You're just an asshole. Plain and simple. I don't know what has happened in your life to make you so angry and unhappy. In all sincerity, you should get some professional help.
15 year old kids provide better discussion on these forums than you do. That, in and of itself, should make you think.
Now let me explain a simple concept. "Could care less" is an accepted and commonly used idiom. Using it allows me to type faster. This is the internet. You're going to see such things, which is gr8. Sure, there are professors out there who don't like the idiom. I could care less. They are the same people who don't understand why their secretary won't take dictation or why they can't find music playable on something manufactured by Edison.
Idioms are the spice in the soup of language. You go ahead and eat your plain oatmeal and brag about how smart you are. Have fun.
Even if you suspend the concept of an idiom to validate your argument - so what? Intelligent people make mistakes. You, of all people, should know this. An example from the "Torture" thread:
Sigh. As I stated earlier, fears that "legal advice" lets anyone in that administration off the hook are unfounded.
Despite his clear declaration during his confirmation hearing that "waterboarding" is torture, new Attorney General Eric Holder Jr. has seemed reluctant to order criminal probes into alleged rough treatment of detainees during the Bush presidency. His rationale: CIA interrogators who used the simulated drowning technique believedthe Justice Department had given them the green light.
So lighten up, Joe. I've been asking you for weeks to stick to the issues. I suspect that many here would agree that there's too much petty distraction.
Thank you Kilarny and Hungry Joe for my weekly entertainment. I still think Jen is better than you guys.
He's the cyberstalker. Notice how I hardly ever respond to him, but he responds to nearly everything I say, and hangs out on that Torture thread calling for me like a little lost kitten.
I keep telling him I don't like him that way, but he keeps following me around like a love sick puppy. There's a lot of pent-up sexual frustration in that boy. I wish him the best, I really do, but I wish he'd finally get it through his head that we are not going to do the nasty.
He's the cyberstalker. Notice how I hardly ever respond to him, but he responds to nearly everything I say, and hangs out on that Torture thread calling for me like a little lost kitten.
I give topical counter arguments in the torture thread to a question you pose. You, knowing that you're wrong, cease debate on your question. When confronted with facts that demonstrate that my fear was well founded, you run even further away.
When you do speak, the content is grumpy and petty. Ad hominems are your tool of choice. Which is the more "cyberstalker" like behavior?
You seem to enjoy being the grumpy old man. It might be funny of you were a muppet sitting in a balcony. In this context, it's just sad.
I'm not kidding when I say that you need help, Joe. Spending much less time here and taking the personal element out of things has made me realize how much you pollute this place. In all seriousness, you seem to be very angry and unhappy. Life is too short to feel that way.
I'm happy now just dropping in from time to time, but it's too bad. It used to be a much better place. I've said it once, and I'll say it again - I've never been happier than when I cut a lot of the white noise out of my life. I just didn't realize how one person on this forum contributed to most of that white noise.
I'm not kidding when I say that you need help, Joe. Spending much less time here and taking the personal element out of things has made me realize how much you pollute this place. In all seriousness, you seem to be very angry and unhappy. Life is too short to feel that way.
I'm happy now just dropping in from time to time, but it's too bad. It used to be a much better place. I've said it once, and I'll say it again - I've never been happier than when I cut a lot of the white noise out of my life. I just didn't realize how one person on this forum contributed to most of that white noise.
Actually, I've been continuously, ecstatically happy since November 4, 2008. I have never been happier or more content in my life than right now.
That being said, I'm going to try to be gentle when I say this. I know you have this creepy, serial killer-style obsession with me, but I don't like you in that way. I'm sorry, but I only like you as a friend.
Maybe if you're happier when you're away, you should focus more on maximizing your happiness.
I'm not kidding when I say that you need help, Joe. Spending much less time here and taking the personal element out of things has made me realize how much you pollute this place. In all seriousness, you seem to be very angry and unhappy. Life is too short to feel that way.
I'm happy now just dropping in from time to time, but it's too bad. It used to be a much better place. I've said it once, and I'll say it again - I've never been happier than when I cut a lot of the white noise out of my life. I just didn't realize how one person on this forum contributed to most of that white noise.
Actually, I've been continuously, ecstatically happy since November 4, 2008. I have never been happier or more content in my life than right now.
That being said, I'm going to try to be gentle when I say this. I know you have this creepy, serial killer-style obsession with me, but I don't like you in that way. I'm sorry, but I only like you as a friend.
Maybe if you're happier when you're away, you should focus more on maximizing your happiness.
You just have a way of snapping at people when your views differ.
You just have a way of snapping at people when your views differ.
Well, I apologize for that. I'm sorry if I offended you.
In Joe's defense, Kilarney and HTMKSteve often post inflammatory things specifically to poke "the liberals" on the forum. Joe was left to deal with a lot of their incendiary remarks. They were playing games, so he played back. He can be vicious, but they are as well.
In Joe's defense, Kilarney and HTMKSteve often post inflammatory things specifically to poke "the liberals" on the forum. Joe was left to deal with a lot of their incendiary remarks. They were playing games, so he played back. He can be vicious, but they are as well.
