| Live Weather Stations: East Gloucester | Rockport | Sandy Bay Yacht Club | GoMOOS Buoy | |||||
Gloucester Inner Harbor
![]() |
Sandy Bay Yacht Club
![]() |
Sandy Bay Yacht Club
![]() |
Lanes Cove
![]() |
||
| Author | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
oldhippie01930 |
|||
|
Right, 99! Get a rubber room.
|
|||
Island Annie |
|||
|
I'm not sure that anyone, and that includes Obama, sees the Weather Underground as heroes. It was an ugly time in our history - after less radical equal
rights leaders had been shot to death and generations of blacks had themselves been terrorized, often by law enforcement. Can't imagine what you'd do
in that situation. Keep following the rules, I suppose.
So interesting how you people want to make Obama out to be some kind of angry black man - all the while insisting that blacks have nothing to be angry about. But an angry white man - well, he's got a legitmate beef, whether he's a militia wacko, a freeper, or a radio show host. His anger's okay. Because it disguises his fear.
"How deadly stupid we are that we can study history and live through what we live through, and complacently
allow the same causes to put us through the same thing again!"
-Eleanor Roosevelt, 1934 |
|||
Agent99 |
|||
|
So which is it? Here you say state that McCain will siphon off voters away from Obama who feel that feel that though the Weather Underground may have been a
terrorist organization, the anti-government militia types of the 90s were heroes of their age.
Oh sure, McCain will siphon away a few Hillary voters- those upon whom Hillary shamefully, but successfully, played the race card; those who fear the new and unknown; and those who feel that though the Weather Underground may have been a terrorist organization, the anti-government militia types of the 90s were heroes of their age. and here you state I'm not sure that anyone, and that includes Obama, sees the Weather Underground as heroes. I certainly disagree with that, by the way. I think there are those on the radical left, like Ayers, who do absolutely believe themselves to be heroes. He has shown no remorse for his crimes. Instead he stated in 2001 that he wished they had planted more bombs. To suggest that followers of the likes of Ayers and other terrorists would choose McCain over Obama is just ridiculous. So interesting how you people want to make Obama out to be some kind of angry black man - all the while insisting that blacks have nothing to be angry about. It is unclear who you mean by you. I don't think Obama presents himself as an angry black man. I think he presents himself as an opportunist. I strongly believe that he joined Trinity Church not because he shared the anger of its ranting, raving and very angry pastor Jeramiah Wright or for any particular quest for spirituality. He joined Trinity, IMO, because Reverend Wright controlled the vote of Trinity's thousands of members. I also doubt that Obama sees Ayers as a hero. More likely he sees him as a strong political connection to Chicago's radical left, a powerful political presence in Illinois. What is most troubling is that Ayers violent criminal past does not seem to bother Obama in the least. The choice Obama made to associate with these people is the reason he won a congressional seat in his state. Now that he is on the national stage, these associations are coming back to bite him....as they should.
Last Edited By: Agent99
07/25/08 06:58 PM.
Edited 2 times.
|
|||
leftwingnut |
|||
Island Annie wrote: She's morally incapable of honesty, Annie... just pay her no never mind... To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.-Theodore Roosevelt, The Kansas City Star, May 7, 1918 |
|||
leftwingnut |
|||
Y DEVELOP wrote: It's just one of many examples of the Repugnican slime machine at work, Y. They know that there are morons out there who are actually stupid enough not
to see through it... or morally challenged enough not to care that they spread such filth.
In Bitch 99's case, probably both.
To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.-Theodore Roosevelt, The Kansas City Star, May 7, 1918 |
|||
leftwingnut |
|||
Island Annie wrote: Spot-on, Annie, but I doubt Bitch 99 has the wherewithal to understand... or the moral fiber to care.
To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.-Theodore Roosevelt, The Kansas City Star, May 7, 1918 |
|||
Agent99 |
|||
|
Speaking of the angry white man.....using the term "man" very loosely of course!
|
|||
brainfix |
|||
|
Do humanimals always get so defensive when queried about their addddddddictions?
|
|||
oldhippie01930 |
Agent 99 Gives Careful Consideration to her Next Repsonse | ||
|
|||
vodka rocks |
|||
|
Nice talk LWN. Time to find a hobby.
|
|||
brainfix |
|||
|
Very controlled, OH. Can you imagine what it would take for her to orgasm? Please.
|
|||
oldhippie01930 |
|||
|
Good point, VR. Calling 99 that awful name is a terrible oversimplification.
|
|||
leftwingnut |
|||
vodka rocks wrote: It's 100% accurate, whether you realize it or not -- not that I care what you think. I'll continue to post TRVTH... To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.-Theodore Roosevelt, The Kansas City Star, May 7, 1918 |
|||
Y DEVELOP |
|||
|
Agent 99 has still not answered my question as to the significance of her initial post by John Murtagh. I am waiting...
|
|||
brainfix |
|||
|
A99 will post at her convenience and based on her delusional beliefs. That much we know.
|
|||
vodka rocks |
|||
leftwingnut wrote: Your "TRVTH" and any other credibility you think you have, is diluted by your anger and foul mouth. You take this stuff WAAAAY too seriously.
