Return to the Hot Topics Forum

 o
Go for the Throat!

Posted by mrskjun 9 (My Page) on
Tue, Jan 22, 13 at 8:47

'Obama Can Only Cement His Legacy If He Destroys the GOP'

Think this comes from Chris Matthews or Rachel Maddow? Nope, those words come from John Dickerson, Political Director at CBS, or MSM itself. "Go for the Throat", is an article written by Dickerson.

Seriously? Destroy one of the political parties and move to a dictatorship? Is this what the Democrats are about?


Follow-Up Postings:

 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Nonsense , the GOP doesn't need the President to do this.....they are doing it quite well all on their own.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

"....they are doing it quite well on their own." Ain't that the truth.

~Ann


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

  • Posted by ohiomom 3rdrockfromthesun (My Page) on
    Tue, Jan 22, 13 at 9:15

What is nonsense is that anyone would listen to a "talking head" who has nada to do with policy. They like to listen to themselves, and unfortunately people actually believe they are journalists. They are not.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

  • Posted by kwoods Cold z7 Long Is (My Page) on
    Tue, Jan 22, 13 at 9:18

".... and be sure to tune in next week for a special debt ceiling debate episode of .... As The Worm Turns..."


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

The speech didn't change any lives here. Hate goes on. Gotta love it!

Do any of you remember Obama's speech delivered at Notre Dame Commencement?


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

I know!!! It's amazing how Obama manipulated the Congressional Republican approval rating to the lowest in history!


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

The Political Director of CBS is unknown to most Americans and therefore can't be considered to "speak for" most Americans--heck, for any Americans. No one elected him or appointed him as speaker for the Democrats. He was uttering his own personal opinion that in no way reflects what any other Democrat was even thinking--though quite a few Democrats have been watching in amazement as the Republicans work so industriously to self-implode.

Maybe the real question is why would you or anyone else consider the word of a total unknown who has no connection with Democratic politics to be the voice of the Democrats? That is really a strange reaction.

Kate


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

This while so many republican legislatures seek to gerrymander & actually did in Virginia I think that's backwards K.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

This post is rated is but a single exclamation point.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

'Obama Can Only Cement His Legacy If He Destroys the GOP'

As Democrats across the nation cheer, CBS News officially calls for Obama to end the two party system.

Reason enough for me to find out which companies and corporations are putting money into CBS News coffers, when they know it is out to disenfranchise conservative American voters.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Hoot!!! (notice the three exclamation points)


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Worked for Mussolini didn't it?


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Detailed chronological analysis of Joe Biden's golfing history wearing thin already?


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Well if their throats get in the way of the US progress with obstruction and do not want to progress so be it.

Our government was founded on for the people by the people. There was an election of who should lead the country. The Republican leaders have said they want the President to lead. So he said he is ready to lead.

The question should be "Do they want to follow?" If not. Do not say you want a leader. If you are not ready to follow you will get your throat stepped on with the millions that are running to follow because you are running in the wrong direction.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

nik--Democrats across the nation were NOT cheering this unknown CBS Political Director's statement. They were cheering because their candidate won the election and Democrats across America are ecstatic! Just as you would have been if Romney had won. (but he didn't)

You are over-reacting again. I assure you, there is no Democratic plot or secret meetings about how to completely destroy the Republicans--though I sometimes wonder if Republicans aren't trying (but failing miserably) to destroy the Democratic Party.

Kate


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

marquest, the government was founded for ALL the people. There is a reason for division of powers. Yes, the president should lead, but he should lead according to what the people want. And it's not just his agenda, or yours. We send representatives to Washington to represent us all. Not just one party or another. Republicans control the house, there are 30 republican governors. We are not just one party or the other, and all should be represented by the president. But this president doesn't seem to understand that. He is the very reason that this country is so polarized and divisive, and that is a shame, because he could have brought the country together at a time in history when his leadership is so important. It would have been a great legacy for him.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

  • Posted by vgkg 7-Va Tidewater (My Page) on
    Tue, Jan 22, 13 at 10:43

Mussolini?
What, Hitler & Stalin out of vogue?

Obama doesn't need to go for the throat, the repubs are wrapping their own hands around it and squeezing hard. Of course if the GOP dies from suicide it will be blamed on the msm and Obama. The real culprit of the GOP demise is 20+ years Fox news, Limbaugh, and other similar rage outlets painting themselves into an unsustainable corner. GOPers always shy away from taking responsibility for it's own actions.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

but he should lead according to what the people want.

Hoot!

Aren't presidential elections held to determine what the people want?

He is the very reason that this country is so polarized and divisive

Double hoot!!


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

He is the very reason that this country is so polarized and divisive

Nonsense. This country was polarized long before Obama. Don't try to pretend we were all singing kumbaya under Bush/Cheney.

Unjustified fear, lies and prejudice have made it worse just like what this op is based on.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

He is the very reason that this country is so polarized and divisive


The "just say no to anything the President proposes even if it is a Republican idea" is the very reason that this country is so polarized and divisive.

Unclear why you think the President wants to exclude Republicans from women's rights, civil rights, gay/lesbian rights, elderly rights, health care rights, etc.

Does anyone remember a speech of his where he advocated excluding Republicans from all these rights?

I was under the impression the President intended these rights to apply to ALL Americans. Was I wrong?

Kate


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

marquest, the government was founded for ALL the people

What is the point of an election if you do not accept the leader that was elected if you believe in our Democracy?

If you do not believe in the Democracy we will not have a Leader we will have a dictator. It seems that is the choice that the Republicans want to choose. If you say the elected Leader of the Free World should not express.....

That we as a country do not leave our vulnerable to suffer
We do not care for the least of thee
Equality for all regardless of color, financial standing, who they love

That is division to you? It is not my feeling that hate unites. If hate unites leave me out.

He is the very reason that this country is so polarized and divisive

Can you explain what the President said in his speech that was divisive?


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Can you explain what the President said in his speech that was divisive?

Marquest, do we really have to explain this to you?

President Obama was elected in 2008 on a platform that included health care reform. He proceeded to encourage Congress to develop legislation for health care reform. The Democrats on the Hill put a reform package together, whose process the GOP effectively boycotted, and it was passed with the help of some defectors from the GOP. President Obama was re-elected in 2012. Obviously he has strong-armed the Republicans into a stance of non-cooperation, opposition to reform, and a failure to offer a viable alternative. Who could ever forget that he actively recruited the extremist Tea Party members. Being so brilliant, I also bet that President Obama also covertly crafted the GOP position against women's and LGBT rights, and scapegoating immigrants - especially Latinos - as being the ruin of the country.

Never, never trust a Marxist, Muslim, Kenyan-born, anti-colonialist Democrat.



How anyone who has ever given a second of consideration to the various paranoid fantasies surrounding President Obama - pals with terrorists, not a citizen, anti-colonialist desiring to bring the U.S. to ruin - can have the nerve to assert that he has been divisive is beyond my powers of comprehension.

Or maybe it's simply trolling.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

  • Posted by momj47 7A..was 6B (My Page) on
    Tue, Jan 22, 13 at 11:31

The President doesn't have to destroy the Republican Party, they will do it themselves. They are well on their way to becoming completely irrelevant to most Americans. And they have nobody to blame but themselves. No matter how they try to twist and spin it, they are their own worst enemy.

We can all sit and watch.

Of course there will be a tiny group, off in some corner, who thinks the GOP still matters, but they'll be ignored, too.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Gee are we becoming egalitarian after the republican loss?


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Political Director at CBS = all Democrats.

