Do Democrats Comprehend?

In truth, it was "the people" that finally got us out of vietnam...

the peace movement made an impact and Congress was forced to do such...they did nothing but fund this war from our first involvement in Viet Nam during the Eisenhower administration in 1958/59 I believe...thru to the early 70's....

It was us, we the people, that forced congress to follow what we wanted.

The Democrats were the ones that FINALLY listened to the public....and the republicans have used this as a negative political tool over and over again to manipulate small minded people....(shakes head) ....even to this day....just amazing.

And this past week, the people of this country spoke again....Congress better listen to their bosses, or they will pay with their jobs....as they should.

If congress can convince the public that there is a real threat to us for being their and change the publics sentiment on this war through LEGITIMATE info and legitimate means, then that is totally another story...this will not be done and can't be done imo, so ....the public will determine congress's actions...eventually! :(
 
Dixie said:
I am not going to argue with you, I think I know what my priorities are. If you just want to rehash a bunch of old debate over who, what, why, on Iraq, we aren't going to get anywhere. The argument is over, the people spoke on Tuesday, but you still seem to think it is valid to continue arguing it, even though you won.

The issue now, is what to do about Iraq. Okay, you indicate, you don't like the idea of establishing a democratic Arab pro-western ally in the heart of the Caliphate, so what is your alternative? To bluster and brag about yourself the next two years? I don't think that is what America voted for, do you?
Click to expand...

Dixie has made some bone-headed posts in the last two-three months and he has written some confused and inarticualte statements but this one "I think I know what my priorities are" seems to me to be the cake-taker. The rest of the post is equally confused. He goes from saying last week why every Republican voted Republican, and didn't vote Republican, which in itself was quite confusing, since he said that he voted Republican as a protest vote, but he didn't allow that same possibility to any other voting Republican, to now telling us all why the Democrats won, and what American "voted for." As a person who voted in a reactionary manner it is imperative to tell us just how he would have any insight into the voting intentions of anyone besides himself.

I don't know about anyone else here but on a personal level, I wonder how someone who only "thinks" they "know" what their own "priorities are" could be so damn sure about the priorities and motivations of every other person in America. Stiking; simply striking!!!!!
 
after the dems cut off funding for the Vietnam war, which was the right thing to do, they paid a price, and a huge price, for decades.

Let me ask you something... if it was "the right thing to do" why did they "pay a price" for decades? In democracy, we generally support the idea that the "right thing to do" is what everyone agrees is "the right thing to do" and not what one party decides it is.

So to pretend that the dems are going to consign themselves to that again is also disingenuous.

No one is pretending here, the Democrats ran on an anti-war platform and won. America "gave you the keys" and they don't expect you to go for a joy ride! What's disingenuous, is thinking that the Democrats EVER had a plan, or EVER considered the consequence of what to do if they won. You are trying to shirk your responsibility here, the people voted you in power to get us out of Iraq, and I would suggest you find a way to do that, or the people are going to let you hear about it. Let's not start the chickenshit hiding behind the past, and claiming you can't do anything, that isn't why Americans voted for Democrats!
 
Dixie said:
after the dems cut off funding for the Vietnam war, which was the right thing to do, they paid a price, and a huge price, for decades.

Let me ask you something... if it was "the right thing to do" why did they "pay a price" for decades? In democracy, we generally support the idea that the "right thing to do" is what everyone agrees is "the right thing to do" and not what one party decides it is.
Click to expand...

I would never have guessed that you of the principled stand were such a relativist! I guess then according to this thinking, your position on abortion, once you enter South Dakota or any other location where the voters have spoken on it and approved it, is wrong. I'm at least glad to see that you are finally making such progressive admittances.

Dixie said:
So to pretend that the dems are going to consign themselves to that again is also disingenuous.

No one is pretending here, the Democrats ran on an anti-war platform and won. America "gave you the keys" and they don't expect you to go for a joy ride! What's disingenuous, is thinking that the Democrats EVER had a plan, or EVER considered the consequence of what to do if they won. You are trying to shirk your responsibility here, the people voted you in power to get us out of Iraq, and I would suggest you find a way to do that, or the people are going to let you hear about it. Let's not start the chickenshit hiding behind the past, and claiming you can't do anything, that isn't why Americans voted for Democrats!
Click to expand...

