Yep, its all about the perception and not the reality. This sounds like an act of manipulation to me. Paints a picture of what Romney's Presidency would be like, he will tell you what you want to hear, and then do what is best for him and his.
No integrity what so ever.
Desperate actions from a desperate man.
On a side note: As I said before, if Obama's Denver slump was intentional, it was one of the most brilliant political moves in a long, long, long while. If Obama knocked it out of the park in Denver, Romney would have been done and the main GOP/SuperPAC dollars would have gone to the congressional races. Now as it stands, Obama is leading, the Senate looks like it wil gain on the Democrat majority as opposed to lossing it as EVERYONE thought around summer. All because Mitt was even marginally viable after Denver.
Good letter. Did you submit this to the Bulletin Larry?
This is what I meant when I talked about politicians, being the professional liars that they are, tell lies to our vision. If the mainst*ream media doesn't do a good job reporting this(and this isn't the first time it's happened is it Paul Ryan at a charity) then it will prove my point exactly.
Hello Larry, From the news reports that I listened to and online sources that I read, the amount the Romney campaign donated upfront was FIVE thousand dollars (not FIFTY thousand) worth of supplies purchased from Wal-Mart. I could be wrong, but thought I would let you know about this discrepancy. Actually the $5,000 figure makes the story even worse for as an online blogger (not on this forum) pointed out, that is HALF the amount of Romney's "bet" with Perry. Remember that one? Sincerely, Karen
Funny how none of the usual fringe members care to debate this little show Willard put on. Guess it's hard to debate facts in fringeland....:-)
There is really nothing to debate. Mr. Romney held an event and called it a relief rally. Perception is truth. You and the liberals pick it apart like it is some horrific anti-American event. I'll bet if Mr. Obama had done the same thing you'd all be declaring how helpful and in touch with the people he is.
So what if it was staged and a photo opportunity. Big deal. As for the donations, no one said they were for the Red Cross. In fact, Mr. Romney has a link to the Red Cross donation site on his home page and people were encouraged at the event to donate funds to the Red Cross. Mr. Romney said they were destined to a location in New Jersey.
The issue is the disaster is so huge that much more assistance is needed from all quarters - Military, local, state, and federal. US Air Force assets are being used to fly PGE and SoCalEdison crews and equipment to the affected area. The donations collected in Ohio may not be of much help in New York, but you better believe they will be welcomed wherever they end up in New Jersey.
As for the future of FEMA and Mr. Romney's plans... Who better than the local and state to determine what is needed and how best to help. FEMA is a MANAGEMENT agency, not a federal MONEY agency. Even when the basic infrastructure is wiped out, the states can determine their needs and assistance brought in from outlying states and localities. Government is TOO big, and in order to begin to halt the massive deficit, spending must be controlled.
Looks like your letter made it to print,
Thanks for posting these letters as blogs also because not everyone gets to read the Opinion pieces.
Yep, great letter Larry, congrats on getting it into the paper.
This is a good example of how the Romney Presidency will be just one big staged event, and it seems to be no "big deal" to his followers.
On the subject of FEMA, have you seen "you're doing a great job, Brownie!" Is out there critiquing the President saying he acted too soon? Who would know better than the guy who ran FEMA the Conservative way by just sitting there with a blank look on his face when he should be doing something.
Hello LarryBaca, I'm glad that your letter was published in the print edition of the Bulletin, but wish that they didn't edit it (for space?). That is why it is such a good idea to also post your letters on this forum. This way, we get access to the full opinion piece. Thank you.
I hope you will post a response to Bull153's comments (the guy who insists that he isn't "championing" Romney). Besides the obligatory straw man arguments where Bull153 invents his own victimized scenario ("if Mr. Obama (apparently he can't afford him the respect of his title of "President") had done the same thing you'd all be declaring how helpful and in touch with people he is") it is FULL of unintentional? hilarity (as in: "So what if it was staged and a photo opportunity. Big Deal." One can find that sentiment highly offensive, hysterically funny, or an outrageous combination of both) as well as an unusual perspective on how the federal government is not needed for relief efforts for epic natural disasters. Sincerely, Karen
Karen, yes, it was published but edited, I assume for space...too bad cause I thought the football reference Romney made was hilariously pathetic.
That's one of the reasons I like to post my letters on this forum, UN-edited...plus I can add a picture..:-)
Bull, you are missing the point completely, the reason I brought up the fake rally was because it was just that, a FAKE.
A "Staged photo op" IS a "Big Deal" when it is a blatant fake, as it was. Also, Romney himself said the "Donations" were going to the Red Cross.
Yes, the disaster was huge and help was needed from all quarters, who do you think coordinated the whole thing? Are you saying FEMA had no part to play?
You say we don't need FEMA, that states can handle the whole thing, apparently with their own funds? Heaven forbid that the Government help the victims by driving up the deficit, right? That is as dumb as Romney's comparison to cleaning up the disaster with cleaning up a football field after a game...Hilariously pathetic..
I didn't miss anything, you simply have you point of view and I have mine. The rally was not fake, it had been scheduled as a campaign rally and the Romney campaign decided to make it a relief rally instead. Yes, it was a photo op. Yes, the Romney people bought supplies for people attending that didn't bring anything. Keep in mind it was a last minute decision and not well publicized. You all act like the Romney people raided a kindergarten for the supplies. I contend that had it been sponsored by the left, NOT ONE of you would be calling it fake or having an issue. Of course, that's just my opinion. The Romney campaign isn't the only organization collecting items for the Red Cross. Many church groups, schools, and such collect dry goods and non-perishables for the Red Cross that are used all over the US and the world. The Red Cross prefers money initially because it is the easiest and the fastest way to get help to the affected areas. But these things are not resolved overnight or in a week, they take months. As the roads and the infrastructure are repaired and opened, then shipments of goods and supplies can be brought forward.
I have NEVER said FEMA has no part to play, they are a Federal MANAGEMENT agency. Coordination is exactly what their function is. While it would be nice for every state to have a huge self-sustaining emergency program of their own, some disasters - like Sandy - are too huge for a single state to handle. That's where FEMA should step in to coordinate assistance from neighboring states and for military/federal help. We need FEMA, but a lot of what FEMA now does can be shuttled to the individual states. There is often duplication of services that should be eliminated.
Yes, for the most part IF the Federal Government would stop wasteful and excessive spending, allowing the states a larger portion of funding, including emergency funding, THEN the states would be in a better position to handle their disasters. Dumb? Dumb is the Federal Government continuing to spend money like drunken sailors and creating 16-20 trillion dollar deficits that your grandchildren's grandchildren will be stuck paying for. I have said it before - we MUST STOP the excessive government spending at all levels.
I have to pretty much stand back and watch what's going on, I can't really say much because I didn't cast a vote for either of the Party's that everyone is discussing.
I do think their is game playing tho on "both sides",there has to be because that is pretty much what Politicians have to do (at least they think this is what they have to do)
I think they can only stay honest to a point because I don't think that they can remain intact with nothing but good intentions once they enter the playing field.Politics won't allow a simple Politician who wants to serve the people be nothing but honest.Ever see that movie "The Candidate" with Robert Redford,describes what having the "best intentions ,a heart full of goodwill and honesty ,and dreams about how you want to help the people you serve" actually gets you!
Not very far before a well meaning Politician has to sacrifice a principle then another and another .
I for one will be glad when the election is done,over and then people can get back to discussing the next 4 years of what is wrong and what is right.
Should be interesting :)
Bull, ok you made it clear, screw the victims if it means we have to raise the deficit...Bottom line, right?
Either you didn't read my comment or you didn't comprehend it. I would have thought a smart guy like you could understand that there are ways to help victims of major catastrophes without continuing to make huge additions to our deficit. By your own words you seem to think the only way to help is by increasing the deficit. I am sure glad you aren't in charge.
Seems that some here have a "me first" attitude about the world. That is not a society; that is just a rat-race. Personally, I'm glad that we still live in a country that looks after one another - regardless of the financial cost.
I guess money is more import to some people than lives. That is an even bigger travesty than the hurricane.
"I would have thought a smart guy like you could understand that there are ways to help victims of major catastrophes without continuing to make huge additions to our deficit." - Funny, I have the same sentiment when it comes to the actual wasted spending like on our military, which disaster relief is a mere drop in the bucket in comparison. Why must we spend ridiculous amounts of money just because we have a fearful right wing in this country? We spend nearly three quarters of a trillion dollars a year on the military, how much do you think this disaster relief will cost, and how much of an immediate effect will there be in comparison?
