Barack Obama: A Historic President

[daydreamer41]

Hello Daydreamer,

Aside from those on the Left obsessed with the hate labels, no matter what legitimate reasons they may have, you are obsessed with going after every post they make...in an equally hyperbolic way. I believe you have probably made as many or close to as many posts as all those on the Left combined and it's getting a bit nuts. There's a difference between defending your position (commendable) and being so obsessed with those who bait you (foolish and useless) that you can't help responding to every post they make. But hey, you do seem to enjoy it. Just be aware you are coming off like one of those extremist shouters who started with legitimate points and became obsessed with just saying anything for effect. Still, you aren't the only one. Neither side of extremists cares about truth here...just demagoguery and shouting points.



The motus operandi has been well established by the GSB (Gingrich-Swaggart-Bakker) Method. Condemn all others to damnation while playing Conan and the bouncing bimbo in cheap country hotels. Other self-righteous savior wannabe GSB practitioners include Aimee Semple McPherson, Lonnie Frisbee, Billy James Hargis, Marjoe Gortner, Peter Popoff, Morris Cerulo, Mike Warnke, Robert Tilton, W.V. Grant, Roy Clements, John Paulk, Paul Crouch, Douglas Goodman, Kent Hovind, Ted Haggard, Paul Barnes, Lonnie Latham, Gilbert Deya, Richard Roberts, Earl Paulk, Coy Privette, Thomas Wesley Weeks III, Michael Reid, Joe Barron, Todd Bentley, and Tony Alamo...just to name a few...lol

Cuckoo,

Merlot

BTW SK...you stole my avatar...ya horny heathen...lol.

No, Merlot. I am just trying to make a point. If you say something, back it up with facts, not some type of fairy tale perception or misconception that you may have.

Barack Obama is a facade. Change means nothing without results, for the better. So far the US has been stagnant. Unemployment is still 9.7 percent It has been hovering around 10 percent for a long time. Good jobs are being outsourced. Many Americans are not optimistic. Obama has flipped flopped all over the place. He said he was going to end the war immediately after he got into office, then 16 months and now it is delayed to 23 months or whatever. It doesn't matter.

I run into Liberals all over the place. I live in the NE part of the US. They are a dime a dozen and they all sound alike. Bush stinks. Obama good. blah blah blah. I know the history of the US. It is not perfect, but its Constitution that the founding fathers had given its people and the freedom and liberties, along with responsibilite is, as I see it, is being eroded. Time will tell. I hope I am wrong, but I do not see a good future. The road Obama is paving has much higher taxes, much higher Unemployment, an eroding value of the dollar, and consequences because of it. The states are going broke. It is not a pretty picture.

You are right. I am not going to convince Socialists like Rumple and Doc that they are wrong no more than they are going to convince me that I am wrong. Good luck to all and happy hobbying while you can.

DD41

 

[Below500k]

Because you can't back up what you say, or you would.

Really, that is where you want to go. I keep trying to let you off, open your mind.
The list you give is historic and not on topic.

If you want the equivelnt in right terms...

James Earl Ray, Timothy McVeigh, Eric Rudolph, David Lewis Rice, James Von Brunn, Richard Poplawski, Jim David Adkisson, The entire history of the KKK, and <insert name here> militia groups and on and on and what's the point?

But for the last time, the point is not "well they did it too", that is childish.

It is this... It starts with sentiments or denials, (thoughts). Then it goes to spreading it (words). Then it goes into action.

Deny it DD, or state that since BO has been running, that the right has gone too far and that it is not justified. It is one or the other.

 

[Doc Holliday]

Tea Party member on David Letterman last night

In a quietly remarkable piece of television, David Letterman interviewed Tea Party member Pam Stout on last night’s Late Show. “I know nothin’ about the tea party,” Dave began, saying Stout had come to his attention after the 66 year-old Idaho woman had been featured prominently in a Feb. 15 New York Times story on the Tea Party movement.

Letterman invited her on to ask about the movement and whether it aimed to become a “third party.” She said, “I don’t think it will become a third party,” but that its voice “can be pretty devisive” in some elections, and that locally, she wanted the Tea Party to “take over the Republican Party… [and] go back to the old ideas.”

