Gutsy move: Lech Walesa shuns Obama

View Comments (167)

• Olivia writes: You poor, poor boy. Are you really so ill informed that you think Frank Luntz is best known only to FOX News fans? He’s famous for his ability to manipulate language! He didn’t invent word spin, but he carried it to a whole new level for GOP propaganda, and he’s been doing it for years. The fact that you know him only from right wing TV shows just how limited your “information” sources are.

  ______________________________________________________________
  I am quite certain that I am much better informed than you are. Your support of labor unions at the expense of the company ownership speaks volumes to your narrow worldview (workers of the world unite). It is ownership that puts its capital at risk. Labor is just that, labor. If he does not like the job, then he is free to move. We do not do servitude in this country. and your slavish devotion to liberalism even though it is destroying our country's economy is all I need to know about your level of economics. The liberal social agenda is bad enough but its economic policies are flat our ruinous. Don't bore me with TARP or Bush expanding Medicare, those both were liberal moves and both were wrong in my view.

  Back to Frank Luntz: Yes he is a word smith that is what he does. Contract with America and all that. His TV exposure is generally limited to Fox News and since you stated that you had no TV I found it to be important as an example of you being generally full of yourself and untruthful. In other words, you lack credibility.
  ________________________________________________________________

  Olivia writes: No, I’m telling the truth when I say I don’t have TV—or TV reception, at any rate. (I do have TV for playing DVDs.) What knowledge I do have about TV shows comes from watching them on Youtube or other websites, when I want to find out what the latest political fuss is about. As I said earlier, I believe in the adage “Know your enemies.” So I don’t just swallow and regurgitate every uncomplimentary thing I hear about the far right—–I check it out for myself.

  But why are you so eager to believe that I’m lying about not having TV? It’s not as if it were any huge accomplishment, or took any special ability to achieve.

  _____________________________________________________________

  Because you lack credibility as I said above. No-one here bought your bs, not because of a ideological disagreement but because you just simply were factually wrong and presumptuous. You presumed to say that other posters here do not know the difference between the various political/economic ideologies. I then suggested that you do not. You never responded to that charge. Not that you were obligated but again it goes against your credibility. Then the TV thing, again lack of integrity.

  I know that the last word is important to you so it is yours. I am signing off from this thread for good.

  • Frank Luntz has been everywhere, for years. I've seen him on all 3 cable news networks. It is ancient history that he coined the term "death tax". It would not require a TV to learn of this. Hanging suppositions on this is ineffective

• Olivia......the UK is really having trouble with getting enough wind to run their wind turbines. They have one that only put out enough electricity in a year to run one light bulb for 3 months. You are so long winded I'd suggest you head to the UK and offer your services. You're such a wind-bag you should be able to really get those turbines spinning. It's a win-win situation. We get rid of you and the UK gets another libtard.

  • Olivia……the UK is really having trouble with getting enough wind to run their wind turbines. They have one that only put out enough electricity in a year to run one light bulb for 3 months. You are so long winded I’d suggest you head to the UK and offer your services. You’re such a wind-bag you should be able to really get those turbines spinning. It’s a win-win situation. We get rid of you and the UK gets another libtard.

    ****************************
    Translation: "I can't dispute a single point you were making, so I'll just fling a lot of juvenile insults and do some name calling. Am I winning the argument yet?"

    • Olivia I'm not arguing with you...it's impossible to argue with a moron. I'm insulting you because evidently that's the only thing you can comprehend.

• I have no words for a person that cannot comprehend a simple figure of speech. God forbid you should say something to anyone in the heat of the moment, and get hauled into court over it.
  *********************
  It's called "self control," Perlcat. I'm not buying your insinuation that you were powerless to stop yourself from making such an ugly remark. What's more, you didn't sound particularly overcome with rage or terror when you said it. In fact, you sounded rather as if you were showing off.
  *********************
  Apparently, by your logic, *all* cheerleader squads are guilty of terroristic threats, and all of them should be locked up, or at least have their freedom of speech curtailed, so they don’t say such awful things as “Go, fight, win”, or “whip those guys”.
  *********************
  Come, now, Perlcat. What you said was considerably more vicious than "Go, fight, win." And it's very telling that you refuse to take any responsibility for your own nastiness, particularly when you were so filled with virtuous indignation when Obama said "the police acted stupidly" (in the Gates arrest) and didn't retract it afterward.

