“2016 No Clinton No Bush!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#175029 Feb 21, 2014
Yellow Star Seed is Back wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't meet with Putin, not sure about WWW...but my guess is neither did he. Neither of us claimed to see into his soul as GW did, nor have we claimed to know him like you and Bob do.
"The more you say, the less you know"
You and CC are the most naive of all.
Really?

You're going to do "I'm not naive, you're naive" but leave out the "neener neener neener" at the end?

The naive stuff is hogwash. It's hogwash when she claims it, and it's hogwash when you bounce it back to her.

I thought the criticisms of Obama for his remarks on the Ukraine were, to put it mildly, exaggerated beyond reason (unless you define "I can't believe that guy is my President" as reason).

Bush's comments on Putin's soul from 12 1/2 years ago are hardly relevant to a conversation about Obama's actions this past week in a political discussion.

In a game of tit for tat, maybe - but not in a political discussion. Of course, political discussion very rarely breaks through the rage in this thread any more, so maybe tit for tat is the best I can hope for.

“2016 No Clinton No Bush!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#175030 Feb 21, 2014
Wish they made this stuff for cyberspace ...

“Custer @ LBH - Ooops”

Since: Nov 07

Bakersfield, CA

#175031 Feb 21, 2014
Yellow Star Seed is Back wrote:
<quoted text>
So why didn't GW employ the same flattering approach to other murdering thug leaders?
It's funny how you ended by commenting how the "murdering thug" Putin liked GW more than Obama.......
If you are trying to make yourself look like a tool, yer doin a damn good job there me boy.
"Flattering approach"? I know you can't be that stupid.

GW & Vladimir had one connection. They were both outdoorsmen, pure & simple. That connection allowed them the opportunity to discuss certain issues both at Crawford, and in Moskow. I'm certain both men got their points across, and whatever the disagreements were, were settled one way or the other.

GW didn't hafta deal with a Libya uprising-Putin, or an Iran nukes treaty-Putin, or a Syria anti-government-Putin. Those things are taking place on Obama's watch and GW is no longer
meeting with Putin.

As for "other" thugs and murdering leaders, there are only so many of them in key countries, such as Russia, China, Iran. YOU try to see why inviting those "other" leaders to cowboy down in Texas is probably not the best remedy.

Last, it's easy to cast yer own manufactured aspersions on me, and make it look legit. But
it's another thing altogether to clearly illustrate your accusations.

“Custer @ LBH - Ooops”

Since: Nov 07

Bakersfield, CA

#175032 Feb 21, 2014
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>So, what you're saying is the guy practiced in treachery and manipulation probably liked GW more than he would Barry.
Hmmmmm ...
(I recognize this is a silly diversion which has nothing to do with, well, anything at all. Everything that's been said has been about the fingernails on the blackboard reaction to Obama speaking. Ukraine is just what he happened to be talking about; he spoke, so there MUST be something wrong with it.)
My guess is you will find liberals who howled in outrage when Bush said that, and probably plenty who denounced Bush as weak when condemning Russia's incursion/invasion of Georgia in 1988.
Hmmmmmmm again ....
Refer to msg #175031

“Custer @ LBH - Ooops”

Since: Nov 07

Bakersfield, CA

#175033 Feb 21, 2014
Yellow Star Seed is Back wrote:
<quoted text>
I sure thought your momma was a woman, are you say in she ain't?
Immature juvenile schoolyard banter. Take it somewhere else, "me boy".

“2016 No Clinton No Bush!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#175034 Feb 21, 2014
bad bob wrote:
<quoted text>
Refer to msg #175031
I read it, and I stand on what I said.

If you're going to 'go there' with this silly thing, then who was doin' the likin' is fair game. That's going to be true no matter how hard you work at justifying the silliness.

Don't get me wrong ... bringing something that Bush did over a dozen years ago was silly too. It has nothing to do with the rage over the fact that Obama has the audacity to be President of the U.S. over your objections, and he said something about Ukraine, and if he said something it must have been wrong.

