RkFast Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Nobody asked you to go "further". Your “criticism” of the leadership of the Democrats was a generic statement that you still couldn’t even get through without whining about GOP attacks. And regardless, it has nothing to do with the issue of Clinton's statement. Somebody speculated whether you would specifically criticize Clinton for making an ignorant, racist comment about 'plantations'. That's all I wanted to hear, but as usual you dance around the issue so as to avoid having to make a specific criticism of one of your sacred liberal cows, proving once again that you are a hypocrite with no credibility. So go ahead and make yet another post where you refuse to criticize Clinton's comment. I hope that explained it clearly enough for you. 571240[/snapback] Please....what Mick is doing is NOTHING. Ive seen a few interviews around the dial and comments where liberals and black leaders DEFENDED Nagin and validated what he said because it....get this..."opens a valid dialouge of race relations in the U.S." So basically weve come down to this......A white man in the public eye does as much as says "black folks have darker skin than white folks" and he is outcast by society. Completely and thoroughly. But a black man in the public eye, even an elected official, can say the most hateful, racist crap imaginable and its considered "valid dialouge on the issue of race." As CTM said earlier...."UN!@#$INGBELIEVABLE." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scraps Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 This board has degenerated into a radical right wing pack of hungry dogs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IowaBill Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 This board has degenerated into a radical right wing pack of hungry dogs. 571268[/snapback] Wasn't it Dandy Don Meredith that said" howard, you have a temendous grasp of the obvious". Couldn't agree with you more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Actually, that is not what I said but don't let a little thing like lying about what I said get in the way of your fun. What I said was "the Democrats have a serious leadership problem." I also said: "Most of the problem is that their leaders are pretty bad in their own right." Did you not see that part? I would think that Hillary saying something offensive would count as a "serious leadership problem" and that calling all democratic leaders pretty bad would be sufficient. Even if your apparent point, that I was critical of democrats but not critical enough for your taste; your accusation that I was treating democrats as being immune from all criticism, is still totally wrong. There is no question that I was being critical of democrats, at least not to anyone who can read english and has a double digit IQ. For you to claim I was treating democrats as immune from criticism in a post that was directly critical of democrats leads me to conclude that either you are an idiot, are just having a bad day or, this has become personal with you. Hence the Richio reference. 571262[/snapback] I will make it easy for you. State the following: I hold Hillary to the same standards that I hold Republicans. Hillary made a racist comment and has no business being in any sort of leadership position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 This board has degenerated into a radical right wing pack of hungry dogs. 571268[/snapback] Nobody is forcing the radical left to be here. You can leave any time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Nobody asked you to go "further". Your “criticism” of the leadership of the Democrats was a generic statement that you still couldn’t even get through without whining about GOP attacks. And regardless, it has nothing to do with the issue of Clinton's statement. Somebody speculated whether you would specifically criticize Clinton for making an ignorant, racist comment about 'plantations'. That's all I wanted to hear, but as usual you dance around the issue so as to avoid having to make a specific criticism of one of your sacred liberal cows, proving once again that you are a hypocrite with no credibility. So go ahead and make yet another post where you refuse to criticize Clinton's comment. I hope that explained it clearly enough for you. 571240[/snapback] Gee, and I thought I was saving time by being critical of democratic leaders, without exception, rather than limiting it to Hillary. You do recall that the original post was about both Hillary and Nagin. It seemed appropriate then to respond in the plural, ie "democratic leaders". I have no problem with the idea that what Hillary said was stupid, mean spirited, the very thing that makes reasonable discussions so difficult to have. Accusing the entire Republican party of being like plantation owners is the kind of rhetoric that just alienates people, prevents any reasonable discussion and further poisons public debate. By they way, I have never, ever even remotely supported the idea of her running for President. Never. Don't let that little fact get in the way though. Still waiting for you to explain how it is that my comments, being critical of democratic leadership and Nagin, can be fairly interpreted as Democrats being immune from all criticsm. Your micro analysis and bitter criticism of my post simply because I wasn't critical enough sets the standard. I assume you will be taking KRC to task for his inaccuracy in spinning a criticism of democrats on my part into "democrats being immune...." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 This board has degenerated into a radical right wing pack of hungry dogs. 571268[/snapback] We missed you soooooo much scrapper. Wooooof!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scraps Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Nobody is forcing the radical left to be here. You can leave any time. 571274[/snapback] Are you calling me part of the radical left? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnTheRocks Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Nobody is forcing the radical left to be here. You can leave any time. 571274[/snapback] Tom....errr...i mean Ken...what got into you today? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 I will make it easy for you. State the following: I hold Hillary to the same standards that I hold Republicans. Hillary made a racist comment and has no business being in any sort of leadership position. 571272[/snapback] Lets leave the your personal delusion that your not partisan alone for now, especially when it comes to racism. Not after you had a cow over my taking the ludicrous position that racism was a significant problem. I was directly critical of democratic leaders, called them bad in fact. I called their leadership problem "serious", something you conveniently left out when you "quoted" me. I also called Nagin a promising new comer, a challenger to Pat Robertson and you certainly know how I feel about him. All of that criticism of democrats and then you interpret it as "Democrats can say anything and should be immune from criticism". I am still waiting for you to explain that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blzrul Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Actually when you read what she said, it's not remarkable. She said Congress was run in such a way that there was retribution toward anyone who spoke up in disagreement with the ruling party. Anyone here want to argue that? The pervasive attitude there, like here, is that "if you're not with us you're against us". There's very little democracy left in the way they're running the show in DC. Any fool who even thinks about taking the high road (either party) gets run over into the mud....so they either fall into line or wait until the ruling party begins to implode when they can sidestep away quietly.... The Repigs are just mad they didn't think of it themselves. They are the original highjackers of language. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 They are the original highjackers of language. 571316[/snapback] Ah yes, so I suppose republicans were behind such nauseating terms as "New Deal" and "Great Society". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Wasn't it Dandy Don Meredith that said" howard, you have a temendous grasp of the obvious". Couldn't agree with you more. 571271[/snapback] It is a shame to see, really. I can recall that he would get all hot and bothered whenever I was critical of Anne Coulter or Limbaugh and the like because it was supposedly unfair to saddle those nuts and their meansprited rhetoric on to all conservatives. This thread is a good example of how he has become what he claimed to despise. This was never a discussion about race, about political issues or anything else of substance. If he had any ideas on those issues, he never bothered to mention them. No. His major concern was "what will Mickey say?" We end up essentially arguing about who is being the bigger jerk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Okay, I'll take the bait and ask the obvious....what is offensive about saying someplace is run like a plantation? What exactly is offensive about that? Is it always offensive to say a place is run like a plantation? That hurt republican feelings? Give me a break. I am no supporter of Hillary Clinton, but I find the woundedness of the whole matter laughable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnTheRocks Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Actually when you read what she said, it's not remarkable. She said Congress was run in such a way that there was retribution toward anyone who spoke up in disagreement with the ruling party. Anyone here want to argue that? The pervasive attitude there, like here, is that "if you're not with us you're against us". There's very little democracy left in the way they're running the show in DC. Any fool who even thinks about taking the high road (either party) gets run over into the mud....so they either fall into line or wait until the ruling party begins to implode when they can sidestep away quietly.... The Repigs are just mad they didn't think of it themselves. They are the original highjackers of language. 571316[/snapback] i was on board early when the Republicans took over the House, Senate, White House, and said "Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely" and knew the Right was going to run into some problems if they weren't bipartisan. but...what the hell is this just mad they didn't think of it themselves supposed to mean in context with what that poor slave Hillary had to say? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Lets leave the your personal delusion that your not partisan alone for now, especially when it comes to racism. Not after you had a cow over my taking the ludicrous position that racism was a significant problem. I was directly critical of democratic leaders, called them bad in fact. I called their leadership problem "serious", something you conveniently left out when you "quoted" me. I also called Nagin a promising new comer, a challenger to Pat Robertson and you certainly know how I feel about him. All of that criticism of democrats and then you interpret it as "Democrats can say anything and should be immune from criticism". I am still waiting for you to explain that. 571308[/snapback] Still dancing, I see. Trying to deflect, yet again. It is not going to work. You just cannot do it, can you? You talk about racism and how prevalent it is, but when there is an opportunity to specifically call out a politician who made a racist comment, you hide behind veil statements to avoid specifically criticizing Hillary. Funny, if it were a Republican making that exact same statement, you would have no trouble calling them out by name. Hypocrite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Oh look, another lefty circle jerk with Mickey in the pivot. Nice to see Scrappy tossing in the rhetoric too. Perhaps RCow will finally come back now that there is some semblence of a united front. I'd put up the link to last week's racism thread, with Mickey trumpeting from Mt High about how prevalent the problem is because we don't take it seriously enough, but I'm too busy laughing my ass off at his hypocrisy of not being honest enough to BY NAME call out his favorite liberal B word goddess for her choice of phrase. Because Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh are bad. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Are you calling me part of the radical left? 571297[/snapback] The right keeps edging further and further to the right, if you don't move with them, sooner or later you find yourself among the "radical left". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Oh look, another lefty circle jerk with Mickey in the pivot. Nice to see Scrappy tossing in the rhetoric too. Perhaps RCow will finally come back now that there is some semblence of a united front. I'd put up the link to last week's racism thread, with Mickey trumpeting from Mt High about how prevalent the problem is because we don't take it seriously enough, but I'm too busy laughing my ass off at his hypocrisy of not being honest enough to BY NAME call out his favorite liberal B word goddess for her choice of phrase. Because Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh are bad. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA 571348[/snapback] Yes, the infamous thread where I took the radical position that racism was a significant problem in America. Just me being crazeeeee. I think that was right after I broke all the rules and declared, brazenly I might add, that bugging journalists, especially one whose husband is your chief political rival's foreign policy advisor in the middle of a presidential campaign was wrong. Wasn't that just after I went off the deep end and actually laughed, out loud mind you, at David Letterman? As if that wasn't bad enough, didn't I agree with the radical, hitherto unheard of theory, that O'Reilly is a dick? That was just after I set the wires ablaze with the notion that Pat Robertson crediting God with giving the PM of Israel a stroke was bad. Who knows where all this will end? Maybe next I will come out with a merciless and unwarranted attack against pedophiles. Maybe I will shock the world with my over the top views on traumatic amputations (Preview: I'm against it!). Where or where will the madness end? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scraps Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Oh look, another lefty circle jerk with Mickey in the pivot. Nice to see Scrappy tossing in the rhetoric too. Perhaps RCow will finally come back now that there is some semblence of a united front. I'd put up the link to last week's racism thread, with Mickey trumpeting from Mt High about how prevalent the problem is because we don't take it seriously enough, but I'm too busy laughing my ass off at his hypocrisy of not being honest enough to BY NAME call out his favorite liberal B word goddess for her choice of phrase. Because Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh are bad. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA 571348[/snapback] So are you calling me a lefty? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts