Something that has happened (not hypothetical)

[KJUN]

Just for the record......

I WAS upset that a presidential candidate (Bush) called a reporter a nasty name where everyone could hear it. I understood it was an accident, so I wa not mad about it. I took it as one person calling another member of the public something not nice. End of story, but I still felt it wasn't appropriate in that setting.

Also for the record......

i DID like how he handled it. No denials. No watering it down. Just an attitude of, "Yeah. I did it. Let's go on with the rest of our lives now." None of the backpedaling or trying to say something ELSE was meant.

"You can't survive without a functioning anus, so I was really stressing how IMPORTANT he was to our lives!" LOL.

 

[ForkedTung]

Palin, Emanuel. Pot, Kettle

Did she really just call for Rahm Emanuel to be fired because he allegedly used the term "ing retarded" to refer to fellow Democrats in a private meeting? Last summer? Did she really?

I don't like the term myself. I think it is offensive. I think Rahm Emanuel is offensive. But at least he's real. And he has now apologized. And at least he used the term metaphorically.

Palin, in contrast, called her own campaign prop "her retarded baby" in private, according to an eye-witness account from the father of her own grandson who lived in her house for months and knew her intimately. "I was just in shock the first time I heard it," Levi Johnston told CBS. Unlike Sarah Palin, Johnston has not been caught in multiple indisputable lies. I believe him over her. In fact, in any factual dispute, I believe anyone over her.

While I'm at it, does anyone actually believe that Palin's name for the child of miraculous provenance was found by her deep knowledge of ancient Norse as she claims in her magical-realism novel, "Going Rogue"? I mean, seriously. She knows about as much ancient Norse as she does English grammar. It's as credible as the idea that she gave a speech while having contractions, several hours after going into labor, as she claims in her novel. It's as credible as her amazing journey in labor with a special needs child on a plane where the flight attendants, according to the Anchorage Daily News, did not even notice she was pregnant. It's as credible as any number of indisputable self-serving, unbalanced lies that she has told in the public record for years.

The medical term for Down Syndrome is Trisomy-21 or Trisomy-g. It is often shortened in medical slang to Tri-g.

Is it not perfectly possible that the very name given to this poor child, being reared by Bristol, is another form of mockery of his condition, along with the "retarded baby" tag? And does the way in which this poor child was hauled around the country on a book tour, being dragged out in front of flash photographs in the middle of the night, barely clothed, suggest someone who actually cares for children with special needs, or rather sees them as a way to keep the spotlight on her?

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/02/palin-emanuel-pot-kettle.html


"They are kooks, so I agree with Rush Limbaugh," she said, when read a quote of Limbaugh calling liberal groups "retards." "Rush Limbaugh was using satire .... I didn't hear Rush Limbaugh calling a group of people whom he did not agree with 'f-ing retards,' S. Palin.
True he just called a group of people he did not agree with 'retards' left the 'f-ing' out.

 

[Drizzt80]

Since we're going on record. I don't like the word, and feel it's as offensive as the n-word, regardless of who's mouth they come out of.

D80

 

[tyflier]

I wasn't bothered by Bush's words one bit.

I'm confused, however...it must be my lack of a degree, 'cause this just don't make sense to me...

Bush uses inappropriate language during a public appearance to insult a person, than later apologizes for it. It's called "a slip-up" and a "mistake", and his apology is taken as honest and true, and we are expected to move on with our lives. OK. So far so good. No confusion yet. I agree 100% with the way it is handled...

Skip ahead a couple years...

A Democratic supporter is overheard in a private meeting, referring to an idea inappropriately, and later apologizes for it. This man is evil, full of hatred, a hate-mongering socialist hell bent on destroying anyone with a developmental disability. OK...now I'm starting to get just a little confused. I'm fairly used to this sort of two-faced, double standard, especially from the people I am hearing it from. But still it seems odd to me...

Than read the quotes that ForkedTongue just posted. Seems the lady starting all the brouhaha over the use of an inappropriate word to describe an idea, uses the same word to describe her own child. Not only that, but when a fellow conservative she respects uses the exact same word to describe a generalized group of people...she agrees with him.

OK...now I'm really confused. Maybe it's my lack of education, or my lazy, never-go-to-work, just lay-around-all-day-and-steal-KJUN's-money attitude, but I can't find any sense or logic in this to save my life...

 

[LBoz]

I or my lazy, never-go-to-work, just lay-around-all-day- .

Ok, Ty...now you're really pissin' me off. You're raising a daughter, right? So that means that you have at least one full-time job. Stop selling us parents short. Don't make me report you!!!

 

[KJUN]

Ok, Ty...now you're really pissin' me off. You're raising a daughter, right? So that means that you have at least one full-time job. Stop selling us parents short. Don't make me report you!!!

Having a child doesn't make one a parent. I'm sure everyone here IS a great parent, but just donating 23 chromosomes (normally.....plus mtDNA if you are the mom) doesn't automatically make one a parent. My neighbors on one side would be EXCELLENT examples of gamete donors, but horrible examples of parents.