So now the man who just a few posts ago was ranting about how important it is that we stay in Iraq and finish the job no matter what so the troops would not have died in vain and we don't have another Vietnam, is here claiming that not only do the Democrats have to find a way out, but that they have to do it pretty quickly. I guess BILLO is nothing but a relativist after all. I guess embryonic stem cell research is right once you hit the Missouri border, huh BILLO. Indeed, its a responsibility.
 
Dixie...why in the world are you still trying to convince anyone that you have even the faintest clue what "America" wants? You have been wrong for longer than I'd care to think about, regarding everything from the Iraq War, to Schiavo, to Bolton, to the '06 election (that's when the Dems were supposed to feel all of that backlash you promised....remember?)

As I have tried explaining to you several times, I don't think any prominent Dem sees what happened last week as a mandate for a far-left agenda, but you seem to be sticking with this one, out of your own fear & who knows what else. Everything Pelosi & Reid are talking about are straight down the middle of American values - cleaning up Congress, raising the minimum wage, helping with college tuition, funding stem cell research. There are no immediate plans to force people into gay marriages.

As for Iraq, things WILL change, as the American people have asked for. I'm not sure if you're reading the news, but they're already considering a variety of options.

Pipe down for awhile. Your track record has been abysmal, and what you say has little value to any reasonable discussion about the pulse of the American people, or how Congress should legislate going forward.
 
Onceler said:
Dixie...why in the world are you still trying to convince anyone that you have even the faintest clue what "America" wants? You have been wrong for longer than I'd care to think about, regarding everything from the Iraq War, to Schiavo, to Bolton, to the '06 election (that's when the Dems were supposed to feel all of that backlash you promised....remember?)

As I have tried explaining to you several times, I don't think any prominent Dem sees what happened last week as a mandate for a far-left agenda, but you seem to be sticking with this one, out of your own fear & who knows what else. Everything Pelosi & Reid are talking about are straight down the middle of American values - cleaning up Congress, raising the minimum wage, helping with college tuition, funding stem cell research. There are no immediate plans to force people into gay marriages.

As for Iraq, things WILL change, as the American people have asked for. I'm not sure if you're reading the news, but they're already considering a variety of options.

Pipe down for awhile. Your track record has been abysmal, and what you say has little value to any reasonable discussion about the pulse of the American people, or how Congress should legislate going forward.
Click to expand...

Poor lonely, reactionary BILLO, he doesn't have a clue and doesn't want one!!!
 
Man, you guys are pathetic. Is this all you can think to do? Is it all you have to talk about? Life must really suck for you guys, is all I can say.

Look, I know you two aren't the brightest pair of bulbs on the Dummycrat shelf, so why don't you just save your energy for whenever your 'leaders' tell you what to say? As it stands, you just seem to want to vent your personal frustrations on me, and I don't come here for that. Sorry.
 
Dixie said:
Man, you guys are pathetic. Is this all you can think to do? Is it all you have to talk about? Life must really suck for you guys, is all I can say.

Look, I know you two aren't the brightest pair of bulbs on the Dummycrat shelf, so why don't you just save your energy for whenever your 'leaders' tell you what to say? As it stands, you just seem to want to vent your personal frustrations on me, and I don't come here for that. Sorry.
Click to expand...

You should have voted absentee BILLO, then you could have made some spare copies of the ballot and whenever you were feeling down you could have taken one out and voted straight Republican again as a protest!! "I think I know" it would have had a cathartic effect on you every time you did it.
 
Dixie said:
Man, you guys are pathetic. Is this all you can think to do? Is it all you have to talk about? Life must really suck for you guys, is all I can say.

Look, I know you two aren't the brightest pair of bulbs on the Dummycrat shelf, so why don't you just save your energy for whenever your 'leaders' tell you what to say? As it stands, you just seem to want to vent your personal frustrations on me, and I don't come here for that. Sorry.
Click to expand...

Dixie....look back to your prognostications over the past two years....

THAT is what pathetic is all about. The people were really tired of this stupid counterproductive war in Iraq..... and the jury is still out as to how we will extract ourselves from that mess, but the jury IS out when it comes to continuing to let Bush and Rummy just "play it by ear" and have congress not exercise a ounce of oversight.