This is what conservatives think

This post was edited by david52 on Tue, Jan 22, 13 at 11:56


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

dublin"""""""No one elected him or appointed him as speaker for the Democrats. He was uttering his own personal opinion that in no way reflects what any other Democrat was even thinking"

So, the next time a Republican/Conservative comes out with a stupid statement please remember that No one appointed him as speaker for the Republicans/Conservatives. He was uttering his own personal opinion that in no way reflects what any other Republican/Conservative was even thinking".

david""""""Political Director at CBS = all Democrats. This is what conservatives think."

Really??? Of course no one on HT has ever insinuated that FOX = all Republicans/Conservatives or that all Republicans/Conservatives would have no opinions of their own if it wasn't for FOX. No, of course not.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Gotta go with "trolling" on this one, Vannah Nancy.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

I assure you, there is no Democratic plot or secret meetings about how to completely destroy the Republicans

Even if that is what the Democrats wanted to do, it would not be necessary. They are handling that just fine by themselves. No help needed from outsiders.

Funny...when a democrat is President, he's supposed to do what the GOP members in Congress want. But when a Republican is President, he has a mandate to do whatever he wants.

Conservative logic again, I suppose. It will never make sense to me.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

  • Posted by ohiomom 3rdrockfromthesun (My Page) on
    Tue, Jan 22, 13 at 12:52

...next time a republican/conservative comes out with a stupid statement, please remember no one appointed him as speaker for republicans/conservatives.

Then don't defend the "stupid statements", as you can see above democrats are not "defending" the talking head.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

I happen to agree with John Dickerson and, for the sake of fairness, here is the Slate article he wrote that the OP neglected to post.

Here is a link that might be useful: source of course


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Detailed chronological analysis of Joe Biden's golfing history wearing thin already?

Love it!

We don't seem to be talking much about the economy anymore. Something must be moving in the right direction.

-Ron-

This post was edited by fouquieria on Tue, Jan 22, 13 at 13:20


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

We don't seem to be talking much about the economy anymore. Something must be moving in the right direction.

*

No, there's nothing to talk about because no one is doing anything about it.

Did Obama say anything about the economy and his plan to repair the fiscal damage caused by previous administrations and his administration in his inauguration speech?


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

"he should lead according to what people want". And the people want HIM!! By 51%. He can sit back and watch the GOP destroy itself. As I said before, if my father a staunch republican who died in 1977 came back today, he would not believe his beloved "Eisenhower party"

I ,for one, am super stoked over Obama's speech. As a person who worked on three campaigns for him, two in 2008, he disappointed me a little in his first term because I thought he caved too much and didn't mention the issues I care about. But he covered them yesterday,...gun control, ,gay equality, and climate change.

Lets see the chinless wonder McConnell sputter about these. Remember the meeting that those teaheads had on inauguration day in 2008 vowing to make Obama a one termer and strand in his way on every issue. In your face, guys!!!!!


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Thanks for posting the link, JG. I can't understand why some people won't post that with their OP? What are they afraid of? Oh, right, the truth.

He does make some very good points. For example:

Through a series of clarifying fights over controversial issues, he can force Republicans to either side with their coalition's most extreme elements or cause a rift in the party that will leave it, at least temporarily, in disarray.

and

Obama's gambit in 2009 was to build a new post-partisan consensus. That didn't work, but by exploiting the weaknesses of today�s Republican Party, Obama has an opportunity to hasten the demise of the old order by increasing the political cost of having the GOP coalition defined by Second Amendment absolutists, climate science deniers, supporters of "self-deportation" and the pure no-tax wing.

and

The NRA, by close association, risks further defining the Republican Party as the party of angry, white Southern men.

The issues Obama brought up in his speech yesterday - gun control, gay rights, women's rights, etc are all issues the Republicans don't want to talk about. Most of America agrees with the President. The Republicans will look very bad if they disagree and refuse to act on anything. On the other hand, if they break ranks with the GOP, they will worry about the t-baggers trying to take their seats.

Looks like a win-win situation to me :-)

Once again, President Obama seems to be playing chess while everyone else is playing checkers. Gotta love it!


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

defining the Republican Party as the party of angry, white Southern men.

Which is why I think the choice of the Brooklyn Tabernacle Choir to sing the Battle Hymn of the Republic was brilliant (also reinforcing the celebration of the life and work of Martin Luther King).


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Well duh. Of course CBS wants Democrats to "Go for the Throat." They don't have guns!

Democrats hate gun violence. Besides, what's wrong with slashing the opposition's throat instead? Knives don't have to be registered. And almost everybody has an unregistered rope lying around. Ropes are all the rage in Iran. The government just wraps one around the throat of the opposition, and hangs them in public! There's a 100% guarantee that hanged opposition can't bother those peace loving politicians again!

We know Jared Loughner went on a murderous attack because Republicans used WORDS and PICTURES of such items as "GUNS" and "TARGETS!!!"

Now the head of CBS News is doing the same thing. He advocates violence to silence American citizens. Rip out their THROATS!!! Can't wait to hear how sponsors feel about Mr. Dickinson's violent advocacy journalism.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

You need some remedial reading lessons nik or perhaps a new pair of glasses. And irony is entirely lost on you.

You can hurt someone with that hand flapping.

This post was edited by jerzeegirl on Tue, Jan 22, 13 at 14:14


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

"Did Obama say anything about the economy and his plan to repair the fiscal damage caused by previous administrations and his administration in his inauguration speech? "

Did you listen to the speech or is your question rhetorical?

Yes he did. He talked about the need to deal with the debt and the need to have the US lead in many areas like renewable energy, rather than have other countries lead the way. He also talked of building a strong educated youth to help the US regain it's leading position in the world of innovation. He talked about the reality of what needs to happen to move forward rather then just pad the pockets of the existing establishment which haven't used any of its money to do a darn thing to move the economy forward...and I am a true blue, died in the wool, capitalist!


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

demifloyd wrote,

Did Obama say anything about the economy and his plan to repair the fiscal damage caused by previous administrations and his administration in his inauguration speech?

Fairly clever use of the Loaded Question fallacy. Well done.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

The Republican party has been imploding from within for over a decade. Fewer Americans can identify with Tea Party narrow exclusive values. It is only a matter of time when the old white guys die off and the new generation takes charge. The nation is increasingly evolving in a multi-racial, multi-cultural manner. Most Democrats see this and want to deal with the realities. It is the Repubs who have become obstructive and are increasingly becoming irrelevant.

And anyone who listened closely to the speech noted that the President did, indeed, talk about the econony, renewable energy, educational reforms, and rebuilding infrastructures.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Did you listen to the speech or is your question rhetorical?

*

Nope, haven't heard a word.

I saw some of the pre inaugural shots at the gym--no audio and at another business more preinaugural, including the Obama daughters and grandmother, and left before Obama showed up, right after the cameras showed a glimpse of Michelle Obama walking towards the podium area.

So no speech info.

Mother fell yesterday, several other distractions I haven't read a paper and only glanced at headlines online.

More drama today since I got back home, so I intend to read the transcript after I get back home tonight if I can.

As I have said--I seldom turn on the television and if I do I am not interested in anyone's opinion--from either side.
It's too much negativity in my life, and anyway I am perfectly capable of drawing my own conclusions and always have been.

Not what some here want anyone to know and not what they want to think--but it's the absolute truth.

It was a legitimate question, but of course I see someone has made an insipid, smarmy and incorrect assumption about a "motivation" for my post.

Imaginationland is alive and well.

Thanks for the information, Chase.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

I'm sorry about your mother, demi. I hope she wasn't hurt.

Here is a link to the text of the speech if you want to read it. I prefer to read it myself than listen to it (although doing both is ok).

