nasty on all sides
Posted By: skunko on 2009-02-07
In Reply to:
Can't we just state our opinions without calling each other "idiots" and "children?" Does that really enhance the argument? Ever?
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
It has been nasty, hasn't it? On both sides...
McCain certainly would not have been my first choice either, but I voted for the candidate that I thought was the better of the two--I actually prefer a more conservative candidate than McCain. I do think that it is a shame that everyone has become so mean. I have tried not to be that way to anyone, although I guess some people see me as "rabid." What can you do? I at least know that I am not a name-caller or a racist, regardless of what others might think. Perhaps it will cool down. At any rate, have a good night!
Both sides should have a choice, on both sides, pregnant woman and doctor...nm
bm
I won't be nasty. sm
American Woman, if I wuz to venture a guess, I'd say you and gt were definitely the same person, but I don't really care. I really don't. And I don't care if you believe me either. GT did tell us both not to leave. I am sorry that you don't feel the need to verify that, but GT just as much admitted to it above, so there you go. Have a safe holiday weekend.
Why be so nasty? sm
I mean really. Why is that necessary? Why? Can you tell me? Is it something you can't help. I have been civil the entire time I have posted here. When I go to school, one person, ME, will not be posting. I can't speak for the rest. So let it go. Take a deep breath, let it out. Let it go. Let all that anger go. You will feel better.
Nasty. (nm)
nm
no need to get nasty as the same could be said about you.
,
wow - sam -- you really do get nasty
I don't know about you, but I'm American, not dem or pub, just American. I refuse to shut up or put up, as you so kindly put it, about anything. I have to admit the last election I voted pub, and I'm still paying for that one. But seriously sam, keep playing the blame game. You'd make a good politician. See where it gets us.
Fact is 140 dems did vote to pass it, while only 65 pubs voted for it. Maybe because the pubs didn't feel they were getting enough out of it for themselves or because of fear of its failure. It's a shame that pubs can't even support their own party, ie Bush, who wanted this to pass.
cause you are nasty
You were so nasty in your first post. I was answering questions to someone who asked about my faith and you come bouncing in with h*ll fire and damnation. I don't believe in heaven or h*ll, so I'm not real worried about it. Give your prayers to someone else. I certainly don't need someone as hateful as you praying for me. I don't believe what is in the NT and you screaming about it isn't going to change that. I bet you are the top evangelizer at your church, aren't you?
Why do you believe the KJV is right? Do you know the history of it? Have you studied original texts? Probably not ...
why be so nasty?
What's your point? If you didn't like it, no need to read it, but why be nasty for the sake of being nasty?
Why do you have to be so nasty
and stoop to attacking people? Attack the politician if you like, but this is just so juvenile.
And it's still nasty (nm)
n
My my - how nasty can you get
Very I see.
Exactly....and that happens on both sides...
in all seriousness...without the jibes...I have two big issues with the Dem candidates, that being the abortion issue and the endless tax and spend for social programs. I am not against social programs, I am just against the waste associated with it and the constant assault on the paycheck. The average in the US is 30-35% of your paycheck off the top in taxes. Can't we all agree that is enough? Why create more programs or throw more money at programs that aren't working? Why not look at the programs and cut the waste. Look to helping people better themselves instead of pushing assistance higher up the income ladder. Because it is we in the middle class who suffer the most. Pretty soon there will not be any middle class at all, because they will then be the working poor on the assistance that goes higher up the ladder.
There is such a thing as a conservative Democrat...who believes in fiscal responsibility.
And I will be the first one to say that the Bush Adminstration has strayed way away from that...fiscal responsibility. While I agree with him on some things...I sure don't agree with him on that.
I fear Hillary's national health plan because I know Canada's is not working the way it should...and it is horribly expensive to the taxpayer. Up there, their median is 50-55% of their taxes off the top, and the #1 place for that money to go is the universal health care. And even if you have the money to pay for an operation, you can't jump the waiting list. Hence, they come here for it.
I would just hope that whoever wins will look at the long-reaching ramifications before just jumping in. Be that Hillary or a Republican....because I do think Hillary will get the nomination. I can't see it go any other way...unless something drastic happens between now and the primary. Of course, we won't see all the ugliness (on both sides) until a little later. I guess the proof will be in the pudding.
