Now imagine Americans that are so brainwashed by this same media that they are willing to support that kind of disgusting political grandstanding.
By Truth
July 21, 2008 12:06 PM | Link to this
GOB
You just don’t get it. The swift boaters were regarded as right wing lunies by the national media from day one. If you don’t believe me, just look at how they are regarded now. Propaganda works. The lying SOB, John Kerry is still considered the victim. And that was all done by the national media.
The banner was propaganda? No. It was displayed on an aircraft carrier that was headed home, their mission had been accomplished.
The president giving a speech in front of it wasn’t bungled at all. There was nothing he could have done or said that wasn’t grabbed by the media and turned against him. And they did, didn’t they?
What was bungled is the fact that few understood how desperately the media was for an encompassing photo that would make Bush out to be the biggest fool. They found it, and you bought it. Ho hum, just another day in America.
By USinUK
July 21, 2008 12:09 PM | Link to this
GOB -
I couldnt agree more about the call for sacrifce at the beginning of the war. Instead we were told to go about our daily lives or the terrorists have won. Go drive your SUV 50 miles one way to work, go to Target and spend spend spend.
while I understand that 65% of US GDP is comprised of consumer spending, and, therefore, if that spending is cut in half, then GDP is going to fall drastically - I do think that it was an opportunity wasted to not call on Americans to conserve energy to do our part to end reliance of foreign oil.
Meanwhile, Bush-Cheney cronies continue to get rich: http://blog.washingtonpost.com/washingtonpostinvestigations/2008/07/demsadministrationknew_more.html
Hunt Oil, whose chief executive Ray L. Hunt is a member of the President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board and a major contributor to Bush’s campaigns, signed a petroleum production-sharing contract in September with the Kurdistan Regional Government, the first since the semi-autonomous government unanimously adopted its own petroleum legislation in August.
By USinUK
July 21, 2008 12:19 PM | Link to this
Truth -
way to completely ignore Rumsfield’s quote.
nice one.
heading home -
pasta los huevos
By GOB
July 21, 2008 12:22 PM | Link to this
Truth - For a group that was considered “right wing lunies” from the beginning, they certainly played a large part in the election. If you dont think it hurt John Kerry in a major way, you are kidding yourself.
As for the banner, in his speech, Bush declared that US had won the battle for Iraq. Do you honestly believe that the banner was in place to signify nothing more than the ship returning home? It was there to send a message to American people that the war was winding down. Now we’ve been in Iraq longer than we were in WWII. And all because we thought they might do something in the future. I seem to remember some speech mentioning a mushroom cloud over a US city. Talk about propaganda.
By Truth
July 21, 2008 12:26 PM | Link to this
USinUK
This is not a good discussion for us. I am infuriated by the way the democrats have used the Iraq War as the political hammer to dislodge the Republicans.
EVERYONE made mistakes in the way the war was conducted and we can talk for years about the reasons for such a timid effort on our part.
But it is issues like the Mission Accomplished banner that sickens me and guarantees that I will never vote for a single person that would support that party.
Abraham Lincoln sent congratulatory letters to field commanders whom had accomplished their missions. Every setting president has done that very same thing. And they all made a huge media exhibition of it.
But Bush can’t do that. Stop for a second and think about that. The party that you support, in order to have yet another mindless, pointless talking point has taken a time honored tradition of our president honoring a group of soldiers and made it a political hammer.
Rumsfield and other Republican operatives are brilliant in so many ways, but their main advantage is the fact that they never underestimate how low the democrats with the help of their media will sink.
By Wally
July 21, 2008 12:29 PM | Link to this
Posting the Ten Commandments in public is just so much bland, tepid, fair weather, psuedo Christianity.
If you’re going to abide by those old Israelite saws and laws, you can’t pick and choose among those found in the book in which they were written.
So you insist that the Ten Commandments are still as valid and in force as the day they were written, and therefore that they ought to be posted in whatever public place Christians please.
I insist that along side them you not only post some document representing every other religion of the people of this diverse country, but that you also post - and abide by - the other laws and commandments in that archaic Testament.
I can’t conceive of how any self-respecting, intelligent, moral Christian can believe in an inerrant Bible, intelligent Design, and the six thousand year old earth if they don’t believe they and their fellow Christians should be stoning people for the offenses for which it is ordered by the Creator Himself. After all, the Bible is His exclusive written communication with mankind.
How many times have I heard that you can’t pick and choose which parts of the Bible you’re going to believe and live by.
So activate those phone trees, start writing those letters to Sonny and your state and federal representatives. It’s time Christianity and America really got right with God.
By Truth
July 21, 2008 12:42 PM | Link to this
GOB
We had accomplished more in a few days than had ever been done in the history of warfare. What should he have told the American People? Think about what you are complaining about. Go back and read speeches of our various presidents from both parties after a major military victory. No a lot of “downer” speeches in that bunch.
The difference was that in the past, the media made the choice to support the president. The modern, liberal-ran media wouldn’t consider it and now we have people posting on a political blog about how wrong it was that Bush was making a positive speech about a war. It’s nuts. Stand back away from what the media is pounding into your head every day and just look at what you are saying.
your coomplaiint is that Bush was speaking positive about a war.
Your complaint is that Bush was congratulating groups of soldiers on accomplishing their missions.
And you are complaining that a banner that was hung behind the president just might be saying something positive about a war.
Just stand back and look at what you are complaining about.
By Truth
July 21, 2008 12:52 PM | Link to this
Wally
Christians gave up on the stoning thing because liberals turned out to be such cry-babies when they are hit with those rocks.
But Christians are a lot smarter than you think. Instead of a few minutes of pain and then peaceful death, they figured out a way that liberals could be miserable by feeling guilty about every bug that is squished and angry about every morning that reveals that many people do not think like them.
So Christians just keep thanking Jesus for NPR.
By Mara
July 21, 2008 1:06 PM | Link to this
I am infuriated by the way the democrats have used the Iraq War as the political hammer to dislodge the Republicans.
you’ve GOT to be F-ing kidding me!!! The DEMOCRATS using the Iraq War as a hammer?! Where was your anger while Rove and Cheney were telling the American people that Democrats HATE America and wouldn’t mind seeing Sadddam win?
Where was this wrath when the REPUBLICANS were telling America that the Democrats hate the military, even though many of us are military or related to military veterans?
Where was your fury when the REPUBLICANS were hammering the Dems with their Osama/Obama crap? Where was your outrage when the REPUBLICANS were likening Max Cleland to Osama Bin Laden?
Where is your fury at the sheer effrontery of “TheRepublicanSong.com” putting up billboards of the burning towers with the words “Please Don’t Vote For A Democrat”?
Your president used fear, intimidation, and “misinformation” to get convince the American people that Saddam was a bigger threat than Bin Laden and that the Republicans were the only ones who could protect their little Jimmy from “the terrorists”. It was all well and good when the Republicans were using the fear of terrorism to hammer loose the Democrats from congress. But now when the Democrats are pulling hammers from the Republican tool-box…NOW it’s beyond the pale?!
By Recruiter
July 21, 2008 1:18 PM | Link to this
Christians gave up on the stoning thing because liberals turned out to be such cry-babies when they are hit with those rocks.
Suggestion: Why don’t you put your money where your mouth is and run for office yourself? The continuous stream of information, logic, and razor-sharp analysis you provide is wasted here. Just think what you could accomplish by sharing your keen insights with the masses. The America people need you, buddy!
By Copyleft
July 21, 2008 1:21 PM | Link to this
I notice that Truth persists in trying to draw a line between “Christians” and “liberals,” when in fact they’re the same people.
No such conflict exists, Truth… actual Christians ARE liberal, one and all.
By Truth
July 21, 2008 1:21 PM | Link to this
GOB
I seem to remember some speech mentioning a mushroom cloud over a US city. Talk about propaganda.
The propaganda wasn’t about the fact that Bush was saying what every major leader from both party had said since 1998. Where the propaganda came into play is the fact that Democratic supporters still use this argument. Now, I will post the quotes of democrats declaring that Saddam had WMDs. And then you will claim that Bush (The dumbest man in the history of dumbness) somehow, by using Cheny hip-mo-tized the good Democrats in Congress into voting to go to war.
This game is like Tic Tac Toe. There is no winner. And that’s because BOTH PARTIES ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE IRAQ WAR!!!!!
All those Democrats that are claiming to be against the war? Let’s get Congress to shut down General Dynamics California Operations. Let’s see what those raving liberals would say about the war, then. Let’s move the West Coast Naval facilities out of San Fransisco and see what happens to the economy of that liberal haven.
You probably won’t read them, but a list of statements by Democrats about WMDs will follow.
“One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line.” —President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998
“If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program.” —President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998
“Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face.” —Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998
“He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983.” —Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998
“[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.” Letter to President Clinton, signed by: — Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998
“Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process.” -Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998
“Hussein has … chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies.” — Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999
“There is no doubt that … Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies.” Letter to President Bush, Signed by: — Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001
“We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them.” — Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002
“We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country.” — Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
“Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power.” — Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
“We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.” — Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002
“The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons…” — Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002
“I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force — if necessary — to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security.” — Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002
“There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years … We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction.” — Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002
“He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do” — Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002
“In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members … It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.” — Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
“We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction.” — Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002
“Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime … He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation … And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction … So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real…” — Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
By Letterman
July 21, 2008 1:26 PM | Link to this
Truth, please run for office! I need some new material. You can start off on Stupid People Tricks. Then we’ll bring you back for a serious interview after you win the primary. Wow. You’re just too good to be true!
By Mara
July 21, 2008 1:41 PM | Link to this
Truth, what you fail to appreciate is that though Clinton believed that Hussein had access to WMD, he also believed that such access and material could be evaluated, controlled, and monitored without going to war. (And he was right, as we found out after BushCo pushed us into Iraq)
Also consider how close and secret this Administration has kept all information regarding these supposed WMD’s, and how they intimidated the intelligence analysts and manipulated reports and surveys to reflect what they believed to be the true. And then passed that adulterated “intelligence” along to the Congress as trustworthy, documented, and vetted.
When the Executive Branch misleads the Legislative Branch, why blame the legislators for believing it?
By Frustrated
July 21, 2008 1:58 PM | Link to this
So what would you have done if the US did not take September 11th seriously? What if we never went to war and wound up getting pummeled by our enemies? Would you blame Bush for that too?
I understand that there will never be a person that EVERYONE agrees with, but the whole “Stand together or fall apart” comes to mind with so many people constantly bashing the president….whoever that shall be..
I am not saying I agree 100% with all the choices that the President has made, but for Pete’s sake, I think he did what he needed to do….defend this country in a time of need.
By Truth
July 21, 2008 2:05 PM | Link to this
Mara
you’ve GOT to be F-ing kidding me!!! The DEMOCRATS using the Iraq War as a hammer?! Where was your anger while Rove and Cheney were telling the American people that Democrats HATE America and wouldn’t mind seeing Sadddam win?
My anger was aimed at a whole bunch of Democrats that had voted to go to war while it was politically advantageous to hold hands and sing America the Beautiful, but once the media had changed the minds of the moderate left, the democrats ran like cockroaches.
Where was this wrath when the REPUBLICANS were telling America that the Democrats hate the military, even though many of us are military or related to military veterans?
Thanks for your service, but it is not Republicans that put out the yard signs that say Support the troops, bring them home. Do you understand that the military is there to put the lead downrange and kill people? Do you understand that a YF-22 Fighter Jet has a primary purpose to kill as many people as possible?
The military is not the police. The police arrest people and kill them if necessary. The military kill people and arrest them if necessary. Military people that are home are called unemployed. It doesn’t sound like democrats support the troops. They support Americans, but not Americans that are on a mission to kill other people, which pretty much eliminates the military. You cannot support a soldier without supporting what he is doing. If you do not support what he is doing, you are not supporting a soldier. You are just supporting a guy. (or a girl)
Where was your fury when the REPUBLICANS were hammering the Dems with their Osama/Obama crap?
Maybe this is the problem. I can’t compare bad politics with voting to send our children into harms way and then running like a coward.
Where was your outrage when the REPUBLICANS were likening Max Cleland to Osama Bin Laden?
That’s the side you always hear, but the things Cleland had said was pretty bad. Again, bad politics, but certainly not sending kids out in front of bullets.
Where is your fury at the sheer effrontery of “TheRepublicanSong.com” putting up billboards of the burning towers with the words “Please Don’t Vote For A Democrat”?
Didn’t see those. But I’ve seen American Politics. I see it every night on every TV show on the major networks. Republicans are idiots at politics. They could never run the slick propaganda machine that is most of Hollywood. The Demorats are great at it.
Your president used fear, intimidation, and “misinformation” to get convince the American people that Saddam was a bigger threat than Bin Laden and that the Republicans were the only ones who could protect their little Jimmy from “the terrorists”. It was all well and good when the Republicans were using the fear of terrorism to hammer loose the Democrats from congress. But now when the Democrats are pulling hammers from the Republican tool-box…NOW it’s beyond the pale?!
Hammer loose Democrats? LOL!!! Plenty enough of hammered loose democrats to send us to war.
By GOB
July 21, 2008 2:08 PM | Link to this
Truth - Not sure if you’re aware, but there is now something called the internet. Now there is more information than there was in past, which means if someone is telling us something that isnt true, we can call BS. In the past, the average citizen had to take whatever the news reported at face value.
Now, however, when they see Bush telling us that we have won the war in Iraq (over 5 years ago), there is enough information for us to call BS. It sounds as though if you had the choice, you would prefer to be in the dark and only know as much as the WH wants you to know (ie propaganda) rather than actually know the truth, which is ironic given your name.
By RF
July 21, 2008 2:11 PM | Link to this
Truth- the media LOVE conflict and controversy, and who’s an easier target than the prez? They are doing exactly what they seem to do to every two-term president. They wailed at Reagan’s age and memory in his second term, they eviscerated Clinton over the whole sex scandal, and now they’re sticking it to Bush. Most people form their own opinions and aren’t as swayed as you think by the media. The hot air blasting over the cable channels isn’t as powerful as you might think. People watch the shows that support their side anyway, as is evidenced by bloggers here.
As for Bush and Iraq, it’s a simple case of money and time. People, including those dang libruls, supported the war for a while. Now we’ve been there five years and it’s time to talk reduction. We were in WWII less time than this, and after the debacle in Viet Nam, people expect “wars” to be over quicker. The media would be blasting it regardless of who is in the White House. People get tired of hearing about the casualties and the money that is being spent over there to keep the war effort going, especially in light of the state of the economy right now. Bush could do a lot for his approval ratings by talking timelines and being more public about his thoughts on Iraq. Instead, he’s letting the upcoming candidates hash it out and get the glory for having a plan.
By Truth
July 21, 2008 2:12 PM | Link to this
Copyleft
I notice that Truth persists in trying to draw a line between “Christians” and “liberals,” when in fact they’re the same people.
I was actually trying to make a parody out of the fact that he had done exactly that by constantly using the term Christians instead of “many Christians” or “some Christians”. He was pointing an all encompassing finger. I was doing the same, except I was being a little more overt, hoping someone would catch my parody. i’m not saying that you missed it, i’m saying that I didn’t present it well enough.
By GOB
July 21, 2008 2:18 PM | Link to this
So what would you have done if the US did not take September 11th seriously? What if we never went to war and wound up getting pummeled by our enemies? Would you blame Bush for that too?
Bush did appear to take 9/11 seriously at first when we went after Taliban and Al Queda (you remeber them, right? They’re the ones that actually were involved in the attack), but then quickly shifted the focus to Iraq, who had nothing to do with 9/11.
Now that the troop levels in Afghanistan have been reduced to allow for a stronger presence in Iraq, the Taliban is regaining strength and retaking areas they had previously lost. By refusing to keep the people who attacked us as a priority, you could argue that Bush did in fact decide to not take 9/11 seriously, and instead focus on Iraq.
As for standing together, I think the fact that almost 70% of the country disapproves of the way Bush has done his job shows that we are “standing together.”
By AGF
July 21, 2008 2:22 PM | Link to this
Saw this aritcle in the AJC. The following is a quote from Michael Johnson, a player on GT’s football team.
Michael Johnson Q: Your father, Samuel, earned a Purple Heart in Vietnam and you have several relatives in the military, some serving overseas now. Does that make you more likely than most college students to follow coverage of the war? A: I really don’t read the news about the war because most of the stuff is negative. I try to just keep our country, the leadership and the military in my prayers. I talk to family whenever I can. I have nothing against the media, but a lot of things that get reported are so negative, and it’s just to instill fear in people. When I hear about victories, and positive advances, that’s what I like to hear. What you dwell on is what you manifest. If you dwell on the negative, you’ll manifest the negative.
Any thoughts on his comments?
By Mara
July 21, 2008 2:25 PM | Link to this
Frustrated - So what would you have done if the US did not take September 11th seriously?
er…like invading Afghanistan, deposing the Taliban, and poising ourselves to deliver Al Qaeda’s deathblow…only to get bored, pull out a good portion of troops and resources to go a-huntin’ in Iraqi sands for an American-built despot who had absolutely NOTHING to do with September 11th? You mean taking 9/11 seriously like that?