  I've often said that the right wing media has convinced its devotees that hypocrisy is a patriotic American value. And you, like so many others before you, just illustrated that point perfectly.

• “…ln your boast that you’d pay for the opportunity to brutally torture your president.”

  You’re misrepresenting an offhand line.

  **********************
  Oh, I see. So he was being "offhanded" in expressing a desire to rape and mutilate his president...even offering to pay for the privilege? And, because he expressed such a desire in an "offhand" way, that makes such viciousness AOK in your book?

  What an ugly attitude for any American to take toward his country's leader, "offhand" or otherwise. And how cowardly of YOU to try to make excuses for him.

  • I have no words for a person that cannot comprehend a simple figure of speech. God forbid you should say something to anyone in the heat of the moment, and get hauled into court over it.

    Apparently, by your logic, *all* cheerleader squads are guilty of terroristic threats, and all of them should be locked up, or at least have their freedom of speech curtailed, so they don't say such awful things as "Go, fight, win", or "whip those guys".

    Methinks your case of the vapours is running a little dry.

  • Olivia,

    Sorry you disagree, but I stand by what I said. I'm not being cowardly, I'm being sensible, get a grip. In the event Perlcat can speak for himself.

• I have a question for you. Do you know the difference between indentured servitude and slavery?

  Have a fantastic Memorial Day. Be sure to thank a veteran and the family members of those veterans who did not return.

  ***************************
  Thank you; I did. I appreciate your concern, but I don't need to be prodded to thank veterans for their contributions to this country.

  As for the list of things you think Obama (he doesn't go by the name of "Barry," whether or not the person talking about him has been in the military): I notice an interesting pattern here. Virtually every item on your list is a giveaway for corporate America. The only problem is, this is the United States of America, not the United Corporations of America.

  Yes, yes, I've heard that trendy talking point about never having gotten a job from a poor person---God knows I've heard it parroted at least four dozen times lately. But it's misleading. Businesses don't hire employees unless they need them. And, in most cases, they're unlikely to need additional employees unless there's high demand for the goods or service that they supply. Now, tell me, who creates the demand for said goods and services? In most cases, it's people like you and me, not just wealthy business owners.

  Essentially, what your oft-repeated talking point implies is that, if we let corporate America dictate how this country should be run (e.g., give selected businesses a free pass on polluting the environment, give them big tax breaks, give tax breaks to wealthy investors, protect them from having to provide health care benefits to employees, and of course DRILL BABY DRILL), those corporations will be so grateful that they'll obligingly hire lots and lots of currently unemployed Americans, whether or not they need more people on their payrolls. That's not going to happen. Business owners and CEOs get to be successful by knowing how to keep as much money as possible flowing in THEIR direction, and as little as possible flowing AWAY from them. They're not going to hire more employees unless it's to their financial advantage to do so----and they're not necessarily going to choose currently unemployed people when they do decide to hire.

  Now, regarding your objection to health care reform: I don't know why you far righters keep failing to get this, but HEALTH CARE IS A NECESSITY, NOT A FRILL. EVERY SINGLE HUMAN BEING requires medical attention at times, and, for most people, the most economical way overall to get it is to have regular checkups and prompt treatment of problems before they're allowed to turn into medical catastrophes.

  For some reason, you keep ignoring the fact that, if people lack access to affordable health care, they end up resorting to the most costly and inefficient system in existence: running to the emergency room. There are two advantages to this option: (1) no one gets turned away, and (2) you don't have to pay up front. But it drives up health care costs far more rapidly than ANY form of national health care ever could, because the hospital stuck with a lot of unpaid and unpayable bills. So who ends up covering those (usually big!) bills in the end? You and I do. And we cover them through grossly inflated charges, up to 10 or 15 times higher than the same charge would be in a system using socialized medicine.

