Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.

Poor poor Alexandria

Collapse
X
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by guido61 View Post

    We can agree to disagree about whether all politicians who are caught lying should be held to exact same degree of public account for it regardless of their position or stature. But if you are going to accuse me of hypocrisy and that it's for partisan reasons, then you need to find examples of me doing so based on MY criteria for holding political liars to account, not YOURS.
    Wait, wait, wait...You do realize how ridiculous you sound, right? You are one of the ones who ridicules others for their views of Trump because they do not agree with your views. Now you are getting upset because I called you out for defending and temporizing for her doing the very same thing Trump does. You have chosen, as your defense, to assign levels of lying based upon the persons position. That in itself flies directly in the face of what progressives call for: equal treatment. And that is hypocrisy in that you are now assigning "castes" to liars among other things. Not very proletariat of you as a progressive or one who espoused equal treatment for all.

    Practice what you preach at all times or you are a hypocrite.

    On top of that you then state that I am incorrect for my criteria not being the same as yours.

    One is either ethical, or they are not. One is either a liar or they are not. If you assign different levels of culpability based upon position you are not treating everyone as an equal.




    Originally posted by guido61 View Post

    I've even given examples of some comparable public figures to her for which you might try to find examples of me being hypocritical or partisan based on my clearly laid out criteria. You're free to also find others. Sorry, but you continually trying to complain that I'm not holding her to YOUR standard is complete BS. And all the personal insults along the way don't make your case any stronger.
    I do not need any other examples to bolster my judgement. Just one is enough.

    You are complaining that I am not holding her, and holding you to your own standard. Pot meet kettle.

    People whine about Trumps ethics yet temporize and defend her same lack of ethics. You are holding people to different standards and expectations and the person you are defending and temporizing for, the person you have assigned different standards to, is one who opposes Trump.

    You do not see the hypocrisy in that?

    As far as personal insults? Again, pot meet kettle. If you think I am attacking you personally then you need to watch what you say. I could "interpret" anything you post that is in opposition to me as a "personal insult".

    Originally posted by guido61 View Post

    I've been clear on all the pertinent points from the very beginning. Including the most important one of all: AOC isn't being let off in the broad scheme of things. There are PLENTY of media outlets skewering her over this. We've all been talking about it here for 8 pages. That she isn't being as roundly and widely skewered as would the POTUS? Sorry if you find that to be unfair, but that's just the way the real world works. U2 sells more tickets than some newly-signed rock band.
    She is. By you and others. You are unwilling to treat everyone the same. Not doing so is hypocritical. And so un-progeressive to boot. Walk the walk if you are going to talk the talk. At all times, not just when it is convenient politically and personally. If you are unwilling to do so then you are biased or, in this case, with a partisan motivation.

    Originally posted by guido61 View Post
    I don't know what you're asking for. Please quote the statement of mine that you believe was in error and we can discuss it.
    Stop dissembling. Daryl does that.
    Sprinkles are for winners...

    Comment


    • guido61
      guido61 commented
      Editing a comment
      Well then he can provide the quote where I accused him of such if he wants me to support it or retract it. I don't recall ever doing such.

    • gp2112
      gp2112 commented
      Editing a comment
      Read the last line of post #97, Guido. It seems clear that you are accusing me of having a political agenda. I want links to any agenda I may have in this, other than pointing out hypocrisy.

      Show links, not opinion or your interpretation, or retract.

      Simple enough, and not too difficult to find.

    • guido61
      guido61 commented
      Editing a comment
      The last line of post #97 is:


      "And it seems to me that anyone doing so has their own political agenda they are trying to promote. "

      That's both a general statement and an opinion. I retract nothing. Take it up with Phil if you think I've somehow violated the rules here.

  • Originally posted by oldsoapbars View Post
    Hill

    Airy

    US.

    Gotta love trump supporters clutching pearls over a nobody lying yet display unwavering support for the most corrupt, immoral, lying POS to ever sit in the big chair.

    I find it very ironic that trumpanzees could have such a deep sense of self unawareness to think that this is a way to gain moral high ground.