Most Americans supported (and still support) our operations in Afghanistan. Too bad this administration didn’t have that kind of commitment.
By Truth
July 21, 2008 2:31 PM | Link to this
GOB
I would prefer to live in a world with no war. I don’t like the fact that we were born this early in the evolution of man that we need to deal with this barbaric right. As a kid, I wondered why Kennedy and Kruschief did not have a big public fight and settle their differences.
But we were born now, and we do have a military that is highly trained to kill people. And there are going to be politicians that send young men and women to die at the hands of strangers and to kill strangers.
War requires some pretty crazy things. One of the things it requires is loyalty at home. Ask Palestine. Ask Israel. Ask India. Ask any country that is constantly at war. If the troops are not supported IN THEIR MISSIONS back home, it is an easy thing for the enemy to exploit that weakness and as was seen by Ho-Chi-Mehn when he called the American Protesters: “His little soldiers”, that weakness can lose a war.
We will never win another war that lasts more than two weeks. It just opens the door to too many political opportunist. After all, how hard is it to show that war is bad? Babies are burned alive in war. A couple of pictures and the war is over.
I’d like to disband the military, but I’m just not rich enough to get the hell out of dodge. But if we are going to have a military that we don’t support, we need to get rid of the military.
Remember, like it or not, supporting the killing is supporting the military. Training people to shoot guns that they will never use is just supporting a heavily armed Great Society.
By Truth
July 21, 2008 2:40 PM | Link to this
RF
I understand what you are saying, but the democrats were running away within months of voting to go. It’s politics, Pal.
Iraq’s occupation was not handled correctly. We have presidential candidates who claim that the American Soldier is the people who can’t get a job and you have a 6 year media blitz about the atrocities of war. Liberal colleges start kicking recruitment off their campuses. Recruitment drops like crazy. We don’t have enough soldiers but it is all the Republicans fault. How does that work?
I say disband the mllitary If we don’t have the balls to support them, we don’t deserve them.
By GOB
July 21, 2008 2:48 PM | Link to this
Truth - I dont think the problem is with war in general. Sure, it sucks and it would be nice if it went away. The problem with this particular war. We are there under false pretenses that have proved to be false (WMD) and this administration planned the war about as well as a group of 5th graders.
There doesnt seem to be much protest about getting out troops out of Afghanistan, and with good reason. Americans will support a war that makes sense. In fact, Obama wants to increase the troop levels in order to better fight the Taliban and Al Queda, yet those liberals who all hate America and the military and spend their spare time burning flags while performing gay weddings seem to be ok with his plan.
By Mara
July 21, 2008 2:50 PM | Link to this
Truth - there’s no point in rebutting every point you make. You seem absolutely convinced that no Democrat has ever been in the military, no Democrat could possibly understand the military mind, no Democrat could ever love and be proud to be an American and no Democrat would stand and defend the “American Way”
It’s just funny how someone who names himself “Truth” can blindly parrot the lies and mischaracterizations of the last eight years. You’re smart enough to know how much of your posts are crap, yet you still keep flinging it. For shame…
By RF
July 21, 2008 2:57 PM | Link to this
It’s politics, Pal
Absolutely. And if a democrat in the White House had started the war, the republicans would be doing the same thing, just so they wouldn’t look like they were being too liberal. To me, the problem is that as we evolve, we should be becoming less politically polarized, but the fact is we’re not. The media has a lot to do with that, because bipartisan work is BORING news. Conflict is where the interesting stuff is. It’s not nearly as much about being liberal as it is looking for something controversial to report to boost ratings.
AGF- that young man typifies lots of our young today. They only listen to what they believe or want to hear. They’re not as swayed by media influence as many might think. His quote, to some degree, points out what I’ve been saying. The media report what is controversial and will get at people’s emotions if they watch. Most people, after a certain amount of time, quit watching as much because they get tired of the same old stuff.
By Leno
July 21, 2008 3:23 PM | Link to this
Did you hear about this Truth guy? He just decided to run for office, and you won’t believe what he has to say!
By AGF
July 21, 2008 3:31 PM | Link to this
RF,
I really appreciate your level-headed response @2:57.
By Truth
July 21, 2008 3:31 PM | Link to this
GOB
Truth - I dont think the problem is with war in general. Sure, it sucks and it would be nice if it went away. The problem with this particular war. We are there under false pretenses that have proved to be false (WMD) and this administration planned the war about as well as a group of 5th graders.
First, just because we didn’t find WMD, doesn’t mean they were there. READ THE QUOTES!!!
What war has ever been started on TRUE pretenses? Why did we attack Germany. Japan attacked us? When is war ever justified unless the soldiers are at the border?
Why did we go to Viet Nam? Why did we go anywhere we have been since 1776? There was always a reason not to go.
*There doesnt seem to be much protest about getting out troops out of Afghanistan, and with good reason. Americans will support a war that makes sense.”
No. Americans will support what they are told to support and right now, that is the “good” war. It is part of the hammer. Good war: ours, bad war: theirs.
In fact, Obama wants to increase the troop levels in order to better fight the Taliban and Al Queda, yet those liberals who all hate America and the military and spend their spare time burning flags while performing gay weddings seem to be ok with his plan.
Obama: Good. McCain: bad.
Obama war: good” McCain war: bad.
By Truth
July 21, 2008 3:38 PM | Link to this
Mara
if you really believe that is the way I feel, that’s cool. But I’m telling you what the perception is. Yard signs that say crap like that are not from Republicans. I think the perception is right for the most part. Many Liberals want to support Americans, but not if they are soldiers. That’s not supporting our troops.
Leno
Wow, you sure know a lot about me considering I have never seen you or your “bot” buddies. wazzzzup, Pal? Too afraid to come out of hiding?
I think we have all seen you before. LOL!!
By Copyleft
July 21, 2008 3:43 PM | Link to this
AGF: Any thoughts on his comments?
Yes… “Ignorance is bliss.”
By Copyleft
July 21, 2008 3:48 PM | Link to this
We do have a military that is highly trained to kill people. And there are going to be politicians that send young men and women to die at the hands of strangers and to kill strangers.
Which is why it’s so important to ensure that they’re sent on only those missions that are absolutely necessary. Iraq wasn’t, and we all know it.
War requires some pretty crazy things. One of the things it requires is loyalty at home.
So when a war turns out to be needless, it loses support. Which is exactly as it should be. “Support the troops—bring them home!” isn’t a contradiction, it’s basic logic. They don’t need to be there getting shot at for no purpose; therefore, the best thing we can do for them is to bring them home.
If the troops are not supported IN THEIR MISSIONS back home, it is an easy thing for the enemy to exploit that weakness
It’s not weakness to correct a mistake. Pretending that all missions are eternally legitimate is silly and wasteful, as we’ve seen with the Iraq blunder.
that weakness can lose a war.
A war that’s unjust can never be won. The question is whether to prolong the mistake or fix it.
Remember, like it or not, supporting the killing is supporting the military. Training people to shoot guns that they will never use is just supporting a heavily armed Great Society.
And what’s wrong with that?
By NYer
July 21, 2008 3:53 PM | Link to this
RF,
To me, the problem is that as we evolve, we should be becoming less politically polarized, but the fact is we’re not.
AGF- that young man typifies lots of our young today. They only listen to what they believe or want to hear.
My post will likely come across as far more negative of the media than I intend, but nevertheless:
In my opinion the explosion of media outlets, whether internet sites, magazines, or 800 channels of digital cable television, has created unprecedented demand for content. The demand for content to fill the page or airwave has lead to the watering down of journalism and the product put forth by the media in general. Stories that should not be stores become major stories, and stories that are indeed major stories are covered so much, by so many sources, that they become overexposed and their importance lost. In just a few days people get tired of hearing about them. Further, because the average person, in general, has very cheap and easy access to tremendous amounts of this content, people have become self-selective in where they go to get their content. Instead of being fact, content becomes “personalized” based on where the individual goes to get their “facts”. With all the content that is out there, it is impossible to actually confirm the veracity of half of what one hears or reads. And since critical thinking is a skill not adequately drilled into the minds of our young people, we are overly succeptible to believing things that cannot possibly be true. So we are left more polarized than ever during what I fear is the age of the over-generalizing soundbyte.
So people listening and believing what they want to hear is not limited to today’s young. Not by any means. There are plenty of people, some of them resident on this blog, that can parrot the talking points of their given political group, and ignore true facts with the best of them.
Unfortunately most people (including most politicians) don’t debate - they don’t know how. They just sling their generalized soundbyte at the other side, and the media, desperate for content, gobbles it up like piranhas.
Republicans hate black people.
Democrats are cowards who hate the military.
George Bush is the worst President in the history of the country.
Democrats want us to lose the war.
Demorcrats are socialists.
Republicans are fascists/Nazis.
By Truth for Elected (or stolen) Office!
July 21, 2008 3:54 PM | Link to this
I GOT MY FIRST BILLBOARD! Don’t know why people are so upset….
By RF
July 21, 2008 4:16 PM | Link to this
And since critical thinking is a skill not adequately drilled into the minds of our young people, we are overly succeptible to believing things that cannot possibly be true. So we are left more polarized than ever during what I fear is the age of the over-generalizing soundbyte
Nyer- You tell them!! Very accurate, carefully stated truth! Our young believe that if they read it on the internet, it must be true. Teaching them critical thinking now involves teaching them to judge the accuracy of what they read, which isn’t always easy. Unfortunately, we have more out there to evaluate because of the media’s desperate grasp for soundbytes. I don’t think even adults know what to believe anymore.
By USinUK
July 22, 2008 8:10 AM | Link to this
Mara -
er…like invading Afghanistan, deposing the Taliban, and poising ourselves to deliver Al Qaeda’s deathblow…only to get bored, pull out a good portion of troops and resources to go a-huntin’ in Iraqi sands for an American-built despot who had absolutely NOTHING to do with September 11th? You mean taking 9/11 seriously like that?
VERY well said. you just go!
By JokesOn
July 22, 2008 8:43 AM | Link to this
It must be love.
He sees me when I am two states away;)
or maybe it is just paranoia…
By USinUK
July 22, 2008 9:00 AM | Link to this
Jokesy -
It must be love.
dangit. Now, I have that Madness song in my head … t’anks a rot.
It must be love, love, love. (da-DA) It must be love, love, love. (da-DA) nothing more nothing less love is the best …
By JokesOn
July 22, 2008 9:17 AM | Link to this
USinUK,
Your comment got Tori Amos’ version of “I’m not in love” going in my head for some reason.
Good tune also.
By USinUK
July 22, 2008 10:04 AM | Link to this
Jokes -
Your comment got Tori Amos’ version of “I’m not in love” going in my head for some reason.
is that a cover of the 10cc song??
(despite being of an age that I remember the song when it first came out, I only learned in 2003 that he was saying “big boys don’t cry” in the whispery part … I always thought he was saying “be quiet, stay quiet”)
By AGF
July 22, 2008 10:08 AM | Link to this
AGF: Any thoughts on his comments?
Copyleft: Yes… “Ignorance is bliss.”
Hate to break it to you Copyleft, but the article said he has several family members overseas and that he talks to THEM whenever he can. He doesn’t rely on the AJC to get his news. He gets his information straight from the source - you know, the soldiers actually fighting in the war. But no, we shouldn’t trust THOSE people. I am sure the AJC does a much better job of reporting the “facts”.
By JokesOn
July 22, 2008 10:10 AM | Link to this
is that a cover of the 10cc song??
Yep.
She also did a great job on “I’m on fire” and “Only women Bleed,” but are hard to find. Of course her demo had lots of covers, but I am referring to the bootleg stuff.
By USinUK
July 22, 2008 10:33 AM | Link to this
AGF -
I really don’t read the news about the war because most of the stuff is negative. I try to just keep our country, the leadership and the military in my prayers. I talk to family whenever I can. I have nothing against the media, but a lot of things that get reported are so negative, and it’s just to instill fear in people. When I hear about victories, and positive advances, that’s what I like to hear. What you dwell on is what you manifest. If you dwell on the negative, you’ll manifest the negative.
He doesn’t rely on the AJC to get his news. He gets his information straight from the source - you know, the soldiers actually fighting in the war. But no, we shouldn’t trust THOSE people. I am sure the AJC does a much better job of reporting the “facts”.
I think that, if you ask any soldier what’s going on, he can tell you what s/he sees on a daily basis, but I don’t think that’s an accurate gauge of what’s really going on.
if you’ve never read LTC Bob Bateman, I’d like to take this moment to highly highly recommend him - he’s served a couple of tours in Iraq, is currently serving at the Pentagon, was a military history professor at West Point. in other words - he knows of which he speaks. this is what he has to say about servicemen and -women talking about what’s going on in Iraq:
Let me begin with a basic premise: Rank matters. That is not elitism; it is merely an observation of facts. Nobody, for example, would take seriously a New York Times business section article about the broad course and strategic direction that Ford Motors or General Electric might take if the sole source cited in the article is a foreman on the factory floor. This is not because the foreman is not wise or educated. He may well be both. But he would not know anything about grand strategic decisions being made at the corporate level, would he? By the same token, an article about local innovations on the factory floor itself should have a quote from that same foreman, and nobody would much care what the higher corporate HQs said. See? It is not elitism; it is a matter of access and knowledge. The same applies to the military.
So it was that in my own command I followed and reissued the general guidance that Lieutenant General (Retired) Hal Moore gave to his men as they left for Vietnam 43 years ago. In essence what he said was this: “Say whatever you want to any reporter, but stick to what you know.” Now, that was a suggestion, but anyone who knows Hal Moore will tell you that his “suggestions” are perhaps a tad more directive than other people’s — a quality to which my running mate can attest. The wisdom therein, however, is solid. In military-speak, we call this “staying in your lane.” Not as in your lane on the highway, of course, but as in your lane on the rifle range. Same concept, though.
This advice applies well when you are a junior officer. Stay in your lane, talk or write about what you personally know, and you are pretty safe. As you ascend in rank, however, it becomes a little more difficult. Mid-grade officers, called “field grades” by the military (Major, Lieutenant Colonel, Colonel), serve a lot of their time on higher-level staffs. Accordingly, they do have personal knowledge of discussions and decisions made at much higher levels. But the trick is that they usually do not know everything that goes into a decision made by a general or one of the civilians appointed over us. And there is the rub. Their “lane” appears wider, but in fact it is not. This is the point at which professional ethics are supposed to kick in. Sometimes, however, they do not. It is sad, but understandable in a way, that many of the “leaks” that come out on various military issues are from officers of just this very grade. Both sides play a part in this of course, the mid-grade officers who are flattered that the journalist wants to talk to them (and often have an axe to grind) and who are made heady by their proximity to power here in the Pentagon and in DC in general, and the reporters who enable these sentiments in order to write a story.
here is the complete article in question: http://mediamatters.org/altercation/200807080005
if you want to read more about him or more of his writings: http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=ltc+bob+bateman&meta=
By USinUK
July 22, 2008 10:42 AM | Link to this
Jokes -
Of course her demo had lots of covers, but I am referring to the bootleg stuff
I’ve tried, but I just can’t bring myself to like Tori Amos. Her voice drives. me. up. a. flippin. wall.
when it comes to interesting covers, try Alaina Davis’s cover of “Don’t Fear the Reaper” (sans cowbell) - she also does a kick-a$$ cover of Ani diFranco’s “32 Falvors”
By Copyleft
July 22, 2008 10:44 AM | Link to this
AGF: Exactly. The media is certainly guilty of sensationalizing and superficiality on many issues, but they still provide a more coherent high-level picture than interviews with “grunts on the ground” alone will.
To understand crime, you need to talk to more than just beat cops. To understand a war, you can’t just listen to footsoldiers. The picture will be just as skewed.
By USinUK
July 22, 2008 10:49 AM | Link to this
“32 Falvors”
not to be confused with 32 FLAVORS … criminey.
By Truth
July 22, 2008 10:53 AM | Link to this
Copyleft
Which is why it’s so important to ensure that they’re sent on only those missions that are absolutely necessary. Iraq wasn’t, and we all know it
Who gets to decide which missions are absolutely necessary? We don’t all know that Iraq wasn’t necessary. Your own party voted to go. Your political leaders thinks it, now, but there are millions of Americans that don’t agree with you. So who gets to decide? Political pundits? Politicians protecting our country? Are you out of your mind?
So when a war turns out to be needless, it loses support.
Who decides what is needless? You are under the wrong impression that everyone agrees with the cut and runners. Does the leaders in the Pentagon give you a call each morning and you get to decide what wars are just? Would you rather they just check the latest poll numbers? Yea, That is probably a course at West Point: It’s called “Let the housewives lead our battles”. it’s all the rage in military circles.
“Which is exactly as it should be. “Support the troops—bring them home!” isn’t a contradiction, it’s basic logic.”