What do you have against 2 sides
su
Yes, they can be - on BOTH sides.
Someone makes a wise crack about it being nice to have someone with a triple digit IQ - when in FACT they don't know what Bush's IQ is OR the possible that Barack has a higher OR lower IQ score. The problem is the people who post don't know. They have just an outright hatred and loathing for the republicans. Well how would they feel if I went and said Obama has an IQ of 68 or something so absurd. They wouldn't. You know what, having a high IQ doesn't mean squat. I know a lot of people with degrees and high IQs and they are more of imbs than people without degrees. Just another put down for Bush they they think is cute and funny. It's not! We get it already. They don't like Bush, they hate him, and some of them like my MIL will come right out and say what they want to happen to Bush (i.e. the same thing Hillary said would happen to BO and that is why she is staying in).
I'm really getting tired of the utter hatred and disdain for Bush, and the constant Bush bashing I see on this board. Calling him stoopid, etc, etc. when there are no facts to back it up (unless they are sitting with his school transcipts on their desk). You know I like Obama. I think he's an okay guy. I don't care for Bush. Never have, but this utter hatred and lies get to be a bit too much. Then of course they find websites to try to "validate" what they are saying, yet they won't post websites that go against what they are saying. I'm just sick of the whole thing. The next 4 years should be interesting. Not going to say O is going to fail, but I'm also not putting him up on a pedistal and praising him while I dance around in circles chanting his name like most on this board are doing. Then again if he does fail I expect no comments from the libs on that one. For him it will be okay.
Your above post is very nasty....
Calling democrats "traitorcrats."
Nasty response, I see.
You became nasty. Too bad. Guess you couldn't help yourself and couldn't stay reasonable and even-handed for more than a post or two. I was starting to think I'd been too hard with my thinking that some of the conservative posters were...well...kind of mean-spirited. Apparently I was wrong.
Dang you are nasty.
read ur post again. U R talking about it like its true. Maybe U can't see it but i can.
I did read it. No need to be nasty.
I have tried to keep an even tone here. That wasn't necessary. I think it stands to reason when you get men like Jong and the leader of Iran who have openly said they wish for our death, that the next step would be nuclear weapons.
Oh, got your hackles up I see. Nasty
I am not making excuses for anyone. Clinton and his presidency with all the bull is over. I know it, he knows it. You know it. Get over it already. He is washed up and has little to no credibility left. Don't mean jack to me right now. Others get away with far more in our justice system every day. I am not defending them either, it's just the way it goes. Am I going to cripple myself because of it? No way.
I could say the same for you in the predictability arena. You've reduced yourself to being flippant once again. You get downright nasty. Morals my foot.
It is not just about the Plame case. It is much bigger and wider, and it is growing every day.
Here is a part of it:
http://www.nlg.org/convention/2007%20Resolutions/Impeachment%20resolution.pdf
This was put together by the National Lawyers Guild. It is just one of many. It will get to the point where it can't be ignored. I can send you batches more if you like.
Nasty and proud of it.....obviously. And...
definitely not someone who should be calling someone else ignorant. But, since your opinion means les than nothing to me...knock yourself out.
Vicious and Nasty
Just vote early and get over yourselves. Unbelievable.
But you are beyond nasty to anyone who disagrees.
in your posts.
You cannot even practice what you preach, the happy, joyous hopeful part.
Just downright nastiness is your party line.
The nasty thing
is your wishing misery on fellow Americans because you have your nose in a snit (or something darker and moister).
wow, nasty this morning,,,
in our area there are people struggling but not to the extent that seem to be here on this board every day. Certainly don't live in a glass house; have struggled before in the past and have figured out a way not to. We are in a fortunate situation at the moment and have taken steps to ensure that we will be okay financially should the rug be pulled out from under us; so be it if that is considered snooty. Bash away as is your style; it humors me.
Boy, sis, you have a really nasty 'tude there...
my world is anything but gloomy. I know I am not responsible for that fella in the White House. That lets me sleep nights. Much Palin's carpet? Change parties? If you read any of my posts as you claim you have, either you have no retention or you would know I have never been a "pub" or a "Dem." Independent from day one. Conservative, yes definitely; "pub" no. Democrat...no way,not ever in this lifetime. The Democrats of my parents' days and Zell Miller are gone forever it would seem, and too bad. Too darned bad.