    It's a lot like living in the hole below the outhouse and complaining about how bad the shrubs smell
    Most if not all of us being critical of her have been equally if not more critical of trump. Why the need to call us trump supporters? Does it really bother that much that we believe all politicians should be held to the same standards?

    Comment


    • bildo
      bildo commented
      Editing a comment
      Yep, and they (the leftys on this forum)still grab at straws and call those of us that do not like trump either deplorables and the like. That is why you will never get anywhere with them. Plain and simple. A lie is a lie.

  • Originally posted by gp2112 View Post

    Wait, wait, wait...You do realize how ridiculous you sound, right? You are one of the ones who ridicules others for their views of Trump because they do not agree with your views. Now you are getting upset because I called you out for defending and temporizing for her doing the very same thing Trump does. You have chosen, as your defense, to assign levels of lying based upon the persons position. That in itself flies directly in the face of what progressives call for: equal treatment. And that is hypocrisy in that you are now assigning "castes" to liars among other things. Not very proletariat of you as a progressive or one who espoused equal treatment for all.
    Oh please. Listen to yourself. You're falling all over the place trying to accuse me of hypocrisy yet you can't do the simple thing and show where I have actually been hypocritical.

    The fact that every one of your posts drips with personal attacks and insults shows just how weak your argument is

    Practice what you preach at all times or you are a hypocrite.
    I gave you the criteria. Sorry if you don't agree with it. No one said you had to.

    On top of that you then state that I am incorrect for my criteria not being the same as yours.
    I never said you were incorrect. In fact, I was CLEAR to say "agree to disagree". PLEASE STOP putting words into my mouth just so you can still pretend you have an argument.

    One is either ethical, or they are not. One is either a liar or they are not. If you assign different levels of culpability based upon position you are not treating everyone as an equal.
    This is YOUR criteria. There's no objective standard here. Where do you get off attacking my integrity simply because I refuse to agree to YOUR criteria?




    I do not need any other examples to bolster my judgement. Just one is enough.

    You are complaining that I am not holding her, and holding you to your own standard. Pot meet kettle.
    I am not complaining. You are projecting it seems. I've simply said we have different criteria. I've explained mine in great detail. And you seem very upset that we don't agree.



    Stop dissembling. Daryl does that.
    It is "dissembling" to ask you for the statement you wish me to retract?
    Last edited by guido61; 01-10-2019, 03:22 PM.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by NOS68 View Post

      Most if not all of us being critical of her have been equally if not more critical of trump. Why the need to call us trump supporters? Does it really bother that much that we believe all politicians should be held to the same standards?
      For me it's not a different standard. They are both Live by lying (sort of the nature of the political beast). To me the importance lies in the impact of the lie. If someone tells a lie that directly affects the American people and it's done with malice is way different then simply spouting a lie. She's a nobody, odds on she will continue to be a nobody and will have zero affect on the nation. Trump is in the big chair. His lies affect my income, my investments and how we're percieved. Trumps lies are going to affect my childrens lives.

      This is why it's almost absurdist fiction to call out a nobody and then claim moral high ground. The guy in the big chair is a real and verifiable problem. This girl will have the same impact as the kid try to talk his way out of missing curfew.

      This thread is little more than a weak attempt to justify trumps lies. You know, she lied so now trump is in the clear.

      PS. I don't believe I've ever seen a trumpanzee call out trump on his destructive and malicious lies.
      Last edited by oldsoapbars; 01-10-2019, 03:14 PM.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by oldsoapbars View Post

        For me it's not a different standard. They are both Live by lying (sort of the nature of the political beast). To me the importance lies in the impact of the lie. If someone tells a lie that directly affects the American people and it's done with malice is way different then simply spouting a lie. She's a nobody, odds on she will continue to be a nobody and will have zero affect on the nation. Trump is in the big chair. His lies affect my income, my investments and how we're percieved. Trumps lies are going to affect my childrens lives.

        This is why it's almost absurdist fiction to call out a nobody and then claim moral high ground. The guy in the big chair is a real and verifiable problem. This girl will have the same impact as the kid try to talk his way out of missing curfew.

        This thread is little more than a weak attempt to justify trumps lies. You know, she lied so now trump is in the clear.