No it isn’t. It’s illogical to train people to do a job and leave them at home. You aren’t supporting the troops, you are “supporting” people without jobs. It is their job to be there.
They don’t need to be there getting shot at for no purpose; therefore, the best thing we can do for them is to bring them home.
So who gets to decide that there is no purpose. Again, you are wanting to put the military in the hands of the politics d’jure. This is the problem. What war would be worth fighting in your book? Would it only be wars that Democrats start? They started Viet Nam. Was that war just?
It’s not weakness to correct a mistake. Pretending that all missions are eternally legitimate is silly and wasteful, as we’ve seen with the Iraq blunder.
Who gets to decide when it is a mistake? If you were a soldier, would you be willing to lay down your life for a country that you know will not support you if the political winds change direction?
A war that’s unjust can never be won. The question is whether to prolong the mistake or fix it.
What war is just? For every one that you name is just, I can explain why it is not just. You can’t fight a war dependent on political whims.
Statement about the great Society
And what’s wrong with that? What’s wrong with another welfare dependent segment of our population? What’s wrong with the great society? Are you talking about the Great Society that has bred ignorant thugs that prey on old people, or are you talking about the poor people that were never given a proper education or family structure that was a result of the great society?
Your post is exactly why we can’t afford Obama in the White House. Leaders lead. They do not govern or lead the military based on public opinion polls. You are literally advocating that the military take only the stands that you approve. I joke about when I am King. Do you know something we don’t. Are you in line for the coronation?
By Lee
July 22, 2008 10:57 AM | Link to this
“Do what you will shall be the whole of the law” is what some of the Satan worshipers say. After all, this is the guiding principle for most of the polticians- they want to do what they want, to get theirs, and to hell with everyone else. Satan is the spiritual leader of many people who call themselves Christians, Muslims and Jews, and is the political head of the rest of the nation. Just see how nasty and filled with lies the political campaigns are! They certainly are out and about doing the Evil One’s work, and not God’s work! Actually, there are a number of politicians who are Satan worshippers without recognizing it- certainly you can see it in the laws they pass and the prerequisites they lavish upon themselves and their pals. Not to mention the horns they wear. Sigh. I just wish they would be more like Satan himself, and at least speak the truth and shame the devil every now and again. So, the next monument to go up should speak for the Satanists of America- they certainly outnumber the Christians! Ask any parson! Then afterwards ask to shake his tail. “Do what you will shall be the whole of the law.” Sure is easier than the Ten Commandments. And makes a cheaper monument, too!
By JokesOn
July 22, 2008 10:57 AM | Link to this
when it comes to interesting covers, try Alaina Davis’s cover of “Don’t Fear the Reaper” (sans cowbell) - she also does a kick-a$$ cover of Ani diFranco’s “32 Falvors”
I will have to check that out.
I’ve tried, but I just can’t bring myself to like Tori Amos. Her voice drives. me. up. a. flippin. wall.
Back when I played, we opened for her in Jacksonville before she released her first CD. She was a blast. We stayed up all night talking music and killing coffee.
By JokesOn
July 22, 2008 11:04 AM | Link to this
Who gets to decide which missions are absolutely necessary?
It should be the president. But, that only works if s/he listens to ALL of the experts take on a situation, which he refused to do. It has been documented dozens of times now. If you do not know about it, your ears are closed.
That is all clear now (to those not in denial). The omissions, the firing of people who did not give him only the info he wanted to hear, the intentional (incorrect) association between 9/11 and iraq, etc.
By USinUK
July 22, 2008 11:04 AM | Link to this
Jokes -
She was a blast. We stayed up all night talking music and killing coffee.
I’ve heard her interviewed … she sounds like a cool person to chat with - too bad about her nasaly voice. (brergh)
By Archie
July 22, 2008 11:07 AM | Link to this
I want to give a memo to liberals and yes I consider myself liberal but some of us have been saying things that sound kind of stupid. First, americans are not addicted to dirty fossil fuels. If could get the sun the shine just right on my car and have the ability to drive my car all week I would do it. To Thomas Friedman please understand that this analogy is stupid:”When a person is addicted to crack cocaine, his problem is not that the price of crack is going up.” No one needs crack cocaine to do anything. Crack is illegal, gas is not and the word illegal is important because that is a common trait of an addiction problem. Doing things that would embarass one’s self if found out is another trait of addiction. Who do you know that’s embarrassed to pump gas at a convenience store? Friedman writes as if americans can just put an alternative into their cars and everything will be better, well maybe in the long run but right now folk need gas at a price they can afford. Idiot, I mean Friedman,needs to understand we buy gas because that’s all we got right now. It’s going to be 102 degrees today so do you think I want to drive my car to work or ride my bike? The car uses gas but the air conditioning works. I don’t agree with the offshore drilling idea but using the term addiction to describe what Americans feel about gas is wrong and silly. I don’t know of any straight men committing f****** to get a gallon of gas. Hell, is a man’s family addicted to him because they need him to pay some bills???! I support the effort of Gore and others to develop clean,alternative energy but gas doesn’t need to be a zillion dollars/gallon to get me to see the point!!
By Heeeeheeee
July 22, 2008 11:09 AM | Link to this
Falvors
and here we thought it was a Salvo done as a Favor.
By JokesOn
July 22, 2008 11:11 AM | Link to this
I’ve heard her interviewed … she sounds like a cool person to chat with - too bad about her nasaly voice.
The people that impress me the most are those that have a reason to be jaded or b!tch about the whole world and not only don’t, but actually are more at peace then the general population.
By Truth
July 22, 2008 11:29 AM | Link to this
JokesOn
Iraq is all about the energy wars. As long as democrats fight domestic production, we will be in Iraq. Make up all the sermons you want. They don’t mean crap as long as we need to continue to rely on foreign oil.
The Democrats have been in charge for almost two years. You may have noticed that we are still in Iraq wth no end in sight. Your party is determined to keep making Arabs that hate us richer and richer. Get a clue.
By Mara
July 22, 2008 11:39 AM | Link to this
Archie - I have to disagree with you.
the word illegal is important because that is a common trait of an addiction problem.
One’s vice doesn’t need to be illegal to be addictive. Some people are addicted to shopping, to sex, to wine, to excitement. These things are all LEGAL but some people just can do without them…
Doing things that would embarass one’s self if found out is another trait of addiction. Who do you know that’s embarrassed to pump gas at a convenience store?…I don’t know of any straight men committing f to get a gallon of gas.
People driving off without paying, people siphoning gas from parked cars, stored RV’s, boats in marina’s. When these people get caught, do you suppose they’re proud of themselves? How about the folks stealing copper and steel to scrap out for gas money. Would they not be ashamed if caught? And maybe straight men aren’t f——- for gas yet, but wait til it gets to $8-$10 per gallon…
the one trait that epitomizes the word “addiction” in ALL cases is the perception of the addict that they need whatever they’re addicted to. Not having it causes discomfort and they will go to great lengths to feed their addiction.
You already admit that not having gasoline would cause you discomfort. Now…what lengths are you willing to accept to secure a supply of that gasoline? What lengths is “America” willing to go?
By USinUK
July 22, 2008 11:45 AM | Link to this
Truth -
The Democrats have been in charge for almost two years. You may have noticed that we are still in Iraq wth no end in sight. Your party is determined to keep making Arabs that hate us richer and richer.
first of all, the Dems aren’t “in charge” - they have Capitol Hill, but not the WH. secondly, they don’t have a huge majority, they have a “scraping by their fingernails” majority (and a*******holes like Lieberman who are more GOP than Dem don’t help the numbers).
lastly, the ARABS are getting richer and richer??? have you checked out oil revenues for Venezuala, Russia, Nigeria and Canada?? … and my neighbors to the north, Scotland, send their thanks, as well. There are a LOT of countries raking in the big bucks - some who like us, some who don’t.
By GOB
July 22, 2008 11:46 AM | Link to this
Truth - How is getting oil in 8-10 years going to get us out of Iraq? When you realize that it will have virtually no appreciable impact on the global price of oil, I just cant see the true connection. It isnt like the oil companies are going to give Americans a discounted price.
By the time any oil is actually pumped out of the ground, the demand in China and India will have increased so much that it wont even matter. And if by some miracle that doesnt happen, do you think OPEC wont just cut their own production to keep prices at the level they want?
I am still undecided about offshore drilling, but the idea that it will be some fix-all for our oil problems is such a sham.
The Democrats have been in charge for almost two years. You may have noticed that we are still in Iraq wth no end in sight. Your party is determined to keep making Arabs that hate us richer and richer. Get a clue.
While true on paper, as long as Bush can veto bills the Democrats dont have the number of votes to beat it. Right now, the government is essentially at a stalemate. The Republicans still maintain enough power with the Executive branch to keep the Democrats from getting anything of substance done, yet they dont have enough power to be Bush’s rubber stamp anymore. With partisonship has bad as it is right now, neither side is willing to conceed anything, and therefore nothing gets done. It isnt that complicated, and to claim that the Democrats are just lazy or dont want to do anything is a major distortion of the truth.
By JokesOn
July 22, 2008 11:47 AM | Link to this
Brian,
Iraq is all about the energy wars.
I know. That is why GWB went in and lied to us all: to get his friends rich while making the region hate us more.
Great to see you can admit that even if it was by mistake.
The Democrats have been in charge for almost two years. And your guys ran it for how long? And in that time what has happened to our quality of life? I almost believed GWB when after 9/11 he said “the terrorist will only win if we change how we live our life and begin living in fear.” Then he effed up everyone’s life, unconstitutionally took executive powers beyond ever seen before, removed many of our “inalienable” rights, and waits for retirement. Your hero!
Get a clue.
If you want to start the nastiness, do not cry again. Only a absolutely and complete dolt would post on boards using their real flicker address Brian W.
Or you can make an attempt at not being a snot-nose brat for once…
By Copyleft
July 22, 2008 12:04 PM | Link to this
No it isn’t. It’s illogical to train people to do a job and leave them at home. You aren’t supporting the troops, you are “supporting” people without jobs. It is their job to be there.
Interesting reasoning! Tell me, do you support “firing” all of our country’s firefighters? Because most of the time, they’re just sitting around with nothing to do….
By Archie
July 22, 2008 12:23 PM | Link to this
One’s vice doesn’t need to be illegal to be addictive. Some people are addicted to shopping, to sex, to wine, to excitement. These things are all LEGAL but some people just can do without them… I know Mara that you can addicted to Legal things but this guy Friedman used crack cocaine as an analogy. It’s MY fault for not being clear but there is limited time and space on a blog. I have known someone that drove off without for gas but that person was addicted to an illegal drug thus didn’t have the money for gas. I don’t think americans give up social activities just to get gas and americans don’t buy gas for the thrill of it. Americans don’t spend hours plotting and thinking about gas. I blog way more than I think about gas. When the gas hand points at empty I go and fill up my car just like I do when groceries get low at my home. I might call up a guy and ask him what Magic city is like but I am not going to ask anyone about that BP or Gulf. The most economical way for me to get to Atlanta is to drive and that means my car needs gas. Some people do spend too much on gas but it’s because they’re trying to engage in some other behavior,perhaps a shopping addiction, but not a gas addiction. As for what lengths America is willing to go to secure gas I have no idea how to answer that question. I know we’re in a stupid war but that’s because of a dumb a.s politician and greedy businessmen. Addiction is the wrong word to use and I think a better word is dependent when talking about americans and gas.
By Archie
July 22, 2008 12:26 PM | Link to this
Interesting reasoning! Tell me, do you support “firing” all of our country’s firefighters? Because most of the time, they’re just sitting around with nothing to do…. Game over! good point Copyleft.
By Truth
July 22, 2008 1:23 PM | Link to this
USinUk
The point is that the dims are making the world richer, while we are sending our children to die to protect our sources.
Planing on powering our vehicles with technology that has not been perfected yet is not a solution. We need the oil, today.
By JokesOn
July 22, 2008 1:25 PM | Link to this
Interesting reasoning! Tell me, do you support “firing” all of our country’s firefighters? Because most of the time, they’re just sitting around with nothing to do…. Game over! good point Copyleft.
And to further that analogy: We do not want our firefighters making fires too big to put out when there are real ones in the making.
On GWB’s watch the exact countries that needed to be watched gain nuke ability. All while we were wasting time on a country that, lets be real, did not have the know-how to make more than a large dirty bomb, at best, and no means of firing it at a location of worth.
I would rather a prez that has our interests at heart, not a puppet that serves old imperialist crusty folk (yes, I am referring to you, Cheney and rove).
By Truth
July 22, 2008 1:28 PM | Link to this
The Big Joke
Who is BrianW? I don’t post on flicker. I make a living at film making. It’s not a hobby. Who are you inventing, now, paranoid boy?
BTW. My standard of living is going crazy. I have more work than I can do.
By JokesOn
July 22, 2008 1:28 PM | Link to this
Planing on powering our vehicles with technology that has not been perfected yet is not a solution. We need the oil, today.
7-10 years before the oil starts running in these new areas vs 5-10 years to have a alternative energy car or at least 100+mpg….
Very difficult decision indeed.
By GOB
July 22, 2008 1:29 PM | Link to this
Addiction is the wrong word to use and I think a better word is dependent when talking about americans and gas.
Archie - the current terminology for people addicted to drugs (legal or illegal) or alcohol is chemical dependency. They are the same thing.
I don’t think americans give up social activities just to get gas
I disagree. The whole idea of a “staycation” is exactly that. Giving up a vacation in order to have money to pay for the gas needed to commute to work and back.
By AGF
July 22, 2008 1:30 PM | Link to this
Copyleft and USinUK:
I AGREE with much of what both of you have written.
However, I disagree with some of your strawmen arguments.
The point of the article I posted was to show that things aren’t as bad as the media reports. I never suggested that the family members of the player in question made top level decisions, I didn’t say that the decisions the top brass (including the President) have made are correct, and I never hinted that the war is a good thing. I am only stating the FACT that the media has purposely concentrated on the bad aspects of the war without fairly reporting on the successes.
With that being said, I would like to offer the following counters to both of your posts:
The foot soldiers and their commanders on the ground ARE the best ones to judge the state of the war. I have worked as a mid-level manager for a fortune 500 company. The CEO’s were the LAST ones to know the success or failures of their major initiatives. That information was collected from the grunts on the floor, analyzed by managers like myself, and then reported to the top management. They didn’t know what was going on until we told them.
How do you know this player’s family members were grunts? He never said that in the aritcle. For all we know, he could have an uncle who is a full bird colonel serving in Iraq.
I have personally talked to mutiple army and air force personel, some of whom were captains and majors and all of whom have served at least two tours in Iraq. They have all said the same thing - it isn’t nearly as bad in Iraq as the media reports.
By Truth
July 22, 2008 1:38 PM | Link to this
Copyleft
Interesting reasoning! Tell me, do you support “firing” all of our country’s firefighters? Because most of the time, they’re just sitting around with nothing to do
LOL!! So that’s your reasoning for spending trillions of bucks to equip and train our arm forces and then leave them set at home? LOL!! Brilliant. How about this. As is seen on TV, crab fishermen don’t work but a few days a year. That would also be a great reason to spend those trillions of bucks. LOL!1
Hey, the Olympic committee only works a few days every two years. There’s a reason to spend trillion of dollars Professional baseball players don’t work in the winter. Football, Basketball! There are dozens of professions that make it OK to spend one third of our federal budget on the military. LOL!
it’s a whole new way to think!!! Let’s spend trillions on nothing because firefighters spend some of their time waiting on fires. This is why I really don’t care about the election. We will get the leaders we deserve.
By RF
July 22, 2008 1:39 PM | Link to this
The point is that the dims are making the world richer, while we are sending our children to die to protect our sources
We were TOLD by our illustrious leader that this was a war on terrorism and WMD’s. Now it’s a war for oil?? I’m confused. Perhaps that’s part of the problem over there now. Do our children know what they’re fighting for, or are they as duped as we are into believing we’re really fighting for democracy, freedom, and to stop terrorism? Iraq’s oil supply is important, but we could do without it. How is the war the fault of the democrats? So far, they haven’t cut war spending or passed any legislation of note to impact the war effort. The war was started by democrats AND republicans, one of the last bipartisan things done in Washington in the last five years.
I’m not parsing your words, I’m just wondering how it suddenly became solely the democrats’ fault. I blame the whole lot of ‘em up there.
By Truth
July 22, 2008 1:46 PM | Link to this
RF
Calm down. We were told by YOUR illustrious leaders the same damn thing. One more time: HISTORY OF THE WORLD DID NOT START IN 2001. OUR PROBLEMS WITH IRAQ DID NOT START IN 2001.
Questions? See above.
By Truth
July 22, 2008 1:56 PM | Link to this
The Big Joke
So what’s the deal with brianW and flicker?
it’s creepy enough when you think you are fooling everyone and you come on as other posters, but I didn’t know that you were rifling through public posting sites with some sort of sick fantasy that you were going to “find me out”.