  I also have to laugh every time I hear that right wing argument "But there wouldn't be enough doctors to go around!" (And I hear it a lot.) No one who uses it ever seems to realize that what they're actually saying is, "Let's keep those 60 million uninsured, and those other tens of millions underinsured. That way, those of us who have good insurance will have plenty of choices and convenience when WE want to see a doctor." Hey, Not-So-Deep-Thinker, the way to remedy an insufficient supply of doctors is to create or hire more, not to lock 1/6 or more Americans out of the system. The Constitution begins the the Preamble, and the Preamble begins with "We the people," not "We the corporations" or "We the most important people."

  The argument for medical expense accounts is equally bogus, in that it helps only those Americans who can already afford insurance. The poor, on the other hand (and don't make the popular mistake of assuming that poor people are all lazy and shiftless-----that's a myth put out by political manipulators with an ax to grind), usually have 10 places to put every dollar. Given a choice between maintaining a medical expense account and putting food on the table, they're probably going to opt for putting food on the table. So would you. So would I. So would anyone with a working synapse.

  The option of a private social security fund is equally illogical. Over the last couple of decades, we've seen many Americans, who played by all the rules, lose their retirement funds through no fault of their own. It's ridiculous for you to suppose that this couldn't happen in the future (especially given the way the far right wants to hand over more and more power to corporations, while regulating them less and less), or that a civilized nation would stand by and allow its elderly to be without any income, simply because they'd trusted private enterprise to do right by them, and private enterprise had let them down.

  As for your sneering remarks about "global warming" and "global cooling": apparently you haven't paid much attention lately. Most experts in the field (even those who are or have been in the pay of the fossil fuel industry, that the right tends to quote most often) readily admit that global warming IS a reality-----they just aren't ready to admit that humans (or industries) had anything to do with it. So much for your tired old "Koolaid" cliche.

  And, speaking of sugary soft drinks: the program's name is "Medicaid," not "Medicade." The fact that you're repeating that particular mistake suggests that you're getting most of your arguments from right wing blogs (where this particular spelling error is very common) rather than reading the bill yourself, as you imply you've done.

  • I read the whole manifesto. So many talking points and straw man arguments. Olivia, all I will say is that you likely lied when you said you don't watch tv, listen to radio, or read many opinion pieces. You listed Left Wing talking point after talking point. Debating you or any liberal is a waste. You state your position, we disagree. We state our position, you disagree. The number of tangents you took this thread on is a testament to your ability to annoy and provoke people. You are the philosophical outsider here just as we would be at Fark or Kos. The difference with you is your typically liberal air of moral superiority. Never mind that we have taken you apart factually. You are an ideological guest here and yet you presume to thread jack this post. I've been entertained but also put off by your smugness and arrogance. It is misplaced and undeserved.

    • I humbly bow to your ability to withstand drivel, sir.

      I tried to throw myself on that sword, but simply could not make it past the first asinine phrase. I admit this, knowing full well that Olivia's natural reaction will be to make bigoted implications about my sexuality for saying that. That seems to be the ordure of the day with her.

      • I humbly bow to your ability to withstand drivel, sir.

        I tried to throw myself on that sword, but simply could not make it past the first asinine phrase. I admit this, knowing full well that Olivia’s natural reaction will be to make bigoted implications about my sexuality for saying that. That seems to be the ordure of the day with her.

        **********************
        There's nothing "bigoted" about pointing out that your fantasy was vulgar.

        But, on reflection, I admit that you're correct in objecting to my comment about homosexual fantasies. Homoerotism is about sexuality, whereas you and your crony here were fantasizing about assaulting and battering a U.S. president----and in a particularly vicious and injurious way. As any nurse, police officer or social worker could tell you, such fantasies are about violence and control, not sex.

        Now, remind me again of what a fine and upstanding American you are? Because I'm just not seeing it, in your boast that you'd pay for the opportunity to brutally torture your president.

        • "...ln your boast that you'd pay for the opportunity to brutally torture your president."

          You're misrepresenting an offhand line.

        • ...as opposed to how 8 years of Democrat fantasies along the same lines never happened. Or are you going to tell me that you were up there objecting to all of the vileness going on about Bush? As they say, "Pics, or it didn't happen".