Those “old ideas” included “letting [some] businesses fail.” Letterman asked, “You mean like car companies and banks?” Stout agreed: “Then other businesses will step up… there’ll always be a demand.” Stout also said she disliked the way “we demonize business” and condemned “one of the highest tax structures” in the world.

Actually, “condemn” may give the wrong impression. Stout was the mildest of souls, calm and remarkably composed for someone probably not used to the glare of network TV cameras. And Letterman loves this sort of person — a Midwestern citizen, a non-celeb; while raising serious points, he made a point of keeping things light .

When he asked her what a Tea Party presidential ticket might look like, Stout said, “Oh, that’s an interesting question.”

“That’s why I’m here, honey!” Dave said, grinning. He also asked whether at Tea Party gatherings, “tea is actually served?” Stout said no, but seemed open to the idea.

After a while, some of Stout’s positions became more clear. She expressed great admiration, twice, for South Carolina Senator Jim DeMint, one of the most conservative members of government. (DeMint is the author of a 2009 book called Saving Freedom: We Can Stop America’s Slide into Socialism.)

Letterman also gave Stout plenty of room to distance herself from what he called “a bonehead like Glenn Beck” and the birther movement. But Stout said Beck had “made me think and re-think” her positions on various issues. Ever the sensible fellow, Letterman said, “Well, anyone who makes you think is good.” But more troublingly, her response to Dave’s observation that “some people in the Tea Party think the President wasn’t born in this country” was, “He spent a lot to cover up his documentation.”

http://watching-tv.ew.com/2010/03/31/david-letterman-pam-stout-tea-party/

 

[daydreamer41]

Really, that is where you want to go. I keep trying to let you off, open your mind.
The list you give is historic and not on topic.

If you want the equivelnt in right terms...

James Earl Ray, Timothy McVeigh, Eric Rudolph, David Lewis Rice, James Von Brunn, Richard Poplawski, Jim David Adkisson, The entire history of the KKK, and <insert name here> militia groups and on and on and what's the point?

But for the last time, the point is not "well they did it too", that is childish.

It is this... It starts with sentiments or denials, (thoughts). Then it goes to spreading it (words). Then it goes into action.

Deny it DD, or state that since BO has been running, that the right has gone too far and that it is not justified. It is one or the other.

The right has gone too far? Too far where? How come everytime the Right wants to claim its Freedom thru political means, the Left say "the right has gone too far" Your perspective is so skewed.

I did not know some of the people on your list. I had to look them up. But from what I looked up, only Jim David Addison actually voiced the desire to kill Liberals and Leftists. McVeigh was an anti-government freak. In fact they are all freaks. As far as the KKK, there were more Democrats than Republican members - ever hear of the Dixiecrats, so I would appreciate if you drop that slanderous myth.

The Tea Party people and RNC have not taken arms against the Obama, nor do they ever plan to. So where do you get your misconceptions?

And as Americans we have the right to Freedom of Speech. You are saying that our thoughts turn into speech turns into action? Come on. Are you denying Americans the right to have thoughts, let alone Free Speech?

 

[daydreamer41]

Tea Party member on David Letterman last night

In a quietly remarkable piece of television, David Letterman interviewed Tea Party member Pam Stout on last night’s Late Show. “I know nothin’ about the tea party,” Dave began, saying Stout had come to his attention after the 66 year-old Idaho woman had been featured prominently in a Feb. 15 New York Times story on the Tea Party movement.

Letterman invited her on to ask about the movement and whether it aimed to become a “third party.” She said, “I don’t think it will become a third party,” but that its voice “can be pretty devisive” in some elections, and that locally, she wanted the Tea Party to “take over the Republican Party… [and] go back to the old ideas.”

Those “old ideas” included “letting [some] businesses fail.” Letterman asked, “You mean like car companies and banks?” Stout agreed: “Then other businesses will step up… there’ll always be a demand.” Stout also said she disliked the way “we demonize business” and condemned “one of the highest tax structures” in the world.

