Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » R. Debate (Page 3)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4   
Author Topic: R. Debate
Fenring
Member
Member # 6953

 - posted      Profile for Fenring   Email Fenring       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The one issue about ISIS where Sanders and Clinton disagreed strongly is where Sanders believes establishing a U.S. no-fly zone is crazy, while Clinton wants to do it and use some muscle. Sanders' point is that to do so when Russia is welcome in Syria and currently flying sorties is that the U.S. would have to be willing to shoot down Russian planes and potentially initiate a war with Russia. Sounds crazy to me too.

The other highlight of the debate was when Dickerson brought up campaign finance and asked Hillary how the people could trust her to really take on Wall Street when they were her primary contributors. Her initial answer was that they already know they can trust her and not to worry about it. She said she intends to go after them even harder than Sanders would, and if need be would break up the big banks. Sanders responded by saying that he's never seen a politician - ever - who took contributions and wasn't beholden to his/her financiers. He said "Now maybe they're dumb and don't know what they're getting, but I don't think so." Also skeptical, Dickerson asker her again how one could reasonably believe she would really go after the very groups backing her, and her answer to this was a bizarre reference to the fact that women support her, and that she helped New York in the wake of 9-11. This answer was puzzling to all involved.

Posts: 1636 | Registered: Oct 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The no-fly zone is a non-issue, since Assad only flies few military missions. Most of the carnage is done by ground-based weapons. As for shooting down Russian planes, we and Russia have an agreement on how to recognize each other in the air. In other words, it would be hard to tell the difference before and after a no-fly policy goes into effect.

I thought more about the GOP candidates, I now think that Carson may be the wackiest, but others aren't far behind. The others variously propose doing everything and nothing, from assembling yet another international coalition to send in a massive ground force as Carson does, having NATO declare war, or even declaring war ourselves.

Surprisingly, Rand Paul introduced a motion in the Senate to make that declaration. He claims that whatever it is that Obama is or isn't doing is illegal and that the 2002 UAMF no longer applies. Hillary hedged the other night and said that it does, but she wants Congress to pass another one and that she would support it (as opposed to just voting for it now and regretting it later, the former aspect of which she can't do now).

The unfortunate bottom line in the debate is that the people who think that the US can go into the Mideastern countries and wipe out ISIS are crazy, and the loudest voices on any stage calling for that are all GOP candidates for President. But assuming they're not completely bonkers, what happens afterward? We would have to maintain a massive military presence with a large contingent of ground troops for decades. McCain espoused that strategy for Iraq back in 2001 and complained bitterly when we didn't plan to keep 100,000 ground forces in Iraq "indefinitely," as he says we do in Korea, Japan and Germany. The differences between those countries and Iraq are profound, making his recommendation then almost comically absurd, and any similar proposal now for Syria or elsewhere equally so.

As many other thoughtful commentators have reasoned, I don't place the blame for the rise of ISIS on Obama. I don't even claim that W is the ultimate cause of the upwelling of extremism in the region. He was the trigger, though, and I believe history will blame him for any and all terrorism coming out of that region since the misguided and mismanaged 2003 invasion he is responsible for.

[ November 16, 2015, 09:23 AM: Message edited by: AI Wessex ]

Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Fenring
Member
Member # 6953

 - posted      Profile for Fenring   Email Fenring       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I think it's generally agreed upon that with Saddam still in power ISIS could never have gotten off the ground. Also if the U.S. were to ever decide to support Assad's regime (or had agreed to Russia's previously brokered deal where Assad would step down, which America rejected) that ISIS could be beaten back out of Syria easily. The reason no one can deal with ISIS is that no one, except allegedly Russia, is even trying. Their targets are too convenient for others to even want to stop them; the rest is empty rhetoric and drum beating.
Posts: 1636 | Registered: Oct 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I don't see any way the US can "beat back" any home-grown cultural-religious-ethnic militaristic movement in that region. We could achieve a short-term military victory but would have to become a perpetual occupying force in order to keep it in place. If we've learned anything over the past 6 decades, it is that.
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Fenring
Member
Member # 6953

 - posted      Profile for Fenring   Email Fenring       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
ISIS is holding territory. You can't make a group that hides in the mountains vanish, but if they hold territory you can take it away and remove their infrastructure. If they're being funded and supplied that may continue, but they would be limited to guerilla action instead of conquest. But yes, ongoing security in that region requires local nations to be able to police their own borders, which in turn means not undermining those regimes on a continual basis.
Posts: 1636 | Registered: Oct 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ultimately ISIS was created by Bush Senior. Junior only helped it spread faster.

