NationStates Jolt Archive

Is anyone else on either side sick of hearing all of the condescending posts that have this tone. I was more than willing to put this behind me and said so in a couple of posts. But this onslaught of conservative posts that goes along the lines of "Now that the election is over you should support the president." I've seen honest polite pleas for unity from Etrusca degenerate into now that we have proven you are wrong you can just give up the act. I'll tell you right now that it wasn't an act, and after hearing Bush talk about his "Political Capital" like the trust of the American people was money to be spent, and Cheaney declaring Bush's mandate like he was annointed by God, I'm going to fight against him stronger than ever since he obviously considers himself stronger than ever.

Let me say that 50% of American voters doesn't make you right, and it doesn't make me concede. Kerry avoided a sticky situation by conceding and I applaud him for it. Now, after Bush and most of the conservatives on here have shown more arrogant, we are right, you are wrong, so live by our rules behavior, I am through with concessions.

May I point out that President Bush will rule the nation for another four years, unless he manages to get himself impeached (fairly unlikely)? You might as well sit back and gather strength for 2008; there's very little that your fights can do to affect the Bush Administration until the next election.

Is anyone else on either side sick of hearing all of the condescending posts that have this tone. I was more than willing to put this behind me and said so in a couple of posts. But this onslaught of conservative posts that goes along the lines of "Now that the election is over you should support the president." I've seen honest polite pleas for unity from Etrusca degenerate into now that we have proven you are wrong you can just give up the act. I'll tell you right now that it wasn't an act, and after hearing Bush talk about his "Political Capital" like the trust of the American people was money to be spent, and Cheaney declaring Bush's mandate like he was annointed by God, I'm going to fight against him stronger than ever since he obviously considers himself stronger than ever.

Let me say that 50% of American voters doesn't make you right, and it doesn't make me concede. Kerry avoided a sticky situation by conceding and I applaud him for it. Now, after Bush and most of the conservatives on here have shown more arrogant, we are right, you are wrong, so live by our rules behavior, I am through with concessions.


I agree with you. Even though I do not support the dems. But you are right, the margin was incredibly close and every democracy needs an opposition. Plus its times like this that can make a party stronger, not weaker.

I think what the democrats need to do now though is concentrate on what are their core-issues nationally and forget about the rest. Hell co-opt a few republican positions that cross party lines if need be, and hammer home where the real differences are elsewhere. Kerry's problem was he tried to be all things to all people.

I will concede that Bush will be our president for the next four years. But I will not concede that Iraq is going well. I will not concede that a huge deficit is good economics. I will not concede that a tax break aimed mostly at the wealthy is what the country needs. I will not concede that women should be disallowed their choice in conception. I will not concede that homosexuals do not deserve the same rights as everyone else. I will not concede that terrorism is a threat so grave that it requires immediate land occupation of Middle Eastern nations.

That is what conservatives never understood about this election. It was never about Kerry or Bush; It was about these issues. Sure we though Bush was a moron and Kerry was an aristocratic twat. But most of us were never so basic as to derive our choices from such meaningless characteristics.

I agree with you. Even though I do not support the dems. But you are right, the margin was incredibly close and every democracy needs an opposition. Plus its times like this that can make a party stronger, not weaker.

I think what the democrats need to do now though is concentrate on what are their core-issues nationally and forget about the rest. Hell co-opt a few republican positions that cross party lines if need be, and hammer home where the real differences are elsewhere. Kerry's problem was he tried to be all things to all people.

Agree completely, he should have made the point that abortion and gay marriage was about free choice to live how you want, not that it was about abortion and gay marriage. We needed to show that compromising with Europe would make us stronger economically and stronger when a true threat to America is unleashed. Unfortunately, we let the issues become single issues, not a general plan of personal freedom and responsible foreign policy.

I will concede that Bush will be our president for the next four years. But I will not concede that Iraq is going well. I will not concede that a huge deficit is good economics. I will not concede that a tax break aimed mostly at the wealthy is what the country needs. I will not concede that women should be disallowed their choice in conception. I will not concede that homosexuals do not deserve the same rights as everyone else. I will not concede that terrorism is a threat so grave that it requires immediate land occupation of Middle Eastern nations.