Yeah, it breaks my heart (not) that you are unimpressed. I know what impresses you and that is sure not where I desire to be.
It does not take a prophet to see where this is going. However...one has to remnove the blinders...ahem.
Just what was his nasty behavior?
I'm curious...........
Uh...that isn't what I said. I said it happens all the time and both sides do it.
Are you sure you read MY post? Just wondering because it didn't sound like it from your response. Man, you guys are trigger happy!
Is good, but not see here. Sad for all both sides.
x
Could it be possible there are 2 sides to the story? sm
The US, UK, and Israel also have a long and colorful history of 'creating incidents' to further their own agendas. I would say control of the Middle East is something at the top of the list. Hezbollah is wrong to send rockets into Israel. In fact, they are all wrong, but what do you expect them to do just wait there and be incinerated by Israel?
I'm sure both sides are represented.
There are soldiers for the war and those against. It's all there if you look hard enough. Absolutely....both sides are well represented.
Both sides say things like that
Obviously, living up someone's rear-end is not something that is to be taken literally - that is why I called it a joke - maybe not the best terminology.
My problem is when people say things about certain groups of people and they mean it literally - hence the reason that I specifically mentioned Anne Coulter's discussion and did not add anyone else mentioned in the OP's message.
This kind of crass talk happens on both sides of the fence. Do you have anyone in your family that is a registered Democrat? Do you lump them in with your comments about liberals? (also in comments on the conservative board) I have close family members that are registered Republicans. That is why I do not make sweeping remarks about all Republicans or conservatives. I'm trying to be very specific in my comments because everyone is obviously different.
Racism is on both sides......not just one
xx
Both sides of this issue.....sm
The emotional part of me, that loves wildlife, absolutely and completely hates this practice. The governor before Gov. Palin did this, as well.
Intellectually, however, my husband and I talked about this last night. I have to realize that things are different in the state of Alaska, and we down here in the lower 48 can't judge them for this, as we don't understand all the facts. Sam posted them down below. It's a different mindset, when it comes to predator control versus the herd availability for the people of Alaska who are subsistence hunters, and need that caribou to make it through the winter.
I would much rather to let nature take its course, and let the predator and prey take each other out, the way nature intended it. However, throw humans in the mix, and it does change things.
All that taken into account, I still don't have to like it. But I can respect Alaska's decision to do this, even if I disagree.
Yep. there are two sides to every story....
you just have to choose the side that fits your view for your country. Godspeed in your search. :)
On ALL sides--does not necessarily mean sm
this fiasco is partisan--only that the current administration (GOP) allowed all entities to run amok. It's the financial world versus the common man, now vice versa. As one pundit said tonight, The public shouldn't have to pick up the broken chairs when they weren't invited to the party.
Hey, the hate has come from both sides.
It's so extreme now.
There are SMs from both sides of the fence
Take the above posts, for example:
Fitzgerald renews interest in Rezko-Obama deal
If you read anything on here, read this.
This should disturb every honorable citizen
Your stereotypes are inaccurate and pretty boring.
I can see both sides of the argument
Yes, many people are getting threatened and businesses getting picketed for supporting Prop 8. You cannot deny that (what was the pink taliban or whatever that disrupted church service a month or so ago?)
But on the other hand, if they want these donations anonymous, than that means Obama and other politicians can make their donations anonymous, and I think it's the publics right to know who is financing the next leaders of the country.
I just find it interesting that the homosexuals are assaulting and threatening supporters of the Prop 8 for what they believe in when they themselves are asking for fair treatment for what they believe in.
I am patriotic. I look at both sides.
It's certain people that refuse to look at the PRESENT ISSUES, not the PAST. I am all for O doing the right things, but right now, it looks like business as usual with the exception of his cabinet picks and this stimulus package.
Sticking to the issues is one thing. Calling some unpatriotic just because they don't agree with you is another.
There is ignorance on both sides here.