        PS. I don't believe I've ever seen a trumpanzee call out trump on his destructive and malicious lies.
        Bull sh!t, I'm the OP and have made it very clear how I feel about trump. I've never attempted to justify any of his BS.

        Yes trump can do more damage so we'll just excuse the same type of behavior from her because she doesn't wield the same amount of power? Sorry that doesn't fly she's pulling her "facts" from the same body orifice that he does.

        Partisan hypocrisy is what will bring this country down.
        Last edited by NOS68; 01-10-2019, 03:58 PM.

        Comment


        • bildo
          bildo commented
          Editing a comment
          He can't help it. He needs a demon in you and I. They never comprehend what we post or chose not to. That is why I have always told them. I will be whatever demon you want me to be. I know they need it to survive.

      • Originally posted by guido61 View Post

        Oh please. Listen to yourself. You're falling all over the place trying to accuse me of hypocrisy yet you can't do the simple thing and show where I have actually been hypocritical.
        That you have not condemned her actions with the same vigor in which you condenm Trump, that you have, over and over again, temporized and rationalized her actions is the hypocrisy. It is up to you to have the self awareness to realize that. I can not help you with that.


        Originally posted by guido61 View Post
        The fact that every one of your posts drips with personal attacks and insults shows just how weak your argument is.
        If you are interpreting any of my posts as personal attacks on you, then that is on you. Perhaps you should flag my posts as such and let Phil figure it out.

        Calling me out for how you interpret something is not the same as fact.

        Stop trying to shut me up with accusations of personal attacks. Or you can temper the manner in which you deal with me and other participants in this forum that do not agree with you.

        Anything can be interpreted as a personal attack if one wishes to see it that way. Does not make it fact.


        Originally posted by guido61 View Post
        I gave you the criteria. Sorry if you don't agree with it. No one said you had to.
        And I told all of you that you were being hyprocrites, even to the point of pointing out that you are all refusing to treat people the same.

        Sorry it bothers you but it is clear to anyone without a partisan agenda that you all are not treating everyone equally.

        How un-progressive...



        Originally posted by guido61 View Post
        I never said you were incorrect. In fact, I was CLEAR to say "agree to disagree". PLEASE STOP putting words into my mouth just so you can still pretend you have an argument.
        Every time you responded that her lies were not as bad as Trumps, you were calling me incorrect. You were trying to correct me, no? If not, then why waste time defending your position?


        Originally posted by guido61 View Post
        This is YOUR criteria. There's no objective standard here. Where do you get off attack my integrity simply because I refuse to agree to YOUR criteria?
        You are correct. When it comes to dishonest behavior there should be no objectivity. One is either honest or they are not.

        That you would think it is an objective matter is telling.

        One who is ethical would not think that degrees of lies are based upon an objective scale. If one decides that the degree of dishonesty should be judged objectively then it would indicate that that persons integrity is questionable as they have allowed their ethics to determine what degree of dishonesty is acceptable.

        I am not attacking your integrity, merely pointing out that your integrity is now in question because you have chosen to accept a certain level of dishonesty as acceptable.


        Originally posted by guido61 View Post

        I am not complaining. You are projecting it seems. I've simply said we have different criteria. I've explained mine in great detail. And you seem very upset that we don't agree.
        Not upset, merely responding to what I see as deeply flawed, and troubling thinking from a group of people who have been clamoring for honesty from one politician, yet temporizing or excusing dishonestly from a politician who shares their views.

        Dishonestly is black and white, there is no grey unless one has a corrupted ethical viewpoint.

        Originally posted by guido61 View Post
        It is "dissembling" to ask you for the statement you wish me to retract?
        Yes, because the post was right there for you to read. You even responded to that post. Or did you not read the whole post?

        Daryl does that too.
        Last edited by gp2112; 01-10-2019, 03:38 PM.
        Sprinkles are for winners...

        Comment


        • Originally posted by oldsoapbars View Post

          For me it's not a different standard. They are both Live by lying (sort of the nature of the political beast). To me the importance lies in the impact of the lie. If someone tells a lie that directly affects the American people and it's done with malice is way different then simply spouting a lie. She's a nobody, odds on she will continue to be a nobody and will have zero affect on the nation. Trump is in the big chair. His lies affect my income, my investments and how we're percieved. Trumps lies are going to affect my childrens lives.