 

[KJUN]

The difference is that Bush was talking about an individual he didn't like (and wasn't even holding ANY federal office at the time) while The F-ret comment came from someone in a federal position used to describe ideas held by MANY Americans. He was de facto calling all people who shared those ideas the same thing. He was calling us - his BOSSES - such an inappropriate name. Go ahead and try to deny that he wasn't calling people that held those ideas "stupid," but I suspect you won't even believe such a denial yourself. Of course, let's assume he didn't mean that. Let's assume he meant it was a dumb idea from people he considered smarter than him. Just lets assume that. It would be the FIRST time the Obama administration wasn't treating Americans like fodder for the meat grinder. What difference would it make if they didn't mean it this ONE time? None to me......and NONE to the voters in 2010 and 2012, I suspect. We'll see, eh?

Maybe it's my lack of education, or my lazy, never-go-to-work, just lay-around-all-day-and-steal-KJUN's-money attitude, but I can't find any sense or logic in this to save my life...

Well, I'd replace "KJUN" with "the working class" since the damage to the economy are the taxes on all of us - especially small business owners and others that HIRE the rest of us - and not just the monies extorted from me personally by the .gov.

...OR you could have typed a lot less and just said "socialist." It means pretty much the same thing.

 

[reptile_jones]

Umm...what? Sorry, I got distracted!

That's thinking with your dip stick......JIMMY!!

 

[LBoz]

Having a child doesn't make one a parent. I'm sure everyone here IS a great parent, but just donating 23 chromosomes (normally.....plus mtDNA if you are the mom) doesn't automatically make one a parent. My neighbors on one side would be EXCELLENT examples of gamete donors, but horrible examples of parents.

Not HAVING a child, KJ, but RAISING a child. Two different things altogether. Chris, as far as I've seen from his postings and photos, is doing an excellent job RAISING his child. If anyone dares to suggest that it's an easy job, I'd love to let them live one day in the shoes of a parent.

 

[KJUN]

Don't confuse "raising" with "raising properly," "raising well," or......... I still think many people that "raise" a child don't do what most of us would consider parenting. Again, reference my neighbors. I guess they are technically raising their offspring, but I wouldn't call them parents by any stretch of the definition.

Yes, I recognize that bad parenting is still "parenting" to some. I'm not arguing that point. I'll say you can still have an offspring in your home for MANY years and never parent them at all - not even bad parenting. I stand by my original post and intent.

As I already pretty much stated, I wasn't referencing ANYONE other than my neighbors - not even Chris (even if I HAD anything bad I wanted to say which I don't, I wouldn't risk getting banned just for making a cheap, unnecessary, shot at someone like that). Considering one of the neighbors was arrested in my yard last weekend, I have no problem admitting I don't like them. Oh, well. Barb wire was invented for a reason.

 

[ComoxCorn]

I'm starting to get it. If you have a bushel basket full of degrees, you can produce more hot air than those without degrees.
I can't help but sit here and laugh at how ridiculous this thread has become. We all get it that the "R" word offends some people, but, it's hardly worth all the hooplah. What I am really seeing is that this isn't about the "R" word at all. It's just another political thread started by the same old same old to draw a few chosen people into an arguement so they can continue on with their childish name calling that has gone on in other threads that were locked. Nobody's lookin' too good here. LOL

 

[tyflier]

I am so confused. This thread is going in as many directions as "Did You Know...".

Where's the little smiley with the dude slapping his forward, saying, "D'OH!"?

 

[mike17l]

Kronk only pawn in game of life. Have something to do with where choo-choo go.

Dean, its Mongo, "Mongo only pawn in game of life."

25 pages, and no David? Strange, because I thought that he liked creating threads to stir people up (according to many people, not myself). Wasn't he banned for posting threads that constantly cause controversy? Or was it that he was a kid, so that made him easier to target. Again, I'm not implying that there are others, not named David, who ONLY start trollish threads, controversial threads, etc... or am I???

25 pages? only 7 over here.

I guess I have thick skin, too? Neither remark hurt me, didn't feel a thing. Words.
Would we rather they hold their tongue so we never know who they really are?

No, I would rather they speak out, let us know who they are, and then we (their boss/the American people) remove them.

A Democratic supporter is overheard in a private meeting, referring to an idea inappropriately, and later apologizes for it. This man is evil, full of hatred, a hate-mongering socialist hell bent on destroying anyone with a developmental disability. OK...now I'm starting to get just a little confused. I'm fairly used to this sort of two-faced, double standard, especially from the people I am hearing it from. But still it seems odd to me...

Well it took ol dead fish many months to apologize, but that does not make him a socialist, the fact that he wants to take from people who have worked hard to get what they got, and then give that to people who desire nothing more than sit and suck at the proverbial .gov teat makes him a socialist.

Than read the quotes that ForkedTongue just posted. Seems the lady starting all the brouhaha over the use of an inappropriate word to describe an idea, uses the same word to describe her own child. Not only that, but when a fellow conservative she respects uses the exact same word to describe a generalized group of people...she agrees with him.

I don't think he should have used it, but I guess you probably missed the satire part anyway.