As to whether bringing Bush into it is more, less, or equally silly than bringing Reagan into it ... that I'm not sure about.

“Custer @ LBH - Ooops”

Since: Nov 07

Bakersfield, CA

#175035 Feb 21, 2014
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>That's going to be true no matter how hard you work at justifying the silliness.
With that comment in mind, yer opinion is noted.

Since: Jun 08

Location hidden

#175037 Feb 21, 2014
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>First of all, as I said in my post, I recognize this is a silly diversion which has nothing to do with, well, anything at all.
Second, if you're going to be petty enough to say that Bush was more likable to Putin than Obama, then it's fair game and hardly naive to look at the fact that the person doing the liking is trained in treachery and manipulation.
And while I realize (and knew when I typed it) that's bunk logic applied to a bunk discussion, it's probably more valid than your dime store 'analysis' of Putin.*
Look, I get it. Obama's your President and it drives you to distraction. You will find fault with anything he says and anything he does. This time he said something about the Ukraine, where the U.S. has virtually no meaningful options. You're claiming to be upset by the fact that he didn't more firmly talk about something the United States can do very little to affect the outcome, which frankly doesn't make sense even before you take into account the diplomacy that's going on behind the scenes.
*- I'll take that back when you can provide me your credentials to a) offer an analysis of someone you never met with, b) have sources of information that describe Putin's actions from other than an American perspective, and c) show me a world leader of any major power who can't be a dandy at times, appear to be a thug at others.
a) EVERYONE has credentials to offer an analysis of Vladimir Putin. He is on the world stage and likes it that way. b) uh, are you kidding me? What other perspective matters to an American? c) You're right there are lots of them. Bill Clinton comes immediately to mind. I can't come up with another right away but I'll give it some thought.

Since: Jun 08

Location hidden

#175038 Feb 21, 2014
And Willie Obama being president does not drive me to distraction. Truth is I don't think about him much. It's a funny thing though. First I liked him as a person then he did so many bad things and it's hard to like him at all. Nothing he's done will change things irreversibly, they just make things very uncomfortable. It was the same with Jimmy Carter.
But I would like to know how you think you can get away with that accusation as your defense of what he has been doing....all along. He's a bad president, Willie, I'd say that if his name was Bush, Reagan, or Kennedy, if he still did the things he does.

Since: Jun 08

Location hidden

#175039 Feb 21, 2014
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
Wish they made this stuff for cyberspace ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =cXXd9LVWy-kXX
heh-heh. But Willie you forget that raid gets rid of pests but it also invades the environment and changes the DNA of good guys and bunnies.

“"Tanners Flat" U dummy”

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#175040 Feb 21, 2014
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>Really?
You're going to do "I'm not naive, you're naive" but leave out the "neener neener neener" at the end?
The naive stuff is hogwash. It's hogwash when she claims it, and it's hogwash when you bounce it back to her.
I thought the criticisms of Obama for his remarks on the Ukraine were, to put it mildly, exaggerated beyond reason (unless you define "I can't believe that guy is my President" as reason).
Bush's comments on Putin's soul from 12 1/2 years ago are hardly relevant to a conversation about Obama's actions this past week in a political discussion.
In a game of tit for tat, maybe - but not in a political discussion. Of course, political discussion very rarely breaks through the rage in this thread any more, so maybe tit for tat is the best I can hope for.
There isn't a whole lot of "discussion" going on here so pardon me for not taking any of this too seriously.

“"Tanners Flat" U dummy”

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#175041 Feb 21, 2014
bad bob wrote:
<quoted text>

I'm certain both men got their points across, and whatever the disagreements were, were settled one way or the other.
I'm certain you don't know what you are talking about there.

Since: Sep 10

Long Beach, CA

#175042 Feb 21, 2014
Yellow Star Seed is Back wrote:
<quoted text>
There isn't a whole lot of "discussion" going on here so pardon me for not taking any of this too seriously.
That's perfectly fine.

