Bush supporters' aftermath thread

blatham, My brother, a politician, told me some time ago that Bush will never admit mistakes. I posted as much some months ago on a2k. Seems he was right, and he's a republican. ;(

0 Replies

blatham wrote:

Lash wrote:
McTag wrote:
Lash wrote:
They neither deserve, nor will they recieve, courtesy on this point under any circumstances again. I will consider any requests in that vein by them as a personal invitation from now on.

They have obliterated personal courtesies.

I nearly choked, when I read Lash writing about extending personal courtesies.

What's it to be, Lash, No More Ms Nice Person?

While that is funny--when asked, I have always --to this point-- taken requests by thread starters seriously. I have left a thread when asked by a thread starter; and when the Democrats asked me and my ilk (haven't used ilk in three days) to give them space after they lost the election, I did so immediately.

So, did the ilk.

Yet, it has been apparent that we are the only ones to take such courtesies seriously.

I was just giving public notice that I shall in the future, behave as they do on this matter. Hate to lose that last semblance of propriety, but when in Crete...

You know, mock the cretins...

Sorry lash. We are resolute. We are fighting you where you live so that we don't have to fight you at home.

That's fine. Just don't pee in your shorts when we show up in your face.

0 Replies

We promise to hold you and comfort you when you realize we have been right all along.

0 Replies

's long as i dont have to hold Tico.

0 Replies

Maybe you think it is fine, Lash. I think it is boorish, rude, unkind and childish to intentionally disrupt a thread for others. I think they WANT you to get in their face--they're actually inviting you--so they can use it to justify their pettiness. Their own threads are so empty and boring they can't stand to be in them, so they do the only thing they know: engage in the sport of taunting and mocking and interfering. They can't see how nonproductive that is, or how that kind of mindset works against them and costs them elections.

It's okay though. I suppose their childishness is not a violation of TOS. So I'll spend my time elsewhere until they tire of their game. Meanwhile we can just smile and enjoy the political advantage they hand us.

0 Replies

You'll draw back nubs, the lot of you misguided so and so's.

0 Replies

squinney wrote:

It's part of the reason for putting blame on the state and local government as well, since putting more responsibility on the states is another aim of the neoconservatives.

Perhaps the biggest reason is because that's where it belongs?

0 Replies

FreeDuck wrote:

Thanks, I'm bad about propogating spelling errors.

Not to pile on, FD, but did you mean to misspell "propagating"?

Cool

0 Replies

Lash wrote:

You'll draw back nubs, the lot of you misguided so and so's.

Lash honey years ago I did something that changed my life in a positive way, and I'd like to suggest, with love, that you try it. I bought a round bed.

0 Replies

Ticomaya wrote:

FreeDuck wrote:
Thanks, I'm bad about propogating spelling errors.

Not to pile on, FD, but did you mean to misspell "propagating"?

Gotta love that. I mean, gotto lov tat.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

disrupt a thread for others.

This thread is for everyone. Just ask Tico.

0 Replies

FreeDuck wrote:

Foxfyre wrote:
disrupt a thread for others.

FreeDuck wrote:
This thread is for everyone. Just ask Tico.

0 Replies

FreeDuck wrote:

Foxfyre wrote:
disrupt a thread for others.

This thread is for everyone. Just ask Tico.

Actually, FD, while this thread is for everyone, spammers and trolls are not welcome. As they are well-aware, the chief spammers and trolls of this thread lately, are c.i. and blatham.

It's as if this site were predominately visited by dog owners, and there was this one little thread for the few cat lovers to discuss "all things cat," and a gang of rabid anti-cat dog lovers kept showing up out of the blue, posting all kinds of articles about how stupid cats are, why they should all be shot, why dogs are so superior, etc.

But this has all been said before. It is clear that blatham believes he has been divinely ordained to preach to the Bush Supporters his brand of liberalism, and hence his frequent appearances here, spamming us with some odd bit of nonsense he's gleaned from his many liberal sources.

c.i. hasn't proclaimed his mission, but certainly seems to have the same goal as blatham.

Why they aren't over at their dusty gloat thread is beyond me. Lash has been trying to inject some action over there, but it is clear they'd rather hang out in this thread.

... and so I oil my scroll wheel.

0 Replies

Ticomaya wrote:

Actually, FD, while this thread is for everyone, spammers and trolls are not welcome. As they are well-aware, the chief spammers and trolls of this thread lately, are c.i. and blatham.

Yes, but spammers and trolls are not welcome anywhere.

I would argue that your definition of spam seems to take into account a presumption that the thread is only for Bush Supporters. When the sister thread to this one was opened to all, it was open for those who wanted to gloat as well as those who wanted to mourn. Those who wanted to say "snap out of it and quit sniveling" were not considered spammers or trolls. Those who questioned our logic or refuted our ideas were not considered spammers. Of course, that thread was abandoned when the need for such emotional and irrational partisanship (ie. election is over and gone) faded. So you all are free to keep this thread going, and anyone who wishes to rain on your gloating is also free to post. You have, as you say, a well-oiled scroll button.

I do see your point when the posts are just drive-bys, and I agree that is trolling. But blatham's posts are certainly something that you could refute or discuss cordially -- if you wanted to.

0 Replies

heehee, i am a guilty drive byer...i put little tiny thoughts here and there... Smile

0 Replies

there was a drive-by shooting in Lake Woebegone last week, it resulted in a pile-up on the information highway.

0 Replies

Actually when Thomas called for civility some got the message and the thread briefly returned to civil give and take and could have been enjoyable. But then Blatham and CI showed up to start spamming with their drivel again--and yes, FD, it IS mostly drivel--not to mention insulting cartoons that are obviously meant to flame--and bye bye civil conversation.

The only conclusion one can draw is that the intention is to flame and there is no intention of allowing any kind of civil discussion.

If we were doing that to a thread designed by one of you for Kerry supporters, and the thread author requested that we not do that, and we did not cease and desist, I would object just as much.

You said MANY pages back that we should not be able to have a thread where we could take shots at the Left with impunity. Why not? We suggested you guys do your own thing in your own thread and you would be left entirely alone. Why wasn't that good enough?

I welcome civil discussion from all sides here or anywhere. We almost achieved it just yesterday. And then Blatham and CI spoiled it again.

I think that's a shame.

0 Replies

Foxfyre

Foxfyre wrote:

Maybe you think it is fine, Lash. I think it is boorish, rude, unkind and childish to intentionally disrupt a thread for others. I think they WANT you to get in their face--they're actually inviting you--so they can use it to justify their pettiness. Their own threads are so empty and boring they can't stand to be in them, so they do the only thing they know: engage in the sport of taunting and mocking and interfering. They can't see how nonproductive that is, or how that kind of mindset works against them and costs them elections.

It's okay though. I suppose their childishness is not a violation of TOS. So I'll spend my time elsewhere until they tire of their game. Meanwhile we can just smile and enjoy the political advantage they hand us.

You may want to make an appointment with your mental health counselor to have the term "projection" explained to you.

BBB

p.s. Since you and your ilk enjoy playing your game so much, we knew you would recognize it and secretly admire how clever we've become.

When you stand at the edge of a cliff and yodel, don't be surprised that the yodel comes back to you, just like a boomerang.

(I must stop mixing metaphors.) :wink:

bbb

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

If we were doing that to a thread designed by one of you for Kerry supporters

It's interesting to observe, however, that there isn't such a thread, and that the only such thread that existed was 'opened for the public' in a matter of weeks.

Foxfyre wrote:

You said MANY pages back that we should not be able to have a thread where we could take shots at the Left with impunity. Why not?

Another observation here could be that the rationale for the one thread that was, briefly enough, started with the request for others to stay out was not to allow cheap shots with impunity, but to share and overcome political grief.

(Not that I generally care one way or another - far as I care anyone should be able to get their own private niche, and now that they're open I'm posting in both the Democrats and Bush supporters gloat threads.)

0 Replies

If you can show where I intentionally disrupted a thread anywhere, anyplace, anytime, BB, I will write a three paragraph apology.

Even you got reasonable for a time yesterday. I was actually encouraged. But now we're back to the old ad hominems aren't we.

I guess some people simply can't help themselves.

0 Replies

Bush supporters' aftermath thread

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know