But then, Santorum said the Conservatives do not attract the smart ones, and that is obvious.
Crimeriddendump, yes he sure did...
Bull, crimeriddendump and the Sov answered your statement better than I could have...
hey, Larry! Let me know when you have something to actually discuss, instead of lame criticism and crude humor. I'll be waiting... Nyuk, Nyuk!
Yes sir, Larry! Just like the Stooges, SNL did find Mr. Romney's analogy hilarious, so hilarious that their skit offended many of the hearing impaired. Way to go, SNL!!!! Way to go, Larry!!!! Nyuk, Nyuk, Nyuk!!!!
Marlee Matlin upset over 'SNL' sign-language skithttp://tv.msn.com/tv/article.aspx?news=772980
"I for one will be glad when the election is done,over and then people can get back to discussing the next 4 years of what is wrong and what is right." - I hope you all have come to understand that wearing out the electorate with the hopes that they will stay home and only the Party loyal get out and vote is a scheme that both parties play.
The less people participate, the more things will stay the same or get worse. Not voting gives more power to the government to control itself, and not by us through our laws and by the sheer number of people who care enough to participate.
For all of the promises across the world about how we as a nation represent Democracy to the world, we see Free States looking to limit Democracy, instead of insuring that no one loses their right to vote due to bureaucratic road blocks. As simple as a voter ID may sound, it is one more way of allowing the government to grow in order to control the process and limit who can participate. Its just another way for a party or government to control from the minority of the total population of the nation.
Here is a thought, does our voter ID number become a replacement for our Social Security numbers, and become our means of identification? It gives the imagination something to ponder, is this the real reason why there is such a push for voter ID cards? Because the Conservatives will do away with Social Security so there wont be any need for Social Security numbers and they will need a replacement.
Don't forget to vote tomorrow, its one of the few times that your opinion counts, even if it counts as one.
No turning a blind eye to the truth just so your "team wins" its about honesty and integrity, not about what your fears and emotions dictate. "You have nothing to fear, but fear itself."
Be proud Americans and exercise your right to vote now to ensure we don't lose our right to vote later.
Now the trumpet summons us again-not as a call to bear arms, though arms we need--not as a call to battle, though embattled we are--but a call to bear the burden of a long twilight struggle, year in and year out, "rejoicing in hope, patient in tribulation"--a struggle against the common enemies of man: tyranny, poverty, disease and war itself.
John F.Kennedy Inaugural Address
This is not a day of triumph; it is a day of dedication. Here muster, not the forces of party, but the forces of humanity. Men's hearts wait upon us; men's lives hang in the balance; men's hopes call upon us to say what we will do. Who shall live up to the great trust? Who dares fail to try? I summon all honest men, all patriotic, all forward-looking men, to my side. God helping me, I will not fail them, if they will but counsel and sustain me!
Woodrow Wilson First Inaugural Address
I AM certain that my fellow Americans expect that on my induction into the Presidency I will address them with a candor and a decision which the present situation of our Nation impels. This is preeminently the time to speak the truth, the whole truth, frankly and boldly. Nor need we shrink from honestly facing conditions in our country today. This great Nation will endure as it has endured, will revive and will prosper. So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself—nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance. In every dark hour of our national life a leadership of frankness and vigor has met with that understanding and support of the people themselves which is essential to victory. I am convinced that you will again give that support to leadership in these critical days.
Franklin D. Roosevelt First Inaugural Address
We have learned that we cannot live alone, at peace; that our own well-being is dependent on the well-being of other nations far away. We have learned that we must live as men, not as ostriches, nor as dogs in the manger. 11
We have learned to be citizens of the world, members of the human community. 12
We have learned the simple truth, as Emerson said, that "The only way to have a friend is to be one."
Franklin D. Roosevelt Fourth Inaugural Address
There are many more to read,I found it fitting on this day .
I must of been feeling similar last October I did a blog called "Excerpts From Past Inaugural Addresses"
I didn't remember it till something rang a familiar tune with me in the Franklin D.Roosevelt speech,after I posted the above.
Well anyway still,enjoy reading the speeches many are worth re-reading over and over.
...One gets outted by the voting public as one gets outted by Presidential Impeachment as provided for in the US Constitution. How was Watergate a greater Presidential offense than Benghazigate? How many lives were lost in Watergate?
Why don't you go cry somewhere else Friendo, that didn't work during the campaign and it won't after the election.
CN, How was Watergate a greater Presidential constitutional offense than the embassy attack at Benghazi or the offense committed by a cigar probing president? How many lives were lost in Watergate? How many lives were lost in a cigar probing?
What did Obama know before during and after the embassy attack? What appropriate and necessary actions did obama take before during and after the embassy attack? What appropriate and necessary actions did obama fail to take before during and after the embassy attack? Why is Obama being held to a lesser standard of presidential accountability?
Sorry, but I don't think you understand the fundmental concept of impeachment. Please let me know if you would like to have a rational conversation about the specifics of how that system works.
Crimeriddendump, The words "understand" and "rational" are foreign to our boy Fredo the score keeper of Presidential votes..:-) What was that score again, Fredo?...:-)
Friendo you really are petty when it comes to politics. Really you think the president should be impeached because of the attack on our embassy in Benghazi that killed four Americans? Where were you when about 3,000 Americans were killed, on our soil, after multiple foreign governments and our own agencies warned us of attacks they thought might happen? Where were you when the Bush administration was saying it was because of our freedom and not because of our foreign policy in the Middle East? Were you sitting here saying that Bush should be impeached? No? What were your Democratic opponents doing? Mourning with the rest of us uniting around the president to lead us out of the mess(Maybe we should have just impeached the buffoon like you wish Obama would). I could name you about a thousand things Bush did wrong before and after 9/11(an event that was on a much grander scale than the Benghazi attack) but nothing that was really impeachment worthy.
And I'm not saying this about all Republicans but the Romney campaign(and people like Friendo) tried to capitalize on a tragic event when Democrats did not. I think this shows you a little bit of the character of both parties, take that for what it's worth. Both have pros and cons I guess, opportunism always does.
Friendo, Read your own words with a few of my own edits:
What did Bush know before during and after the 9/11 attack? What appropriate and necessary actions did Bush take before during and after the 9/11 attack? What appropriate and necessary actions did Bush fail to take before during and after the 9/11 attack? Why is Bush being held to a lesser standard of presidential accountability?
Does this really constitute "Treason, Bribery, or other High Crimes and Misdemeanors"?
The real tragedy here is that this attack will be forgotten about in about a week. It is no longer something that could sway an election, so the right will forget about it, and the left will not want to drudge up the tragedy. Let our citizens' memories never be forgotten, but let us move toward solutions, and not politicization.
You are on solid ground with your argument that President Obama could certainly be subject to impeachment under the Constitution because of his actions (or inactions) regarding Benghazi.
While there are still only two proven facts, should the investigation reveal the truth that President Obama was aware of the security lapses, failed to provide adequate security, and failed to promptly respond to the attack, among other things, he could be impeached.
"Impeachment is a fundamental constitutional power belonging to Congress. This safeguard against corruption can be initiated against federal officeholders from the lowest cabinet member, all the way up to the president and the chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. Besides providing the authority for impeachment, the U.S. Constitution details the methods to be used. The two-stage process begins in the House of Representatives with a public inquiry into allegations. It culminates, if necessary, with a trial in the Senate. State constitutions model impeachment processes for state officials on this approach. At both the federal and state levels, impeachment is rare: From the passage of the Constitution to the mid-1990s, only 50 impeachment proceedings were initiated, and only a third of these went as far as a trial in the Senate. The reluctance of lawmakers to use this power is a measure of its gravity; it is generally only invoked by evidence of criminality or substantial abuse of power."
There are those who have already decided to give Mr. Obama a free pass even before the investigation is complete. You better believe that if Richard Nixon could be impeached (he resigned instead) for theft and perjury, Bill Clinton could be impeached for lying about where he was placing his cigar, then Barack Obama could be impeached over the Benghazi murders.
My post above is simply to provide a factual basis for whether or not President Obama could be impeached. There are those who have already declared that the matter has been proven beyond any doubt that President Obama is completely innocent of any wrongdoing even though no investigation has been completed or results announced.
While there may be solid ground for the argument, it does NOT mean that I think impeachment proceedings should be started. We don't know enough. There are only two facts that are known. One, four Americans were murdered in Benghazi, and two, President Obama and his administration lied about it for two weeks.
