192
   

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

 
 
georgeob1
 
  0  
Sun 10 Dec, 2017 02:49 pm
@glitterbag,
glitterbag wrote:

These people are easily led, they are manipulated by fear and by imaginary grace of God. They’ve been convinced it’s them against utter destruction/loss of importance. I can only hope the fair minded among them will sober up and realize that they are not ‘winning’ and making democracy strong......they are attempting to destroy the very foundation....they may not understand it right now....but these so-called ‘conservatives’ will start turning on each other. When you are in a contest to be the most righteous everybody loses. Those ‘good, decent, Christian hypocrites will be shooting each other in the back.

That’s from where I think the whiff of desperation emanates. Think of Jonestown and Kool aid.


Do you mean shooting each other in the Back the way the Democrat Congressional establishment recently did Al Franken? Self righteousness is hardly concentrated in conservatives. Indeed the levels of this unwholesome trait you display, and found among contemporary Liberals, are far out of sight.
thack45
 
  4  
Sun 10 Dec, 2017 02:55 pm
@blatham,
It was my guess that the reason for the RNC, McConnell and others' about-face on their pretended indignation had to do with the realization that Moore was going to win regardless, and they didn't actually have a desire to follow through with what would ultimately amount to infighting within the party
georgeob1
 
  1  
Sun 10 Dec, 2017 03:02 pm
I did enjoy Finn's long but thoughtful and incisive post a couple of pages back. Blatham's rather vacuous reply above was a very weak rejoinder, if that is what was intended. In his defense we should recognize that there appear to be lots of Canadians here, obsessed with the internal politics of a neighboring country and evidently bored with their own. This may well be a malaise ( to quote Jimmy Carter), pervasive among them.

Very glad to see Layman back on this thread. It had gotten very stale and repetitious, replete as it was with reading assignments from the master and a chorus of "amens" from the sheep.
hightor
 
  4  
Sun 10 Dec, 2017 03:02 pm
@georgeob1,
Quote:
Do you mean shooting each other in the Back the way the Democrat Congressional establishment recently did Al Franken?

While the hasty jettisoning of Sen. Franken looked a bit unseemly I don't think it sinks to the level of shooting anyone in the back. It was a choreographed act of political theater, the various pluses and minuses carefully weighed and assessed. It just didn't make sense to leave Franken there and have to deal with charges of "hypocrisy". Nor did anyone want to get caught defending Franken's actions as "not so bad". I believe it was the Scarlet Pimpernel who observed that, "there is nothing as bad as something not so bad."
maporsche
 
  4  
Sun 10 Dec, 2017 03:08 pm
@georgeob1,
Always nice when you stop by to comment on the forum members themselves all while ignoring the policies and issues with our government.

I can't wait for next week and what new insights you'll bring here.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  0  
Sun 10 Dec, 2017 03:08 pm
@hightor,
hightor wrote:

Quote:
Do you mean shooting each other in the Back the way the Democrat Congressional establishment recently did Al Franken?

While the hasty jettisoning of Sen. Franken looked a bit unseemly I don't think it sinks to the level of shooting anyone in the back. It was a choreographed act of political theater, the various pluses and minuses carefully weighed and assessed.

I wouldn't argue with that assessment. However I note that such "political theater" is hardly "doing the honorable thing", as one of the slavish claques noted above. Indeed there was very little that was honorable in his final statement to the Senate in which he denied the charges and, in the same breath accepted the "moral" judgment of his Democrat peers in the Congress.
0 Replies
 
layman
 
  -1  
Sun 10 Dec, 2017 03:10 pm
@georgeob1,
georgeob1 wrote:

Very glad to see Layman back on this thread. It had gotten very stale and repetitious, replete as it was with reading assignments from the master and a chorus of "amens" from the sheep.


Hey, George! Likewise, homey. I was afraid you had left forever. I wouldn't blame you, of course, but would be sorry to be deprived of the sober, rational input you bring to this thread.

I came back for a spell, out of boredom, I guess, but I've been getting even more bored in this cookie-cutter joint than I was, I'm afraid.
0 Replies
 
Sturgis
 
  3  
Sun 10 Dec, 2017 03:16 pm
Although some posters put up ideas which others find reprehensible (from either side), I enjoy reading both sides. Whether I agree with or don't is of lower importance than having a full set of ideas presented. If I want only one side I can watch CNN or listen to Rush Limbaugh on one side and most of MSNBC and various radio persons, on the other.
Below viewing threshold (view)
georgeob1
 
  1  
Sun 10 Dec, 2017 03:25 pm
@glitterbag,
glitterbag wrote:

He devotes an incredible amount of time trying to insult you, it illustrates my point about the desperation.


Not true. It appears to me he does it effortlessly as do you when applauding your master on signal.
maporsche
 
  5  
Sun 10 Dec, 2017 03:27 pm
@Sturgis,
Sturgis wrote:

Although some posters put up ideas which others find reprehensible (from either side), I enjoy reading both sides. Whether I agree with or don't is of lower importance than having a full set of ideas presented. If I want only one side I can watch CNN or listen to Rush Limbaugh on one side and most of MSNBC and various radio persons, on the other.


