Bush is a hero
Lyndi

Sarasota, FL

#168857 Sep 22, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you drunk?
No but I have humiliated you and that question is a beginners attempt at trying to conceal it.

Now, I'm going to hang up on you and do some reading.
You can either go back "over there" -lol- and come up with a new secret code or now that the wallpaper guy has shown up to spam the thread, you can help him with his spelling and grammar. Maybe you two could start personal messaging each other and grow your friendship!

Since: Apr 07

Location hidden

#168868 Sep 22, 2013
BobinTX wrote:
<quoted text>
Democrats don't seem very interested in finding out what caused the deaths of four Americans in Benghazi, or about the lies that were being told to the American people afterward. Democrats seem to be more interested in covering-up, than in the investigation.
Lost In Transition wrote:
<quoted text>
It's worse than that. No matter the party, when government incompetence gets people needlessly killed, the least they owe the family members is the opportunity to vent. This was sickening.
Well said, both of you. The fact that neither Obama or Hillary Clinton have kept their promises to keep in touch with the family members of those killed, or to bring their killers to justice, should tell Americans all they need to know about just how much either one of them cares about American lives--when those lives interfere with their political ambitions.

“Custer @ LBH - Ooops”

Since: Nov 07

Bakersfield, CA

#168874 Sep 22, 2013
Lyndi wrote:
<quoted text>
No but I have humiliated you and that question is a beginners attempt at trying to conceal it.
Now, I'm going to hang up on you and do some reading.
You can either go back "over there" -lol- and come up with a new secret code or now that the wallpaper guy has shown up to spam the thread, you can help him with his spelling and grammar. Maybe you two could start personal messaging each other and grow your friendship!
Heh heh heh heh heh.
:-D

Since: Apr 07

Location hidden

#168875 Sep 22, 2013
lisw wrote:
<quoted text>You are just so wrong. We can tolerate the cheating and the lying and the blow jobs and the broken promises until someone dies for those things. Benghazi is the only thing I care about. The rest is just politics as usual.

If anyone could have used it to political advantage it would have been Romney but he refused to do so. You may be able to imagine people using dead sons, husbands and brothers as pawns but it is totally off my radar screen and I think it is off those who are trying to get to the bottom of this.
Amen, Lis, every last heartfelt word.

Hip, whoEVER was at the bottom of the lack of military aid to the embattled consulate on September 11, 2012, I WANT TO KNOW. I want to know who made or did not make the decisions to send help, and I want to WHY this decision was made. For heaven's sake, I as an American am ENTITLED to know why. I am entitled to know who and why made the decisions that resulted in the utterly needless deaths of four other Americans.

And that's not even mentioning the pain of those four men's families and friends. SOMEBODY IS LYING TO THEM and I want to know who that is too, I want to know who has decided that other considerations outweigh the families' right to answers, and what those other considerations are.

This is NOT a political issue, Hip--or shouldn't be. There would be no political component here if it had not been deliberately injected by those who do not want to provide the answers that all Americans deserve to know.

One other thing: I trust you will not insult me by implying that I would feel differently if the two people most likely at the bottom of this, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, were not liberals whom I dislike.

“Unemployed Bush 5.3 obama 8.7”

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#168876 Sep 22, 2013
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>I agree with almost all of this, except maybe the the part about the kids not planning on trashing the place. That seems to be a regularly scheduled part of the festivities. I've read several stories like this about homes in foreclosure, and others from places where there's a high concentration of vacation/2nd homes.
Vandalism seems to be part of the entertainment at these parties.
I'm sorry to hear that. Although I did foolish things when I was young, I had too much respect for the property of others to intentionally destroy it. If that value system has changed, it's a sad state of affairs.
Lyndi

Sarasota, FL

#168878 Sep 23, 2013
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>
1a) So lemme see if I've got this straight. I'm a suspicious man who only disengages from a conversation when I think I'm going to lose or my side will be depicted in a bad light....
1b) but YOU are a sincere person who doesn't pose phoney questions and, essentially, doesn't like the fact that I talk to you the way you talk to me.

2) I probably should have described the question as based on a flawed premise rather than phoney, because phoney can imply that you posed it insincerely, and I don't believe that.