          This is why it's almost absurdist fiction to call out a nobody and then claim moral high ground. The guy in the big chair is a real and verifiable problem. This girl will have the same impact as the kid try to talk his way out of missing curfew.

          This thread is little more than a weak attempt to justify trumps lies. You know, she lied so now trump is in the clear.

          PS. I don't believe I've ever seen a trumpanzee call out trump on his destructive and malicious lies.
          And that is projecting what you want to be happening in here.

          I too, despise Trump and make no bones about it.

          I also despise when people allow their allies, so to speak, are more than willing to overlook behavior that they are castigating their opponent for.

          I just want all the people who are defending or temporizing her actions to realize just how hypocritical they are at this point. Despite the "degree" of her dishonesty, she still acted in the same manner as the man you all dogpile on for his dishonest words.

          And yet, no one seems to be willing to treat her in the same manner. They would rather rationalize.
          Sprinkles are for winners...

          Comment


          • Originally posted by gp2112 View Post

            That you have not condemned her actions with the same vigor in which you condenm Trump, that you have, over and over again, temporized and rationalized her actions is the hypocrisy. It is up to you to have the self awareness to realize that. I can not help you with that.
            I have REPEATEDLY explained my rationale for not condemning her with the same vigor as Trump. You may disagree with my rationale, but that doesn't make me hypocritical.

            We've gone around on this enough times now. I will now formally ask you to cease with the name-calling.



            Stop trying to shut me up with accusations of personal attacks. Or you can temper the manner in which you deal with me and other participants in this forum that do not agree with you.
            I was quite tempered and reasonable with you. I only upped the temper a bit when YOU started attacking ME calling me "hypocrite" attacking my integrity, etc. As far the others that don't agree with me? pfft. There's others here that do.

            What else is new? Welcome to a debate forum.

            Anything can be interpreted as a personal attack if one wishes to see it that way. Does not make it fact.



            And I told all of you that you were being hyprocrites, even to the point of pointing out that you are all refusing to treat people the same.

            Sorry it bothers you but it is clear to anyone without a partisan agenda that you all are not treating everyone equally.

            How un-progressive...
            And I pointed out to you the reasoning for not treating everyone the same. Again, if you want to accuse me of being PARTISAN, then find someone of equal stature as her of the other party that I didn't treat the same as her.

            Otherwise, STOP with the "partisan" BS. PROVE I'm being partisan or STFU already.





            Every time you responded that her lies were not as bad as Trumps, you were calling me incorrect. You were trying to correct me, no? If not, then why waste time defending your position?
            I called you incorrect when you misstated my position. Sorry, but I don't allow people to do that.



            One who is ethical would not think that degrees of lies are based upon an objective scale. If one decides that the degree of dishonesty should be judged objectively then it would indicate that that persons integrity is questionable as they have allowed their ethics to determine what degree of dishonesty is acceptable.

            I am not attacking your integrity, merely pointing out that your integrity is now in question because you have chosen to accept a certain level of dishonesty as acceptable.
            It's never been about "degrees of dishonesty". Have I ever said that? It's about the public response to the dishonesty. You believe everyone should just as loudly and forcefully stand up and denounce the lies of first term House member as they do the President of the United States.

            I disagree. I believe the position and the power of the person in question is part of the criteria we use to decide what sort of public response we will issue.

            Frankly, I believe EVERYONE does this. Probably even including YOU. Why this is something you feel the need to make such a big deal out of is beyond me.





            Not upset, merely responding to what I see as deeply flawed, and troubling thinking from a group of people who have been clamoring for honesty from one politician, yet temporizing or excusing dishonestly from a politician who shares their views.

            Dishonestly is black and white, there is no grey unless one has a corrupted ethical viewpoint.
            This is getting to be too much, really. Just because we disagree on this you feel you can accuse me of having a "corrupted ethical viewpoint"?

            And yet you dare accuse ME of insulting YOU? Un-fricking-believable.


            Yes, because the post was right there for you to read. You even responded to that post. Or did you not read the whole post?

