Intrepid
 
  3  
Reply Fri 19 Jun, 2009 05:34 pm
@genoves,
genoves wrote:

And you, parados< What do you think of this(I know you won't answer since I usually win our debates)


Boy, that got me shaking my head. I haven't seen you WIN a debate against anybody. Much less parados. You have just won quote of the day.
genoves
 
  -3  
Reply Fri 19 Jun, 2009 05:36 pm
@Intrepid,
Well, Intrepid, If you are correct, just try to debate with me. After I hand you your head, you may change your mind.

0 Replies
 
genoves
 
  -3  
Reply Fri 19 Jun, 2009 05:37 pm
@Intrepid,
It is not I WHO IGNORE THE FACTS, INTREPID. That post was from the Wall Street Journal.
contrex
 
  0  
Reply Fri 19 Jun, 2009 05:38 pm
@genoves,
genoves, you should just plain STFU, because you are such a dumb f*ck.
0 Replies
 
Intrepid
 
  3  
Reply Fri 19 Jun, 2009 05:40 pm
@genoves,
genoves wrote:

It is not I WHO IGNORE THE FACTS, INTREPID. That post was from the Wall Street Journal.


If you are such a great debater....no need to shout.

In what context are you making this post? I didn't say anything about anybody ignoring facts.

You lose.

Wink
genoves
 
  -3  
Reply Fri 19 Jun, 2009 05:42 pm
@Intrepid,
Do you know how to read?
You wrote:
Re: genoves(Post 3682034)
You seem to ignore the fact the ma'am and madam are two different words.
end of quote.

Since you seem to be a clueless sort who thinks I cannot respond to you--Note

[edit] Use as a form of address
Madam is used in direct address, without the woman's name, for example when addressed by a stranger: May I help you, madam? In the United States and in Canada, "Ma'am" is usually used. The male equivalent is sir. Spelling of the word is often quarreled; some argue it is spelled "M'am" while it is widely accepted the correct form is "Ma'am". When addressing a letter to the holder of a particular position (for example, the editor of the Letters to the Editor column in a newspaper) without knowing the name of the addressee and if it is a man or a woman, it is common to address the letter with "Dear Sir or Madam".


****************************************************************

Despite your ignorance, it is clear that Ma'am and "Madam" are the same when used as a form of address. Boxer disrespected Rice when she used "Madame" instead of Ms. Secretary. Or did you not, as many left wingers do, read the article which called Boxer a hypocrite.
genoves
 
  -3  
Reply Fri 19 Jun, 2009 05:49 pm
Here are the FACTS you ignore,Intrepid.

In what context? In the context that Boxer is a HYPOCRITE!

Senator Barbara Boxer Calls Condi Rice "Ma'am!"
HYPOCRISY ALERT! HYPOCRISY ALERT!

Princess Barbara Boxer was offended by the words of a mere commoner today, namely one Brigadier General Michael Walsh who was testifying before Her Highness.

Forgetting his manners in a most atrocious form, the General called her "ma'am," which is a contracted form of the word "Madam."

Her royal highness immediately dressed down the scoundrel, assuring him she deserved to be called by the title to which she has worked so very hard to achieve:






Put aside that in England where the word originates, Madam is used to address the queen or a royal princess. Forget that in America, Madam is an appellation of respect used toward women. It is all still far below Her Liege Barbara Boxer.

Recall though when former Secretary of State Condolezza Rice was testifying before Senator Boxer two years ago. That was when Boxer dressed Rice down for having the nerve to be a childless woman who has the power to make decisions.

Few may remember that Boxer called Rice 'Madam" three different times during that testimony.

So, what is good enough for the childless Condi Rice is certainly not good enough for the all high and fertile Barbara Boxer.

Bow down. Kneel before your new Democrat masters.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  4  
Reply Fri 19 Jun, 2009 05:53 pm
The incidents reported here are rather trivial and not of much consequence. However they do - in my opinion - illustrate some salient characteristics of the esteemed senator from California.

