ND Fills Sandbags--Obama Swigs Beer!
- Thread starter Dixie - In Memoriam
- Start date
Of course. One must "interpret" ideas that are not expressed in order to maintain the "evil" they wish to find. It makes it easier to dismiss an idea if you believe that the messenger is "tainted".
It's an old habit usually built on strong partisanship.
The idea they begin with is that I somehow believe that Obama is "evil", if they begin from that starting point and then color their "interpretation" from that false premise then they can maintain a level of "evil" that isn't overly horrible, but they can dismiss any idea even a simple one like "Don't appear dismissive to the pain of ND so you won't appear like GWB with NO" as "evil" in some way that is implied but not directly stated.
So your simplistic dumbshit responses are OK yet you attack mine. Then, when I provide you with an explanation for my post in response to your criticism I get a "duh?"
You really are on tilt lately.
Please. Basically restating what I had already said to uscitizen is your important "answer" to my previous post?
You have gone seriously downhill. Seriously, what is wrong?
You get "angry" at the simplest things. Then repeat what I say as an "answer" to my post... yet I am supposed to take you seriously?
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
Did you know? ...Katrina marked the first time in US history, a president declared a national disaster, authorizing the release of funds and aid for assistance, two days BEFORE the disaster happened? This didn't get a lot of press coverage at the time, the major networks were too busy interviewing drunks in the French Quarter, who 'planned to ride it out.'
And as I recall, when Bush made the very same point about a presidential appearance interfering with the relief effort, you guys claimed he really just wanted black people to die because they didn't vote Republican. So, I guess this means, since you are making the same case for Obama, he must just want white people to die because they don't vote Democrat?
And to answer the question "Which would you rather do?" If I were a president who campaigned on, and built my political career on, helping people and communities, I'd want to be doing something to help. Not holding daily press conferences to pontificate on what form of alcohol I prefer with my meals. This guy is so caught up in himself, it's not funny.
See, Damo? This is what you're passively endorsing & aligning yourself with.
Congrats...
Again, you "add" meaning liberally when you "interpret" my posts to mean whatever you want them to mean in your mind rather than actually reading what I say.
This is just more weak "interpretive" argument. Basically you build whatever straw man you think will be easy to dismiss then begin arguing with that by implication. It's such a habit with you that as you come on the board I prepare to point out what is being done on whatever thread you decide to start it in.
You want me to have "endorsed" something so badly you just pretend it is there and start off on weak ad homs based on an "interpreted" endorsement that doesn't exist.
Then you repeat it hoping I will attempt to distance myself from whatever idea you want me to have "endorsed".
I have yet to read a post by Dixie in this thread. I answered a simplistic question quite deliberately with a simplistic answer and explained why.
So far all you have done is repeat what I stated, then started in on "interpretive argument".
"Obama has far more than these two choices." <- in this statement we agree.
I'll give you a hint, you are equally good at interpretive argument as interpretive dance.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
See, Damo? This is the treatment you get for maintaining a somewhat "moderate" viewpoint, and showing a willingness to 'side' with liberals on anything. Once they know your weakness, they focus on it.... Oh, let's accuse Damo of endorsing someone we've already demonized as radical, and maybe we can move him into our camp!
Of course, they know this charge will likely not 'convert' you to the left, but it will cause you to respond with a blanket refutation of endorsing Dixie, which was all he was after. The more they can get you to do that, the less they have to work their own mouthpiece.
Why don't you ask the nitwit what was in the post he quoted that was incorrect or inaccurate, any why? Instead of allowing him to play on your emotions for the sole purpose of getting you to attack another conservative.
So, Dixie mentions that when he said that if Bush went to NO, etc that he would get in the way because of his position that people on this board said that it was because Bush wanted to kill black people was he wrong? (Yes, I finally read the post that I was supposedly "endorsing".)
Do you remember people telling us that?
Do you remember people telling us that?
It resides firmly in this world. They were questions based on what I remember.
Do you remember people saying that to us, back in the fp.com days? I do.
Please.
It is so very convenient to ask for evidence that resides on a server you know has been expunged of the posts we made back at that time.
fp.com cannot be searched for those posts any longer.
There were many who suggested it was because people in NO were black that Bush did so horribly in NO. That he didn't care because of that.
I don't. If they did, it wasn't prevalent, and it certainly wasn't the prevalent theme of the criticism nationally.
People were ticked at Bush because he assured NO a day before the storm that the feds were ready for anything, because it took him several days to even react to the fact that New Orleans was overwhelmed, and because he appointed an old buddy whose previous experience was equestrian to head up FEMA, among other measures of incompetence.
The whole gist of Dixie's post is nothing more than "I took crap for 8 years, now it's my turn to dish it out." He's been chomping at the bit to post stuff like this, but it doesn't make the situations remotely comparable.
I recall criticism of Bush but I don't recall people bitching about him not actually being in New Orleans. In fact, I recall criticism him for visiting New Orleans and Alabama shortly after the hurricane and everything was going to shit because he couldn't do anything to help and would only hamper relief efforts by diverting resources.
http://thinkprogress.org/2005/09/02/photo-op-2/
http://thinkprogress.org/2005/09/02/photo-op-2/
It was prevalent enough that Desh was posting about how much Bush hated black people based on poor handling of New Orleans. And very little was said against her by your bunch.
It was what you "endorsed", if we use your pattern of accusation against me.
There was plenty to blame Bush for, if you maintain that only the Federal government could do anything there, but seriously believing he "hates" black people and thus messed it up on purpose was a bit of a far stretch. Yet it was propounded.
Shoot, people created T-Shirts about it it was so prevalent.
http://www.cafepress.com/bushhateblacks
I think it basically started with Kanye's statements, but certainly wasn't rejected by many...
That's pretty weak. Again - the criticism leveled at Bush for Katrina was almost entirely based on the incompetence that was reflected by the event.
I have no interest in trying to refute whatever conjecture you come up with to try to cover your arse.
Anyway, I joined in on the incompetence argument. Bush was a frustrating 8 years for me. He wasn't a conservative yet conservatives supported him because of party affiliation.