2016 Election
Quote: ams288I feel like this could be just the tip of the iceberg with Chris Christie.
After all, in that Double Down book Mitt Romney's VP vetting team said if they were running against him he'd never be able to hold political office again with all the skeletons in his closet.
If that is true, the quicker he is knocked out of contention, the better for the Republicans. The last thing they need (and the best thing for the Democrats) would be a candidate getting almost to the finish line and then being disqualified by his/her actions. All the time and effort used on pushing him would have been wasted in that case...
Quote: RonCChanging a quote and attributing it to the member you are supposedly quoting without saying what you have done (at a minimum) should be grounds for a suspension.
Has that happened?
Yes, on the DT site.
Quote: RonCChanging a quote and attributing it to the member you are supposedly quoting without saying what you have done (at a minimum) should be grounds for a suspension.
Has that happened?
Yes, absolutely, I gave no indication at all that I was changing the quote. If you read it here, you'll see that I completely changed AzDuffman's quote into something that he still agrees with without giving any indication at all that I was doing exactly that.Quote: AZDuffmanYes, on the DT site.
Quote: s2dbakerYes, absolutely, I gave no indication at all that I was changing the quote. If you read it here, you'll see that I completely changed AzDuffman's quote into something that he still agrees with without giving any indication at all that I was doing exactly that.
You can try to justify it all you like but my guess is the group at large will not approve of your Dan Rather type stunt.
Quote: s2dbakerYes, absolutely, I gave no indication at all that I was changing the quote. If you read it here, you'll see that I completely changed AzDuffman's quote into something that he still agrees with without giving any indication at all that I was doing exactly that.
I wish one of the moderators would weigh in on this issue, but this seems like an offense worthy of moderator action because you are taking another member's post and changing it while still attributing it to that member. It really doesn't matter whether you changed the meaning or not--you should still have noted that you changed the quote. Would you like it if I took one of your "we win" posts and changed it to "we lost" without saying that I changed it?
Quote: RonCQuote: s2dbakerYes, absolutely, I gave no indication at all that I was changing the quote. If you read it here, you'll see that I completely changed AzDuffman's quote into something that he still agrees with without giving any indication at all that I was doing exactly that.
I wish one of the moderators would weigh in on this issue, but this seems like an offense worthy of moderator action because you are taking another member's post and changing it while still attributing it to that member. It really doesn't matter whether you changed the meaning or not--you should still have noted that you changed the quote. Would you like it if I took one of your "we win" posts and changed it to "we lost" without saying that I changed it?
He is joking around when he says he didn't say he changed it. What he did is change it to make his point instead of manning up and asking directly what he wanted to know. From what I learned in Journalism101 you *never* change a quote. If you do it is not a quote.
Some liberals are now talking about impeaching Christie over the bridge scandal. You gotta love these libs. They are indignant over a freakin bridge, yet they don't give a rat's a** about 4 dead Americans in Benghazi.
Quote: terapinedQuote: Beethoven9th‘Impeachment’? Dems escalate NJ bridge probe, while some defend Christie
Some liberals are now talking about impeaching Christie over the bridge scandal. You gotta love these libs. They are indignant over a freakin bridge, yet they don't give a rat's a** about 4 dead Americans in Benghazi.
2 completely different issues.
Anytime corruption is exposed, it needs to be condemned by everyone regardless of where you sit on the political spectrum.
If Christie lied during his Press Conference, yes he should be impeached.
The Christie bridge scandal needs to be investigated.
Corruption is not a left right issue. Its a corruption issue.
Politicians on left and right are never to be trusted due to possible corruption.
Once corruption is discovered, it needs to be investigated.
Whoever is president and whatever problems a president has should have absolutely no bearing on a local politicians corruption investigation.
Local political corruption always needs to be investigated regardless if you like or don't like the President.
So you would agree with a complete independent investigation of each of the allegations of misdeeds in the Obama administration as well as in the Christie case?
I think the point is the hypocrisy between calling for complete investigations instead of stonewalling in one case and not the other. I think we should check all of them out and eliminate the people who abuse power.
Having a department investigate itself is not exactly "independent" or "transparent"...
Even if the investigations don't lead to the top person, there are usually a few more involved that need to go. My point is not to "get" anyone except those who deserve to fall. If it goes all the way to the top, then that is who should fall. You can't keep anyone honest by allowing them to stonewall an independent investigation.