As a Christian, I would appreciate it if people would leave this type of subject out of our children's education. It is not unreasonable to ask since we have given up God and prayer in the schools to accommodate those who do not believe.
There are some people who will ridicule the act as well as the person as you can clearly see when we get on the subject of homosexuality. But you cannot group all of us into this category. I do not agree with that lifestyle but having no reason to treat them poorly. That is what I want to teach my children. We may not agree but we cannot be mean to them.
However, I cannot stand by and allow the teaching that homosexuality is okay. It is too controversial of a topic for that to be taught in schools.....just like religion. I can teach my children acceptance of people without teaching acceptance of a lifestyle we don't agree with and I would appreciate it if schools wouldn't undermine my authority on that subject.
You don't see me going around forcing religion on children who I know has parents who don't believe in God and don't want their kids hearing about God.
I was merely stating there are TWO sides....
to every story. I have not taken sides, as apparently you have. That is all I am saying. The Palestinians are not without fault either, and their present governing body are on the terror watch list. That should mean something....?
Right! Definitely hate from BOTH sides. The OP
nm
No, she is sounding very rational and not nasty at all, but once again
the mighty mouth gt shoots another poster down! Wow, that's gotta feel good, huh? Just vomit those words out there without thought. I read all the posts by AR. Other than Suzie and at one time Lurker they are the most rational posts on either board I have ever seen. Hey gt, little bitty clue, it all really is not about YOU. And as far as getting a life, you practically LIVE on this board. Just look down it and go a couple pages back. POT KETTLE BLACK.
No gt you're never hateful or nasty
don't stand in an open field during a thunderstorm.
Well, that's nasty propaganda at work...
...and they use it because it *does* work, unfortunately.
But hey - Jesus and his closest followers were never a majority of anything. They weren't the powerful, or those in control of the Temple, or those who lived in luxury in the lap of Rome. Those who were in control hated them and considered them pesky liberals. So I guess Democratic Christians stand in pretty good historical company.
You're particularly nasty today
I don't think a liberal has lost an election anywhere today, so what's the the nastiness?
HRC supporters downright nasty
Watched some of the DNC hearing (or whatever it was called). I was utterly disgusted with the supporters of HRC. She said she wanted the delegates seated. Well they are going to be seated! So what's the problem now? Oh - I get it, they want everything and they want it their way or no way. They just want to be placed in the position whether or not they got more votes. They are not playing fair. First they want the delegates seated - they are. They want their votes to count - they are. But because HRC does not get every single vote and Barack with none they are going to keep pushin it. You want to talk about just looking like a bunch of spoiled losers that is surely what they are. And what are they screaming about. As some lady said "a black man came and took it away from HRC". Well boo hoo. You want to talk about downright biggots - there you go! First you have the comments about Jesse Jackson by Billy boy, then you've got the "I'll win because white working people will vote for me and not a black man" statement by HRC. I'm tellin ya, they are really gearing up for a racial war. She lost, fair and square. End of discussion! The media if anything always gave her the benefit of the doubt. Gave her the easy questions at the debate, and certainly favored her, but now its just obvious she is a spoiled sport and sore loser. Well for all the ones who say they'll never vote for a black man, there are a hundred more who will not vote for that woman. Sure we'll one day vote in a woman in the white house but not her! I know there were many other qualified women who should have run. Why didn't they? Seems like the Clintons once again pulled "something funny" so she would be placed in there. Anyway...that's my rant for the evening. She just disgusts me and a lot of people I know and we are all anxious for her to just go home. Sure, go ahead, take it to the convention, but she better be prepared for the outcome. She lost, fair and square. More people and more delegates voted for Obama. Someone needs to set her figures straight. I guess if you don't count a bunch of states that Obama won then she can say she won, but I know she'd have a fit if Obama left out some of the states she won and said "See I won, we just won't count New York, Ohio and Calfornia (or any other combination of states she won). You want to talk about disenfranchizing people. She's just coming right out and saying "oh this states is important because I won so we have to count their votes, but this state over here that Obama won in, those people are not important, their votes don't count". Like I've said before....HRC go back to living under that rock you crawled out from. We're sick of you.
Here is one of those nasty four-letter words for you....