Lighten up.
|
|||
oldhippie01930 |
|||
brainfix wrote: I think you will find this to be the case with the vast majority of neocons, Brain. If you study up on some of the more prevalent mental illnesses, you will learn that folks who suffer with these have a very different world view than those who are better able to separate emotion from hard fact. Each thought they process is heavily colored by their emotional filters, oftentimes compromising reality in the process. Neocons are not very different in this regard, and you'd probably find that the lot of them are made up of sufferers of a variety of emotional maladies. They tend to gravitate to black and white, all or nothing, thinking, and find it very difficult to see shades of gray. They love structure and tend to lack creativity of any kind, other than writing prolifically about thier dislikes. They will also see you as either all good or all bad, depending upon which way the wind is blowing. If you simply dismiss them as the troubled people which they most certainly are, then communication with them will be completely cut off, since they will easily sense that you are exposing their condition. Sometimes if you preface your comments with something like "I understand you are upset about this, but please help me understand your view on this better", then you have a chance of getting them to reveal the thought process behind some of their incredibly bizarre pronouncements. You probably will not understand their message due to the emotional distortions involved, but please don't press them too hard on this, as they might have a conniption fit* without the normal provocation, and that's not a pretty sight to see. * Conniption Fit (See also "Hissy Fit"): Assume for a minute you decided to tell your parents about your plans to ditch college and join the circus. The next event you witness should qualify as a conniption fit. A conniption fit is a sudden, violent emotional outburst generally triggered by shocking news or an unexpected turn of events. Unlike a tantrum, which could be triggered with little outside provocation, a conniption fit is often an anticipated response to incredibly bad or disappointing news. A conniption fit is generally characterized by a tirade of strong language accompanied by signs of frustration, rage and/or sadness. Sometimes a person having a conniption fit is reduced to stutters and incomprehensible epithets. The origins of the term conniption fit are not exactly clear, although many sources place the first known usage around the 1830s. Some theorize the word "conniption" is literally a corruption of the word corruption, which at one time described feelings of anger or sadness. Others believe the word "conniption" was formed as a nonsense word, suggesting a mock Latin origin. There was also an informal English word, canapsha, which had roughly the same meaning as "conniption" at the time. It is even possible that the phrase "conniption fit" arose from the Yiddish language, since Yiddish words like knish are routinely pronounced with both the hard K and N sounds. Some people use conniption fit interchangeably with other descriptors such as temper tantrum or hissy fit. While each phrase can describe a violent emotional outburst, there are some subtle differences. A temper tantrum can be triggered whenever an emotionally immature person experiences frustration or disappointment. A child who drops an ice cream cone might have a temper tantrum, for example. A person with a histrionic personality or poor anger management skills might have a hissy fit when faced with disappointment or denial, a response generally seen as immature or inappropriate for the situation. A conniption fit, by comparison, could be triggered whenever an otherwise rational person is confronted with an irrational set of circumstances. Under those conditions, an emotional response may very well be anticipated, although having a conniption fit could be translated as a momentary lapse of reason. |
|||
Zannylicious |
|||
|
I went out last night with one of my favorite Summer people here... She is also a Republican, and of course, we got talking about the election.. I had made the
comment "I really don't feel comfortable drinking the Obama Kool-Aide, nor do I feel totally comfortable voting for McCain"
FINALLY!!! someone else totally agrees with me.. We know that Obama is likely to win this election. No doubt about that there.. So, now, do we still, as Republicans vote for McCain, or do we become followers and vote for Obama?? The choice Obama made to associate with these people is the reason he won a congressional seat in his state. Now that he is on the national stage, these associations are coming back to bite him....as they should. 99 This was also brought up in our conversation.. The former associations kind of scare me, quite frankly.. It seems to me that he cut off ties to Wright after he caught some flack from his rants on "God Damn America" for example. This is a man Obama said he saw as a Father Figure. I just can't wait to see whom McCain picks to be his running mate.... |
|||
Island Annie |
|||
|
Why do they scare you Zanny? What do you think that Obama might do that is a result of listening to Wright?
If anything, I think Obama may prove to other blacks that such rhetoric is not conducive to progress. The days of the Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton way of talking to people are over. They never accomplished much from what I could see.
"How deadly stupid we are that we can study history and live through what we live through, and complacently
allow the same causes to put us through the same thing again!"
-Eleanor Roosevelt, 1934 |
|||
Zannylicious |
|||
|
Annie-Bananny-
I think I must have a "Guilt By Association" thing with Obama. |
|||
sidebar © ezdesign