That is what conservatives never understood about this election. It was never about Kerry or Bush; It was about these issues. Sure we though Bush was a moron and Kerry was an aristocratic twat. But most of us were never so basic as to derive our choices from such meaningless characteristics.

I know your going to say that all of Kerry's policy positions are clear on his website, but his behavior as a candidate belies that. The duck hunting, the sudden interest in God. It just comes off as fake. And while you should choose who you vote on based upon the issues they present, there is also the calculus of whether or not they will actually follow through - or a least try to.

Look you have just listed what you consider to be the key issues forcefully and with conviction. If kerry could have been as forthright don't you think he
would have done better.

Agree completely, he should have made the point that abortion and gay marriage was about free choice to live how you want, not that it was about abortion and gay marriage. We needed to show that compromising with Europe would make us stronger economically and stronger when a true threat to America is unleashed. Unfortunately, we let the issues become single issues, not a general plan of personal freedom and responsible foreign policy.

Yeah, actually I think that's spot on. Kerry was completely unable to articulate things in terms of a wider ideology. If he could have done that.... well who knows what would have happened, but it surely would have resonated more. Unfortunately he split things up into single issues, and then over explained himself in order not to offend anyone. Like his stance on abortion, the whole "i'm not going to legislate religion" etc. If he'd said what you just said, he would have pissed of far fewer people. Like I said from the beginning Dean was a better candidate.

I mostly disagree with the contention that it is somehow the responsibility of the left to come to the right in unification. It is exactly the opposite. This rift in America isn't imaginary; it's very much real. And since the right is in charge, it's up to them to prove that they really do care about the people on the left, by showing that they do understand that they aren't an enormous majority, and not acting like everyone in the nation agrees with them. It is not the job of the Democrats to accept defeat and come to the Republicans and say "Hey, you guys won, we concede, now go ahead and do what you want." No, I say it is the job of the Republicans to come to the Democrats and say "Hey, we won, but to show you that we're not so pig-headed to imagine we're better than you, we aren't going to marginalize you and ignore all the issues that are most important to you." Just because Bush won does not mean that the Democrats should forget about the fight and just accept whatever the Bush administration does; it means that the Republicans should try to prevent the fight by remembering that the Democrats are still Americans.

Yeah, I agreed with you on Kerry's ineffectiveness in a previous post. I don't know why the democratic party is more concerned with turning off voters than actually gaining them in the first place.

I mostly disagree with the contention that it is somehow the responsibility of the left to come to the right in unification. It is exactly the opposite. This rift in America isn't imaginary; it's very much real. And since the right is in charge, it's up to them to prove that they really do care about the people on the left, by showing that they do understand that they aren't an enormous majority, and not acting like everyone in the nation agrees with them. It is not the job of the Democrats to accept defeat and come to the Republicans and say "Hey, you guys won, we concede, now go ahead and do what you want." No, I say it is the job of the Republicans to come to the Democrats and say "Hey, we won, but to show you that we're not so pig-headed to imagine we're better than you, we aren't going to marginalize you and ignore all the issues that are most important to you." Just because Bush won does not mean that the Democrats should forget about the fight and just accept whatever the Bush administration does; it means that the Republicans should try to prevent the fight by remembering that the Democrats are still Americans.

Well if the Republicans are smart that's what they'll do. Unfortunately politicians tend to get over excited when you hand them power, and tend to run around rubbing peoples nose in it, like the children they are.

Look at the first two years of Clinton's presidency. The dems are still recovering from that. Then when the Repubs found out they could actually keep the house and senate, they go off on a completely pointless impeachment kick. Silly rabbits.

Hopefully this time they will have more sense, and not run around trying to impose their will about everything. Just pick a few issues and try to reach out.

Well if the Republicans are smart that's what they'll do. Unfortunately politicians tend to get over excited when you hand them power, and tend to run around rubbing peoples nose in it, like the children they are.

Look at the first two years of Clinton's presidency. The dems are still recovering from that. Then when the Repubs found out they could actually keep the house and senate, they go off on a completely pointless impeachment kick. Silly rabbits.

Hopefully this time they will have more sense, and not run around trying to impose their will about everything. Just pick a few issues and try to reach out.