Al Qaeda, by its own account, was a reaction to something CARTER -- the camp David accords.

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
And all were the result of the WWI dissolution of the Ottoman Empire.
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Or you could go back to Abraham and Hagar, which is the scriptural doctrinal underpinning of the ISIS Muslim male's inalienable right to rape the slaves that he "holds with his right hand",whatever that that means
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Sure, since we're talking about a bizarre aspect of innate behavior, let's go back to our pre-simian ancestors. The moral part of our minds (most of ours, anyway) call them evil because we disavow the biological parts of our nature that allow us to do such things.

It's notable that mostly Republican Presidential candidates and Republican elected officials are now calling for closing our national borders to people coming from Syria, allowing in only Christians, 25 Republican Governors say they won't allow Syrian refuges in their states, expelling Syrians who have already arrived (including Cruz whose new-found policy would not allow a 3-year old Syrian orphan to remain in the country) or even in one case calling for state borders to deny passage to people who look Syrian.

It's hard to separate our emotional responses from more critical ones. We know what happened there could happen here. In fact, it happens over and over, but because the perpetrator(s) are thought to be members of our American "tribe" the very same people who rise up to protect those killers' right to buy and carry lethal weapons around with them are moved to anger and outrage by what happened in France, a country they might not normally express much fondness for. And let's not forget that there's a Democrat in the White House, which drives a lot of this backlash reaction. Politics inflames a lot of this emotion, and vice versa.

In that regard, things are already bad and they're going to get worse. Whether we'll actually see any terrorism on US soil is another matter entirely.

[ November 17, 2015, 07:16 AM: Message edited by: AI Wessex ]

Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
What do you find "innate" about using and expanding the myth of Abraham with Hagar to justify modern atrocities?
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
That innate biological characteristics span all of human behavior, including the ability to carry out this kind of atrocity.
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
including Cruz whose new-found policy would not allow a 3-year old Syrian orphan to remain in the country
My mistake, it was Christie.
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ben Carson for Mayor, maybe...maybe not:
quote:
Ben Carson’s remarks on foreign policy have repeatedly raised questions about his grasp of the subject, but never more seriously than in the past week, when he wrongly asserted that China had intervened militarily in Syria and then failed, on national television, to name the countries he would call on to form a coalition to fight the Islamic State.

Faced with increasing scrutiny about whether Mr. Carson, who leads in some Republican presidential polls, was capable of leading American foreign policy, two of his top advisers said in interviews that he had struggled to master the intricacies of the Middle East and national security and that intense tutoring was having little effect.

“Nobody has been able to sit down with him and have him get one iota of intelligent information about the Middle East,” said Duane R. Clarridge, a top adviser to Mr. Carson on terrorism and national security. He also said Mr. Carson needed weekly conference calls briefing him on foreign policy so “we can make him smart.”

But I thought he had those big frontal lobes:
quote:
GOP presidential hopeful Ben Carson argued on Sunday that anyone with "big frontal lobes" could see that the U.S. must not accept refugees from Syria.

Following recent terrorist attacks in Paris, Carson vowed to reverse President Barack Obama's policy of accepting up to 10,000 Syrian refugees.

"Bringing people into this country from that area of the world, I think, is a huge mistake," Carson opined to Fox News host Chris Wallace. "Because why wouldn't [ISIS] infiltrate [the refugees] with people who are ideologically opposed to us? It would be foolish for them not to do that."

"We should use our expertise and resources to help get them resettled -- over there -- and to support them over there," he said. "But to bring them here under these circumstances is a suspension of intellect."

"You know that the human brain has these big frontal lobes, as opposed to other animals, because we can engage in rational thought processing."

The former neurosurgeon noted that his advanced brain gave him the ability to "extract information from the past [and] present, process it, and project it into a plan."

Maybe...maybe not.
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
We should use our expertise and resources to help get them resettled -- over there...
I've seen a lot of this sentiment, along with people saying things like "Why don't we help our homeless vets before helping Syrians?"

So, okay, serious show of hands: who here believes that, if we did not accept Syrian refugees, we would allocate significant resources to finding homes for homeless veterans or providing meaningful aid and security to Syrian refugees in other countries not yet significantly threatened by ISIS?

Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
We should do all of those things, but the reality is that a lot of the people who don't want to allow Syrian refugees in the US would not raise a hand to do any of them.

[ November 18, 2015, 09:18 AM: Message edited by: AI Wessex ]

Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Headline yesterday:
quote:
Bobby Jindal Drops Out of GOP Race to the Disappointment of His Four Loyal Supporters

Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Fenring
Member
Member # 6953

 - posted      Profile for Fenring   Email Fenring       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Let's just say I would be nervous as hell having Dr. Ben "the stoner" Carson operating on my frontal lobes.
Posts: 1636 | Registered: Oct 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Today's dose of Carsonitis:
quote:
Ben Carson likened Syrian refugees fleeing the country’s bloody civil war and Islamic State violence to dogs on Thursday.

“For instance, you know, if there is a rabid dog running around your neighborhood, you’re probably not going to assume something good about that dog, and you’re probably gonna put your children out of the way,” Carson said. “Doesn’t mean that you hate all dogs by any stretch of the imagination.”

Continuing his analogy, the Republican presidential candidate said that screening refugees is like questioning how you protect your children, even though you love dogs and will call the Humane Society to take the dog away to reestablish a safe environment.

I'm beginning to think the only way to treat the symptoms he causes - head-banging, Tourette's like outbursts, possible eruptions of stabbing motions - is a good dose of single malt scotch. I'm feeling better now, but I am sure I will need more to get through this...<whimper>
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Fenring
Member
Member # 6953

 - posted      Profile for Fenring   Email Fenring       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Watching Carson debate with Putin would be like watching Ren and Stimpy (you get only one guess about who Stimpy is).
Posts: 1636 | Registered: Oct 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
There should be a Carson tracker like a storm tracker so we can monitor the wind gustiness as he moves around the country. In just the last few days there has been a sudden and inexplicable bluster spotted in several locations. Someone who used to post on Ornery but is now long gone would call his spreading of his message crap dusting, dry, hot and poisons the soil of conversation.
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ok, he's definitely turning into a category 6 windstorm, knocking down Constitutional rights and guarantees wherever he touches down. Today's toll:
quote:
The United States should have a database on every immigrant who enters the country, Ben Carson said Friday, addressing comments from Donald Trump that he would not rule out creating a registry of Muslims to track for terrorist activity. At the same time, he called Trump's call for tracking and targeting Muslims specifically as something that would be "setting a pretty dangerous precedent."

"Well, I think we should have a database on everybody who comes into this country," the retired neurosurgeon told reporters at a media availability in Concord, New Hampshire, after filing for the state's Feb. 1 primary election. It was unclear whether Carson was referring to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, which has been a component of the Department of Homeland Security since its founding in 2003.

Pressed further, Carson said he hopes that "we already have a database on every citizen who is already here."

"If we don't, we're doing a very poor job," he said.

As far as what he would like to see in such a database, Carson said he wants the country “to be able to know who they are."

He continued, "I want to know where they came from, I want to know where they’re going and why they’re here.”

“That’s already being done,” a reporter interjected.

“If you want to add more things to it, we can talk about it and what the rationale is for it," Carson said.

"Well, the database you're describing is already in place," another reporter responded.

“And that’s what I’m saying," Carson added. "That’s what we should have.”

Asked whether he would support or condemn Trump's comments to have stricter scrutiny of Muslims arriving in the U.S. from places like Iraq and Syria, Carson said he would not.

Pity the defenseless English language that takes a body blow every time he opens his mouth, too.
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The 911 hijackers certainly did not come here as refugees. I think we obviously need better scrutiny of student visas from Islamist-rich places.

And I am disgusted that we have allowed immigration and naturalization of folks that think Khomeini was a holy man. Imo such nimrods should not even be here on visa. It's literally impossible for someone with such beliefs to honestly make the oath of naturalization

But refugees are already scrutinized quite enough.

[ November 20, 2015, 05:27 PM: Message edited by: Pete at Home ]

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
" I doubt if there has ever been a society that has been without strong and young people eager to experiment with homicide homicide, provided no very awful penalties are attached to it."