Are you just obsessed with me or are you also stalking other posters on this and other blogs?
You are exactly the kind of person that makes the internet like walking down a dark ally.
Just a word of advice: you may want to be careful about coming on a public forum and openly advertising that you are this obsessed with another poster.
By Copyleft
July 22, 2008 1:57 PM | Link to this
Sorry, Truth, but you’ve blown this one. The firefighters analogy has sunk your battleship.
According to your “logic,” the fact that we spend money on armed forces means that they should always be off somewhere, fighting and killing SOMEBODY (regardless of whether there’s a need), so the money won’t be wasted.
By that same logic, we need to be starting more house fires so the money we spend on firefighters isn’t wasted. The irrationality is obvious; your argument fails completely.
Better luck next week!
By JokesOn
July 22, 2008 1:59 PM | Link to this
it’s a whole new way to think!!!
Yeah! Let’s send troops in to places to simply die so Truth and his buddys in the white house can get theirs while everyone else flounders.
I mean, the troops are paid for, so they might as well be killing people somewhere, right?
Your abandon for human life and liberty coupled by your “I got mine” attitude is exactly whats wrong with this country.
By GOB
July 22, 2008 2:04 PM | Link to this
Truth - No one is saying that nothing before 2001 is relavent, but with regards to our current situation in Iraq, what happened after 9/11 is what is important. That is what led us to war. Faulty intelligence, and an administration that did everything it could to scare the hell out of Americans (see: mushroom cloud over an American city; Colin Powell at the UN, etc). Based on the evidence given to congress, they choose to approve the invasion. After the evidence was proven faulty, they realized they had made a mistake, and are still, 5 years later fighting the administration to get it corrected.
How is changing your mind after you find out you were misled somehow a bad thing? Isnt that how logical, rational people think?
I am agnostic and dont believe christianity is correct, but if Jesus were to descend from the heavens in my back yard and start with the miracles, I would be willing to admit I was wrong. We dont live in a vacuum where once a decision has been made we just move on and never look at it again. Its ok to change your mind when new evidence is presented. Really, it is.
By JokesOn
July 22, 2008 2:08 PM | Link to this
Just a word of advice: you may want to be careful about coming on a public forum and openly advertising that you are this obsessed with another poster.
In your famous words: You did it first;)
it’s creepy enough when you think you are fooling everyone and you come on as other posters,
You see me around every corner, although I am not there. Talk about creepy! You actually think I am every poster that opposes your position (which is 99%) who has a name not heard of before.
Are you just obsessed with me or are you also stalking other posters on this and other blogs?
Nope. Took me less than a commercial break. I know it is yours too, because the info on your “haunted house” trip. Your PS touch-ups suck though. Never over-work a photo…even a bad one.
By Truth
July 22, 2008 2:17 PM | Link to this
Copyleft
Me thinks thou protest too much.
I saw the attempted parallel. Let me give you one:
The firefighters are fighting a very large and dangerous fire, That fire is in a very dangerous part of town. Firefighters are getting hurt, some killed. The old tenderbox buildings across the street are fuill of oily rags and will ignite unles the building is kept under control.
Your logic:
To the trucks. We are outta here. Too many firefighters are getting hurt, no one back home supports this mess and it is costing too much money.
Let it burn.
I know that you want it to be a black or white issue, but it is not. The reasons to fight wars is never black or white. There is a lot more radical Islam in the Sudan than in Afghanistan. So all of the sudden, Afghanistan is no longer the “sanctioned war” by Salon.com. What do you tell those one legged kids that gave their all? “Sorry ‘bout your leg, but we should have never been there in the first place. It’s crap. You are asking people to lay down their lives for a “variable”? Today it is a reason to fight a war. tomorrow it is not?
Or better yet: we think what you were doing was wrong but we support you and your missing leg. Feel free to vote.
By Archie
July 22, 2008 2:27 PM | Link to this
The whole idea of a “staycation” is exactly that. Giving up a vacation in order to have money to pay for the gas needed to commute to work and back. No, it’s called living within your means. It’s called common sense. A person on crack cocaine does not use common sense. A crack addict will steal from his/her mother,brother,spouse, child, etc. You can’t make a direct comparison to americans and gas and the behavior of a crackhead. There are specific criteria used for crack addiction. Hell, if you have an alternative fuel that I can use today that’s affordable I will have no withdrawal symptons from not using gas.
By JokesOn
July 22, 2008 2:38 PM | Link to this
What do you tell those one legged kids that gave their all? “Sorry ‘bout your leg, but we should have never been there in the first place. It’s crap. You are asking people to lay down their lives for a “variable”? Today it is a reason to fight a war. tomorrow it is not?
If we had a leader that listened to his peers, that would not have to be the case. But, once again, you are with us or against us!
What a great way to divide the whole country based on ego and cronyism, and then to disguise it as moral-majority vs those hellion libs is just plain wrong.
Yet you still kiss his feet and absolve his every misstep. Makes me wonder what he pardoned you for, or if you just really need someone to blindly follow that bad.
And your analogy is bs. The correct one is as stated: Hey, there are two fires starting over here. What should we do mr. GWB? GWB: Well, of course we start a bigger fire that we cannot control over there.
By Archie
July 22, 2008 2:42 PM | Link to this
Copyleft I think you’re winning your debate but as much as I hate it I have to give Truth a point when he says We need the oil, today.
I signed a petition to support the new energy ideas but gas does not have to be 8 to 10 dollars/gallon to make a point with me and it’s crazy to say that it does. Oil companies have always wanted to drill but not to help out the country but to increase their bottom line. Heck,oil companies know that alternative fuel will be available in the next 10 years so they want to get all the profit they can get right now. As a public, american citizens need to make sure alternative fuel is developed and implemented within the next 10 years and stop the procrastination. We’re being gouged at the pump because we can be gouged at the pump and the rest of supply/demand talk is just intellectual junk.
By Truth
July 22, 2008 2:45 PM | Link to this
The Stupid Joke
Give me a link. I don’t go to Flicker. I have no idea what you are talking about. I went to the site and couldn’t even find the search engine. I managed to find some young guy named BrianW. he looked like he was thirty. If I looked like that, I would live in LA.
i’m going to help you out because you are such a creepy guy and i just don’t want you stalking me. You are not going to find me. If you had my name, you could, but you don’t. There are thousands of film makers in this town and each one has many projects, and most are probably doing something on a haunted something.
When I say that i don’t have time, or i have to work or i’m running out the door, that doesn’t mean that i am changing sites. That means that i have to work. I come here and occasionally i visit a site that is a conservative blog where i have known the posters for 10-15 years.
One of my own sites is my company site. One is a retail store. One is a product display. My kid set them up, I go there to check on them, maybe once a week. The retail store is taken care of by my kid.
I am not part of the internet “film” community. I work for money. When people pay me, they buy my copyrights. I don’t post current work on the internet. On my website, I have a coded door for clients to view their most recent edit, but that is all password protected.
I have posted nothing from my shoots and there is no Brian on my crew.
I have done nothing that I am ashamed of. I would be proud of anyone on here to see anything I have done. But in this world of creepy, sick people, that is not possible. I think we are seeing exactly why everyone has to be careful about how much of their life that they share.
Again, just the fact that you are pursuing this should put a fear of you in any poster on this blog.
If he is looking for me, he is looking for all of you.
By GOB
July 22, 2008 2:50 PM | Link to this
Archie - I wasnt making a “direct comparison to americans and gas and the behavior of a crackhead.” The behavior of a crackhead has nothing to do with the discussion about the impact of American dependece on oil, beyond the fact that there are now more people willing to steal gas than before.
Because of the rise in gas prices, people are sacrificing social activities in order to have money to buy gas. That is what I was responding to. Living within your means requires lifestyle changes, like sacrificing social activities, when the cost of gas, food, etc. increase.
There are specific criteria used for crack addiction.
Well, one big one anyway…being addicted to crack.
By Retardo-Rama
July 22, 2008 2:54 PM | Link to this
I call myself “Truth” because “Consumed with Bitterness” is too long to type over and over all day every day while I wank myself. I need to feel powerful, so I latch on to those who actually have power and defend their actions, right or wrong, legal or illegal, all day every day until my prize comes in the mail, which I check every afternoon at three, when I venture into the sunshine for the first time. In fact, I bet it will arrive today! Please excuse me while I find my slippers and change into a fresh pair of boxers. The button fell off my flap earlier while I was explaining what spineless cowards the Democrats are. Don’t go away! I’ll set you brainless idiots straight when I get back.
By JokesOn
July 22, 2008 2:56 PM | Link to this
Archie,
I signed a petition to support the new energy ideas but gas does not have to be 8 to 10 dollars/gallon to make a point with me and it’s crazy to say that it does.
As much as it sucks, if it does not have to be $8-$10/gallon for change to occur, why did it take a hike to bring change?
You cannot argue what has happened as a result: Car companies are scrapping the huge guzzler models, people who gave their suv a high rating 3-4 years ago now rate it in the “unsatisfactory” zone, people are conserving their gas consumption, companies are looking and finding new technologies…etc.
I do not like that humans still have such a problem with issues that involve longevity, but they do. Studies have proven that if there are no immediate consequences, people will not perform. This drives that knowledge home. And on top of all that are the people like Truth that, even after the ink is old and dry, deny there is a problem and all we need is more petrol.
By JokesOn
July 22, 2008 2:59 PM | Link to this
I have done nothing that I am ashamed of.
That is the scariest part. You actually believe that.
By Retardo-Rama
Opps. There I go again. Posting under other names! Too funny.
By Truth
July 22, 2008 3:01 PM | Link to this
Archie
We need to open negotiations with the oil companies. To hell with negotiating with other countries. They want things. We need things.
The oil companies hold a lot of cards, but so does the government. They don’t have to be regulated or under the complete control of the government, but they need a profit cap, much like publcally owned utilities have. We negotiate distribution. Native oil must not leave our shores, unless we have a surplus. We negotiate environmental protection rules Workers rights. We are talking trillions of dollars and we could demand that a substantial amount of money be invested in research into alternatives, cleaning up coal, anything is possible, IF we negotiate with the oil companies.
We make the negotiations a public broadcast and demand that NO money changes hands before or during the hearings… .
and a rainbow.
and all the women have to dress sexy
and we are all movie stars …
And I get a new Ferrari 420 California. (It’s only right)
While I was dreaming, I thought I would throw in a couple of other things.
By Truth
July 22, 2008 3:14 PM | Link to this
And now he starts this.
This has been a bad day for you. You showed everyone that you are a creepy stalker, exactly the person that everyone should run from. I didn’t do this. You did.
And now these magic people suddenly appear that say all the things that you don’t have the spine to say, using your real nik.
I’m not sure what is wrong with you. My kids were never like this, so it’s not like you are acting childish. But it is certain that your logic is flawed.
You are hurting yourself.
You are saying nothing original about me. We have heard the same rants from your magic bots for ten months.
I would be interested in seeing what you are talking about on flicker. I guess I shouldn’t have pointed out the stalking thing so early that it scared you away from the subject.
By JokesOn
July 22, 2008 3:14 PM | Link to this
They don’t have to be regulated or under the complete control of the government, but they need a profit cap, much like publcally owned utilities have.
It is too bad that Truth sounds smartest when he is being sarcastic;)
By Truth
July 22, 2008 3:23 PM | Link to this
i’ll bet jokeson won’t give me a link to the site he was talking about because he has been sending nasty notes to this poor guy who has no idea who he is. LOL!! Come on jokesy. Give us the link!!!
By Mara
July 22, 2008 3:26 PM | Link to this
GOB - I am agnostic and dont believe christianity is correct, but if Jesus were to descend from the heavens in my back yard and start with the miracles, I would be willing to admit I was wrong.
LOL!! Well put.
truth - the fallacy is that war proponents like to stir Afghanistan and Iraq into one big pot, when in reality they have ALWAYS been two different issues. You deliberately overlook the fact that the operations in Afghanistan have been supported all along by a broad spectrum of Americans. We know why we’re there. We know what “victory” will look like. And we are still willing to have our children fighting there.
Then there’s Iraq. First it was because Saddam (heart) Osama. Then it was because Saddam had WMD. Then it was because he wanted WMD’s. Then it was because Al Qaeda had sprouted up in Iraq. Then it was because the Iraqi people deserved freedom. Now, only now when their elected president suggests our welcome is getting worn…it turns out that it was about “protecting American interests” in the oil fields after all.
Most Americans are still willing to fight Al Qaeda and the Taliban. We’re willing to continue support of the Afghan people, their nation, and their economy. Because while doing a job that needed to be done (rooting out the islamists) we broke their nation. Iraq, on the other hand, is nothing more (or less) than the usurpation of the oil fields.
One war is just and right; the other is not.
By JokesOn
July 22, 2008 3:29 PM | Link to this
I would be interested in seeing what you are talking about on flicker. I guess I shouldn’t have pointed out the stalking thing so early that it scared you away from the subject.
No. I just won’t cross the line of publishing your full name. I am happy knowing how dismal your acquaintances opinion of you are; not unlike the people on the blog.
Faulty logic? I am here and someone snipes you = it must be me. I am gone all day yesterday. You get sniped = it must be me.
Sounds like it is you that has the creepy issues. i simply did a quick search to see if you were stoopid enough to post under the names you have here, and voila! I am happy just knowing you are hated as much other places (they call you arrogant there too) as you are here. Pretty soon you will accuse me of being the snipers at the other blogs and on flickr. LOL
By JokesOn
July 22, 2008 3:32 PM | Link to this
i’ll bet jokeson won’t give me a link to the site he was talking about because he has been sending nasty notes to this poor guy who has no idea who he is. LOL!! Come on jokesy. Give us the link!!!
I wouldn’t do that our of morality and legality. You would sh!t your pants and call a lawyer.
I will simply peruse your amateur work and read the insults.
By Alpine Ninja (Formaly the Artist known as Truth)
July 22, 2008 3:45 PM | Link to this
I found it!!!!!
http://flickr.com/search/?q=Brian+W.&page=2
This is Brian W. AKA Alpine Ninja.
You have done it!! You have exposed me!!
Woe is me, woe is me!! I will lose my Ninja certification over this for sure. And I can kiss the Alpine part of this goodbye. I love a good snowball. That’s why i live here in Atlanta.
Seriously, man. Tell me who I am. It’s something I really need to know. Post the last letter in my last name. The third letter in my first name. Just give me sign, man. I gotta know who I am.
It’s not a copyright issue to post a link, anyway. It’s bad enough that you brought it up, but to try and slink away just makes you look really bad.
I’ll bet you have been sending him nasty messages, haven’t you?
By Alpine Ninja (Formaly the Artist known as Truth)
July 22, 2008 3:54 PM | Link to this
The Slimy One
Wow, man. Could you look any worse? What a slimy thing to do. LOL!!
Morality and legality? You have no morality and there is no legality. It’s a link to a public site from another public site.
I’ll keep looking.
I have to say that I have laughed a lot today. It was like watching someone shoot them self in slow motion. LOL!!
Come on man, shut me up. Give me a link. You know that I will never drop this.
I’m the Alpine ninja. LOL!!!
By RF
July 22, 2008 4:16 PM | Link to this
We dont live in a vacuum where once a decision has been made we just move on and never look at it again. Its ok to change your mind when new evidence is presented. Really, it is
GOB- thanks for putting my thoughts into words!! Good post.
Truth- if the democrats are to blame currently, then we have to look back and realize who created the mess they’re not fixing. We can’t blame the dems any more than we can the repubs for the economy, Iraq, and oil prices. Yep, history started before 2001, but events since then are what bothers me now. I have to wonder what my kids will have when they enter the adult world, and BOTH PARTIES ARE TO BLAME RIGHT NOW. I’m not blindly defending liberals or conservatives either one. I say boot ‘em all out and start over.
By JokesOn
July 22, 2008 4:18 PM | Link to this
Come on man, shut me up. Give me a link. You know that I will never drop this.
I would love to believe anything could shut you up, but we ALL know that is a pipe dream. Even when you have been totally annihilated on this blog, you deny someone posted the killing blow - and it is right there in b&w!
Naw. I will simply laugh at your feeble attempts on flickr and the harsh critiques you receive.
no legality.
A: You have written to ajc because we played too rough for you already. dish it out but cannot take it is your motto.
B: You obviously do not keep up with current events. from blogs to the myspace fiasco, people have been jailed for disclosing info in a public place if not done in good faith.
You have no morality
Coming from the guy who wants to send kids to war because “they are already paid for.”
