The Do As I Say Not As I Do In Politics

[LBP 76]

Uh huh. And YOU'RE a hypocrite. I like the way you singled mine out when to MOST people it's obvious that neither statement was meant to be taken 100% seriously. Except by people like you, apparently, who try to keep their biases from being 100% evident. At least I'm up front about mine. Maybe you should consider being the same way about yours, hypocrite.

I AM a hypocrite. I have said it many times.

It still doesn't change what you said.

And I assumed you were (probably) kidding. But I still think, no, know that you went too far (not a terribly intelligent statement to boot).

 

[LUVbigboobs]

I AM a hypocrite. I have said it many times.

It still doesn't change what you said.

And I assumed you were kidding. But I still think you went too far.

Unacceptable. Unless you mention the same thing about the other thread, then your comment is simply unacceptable and I take nothing from it. Simple as that. Is that easy enough for you to understand?

 

[LUVbigboobs]

I AM a hypocrite. I have said it many times.

It still doesn't change what you said.

And I assumed you were (probably) kidding. But I still think, no, know that you went too far.

And it was an ignorant statement anyway.

And what you think or say or post means nothing to me. Do you understand me?

 

[LUVbigboobs]

I AM a hypocrite. I have said it many times.

It still doesn't change what you said.

And I assumed you were (probably) kidding. But I still think, no, know that you went too far (not a terribly intelligent statement to boot).

Can you explain to me why what you think about what I posted should matter to me? 'Cause if you can't in a MEANINGFUL and COHERENT manner, then I couldn't care less what you think of what I post. Am I getting through to you, yet, hypocrite?

 

[LBP 76]

And what you think or say or post means nothing to me. Do you understand me?

Do you often respond 4 times in 15 minutes to posts that mean 'nothing' to you?

Anyway...if you change your mind, why not pm me so we don't further hijack the thread (though I started this hijack, I admit)?

And if not? Take care.......




....and lighten up.

 

[LUVbigboobs]

Do you often respond 4 times in 10 minutes to posts that mean 'nothing' to you?

Anyway...if you change your mind, why not pm me so we don't further hijack the thread (though I started this hijack, I admit)?

I'm not interested in interacting with you in any way. I'd rather you just STFU and not tell me not to do something that you're unwilling to tell someone else not to do.

 

[LBP 76]

I'm not interested in interacting with you in any way. I'd rather you just STFU and not tell me not to do something that you're unwilling to tell someone else not to do.

okee dokee

 

[Facetious]

What is peculiar isn't so much the double standard disposition of these politicians, but the observance of those who defend them. For them to sit here and make claim that their man (or woman where applicable) of choice, can and will do no wrong, ever ! not a once ! sounds like a dictatorial regime in the making.

It's healthy for the democracy that We The People critique our president when deserved. Nobody gets a pass here. I think that people are and will continue to be afraid to criticize this president, because if they did, it would wrongly be "interpreted" as a form of bigotry.

Oh yea, this will get real interesting. :o

Sheesh ! they didn't even look into her background before they abruptly escorted her off, pre interview.

 

[86150]

I sense a lot of love in this room. :rofl:

Geez lighten up people!


MAN someone her has ANGER issues.

 

[Facetious]

I sense a lot of love in this room. :rofl:

Geez lighten up people!


MAN someone her has ANGER issues.

who me ?

Naaaaaw . . . and if so, don't call me "her". :tongue: J/K

 

[don_equis]

There's plenty of room to discuss Obama in the numerous amount of threads that already exist for that discussion.


This is fresh news!!


We can, in their respective threads.

This has nothing to do with the other threads.



So, talk about it in one of the anti-Obama threads that you, or somebody else, has already created.

There's nothing you can say that will get anyone on your side with this. We all know what you're doing, I called you on it, so it's time to stop. Give it up.

Don't wanna get anybody on my side, so now we need to stop seeing the political bullshit? Since when do elected officials can't be scrutinized, don't post on this thread, sorry if I got your man on his bullshit and hurt your feelings.

And you stand corrected in the stating that the one post extolls "mass suicide." Had that been the case, that person would have typed "why don't we all grab a gun and shoot ourselves" (not "each other"). If anything, his is the more damaging because he was talking about everyone in the whole world having a hand in killing everybody else, while my post was referring to a mere subset of humanity (that is, the idiots of the world). But I guess you don't see it that way, hypocrite.

Man you need help, guess what there will be free heath care for sick people like you.

Uh huh. And YOU'RE a hypocrite. I like the way you singled mine out when to MOST people it's obvious that neither statement was meant to be taken 100% seriously. Except by people like you, apparently, who try to keep their biases from being 100% evident. At least I'm up front about mine. Maybe you should consider being the same way about yours, hypocrite.

Easy to acusse and get personal on other people in this forum, what's yer deal you need sex or meds? You are a very violent insulting person and don't punch yer computer screen or spit on it.