We seem to have it figured out DeaconDave, so what do you say DeaconDave/Sussudio 2020. I'll take VP as it is obvious I will be elected in 2028. Question are you Deacon because of religion, Wake Forest, or other?

We seem to have it figured out DeaconDave, so what do you say DeaconDave/Sussudio 2020. I'll take VP as it is obvious I will be elected in 2028. Question are you Deacon because of religion, Wake Forest, or other?

Actually it's Deacon because I in RL I spend most of my time riling up ultra-conservative christians who don't know the bible very well - whereas I do, or at least better than them - having had a minister for a Grandfather (not that he'd support most of the these evangelists these days, he was a big Ecumenicalist). Mostly because I can't stand how smug and pompous they are. In any event one of my jewish friends started to call me Deacon after a particularly "heated" exchange and I liked it. He said he got the idea from a fake christian website. (And it's true,there is another DeaconDave, but that's not me).

Ironically, here I apply my knowledge quite often to do just the opposite, for much the same reason, but don't tell anyone. I don't want to get a reputation for being reasonable.

And yeah, I think we'd make a fine team. The country needs some balance. (Or at least candidates that are not arrested adolescents).

Actually it's Deacon because I in RL I spend most of my time riling up ultra-conservative christians who don't know the bible very well - whereas I do, or at least better than them - having had a minister for a Grandfather (not that he'd support most of the these evangelists these days, he was a big Ecumenicalist). Mostly because I can't stand how smug and pompous they are. In any event one of my jewish friends started to call me Deacon after a particularly "heated" exchange and I liked it. He said he got the idea from a fake christian website. (And it's true,there is another DeaconDave, but that's not me).

Ironically, here I apply my knowledge quite often to do just the opposite, for much the same reason, but don't tell anyone. I don't want to get a reputation for being reasonable.

And yeah, I think we'd make a fine team. The country needs some balance. (Or at least candidates that are not arrested adolescents).

I do enjoy born-agains who can't even quote the Bible accurately. I worked with one who I would incessantly argue with about everything. She would constantly say things like "There's a quote from Leviticus/Romans/Acts/etc. that I can't remember..." in an attempt to prove her point, and it would drive her up a freaking wall when the pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage kid could quote the passage she was referring to and she could not. I could not have found it more humorous.

Actually it's Deacon because I in RL I spend most of my time riling up ultra-conservative christians who don't know the bible very well - whereas I do, or at least better than them - having had a minister for a Grandfather (not that he'd support most of the these evangelists these days, he was a big Ecumenicalist). Mostly because I can't stand how smug and pompous they are. In any event one of my jewish friends started to call me Deacon after a particularly "heated" exchange and I liked it. He said he got the idea from a fake christian website. (And it's true,there is another DeaconDave, but that's not me).

Ironically, here I apply my knowledge quite often to do just the opposite, for much the same reason, but don't tell anyone. I don't want to get a reputation for being reasonable.

And yeah, I think we'd make a fine team. The country needs some balance. (Or at least candidates that are not arrested adolescents).

I have to say that riling ultra-conservative christians is very fun, and that riling the ultra-liberal athiests and anarchists is fun on here. We seem to be in the same boat as my grandfather was a preacher (very laissez-faire christianity though, I am proud to say) and I know more of the bible than a great deal of my more "faithful" friends.

I do enjoy born-agains who can't even quote the Bible accurately. I worked with one who I would incessantly argue with about everything. She would constantly say things like "There's a quote from Leviticus/Romans/Acts/etc. that I can't remember..." in an attempt to prove her point, and it would drive her up a freaking wall when the pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage kid could quote the passage she was referring to and she could not. I could not have found it more humorous.

Yeah, I actually like to rile them up about lesbians myself. The bible never even mentions them. That one usually makes their heads pop.

Yeah, I actually like to rile them up about lesbians myself. The bible never even mentions them. That one usually makes their heads pop.

Never even thought of that. Should have been obvious considering the misogynous nature of the bible.

I have to say that riling ultra-conservative christians is very fun, and that riling the ultra-liberal athiests and anarchists is fun on here. We seem to be in the same boat as my grandfather was a preacher (very laissez-faire christianity though, I am proud to say) and I know more of the bible than a great deal of my more "faithful" friends.