3) The fact that you're sincere doesn't make the question any more valid.
=======

1a) I didn't say you only disengage when you think you're going to lose or your side will be depicted in a bad light. I said you have a tendency to halt play and that occurs coincidentally when the debate isn't going the way you'd probably like it to. Calling someones questions "phoney" and refusing to answer has a 100% success rate of doing precisely that.
1b) You make assumptions as to how I'm talking to you. Example: Regarding the Modesto college/constitution issue, you assumed I was being "cute" as you put it when I apologzed in advance for using FOX as my source. I wasn't, so you're being "cute" in return was based on your false assumption. Furthermore, I satisfactorily defended that by explaining and posting my google search. You still choose to doubt my sincerity. I'm not stupid, Willie. Most liberals/democrats think FOX is FAUX. Why on earth would I set myself up for news source ridicule? Answer: I wouldn't.
I RARELY use FOX as a source. It's political suicide with people like you.

2) If you want to say my questions are based on a flawed premise, that's fine but the burden is then on YOU to provide an explantion which proves that. You can't just walk around, Willie like the referee telling people their questions are based on a false premise, not elaborate then walk away. When you do that, you're stopping the dialogue (or halting play) simply because you don't happen to like the route your opponent is taking you.

3) False. A question is always valid if asked with sincerity.

Since: Sep 13

Location hidden

#168879 Sep 23, 2013
Hahahahaha, I'd rather have Hitler as a hero.Bush almost messed up 1 of the greatess countries in the world....I don't understand how you get a job and almost mess up EVERYTHING...Does Bush really think you can mess around with all the brown people and go back to the States as if everything is A-OK.Wait, where is terror actually?Iraq,Libya,Afghanista n,Syria,Pakistan....WHERE?
Lyndi

Sarasota, FL

#168880 Sep 23, 2013
“Who will help me plant my wheat?” asked the little red hen.

“Not I,” said the cow.

“Not I,” said the duck.

“Not I,” said the pig.

“Not I,” said the goose.

“Then I will do it by myself.” She planted her crop and the wheat grew and ripened.

“Who will help me reap my wheat?” asked the little red hen.

“Not I,” said the duck.

“Out of my classification,” said the pig.

“I’d lose my seniority,” said the cow.

“I’d lose my unemployment compensation,” said the goose.

“Then I will do it by myself,” said the little red hen, and so she did.

“Who will help me bake the bread?” asked the little red hen.

“That would be overtime for me,” said the cow.

“I’d lose my welfare benefits,” said the duck.

“I’m a dropout and never learned how,” said the pig.

“If I’m to be the only helper, that’s discrimination,” said the goose.

“Then I will do it by myself,” said the little red hen.

She baked five loaves and held them up for all of her neighbors to see. They wanted some and, in fact, demanded a share but the little red hen said,“No, I shall eat all five loaves.”

“Excess profits!” cried the cow.(Nancy Pelosi)

“Capitalist leech!” screamed the duck.(Barbara Boxer)

“I demand equal rights!” yelled the goose.(Jesse Jackson)

The pig just grunted in disdain.(Harry Reid)

And they all painted ‘Unfair!’ picket signs and marched around and around the little red hen, shouting obscenities.

Then the Farmer Obama came. He said to the little red hen,“You must not be so greedy.”

“But I earned the bread,” said the little red hen.

“Exactly,” said Farmer Obama.“That is what makes our free enterprise system so wonderful. Anyone in the barnyard can earn as much as he wants. But under our modern government regulations, the productive workers must divide the fruits of their labor with those who are lazy and idle.”

And they all lived happily ever after, including the little red hen, who smiled and clucked,“I am grateful, for now I truly understand.”

But her neighbors became quite disappointed in her. She never again baked bread because she joined the ‘party’ and got her bread free. And all the Democrats smiled.‘Fairness’ had been established.

Individual initiative had died but nobody noticed; perhaps no one cared so long as there was free bread that ‘the rich’ were paying for.
====
EPILOGUE

Bill Clinton is getting $12 million for his memoirs.

Hillary got $8 million for hers.

That’s $20 million for the memories from two people, who for eight years repeatedly testified, under oath, that they couldn’t remember a thing.

IS THIS A GREAT BARNYARD OR WHAT?

“2016 No Clinton No Bush!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#168882 Sep 23, 2013
Lyndi wrote:
<quoted text>
=======
1a) I didn't say you only disengage when you think you're going to lose or your side will be depicted in a bad light. I said you have a tendency to halt play and that occurs coincidentally when the debate isn't going the way you'd probably like it to. Calling someones questions "phoney" and refusing to answer has a 100% success rate of doing precisely that.
1b) You make assumptions as to how I'm talking to you. Example: Regarding the Modesto college/constitution issue, you assumed I was being "cute" as you put it when I apologzed in advance for using FOX as my source. I wasn't, so you're being "cute" in return was based on your false assumption. Furthermore, I satisfactorily defended that by explaining and posting my google search. You still choose to doubt my sincerity. I'm not stupid, Willie. Most liberals/democrats think FOX is FAUX. Why on earth would I set myself up for news source ridicule? Answer: I wouldn't.
I RARELY use FOX as a source. It's political suicide with people like you.
2) If you want to say my questions are based on a flawed premise, that's fine but the burden is then on YOU to provide an explantion which proves that. You can't just walk around, Willie like the referee telling people their questions are based on a false premise, not elaborate then walk away. When you do that, you're stopping the dialogue (or halting play) simply because you don't happen to like the route your opponent is taking you.
3) False. A question is always valid if asked with sincerity.
1. I have a tendency to halt play when I think someone is asking Socratic questions designed to elicit specific responses, or when they're posing 'when did you quit beating your wife' questions. If you're trying to take me down a route, fergitaboutit, I ain't likely to go ...

(oh, you do it too and worser's gonna have a field day with that)

2. What more elaboration on the flawed premise do you need beyond "I think that avoiding responsibility, playing the victim, and a disproportionate sense of entitlement are human failings, and human failings cannot be associated with a political ideology"?

Since: Sep 13

Location hidden

#168883 Sep 23, 2013
There is no way in the whole world that G W Bush can be considered a hero. The only way he could be known as a hero is if there was some serious corruption going on in our government and our media. Only a truly corrupt media would promote a liar as a hero.

He stole Florida and lied about Iraqs WMD.

Can someone explain what Im missing?
Roberta G

United States

#168884 Sep 23, 2013
Adlib wrote:
There is no way in the whole world that G W Bush can be considered a hero. The only way he could be known as a hero is if there was some serious corruption going on in our government and our media. Only a truly corrupt media would promote a liar as a hero.
He stole Florida and lied about Iraqs WMD.
Can someone explain what Im missing?
That would be the previous seven years' worth of posts. Doesn't it ever occur to any of you newbies to check whether the thread name is still relevant to what the people in the thread are talking about?

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#168885 Sep 23, 2013
“Who will help me plant my wheat?” asked the little Red Hen.
“Not I,” said the gluten intolerant.
“Not I,“ said the celiac disease patient.
“Not I,” said the folks with inflammation.
“I will,” said Monsanto.

So the little Red Hen, and the toxic-chemical-turned-bioengin eering company, planted the wheat, and it grew, and mutated, and killed many insects feeding upon it.(But not all of them. The survivors mutated in return.)

“Who will help me harvest my wheat?” asked the little Red Hen
“What do you mean, YOUR wheat?” asked Monsanto.“We have the patent on this wheat. Didn’t you read the contract?”

So the little Red Hen harvested her wheat at her own expense, and Monsanto claimed the lion’s share of it in payment of copywriting fees.
Lyndi

Sarasota, FL

#168887 Sep 23, 2013
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>1. I have a tendency to halt play when I think someone is asking Socratic questions designed to elicit specific responses, or when they're posing 'when did you quit beating your wife' questions. If you're trying to take me down a route, fergitaboutit, I ain't likely to go ...
(oh, you do it too and worser's gonna have a field day with that)
2. What more elaboration on the flawed premise do you need beyond "I think that avoiding responsibility, playing the victim, and a disproportionate sense of entitlement are human failings, and human failings cannot be associated with a political ideology"?
1)The Socratic technique of debate was designed to elicit critical thinking, not specific responses.

