Eliot Spitzer explains how Bush screwed the pooch

AssHatZombie said:
So the impact of these laws is due to bush's decision to enforce them mercilessly despite all opposition and local outrage. I think that was desh's point. You agree with desh and me.

You better getter a second mortgage on your ass cuz it's pwned.
Click to expand...
Rubbish. Long ago we agreed that Bush's contribution to this was large.

Again, you don't read the thread and keep repeating 2+2=4 I win!

Yes 2+2=4, but it isn't salient to advanced Geometry. We have advanced the conversation past your simple assertion. Now contribute or go away. I need to help out my daughter with her homework.
 
Damocles said:
Rubbish. Long ago we agreed that Bush's contribution to this was large.

Again, you don't read the thread and keep repeating 2+2=4 I win!

Yes 2+2=4, but it isn't salient to advanced Geometry. We have advanced the conversation past your simple assertion. Now contribute or go away. I need to help out my daughter with her homework.
Click to expand...

The executive is uniquely responsible for enforcing laws. This is as right as 2+2=4, as per your admission.

Just admit you're voting for McCain.
 
AssHatZombie said:
The executive is uniquely responsible for enforcing laws. This is as right as 2+2=4, as per your admission.

Just admit you're voting for McCain.
Click to expand...
LOL. Now I get to use the emoticon!

:1up:

You are so totally owned that now you are pretending to know that I will vote differently than I state. I don't do that to you. I believe you will vote Obama to "punish" those who betrayed us. (I agree on the betray thing.)
 
I agree on the betray thing. We elected these people to be strong on defense of the border, to spend less money, to stop growing government, and to quit being the world police. Instead we got spendthrift idiocy and nation-building rubbish.
 
Damocles said:
LOL. Now I get to use the emoticon!

:1up:

You are so totally owned that now you are pretending to know that I will vote differently than I state. I don't do that to you. I believe you will vote Obama to "punish" those who betrayed us. (I agree on the betray thing.)
Click to expand...

Not quite. You admitted that the unique responsibility to enforce laws is solely upon the executive. Thus, if bush had really had a problem with any of this he could have refused to do anything with it.

I do believe you will vote for McCain. you can present your side, but we will never know the actual truth.
 
AssHatZombie said:
Not quite. You admitted that the unique responsibility to enforce laws is solely upon the executive. Thus, if bush had really had a problem with any of this he could have refused to do anything with it.

I do believe you will vote for McCain. you can present your side, but we will never know the actual truth.
Click to expand...
LOL. 2+2=4. Thanks. Now Desh and I can get to talking about the actual current subject of the thread.

Just more total ownership. Of course your point takes away Desh's earlier whine about how Clinton should be absolved of any and all responsibility because of who wrote the laws he was signing.

:1up:
 
Damocles said:
LOL. 2+2=4. Thanks. Now Desh and I can get to talking about the actual current subject of the thread.

Just more total ownership. Of course your point takes away Desh's earlier whine about how Clinton should be absolved of any and all responsibility because of who wrote the laws he was signing.

:1up:
Click to expand...

It is as basic as 2+2=4. Bush could have listened to locals and their concerns. Instead he chose to be an asshole. You're owned by a simple truth as basic as 2+2=4, according to your own admission.
 
AssHatZombie said:
It is as basic as 2+2=4. Bush could have listened to locals and their concerns. Instead he chose to be an asshole. You're owned by a simple truth as basic as 2+2=4, according to your own admission.
Click to expand...
Again you are repeating what we agreed to long ago in the thread and pretending you came up with something new. We can all pretend with you, but it doesn't change that you are doing exactly what I said you were. Repeating something simplistic that we already knew and recognized long ago in the thread.

Catch up, you came to the race 2 hours after it started, and are pretending that the discovery of a curve in the road is amazing and new to us. Newsflash, we passed that curve long ago.
 
Damocles said:
Again you are repeating what we agreed to long ago in the thread and pretending you came up with something new. We can all pretend with you, but it doesn't change that you are doing exactly what I said you were. Repeating something simplistic that we already knew and recognized long ago in the thread.
Click to expand...

So you were defeated long ago in the thread. That's not helping your case.
 
AssHatZombie said:
So you were defeated long ago in the thread. That's not helping your case.
Click to expand...
You are only pointing out now that you have no comprehension in what you read. First, this thread is not in a vacuum, and is an extension of earlier conversations in other threads between Desh, SF, and I.

While the beggining of this thread was "This is Bush being bad." It quickly progressed past that.

My answer was "Yes, it is. However he couldn't have been bad here if all this before didn't happen, if we want to avoid this in the future we need to pay attention to this."

Her answer was "All that other stuff happened but only Bush is bad!"

You come in and say, "Bush bad!"

I say, "Duh! Bush bad, we already all agreed 'Bush bad'. Now the conversation is past that and you are not contributing."

You say, "Bush Bad! I'm smart!"

I say, "Yes... Bush bad... Now catch up."