FACT...it was not the Republican Party who made it the thing to do to outsource to India...that was YOUR party. Here you go:
When Hillary Clinton threw her hat in the senatorial ring in 1999, one Sikh donor with business interests in India enriched her to the tune of $50 thousand-and she enriched him with access. The Sikh is a millionaire whose circumstances suggest may be living on “borrowed” wealth. The man is hotel-restaurant mogel Sant Singh Chatwal. Chatwal a naturalized citizen from India who initially raised $500 thousand for Clinton in a fundraiser in his Upper Eastside penthouse. Chatwal reportedly committed 14 entities controlled by him to donate $210 thousand of that amount to Hillary’s first campaign for the US Senate. Not in the least surprising is the fact that Chatwal is also a key Trustee of the William J. Clinton Foundation.
Chatwal, a US tax deadbeat since at least 1996 (and a debt deadbeat before that) began donating to Bill and Hillary Clinton early in the Clinton years. The Clintons reciprocated (that old political quid pro quo) by approving grants to Indian-American advocacy groups that were used to finance the outsourcing of jobs from the United States to India. Beginning in 1996 Cisco Systems (another major Clinton donor) began laying off $60 thousand-plus high tech employees and replacing them with new hires from Bangalore, India for about half the dollars. Cisco Systems justified the hirings, claiming they could not find qualified employees in the United States. By 1998 Cisco had only a handful of Infosys Technology workers overseas (Infosys is an outsourcer of jobs to India). Most of their 850 employees are now Indian. (Infosys has just launched an IT subsidiary in Monterray, Mexico to outsource outsourced jobs from India to Mexico.) In 2006 Newsweek reported that Cisco System’s R&D facility-employing 3,000 people, would be located in India. (Bill Clinton received $300 thousand from Cisco in 2006 for two speeches at $150 thousand per speech. Cisco employees-those who still had jobs-donated $39,450 to Hillary.)
Bill Clinton invested upwards of $50 thousand in an Indian bill paying company through his WJC Investments, LLP when outsourcing became a hot property. The company, Easy Bill Limited, is an Indian corporation. Easy Bill functions as a one-stop bill paying outlet for utility bills, credit card bills or any other debts you pay online. (It’s website, www.easybillindia.com (does not conceal from anyone interested in billing collection services that they are outsourcing to India).
In 2004 Congress-and several States-attempted to enact anti- outsourcing laws. In March, 2004 the Senate approved an amendment by Sen. Chris Dodd [D-CT] disallowing tax dollars from being used to facilitate the outsourcing of American jobs. A day earlier, Congressman Bernie Sanders [I-VT] (now one of Vermont’s two US Senators) introduced a bill that would deny grants or loans to any company that outsourced jobs if they laid off workers in the United States to a greater level than layoffs of employees in any other country in the world. Several industrial States attempted to enact anti-outsourcing laws that year, but those bills either failed and were defanged before passage.
As pressure mounted to kill outsourcing, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, and Chuck Schumer were instrumental in creating the Senate India Caucus (which was “coordinated” by the US India Political Action committee) to lobby Senators who were attempting to derail job outsourcing. When the Caucus was formed, Hillary Clinton told Roll Call that “…[i]t is imperative that the United States do everything possible to reach out to India. This Caucus is dedicated to expanding areas of agreement with India and engaging in a candid dialogue of differences.” With their money in her pocket, what else could she say? Hillary is a co-chairman of the Caucus. On the House side, Hillary’s allies are House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Congressman Joe Crowley [D-NY]. (If your job has been outsourced, you now know who to thank.)
Yes, this is an article, but you can confirm every bit of it on line if you are inclined to do so. You are so driven by your hatred of Republicans that you would vote for the YOUR party, the party who instigated outsourcing to India. So you have THEM to thank for outsourcing your profession overseas and driving your wages into the ground.
Not being nasty - it's true. Her and Rush like their
saying something you think is incorrect. The FACT is --- she's a druggie!!
Anyone who would post rumors that are mean and nasty...
concerning a 16-year-old girl are mean-spirited. The dailykos is a swamp with no bottom, as someone so astutely said, and there are those here who prefer to wallow in it. So be it.
Sticks and stones, sticks and stones. And as to go away...you first.
|
