Republicans Need Cuckoo part II

IP is the place for boisterous political discussion, but please remember, the Rules still apply, especially with regards to Personal Attacks. These and other inappropriate posts will be removed without notification.

Moderators: Mick, TheGingerMan

Forum rules
IP is the place for boisterous political discussion, but please remember, the Rules still apply, especially with regards to Personal Attacks. These and other inappropriate posts will be removed without notification.

Re: Republicans Need Cuckoo part II

Postby Jaboney » 07 Jun 2010, 12:03

Tigerman wrote:Or, maybe you just forgot to use a smiley when chastising CC?

No. But I also communicate via PM.

I'm shedding responsibilities and trying to find more time for the Pixie and Sprout. Any time you want to takeover IP again, I'll be more than happy to make room.
Forumosan avatar
Jaboney
Maitreya Buddha (Mílèfó)
 
Posts: 10735
Joined: 09 Jun 2005, 02:02
Location: Broadcasting from Neihu
22 Recommends(s)
56 Recognized(s)



Re: Republicans Need Cuckoo part II

Postby Tigerman » 07 Jun 2010, 13:14

J,

Sorry if all this seems personal. Its not actually meant to. I'm just commenting on what I perceive to be a bias in the way some posters are treated. As a token of my good will, I am still saving some shirts for you.

Peace!
As it is, we seem to regard it as a positive objection to a reasoner that he has taken one side or the other. We regard it (in other words) as a positive objection to a reasoner that he has contrived to reach the object of his reasoning. We call a man a bigot or a slave of dogma because he is a thinker who has thought thoroughly and to a definite end.

From: All Things Considered - The Error of Impartiality
Tigerman
Guan Yin (Guānyīn)
 
Posts: 17772
Joined: 17 Sep 2002, 12:09
263 Recommends(s)
196 Recognized(s)



Re: Republicans Need Cuckoo part II

Postby Jaboney » 07 Jun 2010, 13:33

Sweet. Thanks.
Btw...Imageyou missed a good series.

I'm quite happy to admit that certain posters are treated differently. Not on the basis of political affiliation, but posting history, demonstrated dis/respect, ect.

It's the attitude and lack of respect that get to me, not the opinion. Thus:
Post subject: Re: Hypocritical "family value" Republicans wrote:21 pages. Please start another if you wish to continue gloating.


There are a very, very small number of posters whose opinions I find so noxious that I prefer to avoid any and all contact with them, but none of that touches on IP. There are more posters whose manner is (deliberately) offensive, who tend to congregate in IP, and if they get the shitty end of the stick, well, that's easily remedied.
Forumosan avatar
Jaboney
Maitreya Buddha (Mílèfó)
 
Posts: 10735
Joined: 09 Jun 2005, 02:02
Location: Broadcasting from Neihu
22 Recommends(s)
56 Recognized(s)



Re: Republicans Need Cuckoo part II

Postby mofangongren » 07 Jun 2010, 17:30

Chris wrote:
TwoTongues wrote:Wait but Chris was denigrating the GOP establishment and not forumosa members. I noticed that when TC or CC or Fred or someone claimed Chris did that before, that Chris wasn't being a twat to another board member with whom he was arguing, he was clowning the topic of the post.

I reserve my vitriol for the vile people out there in the political and media world: the politicians (the Cheneys), their aides (the Roves), the pundits (the Limbaughs) and the preachers (the Dobsons), and maybe sometimes rank-and-file bozos like Joe the Plumber. It's these people who are the GOP establishment: their leaders and media spokespeople.

But I do not harbor any condemnation for anyone on Forumosa.


Ah, and that's what's dangerous to 'em. There's folks on Forumosa who will, when inspiration strikes, doctor a mighty spin over the notion that disagreeing with the GOP or Bush or Hastert or whomever or whatever should simply be deemed a "personal attack" upon themselves. I'm glad to disagree with any official, regardless of party affiliation. But to the Halliburton Chorus, they apparently feel they're personally affected, as if they were somehow the footsoldiers of the 101st Fighting Keyboardists, metaphorically jumping onto policy grenades -- albeit at no personal risk beyond whatever they're doing to their blood pressure and liver health.
"As to your first question, that would be murder in some degree. As to your second, there are no laws in this state regarding the unlicensed practice of taxidermy or puppetry."
Forumosan avatar
mofangongren
Generalissimo (dàyuánshuài)
Generalissimo (dàyuánshuài)
 
Posts: 4308
Joined: 14 Aug 2003, 15:00
Location: out working in the fields
1 Recognized(s)



Re: Republicans Need Cuckoo part II

Postby urodacus » 08 Jun 2010, 07:28

Bye Bye Helen Thomas. Don't let the door smack you in the ass on the way out.
The prizes are a bottle of f*!@#$% SCOTCH and a box of cheap f!@#$#$ CIGARS!

Too many people! Almost all of the world's problems are due to overpopulation. The rest are due to religion.