You say, "Bush bad!"

over and over again. The thread is getting boring. I hope Desh starts another one and she and I can continue on the conversation of the contributors that led up to "Bush Bad!"

You and I then can have fun attempting to insult each other and play the "Bush Bad!" game in this thread.

Regardless of who I am voting for, or who you think I am voting for, Bush was still bad.

Bad, bad Bush.
 
Damocles said:
You are only pointing out now that you have no comprehension in what you read. First, this thread is not in a vacuum, and is an extension of earlier conversations in other threads between Desh, SF, and I.

While the beggining of this thread was "This is Bush being bad." It quickly progressed past that.

My answer was "Yes, it is. However he couldn't have been bad here if all this before didn't happen, if we want to avoid this in the future we need to pay attention to this."

Her answer was "All that other stuff happened but only Bush is bad!"

You come in and say, "Bush bad!"

I say, "Duh! Bush bad, we already all agreed 'Bush bad'. Now the conversation is past that and you are not contributing."

You say, "Bush Bad! I'm smart!"

I say, "Yes... Bush bad... Now catch up."

You say, "Bush bad!"

over and over again. The thread is getting boring. I hope Desh starts another one and she and I can continue on the conversation of the contributors that led up to "Bush Bad!"
Click to expand...

But as you agreed, the dogged enforement of these laws is the executive's responsibility alone. That's what the article was about. Even in the greater context, the final implementation of this bullshit is the executives responsibility.
 
AssHatZombie said:
But as you agreed, the dogged enforement of these laws is the executive's responsibility alone. That's what the article was about. Even in the greater context, the final implementation of this bullshit is the executives responsibility.
Click to expand...
Duh. Bush bad. Yes, I agreed. Bush bad. I agreed Bush Bad in my first post and other following posts.

However, agreeing to this I also have to understand that it was Clinton's before, and Bush's before him. Wow, now we are getting somewhere. If you can comprehend that "Bush bad." was agreed to long ago. I am almost positive you can do it! Come on, AHZ!

;)

Now, as for the executive being the "sole reponsibility for enforcement". True, and he actually asked for more laws that made it even worse. However, in order to have the laws to selectively enforce who created them? In other words, where did this begin? Could we have foreseen it before it got to this point, and if so how?

If we ignore all previous contributors to the problem we will repeat them. I wish people like you recognized that so we can continue a real conversation rather than more "Bush bad, me smart!"

These are the heavier questions that we have been speaking of in this thread. You will again repeat "Bush Bad!" But again, please catch up to where we are. We've already passed this corner. "Warning" us about the upcoming curve that we already passed isn't helping or contributing to the conversation.

Bush sided with the banks in 2004. That was bad. That was the article. I agree "Bush Bad." I did long ago.
 
Damocles said:
Duh. Bush bad. Yes, I agreed. Bush bad. I agreed Bush Bad in my first post and other following posts.

However, agreeing to this I also have to understand that it was Clinton's before, and Bush's before him. Wow, now we are getting somewhere. If you can comprehend that "Bush bad." was agreed to long ago. I am almost positive you can do it! Come on, AHZ!

;)

Now, as for the executive being the "sole reponsibility for enforcement". True, and he actually asked for more laws that made it even worse. However, in order to have the laws to selectively enforce who created them? In other words, where did this begin? Could we have foreseen it before it got to this point, and if so how?

If we ignore all previous contributors to the problem we will repeat them. I wish people like you recognized that so we can continue a real conversation rather than more "Bush bad, me smart!"

These are the heavier questions that we have been speaking of in this thread. You will again repeat "Bush Bad!" But again, please catch up to where we are. We've already passed this corner. "Warning" us about the upcoming curve that we already passed isn't helping or contributing to the conversation.
Click to expand...
It is the case that laws have no tangible effect unless the executive decides to enforce them adequately. And that's was bush's territory.
 
Epicurus said:
Damo and AHZ should have Lifetime Achievement Awards for "Most Boring Arguments".
Click to expand...
Yes.

And BTW, yes AHZ, Bush Bad. I know, Bush Bad. Now, can you tell me exactly what other contributors there might have been that led up to the poor decision of Bush to side with the banks?
 
Damocles said:
Yes.

And BTW, yes AHZ, Bush Bad. I know, Bush Bad. Now, can you tell me exactly what other contributors there might have been that led up to the poor decision of Bush to side with the banks?
Click to expand...


I could, but I choose not to. We're focusing on bush now, pay attention.
 
AssHatZombie said:
I could, but I choose not to. We're focusing on bush now, pay attention.
Click to expand...
We aren't. You are displaying your childlike quality of misunderstanding the subject of the thread or anything larger than what you want to see in it.

Let's try again. What contributors were there in making the laws that created the problem that led to Bush taking the side of the banks in 2004?
 
Damocles said:
We aren't. You are displaying your childlike quality of misunderstanding the subject of the thread or anything larger than what you want to see in it.

Let's try again. What contributors were there in making the laws that created the problem that led to Bush taking the side of the banks in 2004?
Click to expand...

Yes. We are.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top