Everything else is unproven and while I have my opinion, it is just that, my opinion. I'm willing to wait until the whole truth is known before I make any further pronouncements. It took years to get through the 9/11 investigation and much of what caused 9/11 was supposed to be fixed. It will be interesting to see the facts behind the Benghazi murders.
Equal accountability? I'll let you know when the truth is finally revealed.
I don't think the "two" of you know exactly what impeachment is or how it works.
Why not look it up and get back to us? As they say in "Australian": "you can do it!"
Hello Bull153, You are AGAIN confusing fact and opinion. It is YOUR OPINION that the President and his administration "lied" about the Libya attack for two weeks. Since you have no way of knowing Obama's actual intent and the initial information coming in had differing reports that contradicted each other, the most accurate FACT that you could say is that the President's and his administration's initial assessment was later acknowledged to be wrong. Just as you note, "there are those who have already decided to give Mr. Obama a free pass even before the investigation is complete", there are also those who obviously have prematurely tried, convicted, and condemned him in their minds and eagerly suggest impeachment. It is wisest to follow your advice to wait for the "whole truth". Even if the President or his administration is ultimately judged to have made missteps, I wonder how that could be grounds for impeachment when President Bush escaped such censure. Bush, who had much clearer information suggesting there were actually no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, chose to disregard that intelligence and instead embraced the false claim of WMDs, leading to the invasion of Iraq at the cost of thousands of American soldiers' lives. Yet Bush was not impeached. I know that there were calls on the left for Bush's impeachment, but that is a serious accusation that requires solid proof of misconduct. It would be more productive for all political factions of this country to try to work together to better our country. Keep tabs on us when you are in Australia. Hopefully, you will be pleasantly surprised (although an economic turnaround will not be taking place anytime soon, as even Romney admitted it would take his own administration TWO FULL TERMS to balance the deficit.) Safe travels! Sincerely, Karen
You gotta love the Foxnews lemmings, have you noticed that they compare everything to being as bad as Watergate? It is one of the low points of American history and it did involve Conservatives. Its like a quest to prove that the Left is somehow just as bad or worse than the Conservatives.
Feign, feign, feign, feign, feign. So sad, get a life!
Its also humorous to see those from the little party start screaming impeachment when ever they don't get their way, like they even have a clue to how it works Constitutionally. It must be tough being out of step with Americans as we can see by the gnashing of the teeth and pulling of the hair from those on the right.
It really is sad to see, especially after the billions that were spent, and all of the bogus laws passed in order to gerry rig the election in favor of the Conservatives and they achieved nothing.
I can imagine that we will be watching the Conservative party implode upon its self in the near future.
Hi, Karen. We have already had this discussion of fact versus opinion. You are as firmly entrenched in your position as am I, so I see there's nothing to be gained by continuing to hash it out. I have my opinions as to culpability, but as I repeatedly said, I'll withhold those until after the investigation is completed.
Regarding impeachment, there is a big difference in having grounds to impeach and impeachment. I think I was pretty clear in my post above that I am not advocating impeaching President Obama. The investigation hasn't been completed, so unlike Bill Clinton and Richard Nixon, impeachment proceedings are very premature.
It is clearly an 'if-then' situation. IF President Obama committed a crime, THEN he should be impeached. For such a simple concept, some of the stooges here have a really tough time grasping it.
I appreciate your kind travel wishes. I spoke to my contact today to get the ball rolling. With the passport requirements, security clearance updates, and getting hired within the DoD, I expect it will be sometime after the first of the year before we'll be on the way. I was told that I might need to travel to Washington DC in mid-December for some training, interviews, and processing. It should be interesting since between my father's Army service and my own time in the Air Force, the closest I ever came to Washington and the Pentagon were several flights through Andrews AFB and Dulles International. I'd like to be able to takes some time and sightsee.
Yo, Moe! You gotta love the stooges. Poor Curly lost the election... so sad. You really should muzzle him now, I think he's been poked in the eye, bopped on the head, and slapped in the face one time too many! Nyuk... Nyuk... Nyuk...
Nyuk... poke... nyuk... bop... nyuk... slap... nyuk... nyuk... nyuk...
Hey Moe! What's humorous is the stooges thinking only they have the right answer and everyone else is wrong! Nyuk... nyuk... nyuk...
It'll be sad to see the stooges implode after all the false statements, misrepresentations, and fibs. Yep, Moe, pretty sad to see Curly confused, Larry lost, and Moe mystified. Too many pokes, bops, and slaps... Nyuk... nyuk... nyuk...
...and that 'soytenly' is the truth!
Its obvious you are an extreme conservative by reading your posts. Then you wonder why the Conservatives lost.
I'll just repeat what I posted on the other string....
"So Fredo now that Bull is faking leaving the Country because Obama WON, I repeat, WON and Native has apparently already faked it, what are you going to fake?
....and what is that score now????"
Yo, Moe! I'm just a conservative, thanks... which is more than I can say for you stooges. I think Curly bopped you one time too many on the head! America has lost, not conservatives. Just wait and see after the first of the year and all the crap we tried to warn America about over Obamacare and the over regulations that are killing jobs really hits. There is going to be one major case of buyer's remorse from everyone except those who love a President who is more of a sugar daddy than a leader. Sadly, that is no nyuk... nyuk... nyuk...
Moe! Did you smack Larry too many times?
Hey Larry, be careful if you poke Curly... he's totally lost it. First he loses the election - then his mind.
Remember Moe, you poke Curly, Curly bops Larry, and Larry slaps you. It's really simple memory, should be simple for such simpletons! Nyuk... nyuk... nyuk!
Hey Larry! I think Moe smacked, bopped, and poked you one too many times! Let me know if you are still in love with the President in a year... nyuk... nyuk... nyuk.
I love it when I wake up and the three stooges are still hanging around with their slapstick humor and silly comments. Thank goodness for the Internet! Thank goodness for Moe, Larry, and Curly! Nyuk... nyuk... nyuk!!!
Bull, you are repeating yourself...it is obvious you are extremly upset about the WIN FOR OBAMA! A fake move out of Country isn't going to help...:-)
Did anyone catch that article in today's MB on Frank Aquilla? I am constantly amazed at the attention by the MB given this guy. This is the same guy who thought Sara Palin was the second coming. He sides with Donald Trump and all the rest of the "Commie agenda" crowd.
On another note, I wonder if the local Tea Party will continue to meet? If so, what are they going to talk about? Somebody better tell these guys they live in the wrong state...:-)
I couldn't find the letter on Frank maybe I overlooked I don't know , but did you catch Dennis Wyatts article I thought it was good and appropriate with all the nonsense talk going on in the blogs bringing up "impeachment ",I for one hope people will calm down and like Mr Wyatt said we are all in this together we are all Americans
Hello rozemist, The article on Frank Aquila is on page A-5 of today's Manteca Bulletin. I found his quoted comments so absurd that it was actually funny (to me). Sometimes, extremist views can be incredibly irksome and frustrating and other times they can be unintentionally entertaining. I found the part where Aquila accused the Democrats of leading this country to a quick death while acknowledging that the Republicans are also leading the country to death, but at a slower pace, to be especially amusing. According to Aquila, this leaves the Tea Party as being the nation's only hope for salvation. Aquila founded the South San Joaquin Republican group, which now he is apparently repudiating with his "slow death" critique. Read it for yourself to get the full effect. Perhaps I am just easily entertained. Sincerely, Karen
I'm glad someone else caught that. Was Frank more or less suggesting that he was wrong and is now a TeaParty guy as opposed to a Republican?
As seen here, I think some people are making a very large melodrama over a simple election that went the way the polls have been pointing for months. I guess all we can do is laugh.
I just found the article on Frank,it is humorous ,and absurd is putting it lightly.I guess the loss of the election has just put him "all the way over the top".Communist taking over America in the form of Democrats.I guess he seen how the election was going and decided to do a quick switch.I don't know what to think of all this extremism,don't know whether to laugh,or be afraid because Frank is not the only one to think like this.