Here is a link that might be useful: Speech text


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

demifloyd wrote,

It was a legitimate question, but of course I see someone has made an insipid, smarmy and incorrect assumption about a "motivation" for my post.

Who are you quoting?


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

She's not quoting anyone, Facto. Have you applied for the Punctuation Police job?


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Demi...so sorry to hear about your mom's fall.
Hope it isn't going to cause more issues for her.

Take care of yourself too.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

  • Posted by ohiomom 3rdrockfromthesun (My Page) on
    Tue, Jan 22, 13 at 16:48

I use quotes all the time to "emphasize" a point/word or just because I can ... I also misspell and have known to be wrong on more than one occasion and have changed my mind about some things since joining this forum. My punctuation (thanks for the spelling HG) sucks.

Facto, I appreciate that you "like the facts, and nothing but the facts" (said in my best Joe Friday voice) but give it a rest.

I will give you the advice that many on this forum give to other posters .... you don't like what you read SOB


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Marquest, do we really have to explain this to you?

I know Nancy. I had to ask, because to make wild statements of divisive I would like to know what is considered divisive.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Please explain what is divisive?

Msk taken from the Speech. Where do you see these points that the President is not for all the people?

Explain to me what you see in this comment is as you say "The President is not for all the people"?

-My fellow Americans, the oath I have sworn before you today, like the one recited by others who serve in this Capitol, was an oath to God and country, not party or faction - and we must faithfully execute that pledge during the duration of our service.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
How about these Msk explain the divisive nature of these comments?

-We, the people, still believe that every citizen deserves a basic measure of security and dignity.

-We, the people, still believe that enduring security and lasting peace do not require perpetual war.

-We, the people, declare today that the most evident of truths - that all of us are created equal

-It is now our generation's task to carry on what those pioneers began.

-That is our generation's task - to make these words, these rights, these values - of Life, and Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness - real for every American.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

hamiltongardener wrote,

She's not quoting anyone, Facto. Have you applied for the Punctuation Police job?

I was not correcting demifloyd's punctuation. I was asking her who she was quoting, because the way she wrote her sentence, it implied that someone had imputed a motivation to her and used thatexact word or a form of it.

That is, it seems reasonable that the difference between being written this way,

...I see someone has made an insipid, smarmy and incorrect assumption about a motivation for my post

...and this way,

I see someone has made an insipid, smarmy and incorrect assumption about a "motivation" for my post

...is that in the second case the assertion is being made that the actual word "motivation" was used, whereas in the first formulation, the meaning is the same but no implication of a verbatim statement is alleged. I assumed, therefore, that demifloyd enclosed the word in quotation marks to indicated that it was a quotation. This is bolstered by demifloyd's statements about the care with which she writes as well as her scrutiny of others' quotes or characterizations regarding the words she has supposedly used (see "put up or..." and "butt" vs. "behind", etc.).

But I am open to the possibility that there is an alternative explanation.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

So... you're saying you got the job then?


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

ohiomom wrote,

I use quotes all the time to "emphasize" a point/word or just because I can ... I also misspell and have known to be wrong on more than one occasion and have changed my mind about some things since joining this forum. My punctuation (thanks for the spelling HG) sucks.
Facto, I appreciate that you "like the facts, and nothing but the facts" (said in my best Joe Friday voice) but give it a rest.

I understand what you are saying, but to my recollection, demifloyd doesn't use quotation marks for emphasis (capital letters are the indicator of choice for her). And, she has expressed repeatedly the precision with which she crafts her words, as well as the importance to her of not attributing to her certain words she did not say. Therefore, it seems reasonable to conclude she chose the quotation marks to indicate a quotation.

I will give you the advice that many on this forum give to other posters .... you don't like what you read SOB

I do that quite a bit. This post fell into a different category; I didn't dislike it. I was interested in it, so I asked about it. You'll notice I do not tell people that I don't like their posts and they therefore should stop posting. I generally read posts even if they are from a source with whom I generally disagree.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Besides om, Factotem is so enamored with himself he is becoming a hoot to read....and then SOB lol.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

hamiltongardener wrote,

So... you're saying you got the job then?

I already have one full-time job. But I will drop off these flyers:


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Another turd in the punchbowl, mrsK? You just cannot resist can you?

Here's what I find funny. When the T-baggers espoused the very same scorched earth philosophy, it was profound and patriotic. When this fellow says the same thing, it's suddenly a scandal. To quote Marshall: Hoot!


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

jz..at least I don't have to lower myself to your disgusting level of speech.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

mrskjun wrote,

Besides om, Factotem is so enamored with himself he is becoming a hoot to read....and then SOB lol.

Neat! You both read and skip my posts.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Yesterday must have been very rough for the partisan politickers on the wrong side of the 2012 elections.

Here comes the bride bile...


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

mrskjun, if you do not want to dicuss the gutter topic maybe you could discuss the divisive issue you brought up. See above my questions. Why bother calling JZ names and go to the topic discussion?


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

But I will drop off these flyers:

Are you criticising the improper use of quotation marks or the use of apostrophes now?

You're certainly going to have your hands full on this forum, yup yup.

Unless it's only Demi's punctuation you're worried about. If that's the case, you got yourelf a pretty cushy job! Perhaps you could pick up some side work as the forum Spelling Nazi too?


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

I don't call people names marquest, neither do I have a "potty" mouth. And the "gutter topic" was written by the political director of CBS News and a democrat in the strongest sense. And yes, I agree that he has gone into the gutter and should not have any part in MSM, who want to be seen as non political.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

hamiltongardener wrote,

Are you criticising the improper use of quotation marks or the use of apostrophes now?

You're certainly going to have your hands full on this forum, yup yup.

Unless it's only Demi's punctuation you're worried about. If that's the case, you got yourelf a pretty cushy job! Perhaps you could pick up some side work as the forum Spelling Nazi too?

As I stated, I wasn't correcting demifloyd's punctuation, and I certainly am not worried about it. I asked her who she was quoting. Are you alleging that demifloyd used quotation marks improperly?

The two apostrophe posters obviously relate to the improper use of apostrophes. I am not correcting anyone's post, nor am I leveling criticism at any individual. Anyone interested in learning proper use of the apostrophe may peruse the posters if they so choose.

Any my elf is permanently retired; he used to work for Santa, but moved to Florida.

This post was edited by Factotem on Tue, Jan 22, 13 at 18:58


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

As I stated, I wasn't correcting demifloyd's punctuation, and I certainly am not worried about it.

Riiiight. We believe you.

Carry on.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

I don't call people names marquest, neither do I have a "potty" mouth.

Okay, okay then lets get back to your OP. Can you debate the divisive speech as you were told. I posted some Excerpts from the Presidential speech. What is your opinion?

You said was founded for ALL the people.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Perhaps you could pick up some side work as the forum Spelling Nazi too?

I believe that job is already filled by another poster but I am sure they can share the duties. :) They share some other characteristics that are similar so it might work.

Factotem, you are relatively new here and many people have given you some good advice. Perhaps you should consider taking it before you completely wear out your welcome?


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

I believe that job is already filled by another poster but I am sure they can share the duties.

So we have a Spelling Nazi and Punctuation Police. All we need now is a Grammar Fascist.

Factotem, you are relatively new here

Relatively new but extremely well informed on forum events from the past. (He's been lurking a long time wink wink nudge nudge)

I think he well understands the ins and outs.

This post was edited by hamiltongardener on Tue, Jan 22, 13 at 19:22


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

hamiltongardner wrote,

Riiiight. We believe you.

"We"? Others have granted you authority to issue your sarcastic rejoinders on their behalf?


