Am I the only one that still likes Bush? (The President)

[TheAnvil 0]

That wasn't what the fellow was referring to. Read again. Funjumper's response to "Actually, many of the Swift Vets were in the same boat unit at the same time... but thanks for playing!! " was a non-clicky link to the wikipedia article from which my quote came.

Reading is fundamental.

If you and funjumper were actually familiar with Naval service - which you aren't - you would realize what sort of complement the boats went out with, what 'served with' means, and how amazing it is that so many from Kerry's wardroom spoke out against him.

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

If you and funjumper were actually familiar with Naval service - which you aren't - you would realize what sort of complement the boats went out with, what 'served with' means, and how amazing it is that so many from Kerry's wardroom spoke out against him.

I am not disputing that. I am saying that funjumper clearly stated he was talking about those that were actually in his boat. You retorted with those in his boat unit, which I understand to be different.

For some one who keeps harping about reading for comprehension and reading is fundamental, you seem to like to go with the assumption behind it as opposed to that which was actually written.

Then when you lose the argument, you make a statement about how we need to read up about how amazing it is that those in his wardroom spoke out against him. Pretty weak....

[TheAnvil 0]

I haven't lost the argument at all...you're ignoring facts. READ THE POST FROM FUNJUMPERS INITIAL POST ON DOWN. READ FOR COMPREHENSION.

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

I am not disputing that. I am saying that funjumper clearly stated he was talking about those that were actually in his boat. You retorted with those in his boat unit, which I understand to be different.

He did state that...then went on to say

Quote

The swift boat liars claimed to have "served with" Kerry. In reality, they never did. They may have been in Vietnam at the same time. That doesn't constitute "served with", unless you are a right wing lying sack of shit.

...which is false. That is the point that Anvil and I were making. The SBV were in the same unit as Kerry at the same time as Kerry, in the same place as Kerry. That does constitute "serving with".

FYI edit for SkyDekker and funjumper101:

The "wardroom" is the group of officers assigned to an individual ship or a shore-based unit... in this case, Kerry's contemporaries... the other Swift boat commanders, not the crew serving on Kerry's boat.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[SkyDekker 1,465]

yes he clearly states that he sees serving with as being defined differently than the way the two of you are defining it.

But then, that would flow from some pretty simple reading comprehension.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

yes he clearly states that he sees serving with as being defined differently than the way the two of you are defining it.

But then, that would flow from some pretty simple reading comprehension.

That was the point Vinnie and I were making...there were a whole lot more people serving with him than just the guys on his boat. That's not to say that everything the SBV said was true...but it doesn't discount it, either.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

That was the point Vinnie and I were making...there were a whole lot more people serving with him than just the guys on his boat. That's not to say that everything the SBV said was true...but it doesn't discount it, either.

And he clearly states that he will take the opinion of those that served on his boat, to those that served with him more at arms length.

Vinny clearly believes those that served with him at more fo an arms length and completely discounts the opinion of those that actually served on his boat (save one).

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Vinny clearly believes those that served with him at more fo an arms length and completely discounts the opinion of those that actually served on his boat (save one).

And at the same time, the libs say that nobody involved with Bush can be trusted BECAUSE they're working with Bush, and that we should believe Kennedy, Schumer, Clinton et al because they're not as closely associated....

Nice conundrum on both sides of the issue, isn't it?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[TheAnvil 0]

Vinny clearly understands Naval operations and structure far better than you. And, for the record, I read the accounts of the people who served on his boat. After reading the other data, reconciling it with my own experiences, and speaking with a couple of actual Swifties, I've made my decision on how I feel about the matter. If you disagree, so be it.

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[GTAVercetti 0]

Quote

READ FOR COMPREHENSION.

See, typing arrogant and pompous stuff like this every other post is why I tend to gloss over most of SC these days.

The minute someone implies I am stupid just because they think I don't get it, is the exact minute they lose the argument. Sniping just makes me ignore what valid points you may have to say.

Please note that this post is not in response to anyone in particular. It is a GENERAL post of dissatisfaction.

Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Vinny clearly understands Naval operations and structure far better than you. And, for the record, I read the accounts of the people who served on his boat. After reading the other data, reconciling it with my own experiences, and speaking with a couple of actual Swifties, I've made my decision on how I feel about the matter. If you disagree, so be it.

- Reread for comprehension.

- Reread and concentrate on comprehension this time.

- Get your facts straight and get back with us.

- Reading is fundamental. The thread has been officially hijacked to the Swifties vs. Kerry topic! Ha! Quite funny.

- Re-read for comprehension. Read what is stated and not what you want to see.

- Read again. Reading is fundamental.

- I haven't lost the argument at all...you're ignoring facts. READ THE POST FROM FUNJUMPERS INITIAL POST ON DOWN. READ FOR COMPREHENSION.





Why is it important to berate people? You brought in the Swiftboat vets on the first post of the second page, so you hijacked the thread that was entitled, “Am I the only one that still likes Bush?”

If you think, “sKerry,” as you put it, was so bad and Bush was a better choice and you want the general populous to buy that, which they apparently don’t due to crushingly low ratings, then you must establish how Kerry would have done worse. OK, so he is rich and spoiled, as you say; does that mean he’s a train wreck? You would have a huge burden to overcome since Bush has fubared this country into such a mess from every angle.

As for berating people by inferring they need to reread and that reading is fundamental is your frustration coming through. Instead if berating, make your arguments. To claim Bush is a great or even a suitable president because Kerry is a POS fails to do that, regardless of the argument topic. I could say GM cars are good because Ford and Mopar suck, but that doesn’t make GM good.

Thread topic: Am I the only one that still likes Bush?

Conclusion: Apparently not, but the numbers of Bush supporters are shrinking.

Anvil: Support Bush by establishing that he is worthy via the merits of his actions as president and I would love to argue that with you.

[TheAnvil 0]

My, my, my have I gotten our left leaning denizens perturbed here. Most humorous. Right wing sack of shit = OK. Get your facts straight and get back to us = pompous and berating. Remember that bailiff from Night Court? Oooooooooooook. Think that if you like.

Ahhh...bwaaaahahahahahahahahaaaaaa!!!! Haaaaaahahahahaaaaa!

Lucky, I'm beginning to lose count of the number of times you state Bush has screwed up the country from every angle and failed to state why you believe so. Perhaps you might provide some proof of this. Unlike you, I don't take it as something res ipsa loquitor.

Other left leaning fellows, if it bothers you that folks who have served in the military have different views from yours with regards to the Swift Vets' claims, then I would recommend not using Kerry's service in comparison to GWB's to make a political point. Rather, I would slam GWB's service without comparison to Kerry's, because saying 'Kerry went to Vietnam' tends to reminds conservatives how the man's shipmates from his wardroom think of him.

Reading is fundamental is an utterly hilarious comment - and an truthful one.



I'm a pompous JACKASS

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[narcimund 0]

Quote

My, my, my have I gotten our left leaning denizens perturbed here. Most humorous. Right wing sack of shit = OK. Get your facts straight and get back to us = pompous and berating. Remember that bailiff from Night Court? Oooooooooooook. Think that if you like.

Ahhh...bwaaaahahahahahahahahaaaaaa!!!! Haaaaaahahahahaaaaa!

Can someone please translate this into English for me?

First Class Citizen Twice Over

[GTAVercetti 0]

Well since Lucky and I were the only two who made note of your snipes (coupled with the addition of pompous to your sig there), I must be included in as a left-leaning denizen (which I shall further put means democrat in this situation). Of course, this is negated by the fact that I think the democratic party is a bunch of spineless iditos without a plan (and have said so numerous times) who want to do MANY things I oppose.

But then, making sweeping generalizations is much easier.

Nor do I care about this Kerry/swift boat crap. I only point out that assaulting a person' ability to read is one of the poorest arguments one can make. From either side. It is a not so clever way of saying "You are an idiiot" without saying it instead of JUST clarifying your position (which I do note you tried to do). But if it makes you feel superior and high-minded and warm and fuzzy, carry on.

Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

My, my, my have I gotten our left leaning denizens perturbed here. Most humorous. Right wing sack of shit = OK. Get your facts straight and get back to us = pompous and berating. Remember that bailiff from Night Court? Oooooooooooook. Think that if you like.

Ahhh...bwaaaahahahahahahahahaaaaaa!!!! Haaaaaahahahahaaaaa!

Lucky, I'm beginning to lose count of the number of times you state Bush has screwed up the country from every angle and failed to state why you believe so. Perhaps you might provide some proof of this. Unlike you, I don't take it as something res ipsa loquitor.

Other left leaning fellows, if it bothers you that folks who have served in the military have different views from yours with regards to the Swift Vets' claims, then I would recommend not using Kerry's service in comparison to GWB's to make a political point. Rather, I would slam GWB's service without comparison to Kerry's, because saying 'Kerry went to Vietnam' tends to reminds conservatives how the man's shipmates from his wardroom think of him.

Reading is fundamental is an utterly hilarious comment - and an truthful one.



I'm a pompous JACKASS

Let's see, how do I word this...... oh yea, GO BACK AND REREAD MY POST, I DIDN'T CALL YOU A RIGHT WING POS, SOMEONE ELSE DID. READ FOR COMPREHENSION.

Hard to believe the guy who tells everyone else to reread for comprehension, misread a post and thought I berated him...... laughable really.

THIS IS HILLARIOUS:

Reading is fundamental is an utterly hilarious comment - and an truthful one.

...an truthful one.

As for Bush screwing the country from every angle, start with this and I will supply more:

National Debt:

before Clinton = 4T
after Clinton = 5.5T
currently = 8.4T (after a little over 5 years of Bush, projected to be 11T by Bush's 8 years end).

So start by taking a bite out of that, then I will get back with more stuff Bush has hosed us with.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

My, my, my have I gotten our left leaning denizens perturbed here. Most humorous. Right wing sack of shit = OK. Get your facts straight and get back to us = pompous and berating. Remember that bailiff from Night Court? Oooooooooooook. Think that if you like.

Ahhh...bwaaaahahahahahahahahaaaaaa!!!! Haaaaaahahahahaaaaa!

Can someone please translate this into English for me?

Yes, I can. Anvil didn't read with enough comprehension, so he thought I wrote that about right wing POS.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Well since Lucky and I were the only two who made note of your snipes (coupled with the addition of pompous to your sig there), I must be included in as a left-leaning denizen (which I shall further put means democrat in this situation). Of course, this is negated by the fact that I think the democratic party is a bunch of spineless iditos without a plan (and have said so numerous times) who want to do MANY things I oppose.

But then, making sweeping generalizations is much easier.

Nor do I care about this Kerry/swift boat crap. I only point out that assaulting a person' ability to read is one of the poorest arguments one can make. From either side. It is a not so clever way of saying "You are an idiiot" without saying it instead of JUST clarifying your position (which I do note you tried to do). But if it makes you feel superior and high-minded and warm and fuzzy, carry on.

Especially considering he had me quoted as writing something about a right wing POS, when in fact, someone else wrote that. Perhaps he should read with more comprehension.

[TheAnvil 0]

Ahhhhh...you saw funjumper's post, did you? Good! You obviously knew where my quote came from then, having read my post - and even quoted it - must also undoubtedly know I never attributed the insult to you, though you act as if I did. Most puzzling behavior on your part. Ahhh well. Anyhoo, I don't recall anyone becoming agitated or perturbed over that, yet my innocuous reread for comprehension quote creates so much turmoil. Tsk tsk. The double-standards in here. For the record, if I want to call somebody an idiot, I do it via PM. I post here in SC for fun and jocularity.

Lucky, you state GWB has screwed up the country from every angle, and then only come up with one topic to discuss - the deficit. Granted, the deficit has many facets, but that's hardly a very good showing to support your hypothesis.

We've discussed the deficit before, you and I. I believe the last time we ended the thread with you being angry about the deficit while simultaneously advocating an increase in entitlement spending and denouncing GWB's attempt to eliminate Dept. of Education programs that had been shown to be ineffective. Quite humorous.

