Stop whining
-
led mike wrote:
And no, this does not mean that someone like Ilion should post another list of Democratic leaders and their misadventures as if there is no list of Republican leaders misadventures.
But, of course, I did not *merely* "post [a] list of Democratic leaders and their misadventures as if there is no list of Republican leaders misadventures." Not, mind you, that I could ever even begin to imagine that Honest Mike would actually be attempting to misrepresent the list I posted[^]:
Red Stateler wrote:
The double standard ...
A quick overview: Clinton ... Nixon JFK; Gore ... Nixon (The Democrats *did* steal JFK's "win" over Nixon, and it was widely known at the time. Including by Nixon. And JFK.) Kennedy, Ted (of MS) ... ??? (specifically, directly causing the death of another and trying to hide it) Kennedy, Patrick (of RI) ... Tower, John (of Texas) (specifically, public drunkenness) Clinton ... Packwood, Bob (of Oregon) (specifically, the "unwelcome advances") Clinton ... ??? (specifically, the quite creditable accusation of rape) Studds, Gerry (of MS) ... Foley, Mark (of Florida) (specifically, actual sex with actual minors vs. "icky" (though legal) email/PMs) Frank, Barney (of MS) ... Cunningham, Randy 'Duke' (of California) -- (specifically, the prostitution component) Kerry, John (of MS) and others too numerous to mention ... ??? (specifically, falsely slandering *all* members of the military) Clinton ... Gingrich (not even about the same things, yet Dem partisans try to make it equivalent)
-
Thanks for stepping up and answering my question.... wait you didn't... that's just shocking... no really... it is. :rolleyes:
led mike
-
If your reference is to my post about Bill Clinton, it was really a genuine question posed to fellow CPians. There have been many instances before where I have made my displeasure with the "pre-emptive war" doctrine. So, my position is not partisan at all. Thomas
Thomas George wrote:
If your reference is to my post about Bill Clinton,
Not only your post no.
Thomas George wrote:
it was really a genuine question
it is?
Thomas George wrote:
Why do Democrats believe that a president indulging in sexual relations with a woman other than his wife is not a problem?
What Democrats told you that it wasn't a problem?
led mike
-
What is all this whining about a double standard? The Republicans have the platform of Religion and Family Values, constantly claiming moral superiority... then you want to whine about a double standard. Please could just one republican in the Soapbox please step forward and explain the logic in this seemingly inescapable contradiction? And no, this does not mean that someone like Ilion should post another list of Democratic leaders and their misadventures as if there is no list of Republican leaders misadventures.
led mike
Look. I understand the yearning for a Fearless Leader to put your hopes in... but can we just accept that it's not gonna be someone emerging from this system? Face it - you don't get to where Bush is, or Clinton was, or Rudy/Clinton/Obama want to be without trading something for it, and unless you're just rolling in money going in, that "something" is gonna be yourself. They're all whores. Fancy, expensive whores, and hey, maybe the one you're backing really does have that heart of gold... but, they're still whores, and that's all you can expect of 'em. So enough acting shocked at the hypocrisy, the lies, the ludicrous gimmicks. It's all an act, a cheesy improv designed by us - because we know they're whores, but still want to see 'em pretending to be honest, upstanding citizens, a prancing mockery of a fiction whose origins we barely even recall. Stop chiding the whores for acting like whores. Start chiding yourselves for buying them. (and no, this isn't directed specifically at you, Mike - i just didn't feel like starting a new thread)
----
It appears that everybody is under the impression that I approve of the documentation. You probably also blame Ken Burns for supporting slavery.
--Raymond Chen on MSDN
-
Thanks for stepping up and answering my question.... wait you didn't... that's just shocking... no really... it is. :rolleyes:
led mike
Stop wasting your time with this moron. Ignore him. It's not hard to figure out he craves attention. Deny him what he so desperately wants or continue to suffer through his pathetic, rambling posts.