I happen to agree with your assessment of the thread.

Welcome.

Enjoy.

Since: Sep 10

Long Beach, CA

#175043 Feb 21, 2014
Yellow Star Seed is Back wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm certain you don't know what you are talking about there.
Yeah, most of the posters here are often looney.

But they are never in doubt.

“2016 No Clinton No Bush!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#175044 Feb 21, 2014
lisw wrote:
<quoted text>a) EVERYONE has credentials to offer an analysis of Vladimir Putin. He is on the world stage and likes it that way. b) uh, are you kidding me? What other perspective matters to an American? c) You're right there are lots of them. Bill Clinton comes immediately to mind. I can't come up with another right away but I'll give it some thought.
Continuing to HOPE you were serious in your post that at least appeared to try and spark discussion, I'll agree with a. I put that in there because you sometimes resort to your education and training as a therapist to back up comments you make about people.

With c, you're doing exactly what YSS did by dragging Bush into this.

Nice try, though. Clinton always works. Should I throw some GHWB in there, or can I go back to Nixon?

B ... well, I guess it depends on how you look at foreign relations . I go more for trying to understand why a person does what they do. In order to do that I have to look at it from their perspective as well as the perspective of others besides my (American) self. That doesn't mean I agree with their perspective, mind you.

You tried to compare Obama's press conference remarks with Ronald Reagan's speech at the Brandenburg Gate, and claimed my pointing out the difference between a prepared speech and extemporaneous remarks was weak. That' was only the FIRST and most obvious difference.

Let me ask you something, though. Do you think Reagan would have made that speech at the Gate if what has been going in the Ukraine was going on in Berlin? Do you think he would have made it two (three?) years later, when East Germany was collapsing in front of the world's eyes?

I don't. I don't hold him in the highest regard and I certainly don't buy the tough guy myth, but I can't think he would be that irresponsible and would challenge anyone 'on my side' who tried to.

While Obama was NOT saying what you wanted to hear, diplomats (including US diplomats) were working to bring about the most recent agreement between the dissidents and the government of the Ukraine. That agreement may not be worth the paper it's written on, but for the moment it may stop the violence.

That, to me, is far more important than a Presidential speech that makes US citizens feel all warm and fuzzy.

“2016 No Clinton No Bush!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#175045 Feb 21, 2014
lisw wrote:
And Willie Obama being president does not drive me to distraction. Truth is I don't think about him much. It's a funny thing though. First I liked him as a person then he did so many bad things and it's hard to like him at all. Nothing he's done will change things irreversibly, they just make things very uncomfortable. It was the same with Jimmy Carter.
But I would like to know how you think you can get away with that accusation as your defense of what he has been doing....all along. He's a bad president, Willie, I'd say that if his name was Bush, Reagan, or Kennedy, if he still did the things he does.
From where I'm sitting, down here in my basement man-cave, it sure looks like a) you think about him a lot, and b) he drives you to distraction. I believe I once said if there was nothing else for you to criticize you'd find fault with his choice of socks, and (again from my perspective) it's only gotten worse.

The only thing I'm trying to 'get away with' is expressing my opinion, much like bad bob frequently did in the early days of this thread when he talked about Bush haters.

Tell you what, though ... if you want to have a discussion, I'll drop the 'drives you to distraction" like I did the socks, if you drop claiming you know why I post or don't post things, and quit looking for my agenda or my ulterior motive.

Deal?

“"Tanners Flat" U dummy”

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#175046 Feb 21, 2014
lisw wrote:
<quoted text>a) EVERYONE has credentials to offer an analysis of Vladimir Putin. He is on the world stage and likes it that way. b) uh, are you kidding me? What other perspective matters to an American? c) You're right there are lots of them. Bill Clinton comes immediately to mind. I can't come up with another right away but I'll give it some thought.
a)Don't confuse your right to an opinion with having credentials, especially when you can't provide any credentials with your opinion. b) None if we are only dealing with domestic affairs but more than just an American perspective is required when dealing with foreign affairs. c)Bill Clinton was a thug? That's a new line of attack.