By Archie
July 22, 2008 4:32 PM | Link to this
Hello JokesOn,”You cannot argue what has happened as a result: Car companies are scrapping the huge guzzler models, people who gave their suv a high rating 3-4 years ago now rate it in the “unsatisfactory” zone,” It was not smart to buy a car that gets 10 miles/gallon in the first place. My point was and still is that addiction is the wrong word to use to describe america and the gas problem. Remember I mentioned an article by Thomas Friedman in which he used the term crack addiction as an analogy and I still think that’s stupid. I don’t own an SUV and neither does my brother,brother-in-law,father-in-law,sister-in-laws,mother,father or my best friend. My aunt does own an SUV but everyone has a unique situation. I do not believe americans are addicted to gas, now americans maybe addicted to a lifestyle but specifically gas, no way! There are still people buying Hummers, I mean I don’t think Truth is denying there is a problem but he has a different solution than you.
Because of the rise in gas prices, people are sacrificing social activities in order to have money to buy gas That is true but that doesn’t mean people were addicted to gas in the first place. I only listed that criteria for addiction because of limited space and the fact that I am supposed to be working. When you look at all criteria to use the term addiction, it doesn’t justify using that word to describe americans and gas.
By JokesOn
July 22, 2008 4:39 PM | Link to this
RF
I’m not blindly defending liberals or conservatives either one. I say boot ‘em all out and start over.
If you read the whole discussion regarding the New Orleans tragedy, you will see that applying blame to all parties involved is not acceptable to Truth. The repubs should not receive any blame ever, not to mention the holy greatness himself, GWB.
Truth has bought the whole “with us or against us” hook line and sinker.
By JokesOn
July 22, 2008 4:43 PM | Link to this
It was not smart to buy a car that gets 10 miles/gallon in the first place. My point was and still is that addiction is the wrong word to use to describe america and the gas problem.
I agree that there are better analogies to be made. If your main point is using crack addiction as a baseline, we agree. That is just to make it sound nastier.
Yet, I also think the US is pretty whiny about something that most of the rest of the civilized world has dealt with (successfully I might add) for years.
By Alpine Ninja (Formaly the Artist known as Truth)
July 22, 2008 4:46 PM | Link to this
Nasty Slimy One
Suit yourself pal. You can blabber all you want, but you told everybody on here today that you were one of those sick, creepy internet stalkers.
If i knew who the guy was, I would go and encourage him, no matter how bad his work was. I guess that is the difference between the two of us.
So let’s review our lessons for today:
Read them out-loud several times so you can remember them:
We mustn’t stalk people over the internet.
Even if it takes just a few minutes to do, it is still stalking and it is CREEPY and wrong.
Other people do not approve of stalking so even though you might think it appropriate to brag about your creepy activity, other people just might think less of you when you brag about stalking others.
As much as thinking is a foreign activity to you, it would be a good thing to ask a caretaker or perhaps a family member to read your posts where you plan to brag about really sick activity before you post them
they are small lessons, but if you can print them out and take them home, tomorrow is a new day.
But don’t ever forget The Alpine Ninja is everywhere.
By Archie
July 22, 2008 4:59 PM | Link to this
I agree that there are better analogies to be made. If your main point is using crack addiction as a baseline, we agree. That is just to make it sound nastier You got it JokesON!!! As for americans being whiny that may be true but some of us get 1 or 2 percent increases as government workers so we can’t support the philosophically high gas prices in order for us to change. I think there’s a better way. No disagreement from me that things do need to change in the transportation department. Thanks for getting it JokesOn! and thanks to Mara for disagreeing on what I posted not just disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing. If I don’t get back this week y’all have a good one but if I do get back I will argue a different topic.
By JokesOn
July 22, 2008 4:59 PM | Link to this
You are freaking out dude.
Stop the frothing and if you cannot take it, do not dish it out. That is a third grade lesson.
Other people do not approve of stalking so even though you might think it appropriate to brag about your creepy activity, other people just might think less of you when you brag about stalking others.
Hmmm. You cheer on chuck for outing dog, yet find my behavior sketchy? You like to visit unregulated porn sites, but think a quick Google is inappropriate? You are the king of hypocrites.
If i knew who the guy was, I would go and encourage him, no matter how bad his work was. I guess that is the difference between the two of us.
Yes, because you are such the empathetic and constructive critic! Jesus, that got me laughing! Holy cow, that is a good one!
By JokesOn
July 23, 2008 8:47 AM | Link to this
As for americans being whiny that may be true but some of us get 1 or 2 percent increases as government workers so we can’t support the philosophically high gas prices in order for us to change.
I understand and agree that it is difficult. The annual increases (can’t call them raises!) when I worked for both the state gov and federal gov was always lower that the inflation rate for that year. Add to that insurance premiums increasing and coverage decreasing and it is no wonder that many gov employees are ill motivated.
That said, I still think what you and many others are going through are necessary growing pains that are nearly inevitable. For if the price of gas dropped back to $2/gallon, the push for better means would simply stop, and the previous norm would return along with the suv’s etc.
So, the question I feel is on every body’s plate is do you want to take a medium size pill now or take a even larger nastier pill later.
By USinUK
July 23, 2008 8:48 AM | Link to this
AGF -
sorry about the delay … (blame it on the GMT) … have addressed your way earlier post below:
I am only stating the FACT that the media has purposely concentrated on the bad aspects of the war without fairly reporting on the successes.
sorry if the article I linked to was unclear - I wasn’t saying that the guy in your original article was only talking with grunts, that wasn’t my point. what I was saying is that they can talk about what they see everyday, they can’t really speak to the bigger picture. as for the media not talking about the “successes”, they have reported on the downturn in violence - however, loss of life (especially when it’s something like a car bomb in front of a police recruiting station) is news.
the fact is, we only get a tiny percentage of the BAD news going on in iraq - do you know how many oil pipelines have been sabotaged? how many oil deliveries to the military have been attacked? do you know how many attacks to the Green Zone there have been? I know about the first two only because I hear about them via an investments vehicle - the third one I know because of a friend who was stationed there.
With that being said, I would like to offer the following counters to both of your posts: The foot soldiers and their commanders on the ground ARE the best ones to judge the state of the war. I have worked as a mid-level manager for a fortune 500 company. The CEO’s were the LAST ones to know the success or failures of their major initiatives. That information was collected from the grunts on the floor, analyzed by managers like myself, and then reported to the top management. They didn’t know what was going on until we told them.
But I’ll bet you couldn’t have talked to your company’s profitability, your company’s debt-to-earnings ratio, your company’s overall marketshare. You actually made my point for me - yes, you can talk about a major initiative, but you can’t talk about the overall running of the company.
I have personally talked to mutiple army and air force personel, some of whom were captains and majors and all of whom have served at least two tours in Iraq. They have all said the same thing - it isn’t nearly as bad in Iraq as the media reports.
I have done the same - all of whom said the media doesn’t show the half of it.
By Mara
July 23, 2008 9:02 AM | Link to this
Stalkers are the lowest form of humans.
By kimberly
July 23, 2008 9:05 AM | Link to this
You are absolutely right Mara, however I did follow an ex-girlfriend one time to see where she worked.
By USinUK
July 23, 2008 9:08 AM | Link to this
Food for fodder, you mean the less you follow someone the more inept you are at bringing closure to the mix?
By JokesOn
July 23, 2008 9:11 AM | Link to this
You remind me of Mara and her Neo-politico backwash.
By JokesOn
July 23, 2008 9:12 AM | Link to this
Mara,
Stalkers are the lowest form of humans.
Curious. You find my quick search on Truth in the stalker category? Any opinion if fine by me since my mind is already set on where the lines are.
By USinUK
July 23, 2008 9:16 AM | Link to this
Stalkers are the lowest form of humans.
with clones being a close second: Food for fodder, you mean the less you follow someone the more inept you are at bringing closure to the mix?
just so you know - that wasn’t me …
By Alpine Ninja (Formaly the Artist known as Truth)
July 23, 2008 9:23 AM | Link to this
The Creepy Joke
So DICK Tracy, So how many websites did you rifle through last night trying to find me, pervert? I can’t believe you have the spine to show your face here after what you admitted to doing yesterday.
Did you send some more nasty notes to a stranger because you thought he was me? How much time did you spend trying to find other posters, DICK?
BTW. You are a liar. I never cheered on Chuck when he “outed” anyone.
it’s all you, DICK. You are the troll. You are the one that is spending your nights trying to find something out about other posters so you can post it openly. In other words, you are not to be trusted and the scum of the earth.
I have said it all along. You are a liar and a troll and I will not let you forget it.
USinUK
Did you read this from yesterday:
If you want to start the nastiness, do not cry again. Only a absolutely and complete dolt would post on boards using their real flicker address Brian W.
Nope. Took me less than a commercial break. I know it is yours too, because the info on your “haunted house” trip. Your PS touch-ups suck though. Never over-work a photo…even a bad one.
This was Joke bragging about his harrassing a poster on Flickr because he is out cruising the internet looking for me.
Your buddy, the big stupid joke is an internet troll. He stalks people over the internet.
I wonder how much time he has spent finding other posters on here? I wonder how much time he has spent trying to find you.
All his bragging about his ability with computers turns out to be a little creepy doesn’t it?
By Alpine Ninja (Formaly the Artist known as Truth)
July 23, 2008 9:33 AM | Link to this
Mara
He don’t get it. Internet trolls rarely do.
it is people like him that make this such a dangerous place. He preaches about how this administration doesn’t respect privacy and then he is just dumb enough to admit it.
The worst part is he is obviously harassing some poor guy on flickr because he thinks he is me.
I spent a lot of time last night trying to find that guy on Flicker and flickr, but there is no Brian W. I can’t imagine what he has said to that guy.
EVERYONE TAKE NOTICE:
JokesOn is an internet troll. He will be using his abilities with computers to try and hurt you.
He admitted doing it yesterday and he apparently does it so much, that he doesn’t see a problem.
By Please
July 23, 2008 9:40 AM | Link to this
Truth and JokesOn - Why not just exchange email addresses so the rest of us dont have to be subjected to this everyday…
By JokesOn
July 23, 2008 9:41 AM | Link to this
So DICK Tracy, So how many websites did you rifle through last night trying to find me, pervert? I can’t believe you have the spine to show your face here after what you admitted to doing yesterday.
T minus 10 minutes to implosion….poor fool;)
This was Joke bragging about his harrassing a poster on Flickr because he is out cruising the internet looking for me.
You wish! I would not send you an email for so many reasons that it is pure stupidity to go into.
I wonder how much time he has spent finding other posters on here? I wonder how much time he has spent trying to find you.
Taken right out of GWBs hand book: If everyone hates you, use fear to coerce the backing of your premise.
I know you cannot read what is posted. You only read what you want to see in the world. If one cannot convince you with a direct link on a topic, talking rational sense to you is unattainable. Gonna cry some more?
By USinUK
July 23, 2008 9:41 AM | Link to this
Truth -
gotta say - not really that jazzed about the new moniker … Alpine Ninja sounds like some kind of scent - a blend of pine forest and ginger, maybe. why not just stick with Truth
otherwise, I’m playing nice in the sandbox and minding my own
By JokesOn
July 23, 2008 9:46 AM | Link to this
The worst part is he is obviously harassing some poor guy on flickr because he thinks he is me.
Proof? Show me proof. I have not sent you any email to your flickr acct and that is obvious because you would be ranting about that.
I spent a lot of time last night trying to find that guy on Flicker and flickr, but there is no Brian W. I can’t imagine what he has said to that guy.
So, he does or does not exist? Pick one…oh yeah you cannot because then you have no point. Or….did I actually find your flickr acct and you are just really p** because I now know all your lies?
no worries though. your bs is safe with me. I find it hilarious that you are viewed as such a pompous a$$ everywhere.
By NYer
July 23, 2008 9:46 AM | Link to this
JokesOn and Truth,
Can you guys drop it? Seriously, it’s annoying to have to gloss over your posts directing more drivel at each other. Most of the times your posts contain at least something of interest, but these attacks at each other about stalking and personal stuff is pointless. For the sake of good order, please stop it.
By JokesOn
July 23, 2008 9:51 AM | Link to this
Truth and JokesOn - Why not just exchange email addresses so the rest of us dont have to be subjected to this everyday…**
Hey. I have already started anew with him at the beginning of each week for 3 weeks and his first replies always include name calling and insults.
Get him to act somewhat civilized and I will stop resorting to baiting the fool, which happens after his childish name calling. Otherwise, he gets what he gives…
By JokesOn
July 23, 2008 9:57 AM | Link to this
Can you guys drop it? Seriously, it’s annoying to have to gloss over your posts directing more drivel at each other. Most of the times your posts contain at least something of interest, but these attacks at each other about stalking and personal stuff is pointless. For the sake of good order, please stop it.
I agree.
No more name calling and insults, Truth? Balls in your court.
By USinUK
July 23, 2008 9:58 AM | Link to this
and the rest of us are stuck in the crossfire
By NoBuffoonsAllowed
July 23, 2008 10:03 AM | Link to this
There are actually posters here who have ‘forensic friends’ and state they can track down anyone who posts here.
They actually cannot, but to them, their own bs sounds ‘official’.
By JokesOn
July 23, 2008 10:05 AM | Link to this
and the rest of us are stuck in the crossfire
And I do apologize and regret that.
By DaveD
July 23, 2008 10:08 AM | Link to this
If you believe that the 10 commandments (only 2 of which are actual LAWS in our nation) should be displayed than you should have NO PROBLEM with the Quoran on the Torah being displayed… or… having someone build a statue of Mohammud in a public place…or at the entrance to a court room. There is no place for a government endorse,ent of ANY religion as they all show the very weakness of mankind. They ALL share one thing: a belief that we get to live forever. That when you die…there’s ANOTHER life waiting for you…one that’s BETTER than this one. get over it. When you die…it will be JUSt like it was before you were born…BLANK…. and guess what? Blank?…it’s kinda peaceful… all things living die, both plant and animal. Stars die, our planet will one day die… but it’s painless… why are you all so friggin’ afraid of death? That is what ALL religions are about…fear of the unknown and a fear of death (which is the very one thing that we never know until we become lifeless)….
Start caring about THIS world and don’t wait for a next one…one that does not exsist…one that is a fable…
By Alpine Ninja (Formaly the Artist known as Truth)
July 23, 2008 10:22 AM | Link to this
NYer
You may notice who posted the first post about Brian W. What would you have done?
JokesOn is a troll. He’s wanting to make nice because I am not the only person who thinks that stalking people on the internet is for perverts and trolls.
He starts this sht, then when i come back at him, he runs and cries that he wants a truce. In the meanwhile, he is stalking me and others on the internet. He then comes on here talking about my “amateurish” work. If we were face to face, my only problem would be figuring out how to get my foot out of his fat as.
Trolls do what trolls do. JokesOn is a troll.
Rest assured that if he did it to me, he will do it to you, and that includes you, USinUK.
BTW. The new name comes from your lying fat friend, the internet troll. When he tried to claim that I was Brian W., I went to Flickr and Brian W. calls himself the Alpine Ninja.
He won’t post anything else about Brian W. because he knows that the nasty letters that he has sent to this poor stranger would be re-posted here.
By Archie
July 23, 2008 10:26 AM | Link to this
For if the price of gas dropped back to $2/gallon, the push for better means would simply stop, and the previous norm would return along with the suv’s etc. I think if it were back to 2/gallon you still could get changes another way. Let me say this cd prices have dropped because technology changed. People bought more cd’s when the price was high because they simply wanted to but now that you have all these legal file-sharing places and illegal bootleg cd’s. My point is that technology and price force change moreso than just a high price alone. Record companies still don’t get it. Everyone has a different view as to what’s a fair price for any product and people act according that view and how much money they have to spend. Gouging people to force change makes them resentful not progressive.
By Mara, the 1 & only
July 23, 2008 10:28 AM | Link to this
Finally got a chance to drop in and BEHOLD!!! I have been posting for over an hour!
IOW, whomever has been posting as Mara is NOT me. Just sayin’…
By GOB
July 23, 2008 10:29 AM | Link to this
I am the only one that feels like they are in the middle of two high school girls fighting? Each one trying to convince anyone that will listen that it is the other person’s fault?
Why not just ignore each other and be done with it.
By Alpine Ninja (Formaly the Artist known as Truth)
July 23, 2008 10:29 AM | Link to this
Buffoon
There are actually posters here who have ‘forensic friends’ and state they can track down anyone who posts here. They actually cannot, but to them, their own bs sounds ‘official’.
So you know what they can and can’t do. I see.
is there anything about stalking others on the internet that you do not know?
By JokesOn
July 23, 2008 10:38 AM | Link to this
he runs and cries that he wants a truce.
Just trying to respect the others on the blog, are you able to do that also?
Everyone is waiting….
By Alpine Ninja (Formaly the Artist known as Truth)
July 23, 2008 10:43 AM | Link to this
GOB
How’s those Reading is FUNdamental classes coming? Read the posts. I was told yesterday that I was being stalked on the internet, by the person stalking me. What would you do?
I think he is a fat slab and a loser so his opinion of me means nothing. But stalking is serious sh*t. This is not a small thing. he would have been immediately barred from most sites for that.
I don’t stalk any one. I come here to discuss issues. I have discussed them with you. But pardon me for not standing and letting some half wit brag about stalking me.
By Mara
July 23, 2008 10:46 AM | Link to this
Trolls do what trolls do.
Pot - you’re BLACK.
Kettle - No I’m not! YOU’RE black.
Pot - Huh-uh, You are!
Kettle - no I’m not, YOU are.
Pot - you are.
Kettle - you are.
Pot - nuh-uh. You are…
GOB - am I the only one that feels like they are in the middle of two high school girls fighting?
you’re not alone, bruddah.
By Alpine Ninja (Formaly the Artist known as Truth)
July 23, 2008 10:47 AM | Link to this
Fat, Disgusting Joke Troll
No one is waiting but you, troll.
Tell you what, you post who this Brain W. guy is so i can go tell him why he has benn harassed and I’ll drop it. if you want this to go away, we need to fix what you have done.
Everyone is waiting, troll.
By JokesOn
July 23, 2008 10:47 AM | Link to this
Archie,
*I think if it were back to 2/gallon you still could get changes another way. *
I agree it could happen, but not on its own. Just think, GWB signed into legistlation tax break for SUVs….
It took this level of price increase to get people thinking, and it is not the first time! We have been through this all before with nothing seemingly learned. Carter implemented goals for MPG, and after gas was plentiful again, Reagan removed those benchmarks.
given the past actions, I do not see the real possibility that people/governments/businesses will act on their own.
By Alpine Ninja (Formaly the Artist known as Truth)
July 23, 2008 11:03 AM | Link to this
Mara
JokesOn had admitted to being a troll. You may think that is OK, as long as he is stalking a conservative. I don’t think it is ever OK and if you found out that he had been stalking you, I would be all over him, not because of your politics, but because it is wrong.
I guess we think differently. (Thank God)
By JokesOn
July 23, 2008 11:17 AM | Link to this
Come on Truth…
Lets see how big you can be and drop the insults and name calling.
We can still spar. You just won’t be able to be uncivilized.
My chip has been thrown in…
As for your Flickr bs (Tell you what, you post who this Brain W. guy is so i can go tell him why he has benn harassed and I’ll drop it. if you want this to go away, we need to fix what you have done.): You know I have not sent you anything in flickr. Everyone knows, because you would have been all over it.
We also know that it is yours. What else could explain the nerve I hit and your posts regarding it or that all the info matches up with what you have stated;)
As for being a Troll. Bzzz - wrong. I bait YOU after the name calling and see you get all frothy. It was you on your first, and subsequent weeks, that admitted your only purpose here was to disturb the bloggers.
Now, back to the topic: You gonna step up and be respectable? you able to do that?
By Mara
July 23, 2008 11:20 AM | Link to this
NameChanger, if googling a screen-name or looking through the internet to see previous comments or scan a blog “profile” page is considered “stalking” then I’ve “stalked” a whole heap o’ people. Get back to me when you find out he pulled your house up on GoogleStreet or sent a virus to your computer to track your browsing habits. THEN I’ll give some credence to your “stalker” charge…
and considering that the definition of “troll” (in this context) is “someone who posts controversial and usually irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum or chat room, with the intention of baiting other users into an emotional response or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion” I would suggest you look in the mirror before you start flinging labels around.
By JokesOn
July 23, 2008 11:21 AM | Link to this
Mara,
You remind me of Mara and her Neo-politico backwash.
That was not my post either. Seems someone is having fun today posting as multiple users.
By Alpine Ninja (Formaly the Artist known as Truth)
July 23, 2008 11:33 AM | Link to this
IS THIS OK WITH EVERYONE?
So, he does or does not exist? Pick one…oh yeah you cannot because then you have no point. Or….did I actually find your flickr acct and you are just really p because I now know all your lies?**
This is what JokesOn posted TODAY. Still bragging about stalking others.
I don’t have a flickr account. If I did, and he had found it, I would be reposting the insults he had posted. He is harassing a stranger because he thinks he is me.
So he is not only a troll, he is an incompetent troll.
By JokesOn
July 23, 2008 11:37 AM | Link to this
Hey all,
As you know I am opinionated, but I think you could also attest to TOJ/Truth/(put condescending name here) starting crap with everyone that does not agree with him. the more cornered he gets in a debate, the more he threatens to get crass while referring to you as dimwit and such.
I will, out of respect of you all, not engage him in name calling but will still post to any posts by people, including him, on the blog with my opinions/facts.
I have disagreed with you all, at some point or another, and been cordial. The only exception would be a brief altercation with Jack (which we both made amends on) and Whiley.
By Alpine Ninja (Formaly the Artist known as Truth)
July 23, 2008 11:39 AM | Link to this
Mara
You ignored the fact that he has targeted an innocent poster on Flickr thing it was me. He’s still bragging about it:
As for your Flickr bs (Tell you what, you post who this Brain W. guy is so i can go tell him why he has benn harassed and I’ll drop it. if you want this to go away, we need to fix what you have done.): You know I have not sent you anything in flickr. Everyone knows, because you would have been all over it.
We also know that it is yours. What else could explain the nerve I hit and your posts regarding it or that all the info matches up with what you have stated;)
Your problem is that I am a conservative. You sided with him when he said that the porn industry does not exploit women and children. is there a limit to what you won’t support or are you just as bad as he is?
By JokesOn
July 23, 2008 11:41 AM | Link to this
Truth,
Lets see how big you can be…
Are you able? If so, I will still be here.
By Alpine Ninja (Formaly the Artist known as Truth)
July 23, 2008 11:42 AM | Link to this
Mara
Just for fun, google the word truth. See anything about a poster named Brain W? If you think all he is doing is googling screen names you aren’t paying attention.
By Alpine Ninja (Formaly the Artist known as Truth)
July 23, 2008 11:48 AM | Link to this
TrollsOn
It was you on your first, and subsequent weeks, that admitted your only purpose here was to disturb the bloggers.
You are a liar. I have let you blather on about things you have claimed I have said and I won’t do it any more.
You are a liar. You lied about this and you lied when you said that I encouraged chuck to out Dog.
You are a liar. You could easily post what i had said by looking through the archives. I’ve challenged you to do that before but you apparently STILL haven’t grown a spine.
Liar and incompetent troll.
Just stating facts.
By GOB
July 23, 2008 11:54 AM | Link to this
It seems as if some people are trying to finish what DOG started awhile back and totally kill this blog. Fun times.
By USinUK
July 23, 2008 11:55 AM | Link to this
Mara and Jokes -
That was not my post either. Seems someone is having fun today posting as multiple users.
it looks like all 3 of us have been cloned today …
By Alpine Ninja (Formaly the Artist known as Truth)
July 23, 2008 11:56 AM | Link to this
TrollsOn
Don’t preach at me, you hypocritical lying troll. Post the site of Brain W. If you are sure it is me, post it. I am giving you permission right now. This post can’t be erased or altered by me.
You have my complete approval and encouragement to post the site. In fact, I demand that you do it. If I tried to sue you, you could bring up this post and actually prove what i had said.
Your move, troll. It is not illegal to post from one public forum to another and I have given you permission.
Post “MY” fllickr site and this will go away. Until you do, expect to be exposed as a troll.
By JokesOn
July 23, 2008 11:56 AM | Link to this
You are a liar. I have let you blather on about things you have claimed I have said and I won’t do it any more.
Not continuing with you…too much spittle coming through the lines.
If you are ever able to debate without name calling and insult….well you know…
By DaveD
July 23, 2008 12:01 PM | Link to this
Show me something…show me “evidence” that a god exsists…ANY god…
even a friggin’ tree carved out somewhere in Africa… or a Greek god…
when you show me “scientific proof”… I’ll shut up…until then… don’t tell me that Santa and the Easter Bunny are fake…yet this man/woman up in the clouds is real….
make them part Lake Lanier….well..have them do it sometime before that “rapture” your type has been waiting for for a few thousand years…you know…when they thought it thundered b/c YOUR god was p**…
By Alpine Ninja (Formaly the Artist known as Truth)
July 23, 2008 12:08 PM | Link to this
TrollOn
Run away coward.
I start calling for you to prove that string of lies that you continue to post and you run away like the spineless coward that you are.
Debate? You don’t know nthe meaning of the wortd.
You are a liar and a troll. I PROVED it yesterday and I have already proved it again today.
You should run away and hide.
By USinUK
July 23, 2008 12:08 PM | Link to this
Am I the only one who misreads Do public displays of Ten Commandments require equal displays from other religious groups?
as
“Do public displays of AFFECTION require equal displays from other religious groups?”
and, am I alone in thinking that maybe the world would be a better place if it did? Jews, Hindus, Muslems, Christians, Wiccans, Pastafarians all coming together for a public display of affection …
By Mara
July 23, 2008 12:11 PM | Link to this
Your problem is that I am a conservative.
There’s no point in talking to you. You are the very epitome of “troll” and yet you persist in believing nobody respects you simply because you’re a conservative.
When you finally come to terms with the idea that people might not agree with you simply because they disagree with the message (or how the message is presented) and not necessarily because the messenger is “conservative”, then there might be some point in engaging with you.
Until that happens, I give up.
By Alpine Ninja (Formaly the Artist known as Truth)
July 23, 2008 12:13 PM | Link to this
DaveD
Show me something…show me “evidence” that a god exsists…ANY god
My God is the natural forces of this earth. And I believe if you look past the dogma of most religions, that is also their God.
Prove it to you? Got any kids?
By Alpine Ninja (Formaly the Artist known as Truth)
July 23, 2008 12:31 PM | Link to this
Mara
So because I don’t think like you, I am a troll. LOL!!
Say what you want, but I would need to be the dumbest person in the world to post under your name, when i know that you are going to be here. Now who is just stupid enough to try something like that. Hmmmm. Who could it be.?
Your mind has been made up about me since my first post. Not that it matters. but now, you are defending him again. I guess his penchant for believing that it is OK to videotape children (17 year old girls) having sex wasn’t quite enough. His openly bragging about stalking others posters wasn’t enough.
What’s it going to take, Mara? You sound like the classic neighbor who says: He was always quiet. Never bothered anyone. This is all a big shock to me. i thought he was fine. Of course you would add: And he was a Democrat.
By Mara
July 23, 2008 12:35 PM | Link to this
USinUK - Jews, Hindus, Muslems, Christians, Wiccans, Pastafarians all coming together for a public display of affection…
one big group hug should do the trick :^)
Come on people now, smile on each other
Everybody get together
Try to love one another, right now
If you hear the song we sing
You will understand
You hold the key to love and fear
All in your trembling hand
Just one key unlocks them both
It’s there at your command
Come on people now, smile on each other
Everybody get together
Try to love one another, right now
By HeeHee
July 23, 2008 12:35 PM | Link to this
Poor Truth got the double Whammy.
Persecution for being a conservative, Persecution for being Christian.
of course it has nothing to do with Personality.
By DaveD
July 23, 2008 12:41 PM | Link to this
nope…. more kids…are the very LAST thing this world needs… why do those that preach so very hard against abortion…adopt the least kids…
it’s a FACT…that in the US…the most that actually ADOPT kids…are liberals…
we don’t need to bring MORE children into this world when are still ones that need homes…
we don’t need to add MORE PEOPLE to the planet when there are kids waiting for homes… adding more people…only makes the world…this sick world…get sicker..
you won’t see it…what i say..
yet it’s the truth…
go adopt a child…don’t CREATE another…
and if you are AGAINST abortion..
it’s YOU who should be adopting most of all…
yet you won’t…
you’ll just add more lives unneeded….
By USinUK
July 23, 2008 12:44 PM | Link to this
I think this message board needs to become a WATB-free environment.
If you don’t know what WATB is, Google it.
If you don’t want to abide by that simple guideline, go elsewhere. The rest of us are just trying to have a civil debate. And, yes, I do mean DEBATE - as in, we have opposing opinions and support our arguments with facts. I don’t want a kumbaya singalong any more than any other participant here.
GAH.
By Alpine Ninja (Formaly the Artist known as Truth)
July 23, 2008 12:46 PM | Link to this
HeeHee (Magical bot that always shows up when the Big troll is having a problem with Truth)
Exactly how stupid are you? I think we are finding out who has been posting under other niks.
By Dictionary
July 23, 2008 12:50 PM | Link to this
definition 2 it is:
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=WATB
By USinUK
July 23, 2008 12:54 PM | Link to this
Mara -
one big group hug should do the trick :^)
I’m with ya, sistah - “they” should put us in charge - it’d be a happier world.
By Mara
July 23, 2008 12:54 PM | Link to this
W.A.T.B.
ROTFLMFAO!!!
By Truth
July 23, 2008 1:05 PM | Link to this
dadD
Great sermon, man.
So when can we expect you to donate your home? Talk is cheap.
I had two kids that are good people and donating members of society. I should have three, but certain laws were not in place to protect my first child.
When you start getting into “Liberals do this and Conservatives do that”, you are walking on thin ice. What are the statistics about which group offers more children to be adopted? That seems to be the real problem with adoption. It’s used as postnatal birth control.
Be careful how you wag your finger, especially when you support the party that has supported the slaughter of 1/10th of our population.
You wanted to be shown God. I would say to take a look at your hand. Look out the window. Go to the emergency room and check out the EKG of a 90 year old person. That piece of weak muscle tissue has worked day and night for 90 years.
Nature is not only evidence of God, it is God. How you see or don’t see God is your own business as how I see it is mine. If you think all this is just the result of a bunch of chemical reactions, that is cool. I personally see it as something much more involved.
By NYer
July 23, 2008 1:21 PM | Link to this
Truth:
In all sincerity, please stop. No more “he did it first” finger pointing. Just stop. Stop posting about this stupid Flicker thing. I don’t even know what this is and I don’t care. I don’t care what your name is. I don’t care what you do for a living and I don’t care if you’re any good at it or not. Chances are, nobody else does either. If you feel like somebody is trying to “out” you or screw up your personal life, the only advice I can give you is to put the keyboard down and go spend time with the important people in your life.
I’m not trying to sound condescending, and I don’t seek to play the role of traffic cop on this blog, but you are behaving in a childish manner. JokesOn has as well, but s/he has at least mentioned a willingness to set it all aside.
Since my post this morning, you’ve made numerous more posts arguing with people about this inane topic. Whether you like it or not, there are no winners in a pointless, immature, silly argument. By the time it is over, everybody looks bad. LET IT GO.
I am here to converse with others about the topics of the day. You are not solely responsible for this but unfortunately, you are helping to ruin the blog for me, and it would appear, others as well.
I politely urge you to do the right thing.
By JokesOn
July 23, 2008 1:22 PM | Link to this
Back from lunch and Truth is still frothing and accusing me of posting under other names. Too damn funny.
Seems as soon as i won’t fight with him he turns to Mara or new bloggers to take out his frustrations.
Any good debates out there? Archie? We have more to cover?
By 1st wife
July 23, 2008 1:32 PM | Link to this
He won’t tell you the real reason I did it. He pushed that out of his mind so he could spend the rest of his life blaming others. He won’t tell you the truth about how it happend. It sounds better when he twists and embellishes the story.
By RF
July 23, 2008 1:40 PM | Link to this
WATB- good one, UsinUk, good one!! ‘bout sums up the crowd today!;-)
One big group hug and a jug of my granny’s homemade muscadine wine and we’d have world peace alright!! That and a mighty universal hangover the next day, but it’d be a great party!!
Speaking of ISSUES, did anyone read the latest about MARTA? 43mil deficit and they paid over 400 grand in severance to their last chief who was let go last year to make way for a newbie. Hmmm, that makes me really want to see them running public transportation in Gwinnett and other counties—NOT!
By Mara
July 23, 2008 2:00 PM | Link to this
How about Robert Novak running over some old guy and then driving away? He claimed he didn’t see the guy plastered to his windsheild -
Politico has the story.
By Truth
July 23, 2008 2:02 PM | Link to this
NYer
Note the post called 1st wife. Do you know what that is about? My wife mistakenly aborted my first child because she thought I was cheating on her. So this stranger comes on and amazingly enough knows something that i have only mentioned a few times and oddly enough talks about this in the middle of this conflict and he does it right after the Big Joke “returns from lunch”.
Now I can be as civil as i can be, and this troll can post whatever the hell he wants to post including posts that are this personal about the death of a child and I get a twenty line dress down from you about the way that I act on this forum.
i have carried on good, civil, discussions with you and most everyone here. That is what I want to do. This is not a matter of wagging fingers at each other. What he is doing would have him thrown off just about any monitored forum on the net.
Don’t preach at me about what is ruining this forum, until you see the reason why7 this forum is being ruined.
I will continue to argue my point to the people who refuse to see it. If you would take the time to look at the posts, you can clearly see that I have ANSWERED posts from others, defending myself.
I am answering your post, right now.
Get it?
By JokesOn
July 23, 2008 2:10 PM | Link to this
So this stranger comes on and amazingly enough knows something that i have only mentioned a few times and oddly enough talks about this in the middle of this conflict and he does it right after the Big Joke “returns from lunch”.