            Daryl does that too.
            Now that you FINALLY told me which post it is, I went back and read it. Seriously....you're going to constantly make references to me having a "corrupted ethical viewpoint" and the like, and then have the audacity to demand I "support or retract" me saying

            "And it seems to me that anyone doing so has their own political agenda they are trying to promote." ???

            Even Daryl doesn't stoop THAT low.
            Last edited by guido61; 01-10-2019, 04:09 PM.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by guido61 View Post

              I have REPEATEDLY explained my rationale for not condemning her with the same vigor as Trump. You may disagree with my rationale, but that doesn't make me hypocritical.
              And that rational is hypocritical in light of the fact that many of those who are temporizing or rationalizing their treatment of Trump v. her are the very same ones who are the first to insist everyone be treated equally.

              Unfortunately, that means that many of the progressives in here are unwilling to walk the walk when it comes to treating everyone in an equal manner.

              To place one's dishonesty on a different plane from another's dishonesty, because of their status in life, while clamoring for equal treatment in other forums not related to two politicians, is hypocritical.


              Originally posted by guido61 View Post
              We've gone around on this enough times now. I will now formally ask you to cease with the name-calling.
              I am merely pointing out that I feel you (and many others in here) are being hypocritical/hypocrites for not walking the walk when it comes to equal treatment.

              You are classifying/pigeonholing behavior based upon status.

              That is not treating everyone equally, and when it comes to dishonesty it is ethically corrupt.

              Originally posted by guido61 View Post
              I was quite tempered and reasonable with you. I only upped the temper a bit when YOU started attacking ME calling me "hypocrite" attacking my integrity, etc. As far the others that don't agree with me? pfft. There's others here that do.
              I called everyone in here who is temporizing and rationalizing for her a hypocrite. You are not being singled out. That is not a personal attack, that is an observation that questions true motivation of all those who would treat one dishonest person differently than another, and make distinctions between the very same dishonest act: Lying.

              How is that not hypocritical? How is that not a product of corrupt ethical standards?

              Originally posted by guido61 View Post
              What else is new? Welcome to a debate forum.

              Anything can be interpreted as a personal attack if one wishes to see it that way. Does not make it fact.
              Funny coming from the person who has stated over and over again that I am personally attacking them.

              May want to read your own words.

              Perhaps you do not like what I am showing you in the mirror, thus lashing out with claims of personal attacks to get me to stop holding up the mirror.

              Thank you for making my point about how a claim of personal attack does not equate fact.

              Originally posted by guido61 View Post
              And I pointed out to you the reasoning for not treating everyone the same. Again, if you want to accuse me of being PARTISAN, then find someone of equal stature as her of the other party that I didn't treat the same as her.

              Otherwise, STOP with the "partisan" BS. PROVE I'm being partisan or STFU already.
              And you made it clear that you are unwilling to follow the standard that you have espoused in other discussions,on different subjects, about equal treatment for everybody.

              That is hypocritical, and if you are willing to ignore your own calls for equal treatment, while making distinctions between two human beings- one being a person you despise while the other being a person who is a potential antagonist to the person you despise- then you are being hypocritical.

              And it makes one think, with support by your own words, that you are doing so out of partisan motivations. That you call for equal treatment for everyone, except in cases like this, is a strong indicator that you are motivated by bias to make the distinction. One who is not motivated by partisan bias in this case would not make a distinction in regards to levels of dishonesty.


              Originally posted by guido61 View Post
              I called you incorrect when you misstated my position. Sorry, but I don't allow people to do that.
              I was stating your position as I see it, and how it compares to the manner in which I would interpret dishonest actions. I hold both of them to the same standard because I believe in this case that they, as politicians and leaders (no matter their position) they should both be held equally accountable for dishonesty.

              You are more than willing to treat them on an unequal basis based upon an objective metric that seems to be borne out of a corrupt ethical standard. One that is called into question even more in the light of your past calls for equal treatment to all.

              Perhaps you should re-examine your positions before you voice them so you do not get called out for hypocritical actions.