There. Fixed! ;)Quote: terapined2 completely different issues reactions [from hypocritical liberals like s2rapined]
BTW, I love how s2rapined always talks about investigations whenever Christie is mentioned, but anytime someone brings up Obama, his reply is, "Corruption is not a left or right issue," and then he'll refuse to support any investigations.
Quote: terapinedIf there is a good case of corruption in the Obama administration, it needs to be investigated.
"If"?
Such a predictable reply from s2rapined.
Quote: Beethoven9thQuote: terapinedIf there is a good case of corruption in the Obama administration, it needs to be investigated.
"If"?
Such a predictable reply from s2rapined.
Why change my handle?
why not refer to me as terapined, my chosen name on this forum.
Sometimes I will shorten your handle to B9 simply because it is shorter. If you are offended by that, I will end that practice.
If you are going to refer to me or a quote made my me, I would appreciate you simply use my name on this forum, terapined, or my name outside of this forum, Ed. Why call me made up names? I dont do that to anybody on this forum. I allways refer to forum members by their chosen handle or shorten it without changing it to imply an insult. Beethoven9th to B9 or the Wizard to Wiz. These should be acceptable. Putting an S2 in front of my name inplies stupid due to your signature below all your posts. I take that as an insult. Its pretty sad you have resort to an insult as a comeback.
If you do not like typing in terapined, simply type my real name , Ed, only 2 key strokes.
Cant we have a civilized discussion using our chosen names or handles?
If you continue to insult me, I will simply block you and we can no longer discuss the issues of the day.
If thats want you want so be it.
Its your call. Is this the last discussion between Beethoven9th and terapined?
Please call or refer to me as Ed or terapined. I would really appreciate it.
But anyway, isn't s2dbaker your buddy who you agree with on just about every issue? If anything, I would think you'd be flattered to be compared to him.
P.S.-Thanks for ignoring the point I made about investigating Obama. ;)
Quote: terapinedThis and all your threads are blocked, Goodbye.Quote: Beethoven9thP.S.-Thanks for ignoring the point I made about investigating Obama. ;)
Once again, thanks for ignoring the (legitimate) points I made about your man Obama.
Book Alleges Hillary Kept "Political Hit List"
Another Mayor Faced Reprisal Over Christie, Files Suggest
Wanna bet which story the mainstream media will pursue more vigorously?
Quote: terapineddeleted
If you're going to post something, leave it there.
Going back and deleting posts because you're
now embarrassed by what you said ruins a
thread. Just don't post at all if you can't stand
by what you say.
Quote: terapinedDeleting posts and departing the forum due to insults by Beethoven9th.
Seriously, if you're going to delete posts, don't
come back. I've never deleted even one post in 20
years. It's a crappy thing to do. If you can't stand
behind what you post, than don't post anything.
--Mike Huckabee
Why isn't this a larger issue RIGHT NOW? If all these people have given up on finding work, who is supporting them? Mom? Dad? A Spouse? The kids? This is where I have always believed the unemployment rate was a lie because it does not encompass all who WANT to work but only those who still are counted as looking.
I saw the jobs numbers for December--74.000 jobs were created and the unemployment rate went down. The jobs number sounds bad but the unemployment rate sounds better. It isn't.
But sadly, libs like s2dbaker and the quitter think Benghazi is no big deal... *facepalm*
Quote: Beethoven9thTop Defense officials briefed Obama on ‘attack,’ not video or protest
But sadly, libs like s2dbaker and the quitter think Benghazi is no big deal... *facepalm*
I'm on your side, B9, but the whole *facepalm* thing is getting old. C'mon...you and I both know we aren't going to convince committed Obama supporters that anything is wrong with Obamacare or any of the other failures of this administration. The best we can do is robustly argue our side and hope that the people who are not committed one way or the other see the failings of our current President.
I will always listen to their side of the argument as long as they aren't spewing talking points but I do believe that the conservative path will lead to more success for more people than the progressive path will.
I understand and respect your view.Quote: RonCI'm on your side, B9, but the whole *facepalm* thing is getting old.
But you see, there are different ways of expressing one's views. You can do so seriously, the way serious journalists like Charles Krauthammer, Brit Hume, Jeff Greenfield, and David Gregory do. Or you can do so mockingly, the way Jon Stewart, Bill Maher, Rush Limbaugh, and Ann Coulter do.