I'd like to give you a link that I found today that might add some humor,and might give some interesting reading as well."Friday Talking Points -- Advice for the Republican Party"
The Obama victory seems to have had a, "Entertaining" effect on the fringe, some faking a move out of the country, others trying to hide their failed score keeping talents with wild predictions, others hiding out curled in a fetal position and still others seemingly abandoning the GOP for the Tea Party....all of it very entertaining indeed...:-)I haven't been this entertained since Sarah Palin fell flat on her face..:-) I can hardly wait for the next SNL....:-)
Hello rozemist, Thank you for the link. I did find it both funny and thought- provoking. As in any aspect of life, hindsight in politics is always clearer than analysis in the heat of the moment. Both political parties need to assess what they did right, leading up to the election and what they could have improved upon. But most importantly, both parties need to figure out what they can compromise on to best serve the country. I don't think that President will (or should) back away from his belief that the Bush tax cuts should expire for the richest Americans. But there are other areas (reforming the tax code, looking at ways for the government to spend more efficiently) where the major political parties could work together to come up with viable solutions that are acceptable to all sides. Sincerely, Karen
I'm in total agreement with you on the Bush tax cuts.There are areas for compromise (on both sides) but this is not one of them.He already did that in 2010,I hope he doesn't do it again.
Question: How many Fringe members can fit into the Fortress of Solitude if all insist on curling into the fetal position?
How is this for a thought, let the Bush tax cuts die.
Instead of trying to compromise on what works, what doesn't work, which cuts stay and which go, why try and fix what was broken from the beginning? Follow a little Jefforsonian philosophy and let the next generation of congressmen coming to office in the next session write a comprehensive tax bill that can be discussed and debated among the citizens, and then voted on by the congress. If tax reform is what we as citizens truly decide that we need then Congress needs to compromise on its goals, and be willing to have their plans means tested by the CBO for viability of claimed result. If it doesn't achieve the stated goal, then they have to go back and rework it until it works as claimed.
Nothing bad is going to happen to the nation if a tax plan isn't produced before the end of the year. We all will see our taxes change, they will go back to the tax rates of the Clinton era, when we ended deficit spending and developed a roadmap as to have the debt paid off by the middle of this decade. It seems the economy was doing well at that time, and revenues were strong, and employment was high, military spending took up much less of the budget as it does now.
As we have come to learn, the wealthy received the largest benefit from these tax cuts, and they will be the group that will see the largest increase in tax obligation when the law sunsets at the end of the year. Which really doesn't require that Congress act swiftly to compromise on this law, when in my opinion they would be better off having a conversation on what is the goal for this "tax reform" conversation? Were taxes too high during the Clinton era? Do we have any signs of equal or greater economic benefit from cutting taxes since the Clinton administration? I can think of at least ONE good argument that it doesn't work, and we just experienced it and we still are experiencing it.
Its better to let this law sunset, and then have a real conversation on taxes. Have a real conversation on what works and what doesn't work, and have actual experts contribute and not just Congressmen, who continue to prove that they aren't real keen on how the economy works to begin with. It needs to be based on the last 100 years, or the last 50 years, but it can't be solely based on the last 10 years and think that something comprehensive will come out of it. We as citizens need to also become more responsible and stop believing that Congress is there to divvy up the pie, and as long as we get some, who cares that the guys at the top get a bigger piece.
If Congress can't find a compromise by the end of the year, we will see how long they continue to bicker while the meter is running on their wealthy donor's tax bill for 2013. After all the money they threw down the drain this election, I am not sure they will be willing to wait too long.
Yo, Stooges! I don't know about repetition, but I am not happy that Mr. Obama won re-election. Oh, well... at least I have the three of you to entertain me for a while yet. You gotta quit listening to Curly! He's the biggest fake here with his multiple identities, fake altruism for a city he insults at every opportunity, and flat out fibs! For crying out loud - work visas? 30,000 dollar payments? Priority for Australians? That only applies to work in the private sector! Nyuk... nyuk... nyuk!!!
Hey, Larry! Speaking of entertaining, are you and Curly and Moe gonna keep posting your hilarity? Have you ever really seen Sarah Palin? I doubt she could fall "flat on her face"... nyuk... nyuk... nyuk!!! and Larry... SNL? Really? The show that demeans hearing impaired citizens? You bozos are really outdoing yourselves! Nyuk... nyuk... nyuk!!!
Yo, Larry... the score's still wrong. Barak Obama - 2, America - 0.
We'll see as the next four years play out, but I'm pretty confident you won't be singing the President's praises once the truth about the economy, Obamacare, and redistribution comes out and takes effect. Hope you stooges have salted away some of your show receipts to pay for your health care. taxes, and fines. There's no funny nyuks about that. The beating is coming and everyone is gonna feel it...
"Question: How many Fringe members can fit into the Fortress of Solitude..?" Answer: Just about as many stooges as fit into a Mini-Cooper and can still bop, poke, and slap each other! Nyuk... nyuk... nyuk!!!
Funny how the extreme Romney supporters have seemingly regressed to a child-like level of maturity after the election.
Grover Norquist says Obama Won Because He Called Romney A ' Poopy Head'
Donald Trump says "'He lost the popular vote by a lot and won the election. We should have a revolution in this country!'"
And here, Bull153 is somehow stuck in three stooges mode claiming to be moving to Australia - with the thousands of other GOP diehards on twitter - thinking his posts do something other than make him look like an immature fool.
I remember another guy - I think his name is Rush something or other - ANYWAY, he claimed he was moving to Costa Rica in 2010 after Obamacare was passed. Where does he live now??? Ohhhh, right Florida! Close enough ... right?
And - like most things - I'm not sure Bull153 thought 'his plan' through at all. Here are some more Australian facts:
Australia has higher taxes than the US
Australia has universal health care.
Australia BANS GUNS
Australia does NOT have the death penalty
Australia is VERY Pro-Choice
Australia's PM is an unmarried atheist
Just keep singing Bull153:
"In my mind I'm going to Australia ... I'm going to Australia in my mind!"
“It’s not going to be the last time anyone says something stupid within our party, but it can’t be tolerated within our party. We’ve also had enough of this dumbed-down conservatism. We need to stop being simplistic, we need to trust the intelligence of the American people and we need to stop insulting the intelligence of the voters.” - Bobby Jindal
"Dumbed-down conservatism" - well, at least we have an answer to the behavior of the Conservatives that we come across, they are the "the stupid party” according to Gov Jindal.
Gov Jindal also stated that Conservatives need to stop with the "offensive, bizarre" comments. The problem with advise is wise men don't need it and stupid men won't take it.
“The president was elected on the basis that he was not Romney and that Romney was a poopy-head and you should vote against Romney,” ...Grover Norquist
Has Bull left on his imaginary trip yet? Maybe he waiting on Rush Limbaugh...:-0
Mr Romney certainly is consistent on revealing what he thinks of American voters
I don't suppose he might do abit of soul searching and look to what it was about himself that turned voters away from him, from the looks of this latest out of his mouth everyone else was wrong, but not him.
When you don't learn from your mistakes and take some accountability it's likely those mistakes will be repeated
It may be too late for "Poopy-Head" but the GOP can do some serious soul searching, that's for sure...
Hey, good news, Romney has started campaigning for President for the 2016 elections. You know his motto, its never to early to get a jump on things.
Bobby Jindal? Really, Moe? You got one thing right about advice, though... I don't need it and you won't take it. Nyuk... nyuk... nyuk...
You really need to reign it 'ol Curly there, Moe... He's become the Sheldon Cooper of you stooges ever since he lost the election... You know Sheldon... acts like he knows everything, but really doesn't know anything. He's the representative immature fool here, you know... Nyuk... nyuk... nyuk!!!
I supported Mitt Romney over Barak Obama once he became the GOP candidate for one reason over all. I'd seen what four years of Barak Obama had done to this country. I'd heard Mr. Obama's half-truths, mistruths, and deviousness long enough. He had a four year record, and I'd hoped that Mr. Romney could reverse the direction Mr. Obama has taken us.
It didn't happen, the American voters made their choice, and while Mr. Obama did not get a resounding vote of confidence from the American people, he did win reelection. With Mr. Obama no longer worried about reelection, having his healthcare mandate for the most part entrenched in stone, I wonder if after 2016 we are going to hear from the American people what the liberals have been spouting for the last four years.... instead of blame Bush... will it be blame Obama? If so it will be justly deserved. Mr. Obama now has four more years to cram his socialist ideology down our throats... to destroy free enterprise and capitalism... to make America dependent on sugar daddy government. When bread hits $10 a loaf, when you can't afford to put gas in your car or food on the table, just remember, you were warned.
The best chance to pull this nation back from the brink was not elected, instead the voters chose four more years of incompetence, stagnation, and bipartisan bickering. Mitt Romney may not have been the best candidate, Mitt Romney may have had his flaws, but Mitt Romney was the best hope to avoid the catastrophe we are facing. Remember.... you (generically) asked for it.