Actually, “condemn” may give the wrong impression. Stout was the mildest of souls, calm and remarkably composed for someone probably not used to the glare of network TV cameras. And Letterman loves this sort of person — a Midwestern citizen, a non-celeb; while raising serious points, he made a point of keeping things light .

When he asked her what a Tea Party presidential ticket might look like, Stout said, “Oh, that’s an interesting question.”

“That’s why I’m here, honey!” Dave said, grinning. He also asked whether at Tea Party gatherings, “tea is actually served?” Stout said no, but seemed open to the idea.

After a while, some of Stout’s positions became more clear. She expressed great admiration, twice, for South Carolina Senator Jim DeMint, one of the most conservative members of government. (DeMint is the author of a 2009 book called Saving Freedom: We Can Stop America’s Slide into Socialism.)

Letterman also gave Stout plenty of room to distance herself from what he called “a bonehead like Glenn Beck” and the birther movement. But Stout said Beck had “made me think and re-think” her positions on various issues. Ever the sensible fellow, Letterman said, “Well, anyone who makes you think is good.” But more troublingly, her response to Dave’s observation that “some people in the Tea Party think the President wasn’t born in this country” was, “He spent a lot to cover up his documentation.”

http://watching-tv.ew.com/2010/03/31/david-letterman-pam-stout-tea-party/

Oh, my the 66-year-old Tea Party woman is a fan of Jim DeMint and Glenn Beck. That is so radical. Throw her in the gulag. That will teach her.

 

[rumpleforeskiin]

I can't help wondering if Tea Party members know of their nickname: Teabaggers and are aware of the meaning.

Tea Party members only know what Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin tell them. And they believe every word.

 

[rumpleforeskiin]

By the way, here's a link to a very well thought out column by Karl Rove on how the recently passed HCR bill will destroy the global economy and lead us to a totalitarian Communist state that will surely take Canada with it.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/herefordandworcester/content/images/2006/03/29/april_fool_420_420x420.jpg

 

[Below500k]

The right has gone too far? Too far where? How come everytime the Right wants to claim its Freedom thru political means, the Left say "the right has gone too far" Your perspective is so skewed.

I did not know some of the people on your list. I had to look them up. But from what I looked up, only Jim David Addison actually voiced the desire to kill Liberals and Leftists. McVeigh was an anti-government freak. In fact they are all freaks. As far as the KKK, there were more Democrats than Republican members - ever hear of the Dixiecrats, so I would appreciate if you drop that slanderous myth.

The Tea Party people and RNC have not taken arms against the Obama, nor do they ever plan to. So where do you get your misconceptions?

And as Americans we have the right to Freedom of Speech. You are saying that our thoughts turn into speech turns into action? Come on. Are you denying Americans the right to have thoughts, let alone Free Speech?

Of course they are all freaks, as are all that you've listed, as is anyone that would go so far as to spit on someone, or even berrate someone with hatred because of an opposing view - that is too far. Each one, (left or right) existed in that chain of think, spread, act.

You've tried unsucessfully to thread a needle between Republicans and what most people call the right, in order to justify and distance your position from hate and violence under the equally irresponsible interpretation of the right to free speech.

My entire dialogue, was to try to illustrate that pattern; thought, speech, action. I could honestly care less what your (or anyones) political affiliation is, or what your country has defined as your rights are. It would be the same discussion if we were talking about the Irish, Tibet, Palestine, Slovenia, or the Congo, past or present.

It all comes back to the same thing, when you enter that pattern, either by denial, turning the other cheek when observing, or do nothing to renounce it, you've made a decision (conciously or unconciously) to keep those melicious thoughts alive - and in doing so you are giving it a chance to continue to the next level.

So, sorry if I sound preechy, on a high horse, liberal, elitest, tree-huggy or whatever you want to lable me to justify your actions. But be very clear about it... it was you who decided to come into a thread about someones positive thoughts towards someone, and act upon it by picking a fight, to "take matters into your own hands" so to speak.