              Originally posted by guido61 View Post
              It's never been about "degrees of dishonesty". Have I ever said that? It's about the public response to the dishonesty. You believe everyone should just as loudly and forcefully stand up and denounce the lies of first term House member as they do the President of the United States.
              It is about degrees of dishonesty to you. You bolster my argument with your last sentence of the above passage. You believe that the degree of dishonesty is based upon the position of the person. That is not equal treatment to all, you are pigeonholing, one could even say profiling, a person and judging the degree of their dishonesty based upon their lot in life.


              Originally posted by guido61 View Post
              I disagree. I believe the position and the power of the person in question is part of the criteria we use to decide what sort of public response we will issue.
              Thank you for highlighting where I feel you are being hypocritical. You "believe". Your belief does allow for equal treatment to all, it allows for you to judge others based upon the level in society you place them.

              Again: You have called for equal treatment for all yet you refuse to treat all the same. You have even decided that a person's position determines their level of dishonesty even if the "Crime" committed is the same.

              To determine levels of dishonesty based upon position is ethically corrupt.


              Originally posted by guido61 View Post
              Frankly, I believe EVERYONE does this. Probably even including YOU. Why this is something you feel the need to make such a big deal out of is beyond me.
              I know you are incorrect. I do judge, often harshly, but I do not make distinctions on levels of dishonesty based upon a persons position or job title.


              Originally posted by guido61 View Post
              This is getting to be too much, really. Just because we disagree on this you feel you can accuse me of having a "corrupted ethical viewpoint"?

              And yet you dare accuse ME of insulting YOU? Un-fricking-believable.
              Yes, you and everyone else in here who is basing her level of dishonesty upon her position compared to Trump. Dishonesty from any person is still dishonest, and to base levels of dishonesty, for the same act, is ethically corrupt.

              What makes it worse is when the person judging has also, many times over, called for equal treatment for all, but refused to heed their own calls in this case.

              That merely heaps hypocrisy upon an ethically corrupt position.


              Originally posted by guido61 View Post
              Now that you FINALLY told me which post it is, I went back and read it. Seriously....you're going to constantly make references to me having a "corrupted ethical viewpoint" and the like, and then have the audacity to demand I "support or retract" me saying

              "And it seems to me that anyone doing so has their own political agenda they are trying to promote." ???

              Even Daryl doesn't stoop THAT low.
              Yep. You make an insinuation with no supporting facts or opinions. You have decided that since I do not agree with you that I have my own political agenda. Prove it.

              My agenda is to point out the rampant hypocrisy and ethically corrupt position of those who would make a distinction of between two dishonest acts that are identical in nature, then temporize the dishonest act of one by making a distinction between two person's position in society. I chose to do this by pointing out that the people who call for equal treatment for all, in other societal subjects, are willing to overlook that position when it is politically advantageous to do so.

              That is what every one of you have done.

              That is hypocritical.

              You were the one who chose to continue the debate with me, thus you have borne the brunt of it. I would have done it with any one of you.

              You all hoisted yourself on the petard, I just pointed out that you all had done so.


              Sprinkles are for winners...

              Comment


              • Originally posted by gp2112 View Post

                Not really.

                When Trump came in to the scene and started his bluster, his lies, his actions, he changed the paradigm in American Politics. People cannot attack Trump and expect his supporters to not do the same to the other side when they commit even the smallest mistake.

                People cannot attack Trump for his crap and then overlook, or even excuse the same actions from one that is on their side. Otherwise those people appear to be merely acting due to dogmatic ideology, not from a rational viewpoint.

                Because the paradigm shifted, there is no more grace period. Those that expect one, say one should be given, or even discount the politician's behavior because they are not "president or vice president" are making a conscious decision to have two different sets of expectations of political leaders.

                All that does is minimize the opinion of those that are willing to hold politicians to different standards, depending upon the politicians leanings.
                I can't argue with this, although I would offer the same review of 'they're young and new to the job - give them a chance to get their sea-legs' to someone not of my ideological stripe. You are correct, though - the standard should be the same for all levels of public service.
                ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Originally Posted by MattACaster : *Runs 2 blocks down the street to Guitar Center, grabs detuned Schecter off the wall, plugs into Line6 Spider and proceeds to bring teh brootalz*

                Comment


                • Originally posted by NOS68 View Post

                  Bull sh!t, I'm the OP and have made it very clear how I feel about trump. I've never attempted to justify any of his BS.