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

epiphyticlvr wrote,

Factotem, you are relatively new here and many people have given you some good advice. Perhaps you should consider taking it before you completely wear out your welcome?

What happens when one completely wears out one's welcome? Do the conservatives stop issuing retractions when they post false information?


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

"We"? Others have granted you authority to issue your sarcastic rejoinders on their behalf?

Why, yes. Yes, as a matter of fact. We all got together and signed secret pacts that allow us to speak for one another.

That's why you see so much talk about "you liberals" and "you righties". It's the Gardenweb Association we belong to, one of many.

You should find one that speaks to you.

Perhaps the Gardenweb English Teachers Association? I hear all the best Punctuation Police and Spelling Nazis sign up there.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

hamiltongardener wrote,

"We"? Others have granted you authority to issue your sarcastic rejoinders on their behalf?

Why, yes. Yes, as a matter of fact. We all got together and signed secret pacts that allow us to speak for one another.

I didn't think so.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

I agree that he has gone into the gutter and should not have any part in MSM, who want to be seen as non political.

Coming from the mouth of someone who worships at the altar of FoxNews. Your statement is just so funny!!!!!!!


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

  • Posted by ohiomom 3rdrockfromthesun (My Page) on
    Tue, Jan 22, 13 at 19:36

Speaking of "non political", just out of curiousity yesterday I turned on Fox News to see how they were covering the inaugural and was surprised but not shocked that they were showing the past inaugurals of Reagan and Bush I & II, whereas the other stations had full coverage on. Guess they were reminiscing about the "good old days" (^_^)

So glad they are "non political" :)


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

I didn't think so.

You're catching on a bit faster than before.

Don't worry, as your social skills develop, you'll start to "get"*** the sarcasm.

Why do I get the feeling that Sheldon from Big Bang Theory has joined the board?

***Note the improper use of quotation marks.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

the past inaugurals of Reagan and Bush I & II

Randomly selected historical coverage, I'm sure...


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

hamiltongardener wrote,

Don't worry, as your social skills develop, you'll start to "get"*** the sarcasm.

***Note the improper use of quotation marks.

That is a correct use of quotations marks to indicate an alternate meaning. Why do you believe it is incorrect?


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Beating up on Facto won't make this thread any less the current faux outrage as submitted by Mrsk than it already is, Ham.

What do you think about the topic and Mrsk's driving force behind it? Do you believe in its honest sincerity in intent and emotion, and if so, why?

I think you always have a good take on political situations in this country, is one reason why I ask you - the other reason is to take the aim of vitriol from Fact o and put if where it actually belongs...being the conservatives perception in general when it comes to the diversionary outrage posting of the day, the head of CBS, Mrsk, or the combo.

I understand why you dislike Facto. Do you understand why she drills down as she does, Ham? Do you think it is completely unjustified or unasked for?

Too many questions, I realize. I don't expect you to address what you don't feel like addressing of course, I don't exchange emails here ever, and won't, but this is one occasion where I wish we could have a private conversation, I'm really interested in why you often react the way you do and suspect it would be good info for me to ponder.

I think Facto will be driven away by conservatives, they are much better at this game than I suspect s/he will be because they can far outlast her, I suspect. Too bad.
On the record I think it will be a shame. She does not ask for too much imo, she asks for it too often, completely legit questions which will never be responded too, they rarely do. Facto is unlikely to last all that long, and things will then settle back to its usual mode of operation. Facto's sin is that he/she makes too many, including myself, uncomfortable in her dogged persuit.

Its not like she/he is the only one here who is like a dog with a bone, she/ he is just the new dog. Again, this is how I see it and I know everyone has their own perception.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Oh my god... it IS you.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

jz, FOX is a cable station with a political slant, as is MSNBC and CNN.. they aren't known as MSM like ABC, NBC, and CBS who tout that they do not have a political slant.

If you watched FOX yesterday they showed the inaugural, as well as past, such as John F. Kennedy, in case you missed him.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Relatively new but extremely well informed on forum events from the past. (He's been lurking a long time wink wink nudge nudge)

I think he well understands the ins and outs.

:) I am as sure that he does as I am sure he is no "stranger". LOL


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Beating up on Facto won't make this thread any less the current faux outrage as submitted by Mrsk than it already is, Ham.

The exchange is not about getting to the heart of the conservative question for Facto, Mylab. I'm just surprised you haven't seen that.

I'm also surprised that you haven't picked up that I am not defending the faux outrages. I'm just not fulfilling a personal vendetta.

Read carefully.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

"I'm just not fulfilling a personal vendetta.

Read carefully."

You appear to be piling on where you don't belong. I am pretty sure MRS and Demi can handle themselves without your help.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Let me see if I understand this correctly: The objection is to some type of alleged Nazi behaviour (sorry, I don't watch television, but I suspect this Nazi business is from something televised, and defined by the television whatever it was) is being made by someone who has taken it upon herself to exhibit the same type of behaviour as she is criticizing.

So if she really believes her TV-inspired reference, and sincerely believes Nazi-like behaviour (as she defines it) is annoying, she is multiplying the annoyance by her participation in same.

OK, one more to add to my scroll-on-by list, as is the rest of the thread.

Addio !


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

frank...hg is not "handling" Facto for demi or I. Perhaps you should read carefully as well.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

You appear to be piling on where you don't belong. I am pretty sure MRS and Demi can handle themselves without your help.

Yeah, but then I'd have no fun at all.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Whoa, Frank. Pay attention. Hamilton is doing no such thing.

;D


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Let me see if I understand this correctly: The objection is to some type of alleged Nazi behaviour (sorry, I don't watch television, but I suspect this Nazi business is from something televised, and defined by the television whatever it was) is being made by someone who has taken it upon herself to exhibit the same type of behaviour as she is criticizing.
So if she really believes her TV-inspired reference, and sincerely believes Nazi-like behaviour (as she defines it) is annoying, she is multiplying the annoyance by her participation in same.

Did you just call Sheldon a Nazi???


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Mrsk just said Fox is a cable station with a political slant..Do ya THINK? I just spit coffee on my screen...!!!


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Well, at any rate, I suspect that long after Facto is gone, those she has hounded for back up to their statements will still be here, posting in the manner and style they always have, for a very,very long time- so there is probably nothing to be overly impatient about for those who are so irritated by her manner in here.

My opinion


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

The usual argument with the usual crowd of Fox deniers!
It's pointless because if you had a signed affidavit from Every legitimate press organization in the world making this assertion this crew would persist. There is no salve, inoculation, measure of means written or otherwise that will bring about a conversion from this delusion!

Fox Gave GOP Candidates 89 Hours Of Airtime Over 7-Month Period In 2011-2012. Between June 1, 2011, and January 22, 2012, Fox News, Fox Business, and Fox News Sunday gave declared and potential Republican presidential candidates a total of 89 hours and 40 minutes over 716 appearances. Newt Gingrich got the most total amount of airtime during that span, with more than 12 hours, while Gingrich and Rick Santorum made the most appearances with 85 each. [Media Matters, 1/26/12]

Fox Promoted "The Hannity Primary." In May 2011, A Fox News commercial touted host Sean Hannity's "special series on the GOP's presidential picks," calling it "The Hannity Primary." Hannity described how it worked: "We'll give each candidate a half-hour right here on this show to share his or her views with you, our audience." [Fox News, Your World With Neil Cavuto, 5/25/11; Fox News, Hannity, 5/27/11, via Media Matters]

Fox's Huckabee: "If You Want To Talk To Voters In The Republican Primary, You Do O'Reilly, You Do Fox News." Discussing the Republican primary with Bill O'Reilly, Fox News host Mike Huckabee, said, "If you want to talk to voters in the Republican primary, you do O'Reilly, you do Fox News." [Fox News, The O'Reilly Factor, 10/14/11, via Media Matters]

Fox's Morris: "You Don't Win Iowa In Iowa. You Win It On This Couch. You Win It On Fox News" And "In The Debates." Discussing the Iowa Republican presidential caucuses on Fox & Friends, Dick Morris said: "This is the phenomenon of this year's election. You don't win Iowa in Iowa. You win it on this couch. You win it on Fox News. You win it in the debates." Co-host Steve Doocy responded: "That could make this [couch] the most powerful piece of furniture in America." [Fox News, Fox & Friends, 12/7/11, via Media Matters]

Fox's Morris Pocketed Money From Cain In The Morning, Defended Him On Fox At Night. Hours before a October 2011 Fox News appearance in which he defended presidential candidate Herman Cain, Dick Morris sent out two emails to his list "paid for" by Cain's campaign: a direct fundraising appeal from Cain, and a promotion of a softball interview between Morris and Cain. Morris later admitted on Fox that he has taken money from several Republican presidential candidates. [Media Matters, 11/1/11; Fox News, Hannity, 12/5/11, via Media Matters]

Fox Aggressively Supported The Anti-Obama Tea Party Movement

Tea Party Express Founder: "There Would Not Have Been A Tea Party Without Fox." A May 22 New York magazine profile on Fox News chairman Roger Ailes, headlined, "The Elephant in the Green Room," featured a quote from Tea Party Express founder Sal Russo. Russo stated: "There would not have been a tea party without Fox." [New York, 5/22/11]

GOP Consultant Highlighted Possible Friendly Coverage From "Fox News Commentators" In Proposing Tea Party Express Bus Tour. Following the April 15, 2009, Tea Parties, Joe Wierzbicki, a senior associate with the GOP consulting firm Russo Marsh, proposed creating the Tea Party Express bus tour in order to "give a boost to our PAC and position us as a growing force/leading force as the 2010 elections come into focus." Wierzbicki also wrote in the original memo proposing the creation of the Tea Party Express that the effort could get "some mentions and possibly even promotion from conservative/pro-tea party bloggers, talk radio hosts, Fox News commentators, etc..." [Media Matters, 11/2/10]

Never has there been a news organization where the bleed between a presidential campaign & it's employees & contributors been so obvious!


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

  • Posted by ohiomom 3rdrockfromthesun (My Page) on
    Tue, Jan 22, 13 at 21:25

"in the manner and style they always have"

I guess that was my point in another thread Mylab, and I will say no more but if Facto or anyone is expecting any retraction or anything else ... well as I also said she/he will need the patience of Job.

I am outta of this .. good luck.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

This whole thread is really pretty amusing. There will be no retractions here or anywhere - and that is just part of the fun. If you know what I mean.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

I'm so confused....no fair when you have to think


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

ohiomom.
I guess that was my point in another thread Mylab, and I will say no more but if Facto or anyone is expecting any retraction or anything else

You are very wise. I asked way back and twice after but no response. If there is no answer it usually is because there is no honest rational answer to give. Oh Heck what about that Bengahazi.


marquest, the government was founded for ALL the people

What is the point of an election if you do not accept the leader that was elected if you believe in our Democracy?

OBAMA INAUGURAL
This is so divisive. Talking about God and country. What was he talking about................

-My fellow Americans, the oath I have sworn before you today, like the one recited by others who serve in this Capitol, was an oath to God and country, not party or faction - and we must faithfully execute that pledge during the duration of our service.

47% speech is not divisive. I guess I have to learn the Romney way


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

I'll make you out to be a fibber by apologizing and retracting 2 or my 3 Exclamation points.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Factotum style just reminds me of old Bulletin Board Postings on the net years ago. The hysteria over it is humorous.

Esh just for you!!!!!!


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Mrskjun,

The man running CBS News sees the overthrow of the opposition party as a desirable goal for our president's second term.

Like many others who read his "analysis," I found John Dickerson's violent language and thoughts about political opposition to be extreme and Inappropriate. He made a mockery of the "free press" by putting himself in the position of a political advisor to the president.

Taking sides with a sitting president is not what a professional and ethical journalist does, because it gets in the way of reporting without bias.

Your OP provided an opportunity for discussion about a news organization advocating for the demise of a party the organization leader clearly does not like. However, your OP was hijacked. Which, if nothing else, tells you it is a discussion Obama supporters are unprepared to participate in.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

oops, for a second or two I thought that nika was excoriating FAUX Knews for shameless pandering on behalf of the Republican Party and ceaseless undermining of the Democrat President and his Party.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

  • Posted by vgkg 7-Va Tidewater (My Page) on
    Wed, Jan 23, 13 at 11:06

You mean this comment Marshall --

"Taking sides with a sitting president is not what a professional and ethical journalist does, because it gets in the way of reporting without bias."

Flushes Fox down the toilet from 2001-09.

This post was edited by vgkg on Wed, Jan 23, 13 at 11:22


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

I agree there is no place for any journalist coming out in clear support of one side or the other. None.....and that goes for Murdoch et al. Mind you I can not recall any outrage for comments made by FOX or Briebart....must have missed them.

Opinion pieces are a different thing....as long as they are clearly identified as an opinion piece but even then journalists should stay away from partisan comments.....ALL OF THEM not just the liberal ones.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Your OP provided an opportunity for discussion about a news organization advocating for the demise of a party the organization leader clearly does not like.

The same thing that Fox News does.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Your OP provided an opportunity for discussion about a news organization advocating for the demise of a party the organization leader clearly does not like.

Did you really say (type) that with a straight face?

Perhaps I'm wrong and you've said the same things about Fox News? Please point me to your posts on that because I would be very interested.

And by the way, Fox News does this on the air. Repeatedly. Not just in an opinion piece by it's director.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Never once have I heard Fox call for the DNC to be "destroyed". Not "take their guff", yes. Propogandize to push their own agenda? absolutely. But never to destroy the Democrat party.

That's okay-- pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

nikoleta wrote,

The man running CBS News...

False. Mr. Dickerson does not run CBS News. David Rhodes is the president of CBS News. Did you make that up to strengthen your argument? In any event, a retraction is warranted, though clearly none will be forthcoming.

He made a mockery of the "free press" by putting himself in the position of a political advisor to the president.

Apparently, you do not know that the essence of freedom of the press is to allow the expression of opinions of all sorts, not merely to report facts. Some reading on the Constitution would be illuminating.

Taking sides with a sitting president is not what a professional and ethical journalist does, because it gets in the way of reporting without bias.

You couldn't be more wrong. You seem not to realize that there is such a thing as a political commentator in the United States. Are you actually taking the position that expressing an opinion is unethical?


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

You may be right, Bill. It's certainly possible Fox never used the word "destroy". Wouldn't know. Don't watch. And perhaps they don't wish to destroy the entire democratic party but they sure wish to destroy the sitting President and will report "news" which is lies and exaggerations to do it. I guess in their mind the end justifies the means.

A news person offering an opinion piece on what they think the sitting President should do is very different IMO.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Back to the article the OP failed to link to (but thankfully JG remedied that error), why don't we comment on what is in it? Most of your comments sound like you didn't read further than the headline--and we all known headlines are written the capture attention. How about the article itself? And does it modify the message of the headline?

--snippet--

[The President's] goal should be to delegitimize his opponents. Through a series of clarifying fights over controversial issues, he can force Republicans to either side with their coalition's most extreme elements or cause a rift in the party that will leave it, at least temporarily, in disarray.