OK...now I'm really confused. Maybe it's my lack of education, or my lazy, never-go-to-work, just lay-around-all-day-and-steal-KJUN's-money attitude, but I can't find any sense or logic in this to save my life...

Like KJ said, you could replace much of that with "socialistic ideals".

 

[diamondlil]

I don't think some people have a good grasp of what socialist ideals are, being as the community as a whole would support those in need. So those who do work hard and earn money then give a proportion in taxes to support others. 'From each according to his means, to each according to his needs'.

 

[KJUN]

Oh, no. Many of us understand how wonderful; socialism, communism, and the like are IN THEORY. They are great ideas - like Santa Claus. In practice, though, it doesn't exist. Those ideals are as imaginary as Santa!

I've said it many times in my life, but I can say it again: "I would be the world's biggest communist if it worked in practice like it does in theory." In practice, some parts of the community abuse the system and don't try top be contributers. In practice, there is no monetary reason for any members to work to thweir best ability. If all you get is the average (taking it to its intended goal whether admitted by all or not), the top only needs to WORK to the average...and not exceed. Why work harder?

'From each according to his means, to each according to his needs'.

In practice, it is more like, "For each according to what he receives, from each is that work given....OR LESS." The less refers to those that abuse the system, and THIS is why socialism doesn't advance us. It brings us down to the LEAST common denominator instead of driving us higher.

Which that said, some of the best machinery ever HAS been invented by communists (harder to find the same example from socialists) who believe in that ideal: talk to Simonov or Kalashnikova . Two great communist inventors. Of course, socialism and communism are very different. Communists force their beliefs on others. Socialists coerce and lie to get to the same results.

 

[tsst]

... Which that said, some of the best machinery ever HAS been invented by communists (harder to find the same example from socialists) who believe in that ideal: talk to Simonov or Kalashnikova . Two great communist inventors. ...

Even communism is not very inventive in it's true sense. A fair share of the communist inventiveness was born out of dictatorial or hierarchical fear, not out of true communist ideology. The old 'you make me a better jet airplane or better bomb or I will kill your family' type of ideals (The Purge). :shrugs:

 

[KJUN]

I really don't know about Kalashnikova's motivation (AK-47), but Simonov (SKS) did it because he DID believe in the ideals. Both are excellent weapons, and both can be made CHEAP, FAST, and FIRE under almost any conditions. Both have killed a LOT of people in their own country and in other countries.

No doubt lots of communist inventiveness came about because of threats. Simonov's case was different. However, my point was that both of those guys invented weapons of war to spread the communist ideals by force: follow or die. Granted, not all inventions from those types of governments were weaponry - not by a long shot.

However, I think there is a STRONG case to support the idea that communist countries only advance to keep up with their enemies (i.e., the "free" countries). Otherwise, they don't WANT change. Change may result in a restless population, and that results in a potential change in government. That's NOT what they want. They want everything to remain static...with them in charge of the sheeple. If there weren't the free countries to force them to keep advancing, there would be MUCH less advancement worldwide. Anyway, that case can be argued, and I personally think the evidence supports it!

 

[tyflier]

I really don't know about Kalashnikova's motivation (AK-47), but Simonov (SKS) did it because he DID believe in the ideals. Both are excellent weapons, and both can be made CHEAP, FAST, and FIRE under almost any conditions. Both have killed a LOT of people in their own country and in other countries.

No doubt lots of communist inventiveness came about because of threats. Simonov's case was different. However, my point was that both of those guys invented weapons of war to spread the communist ideals by force: follow or die. Granted, not all inventions from those types of governments were weaponry - not by a long shot.

However, I think there is a STRONG case to support the idea that communist countries only advance to keep up with their enemies (i.e., the "free" countries). Otherwise, they don't WANT change. Change may result in a restless population, and that results in a potential change in government. That's NOT what they want. They want everything to remain static...with them in charge of the sheeple. If there weren't the free countries to force them to keep advancing, there would be MUCH less advancement worldwide. Anyway, that case can be argued, and I personally think the evidence supports it!

So...you run around here hurling the insult "socialist" at anyone and everyone that disagrees with you yet...you believe that the theory and ideals of both Socialism and Communism are something that you support, it's just the practice that bothers you?

That actually makes a lot of sense. You seemed to support GW stripping the American peole of their basic civil rights in the name of protection. That didn't seem to bother you at all. You evidently suppotred McCain over Obama, even though you yourself have to admit that electing McCain President would have been as bad opr worse than electing GW to a third term.

I've always known that you were a socialist at heart KJUN. Your greed makes you a capitalist, but your heart, soul, and your desire to control everyone around you is pure communist...

 

[mike17l]

So Chris, let me get this right.

Earlier you said that morality should not be legislated, which I agree with.

But you think that redistribution of wealth should be legislated. The rich should be forced to help the poor. While I agree that they should help, I think it is absurd that they should be forced to help. Helping the poor is a morality issue and as such, should not be legislated.

 

[Roy Munson]

Dean, its Mongo, "Mongo only pawn in game of life."

I meant no offense to Mongo by paraphrasing him. I like Mongo. And Mongo like candy.