Riling up "ultra" anything is fun. I have a "friend" who is an ultra-communist, but he hasn't even read Marx. He will bust out his so-called points without having the slightest amount of backing for them, and I'll come back with Marx disagreeing with him.

*A group of republican zombies rise from the ground*

"JOIIIIN UUUUSSS.... JOIN USSSSS....!" :D

Don't be so annoyed. Just remember all politicians suck, and laugh.

Never even thought of that. Should have been obvious considering the misogynous nature of the bible.

Yeah, if your real good you can almost give them an epileptic fit. Especially if you let them prattle on for about half an hour about how god condemns it and it's sick and perverted.

Funny thing though, even when confronted with god's indifference about the whole thing, they seem to right it off as a trick or something. (Although I did meet one at a college party who ended up conceding that, in this respect at least, the bible might be "wrong." Kind of funny because it changed his opinion in no way whatsoever. Ah the joy of Catholic Schools.)

Yeah, if your real good you can almost give them an epileptic fit. Especially if you let them prattle on for about half an hour about how god condemns it and it's sick and perverted.

Funny thing though, even when confronted with god's indifference about the whole thing, they seem to right it off as a trick or something. (Although I did meet one at a college party who ended up conceding that, in this respect at least, the bible might be "wrong." Kind of funny because it changed his opinion in no way whatsoever. Ah the joy of Catholic Schools.)

I suppose that guy considers the bible literal and "right" on creation, noah and the ark, and the exodus.

And to the Imperial Navy, I'm constantly annoyed at something, so it might as well be politics for now. Also, I'm just going to remember that John McCain is out there and will keep hoping he manages to rein in the Republican party.

And to the Imperial Navy, I'm constantly annoyed at something, so it might as well be politics for now. Also, I'm just going to remember that John McCain is out there and will keep hoping he manages to rein in the Republican party.

sounds to me like you have anger problems... oh well. As long as you are angry over somthing like that, we won't see any violence.

sounds to me like you have anger problems... oh well. As long as you are angry over somthing like that, we won't see any violence.

I have anger issues, they have never become problems, though. No violence I assure you. Certain topics can annoy me greatly. Especially when the other side is to morally biased to agree with a logical argument. That and I like drama and to stir shit up.

sounds to me like you have anger problems... oh well. As long as you are angry over somthing like that, we won't see any violence.

At least he's venting it into something harmless instead of going home and beating his kids or something, you know?

I suppose that guy considers the bible literal and "right" on creation, noah and the ark, and the exodus.


Well, I think so, but as far as I could see he really only liked it for the "bigot" bits. (And most of those he sort of imagined anyway). I'm sure to the extent I shook his faith he probably only replaced the bible with mein kampf or something. Nothing about that guy would surprise me.

I just get angry when people use the bible to justify anything. (Actually if someone is doing it in a smug fashion, Jesus was a socialist sets me off too - that kind of thing is only acceptable to upset radical christians.) Hey, look, believe what you want, but don't go around telling me that "god told me it was so." Because you know what, he's god or something, and if he really wanted to get that particular message out he would have told the rest of us too. Probably.

But I digress, yes, I think he did think it was the absolute literal truth. Except for the lesbian oversight. (what an idiot, it's far to easy to get into college nowadays.)

When I get angry, I have a punching bag to take it out on... :D

Bravo sir, on venting your anger in a sensible manner. :)

What gets me is this whole concept being foisted that Bush is a moral man. One of my co-workers, a calvinist, has said this on several occasions. Funny, but I never realized the death penalty and killing over a hundred thousand civilians, not to mention over 1100 of our own young men and women, in Iraq plus however many more happened to be in the way of our bombs and depleted uranium shells in other parts of the world was considered moral. Let's not go into the care for Gods green Earth the neocons have shown over the years. By these standards I guess I should start shooting priests, raping nuns and putting babies on pikes and I'll be assured a place beside some white bearded, all powerful dude sitting on a throne of whispy clouds. Moral? I think not.

Long live Matalatataka!
Mahatma Matt

All hail Eris!
(or not, it's cool)

At least he's venting it into something harmless instead of going home and beating his kids or something, you know?

I go online when I need to vent, I beat my kids for entertainment. :D

Just joking. College student, too young to have kids, and my brain can't handle beating anybody.