I don't ignore the posters who are generally decent people on here. I'll have a respectful conversation with anyone. But I've got no problem blocking out the crazies from my life.

It's like when you taking the L here in Chicago, it's common to start chatting up someone sitting next to you, but if he starts picking **** out his ass and wiping it on my jacket, I'm going to quickly step away.
layman
 
  -3  
Sun 10 Dec, 2017 03:33 pm
@maporsche,
maporsche wrote:

I don't ignore the posters who are generally decent people on here.


Generally decent people? Translation: Those who never question or disagree with me.

I guess the honorable R. P. McMurphy wouldn't make the cut, eh?
glitterbag
 
  1  
Sun 10 Dec, 2017 03:47 pm
@georgeob1,
georgeob1 wrote:

glitterbag wrote:

He devotes an incredible amount of time trying to insult you, it illustrates my point about the desperation.


Not true. It appears to me he does it effortlessly as do you when applauding your master on signal.


And yet, he gets under your skin too. Is that how it works in your world Georgie, master and acolytes? That’s not really a surprise, it’s the way you folks are wired......good, evil, black, white and no independent thought. Yeah, you think you have it all figured out, that’s rich.
layman
 
  -4  
Sun 10 Dec, 2017 03:51 pm
@layman,
There're a lot of cheese-eaters around who whine that Trump aint "presidential" enough; that he lacks the necessary "gravitas" (whatever the **** that's supposed to be); and that he aint no mealy-mouthed double-talkin cowardly politician who is very careful to try to please everyone.

Maybe so. But guess what, cheese-eaters?

He's president, and you aint. He was elected, not the fraud you ran.

Trump is completely presidential because....well, because he's the president, see?
0 Replies
 
Sturgis
 
  9  
Sun 10 Dec, 2017 03:56 pm
Yay!

My post about reading both sides has been demoted to a zero!

(I knew I could count on a few panicky dweebs to get me there)
0 Replies
 
layman
 
  -1  
Sun 10 Dec, 2017 04:00 pm
One of our esteemed former presidents, the great Ulysses S. Grant, was often accused of the same kinda thing.

Some white house reporter of his time once asked him why he drank so much whiskey.

His answer was as simple as it was obvious: "To get drunk."

Drunk or sober, Grant established the Justice Department and had his men run roughshod over the KKK in the south.

A truly great man.

Quote:
Grant's vision of Reconstruction included federal enforcement of civil rights and spoke out against voter intimidation of Southern blacks. In his message to Congress in 1874, Grant wrote, "Treat the negro as a citizen and a voter, as he is and must remain, and soon parties will be divided, not on the color line, but on principle."He lobbied Congress to pass the Fifteenth Amendment, guaranteeing that no state could prevent someone from voting based on race, and believed that its passage would secure freedmen's rights.

To bolster the new amendment, Grant relied on the army and signed legislation creating the Justice Department, primarily to enforce federal laws in the South. Where the attorney general had once been only a legal adviser to the president, he now led a cabinet department dedicated to enforcing federal law, including a solicitor general to argue on the government's behalf in court.

Alarmed by a rise in terror by the Ku Klux Klan and other groups against African Americans, Congress enacted a far more sweeping measure, the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871, which for the first time designated certain crimes as punishable under federal law. In May 1871, Grant ordered federal troops to help marshals in arresting Klansmen. That October, Grant suspended habeas corpus in part of South Carolina and sent federal troops to enforce the law there.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulysses_S._Grant#Later_Reconstruction_and_civil_rights
0 Replies
 
Real Music
 
  2  
Sun 10 Dec, 2017 04:10 pm
Here's a little political and social humor on so many different current events.

Visit with Santa Cold Open - SNL
georgeob1
 
  2  
Sun 10 Dec, 2017 04:14 pm
@glitterbag,
That's definitely not the way it works in my world. I think for myself, am serious, but also have a taste for humor and irony. You don't understand 'how I am wired' at all, and you appear to be repeatedly swinging at ghosts of your own imagining in this area

I suppose your reference to "he" here is to Blatham (though that doesn't follow from the earlier remarks, which I believe started with Finn).

There are many things I like about Blatham, including his wit, erudition ( in some areas) and occasional flair for a good phrase. What I don't like is his intolerance and the sudden absence of his normal appreciation for irony whenever he addresses the supposed right wing conspiracy that so obsesses him. He becomes close-minded, humorless and doctrinaire whenever he addresses such matters.

I also find the master and sheep relationship so evident in this thread to be a bit sad and comical.
layman
 
  -1  
Sun 10 Dec, 2017 04:15 pm
@maporsche,
maporsche wrote:
I don't ignore the posters who are generally decent people on here.


Abraham Lincoln wrote:
“It has been my experience that folks who have no vices have very few virtues.”
0 Replies
 
layman
 
  -3  
Sun 10 Dec, 2017 04:21 pm
@Real Music,
That Santa was OK, I guess, but he sho nuff aint no Homey D. Clown, eh?

0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.46 seconds on 09/28/2024 at 03:54:25