I would place guys like you, AZ, and Face in the first group. (You guys are fantastic posters, BTW) OTOH, I would be in the second. If a person does not like the second group of people, then I really do appreciate and respect that viewpoint. But I must say that our approach is no less valid. It's just a different style, that's all.
Quote: Beethoven9th
But you see, there are different ways of expressing one's views.
Exactly. They hate your facepalms because they're
effective.
Quote: EvenBobExactly. They hate your facepalms because they're
effective.
No need for words once a faceplam has been laid down......very effective, no room for interpretation
Quote: EvenBobExactly. They hate your facepalms because they're
effective.
They're getting old.
Biden: 3-letter word J-O-B-S
Obama: 57 states
getting?Quote: Sabretom2They're getting old.
Right on schedule! lol
Quote: Beethoven9thI understand and respect your view.
But you see, there are different ways of expressing one's views. You can do so seriously, the way serious journalists like Charles Krauthammer, Brit Hume, Jeff Greenfield, and David Gregory do. Or you can do so mockingly, the way Jon Stewart, Bill Maher, Rush Limbaugh, and Ann Coulter do.
I would place guys like you, AZ, and Face in the first group. (You guys are fantastic posters, BTW) OTOH, I would be in the second. If a person does not like the second group of people, then I really do appreciate and respect that viewpoint. But I must say that our approach is no less valid. It's just a different style, that's all.
Thanks for the kind words...I guess I'll just live with the face thing until you start using another one!!
Quote: RonCThanks for the kind words...I guess I'll just live with the face thing until you start using another one!!
That's fair enough :) *thumbs up*
Quote: Beethoven9thI understand and respect your view.
But you see, there are different ways of expressing one's views. You can do so seriously, the way serious journalists like Charles Krauthammer, Brit Hume, Jeff Greenfield, and David Gregory do. Or you can do so mockingly, the way Jon Stewart, Bill Maher, Rush Limbaugh, and Ann Coulter do.
I would place guys like you, AZ, and Face in the first group. (You guys are fantastic posters, BTW) OTOH, I would be in the second. If a person does not like the second group of people, then I really do appreciate and respect that viewpoint. But I must say that our approach is no less valid. It's just a different style, that's all.
Maybe start a separate thread, "Daily Facepalm"? those not interested in your seemingly unlimited supply can simply block the thread...;-)
Quote: Beethoven9thRemember the never ending stories about Palin being able "to see Russia from my house" (which, ironically, is something she never said)? Well, too bad the mainstream media didn't harp on these gaffes with equal fervor:
I don't remember the media harping on Palin for saying that. That was from an SNL sketch. They didn't actually attribute that quote to her.
I do remember the media harping on her for not being able to name a Supreme Court case other than Roe v. Wade, not being able to name a newspaper she read daily, not knowing what the Bush Doctrine was, thinking South Africa was just the southern part of Africa, etc.
Quote: ams288I don't remember the media harping on Palin for saying that. That was from an SNL sketch. They didn't actually attribute that quote to her.
I do remember the media harping on her for not being able to name a Supreme Court case other than Roe v. Wade, not being able to name a newspaper she read daily, not knowing what the Bush Doctrine was, thinking South Africa was just the southern part of Africa, etc.
That being said, she was held to a different and higher standard than was Joe Biden or even President Obama. They made lots of mistakes during the election process and were not held nearly as accountable, yet both were in national office (Biden having been there for years; Obama not so much since he started running for President when he arrived in Washington) at the time while she was in a state office.
We're still not sure what the President really knows without a teleprompter...
Quote: ams288I don't remember the media harping on Palin for saying that.
Granted, it technically wasn't the media, but it was liberals in general. Evidence of that is in the video "How Obama Got Elected and Palin Was Targeted" by John Ziegler. He asked people, "Who said, 'I can see Russia from my house!'" and every single person answered, "Sarah Palin."
Quote: chickenmanMaybe start a separate thread, "Daily Facepalm"? those not interested in your seemingly unlimited supply can simply block the thread...;-)
LOL!
Quote: Beethoven9thGranted, it technically wasn't the media, but it was liberals in general. Evidence of that is in the video "How Obama Got Elected and Palin Was Targeted" by John Ziegler. He asked people, "Who said, 'I can see Russia from my house!'" and every single person answered, "Sarah Palin."
John Ziegler's sole purpose in life is to attempt to make Sarah Palin look like a goddess.
And the framing of that question isn't fair. That's like asking people "Who is the killer in Friday the 13th?" Everyone is going to say Jason, but the answer is Mrs. Voorhees.
Anyway, I'm not interested in bashing Sarah Palin anymore. It was fun in 2008-9. But since then she's become totally irrelevant. She's only around to make bundles of money these days. It's clear she has no interest in holding office ever again, even though she'll always act like she may run just for the attention.
Quote: RonCThat being said, she was held to a different and higher standard than was Joe Biden or even President Obama. They made lots of mistakes during the election process and were not held nearly as accountable, yet both were in national office (Biden having been there for years; Obama not so much since he started running for President when he arrived in Washington) at the time while she was in a state office.
We're still not sure what the President really knows without a teleprompter...
I kind of agree with you.
Everyone makes mistakes during a campaign. It's human nature.
But for example, compare Obama's "57 states" gaffe to any of hers. Had someone stopped him right there when he said that and flat out asked him how many states there were, he obviously would have been able to correct himself and said there were 50 states. Palin would not have been able to correct any of her gaffes without Wikipedia.
What does that have to do with my point? People think Sarah Palin said, "I can see Russia from my house," when she clearly didn't.Quote: ams288John Ziegler's sole purpose in life is to attempt to make Sarah Palin look like a goddess.
I'll tell you what, take any quote from SNL's Obama impersonator, and ask people to name who made the statement. I'll bet big money that not a single person will say, "Barack Obama!"
Um...Jason did kill people in Friday the 13th. Good try though.Quote: ams288And the framing of that question isn't fair. That's like asking people "Who is the killer in Friday the 13th?" Everyone is going to say Jason, but the answer is Mrs. Voorhees.
I think that you give Sarah Palin too much credit. The half-term quitter from Alaska is not intellectually curious. She would have no reason to look up anything on Wikipedia or any tome used to educate because she knows what she knows and facts to the contrary are just lamestream media bias. She will confidently offer up a word salad in her own defense and never-ever admit that she is wrong. See "Refudiate" as a glaringly awkward example.Quote: ams288But for example, compare Obama's "57 states" gaffe to any of hers. Had someone stopped him right there when he said that and flat out asked him how many states there were, he obviously would have been able to correct himself and said there were 50 states. Palin would not have been able to correct any of her gaffes without Wikipedia.
Quote: Beethoven9thUm...Jason did kill people in Friday the 13th. Good try though.
Incorrect. He didn't kill anyone until Part 2.
Quote: ams288Incorrect. He didn't kill anyone until Part 2.
You didn't specify which part in the series.
Quote: Beethoven9thYou didn't specify which part in the series.
I said "Friday the 13th." That is obviously the first one in the series.
This is the WHOLE POINT of me asking the question in the first place. It's a leading question, just like the "Who said 'I can see Russia from my house'"? one.
Nope, it's not obvious because that's the title of the entire series. A very ambiguous question. Again, good try though.Quote: ams288I said "Friday the 13th." That is obviously the first one in the series.
Unlike your example, Ziegler's question was very precise with no ambiguity at all, and there was nothing "leading" about it. Also, there is a correct answer, and it's not "Sarah Palin". The answer is: Tina Fey.Quote: ams288This is the WHOLE POINT of me asking the question in the first place. It's a leading question, just like the "Who said 'I can see Russia from my house'"? one.
Also, thanks for ignoring my challenge about taking a quote from SNL's Obama impersonator and asking people to name who made the statement. Because we both know it would disprove your point.
Quote: Beethoven9thNope, it's not obvious because that's the title of the entire series. A very ambiguous question. Again, good try though.
Nope. You were flat out wrong and continue to be. And I'm loving it.
LOL! You're just upset because your example was terrible.Quote: ams288Nope. You were flat out wrong and continue to be. And I'm loving it.
Here's another challenge (for you to ignore): Ask a bunch of random people if they've seen "Friday the 13th".
Most of them will take that to include every movie in the series.
Just like Sarah Palin.Quote: ams288Nope. You were flat out wrong and continue to be. And I'm loving it.