You need to come to the grips with the fact that your party abandoned the middle. Democrats ran toward the middle and ran a whole host of blue dog moderate to conservative democrats and they beat your pants off. Why? Because you seemed to feel that your "base" of rabid neocons and religious wacko fundamentalists would come out in force and maintain your grip on congress. The problem was, your incredible level of administrative incompetence and corruption soured your base.... and the middle went with us. Reagan won because he brought Reagan democrats into your camp.... well....they all came home on Tuesday, along with lots of moderates. You claim to be conservative but spend like drunken sailors....you claim to be warriors, but have succeeded only in botching up two wars.... you claim to be righteous and moral, but you take bribes and assfuck pages.... the folks you invite to white house conference calls about strategy for energizing your fundie base against the gays turn out to be hypocrites who hire gay prostitutes and get totally twinked on meth. The all powerful Oz is just some perverted selfish neocon behind the curtain.... the average american figured that out... and they voted accordingly on tuesday. Sorry. It must suck to be a Bush loving neocon about now..... you got your asses KICKED. And Damn, did I enjoy it.
 
Dixie....look back to your prognostications over the past two years....

You mean the prognostications I made about the Republican party losing badly, if they didn't snap back into "conservative" mode and give their base something to vote for? Or the prognostications of how pinheads would ultimately lose the Iraq war for us with their dissent? I saw this coming when Sean Hannity started doing exactly as he chastised the Clintonista Democrats for, and running AGAINST something, instead of standing FOR something.

You and your lying scum buddies, want to twist my words, opinions and commentary into "predictions" and "prognostications" and you do so, in spite of my protests to the contrary. If you had the capacity to actually understand my opinions and comments, you wouldn't need to resort to parsing words and personally attacking me in an attempt to intimidate and tear me down. If you were mentally sharp enough to actually debate subjects with me, you wouldn't have to go to your bag of diversionary tricks and insults, in a pathetic attempt to make yourself look important.
 
no...I mean your prognostications about how the republicans wouldn't lose even ONE seat in each chamber, let alone lose them both completely!

I mean your prognostications regarding the insurgency in Iraq ending with the death of Zarqawi, or your prognostication that America would only lose 500 more troops before we were out of there...

I have not parsed a single thing. That is the downside from being a prolific gadfly.... your words live on long after you wish they would was away like your loveletters to Bush written on the sand at the beach..... unfortunately for you, they remain behind.

Your boy in bluejeans whom you LOVE so much has been a terrible failure. He will, in my opinion, go down as the worst president in the modern era. ANd you have stood by him, steadfastly, cheering on his war in Iraq, even though the smart minds were all saying that this war was doing way more harm than good. You have stood by your bombastic opinion that this war in Iraq was a great idea and that it has been worth every dollar and every drop of American blood spilled in its execution... and that opinion is wrong. Saddam may very well have been a bad guy by American standards, but he was excellent at keeping islamic extremists out of his country (something we have been totally incapable of doing in his absence)... he was excellent at keeping a lid on bloody sectarian violence in his country (something we have been totally incapable of doing in his absence)...and he was excellent at standing firm against Iranian regional hegemony (something we have been totally incapable of doing in his absence). We have wasted nearly 25K dead and wounded Americans, and nearly half a trillion dollars and we have only succeeded in making things worse in the middle east than they were before we invaded Iraq. THAT is your legacy. That is the legacy of George W. Bush. Absent any change of heart on your part and admission of your errors, you will always be a totally discredited neocon gadfly.

And George W. Bush, the man you love in bluejeans, will go down as the single worst pResident in our country's history. He will make Warren G. Harding look like a giant.

Aren't you so proud?
 
no...I mean your prognostications about how the republicans wouldn't lose even ONE seat in each chamber, let alone lose them both completely!

Never prognosticated this, In fact, it goes completely against historic facts regarding mid-terms in presidential second terms. I made a bet, but it was for the sole purpose of shutting your pie hole, not because that was my 'prognostication' of the outcome. It was worth $100 to me, just to have you shut up about it for a few months, I considered it an investment in my peace of mind, but unfortunately, you couldn't keep your end of the bargain. I regret that you misinterpreted this as a "prognostication" on my part, it simply wasn't.