Although I still uphold my original statement, I have to agree with you. And I'm not offended, I'm amused at the fights that occur. It can just be rather weary sometimes.
In Joe's defense, Kilarney and HTMKSteve often post inflammatory things specifically to poke "the liberals" on the forum.
Chicken and egg argument. It's not even accurate as it pertains to me. As an example, look at the torture thread and you'll see that I was much more adamant that Bush administration officials be prosecuted than Joe.
I know it's convenient for certain people to paint me as a conservative. It avoids having to respond to actual issues that may threaten one's liberal ideology. The truth, however, is that I'll criticize a conservative or a liberal - and have done so. All that matters is that they are wrong.
HMTKSteve is a conservative through and through. I won't deny that. Nonetheless, I've always maintained that the best way to combat such a person is to use facts. Almost everyone here does that. Joe resorts to making accusations of mental illness, etc. A more mature retort is to demonstratively prove why a person is wrong.
Just recently, I showed demonstratively that Joe was wrong about his position on the Justice Department approving torture. His retort was to call me a cyber-stalker. The fact that you would sympathize with this oft-used tactic says much more about you than I, Mrs. MacRoss. You're usually good about sticking to the facts. I'm not sure why you suspend those rules to support blatantly annoying behavior just because the protagonist is a fellow liberal.
Just recently, I showed demonstratively that Joe was wrong about his position on the Justice Department approving torture. His retort was to call me a cyber-stalker.
You didn't show anything demonstratively, unless it was your own delusion. Maybe you should peruse that thread again after you take your meds. The last few posts you made in that thread read like someone in the last stages of mania. I would invite anyone to read that thread to see whose posts sound more reasonable or who is obsessed with whom.
Further, I called you a cyberstalker only after you once again showed your creepy obsession with me by stating the times that I had made recent posts. Anyone who follows another's forum activity that closely is disturbed. Those instances where you stole my username and my avatar alone are enough to raise concerns about cyberstalking. I wish you could just accept that I simply don't like you that way.
You constantly talk about how much happier you are when you're not here. Maybe you should go be happy for awhile.
Don't bother responding. I'm going to have my de facto "block user" subroutine working, so I'm just going to ignore you.
In any event, I'll provide facts to support my claim:
Sigh. As I stated earlier, fears that "legal advice" lets anyone in that administration off the hook are unfounded.
Despite his clear declaration during his confirmation hearing that "waterboarding" is torture, new Attorney General Eric Holder Jr. has seemed reluctant to order criminal probes into alleged rough treatment of detainees during the Bush presidency. His rationale: CIA interrogators who used the simulated drowning technique believedthe Justice Department had given them the green light.
Bringing this back to Obama, I noticed that the New York Times and CNN were saying that his approval rating had dropped, especially among republicans and independents does anyone think this may further impede the stimulus package?
Bringing this back to Obama, I noticed that the New York Times and CNN were saying that his approval rating had dropped, especially among republicans and independents does anyone think this may further impede the stimulus package?
It's already been signed. Unless someone wants to mount a court challenge there is nothing to stop it.
How about some meaningful reform where this money isn't given in the first place? It's as if getting caught with your hand in the cookie jar is the only thing that's wrong.
And surprise, surprise. Dodd got the most money.
This is the stuff that drives me nuts. At a certain level, we (the electorate) are all fools.
And no... it's not a party issue. The two party system is, in and of itself, a large part of the problem.
Yet another benefit of a two party system that only rewards short term planning.
Just a note, not to defend deficits and such, but you might have to run a deficit in the short term to get surpluses in the long term. Depends what you are spending your money on, if it's hookers and blow then it might be a bad idea. If it's bridges, education and healthcare it might help.
How about some meaningful reform where this money isn't given in the first place? It's as if getting caught with your hand in the cookie jar is the only thing that's wrong.
And surprise, surprise. Dodd got the most money.
This is the stuff that drives me nuts. At a certain level, we (the electorate) are all fools.
And no... it's not a party issue. The two party system is, in and of itself, a large part of the problem.
Let's at least hope that Obama wasserious about transparency.
I've always thought that the two-party system would necessarily make the bailout less useful than it could be, and it seems that was right. The whole issue, I think, stems from the fact that there wasn't enough control over the use of the money from the start.
I'm not too peeved about taxing the piss out of the AIG bonuses, as that money really does need to be recovered and used in an effective fashion.
Like those before him, "Obama's shifting to the political realities," said Zelizer. That's not a bad thing, he said. "We want presidents to adjust to the realities of governing, to the realities of the environment."
He should have foreseen those realities - or admitted that he wasn't going to be any different.
You elected him for "change". Obama hasn't delivered - and has actually done the opposite. Your standards are pretty low if you're okay with this. People like you are why the negatives of our political system will never change. Accountability should cross party lines.
It's not like the situation in Iraq has changed much during the past couple months. Leaving 50,000 troops isn't a withdrawal. He just plain lied about that one.
How about not hiring lobbyists? Obama said: "When I am president, they won't find a job in my White House." Surely you can recognize that his statement was an outright lie. Would it have been so hard to keep that promise?