-Mother Night, by Kurt Vonnegut

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Your daily dose, Carson on racially motivated shootings of blacks by police officers after being shown a video about the Tamir Rice killing:
quote:
“One policy that I would encourage is whenever an instance like this happens, the very fact that I’ve only heard about one of them but there’s a whole bunch of them you’re saying, that’s wrong,” he said. “We should all know about this and they should be made into a big deal, not only for the community but for the police department.”

“When you are given the authority and you are given a gun, that carries a tremendous responsibility and anybody who abuses that should be the dredge of the earth,” he continued.

Before seeing the video, he said he was skeptical that a bias and even that such shootings occurred, so I'm assuming this is a new revelation for him. The article contains a link to a list of police shootings so far this year (873) with details about the 30 killings of unarmed black men and women.

Carson's fact free rampage across the public consciousness continues unabated, though there are some signals that a slow return to a more normal climate of discussion may be coming.

[ November 22, 2015, 08:12 AM: Message edited by: AI Wessex ]

Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Not relevant to this thread, but since I have no comment about Carson today (feel the Ben!), I figured I'd add this other bit of irrelevant news.

A poll asked people if they approve of Obama pardoning two turkeys for Thanksgiving instead of the usual one. 11% of self-identified Republicans said yes compared to 59% of Democrats.

The man can't get a break.

Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
And if Bush junior had did this, how do you reckon the poll would have run? [Smile]
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
One hopes it would have been determined by how relieved the turkey looked when it got word.
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I lifted this from another thread, as my comments are more relevant here:
quote:
quote:
Originally posted by Pete at Home:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by AI Wessex:
I don't believe he thinks there is a difference. Conservatives (and some liberals, but fewer) don't make such fine distinctions, else why would 89% of Republicans disapprove of Obama "pardoning" a second turkey?

Because it's wasteful, entirely lacking in creativity, and conveys no message to the American people other than Obama is bigger than Jesus. Of course those that already believe in the Obasiah like the gesture and those that don't dont
I read a lot of news and commentary about American domestic politics, governance and foreign policy. Upon reflection, Pete's response to my post comes about as close to a Palin-esque disdain for Obama (and by extension, any Democrat or liberal who aligns with him on ideas or policies) as I've seen anywhere. If you're slipping behind on your Palin intake, catch the video of her recent appearance on Seth Meyers' show and try to parse what she says. You can't possibly reason with someone who believes what Pete wrote, and it's clear that there are millions of conservative Republicans who would nod their heads in solid agreement with him.
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
For hell'sake, Al, you are the one making noise about how awful conservatives are for not creaming in their pants over Barry pardoning an extra turkey. I only got a turkey this year by forgoing half my meds for the month, since federal policy denies me insurance until 2017. Pray tell why should I be happy about Barry "pardoning" 2 turkeys rather than one?

If this gesture ticked you let them eat cake lefties in your Lilly white gated communities, consider that not all share your privileges.

You have seen me strongly defend Obama on a number of incidents and policies, praise his leadership as to some specific incidents. But because I don't treat Barry like the Messiah, and disdain folks that reverence him like the god of hope and change, you me with Sarah Palin.

Al Wessex, may you get stuck with Palin on a desert Island.

[ November 26, 2015, 09:27 AM: Message edited by: Pete at Home ]

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
[You seem to have deleted the post I'm responding to here, but the replacement post isn't much better. Back to the sexual imagery, I see. BTW, if you keep editing the post to layer on new outrage, I won't know exactly what to respond to.]
----
Original post: My apologies, but I thought you said that by pardoning a second turkey Obama conveys a message to the American people that he is bigger than Jesus. Wait -- you *did* say that. Perhaps you meant Jesus Alou or you don't believe what you said??? Calling your comments Palin-esque addresses the odd juxtaposition of the reasons you gave to object to what he did. Where does the Reagan comparison come into this? Using Obama's baby name doesn't demean or diminish him, does it?

[ November 26, 2015, 09:29 AM: Message edited by: AI Wessex ]

Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Fenring
Member
Member # 6953

 - posted      Profile for Fenring   Email Fenring       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Al, why are you trolling Pete? He obviously meant that it's a pure PR move and means nothing, and those who don't like him obviously won't be interested in nursery rhyme propaganda (look how kind he is to the turkeys). Incidentally I see the tradition of pardoning a turkey when millions of chickens are eaten daily to be some kind of really dark humor.
Posts: 1636 | Registered: Oct 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Al. I cannot say why Barry's minions attributed that bigger than Jesus move to Barry, but do you really think that's something this President came up with? I give Barry more credit than that. Clinton might spend days taking this sort of crap over with advisors but Barry spend his nonessential time with his wife and children. Because while he's a middling president, he is a good man.