          I suppose you'll say that when Democrats say stuff like that, it's a figure of speech, but when conservatives do it, it's a credible threat.

          Hypocrite, know thyself.

        • …as opposed to how 8 years of Democrat fantasies along the same lines never happened. Or are you going to tell me that you were up there objecting to all of the vileness going on about Bush? As they say, “Pics, or it didn’t happen”.

          ************************
          Neither I nor any liberal I know has expressed fantasies of raping, torturing or mutilating Bush. Most of us thought he was an execrable president, and some thought he should have been prosecuted for war crimes, but not one of us ever stated (offhandedly or otherwise) that we'd pay for the privilege of battering him. Have you forgotten that we're the political faction that adamantly opposes torture----excuse me, I mean "harsh interrogation techniques" (wink wink) even for prisoners?

          Maybe you heard someone express such a fantasy about Bush on another board someplace. It's conceivable, but that has nothing to do with me, since I refuse to take responsibility for ugly remarks made by someone else.

          And, by the way, "Yeah, but So-and-So did it!" has never yet served as a valid excuse for bad behavior. Didn't your mommy ever teach you that?

          (Also by the way, the proper word is "DemocratIC." "Democrat" is a noun, not an adjective, although I realize that Frank Luntz's disciples on FOX News have been trying hard to change that......)

        • (Also by the way, the proper word is “DemocratIC.” “Democrat” is a noun, not an adjective, although I realize that Frank Luntz’s disciples on FOX News have been trying hard to change that……)
          @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

          I knew you were a liar when you wrote that you did not watch tv, listen to the radio, or read commentary otherwise you wouldn't even know who Frank Lintz is since you only read "multiple news sources".

        • Also by the way, the proper word is “DemocratIC.” “Democrat” is a noun, not an adjective, although I realize that Frank Luntz’s disciples on FOX News have been trying hard to change that……)
          @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

          I knew you were a liar when you wrote that you did not watch tv, listen to the radio, or read commentary otherwise you wouldn’t even know who Frank Lintz is since you only read “multiple news sources”.

          ***********************
          No, I don't lie. And the name is Frank LUNTZ, not Lintz. There's plenty of information about him on the internet.

          By the way, I didn't say I never read commentaries. Before you barge in and accusing people of lying, perhaps you'd better find out what they actually said, rather than making guesses.

        • Olivia said above: Sorry, but that’s not me at all. I don’t have TV, and I don’t listen to the radio. I prefer to read my news, from a variety of sources—–and when I read opinion pieces (which isn’t often), I like to read conservative ones, as well as liberal and Tea Party crackpot ones.

          Like I said you are a liar. Don't you split hairs on the commentary piece. I said you said that you didn't read them. You said not often. Bottom line you lied to make a point about something (inane) and then you cite Frank Luntz on Fox News. How would you know anything about what is happening on cable news without a TV?

          By the way to find your quote I had to read through a number of your previous posts. All I can say is I hope you are single or there is one miserable guy out there. You are a piece of work. Holy crap!

        • Like I said you are a liar. Don’t you split hairs on the commentary piece. I said you said that you didn’t read them. You said not often. Bottom line you lied to make a point about something (inane) and then you cite Frank Luntz on Fox News. How would you know anything about what is happening on cable news without a TV?

          **********************

          You poor, poor boy. Are you really so ill informed that you think Frank Luntz is known only to FOX News fans? He's famous for his ability to manipulate language! He didn't invent word spin, but he carried it to a whole new level for GOP propaganda, and he's been doing it for years. The fact that you know him only from right wing TV shows just how limited your "information" sources are.

          No, I'm telling the truth when I say I don't have TV---or TV reception, at any rate. (I do have TV for playing DVDs.) What knowledge I do have about TV shows comes from watching them on Youtube or other websites, when I want to find out what the latest political fuss is about. As I said earlier, I believe in the adage "Know your enemies." So I don't just swallow and regurgitate every uncomplimentary thing I hear about the far right-----I check it out for myself.

          But why are you so eager to believe that I'm lying about not having TV? It's not as if it were any huge accomplishment, or took any special ability to achieve. :D

        • She concedes that she was probably off-the-mark in making an offhand comment about your sexuality. That's something. Maybe next time you'll just say impale?