2) You don't prove your point. It isn't written in stone that "avoiding responsibility, playing the victim, and a disproportionate sense of entitlement" are human failings. When one intentionally avoids responsibilty, intentionally plays the victim or knowingly has a disproportionate sense of entitlement, it has then become a premeditated (human) CHOICE not a failing. And if that is true, then a human failing in it's purest sense is making a genuine effort but not succeeding.

3) You skipped this one. Smart fellow.

===
If got to get you a little whistle and a black and white striped shirt.
Lyndi

Sarasota, FL

#168888 Sep 23, 2013
Adlib wrote:
Only a truly corrupt media would promote a liar as a hero.

What would you call the media who promotes a buffoon into a genius?
Roberta G

United States

#168889 Sep 23, 2013
Lyndi wrote:
<quoted text>
What would you call the media who promotes a buffoon into a genius?
Advertising executives?
Roberta G

United States

#168890 Sep 23, 2013
Lyndi wrote:
<quoted text>
What would you call the media who promotes a buffoon into a genius?
My husband said "Traitors" ;)

“Unemployed Bush 5.3 obama 8.7”

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#168891 Sep 23, 2013
Adlib wrote:
There is no way in the whole world that G W Bush can be considered a hero. The only way he could be known as a hero is if there was some serious corruption going on in our government and our media. Only a truly corrupt media would promote a liar as a hero.
He stole Florida and lied about Iraqs WMD.
Can someone explain what Im missing?
A brain.

Who opened the door to the 'Kids-R-Us' forum and let all these brats in?

“Unemployed Bush 5.3 obama 8.7”

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#168892 Sep 23, 2013
Roberta G wrote:
<quoted text>That would be the previous seven years' worth of posts. Doesn't it ever occur to any of you newbies to check whether the thread name is still relevant to what the people in the thread are talking about?
They don't know facts, so why would it bother them to not be current?

“2016 No Clinton No Bush!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#168893 Sep 23, 2013
Lyndi wrote:
<quoted text>
1)The Socratic technique of debate was designed to elicit critical thinking, not specific responses.
2) You don't prove your point. It isn't written in stone that "avoiding responsibility, playing the victim, and a disproportionate sense of entitlement" are human failings. When one intentionally avoids responsibilty, intentionally plays the victim or knowingly has a disproportionate sense of entitlement, it has then become a premeditated (human) CHOICE not a failing. And if that is true, then a human failing in it's purest sense is making a genuine effort but not succeeding.
3) You skipped this one. Smart fellow.
===
If got to get you a little whistle and a black and white striped shirt.
1. The definition of Socratic method at dictionary.com is as follows:

the use of questions, as employed by Socrates, to develop a latent idea, as in the mind of a pupil, or to elicit admissions, as from an opponent, tending to establish a proposition.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/socrat...

In a political discussion in particular, there is a desire for specific responses from the person being questioned. It's that 'route' you referred to in your post.

2. Whether a human being by instinct or by deliberate choice "intentionally avoids responsibilty, intentionally plays the victim or knowingly has a disproportionate sense of entitlement", it's a human failing.

People fail. Liberals fail, conservatives fail, the completely apolitical fail.

Trying to seize on those failures and attempt to portray that as a characteristic of a particular political ideology is basic demagoguery 101, but it's a cheap parlor trick with no basis in fact.

3. What, exactly, was there to comment on? I've tried to explain that phony was a poor choice of words, and that I wasn't questioning the sincerity of your belief. I can't make you accept the explanation.
Roberta G

United States

#168894 Sep 23, 2013
BobinTX wrote:
<quoted text>
They don't know facts, so why would it bother them to not be current?
Good point.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 3 min ChristineM 865,638
The Christian Atheist debate 43 min ChristineM 2,039
gay bottom in gurgaon (May '14) 47 min cute94 465
Native American lives MATTER 1 hr Poov 2
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 1 hr Pegasus 272,425
White Lives MATTER 1 hr Poov 114
my cousin touches me when i am asleep and i kin... (Mar '14) 1 hr trolllord69 16
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 2 hr RoSesz 600,085
Which is the Oldest Indian Language? Sanskrit V... (Jul '08) 9 hr Victoria Bologna 7,504
Sleeping with mother (Oct '13) 10 hr andy 45
More from around the web