Way OT and political, too

Page 15 of 16  
Tim Daneliuk wrote:

Brilliant! Glad to see you've taken my suggestion to heart.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I wish you'd share your myriad qualities on contributing something that has to do with woodworking, which I never see from you, instead of your childish rants that just embarass yourself and your business.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Perry Aynum wrote:

Funny, I don't feel embarrassed nor is my business suffering. When I have something to share on topic I'll initiate a relevant threat ("relevant" means that it's on topic and germane to wood working). In the mean time I'll feel free to join OTs already underway, thanks very much. (Notice that I don't start 'em and don't participate at all in a good many of the OT threads here.) You don't like it? I don't care much...
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk snipped-for-privacy@tundraware.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Perry Aynum wrote:

I don't find it embarrassing.
What's embarrassing is someone replying to a topic clearly marked not only OT, but "WAY OT," just to bitch and moan about someone not contributing any woodworking information. The real childish part is how your complaint is really just an ineptly transparently attempt to assert your own opinion on the OT matter. An adult would simply ignore the OT thread if he didn't want to participate in it.
--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Tim Daneliuk wrote:

. . . since the last administration already did most of it in anyway? (torture, pre-emptive war, wire tapping without warrants, presidential "signings" that allowed violating existing laws - with impunity, Alberto Gonzales, ...)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
charlieb wrote:

And they were able to do these things *legally* courtesy of the half dozen presidents before them. Most of what is in Patriot was already written into law under the guise of "The War On Drugs". W merely appropriated it for the "War On Terrrah". But you W haters don't get that. In fact, it's become a hobby to hate him for things he either didn't do, did legally, or had ample precedent for. I'm not defending *him* (since I mostly oppose government meddling in things like sex and drugs and rock-n-roll), I'm making fun of you for being so gullible and falling for the Dems line of B.S...
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk snipped-for-privacy@tundraware.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yeah, but it's much more fun to criticise loser freaks like you who have no life whatsoever. You're completely gone where there's any discussion about woodworking, but as soon as there's a thread on something political or how the system is costing you, you're back here with a vengeance. Twelve messages within the space of a few hours.
That's your total existence. Whine, whine, whine, sleep a bit and whine some more. Pretty damned pathetic in any venue.
Yeah Miller, you lying asshole, I'm here insulting someone again. Funny though, how it's usually you and Daneliuk that are on the receiving end?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Heh, heh, heh. Jesus, I'd love to be sitting to one side of and back from Rush and Ann both when they heard about that. In Rush's case, I've never seen a head explode from internal pressure caused by a brain giving off gas.
I just want to ask Annie babe to give my horse back his face, though.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The fact it woke Timbo from his slumber pretty much proves you're on the right track.
In fact, I don't think Hillary Clinton would be a bad choice for Supreme Court Justice. I think she looks weak as Secretary Of State... despite her low- hanging 'nads.
Edward G. Rendell for Secretary of State!! I *like* that guy.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You realize that Rush is nothing more than an "entertainer" What he thinks is irrelevant and he like all radio entertainers are not to be taken seriously.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Leon wrote:

I used to think that, even in the face of evidence like the Vice President making policy announcements via Limbaugh's show and so on. But Rush has recently demonstrated that when he snaps his fingers the Republican Party appears holding a silver tray with a linen towel folded over its arm asking what he'd like to drink. The Chairman of the RNC forced to publicly kiss Limbaugh's ass after calling him an entertainer who employs incendiary, ugly rhetoric marks one of the party's lowest points in years.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
LRod wrote:

I was disappointed enough by his decision to make her SecState, it had every appearance of being a payoff for someone unqualified for the job because he wanted to appease her faction and silence potential criticism from her and that guy who technically is still her husband. A SCOTUS seat for Hillary? No thanks.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Damn LRod, this oughta stir up the dumb asses.
...and they've been so quiet for the last hundred days, or so...

Regards,
Tom Watson http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1 /
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Tom Watson" wrote:

Hell Tom, not many of them left these days, just look at what your senator did.
Good grief, Strom Thurman and his State's Right Dixiecrats had a bigger coalition in 1948 than the Republicans have today with their hard right ideology.
Lew
.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Lew Hodgett wrote:

I want some of what you're smoking, I don't care if it's illegal. The Repuglicans as a party as very far away from anything resembling "Far Right". They seem to be the party of no ideas, no principles, no energy, and no future because they've systematically disassembled their core that believes in limited government and personal responsibility.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk snipped-for-privacy@tundraware.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I thought all REAL Americans had left the country already! They thought that Bush the drunk, drug addict, and intellectual child was GOOD. at least the drug addict Rush is still here .Obama is not the bogyman, wither you agree with him or not and more than half the country does(he the one who was elected). please just get over it Just remember the Most important branch of government is the legislature not the president and they are Our direct representatives and If you do not like what THEY are doing vote them out!
My spouse is from communist china and as soon a she heard Mr. Bush back in 2000 she thought HE was the communist and totaltairan ,so go figure
Leonard
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Len wrote:

Heh! What would /she/ know? ;-)
--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Tim Daneliuk wrote:
(speaking of the Republican Party)

As used as I've become to automatically disagreeing with you, I have to admit that I share this perception.
I'm not sure that there's actually been a systematic disassembly, and I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt and say that they seem to have lost sight of their principles - and without that common foundation, seem unable to produce ideas about which they can reach consensus, and without ideas to which the general electorate can say: "Yes!" they have no energy and no political traction.
If you're a believer in personal responsibility (here it comes round again - wait for it...) let me encourage you to involve yourself in the process of identifying and advocating for those who /do/ have the principles, who /can/ produce ideas that unify people in their support.
Get 'em on the ballot - 'cause if you don't, someone else will be (re)elected. Time's already running short...
--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Morris Dovey wrote:

It was systematic in the sense that winning elections became more important than defending principle. What good is having office if there is no coherent philosophical structure to animate what to do once you're there. This party that claims to preserve personal liberty, for example, has been only too happy to go after all manner of things that are and ought to remain private (for adults): drugs, end-of-life decisions, gay marriage and so on. It is just about literally true that while the Republicans had a collective meltdown about what the word "marriage" means were simultaneously ceding control of the nation to a bunch of radical sewer rats. The party that claimed a strict "originalist" view of the Constitution and thus argued for strong states' rights, was only too happy to trot off to SCOTUS in Schiavo case when Florida didn't give them the answer they wanted. The list is almost endless and nauseating but it boils down to this: You either stand on principle or you fall over loudly - they've fallen and can't get up. Those of us - that diminishing bunch of us - that actually think the Constitution means what it says and what is says is very good are now left with a republic in shambles, a shameless demagogue in the Oval Office, and the most inherently corrupt, dishonest, and self-serving congressional leaders in the last 100 years.

I have and I do ... but the central problem here is not really the political parties, it's the greedy public. You cannot have meaningful and healthy politics when half the population lives off the other half and wants even more. I have contempt for the Republicans because they have opened the door for the cesspool currently in power, but, in the end, it was the public that brought this upon themselves. Absent a holistic and countrywide return to personal responsibility, our republic is doomed. If and when such a day happens, people like Ron Paul and Chuck Hagel will lead. In the mean time, we shall all preside over the destruction of our liberty, future, and possibilities.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk snipped-for-privacy@tundraware.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Tom Watson wrote:

Well, it looks like you've come out of the woodwork on this one, so it apparently worked.

--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.