          I'm old-fashioned in this regard.. American Presidents, especially when they are abroad on state visits, should not be jeered at by us at home. It doesn't matter how slighted one might feel by the other party's behavior. How some Democrats treated Bush should not be an input into one's behavior, anymore than how they reacted to all the crazy theories and vicious rumors about Clinton in his day

          And no one here as answered Olivia's AP post which includes actual Walesa quotes. Not one individual seems to feel that his own words on the matter are salient. Only pointless speculation regarding his state of mind prevail.

          (The primary beef he might have with Obama must be cancellation of defensive missiles... I'm sorry, but the EU should pay for these.. What is the typical tea party stance on America eating this cost?)

        • "The primary beef he might have with Obama must be cancellation of defensive missles..."

          Yet more pointless speculation.

          "What is the typical tea party stance on America eating this cost?"

          An inane question.

        • True it does sound like more pointless speculation.. but I remember an open letter written by these gents, regarding the Russian threat (implicit within warnings about missile defense?)

          Valdas Adamkus Former President of the Republic of Lithuania
          Martin Butora Former Ambassador of the Slovak Republic to the United States
          Emil Constantinescu Former President of the Republic of Romania
          Pavol Demes Former Minister of International Relations and Advisor to the President, Slovak Republic
          Lubos Dobrovsky Former Defense Minister of the Czech Republic, former Ambassador to Russia
          Matyas Eorsi Former Secretary of State of the Hungarian MFA
          Istvan Gyarmati Ambassador, President of the International Centre for Democratic Transition in Budapest
          Vaclav Havel Former President of the Czech Republic
          Rastislav Kacer Former Ambassador of the Slovak Republic to the United States
          Sandra Kalniete Former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Latvia
          Karel Schwarzenberg Former Minister of Foreign Affairs, Czech Republic
          Michal Kovac Former President of the Slovak Republic
          Ivan Krastev Chairman of the Centre for Liberal Strategies in Sofia, Bulgaria
          Alexander Kwasniewski Former President of the Republic of Poland
          Mart Laar Former Prime Minister of Estonia
          Kadri Liik Director of the International Centre for Defense Studies in Tallinn, Estonia
          Janos Martonyi Former Minister of Foreign Affairs, Hungary
          Janusz Onyszkiewicz Former Vice-president of the European Parliament, former Defense Minister, Poland
          Adam Rotfeld Former Minister of Foreign Affairs, Poland
          Alexandr Vondra Former Minister of Foreign Affairs and Deputy Prime Minister, Czech Republic
          Vaira Vike-Freiberga Former President of the Republic Latvia
          Lech Walesa Former President of the Republic of Poland
          

          Its obvious and understandable that these nations will respond badly to any overture we make towards Russia. Withdrawing those missile systems was viewed widely as a betrayal across multiple eastern bloc nations, yet hailed by other European nations. My speculation comes out of this context. The unrelenting global power struggle is way more complex than the Cold War was, on its face, and we will never please everyone

          As for my inane question, that may be true.. Perhaps there's an inane answer, or no consensus there either. But is it truly inane to question the cost of new missile defense systems, at this of all times?

        • FTA: "It's difficult to tell journalists what you'd like to say to the president of a superpower. This time I won't tell him, I won't meet him, it doesn't suit me," Walesa told Poland's public broadcaster TVP.

          "It doesn't suit me..." that is about as direct a snub as it gets in diplomatic speak. Why are you and Olivia the only two who fail to see that 140 posts later.

        • FTA: “It’s difficult to tell journalists what you’d like to say to the president of a superpower. This time I won’t tell him, I won’t meet him, it doesn’t suit me,” Walesa told Poland’s public broadcaster TVP.

          “It doesn’t suit me…” that is about as direct a snub as it gets in diplomatic speak. Why are you and Olivia the only two who fail to see that 140 posts later.