I mean your prognostications regarding the insurgency in Iraq ending with the death of Zarqawi, or your prognostication that America would only lose 500 more troops before we were out of there...

Never prognosticated either of these things. If you want to parse my words and interpret things into what I said, then you can. I can't stop you from misunderstanding, especially when you are determined to do so. Now, run off and find some out-of-context statement I made, and pretend you've proven your case and I am lying. It's what the routine is, right?
 
Hey, Dixie - how 'bout this little prediction?

"Democratic spinmeisters are all lauding yesterday's election results as a "moral victory" despite the fact they didn't win diddly squat. The California seat of Cunningham was supposed to be a bell-weather for the upcoming midterms, being that Duke was sent to jail for corruption, it was the most obvious race for the Democrats to try their 'Culture of Corruption' strategy, and Democrat Busby failed to get even as many votes as she got in the last election for the seat. Even though the strategy failed in this, the most likely race to make it work, Democrats are going to insist the results from yesterday meant some kind of win for the party. I think it was a clear indicator, the voters... even in liberal kookville California... rejected the 'culture of corruption' message from the Democratic party. The strategy is doomed, and yesterday's results proved it clearly. "
 
Hey, I can't help it if retarded people don't comprehend the difference between an opinion and a prediction. An interesting thing occurs, when you stick your neck out and voice an independent opinion, you can sometimes be wrong. It is the reason most simple-minded people such as yourself, are more comfortable regurgitating the party rhetoric, and avoiding independent thought.
 
"The strategy is doomed, and yesterday's results proved it clearly"

Well, I'll do my best to explain to you why the above is a prediction, and not an opinion, Dix. An opinion is something like "Personally, I think the strategy is doomed, and yesterday's results seem to indicate that."

What you wrote above is a pure, bonafide prediction.

Oops...
 
Dixie.... regarding Iraq, you have been wrong at every turn.... regarding the demise of the democratic party, you have been wrong at every turn. Now, you can try to make some grand distinction between your opinions as to the outcome of future events and prognostications, and I really don't want to spend all day counting the angels on the head of THAT pin. SUffice it to say that your opinions about future events have been uniformly wrong and that, given that, perhaps you should consider limiting the expressions of future opinions or, at the very least, understand why everyone laughs at you and doesn't take you seriously when you do.
 
Last edited:
Onceler said:
"The strategy is doomed, and yesterday's results proved it clearly"

Well, I'll do my best to explain to you why the above is a prediction, and not an opinion, Dix. An opinion is something like "Personally, I think the strategy is doomed, and yesterday's results seem to indicate that."

What you wrote above is a pure, bonafide prediction.

Oops...
Click to expand...


No, it is merely taken and perceived by you, a simple-minded moron, as a "prediction", and it wasn't presented as one. This is the problem you seem to be having here, you think that, because you assume it to be a prediction, it simply doesn't matter what anyone else says, including the person who made the statement, you have determined you are right and no one else.

I do not have to preface my remarks with "Personally, I think..." because I am identified by my moniker and avatar, and it is obvious my thoughts are being posted on a message board. Everything I post, assumes that you understand it is prefaced with "Personally, I think..." unless I specifically indicate otherwise, like posting a cut-n-paste article from another source.

What I posted, was a pure bonafide opinion. I honestly didn't think America was stupid enough to elect the Pinheads to power in Congress, and I was obviously mistaken. This doesn't mean I "predicted" anything, especially not something extreme and absurd, it just means I had an opinion which turned out to not be completely accurate. It happens! I could make a list of opinions you've held, that have proven to be less than accurate over the years, and I could even call them 'predictions' and belittle you as a poor prognosticator, and tell you to just shut the fuck up because you don't know what the hell you're talking about. I could do this, but I don't. To me, it is a proverbial cheap shot to take in debate. If you are too intellectually vacant to discuss the issues without having to resort to tearing down your opponent on a personal basis, you are without merit or point. Or, as I call it, "Victory by Default!"
 
"it is merely taken and perceived by you, a simple-minded moron"

"If you are too intellectually vacant to discuss the issues without having to resort to tearing down your opponent on a personal basis, you are without merit or point. "

Does Dixie even understand the irony of these two statements made by him, within the very same post?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top