-
Look. I understand the yearning for a Fearless Leader to put your hopes in... but can we just accept that it's not gonna be someone emerging from this system? Face it - you don't get to where Bush is, or Clinton was, or Rudy/Clinton/Obama want to be without trading something for it, and unless you're just rolling in money going in, that "something" is gonna be yourself. They're all whores. Fancy, expensive whores, and hey, maybe the one you're backing really does have that heart of gold... but, they're still whores, and that's all you can expect of 'em. So enough acting shocked at the hypocrisy, the lies, the ludicrous gimmicks. It's all an act, a cheesy improv designed by us - because we know they're whores, but still want to see 'em pretending to be honest, upstanding citizens, a prancing mockery of a fiction whose origins we barely even recall. Stop chiding the whores for acting like whores. Start chiding yourselves for buying them. (and no, this isn't directed specifically at you, Mike - i just didn't feel like starting a new thread)
----
It appears that everybody is under the impression that I approve of the documentation. You probably also blame Ken Burns for supporting slavery.
--Raymond Chen on MSDN
Shog9 wrote:
I understand the yearning for a Fearless Leader to put your hopes in
I for one don't want a "leader". I want a government that implements my ideals.
-
Shog9 wrote:
I understand the yearning for a Fearless Leader to put your hopes in
I for one don't want a "leader". I want a government that implements my ideals.
Red Stateler wrote:
I want a government that implements my ideals.
You want a servant. So look for people who are good at following orders. ...and pray they take orders from the people who elected them instead of the people who funded their ad campaigns...
----
It appears that everybody is under the impression that I approve of the documentation. You probably also blame Ken Burns for supporting slavery.
--Raymond Chen on MSDN
-
Shog9 wrote:
I understand the yearning for a Fearless Leader to put your hopes in
I for one don't want a "leader". I want a government that implements my ideals.
-
Look. I understand the yearning for a Fearless Leader to put your hopes in... but can we just accept that it's not gonna be someone emerging from this system? Face it - you don't get to where Bush is, or Clinton was, or Rudy/Clinton/Obama want to be without trading something for it, and unless you're just rolling in money going in, that "something" is gonna be yourself. They're all whores. Fancy, expensive whores, and hey, maybe the one you're backing really does have that heart of gold... but, they're still whores, and that's all you can expect of 'em. So enough acting shocked at the hypocrisy, the lies, the ludicrous gimmicks. It's all an act, a cheesy improv designed by us - because we know they're whores, but still want to see 'em pretending to be honest, upstanding citizens, a prancing mockery of a fiction whose origins we barely even recall. Stop chiding the whores for acting like whores. Start chiding yourselves for buying them. (and no, this isn't directed specifically at you, Mike - i just didn't feel like starting a new thread)
----
It appears that everybody is under the impression that I approve of the documentation. You probably also blame Ken Burns for supporting slavery.
--Raymond Chen on MSDN
Shog9 wrote:
Start chiding yourselves for buying them.
Of course "I" don't and I posted as much last week[^]
Shog9 wrote:
Stop chiding the whores for acting like whores.
Yeah, I could care less what any of those washington pukes do or say... but the people here in the Soapbox, that's another fish to fry. :-D
Last modified: 3hrs 38mins after originally posted --
led mike
-
What is all this whining about a double standard? The Republicans have the platform of Religion and Family Values, constantly claiming moral superiority... then you want to whine about a double standard. Please could just one republican in the Soapbox please step forward and explain the logic in this seemingly inescapable contradiction? And no, this does not mean that someone like Ilion should post another list of Democratic leaders and their misadventures as if there is no list of Republican leaders misadventures.
led mike
led mike wrote:
The Republicans have the platform of Religion and Family Values, constantly claiming moral superiority...
That very comment is an example of the double standard.
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
-
led mike wrote:
The Republicans have the platform of Religion and Family Values, constantly claiming moral superiority...
That very comment is an example of the double standard.
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
-
led mike wrote:
The Republicans have the platform of Religion and Family Values, constantly claiming moral superiority...
That very comment is an example of the double standard.
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
Stan Shannon wrote:
That very comment is an example of the double standard.
Are you serious? Another whine is your response? Did I ask for an example? Did I even question the existence of the double standard? Not a single one of you has even attempted to address the question. You have proven, once again, that beyond regurgitating your own brainwashed superiority rhetoric, you have no capability for real discussion.
led mike
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
That very comment is an example of the double standard.
Are you serious? Another whine is your response? Did I ask for an example? Did I even question the existence of the double standard? Not a single one of you has even attempted to address the question. You have proven, once again, that beyond regurgitating your own brainwashed superiority rhetoric, you have no capability for real discussion.
led mike
led mike wrote:
Not a single one of you has even attempted to address the question.