                  Yes trump can do more damage so we'll just excuse the same type of behavior from her because she doesn't wield the same amount of power? Sorry that doesn't fly she's pulling her "facts" from the same body orifice that he does.

                  Partisan hypocrisy is what will bring this country down.
                  Yeah, sure thing

                  It's very clear that this is nothing but a partisan issue for you.

                  For you to get this wound up for a nobody makes it very clear that this is nothing more than a deflection.

                  This is hardly worth a side bar, yet you decided that this is truly important? Why? A nobody tells a lie. Other than the fact she's in the news, what is your vendetta against her? Did she steal your lunch money?

                  Comment


                  • Haven't read all your comments, but I'm finally reading up on the hubbub about AOC right now, and yeah, I have issues with her. Moreover, I have issues with people who aren't willing to see a parallel between her flubs, the ones displaying some serious ignorance, and Trump's flubs, which do the same. They're both inexperienced activists, not experts.

                    I was at a college alumni gathering last night, and the first conversation I had was with two guys from my class. (Bear in mind that these two guys are from the tri-state area and into liberal politics.) When I first said hello, one of them said, "oh, we were just talking about AOC and how she's someone that young people, women, and minorities can all identify with." The conversation quickly moved on to other things, and I didn't tell them the though in my head. What was I thinking? "Well, Donald Trump was someone that angry entitled white men could identify with, but that doesn't necessarily mean anything great about him." (I'll be seeing the one friend who works in politics later, and he's been receptive to my critiques of Dem political techniques before.)

                    Looking at other members of the House, I'm certainly not the only LEFTIST(!!!!) who's concerned about her inexperience, her idealism, and how our opponents will likely benefit from it.
                    My band!:
                    www.steelphantoms.com/
                    my stage stuff:
                    fender jimmie vaughan strat, korg dt-10, ts-9, keeley rat, thoroughly modded big muff, 4ms tremulus lune, eventide timefactor running stereo to a traynor bassmaster (w hotplate) and a fender HRD. Everything ('cept the TimeFactor and dt-10) is modded, with much help from folks at Harmony Central. Thanks everybody!

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by flemtone View Post

                      I can't argue with this, although I would offer the same review of 'they're young and new to the job - give them a chance to get their sea-legs' to someone not of my ideological stripe. You are correct, though - the standard should be the same for all levels of public service.
                      Thank you. It is hard to overcome ones ingrained biases in an effort to be fair to everyone.
                      Sprinkles are for winners...

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by oldsoapbars View Post

                        Yeah, sure thing

                        It's very clear that this is nothing but a partisan issue for you.

                        For you to get this wound up for a nobody makes it very clear that this is nothing more than a deflection.

                        This is hardly worth a side bar, yet you decided that this is truly important? Why? A nobody tells a lie. Other than the fact she's in the news, what is your vendetta against her? Did she steal your lunch money?
                        Again BS, there's nothing partisan about it. Don't be so arrogant that you know what's in my head you're not even farking close. I'm not wound up about her just thought it was an interesting topic.

                        Yes she's in the news has the spotlight on her right now and is portraying some trump like tendencies on her "facts" yet those who get all wound up about him ignore her's. Simple as that.
                        Last edited by NOS68; 01-11-2019, 05:24 PM.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by gp2112 View Post

                          Not really.

                          When Trump came in to the scene and started his bluster, his lies, his actions, he changed the paradigm in American Politics. People cannot attack Trump and expect his supporters to not do the same to the other side when they commit even the smallest mistake.

                          People cannot attack Trump for his crap and then overlook, or even excuse the same actions from one that is on their side. Otherwise those people appear to be merely acting due to dogmatic ideology, not from a rational viewpoint.

                          Because the paradigm shifted, there is no more grace period. Those that expect one, say one should be given, or even discount the politician's behavior because they are not "president or vice president" are making a conscious decision to have two different sets of expectations of political leaders.

                          All that does is minimize the opinion of those that are willing to hold politicians to different standards, depending upon the politicians leanings.
                          i thought the paradigm shift was that a politician's words/actions don't matter as long as their team wins?
                          {O,O}
                          (__(\
                          " "

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X