“Both parties in Washington now agree that our country is headed toward a ‘fiscal cliff.’ The bad news: We just elected a guy whose campaign slogan was ‘Forward.’ But the good news: President Obama says we will run out of gas long before we get to the cliff. So don’t worry about it.” - Jay Leno
Yo, Larry! I'm still here... Unlike those brain dead Hollywood liberals who can afford to pick up and leave on a whim, those of us in the real world have to wait while the process progresses.... of course, 'ol Curly wouldn't know the first thing about reality... he can only spout Wikipaedia factoids and foolish statements... Nyuk... nyuk... nyuk! You 'member... like advice. I don't need it and he won't take it!
"When bread hits $10 a loaf, when you can't afford to put gas in your car or food on the table, just remember, you were warned."
No one cares about your baseless boogieman stories Bull153. Get over it, you lost. Now, either get to Australia already or stop posting about it. 1) No one cares about that either, and 2)I'm pretty sure everyone thinks your travel plans are about as disingenuous as everything else you posted.
Amazing how even more immature you become after your Fox News reality burst. Grow up!
I didn't generically ask for anything, I didn't vote for President Obama.The best person I believed to be for the Presidency didn't have a chance he was a third party, too bad in my opinion.
However Mr Romney never would of gotten even a nod from me, if I were to have gone back to that (lesser of two evils) frame of mind then I can tell you I'd of voted Obama,and I wouldn't of wanted to vote for him (that gives you an inkling of how I think of Romney)
Mr Romney shows a lack of respect and compassion for the underprivileged, his 47% spoke more truth on his real views then I believe I ever heard him speak.I can't even begin to touch on his views of women's rights that list is too long.
If President Obama gives me sincere concerns and he does, then Mr Romney is what would cause me to have nightmares if he had been elected.
The "Fiscal Cliff" does not exist, it is a sound bite, a talking point to describe the fact that Congress has created a situation through playing "chicken" with each other that now requires action on their part. The only cliff they face is a comfort zone cliff.
Since when is it bad for the wealthy to pay their fair share, and since when is it bad for the Government to cut spending by 10%? We hear from the fearful on the right that we need to cut spending, so why is 10% across the board bad? They do that in business all of the time, and we keep hearing that government should be ran as a business. Here is the fiscal cliff that we face, more revenues and less spending, I can see why Congress is up in arms.
"Mr. Obama now has four more years to cram his socialist ideology down our throats... " - So sad that "old people" are such fearing people. Its time to step aside and let the "brave" take over. We're tired of living in their shadow of constant fear and failure.
Bull, "... when you can't afford to put gas in your car..." hmmm I'm planing a trip to Vegas for Thanksgiving and have been checking the gas along the route. I have a concern because I plan on driving the Hummer. Last year about this time I drove it to Phoenix and the gas seems to be about the same price it was then...It's gone down quite a bit since just before the Election. Does that mean that it's Obamas fault the price went down? You were quick to blame him when it went up, right?
Oh, by the way, my trip to Vegas, is real..:-)
Once again you take my words too literally. I know full well you were not happy with either Mr. Obama or Mr. Romney and cast your vote for someone else. Fine, I get it. I need to be really, really clear when I comment to you. What I should have said was "Remember.... you (who voted for Obama) asked for it." - Sorry.
Hey, Moe... you just don't get it. I swear Curly bopped you on the head one time too many, you've poked Larry in the eye so much he can't see to drive the mini-Cooper clown car, and Larry slapped Curly so hard the sweaty sock fell out of his mouth and he's spouting his garbage again! Nyuk... nyuk... nyuk!!!
If it weren't for the wealthy we'd have run off that cliff long ago. What you conveniently fail to say is the wealthy HAVE been paying for the government... the same government that has the upper 10 percent paying 90 percent of the taxes. But that's not enough for you liberals... you clowns want to punish success and make everyone dependent on the great Obama and the liberal feed trough. You can't have a rational discussion with you irrational people!
Old people fearful? Not hardly! I wish you 'brave' ones would step forward. It the people you support who are responsible for the mess we are in and the failure to make progress towards fixing it. Of course, you'd never admit it. It is so much easier to blame conservatives, blame Bush, blame Reagan, blame Lincoln, blame George Washington, or blame the man in the moon. Four more years... I hope our great nation survives four more years of Barak Obama.
Heyyyyyyy Larry! Wow... 'ol Curly got you good a few times there, I see. You really need to put a leash on that old dog. Boogieman, nyuk... nyuk... nyuk!!! What happened Larry, you forget to kiss Curly when you tucked him in bed in his Stooge jammies?
You may want to remind your lame brained cohort that I'm not the one who keeps bringing my move up... it is you three!!! Watsa matter, you guys gonna miss me? Don't fret, you will always have each other to bop, slap, and poke! Nyuk... nyuk... nyuk!!!
Oh, and the gas? That's simple, it's cheaper in spite of Mr. Obama, not because of him. Simple economics... you'd know that if you'd watch some real news and not Three Stooges re-runs...
Oh, by the way, my trip is real, too! Nyuk... nyuk... nyuk!!!
Oh, now the gas price is "Simple economics" when it went up it was all Obama...
Oh, you mentioned you fake trip yet again...
Hello Bull153, You chastise rozemist: "Once again you take my words too literally". "Once again" should be a clue to examine your OWN postings and look at ways to better communicate your actual meaning. If you are repeatedly being misunderstood, it is time to look at the method of the message. I "literally" laughed when I read your comment to rozemist because unless one is obviously a great satirist or skilled humorist (sorry, the nyuk, nyuk stooges humor doesn't qualify) our words SHOULD be taken literally as what we mean and what we stand by. If we are being misinterpreted, it is up to us to clarify ourselves. You seem to put the fault on others (not unlike Romney), rather than objectively scrutinizing your own shortcomings. This forum benefits from a range of positions and life experiences. There IS a valid place here for conservative voices. The back and forth debate, when an exchange of ideas or positions, can benefit everyone. But the constant dumbed down humor of the "stooges" references wore thin long ago. You have turned yourself into the opposite spectrum of the extreme mhoffman. Congratulations! You have BECOME all that you claim to despise and we have lost a reasoned voice to engage in rebuttals on issues. How sad. Sincerely, Karen
Hello Bull153, I apologize for the "congratulations" part of the above post because there is nothing to celebrate at all. It is frustrating to lose someone who was a self-proclaimed moderate to the extremism of your current postings. In the past, although I often disagreed with you, you did give me cause to reflect on my beliefs and opinions and make me think more deeply and go outside my comfort zone. For that, I thank you. I am genuinely sorry that I find little of value in your current offerings. By the way, I DO believe you are planning to accept the job in Australia and DO wish you safe travels and good health. But whether one believes you are going or not, whether your plans come to fruition or fall through, that is just a sidebar on the real significant issues to discuss. Just as you seem to enjoy pushing the "three stooges" humor? button, others seem to recognize that casting doubt on your travel plans is galling to you. I wish there was less "button pushing" and more productive discussion. At the risk of sounding like a street corner doomsday preacher ("Repent! Repent!"), you do have the ability to turn this dynamic around if you so choose. Sincerely, Karen
I dissage that anything has been lost as nothing has really changed. I think the difference here is now the problem has become more painfully obvious. I still have hope that this will subside, but, it would seem the problem is getting worse rather than better. I agree; it's sad.
What is one person's 'chastise' is a simple observation to another. I have often been misunderstood and misquoted, nothing new there. While I try and be as clear as I can be, it's obvious I have fallen short once again.
I make no claim to be a satirist or humorist of any great skill... I am what I am with all the failings and shortcomings of any normal person to go with those positive skills and abilities I've developed over the years. Math and English were never my strong suit - if not for spell check many of my words would never be understood. Literally is one of those terms I find myself often at odds with, I am glad that my misuse brought you some laughter. Fault lies in the eyes of the beholder. I accept responsibility for my actions, even those that others may object to. As I have often mentioned here and in other venues, the written word is not the best medium for clear communication, but it is the one we must contend with. Your 'comparison' using Mr. Romney is not lost on me.
There are many things this forum benefits from, that's true. There are also many things it must suffer through as well. Were it that all of us were as reasonable and patient as you, the blogs would be a much nicer place to discuss, differ, and debate.
I realize my three stooges shtick doesn't portray me in a favorable way. I get that. I still believe what I originally said about it, but like many people, I chose to change my mind. I reverted back to using it for one reason... it drove the three people who it was directed at nuts. It served its purpose, and it allowed me some smiles and laughter. They hated it, I loved it... that simple.
You certainly are allowed to believe what you want. The stooges shtick has served its purpose, and the cat's out of the bag. I'm happy to be anything that is the opposite of Hoffman... that's why I ignore him directly and only refer to his stupidity in the third person. Being such a confrontational fellow, he hates that most of all...
No apology is necessary. You are entitled to become frustrated and cynical at behavior you don't approve of. You have always treated me with respect no matter what our respective positions may have been. Respect earns respect...
You haven't lost anyone yet... let's just say I've been on a hiatus from sanity. In the past I've tried to ignore bad behavior. I've taken the high road many times. I've also engaged in less than stellar behavior as well. I've tried to be what others seem to want me to be, but no more. For the remaining time I'm around I'm going to be me. You can accept that, you can call me out when I misbehave, and you can debate what you disagree with me on. It's going to be that simple.
I think we can all say we have had cause to look at oneself and one's positions in the past. That is the benefit of a forum and divergent ideals. It is a shame that some, myself included, find it more stimulating to be demeaning, dismissive, and derogatory towards an opponent rather than discuss, disagree, and debate the issue. The former three stooges are masters at that. I hope you find some value in my future offerings.
For people who don't believe me, it's their problem. I deeply appreciate your kind words and good wishes. You have always treated me fairly, and I hope your holiday season and the new year finds you and yours healthy, happy, and successful.
Military and public service fosters friendships and personal relationships that can have an impact long after a twenty year military career or years in law enforcement. I still have many friends and acquaintances I've met all over the world and in the US. Three years ago I was recruited for a challenging government position overseas. I didn't apply for it, but my skills and reputation over the years made me a good candidate, along with several others. For many reasons I chose not to pursue the job three years ago.
Out of the blue in October, I was contacted again for this assignment. I asked for some time to consider it, and then made my decision. The election was simply a happy coincidence, and I decided to make the most of it. I would have made the same choice even if Mr. Romney had won. Anyone who is in the least bit familiar with military and civilian government employment and assignments understands that things do not get done overnight.
Yes, there has been some button pushing on both sides. I don't know about repenting, but as for the dynamic... it is in their court.
you said "Once again you take my words too literally" I don't know what other time your speaking of as the above statement seems to imply there were other times I took your statement "too literally".
Why shouldn't I take your statement literally Bull,are they not your words,and were they not directed to me? didn't the statement begin with @rozemist
YOU said " when you can't afford to put gas in your car or food on the table, just remember, you were warned.
Remember.... you (generically) asked for it." Now how was I suppose to take that statement,how would anybody take it?
Since the statement was aimed at me seems only logical that I was apart of the ones who "asked for it"
of, applied to, or referring to a whole kind, class, or group; inclusive or general
So Bull Let me be clear,very clear and that is say what you mean,PLEASE.There is something wrong if people continuously keep misunderstanding you don't you suspect?
All this having to "guess at what you really mean" is exhausting.
Karen is right in that our words should be taken literally,I told you before words matter,words are forever.
I can't keep putting my words out there and then say again and again" I was joking"or "guess what that's not what I really meant" this is why we should choose our words thoughtfully before speaking.
I frankly am having a difficult time even commenting with you or following your comments anymore with all the 3 stooges nonsense,and sorry but it's nonsense.It quit being funny or making any sense after the third go,and I happened to of loved the 3 stooges as a child,and a teenager.
I don't know what happened Bull,but I sure hope that you take a different tact
I apologized for my poor choice of words and corrected the statement. That's all I can do. Regarding the remainder of your post, I'm not going to rehash the 'stooges' comments, I've explained in my posts to KarenPearsall.
For the remaining time I post here I will try to be very clear with everyone I comment with. I've commented before that the written word is the least understood and most complained about form of communication. As long as that is the only way we blog, that is a hassle that will continue.
Making promises I can't keep is something I won't do. I can't guarantee that future posts will always be crystal clear without the reader having to guess at the meaning and intent. I will try. I will review my posts before publishing them to try and avoid further miscommunications.
Like KarenPearsall, you have always treated me with respect. For that I am grateful and will reciprocate. As for what happened, I hope my clarification in my two posts above can answer that question. I'm sure you are not alone in hoping I take a different tack... but that is going to depend entirely on those three stellar gentlemen. Respect and courtesy gets respect and courtesy.
Hello Bull153, Thank you for your comments to rozemist and myself. No one can post comments that are ALWAYS UNIVERSALLY understood. Misinterpretations are a by-product of the written language, which lacks the visual cues of facial expressions or auditory clues such as tone of voice which can in*fluence how words and intentions are perceived. But I think that something worthwhile to consider is not to react so defensively if one of our posts is being misunderstood. It is completely unnecessary to assign blame to the reader, as if he or she should be a mind reader or is willfully misinterpreting our intentions. It is usually best, in my opinion, just to write something along the lines of: "My point is not coming across in the way that I intended. Let me clarify my remarks." And then simply do so.
I am glad to see that you are reassessing some of your posting behavior. Self-introspection benefits all of us. But I am disappointed by your last few sentences to rozemist. It seems that you are giving away the responsibility and power of your own words and actions and instead are content to let your behavior be merely a reaction to and dependent on those around you. Of course you can conduct your forum behavior as you see fit, but it is like if your 3 year old throws a tantrum and misbehaves, do you stoop to the same behavior or do you act like the adult role model? In other words, if you are only respectful to those who show YOU respect, that is really not much of a challenge or stretch is it? It is much harder, yet MUCH more productive for the entire tone of this forum, to respond to childish digs, name-calling, baiting, or ridicule, with reasoned debate and logical arguments, rather than with "in kind" insults. Just as you admitted the "stooges" tactic was satisfying to you for its sheer annoyance factor to your intended "targets" (other readers, who suffered through those posts, being just "collateral damage", I guess) those who write to purposely offend you are no doubt gaining some personal satisfaction also. So really, where does it all end? Do we need to examine and rehash who first insulted whom? The bigger person is the one who puts a stop to unproductive exchanges by self-policing his own words and actions and rises above petty responses, whether the other person engaging in the exchange "deserves" such consideration, or not. Please consider these words, because if you expect the other person (or people) to be the one to change first, I fear you will be locked in a never-ending downward spiral of deplorable postings. I honestly believe that you are better than that. Sincerely, Karen
Thank you Roze and Karen...I hope Bull walks the talk...
Bull, you are wrong, your 3 Stooges bit didn't bother anyone at all, sorry it didn't work out the way you intended.
You are welcome. I didn't consider that my comments could be perceived as blaming the reader. but I do understand your point. I said earlier that I am responsible for my words and my posts, and I will review them in the future. I'll try to be clear and avoid pointing fingers.
I'm sorry to have disappointed you with my last comments to Rozemist. My point didn't come across as I intended, so let me clarify what I meant.
I'm not trying to give away anything, I'll be responsible for my future conduct and comments. If my three year old throws a tantrum, I'll try and resolve the situation in the best manner possible. That might be a swat on the fanny, a time out, or simply telling my child to stop... whatever works. I don't know of many adults who will lay down on the floor kicking and screaming because their child does. I've explained my reasoning with my prior childish posts, I hope it is clear that I don't intend to resort to them in the future regardless of anyone's provocation.
In the past I've tried many ways to participate and contribute. A simple review of all my comments shows that I have gone from reasonable comments, to humor (which sometimes failed), to anger, and to silliness. I tried to be all things to all people, which you probably agree never works. I'm reasonably sure you won't find a single mean spirited post directed at you or Rozemist. On the other hand, there are posts than run from ignoring, to reasoning with, to being angry with, and then plain childishness directed at Hoffman. The difference is simple respect.
When I say my tack depends on someone else, I didn't intend to imply that I would resort to childish and silly posts. What I do mean is that if I am treated with respect, even when opinions clash and ideals are at odds, I will be respectful as well. When demeaned, then my tack will be what is best at the moment. It may be ignoring the bad behavior, simply restating my position, or criticizing the behavior in a responsible way. It doesn't mean a resurrection of Moe, Larry, and Curly. While respect and courtesy gets respect and courtesy, disrespect and insults do not always get the same. There are other options that don't involve childish behavior and the three stooges.
I respectfully disagree. I know it bothered KarenPearsall and Rozemist, they were not even the target. It had the desired effect... I felt better and I know you didn't - your own posts are empirical evidence of that. No apology necessary...
Good for you in realizing the error of your current ways. Hopefully your statement here is not as disingenuous as your past comments.
Now, I really don't understand why you have no problem insisting that you know how other people feel. I don't get it. And I think the word "empirical" and "evidence" mean what you think they mean. The words I think the words you were looking for were "opinion" and "imagination."
Frankly, I personally liked you posting the three stooges bit. It did a better job of illustrating the problems with your posts than any of my comments ever did.
Good luck with your newfound maturity. As I said, I hope your words here are more genuine then they have been in the past.
@ AKA Hoffman...
"... ... ... I'm sorry, the person you are attempting to contact is ignoring you. Please consult your directory for someone else willing to overlook your arrogance and condescension. Thank you. Operator 409. ... ... ... beeeeep!"
It's not a matter of luck. It's a matter of behavior and attitude. Mine is fine, how's yours?
I just wanted to take this time to wish everyone a Happy Thanksgiving
Have a great holiday where ever you are with family, and friends.
I feel especially Thankful this year for so many things.And I'm glad to have you all to share conversations with .
I never stop learning something interesting from each of you.Thank You!
Well it would seem that I was right again and Bull153's prior comments were as disingenuous as ever. Sad indeed.
Thank you for your kind words and holiday wishes. I'd like to add mine to the mix as we head into the end of year holidays. I hope that regardless of what you celebrate, be it Thanksgiving - Christmas - Hanukkah - Kwanzaa - Festivus - or just being with family and friends at the end of the year, you enjoy yourselves in peace and happiness. Everyone have a wonderful holiday season!
Nice start Bull153.
Now, just continue with the type of posting as displayed above and there should be no problems in the future.
When he gets to Australia, Santa Claus gives his reindeer a rest and lets six kangaroos (boomers) take over while he ditches the red coat and pants for some beach wear.
Hello crimeriddendump, Maturity and productive posts should be a goal of all contributors, especially those who urge such behavior on others (I include myself and YOU in this latter category). Just as the "stooges" comments have far outworn any glimmer of appreciative humor, don't you think it is time to retire the "fake trip" and "Australia" references? Let's get on track with some debates on the significant issues of the day. Of course, this type of discussion can certainly wait until after the Thanksgiving holiday. I recognize that I have much to be thankful for and appreciate the true gifts (family, friends, and health) with which I have been blessed. Sincerely, Karen
I'm in total agreement, it's time to move on to subjects that are of importance just as I tired of the 3 stooges postings so have I tired of the "fake trip "comments. I believe we can all have more meaningful conversations,there certainly many issues that can be discussed ex: current fiscal problem, the sad situation in the Middle East, our own local issues all by far more relevant then whether someone believes someone else is going to Australia
Hello KarenPearsall and rozemist,
Sorry, I was under the impression that facts and honesty were import . So, how about this: let's ask Bull153 point blank if the trip was just hyperbole after being frustrated with the results of the Presidential race. He gives a direct honset response and if he was not telling the full truth about his move, I'll just accept it as a moment of "temporary insanity" let it go, move on and never bring it up again. All in the name of honesty.
Honesty is important. If someone cannot be honest with simple, basic inconsequential nonsense, then what value is anything they say?
Then again, maybe you don't have as much a problem with being lied too as I do.
Hello crimeriddendump, If you go back and re-read Bull153's comments, you will find where he mentions that he would be going to Australia EVEN IF Romney had won. You are right, of course, about the importance of honesty, but it is also important to let grudges go and give people the benefit of the doubt if you, yourself have no CONCRETE PROOF that someone MIGHT be lying, but are only relying on supposition and "what seems to be". As Bull153 has ALREADY explained, several times, about his travel and job plans in his posts to rozemist and myself, I find it highly unlikely that he will feel the need to restate these plans YET again, since your words suggest you are less than inclined to believe him anyway. I will not speak for rozemist here, only myself, but I make these comments not to offend you but to put this whole "is he or isn't he REALLY moving to Australia?" in its proper perspective. Bull153's travel plans don't really affect me much, one way or the other, certainly not enough for me to make an issue about them. Of course, you have the right to believe differently and express your opinions. But rozemist and I have the same right to voice our own takes on the situation without inferences that we don't value facts and honesty. In my opinion, if you have no direct proof that Bull153's move to Australia and job offer are false claims, it makes you appear petty to continually harp on the topic. In general, you are usually more insightful in your criticisms and more careful before throwing around wild accusations. We can just agree to disagree here. I choose to spend as much time on your "Australia" digs as I did over Bull153's "stooges comments (which is to say very little). I look forward to reading your posts on more thought-provoking subjects. Sincerely, Karen
I guess your right. Facts and the truth have never seemed to matter here. Why start now I guess. Maybe we should just all comment on Bull153's masogonistic blog instead and just throw all reason to the wind.
crimeriddendump, why does it matter so much if Bull is going to Australia or not? By God I've never seen someone obsess over the most petty crap before. Who cares if you think he's staying or leaving, what I care about is the points that he makes. He can lie to me about leaving to whatever country he wants to live in but that doesn't matter one bit to me because that doesn't change the content of what he's posting right now. So why does it bother you so much and how do you expect a great discussion if all you want to do is make Bull admit to something which is irrelevant to what he's saying?
RIght, like I said: Who cares if what someone says is true or not so long as you like what they are saying. It's the Manteca way I guess ...
Sorry for causing problems, I guess I'm the idiot for being honest and wanting other to be as well.
Happy Thanksgiving! Thank you for your well written and reasoned post. It is unfortunate that some people's rabid dislike for another overshadows any sense of reason or fairness.
I'm declared a liar simply because one person chooses to believe it. It doesn't matter one bit that there is no substantiation or that the same individual has been proven a liar. I'm declared a misogynist because I would rather look at a naked female of my choosing in a film or magazine than be subjected to a nude man or woman on the street. These lines of 'reason' are so illogical that it would give Mr. Spock a galactic headache that a starship full of Excedrin couldn't relieve...
I've said it before and I will repeat it. While respect and courtesy will get you the same from me, disrespect and stupidity will NOT result in a resurrection of the 'trois laquais'. For now, directly ignoring the source works for me.
I have no problem discussing my future plans. People who become acquainted with each other through social media are just like neighbors, and we often share our lives with each other. Legitimate interest in an international move is normal and I'd be happy to discuss it with those who may be interested. I am still in the very preliminary stages of this endeavor, and I am finding this is much more involved than simply moving across town, out of state, or for that matter any of the moves I made while in the military. I am learning much already in anticipation of moving forward, and there are things I am still trying to find out. My wife is calling this our 'Great Adventure', and I think as things are finalized after the 28th the reality may start sinking in. We'll see.
Happy Thanksgiving! Thank you for a well thought out post. From prior experience, I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for any answers. You simple can't expect reason from an unreasonable individual.
I was amused at his reply, but he erred in his editing. The first paragraph should have been deleted and the next sentence ended after the word 'idiot'. That would have been an appropriate response.
“There are few situations in life that cannot be resolved promptly, and to the satisfaction of all concerned, by either suicide, a bag of gold, or thrusting a despised antagonist over a precipice on a dark night” - Ernest Bramah
I hope everybody had a great Thanksgiving, I sure did. Sitting at home plump off of Grandmas cooking :).
Crimeriddendump, what bothers me is this is a discussion board where we discuss various topics in various user created blogs. You choose to bring something which is irrelevant into discussion on every single blog there is which only lowers the level of discussion and derails discussion on every topic. I don't see why anyone would lie about where they're going to move(especially considering it doesn't help out his case in anyway to say he's moving). And even if Bull was lying and he's not going to Australia, you've taken a little lie, blown it out of proportion, and now won't stop talking about it even though I don't think anybody really cares at this point. Rush said he would move to Costa Rica if Obama won. He hasn't. I wouldn't bring it up every single time I find myself debunking or arguing against something that he said.
I think I've made it pretty clear here that I don't take sides based on political views. Bull is admittably conservative and I'm a self-proclaimed communist, but when I see stuff I don't agree with(and this isn't the first time you've done stuff like this to conservative members) I'm going to call it out.
Again, what you seem to be saying is that the truth and facts don't matter. Where is the line between "little lie" and "big lie?" As I said before, I have firsthand knowledge of the process to move people to Australia. I know first hand how long it takes and how much money it costs. This is where my initial apprehension to Bull153 comments came from. I also know - as a FACT - that the age to collect the social security that Bull153 says he collects is 65. I also know - for a FACT - that ALL BRANCHES of the armed service have a MANDATORY RETIREMENT age of about 62.