She appears to be a classic case of an overcompensating short person. Add to that an inflated sense of self-importance and a strong vindictive streak and you have a rather thoroughly obnoxious character. A few years ago I witnessed more of this behavior in a restaurant in Marin County where we were (by chance) seated just a table away from the senator and her companion. A well-dressen woman walked up to her table, and expressed her admiration for the senator and apparently wanted to shake her hand or something like that. Up until that point I hadn't paid much attention, but very quickly the senator loudly complained that she was at dinner and did not want such uninvited intrusions and demanded to be left alone. The woman, crestfallen and very embarrased, beat a hasty retreat. Boxer then loudly summoned the headwaiter and chided him for allowing such an intrusion, creating an equally big distraction for all the other diners around her. A real eye-roller !
boomerang
 
  4  
Reply Fri 19 Jun, 2009 05:57 pm
Quote:
Brig. Gen. Walsh was following military protocol, which advises officers to use "sir" or "ma'am" when addressing
anyone higher than them on the chain of command... Bitch Boxer should have known this and shown all due respect.


Every military officer I've ever met (and I've met several very high ranking officers) call everyone "ma'am" and "sir". Boxer was being a doofus but she doesn't owe him an apology. I'll bet you dollars to donuts that BG Walsh never gave this a second thought.
hawkeye10
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 19 Jun, 2009 06:18 pm
@boomerang,
Quote:
Every military officer I've ever met (and I've met several very high ranking officers) call everyone "ma'am" and "sir". Boxer was being a doofus but she doesn't owe him an apology. I'll bet you dollars to donuts that BG Walsh never gave this a second thought.


ya she does. If she had a problem with protocol then her staff needed to talk to his staff before hand. She blindsided him, it was not fair, and I question what her motivation was for not being considerate of him by not following normally expected behaviour.
boomerang
 
  2  
Reply Fri 19 Jun, 2009 06:25 pm
She "blindsided" him?

You're ridiculous.

She said "please call me Senator, I've worked for that title" and he said "Yes, ma'am" then began to address her as Senator.

I've known doctors (not necessarily medical doctors) that were always insistent on being called doctor. Judges that wanted to be called "Judge".

0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  3  
Reply Fri 19 Jun, 2009 06:26 pm
@boomerang,
This is just an example of the "out of control" members of the GOP on A2K, they are "Issueless"
. Walsh called another sen "sir" in the same hearing. Boxer is being an ego driven bitch. After all shes a politician and psychologically theyre pretty much all alike (prove me wrong on that). She wants to be called Senator (which, by the way is a proper term of recognition like "Mr President", "Ms SPeaker "
or "Mr Representative" Ietc. To address a cabinet member by a legislator, the legislator would use the title "Mr"/Dr" or Ms". Im sure Sen Boxer could have addressed Dr Rice as Dr Rice, but Ms or Maam also works. Boxer doesnt owe anybody any apologies, since when does protocol like this get discussed before hand? The meetings would never occur for Chrisesakes
USING CHILDISH STUFF LIKE ,
"stringing her up" ; or"cunning runt " (, What was really implied,was a" running ****"-which was a punch line of a verry old joke), are just examples of how unprepared for standard debate water boy is.
Mame
 
  2  
Reply Fri 19 Jun, 2009 06:29 pm
@hawkeye10,
You're such a doofus. A problem with protocol? And what is normally "excepted" behaviour, anyway? It was NOT a BIG deal! He said X, she asked Y, and he responded as she requested. END of issue. YOU guys are the ones making it bigger than it was. ROLLY EYEBALLS INSERTED HERE.
hawkeye10
 
  2  
Reply Fri 19 Jun, 2009 06:37 pm
@Mame,
Quote:
YOU guys are the ones making it bigger than it was. ROLLY EYEBALLS INSERTED HERE.


I agree that it is not a big deal, but it was a foreseeable problem that was easily prevented by normal courtesy. This smells like Boxer wanted to scratch an itch, make a public power move on an unsuspecting low ranking General. She has been in Washington a long time she had to know what she was doing. This had to be an event that took place because she wanted it to take place, which was not very nice of her.

Not a big deal, but Boxer makes herself look bad, in my opinion.
0 Replies
 
boomerang
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Jun, 2009 06:40 pm
@farmerman,
Oh I know famerman. And I know I'm silly for taking this kind of thing so personally but I really hate it when soldiers are presented as some kind of inhuman droids who don't have any life experience.

I've dealt with those preconceptions for so long because of who my brother is (a very high ranking military officer). Everyone always assumes he's some kind of brainwashed robot who is going to be pissed off and demand an apology if someone says "call me Senator".