“2016 No Clinton No Bush!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#175047 Feb 21, 2014
Yellow Star Seed is Back wrote:
<quoted text>
There isn't a whole lot of "discussion" going on here so pardon me for not taking any of this too seriously.
Yeah, but you can dumb things down considerably without even trying all by yourself, and you've probably met your intellectual (if not ideological) doppelganger in USA-1.

I guess even adolescents need something to do, but jeez ... can't you go to facebook or snapchat or something?

Since: Jun 08

Location hidden

#175048 Feb 21, 2014
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>Continuing to HOPE you were serious in your post that at least appeared to try and spark discussion, I'll agree with a. I put that in there because you sometimes resort to your education and training as a therapist to back up comments you make about people.
With c, you're doing exactly what YSS did by dragging Bush into this.
Nice try, though. Clinton always works. Should I throw some GHWB in there, or can I go back to Nixon?
B ... well, I guess it depends on how you look at foreign relations . I go more for trying to understand why a person does what they do. In order to do that I have to look at it from their perspective as well as the perspective of others besides my (American) self. That doesn't mean I agree with their perspective, mind you.
You tried to compare Obama's press conference remarks with Ronald Reagan's speech at the Brandenburg Gate, and claimed my pointing out the difference between a prepared speech and extemporaneous remarks was weak. That' was only the FIRST and most obvious difference.
Let me ask you something, though. Do you think Reagan would have made that speech at the Gate if what has been going in the Ukraine was going on in Berlin? Do you think he would have made it two (three?) years later, when East Germany was collapsing in front of the world's eyes?
I don't. I don't hold him in the highest regard and I certainly don't buy the tough guy myth, but I can't think he would be that irresponsible and would challenge anyone 'on my side' who tried to.
While Obama was NOT saying what you wanted to hear, diplomats (including US diplomats) were working to bring about the most recent agreement between the dissidents and the government of the Ukraine. That agreement may not be worth the paper it's written on, but for the moment it may stop the violence.
That, to me, is far more important than a Presidential speech that makes US citizens feel all warm and fuzzy.
That's probably the biggest area where you and I disagree is whether a diplomatic move that temporarily stops the violence works. I don't think it does. It's like putting a cork in a nuclear reactor. We do it way too often, putting sanctions on that don't work or that somehow they find a way around, making agreements they don't keep, and shaking fingers. Obama is supposed to have this power of speech and charisma. That is what Reagan had and when he made a speech he really did make world leaders think "I want some of that" He could make America look like it had the right idea. I don't think Obama is capable of that because he doesn't like America so much. He doesn't believe in our military and he thinks we should be more like "them."

Since: Jun 08

Location hidden

#175049 Feb 21, 2014
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>From where I'm sitting, down here in my basement man-cave, it sure looks like a) you think about him a lot, and b) he drives you to distraction. I believe I once said if there was nothing else for you to criticize you'd find fault with his choice of socks, and (again from my perspective) it's only gotten worse.
The only thing I'm trying to 'get away with' is expressing my opinion, much like bad bob frequently did in the early days of this thread when he talked about Bush haters.
Tell you what, though ... if you want to have a discussion, I'll drop the 'drives you to distraction" like I did the socks, if you drop claiming you know why I post or don't post things, and quit looking for my agenda or my ulterior motive.
Deal?
I'll sure try.

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
Poll If you're Christain what kind are you? (Oct '07) 6 min 15th Dalai Lama 3,595
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 22 min Michael 584,483
This ~ or ~ That? (game) (Dec '12) 25 min Hatti_Hollerand 1,801
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 29 min AntiFreakMachine 828,826
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 31 min Truths 611,838
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 40 min Insults Are Easier 270,681
avandia 2014 (Jan '14) 1 hr now what 323
Why Iím no longer a Christian (Jul '08) 2 hr karl44 442,889
More from around the web