It is of course your right to do so as it was for each of those (your word) freaks before it went to the next level, then the extreme. So for the last time, the only point I'm trying to make is for people to take personal responsibility with the freedom's that they've been given - to be conscious of what they are thinking, saying and doing. Failing to do so, is the only thing that keeps this shit alive.

 

[Mod 11]

Thread cleaned.

When some people get bored about a thread, not reading it and not posting is way better than posting irrelevant stuff.

I suggest people to also make their closing arguments pretty soon. This thread is consuming way too much time in moderation, considering it have nothing to do with the hobby.

Thanks.

 

[Doc Holliday]

This thread is consuming way too much time in moderation, considering it have nothing to do with the hobby.

Uh, that's why the thread was posted in the Lounge section.

 

[Mod 11]

I know it's in the lounge Doc.

May I remind you Mods are not paid to do this job? I spend over 3 hours per day lately moderating MERB and about half of it is on this thread. Yes, I do read it all, go back-forth to follow arguments, check links to ensure no stupid stuff is added... Considering it have nothing to do with escorting, the fact it uses half my time is quite noteworthy, don't you think?

 

[Possum Trot]

I know it's in the lounge Doc.

May I remind you Mods are not paid to do this job? I spend over 3 hours per day lately moderating MERB and about half of it is on this thread. Yes, I do read it all, go back-forth to follow arguments, check links to ensure no stupid stuff is added... Considering it have nothing to do with escorting, the fact it uses half my time is quite noteworthy, don't you think?

If a thread is causing no harm why don't you just ignore it thereby reducing your onerous time commitment ? Is moderating now becoming more of an editorial than a refereeing function in your opinion ?

 

[K Douglas]

I know it's in the lounge Doc.

May I remind you Mods are not paid to do this job? I spend over 3 hours per day lately moderating MERB and about half of it is on this thread. Yes, I do read it all, go back-forth to follow arguments, check links to ensure no stupid stuff is added... Considering it have nothing to do with escorting, the fact it uses half my time is quite noteworthy, don't you think?

I'm not telling you how to do your job but don't you think you're going overboard here. 90 minutes a day? Leave the thread be and if anything gets out of hand I'm sure you'll be notified and then you can take the appropriate action.

 

[CS Martin]

For the record here Mod 11, I endorse this move. I speak for a silent majority that's tired of seeing this ESCORT REVIEW BOARD turned into a political blog. Why not put it up for a anonymous vote?? Or is that now non-demorcratic?

 

[Mod 8]

2) Forbidden Activities:


iii) Personal attacks on others, flames, fights, name-calling, etc...


iv) Lack of respect to either client, escort or other board members.

Hello everyone,

I would like to remind everyone of the rules quoted above and also remind everyone that they apply to every thread and post that exist on MERB, not only those which deal directly with the hobby. We have been very lenient in the Sports Forum, perhaps overly so, and that has led to a total disregard of the rules in certain sports threads. We have no intention of allowing this behavior to expand to other sections of MERB. If members cannot follow simple rules of respect we will have to consider applying the rules of posting to the letter and I have a feeling that many people will be finding themselves appearing on the banned and suspended members thread in very short order.

If you cannot make your point without attacking or insulting the member you are replying to, I would advise you not to make the post at all.


Mod 8

 

[anon_vlad]

No comprehende

For the record here Mod 11, I endorse this move. I speak for a silent majority that's tired of seeing this ESCORT REVIEW BOARD turned into a political blog. Why not put it up for a anonymous vote?? Or is that now non-demorcratic?

Who twists your arm to read the political threads? Why don't you simply ignore every thread which doesn't pertain to merb's mission as you see it. As for voting such threads out of existence, even if you manage to somehow ascertain the thoughts of the silent, tyranny of the majority is not ideal democracy. As a ridiculous example, if the majority of Canadians are brown-eyed, should they be able to vote to force non brown-eyed people to wear coloured contacts? I like the idea of a one-stop shop for blogs about sex and other matters of interest to men.

I understand volunteering for charitable causes, but don't at all donating one's time to a for-profit enterprise such a merb. Most wouldn't even earn any brownie points for it as they would be reluctant to mention it in "polite company". And I really don't understand Mod11 giving away his free time at something he doesn't completely enjoy.

