retrospooty
Platinum Member
- Apr 3, 2002
- 2,031
- 74
- 86
All true... but I can sum it up for you in 2 words.
Bitter Douche.
/edit - dammit, I can't possibly leave out whiney.
=)
All true... but I can sum it up for you in 2 words.
Bitter Douche.
/edit - dammit, I can't possibly leave out whiney.
=)
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
Yes yes, we know you'll move on to only trolling. It's quite obvious that you don't have a clue what you're talking about regarding my initial post as even your own little list has been show to be mostly a fraud. But it's ok if you disagree, I could care less but it doesn't change the fact that libs suddenly turned on a guy just because he was running for President and had an R behind his name. He didn't fundamentally change and sure as hell didn't go "ultra" right wing let alone "repudiate" it all like you seem to be claiming. So I guess about the only thing we can hope for is for you to someday be able to admit you were wrong and overstated the situation... we won't hold our breath....
Meh, it's always hilarious to see libs try to diagnose and tell the R side what they are doing wrong or what they should do.... like they have any idea what the right wants...
You're right, but to be fair, Paulson and Bush asked for this thing and then pumped up the fear level to get it passed. TARP didn't appear out of nowhere. The final Senate vote was 74-25 with a healthy number of R's voting "yea." The second House vote went much the same, 263-171.
It seems the WaPo gets my larger point:
It's pure political theater, something that you, Cad, railed against when the Dems were in the minority. But okay, I think we can all see the value in pure political plays, at least in terms of revving up the party.
I thought the comments by Rep. Pete Sessions was particularly insightful.
So, according to Sessions, the GOP disruptive/obstructionist tactics are a play torn directly from the Taliban playbook? Oh man!
:laugh:
It's pure political theater, something that you, Cad, railed against when the Dems were in the minority. But okay, I think we can all see the value in pure political plays, at least in terms of revving up the party.
I thought the comments by Rep. Pete Sessions was particularly insightful.
So, according to Sessions, the GOP disruptive/obstructionist tactics are a play torn directly from the Taliban playbook? Oh man!
:laugh:
It wasn't an analogy. It was a literal statement. He couldn't have picked another, his choice was either to tell the truth or not to say anything (or lie, but).
My list made it through just fine. Your arguing tactic is to make up unprovable distinctions and then declare that they must be disproven. It's baffling.
What I did just notice in your latest post was something special though. You think that the left has no idea what the right wants, in fact you think it's hilarious when they try to say that they do. All in a thread where you talk about how you know why liberals don't like McCain anymore.
Still not feeling any pangs of irony?
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
Uh... hello? You challenged my post with a mostly worthless list(save 1) so don't even try to suggest *MY* tactics are suspect. I pointed out how you were off base with that list. I'm sorry you can't handle the truth but the facts are the facts.
Maybe I'm wrong about WHY the left doesn't like McCain(because he ran against them for Pres) but any of the excuses you on the left put out as to why you suddenly didn't like him don't hold much water(ie, your list and some of the other excuses posted in the last year and a half). But more to the point, this is just yet another thread by leftist libs trying to claim they "really" know what the R's are doing and what they "really" should be doing. It's laughable to think that libs know what's best for the R's when they aren't one or understand why someone is one...especially when challenged they trot out the same old tired "bitter" line. You libs are a joke. Why don't you try to keep your own party in line instead of trying to diagnose or tell the R's what they should be.
Haha. Yeah, you really demolished that list. He came out in support of Bush's tax cuts in 2006, because... uhmm...nobody's running for president 2 years before the election! Point defeated! ahahahaha. (hint: everyone seriously running for president is running 2 years before the election) At least you (sort of) admitted how stupid you were to declare you knew why the left didn't like McCain in the same thread as you were complaining about how the left shouldn't try to say it knows what conservatives are thinking.
As for the OP, it's about half right. Of course the Republicans are working for Obama's defeat, and it goes beyond ideological differences. If Obama succeeds, they are screwed and they know it. They also know he's incredibly popular right now. Their plan is to ramp up his negatives, let him put through the big legislation that he wants so as to not appear too obstructionist, but have him put it through with minimal majorities so that they can use it against him later. This is politics 101. So...of course liberals can discern why conservative politicians are doing things and vice versa, most of the time it's not particularly hard. I was simply making fun of you for being so minimally self aware that you weren't able to avoid arguing both sides of an issue within the same thread.
Doc Savage Fan
Lifer
- Nov 30, 2006
- 15,456
- 389
- 121
Drakkon
Diamond Member
- Aug 14, 2001
- 8,401
- 1
- 0
This Comic = This thread
(guy holding knife = Conservatives after the last 8 years, Other guy = Liberal America)
(guy holding knife = Conservatives after the last 8 years, Other guy = Liberal America)
Doc Savage Fan
Lifer
- Nov 30, 2006
- 15,456
- 389
- 121
You could...but it wouldn't necessarily be the truth in my case now would it? BTW...I loved this part "...nitpicking petty assholes who attack and attack..." Damn that sounds familiar....can anybody help me with this? My memory is not what it used to be...lol.
