USVI-On-Line

Posted: **Wed Jan 28, 2009 8:11 am**

soxfan22 wrote:I thought Bush spent seven years making this point, but doing so by directly appealing to the muslim world. Anytime he gave a national addres or a white house briefing about the subject, he was always sure to say somthing to the effect of "we know you are a peaceful people, and our wrath is not directed at you"...I believe even at one point appealing to the people of Iran to stand up against their "leadership"...etc.

I wonder how many Afgan peasants have acess to Fox TV

Posted: **Wed Jan 28, 2009 9:18 am**

I'm a big fan of family planning and contraception but to think federal funding of these programs will stimulate the economy is koo-koo.

It's called adding some pork into the stew. Good intentioned pork but not part of a stimulus package.

C'mon.

Posted: **Wed Jan 28, 2009 9:19 am**

DELETED

Posted: **Wed Jan 28, 2009 9:21 am**

sailorgirl wrote:
soxfan22 wrote:I thought Bush spent seven years making this point, but doing so by directly appealing to the muslim world. Anytime he gave a national addres or a white house briefing about the subject, he was always sure to say somthing to the effect of "we know you are a peaceful people, and our wrath is not directed at you"...I believe even at one point appealing to the people of Iran to stand up against their "leadership"...etc.

I wonder how many Afgan peasants have acess to Fox TV

Why? Were his addresses to the nation only aired on Fox? You guys and this Fox thing...You gotta get over it.

Posted: **Wed Jan 28, 2009 9:22 am**

LysaC wrote:I'm a big fan of family planning and contraception but to think federal funding of these programs will stimulate the economy is koo-koo.

It's called adding some pork into the stew. Good intentioned pork but not part of a stimulus package.

C'mon.

I agree.

But if we are going to put money into family planning I would rather have it in OUR economy instead of using it for international family planning.

But I do not like either.

Has anyone noticed that the left is already starting to complain about Obama??? I feel for bad for him!! I certainly would not want to be in his shoes.

Gina

Posted: **Wed Jan 28, 2009 9:24 am**

There is one outlier, and that would be our friend Bill Clinton. Yes, it took a BIGGER nosedive after 9/11, but I specifically found a graphic that displayed the longer term in order to illuminate that maybe the Republican emphasis on fiscal responsibility has not been backed up with things like balanced budgets and the absence of deficit spending.

Posted: **Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:51 am**

soxfan22 wrote:
sailorgirl wrote:
soxfan22 wrote:I thought Bush spent seven years making this point, but doing so by directly appealing to the muslim world. Anytime he gave a national addres or a white house briefing about the subject, he was always sure to say somthing to the effect of "we know you are a peaceful people, and our wrath is not directed at you"...I believe even at one point appealing to the people of Iran to stand up against their "leadership"...etc.

I wonder how many Afgan peasants have acess to Fox TV

Why? Were his addresses to the nation only aired on Fox? You guys and this Fox thing...You gotta get over it.

You're right, I could have easily said ANY TV! My point is that Bush looking into a camera is not likely to reach the people who are the most vunerable to the fanatical extremist philosphy. Those unfortuntely disaffected, isolated and unsophisticated young men and women who are convinced by extremist philosphy to strap a bomb on their backs and go blow it up to take out the infidels are not likely to have acess to the kind of western media which would broadcast Bush's "outreach program."

Posted: **Wed Jan 28, 2009 11:21 am**

Folks - don’t you get it? Certain members will now use the OT Forum to criticize the new administration on a daily basis using the old Chicken Little fear tactics used during the campaign and that have worked so well in the past for the previous administration and their media flacks.

Also consider the other tactics that have been employed here and will be again in the future - guilt by association, and everybody’s favorite: the use of the thermonuclear metaphor, with the predicable response of righteous indignation and “Who me?” when called out.

The other half of this equation is that THEY WANT YOU TO REPLY just so they can parse your words and twist your meanings and defend their beloved and virtually infallible President Bush, because apparently, the bug that they have up their ass about the criticism Bush has received is about the size of Manhattan.

And also it doesn’t matter if any criticism of the Bush administration, direct or implied, is reasonable and based on fact. That only means that you are using smear tactics, are disrespecting Bush and/or the Presidency, and you are being “hateful”, all while sanctimoniously wrapping themselves up in “my kids future”, the flag, 9/11, “he kept us safe” or, of course, that old reliable – it’s Clinton’s fault. And that ain’t ever gonna change.

It’s so tired. It’s no win. It’s just bait. It’s the low road. And it’s a waste of your time and my time because it’s become obvious that some here:
a. utterly define the meaning of the word “ideologue”
b. don’t know when they are being offensive
c. are part Troll / love to inflame / don’t care who they might offend
d. have been indoctrinated and desensitized by years of reading Drudge, listening to Rush, Hannity, O’Reilly, etc.
e. read it on the “internets” so it must be true
f. think that the internet can substitute for life experience

For awhile I enjoyed going with the snarky, sarcastic, over-the-top Onion/Daily Show like replies (my own form of bait). But now I would heartily concur with Pete’s cogent observation that this thread “devolved into a right wing reach around and we should have known better than to have gotten in their way.”