 

[Mod 8]

Hello anon_vlad,

Reading your comment about Mod 11, I have to ask you if you enjoy every aspect of your job or if you think that everyone enjoys every aspect of their job? Moderators do not enjoy having to suspend or ban posters or having to threaten people with suspensions to get them to behave. We do enjoy reading thoughtful, well written posts and well conducted discussions as I assume every member of MERB does. We do not enjoy having to act as babysitters to members who act like spoiled children who constantly ignore the rules and insult other members.

We donate our time to make MERB an enjoyable board for everyone to post on and for everyone to enjoy reading. Those who do not share that goal may be better off posting elsewhere.

M8

 

[Mod 11]

Who twists your arm to read the political threads? Why don't you simply ignore every thread which doesn't pertain to merb's mission as you see it. As for voting such threads out of existence, even if you manage to somehow ascertain the thoughts of the silent, tyranny of the majority is not ideal democracy. As a ridiculous example, if the majority of Canadians are brown-eyed, should they be able to vote to force non brown-eyed people to wear coloured contacts? I like the idea of a one-stop shop for blogs about sex and other matters of interest to men.

I understand volunteering for charitable causes, but don't at all donating one's time to a for-profit enterprise such a merb. Most wouldn't even earn any brownie points for it as they would be reluctant to mention it in "polite company". And I really don't understand Mod11 giving away his free time at something he doesn't completely enjoy.

Anon, the problem with this thread and other of this kind who touch hot topics is, as soon as we are the least lenient, they become a nightmare very fast.

Most of the time, we can allow ourselves to summary scan posts without reading the entire text. In threads like this one, due to the complexity of the topic and how easy it can go from valuable, serious adult discussion to childish bullshit in a single sentence, we must read all posts entirely. If you read this thread, nobody is getting censored for "editorial" reasons. The only interventions we do are because of lack of respect or irrelevant (and I mean TOTALLY irrelevant) posts, never because of an idea we disagree with. All this is time consuming and that time is something we could easily spend doing something else.

Why are we still doing it, free? Because we think MERB members gave us enough information, helping us with our hobby, saving us money and finding pearls, we feel it's worth it to help MERB stay alive. Call us masochist, that might be true but still, when we accepted the offer to become Mods, we accepted the entire package, not to do just what we like.

It's not that I don't see any good points in this discussion but, Obama is still there for a minimum of about 3 years, making this discussion possible for all that time, seeing only the same few posters who are solid on their positions in a discussion that won't accomplish anything.

If other members have opinions they can share to make the discussion move forward, go for it!

I'm actually happy on how good this thread is going respect-wise, I was expecting far worst. If you guys can convince me the thread can be monitored normally, I see no problems with it staying open but, up to know, it's not the case. The ball is on your side of the court guys.

 

[Jman47]

Thread cleaned.

When some people get bored about a thread, not reading it and not posting is way better than posting irrelevant stuff.

I suggest people to also make their closing arguments pretty soon. This thread is consuming way too much time in moderation, considering it have nothing to do with the hobby.

Thanks.

Hello Mod 11,

Great advise...or they can do what I did and just shut up...lol...<insert real rolleyes smiley here>
Sometimes there is a point when being quiet is the best strategy.

Have fun,

Jman


PS Thanks to all the mods for your tireless efforts. I'd pay you guys if this were my board... <wink, wink>

 

[Doc Holliday]

Actually, the simple fact that the Republicans would make a clown the head of their party for the sole reason that he is black makes a very good case for the fact that the party is racist.

Washington (CNN) – North Carolina Republican Party Chairman Tom Fetzer called on Michael Steele Thursday to resign as chairman of the Republican National Committee.

Fetzer made the request in an early afternoon letter sent to Steele.

Fetzer told CNN in a telephone interview that he felt that “the party needed new leadership to move forward.”

“This is a conclusion that I reached only recently and somewhat reluctantly,” Fetzer said. “I have been supportive of him during my entire tenure as chairman of the North Carolina Republican Party. In the last few days, I have reached the conclusion that if we are going to be the party of reform we have to start with our own party.”