This theory of political transformation rests on the weaponization (and slight bastardization) of the work by Yale political scientist Stephen Skowronek. Skowronek has written extensively about what distinguishes transformational presidents from caretaker presidents. In order for a president to be transformational, the old order has to fall as the orthodoxies that kept it in power exhaust themselves. Obama's gambit in 2009 was to build a new post-partisan consensus. That didn't work, but by exploiting the weaknesses of today�s Republican Party, Obama has an opportunity to hasten the demise of the old order by increasing the political cost of having the GOP coalition defined by Second Amendment absolutists, climate science deniers, supporters of "self-deportation" and the pure no-tax wing.

The president has the ambition and has picked a second-term agenda that can lead to clarifying fights. The next necessary condition for this theory to work rests on the Republican response. Obama needs two things from the GOP: overreaction and charismatic dissenters. They�re not going to give this to him willingly, of course, but mounting pressures in the party and the personal ambitions of individual players may offer it to him anyway. Indeed, Republicans are serving him some of this recipe already on gun control, immigration, and the broader issue of fiscal policy.

That is an interesting distinction between a "transformational" president and a "caretaker" president.

Somehow when I see this explanation of what the writer had in mind, it doesn't sound as jarring as the headline by itself (no context except what reader's make up).

What say you?

Kate

This post was edited by dublinbay on Wed, Jan 23, 13 at 14:30


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

You may be right, Bill. It's certainly possible Fox never used the word "destroy". Wouldn't know. Don't watch. And perhaps they don't wish to destroy the entire democratic party but they sure wish to destroy the sitting President and will report "news" which is lies and exaggerations to do it. I guess in their mind the end justifies the means.

A news person offering an opinion piece on what they think the sitting President should do is very different IMO.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Ugh, sorry about the double post. Was trying to say --

Excellent points, Kate. As I said above, the author makes some very good points.

In my opinion, the reason the OP does not include the link may be that the article doesn't support the gotcha comment. Thanks to JG we can see what the author actually meant and I agree with most of what he said.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Demi, so sorry to hear about your mother's fall. Hopefully nothing broken. My Dad's problem started out with a fall, well not really as his hip broke and then he fell but pneumonia followed and we almost lost him. I think I posted that My Mom fell at the rehab center.......thank God nothing broken or even fractured but the bruise that started on her hip as about the size of your fist now extends all the way to her knee and her hand is almost completely purple. I will be praying for your Mom.

HG""""""""All we need now is a Grammar Fascist"

Ken I do this job for youins? I'm so ickcited I cain't hardly wate. I ain't never had a job bein a Grammar Fascist. Can I, Can I, pleez??? Mabe I ken help the punktation and spelin Fascist out two....soons I larn what a Fascist is.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Bill, As a conservative you know the difference between a free press and freedom of expression. Not everyone here has figured that out yet.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

nikoleta wrote,

Bill, As a conservative you know the difference between a free press and freedom of expression. Not everyone here has figured that out yet.

You have repeatedly said there is a difference, but you haven't stated what the difference is. Please provide definitions of the these two Constitutional rights so others will know what you are talking about. It would help if you would include examples that are, and that are not, covered by these Constitutionally-guaranteed rights.

Thank you.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

"Ken I do this job for youins? I'm so ickcited I cain't hardly wate. I ain't never had a job bein a Grammar Fascist. Can I, Can I, pleez??? Mabe I ken help the punktation and spelin Fascist out two....soons I larn what a Fascist is"

LB, it's cruel to mock one of our most talkative posters like that! ;D


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Demi, I do hope your mother will have a fast recovery. Falls can be so frightening and dangerous at that age.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Demi, does your mother use a walker? It's a really great way to keep the mobility and help compensate for balance issues. My mother has a lot more independence and self confidence since she's had hers. She uses one with wheels and a basket so she can keep gardening ;D


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Posted by Factotem none (My Page) on Wed, Jan 23, 13 at 18:09

nikoleta wrote,
Bill, As a conservative you know the difference between a free press and freedom of expression. Not everyone here has figured that out yet.

You have repeatedly said there is a difference, but you haven't stated what the difference is. Please provide definitions of the these two Constitutional rights so others will know what you are talking about. It would help if you would include examples that are, and that are not, covered by these Constitutionally-guaranteed rights.
Thank you.


Nik.....NOW you are going to have to become a teacher too
for gripes sake! Lol.

Facto some of us might think if one doesn't KNOW the difference then that someone has to be a liberal.
Conservatives do know the difference between free press and freedom of expression.

You have tunnel vision and stay too hung up on the trivia.
Its hard to learn with that mindset. Just trying to be helpful. :)


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Citywoman2012 wrote,


Nik.....NOW you are going to have to become a teacher too
for gripes sake! Lol.

Facto some of us might think if one doesn't KNOW the difference then that someone has to be a liberal.
Conservatives do know the difference between free press and freedom of expression.

You have tunnel vision and stay too hung up on the trivia.
Its hard to learn with that mindset. Just trying to be helpful. :)

...and failing.

Can you ask someone to read and re-write your posts before you submit them so they make sense?

Thanks.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Ladybrat, Mylab and Elvis--thanks so much for your kind words.

I'm picking her up at the hospital tomorrow--this is a rather sudden change of being fine one moment and the next mobility issues and blood pressure issues, although she has a lot of health issues. She has not practiced personal responsibility and the piper is coming to call, except a lot of people pay the price in a lot of ways.

Thanks for the walker suggestion--my brother has found dad's walker after his near death/coma/then recovery and it's in her house waiting for her; I'm going to be picking up rails, etc. and she will be going to physical therapy and continuing with water aerobics. What is curious is how fast these changes come on, last week she was going places by herself still, but after a few instances it's obvious the problems aren't going away and will become more pronounced. She refused the wheelchair yesterday at the dr's office and could barely walk and literally had to use one, so the vanity thing is going to have to go out the window.

Whoever it was that said maybe on another thread, maybe bfenton, that they were pushing themselves--I'm doing the same--in addition to twice a week sessions with a trainer to keep my muscles strong and to postpone eventual back surgery, and walking, and Pilates, I'm doing Zumba twice a week for five weeks. If I go down it won't be because I wasn't trying to stay in shape and take care of myself.

*

Sorry for the diversion, but thanks to posters.

*

Now back to regularly scheduled...whatever. ;)


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Demi I am sorry I did not see your post about your Mom. Wishing her a fast recovery and strength to you. I had the same fast downhill with my Mom. She lived a active healthy life but age caught up. If she has steps in her home those chair lifts are great.

People laughed at me because I accepted charges from out of the country because I thought it was my Mom. She traveled so much and would call me collect and tell me when she was coming home so I could stalk the fridge. It turned out to be some lady that was not my Mom.

So don't think she of the lifestyle as the cause it happens with age not all but some.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Consider the way Wayne LaPierre chose to respond to Obama's inaugural speech about absolutists and his suggestion that there should be universal gun registration (something that the majority of Americans favor).

LaPierre stated that the reason Obama wants universal gun registration is that he wants to grab guns. He asked rhetorically, "why else would he want to register your guns."
How ridiculous.

So, Obama suggests a moderate position on gun control, LaPierre goes crazy and in doing so marginalizes himself, the NRA and much of the GOP. It's not like Obama is talking tough or slitting throats. He is not like Dr. Detroit telling "Mom" that he wants to rip off her head and s--- down her neck. All he is doing is giving these clowns enough rope..