What gets me is this whole concept being foisted that Bush is a moral man. One of my co-workers, a calvinist, has said this on several occasions. Funny, but I never realized the death penalty and killing over a hundred thousand civilians, not to mention over 1100 of our own young men and women, in Iraq plus however many more happened to be in the way of our bombs and depleted uranium shells in other parts of the world was considered moral. Let's not go into the care for Gods green Earth the neocons have shown over the years. By these standards I guess I should start shooting priests, raping nuns and putting babies on pikes and I'll be assured a place beside some white bearded, all powerful dude sitting on a throne of whispy clouds. Moral? I think not.

Long live Matalatataka!
Mahatma Matt

All hail Eris!

This just might have been said this forum before, I don't know. But I just can't get enough of these super impassioned hyperbolic political rants people post on here. Just so you know, Mahatma, the last half of that paragraph melted a portion of my brain.

What gets me is this whole concept being foisted that Bush is a moral man. One of my co-workers, a calvinist, has said this on several occasions. Funny, but I never realized the death penalty and killing over a hundred thousand civilians, not to mention over 1100 of our own young men and women, in Iraq plus however many more happened to be in the way of our bombs and depleted uranium shells in other parts of the world was considered moral. Let's not go into the care for Gods green Earth the neocons have shown over the years. By these standards I guess I should start shooting priests, raping nuns and putting babies on pikes and I'll be assured a place beside some white bearded, all powerful dude sitting on a throne of whispy clouds. Moral? I think not.

Long live Matalatataka!
Mahatma Matt

All hail Eris!
(or not, it's cool)


Like I have said before, this is exactly the type of thing that mobilizes the other sides base.

Thought hyperbole was what the internet was for -- that and porn. By the way, is brain melting good or bad?

Mahatma Matt

Thought hyperbole was what the internet was for -- that and porn. By the way, is brain melting good or bad?

Mahatma Matt

Well that, and randomly upsetting people.

http://runningwithpencils.com/box/old_bin/zombie.jpg

"Bush has won... you have lost. JOOOIIIIN US!"

Thought hyperbole was what the internet was for -- that and porn. By the way, is brain melting good or bad?

Mahatma Matt

You have shown more resilience than I expected, Matt. You responded with humor and brushed off my attempt to lure you into more lurid speeches about murdering nuns and such.

Hyperbole and porn is what America is all about these days, in a round about way.

As for brain melting: drug induced-good, fire induced-bad.

Gracias for the props. Haven't smoked anything illegal in while, so I guess I'm still pretty vocal about being peeved at the whole election thing. Way too invested. I'll slouch off back into my cave now.

What gets me is this whole concept being foisted that Bush is a moral man. One of my co-workers, a calvinist, has said this on several occasions. Funny, but I never realized the death penalty and killing over a hundred thousand civilians, not to mention over 1100 of our own young men and women, in Iraq plus however many more happened to be in the way of our bombs and depleted uranium shells in other parts of the world was considered moral. Let's not go into the care for Gods green Earth the neocons have shown over the years. By these standards I guess I should start shooting priests, raping nuns and putting babies on pikes and I'll be assured a place beside some white bearded, all powerful dude sitting on a throne of whispy clouds. Moral? I think not.

Long live Matalatataka!
Mahatma Matt

All hail Eris!
(or not, it's cool)
mmm...babies on pikes...

Gracias for the props. Haven't smoked anything illegal in while, so I guess I'm still pretty vocal about being peeved at the whole election thing. Way too invested. I'll slouch off back into my cave now.

I'm pretty upset by it, too. But on the flip side I have been smoking copious amounts of ganja, so, needless to say, I haven't really been thinking about putting babies on pikes.

It does sound like a smashing good time, though.

Edit: It will take me a long time to forgive Chodolo for referencing the "babies on pikes" before me. And congratulations to Mahatma Matt for such an enjoyable and vivid mental picture.

Credit where credit is due. The babies on pikes part was a rip-off from an Eddie Izzard comedy special.

Credit where credit is due. The babies on pikes part was a rip-off from an Eddie Izzard comedy special.

You have disappointed me. I will never be able to look you in the eye again.

Yeah, I've always been too honest for my own damn good. :headbang:

Now I really will slouch off back into my cave.