Most other political threads on the new administration will also devolve in a similar fashion. Let them have at it and do not give them the smug satisfaction of baiting you into a no-win reply.

So, no matter how outrageous the post, TRY YOUR BEST to sit back and let them wallow in the muck. I know its hard, but just chuckle, shake your head, and click over to the travel forum.
Please - lets give it a try and see what happens.
Don't Feed the Beast!

Posted: **Wed Jan 28, 2009 11:37 am**

You left out:

g. All of the above.

But I hear you and I know you are right, so I am going to follow your advice.

Posted: **Wed Jan 28, 2009 11:41 am**

Not sure if anyone else read the terribly misleading, factually inaccurate, notoriously unfair Drudge Report lately?

The headline:

"$335 million for STD prevention in economic stimulus bill"

Not sure how one equates that with job creation, but in Liberal World I guess it suffices for economic stimulus. Truly unbelievable. Well, actually I take that back...It is what we predicted. As my grandmother used to say "You made your bed, now you lie in it".

Posted: **Wed Jan 28, 2009 11:59 am**

Posted: **Wed Jan 28, 2009 12:17 pm**

Wish I could take credit for this but I can't....

"It is popularly held that the way you behave when you think you’re anonymous — that’s the real you. If all it takes is a goofy pseudonym for you to become misanthropic then congratulations, you’re a misanthrope."

I'm with JMQ here... nothing to see here.... move along.

Posted: **Wed Jan 28, 2009 12:24 pm**

Oh Joshie...Do some research on the terms "Housing Crisis", "Community Reinvestment Act", "Barney Frank", and "Chris Dodd".

Then, you might want to take a look at this piece from the Wall Street Journal (Oct 08 )...I thought the last paragraph about sums up this mess and Obama's plan to fix it:

Beware of trying to do good with other people's money. Unfortunately, that strategy remains at the heart of the political process, and of proposed solutions to this crisis.

Link: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122298982558700341.html

Posted: **Wed Jan 28, 2009 12:48 pm**

jmq wrote:Folks - don’t you get it? Certain members will now use the OT Forum to criticize the new administration on a daily basis using the old Chicken Little fear tactics used during the campaign and that have worked so well in the past for the previous administration and their media flacks.

Also consider the other tactics that have been employed here and will be again in the future - guilt by association, and everybody’s favorite: the use of the thermonuclear metaphor, with the predicable response of righteous indignation and “Who me?” when called out.

The other half of this equation is that THEY WANT YOU TO REPLY just so they can parse your words and twist your meanings and defend their beloved and virtually infallible President Bush, because apparently, the bug that they have up their ass about the criticism Bush has received is about the size of Manhattan.

And also it doesn’t matter if any criticism of the Bush administration, direct or implied, is reasonable and based on fact. That only means that you are using smear tactics, are disrespecting Bush and/or the Presidency, and you are being “hateful”, all while sanctimoniously wrapping themselves up in “my kids future”, the flag, 9/11, “he kept us safe” or, of course, that old reliable – it’s Clinton’s fault. And that ain’t ever gonna change.

It’s so tired. It’s no win. It’s just bait. It’s the low road. And it’s a waste of your time and my time because it’s become obvious that some here:
a. utterly define the meaning of the word “ideologue”
b. don’t know when they are being offensive
c. are part Troll / love to inflame / don’t care who they might offend
d. have been indoctrinated and desensitized by years of reading Drudge, listening to Rush, Hannity, O’Reilly, etc.
e. read it on the “internets” so it must be true
f. think that the internet can substitute for life experience

For awhile I enjoyed going with the snarky, sarcastic, over-the-top Onion/Daily Show like replies (my own form of bait). But now I would heartily concur with Pete’s cogent observation that this thread “devolved into a right wing reach around and we should have known better than to have gotten in their way.”

Most other political threads on the new administration will also devolve in a similar fashion. Let them have at it and do not give them the smug satisfaction of baiting you into a no-win reply.

So, no matter how outrageous the post, TRY YOUR BEST to sit back and let them wallow in the muck. I know its hard, but just chuckle, shake your head, and click over to the travel forum.
Please - lets give it a try and see what happens.
Don't Feed the Beast!

Posted: **Wed Jan 28, 2009 12:51 pm**

Sorry, I pushed the submit button too soon.

I have also grown wear of this back and forth BS. I don't think I deserve the nasty criticism you hurled my way. I wish Obama well, and more importantly, I wish this country well. Peace to all of you.

Cypressgirl