Patting the wrists, rolling the eyes. - Page 123

Replaced_Texan · 04-01-2005, 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Gattigap
I really wish that GWB would stop this shit.

E.J. Dionne in WaPo:

Lately the president has been chastising Democrats for not sitting down with him to fashion a solution. "I think there is a political price for not getting involved in the process," Bush said in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, on Wednesday. "I think there is a political price for saying, 'It's not a problem, I'm going to stay away from the table.' " But when Bush's critics show up at the president's taxpayer-financed events, they are often told there is no place at the table for dissenters.

Just ask Karen Bauer, who tried to attend Bush's Social Security event in Denver last week with her friends Leslie Weise and Alex Young. They were given tickets by the office of Rep. Bob Beauprez (R-Colo.). "We had on suits; we didn't have any buttons or pins," Bauer said in a telephone interview. Beneath their sober attire, they wore T-shirts that read "Stop the Lies," but decided to keep them covered.

Before the three could enter, they were stopped and directed toward "a man wearing a smiley-face tie," Bauer says. The man in the tie told them that the Secret Service was coming to see them. Someone "in a suit wearing an earpiece and a lapel pin" came along to say that "we had been ID'd" and "that if we had any ill intentions, we would be arrested and jailed." They were initially seated, she said, but the organizers had second thoughts and escorted them out.

According to the Secret Service, the man they spoke with was not a government agent but a local Republican volunteer. It appears they were "ID'd" by a bumper sticker on their car that read: "No More Blood for Oil." So don't dare display a controversial bumper sticker if you want to hear your president. The Republican Party is watching you.

This was not an isolated case. The Bush Social Security tour consists of strictly controlled political meetings similar in spirit to the authoritarian style of Bush rallies during the 2004 campaign. In a famous instance last September, a distraught mother whose son was killed in Iraq was arrested for protesting at a New Jersey rally for first lady Laura Bush. The charges were later dropped, which makes you ask why she was charged in the first place.

It was uncool to see him doing this crap during the campaign, but now it's just ludicrous. If he wants to do nothing but revivals, he should simply call them that, and bring his own damned tent.

Gattigap

You'd think that they'd just frisk us for salad dressing, no?

I'm probably on some FBI/Secret Service watch list. I notice a few extra black cars on my street every now and then. I hope they gave me a good nickname.

Gattigap · 04-01-2005, 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
You'd think that they'd just frisk us for salad dressing, no?

I'm probably on some FBI/Secret Service watch list. I notice a few extra black cars on my street every now and then. I hope they gave me a good nickname.

"Sex Toy Warehouser."

Sorry. It doesn't roll of the tongue, so to speak, but still, its connotations are better than the one they gave to ShapeShifter.

bilmore · 04-01-2005, 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
You'd think that they'd just frisk us for salad dressing, no?

I, too, have problems with the idea that a presidential address should have a vetted audience, but, on the other hand, the party whose idea of free speech centers on pie, salad dressing, and screaming "no blood for oil" as a speech interupter loses some credibility in its complaints. When Bush spoke of stepping up and taking part, I think he had something other than banana cream in mind.

Mmmm, Burger (C.J.) · 04-01-2005, 01:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ltl/fb
Re: title -- I'm sure dtb would be happy to spank you if you ask -- no need for this not-so-subtle offensiveness.

ETA I'm sure some of you fancy DC people can tell me -- who would have a "consul" license plate, and what does it mean?

Google is your friend

Gattigap · 04-01-2005, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bilmore
I, too, have problems with the idea that a presidential address should have a vetted audience, but, on the other hand, the party whose idea of free speech centers on pie, salad dressing, and screaming "no blood for oil" as a speech interupter loses some credibility in its complaints. When Bush spoke of stepping up and taking part, I think he had something other than banana cream in mind.

And if the stories discussed people being turned away because of tomatoes in hand instead of the bumper sticker spied on the car in the parking lot, I would be more sympathetic to this view.

Replaced_Texan · 04-01-2005, 01:58 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bilmore
I, too, have problems with the idea that a presidential address should have a vetted audience, but, on the other hand, the party whose idea of free speech centers on pie, salad dressing, and screaming "no blood for oil" as a speech interupter loses some credibility in its complaints. When Bush spoke of stepping up and taking part, I think he had something other than banana cream in mind.

I agree, and the pie/salad dressing people should be prosecuted for assault. I have no where near as much beef with the blood for oil screamers because those types tend to get stifled/assaulted by the crowd.

Kerry didn't have a vetting process, as far as I could tell. There were some crowd issues, but dissent wasn't as vigorously discouraged in that campaign. Maybe that's why he lost, but I'd like to think that a demonstration of honest difference of opinion at a face to face meeting doesn't kill the campaign entirely.

I'm really interested in what people are being charged with. Hell, Ahnold (I say this because I can't spell his last name) is banning people in scrubs for fear of coming into contact with nurses. I'm thinking he'd better hope to high heaven that the bypass worked.

ltl/fb · 04-01-2005, 02:04 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bilmore
I, too, have problems with the idea that a presidential address should have a vetted audience, but, on the other hand, the party whose idea of free speech centers on pie, salad dressing, and screaming "no blood for oil" as a speech interupter loses some credibility in its complaints. When Bush spoke of stepping up and taking part, I think he had something other than banana cream in mind.

This coming from the party whose idea of free speech is killing abortion doctors? Nice.

I exaggerate, but then, so do you. Characterizing the entire party by a couple incidents involving college students I would have hoped would be beneath even you. All y'all on here yap about how great free speech is, blah blah blah, but your fucking leader doesn't want any part of it. If you are going to be a fucking public figure, you fucking need to be able to put up with some fucking guff. Even fucking royalty has a fucking better excuse -- they were born into it. Bush fucking asked to be fucking elected and is fucking traveling around the fucking country pushing a fucking agenda that he fucking well knows is fucking controversial. He should be able to handle dissent.

ETA no, I didn't get any last night. why do you ask?

Replaced_Texan · 04-01-2005, 02:04 PM

As far as I can tell, this isn't an April fool joke. I'm certain that the US Attorney's office will be gathering a grand jury in a few days. (spree: letter from a Senator to a Congressman.)

Shape Shifter · 04-01-2005, 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
]

Shape Shifter is a lizard. Get with the program, newbie.

Thanks for the backup. spanky, you can learn more about me here. But only if you can handle the truth.

Gattigap · 04-01-2005, 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
As far as I can tell, this isn't an April fool joke. I'm certain that the US Attorney's office will be gathering a grand jury in a few days. (spree: letter from a Senator to a Congressman.)

Interesting.

As an aside, I saw on CNN last night that amongst all of the name calling and yelling in the aftermath of the Schiavo case, one family member (the sister, I think) read a statement in which the family discouraged anyone from committing or threatening violence, noting that doing so would disrespect Terri and the Schindler family. A nice touch.

Gattigap · 04-01-2005, 02:12 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Thanks for the backup. spanky, you can learn more about me here. But only if you can handle the truth.

Nice.

Saw this on the page. How this has not become an avatar for a sock on this board shows an admirable level of restraint on your part, I think.

ETA: Hmm, maybe that's why.

bilmore · 04-01-2005, 02:14 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
As far as I can tell, this isn't an April fool joke. I'm certain that the US Attorney's office will be gathering a grand jury in a few days. (spree: letter from a Senator to a Congressman.)

Lautenberg's an idiot. An intentional one, which is worse. This:

“The time will come for the men responsible for this to answer for their behavior.”

equals this?:

"Whoever threatens to assault…. or murder, a United States judge… with intent to retaliate against such… judge…. on account of the performance of official duties, shall be punished [by up to six years in prison]”

Idiot.

Wait. Excuse me. In honor of fringey:

Fucking idiot.

ltl/fb · 04-01-2005, 02:15 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
As far as I can tell, this isn't an April fool joke. I'm certain that the US Attorney's office will be gathering a grand jury in a few days. (spree: letter from a Senator to a Congressman.)

Ooooh, look, not just your buddy but also Senator mixture-of-fecal-matter-lube-and-sometimes-semen-(if-in-monogamous-relationship-and-everyone-has-tested-negative) are getting into this: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...avo_politics_4

Shape Shifter · 04-01-2005, 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bilmore
Lautenberg's an idiot. An intentional one, which is worse. This:

“The time will come for the men responsible for this to answer for their behavior.”

equals this?:

"Whoever threatens to assault…. or murder, a United States judge… with intent to retaliate against such… judge…. on account of the performance of official duties, shall be punished [by up to six years in prison]”

Idiot.

Wait. Excuse me. In honor of fringey:

Fucking idiot.

On the scale of idiocy, or fucking idiocy, where how would you balance the letter with DeLay's comments? The judges have been receiving death threats, you know. In such an environment, you're not defending DeLay's comments as responsible, are you? It's so hard to tell when you guys are joking after the torture discussion.

bilmore · 04-01-2005, 02:27 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
On the scale of idiocy, or fucking idiocy, where how would you balance the letter with DeLay's comments? The judges have been receiving death threats, you know. In such an environment, you're not defending DeLay's comments as responsible, are you? It's so hard to tell when you guys are joking after the torture discussion.

Delay should have been more politically correct, and ended with the logical finish about impeachment or changing the judicial appointment system, not because there is any basis for some BS charge that he's inciting the crazies to murder, but because he had to know that there are idiots like Lautenberg out there just waiting to reinterpret any public statement, no matter how tortuous it must be, to make it sound bad.

Lautenberg, on the other hand, should simply have his feeding tube yanked. He is truly brain-dead.