I'm still trying to understand your question. You asked "What's with all the whining about a double standard", then went on to say that Republicans have a double standard for promoting "family values". I told you they don't since a violation of that standard generally results in removal (rather than promotions that Democrats get). You failed to respond to that comment because it brings down your argument. Now you're accusing people of having no capability for a real discussion. Wow.
-
Shog9 wrote:
I understand the yearning for a Fearless Leader to put your hopes in
I for one don't want a "leader". I want a government that implements my ideals.
-
Stop wasting your time with this moron. Ignore him. It's not hard to figure out he craves attention. Deny him what he so desperately wants or continue to suffer through his pathetic, rambling posts.
I just went back to see what he has posted since last night, so I'd know what to vote as spam the next time round, and most of his messages have been removed. :doh:
Ðavid Wulff What kind of music should programmers listen to?
Join the Code Project Last.fm group | dwulff
I'm so gangsta I eat cereal without the milk -
led mike wrote:
Not a single one of you has even attempted to address the question.
I'm still trying to understand your question. You asked "What's with all the whining about a double standard", then went on to say that Republicans have a double standard for promoting "family values". I told you they don't since a violation of that standard generally results in removal (rather than promotions that Democrats get). You failed to respond to that comment because it brings down your argument. Now you're accusing people of having no capability for a real discussion. Wow.
Red Stateler wrote:
I'm still trying to understand your question.
No you are not.
Red Stateler wrote:
then went on to say that Republicans have a double standard for promoting "family values".
I said that in my OP on this thread? Where? Here is my statement, it does not say what you claim:
led mike wrote:
The Republicans have the platform of Religion and Family Values, constantly claiming moral superiority... then you want to whine about a double standard.
now here is the question
led mike wrote:
explain the logic in this seemingly inescapable contradiction?
How is that NOT crystal clear? You always claim to have superior reading skills don't you?
led mike
-
Shog9 wrote:
You want a servant. So look for people who are good at following orders. ...and pray they take orders from the people who elected them instead of the people who funded their ad campaigns...
I want a public servant, but that doesn't imply someone who simply takes orders, but rather fulfills the duties of their office for the benefit of America.
That's the ideal leader everyone would want, but it's only a dream. Like those people who tried to achieve communism, the idea is good, but it is impossible to achieve; the closest that they got is national socialism. Anyway, I don't think there is another George Washington or James Madison that will come along and save us. The constant growth of the bureaucracy in the government and the military industrial complex, and along with the influence of corporations in the legislating process has killed any chance of anyone trying to do the right thing. Well, unless there's a revolution and we start over again and implement the lessons learned. After awhile, the process would have to start over again and it becomes a cycle. Just my $0.02
-
Red Stateler wrote:
I'm still trying to understand your question.
No you are not.
Red Stateler wrote:
then went on to say that Republicans have a double standard for promoting "family values".
I said that in my OP on this thread? Where? Here is my statement, it does not say what you claim:
led mike wrote:
The Republicans have the platform of Religion and Family Values, constantly claiming moral superiority... then you want to whine about a double standard.
now here is the question
led mike wrote:
explain the logic in this seemingly inescapable contradiction?
How is that NOT crystal clear? You always claim to have superior reading skills don't you?
led mike
led mike wrote:
led mike wrote: The Republicans have the platform of Religion and Family Values, constantly claiming moral superiority... then you want to whine about a double standard. now here is the question
Because that statement is not true, hence there is no contradiction. Quoteing leftist propaganda is not a compelling argument.
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
-
Red Stateler wrote:
I'm still trying to understand your question.
No you are not.
Red Stateler wrote:
then went on to say that Republicans have a double standard for promoting "family values".
I said that in my OP on this thread? Where? Here is my statement, it does not say what you claim:
led mike wrote:
The Republicans have the platform of Religion and Family Values, constantly claiming moral superiority... then you want to whine about a double standard.
now here is the question
led mike wrote:
explain the logic in this seemingly inescapable contradiction?
How is that NOT crystal clear? You always claim to have superior reading skills don't you?
led mike
Like Stan said, the only way your statement makes sense is if there is a contradiction there. And as I pointed out, there isn't one, which makes your statement meaningless. That's why I asked what you were talking about.