Once again, I have yet to ever post under the sniper names or any other.
Why don’t you drop it Truth? We can still argue, it will be more fun with minor rules too;)
By Truth
July 23, 2008 2:11 PM | Link to this
JokesOn
Keep talking about my dead child, you son of a btch. That computer screen is a hell of a thing to hide behind, isn’t it, fat as.
Let me know when you want to discuss this face to face, you fat f*ck.
By JokesOn
July 23, 2008 2:22 PM | Link to this
Keep talking about my dead child, you son of a btch. That computer screen is a hell of a thing to hide behind, isn’t it, fat as.
Let me know when you want to discuss this face to face, you fat fck.*
Freaking out (even about something as tasteless as what the sniper posted/referred to) will not change the fact that I have never posted as a sniper targeting you or anyone else.
By Umm...ok
July 23, 2008 2:40 PM | Link to this
JokesOn/Truth-
I think it is time for the two of you to turn off the computer for the day.
truth, I am sorry that you have went through a terrible tragedy in your life, but no one is going to understand if they haven’t been through the same experience…. NO one can make you feel better about it. So to argue with JokesOn is only making matters worse. Just ignore him
I don’t come on here to read threats, which is exactly what you are doing.
Go watch TV or find another blog to hash it out, I think the whole thing has crossed the line.
By NYer
July 23, 2008 2:42 PM | Link to this
Truth,
Note the post called 1st wife. Do you know what that is about?
No, I don’t know what it is about. If you are uncomfortable with the level of personal information that other posters have about you, there are remedies available to you.
I am not trying to dress you down. But you’re forgetting the cardinal rule of playground: if you stop responding to being picked on, you’ll stop getting picked on. Maybe JokesOn is a troll; so be it. Maybe he’s not. Either way - stop allowing him to get under your skin.
Even in your last post, (this troll can post whatever the hell he wants to post, and What he is doing would have him thrown off just about any monitored forum on the net.) you’re still pointing fingers and claiming that all you are doing is “answering” other people’s posts.
Call it whatever you want, but if you stop “answering” the inane posts from whoever you believe the trolls to be that are going after you about personal stuff, voila, your problem is solved.
This is the last post I will make on this topic. I look forward to having discussions with you about more pressing topics than troll harassment in the future.
By Truth
July 23, 2008 2:51 PM | Link to this
JokesOn
We’ve done this enough. It’s time we settle a few things. The things you have pulled can’t be resolved on a forum writing nasty notes to each other.
Everybody is tired of it. I am tired of it. It’s time we met.
So are you a man or just a fat slug that hides behind a computer screen?
I agree with the rest of the posters. We need to take this off line.
Are you ready?
I am.
By Truth
July 23, 2008 3:06 PM | Link to this
NYer
Call it whatever you want, but if you stop “answering” the inane posts from whoever you believe the trolls to be that are going after you about personal stuff, voila, your problem is solved.
i know you mean well, but you have no idea. I have gone weeks and weeks ignoring dozens and dozens and dozens of posts that are just as vile as what you have seen today. Ignoring him just encourages him to become more and more vile. Goo back about a month ion the archives and see how many posts I wrote back to his many posts to me. You won’t find one.
i’m with you. I think we should take it off line, but he doesn’t seem to be quite up for a real face to face. That’s the way things are done in NY and Atlanta. Men talk face to face. Cowards hide behind computer screens.
He openly admits that he is desperate to find me on the internet. I want to make finding me really easy for him. I would bet that he won’t be as anxious to confront another person face to face. Trolls never are.
By JokesOn
July 23, 2008 3:12 PM | Link to this
*Everybody is tired of it. I am tired of it. It’s time we met. *
Ohhh pleeeeaaase!
By Truth
July 23, 2008 3:25 PM | Link to this
Slimy Joke
I’m done with this on here. I don’t want to hear any more cowardly excuse making from your fat a*s.
if you have a problem with me, let’s work it out. if you want to find me, i’ll show you where to find me.
No one believes that there is a sideline sniper who comes on here every day and waits for a conflict to develop between you and me and then jumps in to take your side and say the vile things that you don’t have the balls to say.
This “just got back from lunch” crap isn’t fooling anyone.
Until you want to grow a spine and come out from behind that computer screen, I say that you are a liar and a coward.
I say let’s resolve this. What do you say?
By JokesOn
July 23, 2008 3:42 PM | Link to this
Two words for you: grow up
By WhoWas-I-Then?
July 23, 2008 3:44 PM | Link to this
This “just got back from lunch” crap isn’t fooling anyone.
was it heeheehee earlier? certainly not Jokeson.
do you belong to the John Birch Society?, you know, see a commie behind every tree.
By Act now! Don't delay!
July 23, 2008 3:46 PM | Link to this
www dot find-a-therapist dot com
“How about it? You creeps, you lunatics, mental defectives? Let’s hear it for Bull Goose Randall back in action… You ding-a-lings. The Mental Defective League, information.”
By Archie
July 23, 2008 4:42 PM | Link to this
A few weeks ago Lyrazel said customers of prostitutes are more to blame than the prostitutes, well, how about drugs, are the customers more to blame or is the seller of illegal drugs more to blame? I saw American Gangster and I thought Frank Lucas was/is a despicable human being. However, why do humans buy drugs in the first place? In other words why does a person try crack or heroin or meth for the first time when those drugs are known to cause havoc on families??? Why are rich men so greedy? Also my coworker was touting the virtues of George Bush and I quickly reminded him that his daddy always signed against offshore drilling.
By AGF
July 23, 2008 4:56 PM | Link to this
AGF: I have personally talked to mutiple army and air force personel, some of whom were captains and majors and all of whom have served at least two tours in Iraq. They have all said the same thing - it isn’t nearly as bad in Iraq as the media reports.
USinUK: I have done the same - all of whom said the media doesn’t show the half of it.
Usink, I believe you have stated that you have family serving in the military, and maybe these are the people you have talked to. But trust me when I tell you that this is NOT even close to what I hear coming from our service men and women. I used to live in a base town, so I had great access to people of all different ranks serving in Iraq. Their story is quite different from yours. I am not suggesting that you are lying, merely suggesting that you have listened for the responses you wanted to hear.
However, I can accept your statement at face value. There are many bad things that happen in Iraq every day. The media cannot report on all of them. The choose to report about half of the bad stuff and .00000000000000000000000001% of the good stuff! LOL!
By USinUK
July 24, 2008 8:45 AM | Link to this
AGF -
The choose to report about half of the bad stuff and .00000000000000000000000001% of the good stuff! LOL!
You’re a news editor of the national news on whatever station you want - you have a 7-minute segment to talk about Iraq (and, believe me, that’s being generous) … during the day, you had the following things happen:
1) car bomb killing 35 people, including 7 service men 2) roadside bomb killing 9 servicemen running supplies 3) the Iraqi government is meeting and voting on some major constitutional issues 4) 6 schools got electricity 5) an oil derrick which has been hit by insurgents 3 times is back up and running
keep in mind, the military doesn’t want you to report on #5 because they don’t want the insurgents to know what infrastructure is working and what isn’t.
aren’t the first 3 things more important than number 4?? while #4 is a feel-good story, there really isn’t the time for it.
that’s how the news works.
as for the “oh, yeah, well MY military contacts can beat up YOUR military contacts” - my point still remains - it depends on who you talk to. and, as you say, you seem to want to hear the good news (or, maybe they just don’t want to think about the bad).
By JokesOn
July 24, 2008 9:11 AM | Link to this
USinUK,
I agree. It seems crass to state: “In Iraq 3 people were killed today, but service men in another city started a soccer league, mending some of the relationships in that area.”
I feel like I am playing “One of these things don’t go together” with that type of news casting.
By Chris
July 24, 2008 9:18 AM | Link to this
“Government has a role in preserving the heritage of our country.” and Shaunti of course agrees with it.
So much for the constitutional separation of Church and State. It always amazes me that conservatives want government intervention ONLY when it suits them.
Shaunti: What exactly is the heritage of our country? Where only white landowners were allowed to vote? Slavery? Segregation? During Apartheid, the government of South Africa also tried to preserve its heritage and we all know how that went, don’t we.
You have a right to believe what you want. Just don’t tell me what to believe in. And I certainly don’t want my government doing that either. Otherwise, what’s the difference between us and Saudi Arabia?
By USinUK
July 24, 2008 9:26 AM | Link to this
Jokes -
I agree. It seems crass to state: “In Iraq 3 people were killed today, but service men in another city started a soccer league, mending some of the relationships in that area.”
you know, sometimes I feel like I’ve gone through the looking glass … “where is the good news???” … umm, don’t you feel like the deaths of 37 innocent civilians is a little more important than distributing candy and toys to kids?
I’m sure there are good stories going on, but if my brother-in-law was killed and the Nightly News decided to spend their time on a fluff piece about a new hairdressing school that had been set up, I would be furious.
more to the point, isn’t it an insult to those who have died to NOT talk about what happened?? wouldn’t that be shuffling them under the carpet??
good grief. I can’t believe we even have to HAVE this conversation, but then, I can’t believe we have to debate whether or not the US should torture or listen in on domestic phone calls without a wiretap.
yep, watch out for that white rabbit. he’s a bugger.
By Gale
July 24, 2008 9:52 AM | Link to this
I wonder how long we would have stayed in VietNam if the media had only shown good things? Oh right, there were no good things.
By RF
July 24, 2008 10:06 AM | Link to this
USinUK- the “good stuff” that happens in any newsworthy situation just doesn’t have the impact that the bad does. Let’s face it, even Dr. Phil wouldn’t bring on a family that has a happy life just because it wouldn’t sell. I think, IMO, that the media is so accustomed to looking for the controversy and shocking stuff that even if there were a day that there weren’t car bombs or insurgent sniper attacks, they wouldn’t report it because it just doesn’t have the punch. I taught in a school once where the kids raised thousands of dollars every year to aid poor families at Christmas. We could barely get the local paper to come, let alone the TV gang. BUT, when we had ONE big girl fight we had news vans all over the place and had to have a faculty meeting to discuss what was appropriate and legal for us to say to them as they were stopping cars on the way out of the school driveway.
I think we need to hear the reality of what’s going on in Iraq, no doubt. We need to honor each and every soldier who is injured or killed. Like you though, I wonder if there will ever be any reporting of some of the good, humanitarian deeds our soldiers work hard to accomplish. Personally, I’d like to see some of that.
By Jack
July 24, 2008 10:16 AM | Link to this
USinUK. You should know that, “if it bleeds, it leads” Our great media journalists are vulture-scum. (except for Lozen)
“Tell me Ms. Smith, what was going through you mind when you found out your children were brutally raped and murdered”
Scum, scum, scum.
By JokesOn
July 24, 2008 10:32 AM | Link to this
I think we need to hear the reality of what’s going on in Iraq, no doubt. We need to honor each and every soldier who is injured or killed. Like you though, I wonder if there will ever be any reporting of some of the good, humanitarian deeds our soldiers work hard to accomplish. Personally, I’d like to see some of that.
Maybe if I think about it long and hard it would make more sense to me, but anything covering the good stuff seems to need to be more….thematical (i think that word will transfer what i mean).
A half hour special showing how the candy helped relations that lead to a soccer league leading to a meeting with the leaders of an area which led to….etc; where-as death is pretty abrupt and binary and any one of those steps means little. It is the cumulative effect that matters.
By Bruce
July 24, 2008 10:41 AM | Link to this
“So much for the constitutional separation of Church and State. It always amazes me that conservatives want government intervention ONLY when it suits them.”
Pot meet Kettle!
By Bruce
July 24, 2008 10:49 AM | Link to this
“Maybe if I think about it long and hard it would make more sense to me, but anything covering the good stuff seems to need to be more….thematical (i think that word will transfer what i mean).”
So you admit you just listen to the talking points and do not really think for yourself.
By USinUK
July 24, 2008 10:50 AM | Link to this
Jack -
You should know that, “if it bleeds, it leads” Our great media journalists are vulture-scum. (except for Lozen)
well, of COURSE it leads. I would hope that something as urgent as the loss of a life would lead the news over sports or Arbor Day festivities.
And the majority of journalists aren’t vulture-scum (especially Lozen) - the majority work incredibly hard to tell us what’s going on and be heard above the din of Britney/Lindsey/Miley - and they’re doing it for very little pay.
By AntiWalters
July 24, 2008 10:55 AM | Link to this
“Tell me Ms. Smith, what was going through you mind when you found out your children were brutally raped and murdered”
that is why I (Strongly dislike) BabbaWahwah, seen her do it.
By USinUK
July 24, 2008 11:00 AM | Link to this
RF and Jokes -
Like you though, I wonder if there will ever be any reporting of some of the good, humanitarian deeds our soldiers work hard to accomplish. Personally, I’d like to see some of that.
I think Jokes idea of some kind of “special” would address that … but, to insert it into the regular news, juxtaposed with the ongoing hostilities in Iraq and the (hello!) INCREASE in hostilities in Afghanistan would be a bit … harsh? insensitive? jarring? not sure what the right word is, but it just wouldn’t feel right.
By Gale
July 24, 2008 11:00 AM | Link to this
” It is the cumulative effect that matters.” Good post.
It brings to mind a TV show called Connections. It was basically a history program showing how many challenges and inventions led to something common in current life. Iraq had an oppressive government… Americans sat the whole country on it’s head… There is a challenge to rebuild a dyfunctional society while the people are shooting at us and each other. It makes for an interesting path.
By JokesOn
July 24, 2008 11:13 AM | Link to this
So you admit you just listen to the talking points and do not really think for yourself.
Not at all what I said.
That was written in present tense. If I thought about it (now)…
That is the problem with focusing only on one sentence of a post. It will be out of context.
Easy way to take pot-shots though.
By Bruce
July 24, 2008 11:24 AM | Link to this
Sure that’s what you meant!
“Easy way to take pot-shots though.”
Again, Pot meet Kettle.
By JokesOn
July 24, 2008 11:36 AM | Link to this
Again, Pot meet Kettle.
whatever.
Not starting a bicker fest with you after ending one.
Have it your way: I took you out of context to make a pot-shot.
By Mara
July 24, 2008 11:38 AM | Link to this
one issue that nobody’s touched on yet is the injection of government-sponsored propaganda into the news stream.
When it became common knowlege that the war was being “marketed” by the government, every success story became suspect. The DoD and State were paying people to write happy stories about life in Iraq and then submitting them to various newsgroups as hard news. Anytime uplifting or hopeful news came out of the warzone, one had to wonder if it was “spin” or truth. The government is legally barred from propagandizing the domestic market, but it doesn’t stop them from publishing in international media (or American-sponsored forums like Radio Sawa and Al Hurra) which inevitably ended up being picked up by the wire services and printed for domestic consumption. One could no longer trust that “the news” was honest-to-goodness journalism.
So we turn to Iraqi bloggers like Riverbend or Iraqi Mojo, as well as military blogs. Unfortunately, the soldier blogs have had an un-even history. Military personnel are now required to have their ‘blogs’ vetted before they can post, and (anecdotally) many have been shut down for questioning their superiors, for voicing problems and concerns about supply lines and equipment, and shining light on issues with the mercenary companies - “private contractors” - and fraud. Stuff the government didn’t want you and I to think about.
But these blogs were also where many of us heard about the small successes, like the refurbished schools, improvements to infrastructure, friendships, and even romances.
The problem, as I see it, is that the Government and the Media have both abrogated their specific duties. The government isn’t supposed to “market” the news and the media is supposed to be impartial and fact-driven. Neither is doing the job they’re expected to do in the manner they’re supposed to be doing it.
By USinUK
July 24, 2008 11:39 AM | Link to this
Bruce/Truth -
Again, Pot meet Kettle.
Jokes didn’t take any pot-shots.
if you want to pick a fight, please go somewhere else.
By Bruce
July 24, 2008 11:56 AM | Link to this
UsinUK, I have been in the back ground now for a few weeks just reading and I can tell you Jokes (as you call him) is full of pot shots. In fact I wouldn’t be scared to say he takes more pot shots than anyone.
Oh and for the record, I’m not Truth. I can think for myself. Unlike JokesOn.
JokesOn, No you didn’t take me out of context.
By Jack
July 24, 2008 11:59 AM | Link to this
the majority work incredibly hard to tell us what’s going on and be heard above the din of Britney/Lindsey/Miley - and they’re doing it for very little pay.
Horse Poo.
By JokesOn
July 24, 2008 12:02 PM | Link to this
The problem, as I see it, is that the Government and the Media have both abrogated their specific duties. The government isn’t supposed to “market” the news and the media is supposed to be impartial and fact-driven. Neither is doing the job they’re expected to do in the manner they’re supposed to be doing it.
Totally agree with you.
Add to that stuff like the Tillman cover-up and one ends up not trusting the governments reporting, and the media exposing it looks like they are looking to discredit the government.