So I qouted a news piece from CNN (one of the most thrustworthy ones out there) it was not from FOX News or any other lunatic right wing media. I called on the bullshit double standards of the "hiring" policy, very few gave their opinions on the news article and it seem like some others took it very personal and decided to attack me instead. Wow I wonder if that made them feel better, I love all the stuff I get called and yet I see no other "intellectual" argument against the "double standard"...just lies about me on how many threads on some particular person (whose name is illegal to metion, unless I am kissing his ass), when it was not true and then some misquotes on another thread.

So base on these responses (which I expected no less),is accurate to say:

1. It's ok to bash Bush 100 times and to continue to blame everything on him for the next 4 years of "change"

2. It's ok to keep on the Sarah Palin bashing because "duh...she's such a dumb bitch."

3. It's not ok to talk about our newly elected President/King, can't call him on bullshit policies, can't find the humor during or after the elections, can't question the bias of the media...shit even the late night show comedians admitted that they don't know fi they can even make fun of this guy.

So is this what we have become an age of political correctness? we can't start questioning authority? our elected officials? you don't get measured with the same stick but yet once in power you get to measure everyone else?
Or is it "Now that I am in power I get to run things my way"

If you don't want to post in here then don't let the thread die, if you get this personal and it makes you mad, then I don't know go work or get some anger managament...Why should I get mad? this is like talking to a bunch of coworkers or friends by the water cooler and just shooting shit,am I going to beat someone up at work over this? hell no, we go have lunch afterwards no big deal just different views.

If you get so offended by my threads then start one bashing me if that makes anyone else happy, I stand by what I said before.

 

[ChefChiTown]

Don't wanna get anybody on my side, so now we need to stop seeing the political bullshit?

The only bullshit here is your blatant disregard for how annoying you are being by starting multiple anti-Obama threads. You can post whatever you want to about Obama. Just do it in the threads that already exist.

Since when do elected officials can't be scrutinized, don't post on this thread, sorry if I got your man on his bullshit and hurt your feelings.

Are you drunk again? Your sentences don't even make sense. If you are drunk again, stop posting. It's making you look ridiculous.

 

[Dawn]

So is this what we have become an age of political correctness? we can't start questioning authority? our elected officials? you don't get measured with the same stick but yet once in power you get to measure everyone else?
Or is it "Now that I am in power I get to run things my way"[/COLOR]

The problem isnt questioning authority. The problem is that said authority will always be wrong in your eyes, whatever they do... but you indeed proposed a subject to discuss and the thread went wrong.

Should we try to get it back on track?

*****

How do you think it should have been handled instead of how it will be?

As far as i'm concerned, it's better to scrutinize people who play roles like Ambassadors instead of being stuck into a scandal afterwards. I don't know if Obama looked at scandals we had just up north of you, in Canada, but a lot of what will be looked deep into have embarrassed our Conservative Government in the past few years.

I'm sure you wouldn't want people playing such roles hired blindly, right?

 

[Torre82]

For the record I didnt particularly like how many Obama threads there were, either. Made it hard to keep track of which one had which info.. which one had this train-of-conversation.. etc.

But, eh.. the Obama threads were started by different people. AFA made this one, I made that one, so on and so forth. There were facts listed, opposing views were all listened to. Honestly Don.. just because you keep reminding everyone he associated with these guys, that group, etc.. doesnt mean we're ignoring it. But we are ignoring you, now.

It'd be perfectly fine if he actually fucked up.. or if he turned hypocrite in a way that mattered. (Singling out positions for his administration is a bad thing, now?... the hell?!) You cant reach *across the aisle* to just anyone and welcome them into the cabinet.

I guess.. I feel like a brick wall is up. We've heard the truth. We just dont care to hear it over and over. Reminding us about all the things ONLY YOU care about isnt winning any extra friends, here.

 

[Jagger69]

Well it appears to all of you who did not cared about President Elect Obama's past questionable associations or questionable statement made by himself. Well it appears like a classic example of "Do as I say not as I do" case. For those of you that so vehemently supported him and would like to get a job at his administration then get ready to spill evertything you have done that might be "questionable".

Here's an excerpt from the news article:

CNN) -- If you want to work for President-elect Barack Obama's administration, be prepared to spill almost everything there is to know about yourself.


As White House chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel will have a say in many of the new administration's hiring decisions.

The Obama transition team is sending a seven-page, 63-item questionnaire to every candidate for Cabinet and other high-ranking positions in the incoming administration.

The questions cover everything from information on family members, Facebook pages, blogs and hired help to links to Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, American International Group and troubled banks as well as lawsuits, gifts, resumes, loans and more.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/11/13/transition.questionnaire/index.html

P.S. "Hope" that your blogs on freeones don't come up after all it's in a porn site and that is quite impolitically correct.

Obama already endured the vetting process on these baseless accusations about his past associations. It was called the election. He passed with flying colors. It isn't an issue any longer (not that it ever was).