This post was edited by heri_cles on Thu, Jan 24, 13 at 2:35


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Demi, I missed the news on your Mom too. I'm sure it is difficult for her and in some ways for you too. It's terrible to see our parents as they decline and at the same time it is a reminder that we are all on a path.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Marquest thank you for your encouragement and well wishes, and thanks, chase, it is difficult but nothing compared to what has already happened. I'd do this the rest of my life for one hour with my husband.

Mom is one of a kind for sure--I'm not much like her--she's our "Scarlet O'Hara" that's bound and determined to smoke and eat chocolates when she pleases. She is a very pretty woman still and does not look her age at all except for the inability to walk--years of not lifting weights or doing yoga tapes I bought her or using the hand weights I bought her, etc. and there is no muscle to hold up her back and she didn't have it to get up after she fell the other day, had to crawl back in the house.

I recall twenty years ago when she found HER mother crawling to the bathroom and had to put her in a nursing home for a short time before her death. She thought it was just terrible and here she is doing the same.

I suppose at one point or another some of us here will face that day when we have to "crawl" to find a way to get up and that be sad for opinionated, independent doers like everyone here is!

Life has a way of humbling us one way or another.
There are lessons we can learn from that so I welcome these experiences, even with a little trepidation.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Hugs to you, Demi, to help you deal with your mom's declining abilities. Sounds like she has lived her life on her terms. Last year when I suffered episodes of leg paralysis, my son took to caring for me and driving me around once I got a bit better. I hated the feeling of dependency and the "new normal" of not being able to trust my body.

She is so lucky to have you nearby and so willing to step in to help her. Good on you.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Getting away from the topic again but want Demi to see this...........

Demi, as I said before, my Dad is in rehab now from a broken hip .....repeating that to say my Mom has a fear of him falling after he gets out even with a walker. She saw a lady in rehab the other day with a walker that resembled a baby walker........not good at describing as I didn't see it but Mom said the appliance totally encircled the woman so it wouldn't tip over and had a seat so if she should fall she would sit down on the seat. Mom found out the name of it but I can't remember right now. I'm sure if your Mother should need something like that her doctor would know the name or be able to reference you to someone who could help you. Again best wishes for your Mom's recovery and you continue to take care of Demi too as I know the drain something like this has on the caretakers.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

I'm sorry to hear about your mom as well, Demi. It's a strange new era we enter when we become our parents' caretakers, eh?


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Thanks, Marshall, Lady Brat, and Circuspeanut.

I am headed to the hospital and drive her home--a day of driving for me.

I had not heard of that type of walker but thanks so much I will check into it; who knows she may be back to driving to the library, bank and church next week or this may be the "new normal."

Thank God it wasn't for you, Marshall, but she has not kept herself strong like you and she has indulged bad habits so it isn't looking good.

Thanks, friends.

*

Sorry again for the diversion, but sometimes positive posts break up discord.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Most of us who are above 50 have aging parents with health concerns and many of our parents are deceased or near the end of life. What does that have to do with this "Go for the throat" thread?

Frankly, the plight of an anonymous person's mother is not appropriate on this thread or in this forum, ever.
If empathy or sympathy is desired, private email or switch over to the conversation side of the forum. This has become a diversionary tactic that is annoying, as is the accusation against those who do not join in the pooled sympathy/empathy. So yes, collectively we all wish grandma demifloyd the best, God Bless you, whoever you are, and know this, you are firmly in our prayers. Let us all now join in prayer on this internet hot topics forum for this anonymous person's anonymous mother. By the way, this doesn't even approach what others here are facing with family health issues, financial issues, aging parents in nursing homes, and what have you.

Now, back OT, as Kate and others have pointed out, the article in the OP has nothing to do with an attempt by President Obama to cut the throat of the GOP or of any GOPer. If being a Centrist and agreeing with the majority of Americans is dividing the GOP and isolating the ideologues and absolutists, well, that's a good thing. That doesn't hurt the GOP, it makes it more relevant to the majority in their party.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Wow heri you have outdone even yourself this time, sinking to absolute rock bottom with your repugnant, unnecessary comments. I can't imagine anyone making comments such as you did regarding a loved one's health even to someone they hate. Speak of going for the throat...............Maybe I wasn't notified, so mind telling me when the moderator died and left you in charge of HT.

And Demi, just consider the source.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Lady_Brat, consider our last conversation of appropriate time. Very quick with the empathy of when you have a shoe in the topic. But see no problem of stepping on someone's shoes when you feel it is appropriate.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

II just LUV compassionate liberals looking after the old and the weak and the ill. Gives me great confidence as I look forward to my declining years.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

I actually do believe there are some compassionate liberals marshall. Just be glad heri isn't your son.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Mrskjun, I have a wonderful son who puts you-know-who to shame. :)


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Although Henri, technically you are probably absolutely correct on every point you just made, I just don't understand the cost to you when these side comments of a more personal nature takes place, such as the discussion about Demi' s mothers fall.
Skipping right over that portion of the thread would be so easy and then just inject the comment pertinent to the subject you wish to make would be fast and easy. I know you objected before to side issues of a personal nature and threads that consist of less hot topics and more personal discussions - but because it doesn't happen all that often, I just can't understand why the persistent objection instead of ignoring what you don't care to read?

I think that as long as the forum remains basically as a hot topics forum for 98% of the time sometimes these personal interjections can be good for the forum.

I'm not trying to be argumentative since obviously you are technically correct as far as I can tell, I just don't understand the apparent cost to you when it occasionally happens.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

I would like to take a little time out here to mention the fact that political parties are not in the Constitution-no place, no where. Not only that, the parties we have are not immutable-hence you get Democrats as the party affiliation of most black people today when that party was their most outspoken enemy back in the 1800's. It is completely within the rights of any president or presidential contender to try and 'destroy' a competing party. We find political parties to be useful-as in helping us select our presidential and congressional contenders, but the process of selecting these contenders is also not in the Constitution.

I am also interested in what our more conservative posters mean by the difference between Free press and freedom of Expression. Since none of them have volunteered the info-which is not obvious on the face of it as they seem to think, I looked up Freedom of expression and learned that in constitutional studies it is usually considered to be short hand for freedoms that are explicitly protected- speech, petition, and assembly. Is this what it means to you and what do you take that to mean?

Are Television and Radio stations held to different standards than newspapers when it comes to promoting their various agendas because they are licensed on airways that belong to all the American people? does anyone know if there is law on this point?

Hey-get this-there is no process in the Constitution for delcaring something unconstitutional-knock me down with a feather!!


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Heri is right technically. I just would like the same respect and empathy from the same crew when what they think is a Liberal problem and show the opposite. Yes I am still ticked when maggie posted a topic of help calling our Senators and the Pork argument persisted.

Not one of that crew said this is not the time to discuss Pork and stopped and went back to the OP. Did they start another topic to discuss Pork? No there had to be a part 2 Walk a mile in my shoes.

It cannot and should not do as I want. So I say if Heri would like to only talk about the OP as technically he is correct and he feels side topics are out of order he has every right to express his feelings. Without being slapped around with a wet noodle.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

I really wasn't trying to slap him around maquest - he would object to the personal discussion even if that thread of Maggies had gone the way it could have and certainly SHOULD have, he has objected to this sort of thing before.

I don't understand the vehemence behind the objection, but Im not arguing that whatever the reason for it could not be valid.

Do you see what Im trying to get at - or does it still seem wet noodlish to you?


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Ah, you mean that when he called me by my personal name and discussed going into my photobucket account, that was on topic? I must have missed the OP.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

No mylab I feel like the liberals are the ones that always show empathy and when maggie started a topic for help and the very ones that want empathy when they want empathy they did not blink before to show how unsympathetic they could perform and did not have a second thought about doing so.

It was okay as long as they said but we think they should get help but ohhhh that Pork like it was the first time Pork was in the hurricane bills.

I want it to be recognized that the knife cuts both ways.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Just for your info marquest, obviously you didn't read the thread too closely. I have stated my position that I am against pork in any bill. I was against pork in the Katrina bill and the Sandy bill. It looks as if a great deal of money is going to relief, when in reality it is only a percentage. I said, and I believe, that every dime allocated in the Sandy relief bill should have gone for Sandy relief, and not one dime should have gone to pork projects. Sandy victims were cheated.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Transferring dollars from one "account" to another so that security recommendations could be implemented in various Embassies was removed...was that pork? Heck it wasn't even additional funding just a reallocation!

I mentioned this in a different thread. People throw that term around without having a clue what they are talking about.

It is often necessary to include smaller measures in larger bills because they simply don't warrant a "bill" of their own. It doesn't mean the initiatives are not of value....best one should know exactly what is in a bill and why before putting it down to pork.

But hey...some blogger calls it pork so it must be...


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Perhaps it would benefit someone to read the bill, that way they would know exactly what the "pork" is, and if it is even worthy of being considered at all. And if it is worthy, then it should be worthy of a bill of it's own. Not used to make it look like the victims of Sandy were receiving far more help than they were.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Mrsk, surely by now you understand that the objection to the interjection of all the pork, then the insistence on continuing to object to it was the problem with you.

Maggie needed supportive words, you and I know EXACTLY what she and all those people are suffering, you and I have walked in those very shoes - and would not have found any comfort in the outrage over pork in a thread where aid was desperately needed and long overdue due to squabbling and political posturing.

The oink could been started as an entirely separate thread and I still don't get why you wouldn't be willing to be sensitive enough to Maggies plight when that very suggestion was made to you. It would have cost you nothing more than a moment of compassion to just drop the subject within that thread.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Perhaps it would benefit those who criticize it as pork to understand what it is they are criticizing. Not every single thing that congress needs to approve has to have it's own bill. That would be ludicrous and cost a fortune.

The important thing is to know and understand the content...it's easy enough to find out.

Mrs, anyone who thought that was all Sandy relief money simply did not take the time to understand the bill. The Bill was called HR 152....it wasn't called the Sandy Relief Bill.

That's what boils me more than about anything.....how many people get on bandwagons without really understanding the process, issues, or facts...it's all just regurgitation of what they hear from their favourite "sources".

Anyhow it's interesting to me that the Republicans, who are so anxious to crucify the State Department and WH for the Benghazi tragedy, won't authorize the TRANSFER of dollars from one SD account to anotherin order to increase Embassy security as recommended by the investigative committee headed by Admiral Mullin.

So there you have it, Republicans consider Embassy Security to be pork......ain't that just a tad hypocritical?


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Has the discussion here gotten so far from the OP as to make further comment pointless? If so I guess I will go put out the trash. I had thought that the OP was an interesting confusion of "facts" that didn't need a discussion of either Demi's mother(who I hope is doing better) or "pork" in the Sandy bill.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

mylab, it looks to me like you are just looking to poke. I was totally supportive of Maggie and said so more than once. I have walked in her shoes. I'm not going to draw her into this brouhaha, but if she were like me, she would have preferred the pork be deferred for a later time as well. And it wasn't just democrats who added the pork, shame on my own party as well.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Mrs was the transfer of funding for embassy security pork?


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

That's what boils me more than about anything.....how many people get on bandwagons without really understanding the process, issues, or facts...it's all just regurgitation of what they hear from their favourite "sources".

It embarrasses me to know end that a Canadian knows more about our governance than most Americans do. How sad is that?


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

.It would have cost you nothing more than a moment of compassion to just drop the subject within that thread.

EXACTLY!!!!!!

That was all that was requested. Mrskjun I WILL REPEAT OVER AND OVER......YOU DID NOT DISCUSS THE PORK WHEN YOU WERE IN THOSE SHOES. YOU AND YOUR ILK THOUGHT IT WAS PERFECT TIMING TO BRING IT INTO THE OP STARTED BY MAGGIE.

BABBLE ALL YOU WANT ABOUT HOW YOU DID NOT LIKE IT IN THE KATRINIA OR ANY OTHER RELIEF BILL.

SHOW ME WHERE YOU STATED THAT YOU OR YOUR NEEDY SAID YOU DID NOT LIKE PORK IN ANY OF YOUR HURRICANE BILLS.

Until then I think Heri has every right to object to anything at anytime during or after any crisis you or your needy have for any reason. Some time you have to accept you get as good as you give.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

I recommend, along with Dr. J. Mercola, eating more Kale:

"Food Fact: Kale eases lung congestion and is beneficial to the stomach, liver and immune system. It contains lutein and zeaxanthin, which protect the eyes from macular degeneration. It also contains indole-3-carbinol, which may protect against colon cancer. Kale is an excellent source of calcium, iron, vitamin A and C, and chlorophyll."

Enjoy the respite from shouting on HT.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

marshallz wrote,

I recommend, along with Dr. J. Mercola, eating more Kale

I too am looking for an emoticon representing earplugs...

But I will also opine that Dr. Mercola is a dangerous quack.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Kale is nasty stuff.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

  • Posted by ohiomom 3rdrockfromthesun (My Page) on
    Thu, Jan 24, 13 at 17:03

Oh gawd thank you JZ I so dislike Kale :)

Demi hope things will go well for your mom.

I remember when my Aunt Lucy was 90 years old and had a fit because the doctor would not let her have cigarettes and coffee in the nursing home ... daddy said at that age let her have what she wants.

My ex outlaw lived to be 90 years old, despite the fact the "some" fussed cause he like to eat a bag of potato chips every day :)

I eat in moderation, but after DH's passing I decided that I will "live life on my own terms" ... for all his healthy eating/exercise he died young.

Now where did I put that piece of chocolate :)


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

Another on the dislike kale list.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

I remember when my Aunt Lucy was 90 years old and had a fit because the doctor would not let her have cigarettes and coffee in the nursing home ... daddy said at that age let her have what she wants.

No coffee? Whhoooaaa...what's the point of getting old if you can't have coffee when you get there?

My 90 year old mom asked me if a particular outfit was appropriate for her 1st granddaughter's (my daughter's) wedding. Mom, when you're 90 and your granddaughter is getting married, you get to wear whatever you want! She purchased it and she's very excited to wear it. As she should be.


 o
RE: Go for the Throat!

I was totally supportive of Maggie and said so more than once.

Back to this Mrsk? If you were really "totally supportive" then you would have called your rep's and asked them to push the bill through which is what Maggie asked in the op of that thread. You didn't. Your words were empty then and still ring hollow now.

It's all there in black and white - on both threads.


 o Post a Follow-Up

Please Note: This thread has reached the upper limit for the number follow-ups allowed (150). If you would like to continue this discussion, please begin a new thread using the form on the main forum page.


Return to the Hot Topics Forum

Information about Posting

  • You must be logged in to post a message. Once you are logged in, a posting window will appear at the bottom of the messages. If you are not a member, please register for an account.
  • Please review our Rules of Play before posting.
  • Posting is a two-step process. Once you have composed your message, you will be taken to the preview page. You will then have a chance to review your post, make changes and upload photos.
  • After posting your message, you may need to refresh the forum page in order to see it.
  • Before posting copyrighted material, please read about Copyright and Fair Use.
  • We have a strict no-advertising policy!
  • If you would like to practice posting or uploading photos, please visit our Test forum.
  • If you need assistance, please Contact Us and we will be happy to help.


Learn more about in-text links on this page here