          ***********************
          I'm not "fail(ing) to see" anything. I've never denied the possibility that Walesa was deliberately "snubbing" Obama, although he did state that he would like to meet with Obama in the future. (I posted the article with that information, as well as a very complimentary comment Walesa made about Obama, but, amazingly enough, none of you seem to have noticed it.) Not being one to leap impulsively to whatever conclusion Rush directs, I prefer (as no doubt Obama does) to take a wait-and-see approach before assuming that it was meant as a personal insult.

          I think it's rather odd that some of you are so filled with joy at the idea that Walesa might be "snubbing" the president. After all, that would be a "snub" to ALL of us and what we stand for, not just Obama. But, then again, anyone who's crass enough to boast of wanting to shove a tree up the president's rectum is obviously not playing with a full deck to begin with........

        • I see your point on the jeering. I do have a hard time with the family laundry being aired on an international scale -- but, in order to be respected, a person needs to seek the high ground. A world tour blaming his predecessor was not high ground in any sense that I know of, and set a precedent that he may come to regret later. A more circumspect president might have said something to the effect of: "That was then, this is now."

          Yeah, I know, it's juvenile to say that it's OK because he did it. However, what with the WWW being, you know, world wide, the line between what is said in the Podunk newspaper and what makes it onto the wire services has been blurred beyond all recognition. Speech is either free, or it isn't, and a sitting president has always been jeerable locally -- even when he travels -- bad form or not. My apologies to our foreign readers for having to read our minutiae about our president.

          I missed the part about what Walesa actually said -- and I already know that Walesa is more socialist than many liberals here would ever be. I'm chalking that one up to her unreadable postings being largely unread on my part. Walesa's motives for not meeting with Obama probably had a lot different substance than what we implied.

          I actually took the article as something more along the lines of how when Michelle has kids doing things at the White House, we accuse her of violating child labor laws. Sure, we know that the actual facts are different -- but it is fun to put the shoe on the other foot for a change, after being mortally tired of being on the receiving end of liberal spin on conservative events.

          Not being a Tea Party member, I would have no idea about who they feel should pay the cost -- I do believe that the beneficiaries should bear the burden -- we benefit from a stable Europe, and Europe benefits from not getting blown to smithereens. However, I also know that if we bring other people into the dance, so to speak, they will want us to use their suppliers of choice -- not so sure how that figures into our interests.

          I don't figure that we gain from antagonizing Russia -- and actually, given that our purported reasoning is to protect Europe from *Iranian* missiles, if this shield is so important, we should have brought them in regardless of the costs of having to include their defense industry -- just to make sure they are on board with it. IIRC, Russia has their own problems with the spread of militant Islam, and would have an interest in extending such a shield to cover the much wider area of exposure they have.

          OTOH, if the true reason was to defend against Russian missiles, then a different tack should have been taken from the start. That, after all, was at the very least, inartful.

          I think any reasonable person could see that putting this shield there would antagonize them, much like McArthur putting a whole bunch of troops next to the Chinese border would antagonize them into doing something that with 60+ years of hindsight, we can say was predictable. It constitutes an accusation of a threat that they may therefore feel compelled to make good upon.

• Let us see what barry should and can do. First stop with the lies about allowing more drilling. It's not true of the 60 plus deep wells less than twenty are now in the Gulf of Mexico. Allow for more drilling, stop ignoring the federal judges ruling that said the ban was illegal. Instruct the EPA to allow for the permits that are being applied for. Where is all the news coverage about the price of gas? It has nearly doubled during this administration.

  Stop kicking the can down the road about SSN and Medicare. This is an issue that needs to be faced now and corrected now. There is no more sands in the hour glass it is empty.

  I believe that Paul Ryan has the correct budget idea for correcting both. Hard times demand hard choices and strong leadership, not scare tactics.

  Secure the borders enforce the laws on the books. Deport every last illegal, no exceptions. This is a country founded on laws, no just platitudes.

  I would stop the meddling health care bill that will put more people on the public system, reduce the number of doctors and cause more individuals to die. Check the bill it reduces Medicare and Medicade by 500 BILLION. It right there in the bill, I believe its on page 123.

  As for business, I never had a job or gotten a job from a poor person. Let business do what they do. I'm sure you are going to come back with how big business doesn’t pay its fair share in taxes. That might be true only if you are GE and the CEO has drank the kool aid about global warming. I remember when it was global cooling by the very same individuals. Yes I was around in the 70s.

  Now for why I use barry, you must not have been in the military. If you where you would understand why.

  If I where President, there would be a directive to drill for what we have. Build the state of the are refineries, REDUCE the taxes, allow for a medical savings account, allow for those individual that wish to op out of SSN. However, if they opt out, their SSN must be placed into a retirement account where they manage the investments. Security of the borders would be among the top 5 on my list and the deportation of every last illegal immigrant. No I’m not against immigrants as I am a descendent of indentured servants from Scotland and Ireland.

  I have a question for you. Do you know the difference between indentured servitude and slavery?

  Have a fantastic Memorial Day. Be sure to thank a veteran and the family members of those veterans who did not return.

• I'll make this as simple as possible for our Democrat "short-bus to the protest" crowd.

  Lech Walesa -- opposed Communist tyranny: Good! Helped topple USSR: Very Good!

  Anything else is irrelevant to the discussion.
  Especially that increasingly irrelevant Sock Puppet infesting the Oval Office.

  • Sock puppet...LMFAO!

• No matter how smart I get I will never breast feed seals....no sir.

  • That's good to hear. We've been meaning to talk to you about that ...

    • Yeah. We never knew seals could gag & spit.

• One thing has become incredibly clear in dealing with this Olivia.

  If we strive hard enough to read the proper books, if we study hard and find all the proper meanings of terms and concepts just as she has, if we do this, we too can, maybe, someday, be as smart as she is. If we all will recognize that she is French (or wishes she was) and embraces a culture that is far superior to ours, we too can someday see the light as she has been lucky to find. Maybe, someday.

  /sarc

  • Hey Ollie, I’m German, will you open up your Maginot Line and let me occupy your heart?

    • She will not put up much of a fight. Her only request will be to set up a Vichyssoise government.

      • She will not put up much of a fight. Her only request will be to set up a Vichyssoise government.

        *************************
        I think you meant to say "Vichy government," LA. The word "Vichyssoise" usually refers either to a feminine resident of Vichy, or a cold potato soup. ;)

        Be that as it may, I think you've seen from my posts here that I have little interest in collaborating with fascist wannabes. I'd rather fight, even if I'm as outnumbered by you far righters as patriotic French men were by the German war machine. ;)

        • I know the difference, as I stated in my assessment of you earlier, you are lacking in humor. You're dense and obtuse.

        • I know the difference, as I stated in my assessment of you earlier, you are lacking in humor. You’re dense and obtuse.

          **********************
          Not at all. It's just that you're too busy being defensive to notice my humor....or to see the sense in what I'm saying.

        • Olivia sweetie,

          "I'd rather fight even if I'm as outnumbered by you far righters as patriotic Frenchmen were by the German war machine."

          Wow! So much courage! You're taking a real chance in fighting us "far righters". French soldiers in 1940 faced death, wounding or the stalag, the only thing you're risking is carpal tunnel syndrome.

        • Elrond Hubbard May 30, 2011 at 12:37 pm

          "...the only thing you’re risking is carpal tunnel syndrome."

          EH, with all of her cutting and pasting I doubt that's going to be much of a problem either.

        • “I’d rather fight even if I’m as outnumbered by you far righters as patriotic Frenchmen were by the German war machine.”

          Wow! So much courage! You’re taking a real chance in fighting us “far righters”. French soldiers in 1940 faced death, wounding or the stalag, the only thing you’re risking is carpal tunnel syndrome.

          *************************

          Yes, I was being facetious there. Obviously, I'm taking little risk, sitting in a comfortable chair cyberarguing with a bunch of equally comfortable right wingers. ;)

          But you're taking even less risk than that. You're sticking with a forum that tells you how to react, and where almost every participant sticks to the prescribed viewpoint.

          That's why I found it funny when one of them sneered that I woudn't put up much of a fight. :D

        • @Oblivia

          Shouldn't you be off breastfeeding a baby seal right about now?

        • Shouldn’t you be off breastfeeding a baby seal right about now?

          **********************
          Why, no. Shouldn't you be off finding out from Rush Limbaugh how you feel about the latest political non-issues?

        • "Shouldn’t you be off finding out from Rush Limbaugh how you feel about the latest political non-issues?"

          I just did. Apparently drinking hard liquor during the meal is permissible . . . but only if you're the dinner companion.

        • “Shouldn’t you be off finding out from Rush Limbaugh how you feel about the latest political non-issues?”

          I just did. Apparently drinking hard liquor during the meal is permissible . . . but only if you’re the dinner companion.

          *************************
          Good point. If I had to sit at the same dinner table with Gasbag Limbaugh, I'd be drinking all the hard liquor I could lay my hands on. And I don't even drink. ;)

        • "You're sticking with a forum that tells you how to react..."

          Yes, I'm just a mind numbed robot adhering to the right wing script provided by the masters of this blog who are, doubtlessly, Tea Party operatives. One could argue that your reactions are scripted too, you do sound rather mechanical and predictable. Perhaps you've been listening to too many NPR gasbags. We're all playing a game of gotcha.

        • Yes, I’m just a mind numbed robot adhering to the right wing script provided by the masters of this blog who are, doubtlessly, Tea Party operatives. One could argue that your reactions are scripted too, you do sound rather mechanical and predictable. Perhaps you’ve been listening to too many NPR gasbags. We’re all playing a game of gotcha.

          *****************************
          Sorry, but that's not me at all. I don't have TV, and I don't listen to the radio. I prefer to read my news, from a variety of sources-----and when I read opinion pieces (which isn't often), I like to read conservative ones, as well as liberal and Tea Party crackpot ones.

        • "...when I read opinion pieces (which isn't often) I like to read conservative one, as wll as liberal and Tea Party crackpot ones."

          The Tea Party again, a recurrent theme in your postings. What are the bases for your hostility towards it?

        • If your patriotic Frenchmen were left to their own devices they'd be German now.

        • More likely Russian, not German

        • Too true. An epic battle between ruthless dictators with no concept of the value of human life -- it'd have boiled down to resources, and Germany was running on 'E'.

        • Yes.. i've had to remind my English relatives a couple times.. I'm willing to believe that Germany's defeat was inevitable once he failed in Britain and broke pact with the Soviets.. But the Iron Curtain might very well have stood on Atlantic shores without our entry into the war.

        • If your patriotic Frenchmen were left to their own devices they’d be German now.

          ************************
          True. No one nation could have defeated the Nazis unaided, including us. It took the combined efforts of France, the U.S., Britain, Canada, Russia, plus quite a few other nations, to achieve that goal.

• In 1983, Lech Walesa (well, a reasonable pictorial facsimile thereof) was my Christmas tree topper, which was just a small measure of my admiration for him. BO, on the other hand, isn't ethically fit to be even the coal in my stocking.

  • ...but would you pay for the opportunity to shove a scotch pine up his @55?

    • …but would you pay for the opportunity to shove a scotch pine up his @55?

      **************************
      Sounds like somebody's got some closet homosexual fantasies.

      (But what else is new on the far right?) ;)

      • Stereotypes again. You are a nasty person, Olivia.

        • Stereotypes again. You are a nasty person, Olivia.

          ***********************
          You're the one who's fantasizing about shoving tree trunks up another man's rectum, Perlcat-----not I.

        • Homosexuality is not where our minds went when he commented about the tree. It was more like a boot in the ass on steroids. I would say the homophile is you, Olivia. Does that image turn you on? Can you not keep your mind out of the gutter for 2 mnutes?

        • Homosexuality is not where our minds went when he commented about the tree. It was more like a boot in the ass on steroids. I would say the homophile is you, Olivia. Does that image turn you on? Can you not keep your mind out of the gutter for 2 mnutes?
          **********************
          I'm a nurse, Deb. I don't gross out easily. But I think it's rather bizarre for you to pretend that even a joking allusion to anal sex is dirty and tasteless, but that it isn't dirty or tasteless to fantasize about violent anal rape of our president.

          I guess we just have different values. I guess I ought to thank you, too: you've just given me one more reason to feel proud that I'm a liberal.