There's nothing wrong with a legitimate background check on a prospective employee....it happens every day. Why anyone would try to make some partisan issue out of this is beyond me. It's pretty evident that those of you on the extreme right are going to be examining everything Obama does under a microscope and this has already been discussed ad nauseum. Much ado about absolutely nothing.

 

[Facetious]

I AM a hypocrite. I have said it many times.

That's it ! He's "Mick Crocket."

Heya dude ! gettin' a bit chili up there yet ?

 

[AFA]

I think most people knew quite a lot about Obama and the so-called questionable people he had known which you allude too.Many of us think it was non-issues, but you can't say it was not spoken of and something people had a chance to consider when voting.The people knowing this information made the judgement to elect(hire) him.As to his cabinet/top level positions being screened and vetted thoroughly I guess he is damned eitheir way lol.You criticize him for it but if he didn't do it and something came out later that was embarrasing it would be see he and his people are incompetent or worse lol.But there is no double standard here ,people were allowed to consider whatever they thought appropriate and the republicans and Fox news made sure you heard every what they thought damaging thing they could say about Obama.Your just disappointed people didn't think the same things you do were important I think and elected him anyway.Always gonna be people who feel like that after elections.I felt that way in 2000 and 2004 and a few others.:1orglaugh

Just for the reasons I've talked about, again and again, you have to wonder at the very least if he didn't have a following because his credibility is so high, and he offered an intelligent solution to at least try to deal with the problems he was able to see, not even addressed by his opponent. I don't get why the majority of people who have made a decision to not elect someone from the party that brought you 8 years of that miserable lying failure George Bush are belittled as followers of a cult figure? He was the consistent candidate that from the first day of the presidential race, said what the majority wanted to hear. It like "who wants chocolate"? The majority won, so they must be stupid.

Anyone aware of the past 20 years or so of American politics, as something more than a sequence of spotty unrelated events will pretty much see throught the smokescreen thrown up to protect the soon to be leaving, (hopefully soon to be prosecuted), members of the Bush administration.

 

[Facetious]

The majority won, so they must be stupid.
.

Not stupid, just given limited options.

Very limited. Heads or tails limited.

 

[LBP 76]

That's it ! He's "Mick Crocket."

Heya dude ! gettin' a bit chili up there yet ?

You too? Not nice man.

I do not appreciate being told I am someone else. And I am asking you to please stop doing it.

 

[don_equis]

For the record I didnt particularly like how many Obama threads there were, either. Made it hard to keep track of which one had which info.. which one had this train-of-conversation.. etc.

But, eh.. the Obama threads were started by different people. AFA made this one, I made that one, so on and so forth. There were facts listed, opposing views were all listened to. Honestly Don.. just because you keep reminding everyone he associated with these guys, that group, etc.. doesnt mean we're ignoring it. But we are ignoring you, now.

It'd be perfectly fine if he actually fucked up.. or if he turned hypocrite in a way that mattered. (Singling out positions for his administration is a bad thing, now?... the hell?!) You cant reach *across the aisle* to just anyone and welcome them into the cabinet.

I guess.. I feel like a brick wall is up. We've heard the truth. We just dont care to hear it over and over. Reminding us about all the things ONLY YOU care about isnt winning any extra friends, here.

Maybe I should start a thread "In Search For New Friends"...I would rather discuss the issues at hand and bullshit or shoot the shit in other threads and if people take it personally and don't see reason for not being my friend that mattters not to me, you win some you lose some.

Obama already endured the vetting press on these baseless accusations about his past associations. It was called the election. He passed with flying colors. It isn't an issue any longer (not that it ever was).

According to the media and those like you. Same thing could be said about Bush second term, yet myself and some other kept pointing out the bullshit that most of his policies were.

There's nothing wrong with a legitimate background check on a prospective employee....it happens every day. Why anyone would try to make some partisan issue out of this is beyond me. It's pretty evident that those of you on the extreme right are going to be examining everything Obama does under a microscope and this has already been discussed ad nauseum. Much ado about absolutely nothing.

I would know, I have a "secret" clearance and it is hard to get and to keep. The point is that these conditions of hiring a very intrusive compared to past admistrations that even CNN points it out:

In an apparent effort to avoid the problems faced by several nominees in the last two administrations, a block of four questions is devoted to ferreting out details -- including the immigration status -- of any domestic help the applicant may have hired.


Question 61 seems to have been prompted by the controversy over former 1960s radical William Ayres in Obama's campaign: "Have you had any association with any person, group or business venture that could be used -- even unfairly -- to impugn or attack your character or qualifications for government service?"

Under the final, "Miscellaneous" category, the questionnaire asks for the names and phone numbers of past live-in lovers;h whether anyone in the applicant's family owns a gun; the state of the applicant's health; and whether he or she has any enemies. <- This is qouted by CNN not me.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/11/13/transition.questionnaire/index.html