"Using Obama's baby name doesn't demean or diminish him, does it?"

I don't think it does. Not unless you think that it demeans a president for citizens to suppose that president is accountable to them.

[ November 26, 2015, 09:43 AM: Message edited by: Pete at Home ]

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by AI Wessex:
Back to the sexual imagery, I see.

I had to reread my own post and can only guess at what you thought was a sexual image. Assuming you don't have a thing for turkeys, I can only think you meant Sarah Palin. And you were the one who brought her up. When I cursed you to isolation with Sarah Palin, sex was the last thing on my Ming. If the idea of sharing Geography with Palin is a sexual image for you, that says more about you than it does me.
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Fenring:
Al, why are you trolling Pete? He obviously meant that it's a pure PR move and means nothing, and those who don't like him obviously won't be interested in nursery rhyme propaganda (look how kind he is to the turkeys). Incidentally I see the tradition of pardoning a turkey when millions of chickens are eaten daily to be some kind of really dark humor.

Trolling? I'd say directly challenging. Who really imagines that Obama is responding to his faithful minions by pardoning a second turkey? FWIW, the tongue-in-cheek tradition of giving a Presidential pardon to a turkey at Thanksgiving goes back to Lincoln and has been performed as a mock tribute at the WH since at least Truman's days, if not going back to the late 1800's. I wouldn't have imagined anyone would raise the political correctness objection, but we live in strange times.
quote:
I had to reread my own post and can only guess at what you thought was a sexual image.
You said something like "creaming in their pants" to describe somebody's reaction. Sexual, no?
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Quite right. Apologies.
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I didn't raise the objection. You provided the fact, and then cited some sort of push survey that shoved the fact in voter faces and solicited a reaction. Then you judged them for how they felt when the privacy of their homes was invaded with a push poll about pardoning a second turkey.

L
Lincoln wasn't trying to start a "tradition." He was trying to divert Americans from judging condemning and hating each other. Which is the exact opposite of what these PR schlepped did when they concocted this better than Jesus ritual, accompanied by a push poll to prove that, gasp, lefties ate nicer people than conservatives. Lincoln Wept.

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Then you judged them for how they felt when the privacy of their homes was invaded with a push poll about pardoning a second turkey.
Then why didn't Democrats in the same poll react with the same disdain? (Hint: You don't need a hint)
quote:
Lincoln wasn't trying to start a "tradition." He was trying to divert Americans from judging condemning and hating each other. Which is the exact opposite of what these PR schlepped did when they concocted this better than Jesus ritual, accompanied by a push poll to prove that, gasp, lefties ate nicer people than conservatives. Lincoln Wept.
No one who does something in response to a specific circumstance is likely to think of themselves as starting a significant tradition that requires all of his successors to play along. I don't think the "tradition" began with Lincoln, but he was the first to make that kind of gesture. It was actually popularized by a turkey farmer who delivered turkeys to the WH every year for a couple of decades. Then it fell out of fashion until Truman came along. I think he was presented with two turkeys, which he cooked and ate. The first time Kennedy pardoned a turkey it had a sign around its neck that said "Good Eating, Mr. President", and he decided to let it go. Maybe he was too squeamish to look his dinner in the eye before it felt the rapture. Maybe that's the religious connection you're looking for.

I don't get where the Jesus connection comes from and why you keep bringing it up. Thanksgiving is *the* secular holiday virtually everyone in the country recognizes and celebrates. It's like claiming that if Obama honored mothers on Mother's Day he's usurping Mary's privilege.

[ November 27, 2015, 08:26 AM: Message edited by: AI Wessex ]

Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
What Jesus conbection? "Bigger than Jesus" is an allusion to Beatlemania. Did you sleep through the 60s and 70s?
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
OK, I'll buy that. Wasn't obvious or clear on reflection, but I'm able to go to my reserves and make that leap [Smile] .
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pete at Home:

"Using Obama's baby name doesn't demean or diminish him, does it?"

I don't think it does. Not unless you think that it demeans a president for citizens to suppose that president is accountable to them.

That's a total non sequitur. You don't have to be rude to someone to hold them accountable.
Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1