That's a false equivalence right these. You didn't have to be a 'nitpicking petty asshole' to criticize Bush. General criticisms were "Bush led us into a calamitous foreign war of choice", and "Bush's response to the destruction of a major American city was incompetent", or "Bush is subverting the rule of law to spy on Americans".
Those are some mighty big nits.
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
Psstt McCain didn't start his run until April of 2007 IIRC.
And no, I provided an explaination as to their(media and "moderates") sudden turn as it's the only one that makes sense since all the other excuses you libs have come up with turn out to be weak at best. Provide a better explanation and I'll reconsider but so far you've offered nothing but a half assed list that was easily picked apart using facts.
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
lol, there is plenty to criticize Bush about but your 3 things are pretty much hyperbole(go figure coming from a lib).
1. Iraq was authorized by Congress
2. Katrina was more a failure of local and state response and "planning" - not Feds
3. "subverting" to "spy on Americans"? lol, you mean listening to calls to/from outside America to/by foreign callers of interest?
Meh, same old tired crap from the rabid left.
Oh CAD. Do you do this on purpose? Slap yourself. Please.
1.) How does Iraq being authorized by Congress prevent Bush from being criticized for it? That means you can criticize Congress as well as Bush, but it does nothing to change his culpability. Did Congress force him to invade Iraq against his will?
2.) You should definitely tell the former DHS that. Michael Chertoff seems to be under the impression that there were large scale failures on the part of FEMA and other federal agencies. Once again though, the failure of other agencies would be cause to criticize them as well, but would in no way absolve Bush's administration's response. (what's strange about this one is that even the Bush administration admitted its response was shit, why are you still arguing it?)
3.) I meant ignoring standing federal law, yes.
Most importantly though: My post was referring to the SCALE of criticisms levied against Bush. Agree with them or not, they are major, major issues to criticize someone about. Since the statement I was taking issue with was the complaints of 'nitpicking', they seem to show otherwise.
Oh, and McCain did not start his campaign in April of 2007. That might have been the day he officially filed, but as anyone who knows even the slightest thing about presidential campaigns knows, you lay the groundwork for your run years in advance. Oh, and so now your argument is "I'm not saying I know how liberals think, I'm just saying that my theory for what they think is the only one that makes sense." ahahahahaha. You're a special flower.
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
I didn't say Bush couldn't be criticized for Iraq. Try actually reading for once instead of stuffing straw.
I didn't say there wasn't some failure with the Feds regarding Katrina. The local and state were more of a failure- not the Feds. The feds could have done more(not that they should have) but most of the failure stems from the pitiful local and state action(or lack there of) - not the Feds. Again - Try actually reading for once instead of stuffing straw.
Federal law? Puhleeze, wasn't this taken care by the court who authorizes these things recently?
So again, you can pick certain things out of all 3 of those to criticize Bush but your list was hyperbole - not criticism.
Yes, troll, I expressed my opinion. You expressed yours and tried to provide an excuse with that list but your list couldn't hold up to the truth. Sorry you can't handle the facts but it doesn't surprise me you can't admit the truth...
Doc Savage Fan
Lifer
- Nov 30, 2006
- 15,456
- 389
- 121
retrospooty
Platinum Member
- Apr 3, 2002
- 2,031
- 74
- 86
OMG Cad, my eyes are bleeding just reading your post.
You are the epitome of the pot calling the kettle black in every thread you enter... Arguing on and on about how you never said you werent black, without admitting that you are black, and attacking the other side with typical partisaned tactics, and outraged by the fact that the other side uses (the exact same) typical partisaned tactics on you. Then nitpicking or ignoring facts that were presented, blaming the other side for nitpicking and ignoring facts. Then you inevitably lay it all on "its just you typical liberal" something or other... Completely ignoring that you are acting the same way.
Give it a rest, your transparancy is more obvious than you think it is, and more tiresome as well.
Your post makes me think you don't understand the definition of hyperbole, a straw man (what I assume you meant by 'stuffing straw'), or that you don't understand how English works.
You responded to my post by labeling it hyperbole. Your stated justification for #1 was that Congress authorized the invasion. I would LOVE to hear how Congressional authorization of Bush's actions in any way relates to branding the statement "Bush led us into a calamitous foreign war of choice" hyperbole. Are you trying to state that because Congress authorized it, Bush was not the leader and so I was exaggerating his leadership to the point in which the statement was hyperbolic? Are you stating that because of Congressional authorization the war was not calamitous? That it was not of choice? You're really going to have to clear this one up for me.
Same goes for #2. Are you saying that the larger failure by state and local governments (highly debatable) somehow changes the nature of FEMA's response from incompetent to competent? If so, you will have to explain this to me as well.
As for #3, action by the FISA court is fairly irrelevant. (and the decision secret, so it is not possible to know what action was taken) The issue was unilaterally deciding to break federal law. You've got your hands full with #1, #2, and the English language though, so lets take things slowly.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 9K
-
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 7K
-
Facebook
Twitter