"Candidates make promises and presidents break promises, and that's a very predictable pattern," said Julian Zelizer, a Princeton University historian. So no change there. You can argue whether or not he's doing the right thing. You can't, however, argue that this is "change".
Comments
You're just an asshole. Plain and simple. I don't know what has happened in your life to make you so angry and unhappy. In all sincerity, you should get some professional help.
15 year old kids provide better discussion on these forums than you do. That, in and of itself, should make you think.
Now let me explain a simple concept. "Could care less" is an accepted and commonly used idiom. Using it allows me to type faster. This is the internet. You're going to see such things, which is gr8. Sure, there are professors out there who don't like the idiom. I could care less. They are the same people who don't understand why their secretary won't take dictation or why they can't find music playable on something manufactured by Edison.
Idioms are the spice in the soup of language. You go ahead and eat your plain oatmeal and brag about how smart you are. Have fun.
Even if you suspend the concept of an idiom to validate your argument - so what? Intelligent people make mistakes. You, of all people, should know this. An example from the "Torture" thread: So lighten up, Joe. I've been asking you for weeks to stick to the issues. I suspect that many here would agree that there's too much petty distraction.
I keep telling him I don't like him that way, but he keeps following me around like a love sick puppy. There's a lot of pent-up sexual frustration in that boy. I wish him the best, I really do, but I wish he'd finally get it through his head that we are not going to do the nasty.
When you do speak, the content is grumpy and petty. Ad hominems are your tool of choice. Which is the more "cyberstalker" like behavior?
You seem to enjoy being the grumpy old man. It might be funny of you were a muppet sitting in a balcony. In this context, it's just sad.
I'm not kidding when I say that you need help, Joe. Spending much less time here and taking the personal element out of things has made me realize how much you pollute this place. In all seriousness, you seem to be very angry and unhappy. Life is too short to feel that way.
I'm happy now just dropping in from time to time, but it's too bad. It used to be a much better place. I've said it once, and I'll say it again - I've never been happier than when I cut a lot of the white noise out of my life. I just didn't realize how one person on this forum contributed to most of that white noise.
That being said, I'm going to try to be gentle when I say this. I know you have this creepy, serial killer-style obsession with me, but I don't like you in that way. I'm sorry, but I only like you as a friend.
Maybe if you're happier when you're away, you should focus more on maximizing your happiness.
I know it's convenient for certain people to paint me as a conservative. It avoids having to respond to actual issues that may threaten one's liberal ideology. The truth, however, is that I'll criticize a conservative or a liberal - and have done so. All that matters is that they are wrong.
HMTKSteve is a conservative through and through. I won't deny that. Nonetheless, I've always maintained that the best way to combat such a person is to use facts. Almost everyone here does that. Joe resorts to making accusations of mental illness, etc. A more mature retort is to demonstratively prove why a person is wrong.
Just recently, I showed demonstratively that Joe was wrong about his position on the Justice Department approving torture. His retort was to call me a cyber-stalker. The fact that you would sympathize with this oft-used tactic says much more about you than I, Mrs. MacRoss. You're usually good about sticking to the facts. I'm not sure why you suspend those rules to support blatantly annoying behavior just because the protagonist is a fellow liberal.
Further, I called you a cyberstalker only after you once again showed your creepy obsession with me by stating the times that I had made recent posts. Anyone who follows another's forum activity that closely is disturbed. Those instances where you stole my username and my avatar alone are enough to raise concerns about cyberstalking. I wish you could just accept that I simply don't like you that way.
You constantly talk about how much happier you are when you're not here. Maybe you should go be happy for awhile.
Don't bother responding. I'm going to have my de facto "block user" subroutine working, so I'm just going to ignore you.
In any event, I'll provide facts to support my claim:
How about some meaningful reform where this money isn't given in the first place? It's as if getting caught with your hand in the cookie jar is the only thing that's wrong.
And surprise, surprise. Dodd got the most money.
This is the stuff that drives me nuts. At a certain level, we (the electorate) are all fools.
And no... it's not a party issue. The two party system is, in and of itself, a large part of the problem.
Let's at least hope that Obama was serious about transparency.
Bleeding red ink is "change"?
Yet another benefit of a two party system that only rewards short term planning.
I'm not too peeved about taxing the piss out of the AIG bonuses, as that money really does need to be recovered and used in an effective fashion.
He should have foreseen those realities - or admitted that he wasn't going to be any different.
You elected him for "change". Obama hasn't delivered - and has actually done the opposite. Your standards are pretty low if you're okay with this. People like you are why the negatives of our political system will never change. Accountability should cross party lines.
It's not like the situation in Iraq has changed much during the past couple months. Leaving 50,000 troops isn't a withdrawal. He just plain lied about that one.
How about not hiring lobbyists? Obama said:
"When I am president, they won't find a job in my White House."
Surely you can recognize that his statement was an outright lie. Would it have been so hard to keep that promise?
"Candidates make promises and presidents break promises, and that's a very predictable pattern," said Julian Zelizer, a Princeton University historian.
So no change there. You can argue whether or not he's doing the right thing. You can't, however, argue that this is "change".