50% of the world's wild animals have disappeared in the last 50 years. Did you eat them, or eat their house?
Forumosan avatar
urodacus
Maitreya Buddha (Mílèfó)
 
Posts: 11577
Joined: 04 Nov 2004, 23:20
Location: picking flowers
226 Recommends(s)
279 Recognized(s)



Re: Republicans Need Cuckoo part II

Postby Chris » 08 Jun 2010, 07:58

Media Research Center, a right-wing media watchdog group, condemns TV sitcom for not portraying homophobes in a positive light:

Forumosan avatar
Chris
Guan Yin (Guānyīn)
 
Posts: 15061
ORIGINAL POSTER
Joined: 08 Jun 2004, 15:51
Location: Type-A, Tie-one-on
95 Recommends(s)
217 Recognized(s)



Re: Republicans Need Cuckoo part II

Postby Chris » 19 Jun 2010, 18:53

Rush Limbaugh shows utter contempt for poor, starving children:



"Let them eat cake!"
Forumosan avatar
Chris
Guan Yin (Guānyīn)
 
Posts: 15061
ORIGINAL POSTER
Joined: 08 Jun 2004, 15:51
Location: Type-A, Tie-one-on
95 Recommends(s)
217 Recognized(s)



Re: Republicans Need Cuckoo part II

Postby Chewycorns » 20 Jun 2010, 04:18

Interesting......very interesting. Still a ways to go before the Dims really represent the rainbow they often like to think they represent. Columbia and Stanford study by the way.

Boston Review wrote:
The media coverage of the Bernard Madoff scandal made extensive reference to Madoff’s ethnic and religious background and his prominent role in the Jewish community. Because the scandal broke at a time of great public outcry against financial institutions, some, including Brad Greenberg in The Christian Science Monitor and Mark Seal in Vanity Fair, have reported on its potential to generate a wave of anti-Semitism.

This concern makes good sense. In complex situations such as the current financial crisis, where the vast majority of us lack the relevant expertise and information, biases and prejudices may play a significant role in shaping public attitudes. To evaluate just how large a role, we conducted a study (part of a larger survey of 2,768 American adults) in which we explored people’s responses to the economic collapse and tried to determine how anti-Semitic sentiments might relate to the ongoing financial crisis.

Interestingly, Democrats were especially prone to blaming Jews: while 32 percent of Democrats accorded at least moderate blame, only 18.4 percent of Republicans did so (a statistically significant difference). This difference is somewhat surprising given the presumed higher degree of racial tolerance among liberals and the fact that Jews are a central part of the Democratic Party’s electoral coalition. Are Democrats simply more likely to “blame everything” thus casting doubt on whether the anti-Jewish attitudes are real? Not at all. We also asked how much “individuals who took out loans and mortgages they could not afford” were to blame on the same five-point scale. In this case, Democrats were less likely than Republicans to assign moderate or greater blame.


http://bostonreview.net/BR34.3/malhotra_margalit.php
Forumosan avatar
Chewycorns
Retired President (tuì xiū de zǒng tǒng)
Retired President (tuì xiū de zǒng tǒng)
 
Posts: 5644
Joined: 22 Jul 2003, 09:38
Location: Back in the Great Wide Open
1 Recognized(s)



Re: Republicans Need Cuckoo part II

Postby Chris » 20 Jun 2010, 09:57

Chewycorns wrote:Interesting......very interesting. Still a ways to go before the Dims really represent the rainbow they often like to think they represent. Columbia and Stanford study by the way.

Nothing to do with Limbaugh or his vile comments.
Forumosan avatar
Chris
Guan Yin (Guānyīn)
 
Posts: 15061
ORIGINAL POSTER
Joined: 08 Jun 2004, 15:51
Location: Type-A, Tie-one-on
95 Recommends(s)
217 Recognized(s)



Re: Republicans Need Cuckoo part II

Postby Chewycorns » 20 Jun 2010, 13:08

Chris wrote:
Chewycorns wrote:Interesting......very interesting. Still a ways to go before the Dims really represent the rainbow they often like to think they represent. Columbia and Stanford study by the way.

Nothing to do with Limbaugh or his vile comments.


Say what? The title of this thread is Republicans need Cuckoo. Cuckoo is a foolish or crazy person.

My post above is merely demonstrating that in a study at Columbia and Stanford, more Democrats could be seen as Anti-Semites based on their responses they gave to this top-tier uni academic survey during the economic downturn.

This demonstrates the ongoing problem of racism in the Democratic Party. A lot of people on this forum seem to associate racism with the Repubs in their posts. I've posted again and again on the roots of racism in the Democratic Party from Nathan Bedford Forrest giving the keynote address at their convention in the late 19th Century, to the screening of Birth of a Nation under Woodrow Wilson, to the modern day ramblings of Sharpton, Jackson, former Senator Hollings, and a bunch of other tribalist leaders. Clearly the survey demonstrates the craziness that is still there when 31 percent had those tendancies (compared with only 19 percent for the Repubs). Let me get this straight, you don't think their answers were cuckoo? :eek: That would be very interesting indeed.
Forumosan avatar
Chewycorns
Retired President (tuì xiū de zǒng tǒng)
Retired President (tuì xiū de zǒng tǒng)
 
Posts: 5644
Joined: 22 Jul 2003, 09:38
Location: Back in the Great Wide Open
1 Recognized(s)



FRIENDLY REMINDER
   Please remember that Forumosa is not responsible for the content that appears on the other side of links that Forumosans post on our forums. As a discussion website, we encourage open and frank debate. We have learned that the most effective way to address questionable claims or accusations on Forumosa is by engaging in a sincere and constructive conversation. To make this website work, we must all feel safe in expressing our opinions, this also means backing up any claims with hard facts, including links to other websites.
   Please also remember that one should not believe everything one reads on the Internet, particularly from websites whose content cannot be easily verified or substantiated. Use your common sense and do not hesitate to ask for proof.
PreviousNext




Proceed to International Politics



Who is online

Forumosans browsing this forum: No Forumosans and 2 visitors

A woman calls the nursing home to see how her dad is doing.
'He's like a fish out of water.'
'You mean he's having trouble adjusting?'
'No, I mean he's dead.'
-- MIKE CLOSE