So whatever ... right? Who cares if someone says they are retired one second, military the next and getting a new job in Australia at age 70 after that? Who cares if any of that is fact or fictional. Just make up whatever we want so long as it sounds good .. right?
Speaking of Rush, would you say that his Costa Rica statement made him more believable or less believable? How many "small lies" does one have to tell before one is simply a liar?
Considering that topic is never being discussed until you bring it up in every blog, I'd say the truth is completely irrelevant because the topic itself is completely irrelevant. Seriously just LET IT GO.
I find it odd that you ask me a direct question and when I answer i your response is "let it go." How about this, don't criticize me unless you care to have my response - which you will.
You say let it go topics you bring up. HILARIOUS!
How about my Rush Limbaugh comment? Seems a valid point and one you are ignoring.
I would say the topic of truth and facts may not be irrelevant. If one's integrity is being questioned, one certainly has the right to defend it. Let's look at some "facts" that are simply NOT true.
First - "I have firsthand knowledge of the process to move people to Australia. I know first hand how long it takes and how much money it costs."
How many of these people were moved to Australia to fill a US Department of Defense civil service position? The procedures, costs, and time frame are different than for a civilian job not affiliated with the US government. Such positions, not only in Australia, but in countries all over the world, are governed by treaties and agreements between the two countries and not solely by the host nation's laws and regulations.
Second - "I also know - as a FACT - that the age to collect the social security that Bull153 says he collects is 65."
Actually, the age for me to collect my full Social Security benefit is 66. I could begin to draw SS as early as 62, but at a greatly reduced rate. I also could delay accepting SS until age 70 and draw a larger benefit. I do not currently draw any social security and I defy you to find a post where I said I do. By the way, I haven't even reached 60 yet...
Third - "I also know - for a FACT - that ALL BRANCHES of the armed service have a MANDATORY RETIREMENT age of about 62."
In 2006 the US Army changed its mandatory retirement for enlisted persons to age 62 from 55. 10 USC Chapter 63 Sections 1251-1263 specifies that in general commissioned officers retire at 62, General and Flag Officers at 64, and warrant officers at 62. There are exceptions, of course. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff can be extended beyond 64 as well as those in medical professional positions. The key is, these are active duty positions in the military, and not civil service positions - which is what covers my position. Except for certain jobs like firefighting (57), pilots (65), air traffic controllers (56-61), and federal police officers (57), there is no mandatory federal retirement age.
Finally - "Who cares if someone says they are retired one second, military the next and getting a new job in Australia at age 70 after that?"
I retired from the USAF in October 1992, from the police department in December 2011, and I was first contacted about the position in Australia back in mid-2009. I was recruited again on October, 2012. I have never claimed to be 70 years old.
I agree with you... "Seriously just LET IT GO." ;)
"Truth is by nature self-evident. As soon as you remove the cobwebs of ignorance that surround it, it shines clear." - Mahatma Gandhi
I understand when you're personally being attacked it's not irrelevant but there's not really anything he could say at this point to make me or others care one bit. Because if there's one thing I don't want to talk about it's defending you against people saying you're not moving to Australia.
Crimeriddendump, looking at the comments here will show you I didn't bring up this topic.
So, are you now saying that you don't receive Social Security? So your post on Sep 03, 2011 were you suggest that "your" social security check is not an entitlement was just completely disingenuous then I guess.
Maybe you do get Social Security and maybe you don't BUT it is very hard to believe anything you say Bull153 when it changes from post to post. You seem to be very Romney like and change your story based on whatever is convient at the time.
Hi Capitalists_Nightmare ,
Odd that you seem to have such a major problem with my questioning the very questionable things that Bull153 has posted - saying they are obsessive etc. - yet seem to be perfectly OK with Bull153's full on arrogant, immature attack blog.
Would be very interesting to get a response as to why my persistant questioning is somehow "called out" by you, yet this antisocial unproductive behavior by Bull153 is not.
Welcome back. I hope you enjoyed the trip. I've retired the 'stooges' and silly behavior. I've been challenged to fair and reasonable debates and discussions without being condescending or insulting. If you wish to discuss a topic, ask a question, or debate something - that's fine. If you are demeaning or condescending, I'll simply ignore you, it's your choice.
“A wise man is superior to any insults which can be put upon him, and the best reply to unseemly behavior is patience and moderation.” - Moliere
HAHHHH! Without being condescending or insulting? What do you call your whole arrogant attack blog? Again Bull153, you seem to have a major problem with hypocrisy and what seems to be a major disconnect with reality.
If you think your recent behavior is not condescending and insulting then I would say you don't know the definition of these two words.
I said earlier today "OK, based on my dealings with you over the past few years, it is my opinion that you are the one incapable of a reasonable discussion and debate. I am willing to give it a try, however."
"So, let's wipe the slate (or etch a sketch) clean, as it were and start over. I'm willing to stick to the topic, answer questions directly, clarify between opinion and fact, and avoid being condescending and insulting."
"Let's see if we are capable of a mature and fair debate."
So, it appears you would prefer to be insulting and condescending. Fine, I was willing to give it a try. By the way, in the spirit of trying to turn a new page (and wiping the etch a sketch clean) I had earlier deleted what you call my "arrogant attack blog". Oh well, I hadn't held out much hope in the first place.
"Don't take the wrong side of an argument just because your opponent has taken the right side.” - Baltasar Gracian
First, I applaud your mature decision to delete your arrogant attack blog like you have your other halfdozen or so attack blogs in the past. Now, just try to refrain from doing this again in the future.
Second, forgive me if I did not notice right away that your arrogant attack blog was deleted. As I said at one point in that blog, I was ignoring it.
Third, I think it is a bit disingenuous to be condescending to me for not seeing that you deleted your blog in the same post you say you will "avoid being condescending and insulting."
Bull153, many times your words ring very hollow as you will say one thing and do another. What is important is action. Your deleting your arrogant attack blog is a great first step forward, unfortunately, this post seems like a small step back. However, it would seem there is a net gain here in the positive direction. Change takes time and I'm excited a the possibility that you might be willing to change your behavior for the better.
The time has come Bull153 for you to stop talking the talk, and start walking the walk. I look forward to that time.
It looks to me that you have difficulty being anything but condescending. In your post above you do not discuss, you lecture. That is not what debate is about.
First - A simple "I appreciate that you have removed your 'attack blog', thank you" is better received than including 'arrogant' and instructing me to try and not do it again. I don't think portraying a 'parental' style of discussion is going to prove a positive step.
Second - Your 'explanation' leaves a bit to be desired regarding you noticing my blog was removed. It was one of the first five until you took steps to move it to the second page. But that is really of no consequence any longer.
Third - what you said makes no sense.
It is hard to move forward when one is so entrenched in going backward. You are right that actions are important, but they need to be positive actions. From my perspective, you seem locked in reverse.
The time has come for both of us to try and be reasonable. I think I am, but I am beginning to doubt that you are. Maybe others can tell.
"A patronizing disposition always has its meaner side” - George Elliot
What ever happened to Native and Fredo? All this "get along" stuff from Bull is OK, if you like that sort of stuff but it doesn't fit his style. It's like a fighter has always been a brawler and decides he now wants to just box. After awhile, fans lose intrest in his fights. That's how I feel, I'm losing interest...
I've never been a fan of pugilism, nor have I ever thought of myself as a 'brawler'. Whether in the military or in police work, I prefer to accomplish the mission or clear the case without a fight. Don't get me wrong, I am willing to 'bring it' with the best of them when called for, but I have found it true that you 'catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.'
If you lose interest because I've abandoned the 'stooges' approach to blogging, I'm sorry. When I look at things at the end of the day, I prefer to try and be a blogger that KarenPearsall and rozemist enjoy reading than one where you are entertained by silliness. Besides, isn't it more important that a blog or post have substance rather than style? I'd rather debate an issue than trade rude comments. There are some who are capable to being humorous while making a point - I know I try sometimes. But it is up to the reader to determine how successful at it one is.
For those who claim to want to discuss things responsibly yet continue to be rude and insulting - well, I can just ignore those folks. It's your choice to be interested or not. It's my choice not to brawl or box.
“I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig, you get dirty; and besides, the pig likes it.” - George Bernard Shaw
Well, I like Boxing and Cage Fighting maybe because I tried fighting as a young man but I quit because my ears started to look funny. Guess I wasn't very good at that game but I still enjoy it. Maybe that's why I liked your 'stooges' approach, oh well, there is still Native and Fredo...:-)