It's just so stupid and it always makes me mad.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Jun, 2009 06:41 pm
Thanks for the chuckles.
0 Replies
 
Intrepid
 
  2  
Reply Fri 19 Jun, 2009 07:34 pm
@genoves,
genoves wrote:

Do you know how to read?
You wrote:
Re: genoves(Post 3682034)
You seem to ignore the fact the ma'am and madam are two different words.
end of quote.

Since you seem to be a clueless sort who thinks I cannot respond to you--Note

[edit] Use as a form of address
Madam is used in direct address, without the woman's name, for example when addressed by a stranger: May I help you, madam? In the United States and in Canada, "Ma'am" is usually used. The male equivalent is sir. Spelling of the word is often quarreled; some argue it is spelled "M'am" while it is widely accepted the correct form is "Ma'am". When addressing a letter to the holder of a particular position (for example, the editor of the Letters to the Editor column in a newspaper) without knowing the name of the addressee and if it is a man or a woman, it is common to address the letter with "Dear Sir or Madam".


****************************************************************

Despite your ignorance, it is clear that Ma'am and "Madam" are the same when used as a form of address. Boxer disrespected Rice when she used "Madame" instead of Ms. Secretary. Or did you not, as many left wingers do, read the article which called Boxer a hypocrite.


In the United States Armed Forces, "ma'am" is used to address female commissioned officers and Warrant Officers. Marine recruits and Air Force trainees also address female non-commissioned officers as "ma'am."

Madam is also used as the equivalent of Mr. in composed titles, such as Madam Justice, Madam Speaker, Madam President. Most of these titles are usually used only in direct address, without the woman's last name: one would say President Smith, not Madam President Smith, even if one would address her to her face as Madam President.

Perhaps Madam Senator would have been appropriate.

Regardless, this is a dumb thread that was only started to draw the kind of responses that have been made.

And, yes, I know how to read. I have a bit of trouble without my glasses, but I get along just fine. Thank you.
0 Replies
 
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Jun, 2009 07:55 pm
@Intrepid,
Intrepid wrote:

Right on. It seems that H2o Man is making something out of nothing here. What's the big deal?


The big deal is that military personnel are conditioned to refer to those higher in the chain of command as EITHER "Sir"/"Ma'am," or by their title. Meaning an enlisted person would call a lieutenant "Sir"/"Ma'am" or "lieutenant." However, based on the context of the situation it might strike a military person to use Ma'am, rather than Senator. Both show respect. In answering a question with an affirmative or negative reply, "Yes, Sir," or "No, Sir" is considered more correct that "Yes, lieutenant," or "No, lieutenant" (which can be taken to sound pedantic, and disrespectful, perhaps, since there is nothing more clear in the military for respect than "Sir," or "Ma'am."

This is what I remember. If it has changed, I would not know. However, Senator Boxer should understand these things as a woman in her position. She cut A GENERAL no slack. In my opinion, that is shameful! She gets to sleep at night, without fear of enemies coming over a hill, because of the tireless hours that military officers put into their careers.

And, based on her taking umbrage in the first place, I would not think she would be willing to apologize, since humility and umbrage are usually diametrically opposites when analyzing a personality.

Senator Boxer never had to say, "Private Boxer reporting as ordered, Sir!" I would guess.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Jun, 2009 08:05 pm
@Foofie,
Quote:
This is what I remember. If it has changed, I would not know. However, Senator Boxer should understand these things as a woman in her position


There is no "SHOULD" about it, she is far from stupid, and she has been playing the Washington game for a very long time. She knew, she manufactured this event. WHY?
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Jun, 2009 08:13 pm
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
This is what I remember. If it has changed, I would not know. However, Senator Boxer should understand these things as a woman in her position


There is no "SHOULD" about it, she is far from stupid, and she has been playing the Washington game for a very long time. She knew, she manufactured this event. WHY?


Is a majority of her constituency ultra-liberal, and perhaps anti-military?
 

Related Topics

50 Shades of A2K… - Discussion by Tryagain
Facebook banned me from commenting - Question by wellatl
Am I alone, revisited - Question by dalehileman
guns - Discussion by moe44
I Have a Small Dick - Discussion by Tryagain
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Cunning Runt
  3. » Page 2
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 12/04/2022 at 06:11:09