By USinUK
July 24, 2008 12:05 PM | Link to this
Bruce/Truth -
Oh and for the record, I’m not Truth. I can think for myself. Unlike JokesOn.
yeah. I can tell you’re not Truth by your rapier-like “I’m rubber/you’re glue” approach.
either have a civilized conversation or go elsewhere. we’ve all had ENOUGH of the bollocks this week.
By JokesOn
July 24, 2008 12:20 PM | Link to this
USinUK, Mara, (who-ever else wants to address this question),
Questions opinions regarding the mortgage assistance bill for Freddy/Fanny Mack:
I understand that IF their situation is bad enough that the fallout would rock our economy, something should be done.
My issue is two fold: If the government helps with money that we are, or are not - makes little difference, being taxed on. When it gets repaid, do we get the money back in a tax right off?
More-over (and this is a though only because of the previous paragraph): At that point why not just buy the houses for the previous owners? That should stimulate the economy pretty well and get the debt off the Macks back, no? Otherwise the houses are simply free for the Macks.
I know little about how this really plays out when loans get that far down the line (to the Macks), so any correction or added info would be appreciated. I know about the path from the broker to the second (more permanent) holder of the loan, but that is it.
See you after lunch and look forward to replies.
By Mara
July 24, 2008 12:39 PM | Link to this
JokesOn - “…they are looking to discredit the government.”
which is odd, since the FCC has pushed to allow the media to consolidate and consolidate until there’re only four or five corporations owning 90% of all outlets. You’d think Corporate would show a little gratitude…
but maybe it’s only to be expected. When Woodward and Bernstein uncovered Watergate, they ended up being crowned journalistic royalty. The Clinton/Lewinsky scandal did the same thing for Matt Drudge. The thinking may be that the easiest way to acheive success in journalism is to expose government shenanigans, big or small. You can bask in the limelight of writing “the big story”, and hope the small ones turn out to be the loose thread that unravels a tangled web of government corruption.
By USinUK
July 24, 2008 12:40 PM | Link to this
Jokes -
about to head home, so I’m keeping this brief:
I understand that IF their situation is bad enough that the fallout would rock our economy, something should be done.
OUR economy??? try the GLOBAL economy - central banks and major corporations across the globe are heavily invested in FNMA, FDMC, SLMA, etc
My issue is two fold: If the government helps with money that we are, or are not - makes little difference, being taxed on. When it gets repaid, do we get the money back in a tax right off?
not sure I understand the question - are you asking if your tax money will be rebated when the housing market stabilizes and the agencies are better situated?
what’s going on right now with the agencies is that they are able to take out loans at inter-bank rates from the Fed - the House vote is essentially to guarantee not only the loans, but the organizations, themselves. (until now, the guarantee has always been implicit, but never explicit)
already, stock prices for Fannie and Freddie have gone back up, which helps improve the situation.
More-over (and this is a though only because of the previous paragraph): At that point why not just buy the houses for the previous owners? That should stimulate the economy pretty well and get the debt off the Macks back, no? Otherwise the houses are simply free for the Macks.
Another part of the legislation that the House passed is a measure to help homeowners avoid foreclosure by refinancing with gov-insured loans. Additionally, there’s $4 billion for local governments to buy and refurbish foreclosed properties. (if they play this right, local governments could do well on this)
I know little about how this really plays out when loans get that far down the line (to the Macks), so any correction or added info would be appreciated. I know about the path from the broker to the second (more permanent) holder of the loan, but that is it.
bottom line: the problem would be these 2 behemoths defaulting on their debt to folkses that hold Fannie and Freddie bonds (the mortgages are the underlying securities of the bonds).
I don’t know if that helps - and I apologize for the brevity … but it’s creeping up on 6:00 and I’m heading home :-)
By Gale
July 24, 2008 1:01 PM | Link to this
USinUK, re the mortgage assistance/bailout. My kneejerk is why should my tax money help someone who made a stupid decision? I read a synopsis of what is supposed to be requirements for assistance money and there are some protections in it. However, I still think bailout for stupid decisions is a bad thing. For instance, I might have bought a house for twice as much money, factoring improvements that I wanted to inflate the mortgage over the true value of the house, as some did. They have house expenses of more than 40% of their income (one of the requirements). The mortgage has now adjusted higher and is eating more of that 40%. Gas, food and energy costs have increased, reducing available money after all those expenses. Yep, those folks are in trouble.
Now, more rational people did shop for the best interest rate. (I did get an ARM, but it has an increase cap.) The rational person did not jump on a house twice what they would be able to pay for in a worst case scenaio. This bailout tells the rational home owner, that’s good you were smart. Now we are going to use your tax money to —once again— bail out people who made stupid decisions. You go right on being a good tax payer.
When I listen to some of the people who are losing their homes, I wonder what planet they were thinking of to think an annual income of $40k for a family of four could afford a $1,500 a month mortgage? That’s just dumb. People like that need to be helped into a reasonable rental unit; not be rewarded by patting their head and telling that’s all right. You can keep your house and we’ll lower your payment to $500 a month. Which would pay for the house NEVER.
Ok, deep breath. Sorry for the rant.
By Mara
July 24, 2008 1:06 PM | Link to this
“Another part of the legislation that the House passed is a measure to help homeowners avoid foreclosure by refinancing with gov-insured loans. Additionally, there’s $4 billion for local governments to buy and refurbish foreclosed properties.”
I think the whole thing stinks. The government fell down on the job of regulating and overseeing banks and mortgage markets, which allowed these institutions to reap billions by giving loans to people who should never have been approved. A $300,000 loan to someone who makes $40,000/year? THAT’S stupid and irresponsible. A failure of their fiduciary duties!
And now we tax-payers are not only going to end up paying these banks off, we’re going to have to refinance these people at a rate I, a responsible borrower, could only dream of getting.
It just chaps my nether regions.
if anyone wants to know how this mess happened, here’s a link that has a pithy (and entertaining) explaination.
By RF
July 24, 2008 1:19 PM | Link to this
The government isn’t supposed to “market” the news and the media is supposed to be impartial and fact-driven. Neither is doing the job they’re expected to do in the manner they’re supposed to be doing it
Mara- my sentiments exactly!!
The problem with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is that they fell into the mortgage mess by loaning money on houses that have plummeted in value and extending too much loan for the income people had. When the housing bubble began to burst, they, like many other banks, found themselves holding loans that were doomed to foreclosure for properties that had dropped significant value. Once again, the current government body, as a whole, failed to monitor through established agencies. Congressmen and women weren’t concerned because the economy was still growing. So what if the growth was predicated on subprime mortgages, inflated values, and unrealistic loans. Now we’re all going to pay the price as the fed has to bail them out.
By JokesOn
July 24, 2008 1:36 PM | Link to this
My issue is two fold: If the government helps with money that we are, or are not - makes little difference, being taxed on. When it gets repaid, do we get the money back in a tax right off?
What I mean is that tax dollars are being used, right? Or the loan from the Federal Reserve (or who ever…not the important part) it is getting paid over time by us.
This money is a loan to freddy/fanny as i understood it. A bailout that gets paid back.
And even if what was posted stating that it would get paid back because the government would provide their own loans, that is still our money they are loaning, right?
That is why I asked if “we” get paid back.
By JokesOn
July 24, 2008 1:50 PM | Link to this
Mara, I think the whole thing stinks. The government fell down on the job of regulating and overseeing banks and mortgage markets, which allowed these institutions to reap billions by giving loans to people who should never have been approved. A $300,000 loan to someone who makes $40,000/year? THAT’S stupid and irresponsible. A failure of their fiduciary duties!
And now we tax-payers are not only going to end up paying these banks off, we’re going to have to refinance these people at a rate I, a responsible borrower, could only dream of getting.
It just chaps my nether regions.
I totally agree on the chapping!
Yet….If looked at purely from a solution orientated angle, what do you think? (again, I agree with you on how we got here and culpability)
By Copyleft
July 24, 2008 2:03 PM | Link to this
If we’re always going to be paying for the bailouts, why all the vehement insistence that we can’t POSSIBLY regulate their behavior in the first place? That’s as silly as refusing to have national healthcare because it would be easier and cheaper than paying for everyone’s ER bills!
Deregulation always backfires, and it always winds up costing the consumers and taxpayers the most. It’s time to rein in corporate America and put them back under government oversight, where they belong.
By USinUK
July 24, 2008 2:13 PM | Link to this
Jokes, Mara and RF -
Once again, the current government body, as a whole, failed to monitor through established agencies.
and you can thank Alan “frothiness” Greenspan for most of it. he was head of the fed when the worst of this was going on (and retired just as the effluvium was about to hit the rotaries). gah. don’t get me started about him or we could be here all night.
http://www.federalreserve.gov/pf/pdf/pf_5.pdf
Bank supervision involves the monitoring, inspecting, and examining of banking organizations to assess their condition and their compliance with relevant laws and regulations. When a banking organization within the Federal Reserve’s supervisory jurisdiction is found to be noncompliant or to have other problems, the Federal Reserve may use its supervisory authority to take formal or informal action to have the organization correct the problems.
By USinUK
July 24, 2008 2:23 PM | Link to this
Mara -
I forgot to add - the term you’re looking for is “moral hazard” - it’s why you don’t want to bail out investment houses or individuals (because the risk should keep them on the straight and narrow and if they feel that there’s no risk, then they’ll just make stupid decisions like buying derivatives based on crappy mortgages or buying a LOT more house than they can afford)
Jokes -
Yet….If looked at purely from a solution orientated angle, what do you think? (again, I agree with you on how we got here and culpability
here’s the thing. the US is wedded to consumer spending - it makes up 65% of GDP, so if THAT tanks, the country tanks. by shoring up homeownership and stopping the foreclosure juggernaut, the theory is that the economy will start to stabilize.
here’s problem No. 1: the US doesn’t make anything anymore. you are a service economy and services are being cut globally. the only good thing is that the dollar is so weak right now, what little manufacturing the US still does is seeing a boost cuz your stuff is cheap.
here’s problem No. 2: people aren’t just borrowing on their houses, anymore. they’re starting to pull money out of their 401K and borrow on their life insurance policies, as well (ed. note: WTF???!!!) so, unless an economic miracle occurs and there’s another huge revolution like the Internet economy, this pain is going to be felt for decades to come because people won’t have their retirement to fall back on.
By JokesOn
July 24, 2008 2:32 PM | Link to this
Deregulation always backfires, and it always winds up costing the consumers and taxpayers the most. It’s time to rein in corporate America and put them back under government oversight, where they belong.
You know. Twenty years ago I would argue with you to the death;)
But, with other countries having such cheap labor (not giving US corporations a total out here…only understanding), in order to compete our companies have to find any way to cut costs.
Government regulation could (maybe?Possibly?) help with leveling the playing field while keeping our businesses honest. Just a thought.
By Mara
July 24, 2008 2:44 PM | Link to this
Copyleft - Deregulation always backfires, and it always winds up costing the consumers and taxpayers the most. It’s time to rein in corporate America and put them back under government oversight, where they belong
~~ applause ~~ Hear, hear!!
JokesOn - If looked at purely from a solution orientated angle, what do you think?
I’m not enough of an economist to really say. I can say that while it’ll probably keep the mortgage giants alive and keep the financial market from imploding completely, I have to wonder at what cost.
A correlation could be drawn between the current sub-prime debacle and the S&L bailout in the ‘80-’90s (anybody remember Neil Bush?) which ended up costing tax-payers $190 Billion and (arguably) was one of the key components of the ‘91 recession.
Our current situation could be viewed as even more dire. Approximately 1.3 trillion dollars (or more) is now tied up in loans that are considered to be suspect. Our national debt is at record highs, and the worth of the dollar is at record lows. Even if the legislation passes and financial markets are propped up on the backs of the tax-payer, I expect that the pain will only have just begun.
By JokesOn
July 24, 2008 3:10 PM | Link to this
I’m not enough of an economist to really say. I can say that while it’ll probably keep the mortgage giants alive and keep the financial market from imploding completely, I have to wonder at what cost.
That is basically where I am at.
Gosh, I like the honesty of you all.
By JokesOn
July 24, 2008 3:43 PM | Link to this
While on this topic, did anyone read this?
http://www.ajc.com/news/content/news/stories/2008/07/23/homeforeclosuresuicide.html?cxntlid=homepagetabnewstab
Like it is not bad enough, I hope it does not have the same ending as “Death of a Salesman.”
By NYer
July 24, 2008 4:25 PM | Link to this
Deregulation always backfires, and it always winds up costing the consumers and taxpayers the most. It’s time to rein in corporate America and put them back under government oversight, where they belong.
That is a troubling post. And the fact that others are applauding is frightening.
First is the extremism, the black and white: Deregulation ALWAYS backfires. Perhaps this group preferred their choices for telephony prior to the massive opening of the telecom markets in 1996? Obviously Copyleft’s comment is just a wee bit over the top.
Secondly, there are degrees of de/regulation. While the US is, overall, a more-lightly regulated economy than others, I can’t think of a single industry where there is complete deregulation. So corporate America is already under government watch. The question is the degree of that oversight, which is something we can all debate.
Thirdly, there is the timeframe over which a conclusion about the “success” of deregulation is measured. Certainly when markets are altered significantly by the amount and kind of regulations, there is displacement while market participants and consumers adjust to the new rules.
But let’s also remember that (generally speaking) industry is creative, whereas regulators are not. So industry will always be ahead of regulators and finding “creative” ways to get ahead. Sometimes industry behaves honorably, and sometimes it doesn’t, which leads to people getting screwed, and the regulators stepping in to return fairness and stability to the market. How do you think we got the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934?
This natural ebb and flow is how it works in a market-driven economy. It is clear to me that more regulation of mortgage lending is warranted, but we must be careful not to take too much of a knee-jerk reaction, or conclude that DEREGULATION = ALWAYS BAD.
By NYer
July 24, 2008 4:31 PM | Link to this
My biggest issue with the housing bubble and the overheated credit markets that fueled the bubble is this:
All the people who bought houses they couldn’t afford during the bubble pushed up the price of houses for everyone. Ergo, all of the responsible buyers paid more for their house during this period than they would have if it weren’t for all the knuckleheads with loaded up with debt they couldn’t afford to service.
By NYer
July 24, 2008 4:36 PM | Link to this
I’m not sure people realize how important Fannie and Freddie are to the mortgage market. They are the entities that buy (conforming) mortgages from local banks, which frees up the capital of the local bank to make more mortgages in the local market that bank serves. Without Fannie or Freddie to buy these loans from the local banks, the local banks have to keep holding the loans on their balance sheets, diminishing their ability to make new loans.
By NYer
July 24, 2008 4:50 PM | Link to this
The silliest, and perhaps scariest thing I have read during this whole mortgage mess is the desire to amend the bankruptcy code to reduce the amount of a loan to the “market” value of the property.
I shudder to think that a secured creditor, with a perfected security interest, can have the secured portion of their claim written down to an arbitrary figure (who knows what would happen to the undersecured portion of their claim) and the owner, with no remaining equity interest in the property, would still retain ownership and have all future appreciation rights.
Apparently politicians have never heard of absolute priority.
Anybody want to take a guess at how lenders respond to the new risk profile of the loans that they would be making going forward?
By USinUK
July 24, 2008 4:51 PM | Link to this
NYer -
VERY well said!
Despite what most people think, the US doesn’t have a 100% free market system - most industries are heavily regulated - and any corporation that is publicly listed is closely scrutinized by the SEC (especially in these post-Enron years).
Like most things (such as illegal immigration), most of what has occured in the past 6 years could have been prevented if the government entities that were regulating banks had been doing their jobs.
however, that wouldn’t have solved everything. the fact is, with the growth of derivative products and structured debt, banks were able to off-load a lot of their risk onto the marketplace where folks were looking for return. since the risk was off the books, even the Fed would have been hard-pressed to sanction them for bad business practices.
so, for the most part, NYer, I’m with you … however, when it comes to media ownership, I think that there should be stricter regulations than those currently on the books. but that’s a discussion for a different time …
okay - enough for one day - have a good night!!
new topic tomorrow :-)
By GOB
July 24, 2008 4:54 PM | Link to this
Not sure if any of you have listened to the “Giant Pool of Money” episode of This American Life, but it did a really good job explaining what really happened to get us into this mess.
It comes down to investors seeing a way to make a quick buck, and in the process throwing all their common sense out the window. I’d highly recommend taking a listen if you get a chance (the podcast is on iTunes).
By girls
July 25, 2008 1:54 PM | Link to this
galleries of girls in g strings stripping string bikini girls in string bikinis malibu string 12 string guitar bikini strings for girls microkini g string g strings bikini girls hot g string college g strings girls malibu strings bikinis g string sex hot g string models
By girls
July 25, 2008 8:13 PM | Link to this
What you like they said,. Tom told g string sex him ablowjob to get every bit. I swear.
By ficibruze
July 26, 2008 1:00 AM | Link to this
string bikini models string cheese incident stripping string bikini wet g string hot g string galleries girls in g string galleries