Which aspect of the budget deficit would you like to discuss now? Discretionary spending? Entitlement spending? Amount of debt held by the public? Gov't working capital funds, perhaps?

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[ViperPilot 0]

Quote

It's obvious we are losing control

Are you fucking kidding? Over the past 3 years, the insurgents have proven to be nothing more than a massive pain in the ass. They have not disrupted the creation of the Iraqi military/police force (who are getting much better as we speak...now they can handle operations completely on their own...big improvement), they have not stopped national elections, they have not stopped the will of the Iraqi people to have a free state. They have not accomplished a SINGLE GOAL. No one's losing control except maybe you over reality.

Quote

Specifically, as of right now, privacy. SEE: Wiretaps, Patriot Act.

Oh wow, they can wiretap people, oh my God, wait, you say they've been doing that for freaking 40 years? The only thing the PA changed was allowing roving wiretaps...as it should, non-roving wiretaps were retarded and made much less sense. By the way, you've obviously jumped on the bandwagon of "the govt is listening to all of us!", but if you actually read a little, you'd see the PA requires law enforcement/feds to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that wiretapping an individual is crucial to a case...then the fed judge gives a warrant. Yes, a warrant. Of course the misled think the feds can run around tapping anyone they want...well they can't, just freakin read. If you're not a criminal and you're not doing anything shady or connected to any shady people, YOU WILL NOT BE TAPPED.

[ViperPilot 0]

***All kinds of rights to privacy. Privacy is nowhere in the Const, but it is the center of many decisions.

The right to have your door be the threshold of privacy is gone, now the cops may enter your house, remove you and then get the warrant. ***

That's such bull dude...if they're is an imminent threat from you in your house (like you're about to walk out the door to the local mall with a dirty bomb and LE gets wind of it...yeah they're gonna come and stop you), they've gotta do something about it. Otherwise, NO, they cannot just bust down whoever's door they want and drag them kick and screaming out. THEY NEED A WARRANT (besides MAYBE an imminent situation like the example above). Completely false.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

***All kinds of rights to privacy. Privacy is nowhere in the Const, but it is the center of many decisions.

The right to have your door be the threshold of privacy is gone, now the cops may enter your house, remove you and then get the warrant. ***

That's such bull dude...if they're is an imminent threat from you in your house (like you're about to walk out the door to the local mall with a dirty bomb and LE gets wind of it...yeah they're gonna come and stop you), they've gotta do something about it. Otherwise, NO, they cannot just bust down whoever's door they want and drag them kick and screaming out. THEY NEED A WARRANT (besides MAYBE an imminent situation like the example above). Completely false.

Before you calling bull and spouting off when you have no education in the law, research or ask someone first.

1) I didn;t write that they could kick down your door, but I won;t eliminate that possibility - again, didn;t write that.

2) There was a Texas case about 5 years ago where a guy had some drugs in plain view, the cops walked up and saw it, they then crossed the doorway, I think the door was open or unlocked, and they entered, removed all people from the house, they then secured the door and obained a warrant.

Maybe Lawrocket can weigh in in this, and I will see if I can find the case. Formerly, the only reasons the cops could execute a warrantless search was in cases of:

1) Exigency (fancy way to say 'emergency')
- fire, rape distress, domestic abuse, etc

2) A felon fleeing thru your house
- cops can chase and admit whatever they see along the way thru your house

But formerly you could stand in your doorway and blow pot smoke outthe door at them and they couldn't do a thing w/o a warrant. I don't care if you believe me - this is why you need an attny if you get into trouble - no clue of the law

[Nightingale 0]

Well, I think standing in the doorway and smoking pot would probably fall under a "plain view" exception...?

[akarunway 1]

See my AT&T thread

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Well, I think standing in the doorway and smoking pot would probably fall under a "plain view" exception...?

Not inside a doorway though. There is nothing exigent about smoking pot. That's my point, the US SUp Ct has crossed tha line and diminished the "Threshold" provision fro nin-exigency.

Aren't you in law school? I found some precedent online, show us your stuff.

[Skyrad 0]

Quack

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca