THAT is PRICELESS! I thought I was the only one who knew she was a hired poster. Ann - you've surprised me. Why did you continue to pump her posts when you knew she was getting paid to write them? Weird. Oh well. I guess everyone was in on it.
They hire those people to "control the online dialogue." To me, LALO was pretty bad at it, or lazy rather. She never really posted a legitimate argument...just a link from a wackjob website, then her only posts were simplistic : "nuh-uh, Obama did it", type of statements. Maybe her boss actually read a few of them and realized she only spent about 30 minutes a day on it.
Yes it is possible, as to what you say. It's just either part isn't likely.
She didn't seem the type who really worried about ganging up on in a computer-related forum. I could see it, if she was in a room(physically) with people, then fear would have some effect.
Otherwise, it wouldn't matter. As for just being another poster? Her actions went above and beyond the actions of the average poster. Therefore, it's unlikely- not to mention- the junk she was saying, was too specific.
Wonder if he would have spent us a trillion in debt with two unfunded wars? just curious...loll You Conservatives kind of back off that one real quick I have noticed. It gets brought up all the time but never gets addressed by the Right. Then again, if Little Bush hadn't been in office, 9/11 may have never occured. We will never know... Then again, nahhhh considering how tight the Bush family is/was with the Saudi Royal Family. Hell Osama's brother-in-law was the one who loaned Little Bush the money for his first wrecked oil company....
The man was a FISCAL GENIUS - no other time in American history have we fought a war, let along two wars simultaneously, without raising taxes... Living in the Shadow of Ronald Wilson Reagan I imagine...
That's how Bush beat Gore in Florida thanks to Secretary of State Katherine Harris and the U.S. Supreme Court which reversed the Florida Supreme Court's reversing Harris's certification of Bush as the winner.
"But Al Gore was unhappy about Bush winning so he demanded a recount which G.W Bush won again."
Rather, the count was very close, within the statistical margin of error, and given the closeness of the election, and the suspicious actions on the part of W's cronies in Fla, Gore asked for a recount, which is pretty standard when the count is that close, no matter who is ahead. But Gore did it wrong: rather than ask for a recount of Florida, he asked for a targeted recount.
"The democrat heavy Florida Supreme Court said this was ok." As they should have, since a recount in a close election is S.O.P., but they ought to have rules that all of Florida would be recounted.
Then W's crowd sued to stop the targeted recount, and not do any recount at all.
There were so many wrong decisions by so many parties it's really hard to say who was the wrongest. Even the SCOTUS made a wrong decision when they ruled that the recount would stop and the first count would stand, in effect ruling that no, the actual count of the votes in Florida aren't important, and W should be president. It is, I believe, the first presidential election to be won by decision.
"And [people who care about democracy] have been beside themselves ever since." There, fixed it for you.
We bother because it deserves to be remembered. Having just recently watched "Fair Game," my indignation over Bush and all the evil he perpetrated (starting with stealing the 2000 election) is back top-of-mind.
You may engage in euphoric recall of the Bush regime. But I don't and neither does LMC and many others here.
Go ahead. Take your best shot, Jim. I'm sure you've got a stinging comeback for me. Go for it.
Did you see the movie "W"? They did a pretty fair rendition of Ms. Harris. I wonder what she's up to these days? I think she's giving workshops -- that county clerk in Waukesha County, WI who gave a press conference to announce she'd "found" 7,000+ votes 20 hours after the fact -- instead of reporting it to her BOSS -- yeah, she's cut from the same dubious cloth as Kathryn Harris.
Similarities between the battle for the swing state of Florida during the 2000 Presidential Election and the Waukesha County judicial election that took place last week could be indicative of the early results from key states in the 2012 Presidential Election next year.
The votes were so close that differences reported in just a handful of counties could swing the race in favor of either conservative Judge David Prosser or liberal JoAnne Kleoppenburg, and both campaigns were thrust into the national spotlight because of a single issue, WI Governor Scott Walker’s battle against public sector unions.
Then, at the last moment, after Kloppenburg was unofficially claimed to be the winner, Waukesha County Clerk Kathy Nicklaus reportedly found thousands of unsaved votes on her personal computer, similar to the cases of late discovered and “dimpled chad” ballots that pushed Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris into the public’s eye and make her the butt of poll jokes to this day.
Prosser’s team has hired Republican lawyer Ben Ginsburg and Kloppenburg’s campaign has added Democrat Marc Elias to their ranks in order to debate the legitimacy of the 14,000 votes discovered by Nicklaus, as well as to defend each side in a federal investigation that was called for by Wisconsin Representative Tammy Baldwin, a Democrat from the 2nd District. Nicklaus has refused to step down and released a statement Tuesday that she will finish out her term, amid calls for her resignation. The break down for the Supreme Court election showed much closer results, with 32 counties for Kloppenburg and 27 for Prosser, and the residents of WI divided almost perfectly in half.
As to "Take THAT Governor Walker" -- yes, the people of Wisconsin are not taking his anti-union bullying lying down!
Republicans are likely to claim a victory for Prosser as a vicarious victory for Walker if the legal battles, which could last the length of the summer months, turn out in favorite of the conservative incumbent. Democrats could claim a win for their side in the fact that no one expected the judicial race to be so close, Prosser was chosen with almost 100% of the vote in 2001, and had no major competition in that race.
The heavily divided state will likely be entangled in recount, recall and election battles through July or even August, as amid the chaos of protests in Madison and recount battles in Waukesha, three WI state Senators have already faced demands for recall from both sides. Republicans Dan Kapanke and Randy Hopper have already had petitions filed against them by Democrats, and on Saturday State Representative Jennifer Shilling offered to “stand up to the Governor” and challenge Kapanke’s seat. Republicans claim they have enough signatures to mount a petition for recall against Democratic State Senator Robert Wirch, but as of Wednesday nothing has been filed.
Let me back up a minute. Before Lady Love went awol from the forums, there were many comments and speculation as to whether she was a paid "plant," etc. This was all prior to her depriving us of her company.
I don't care if she was paid or not and never suggested she was. I just thought she was like the socially clueless nerd who doesn't know when to shut up when others start yawning at his endless monologues about obscure trivia.
Then you'd be wrong. I read most,if not all the links she posted. When I did more than dispute the source then Lady Love would abandon the topic and start another one off,neatly avoiding any testing of her ludicrous claims.
That's an interesting interpretation. I can't speak for everyone but after reading 4 or 5 of her links, I stopped trying. Her links not only did not support her posts, they often didn't even relate. Most were opinion pieces with very little facts to back them up.
Here is an example of us "libs" trying to engage ladylove. I remember it clearly because it was the moment I decided to stop trying to have a rational discussion with her. The topic should have been relatively nonpolitical (at least I thought so) because it had to do with decreasing our dependence on big agriculture and returning to backyard and community gardens as our primary source of produce.
LALO a victim? With all of her terrible comments on people simply because they don't 'think' like she does? I've never read anything so ridiculous. She dished it out until people said, enough. She doesn't run the political forum and she tried to.
I would wager that had not Bush/Cheney been in the White House, even though the attacks would have occurred, I don't see an invasion of Iraq happening...
Donald Rumsfeld, Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice were key figures to selling the deliberate misinformation campaign that led us to a multi-hundred dollar investment there every fiscal year...
Of course, I am completely underscoring Mr. Cheney...and his carryover cronyism from the Nixon days...along with Rumsfeld..
The way the 2000 Administration was lined up perfectly for the foreign policy that "was thrust upon" them is too coincidental for my liking...
The Project for the New American Century gang were all at key levers of power....and the "Pearl Harbor like" event they called for in their own publications happened precisely when they needed it to.....
It is also important to remember that "Muslims" as a blanket term does not exist... Those who carried out the attacks, from what we know, represent a fringe element of Arab elites.. The deep pockets of the Saudi's...who U.S. tax dollars protect directly and indirectly, enable a deep grasp into poor neighboring nations.... We trained their intelligence services, influence, and wealth..
She's not wrong about the liberal, progressive and socialist modus operandi, PP. History bears this out over and over again. And it turns out to destroy people's lives over and over. Look at your heroes and look at their results. Look at the poverty stricken inner cities, those places that were supposed to be wonderful, modern housing developments for the poor. Look at the states where they have held power for years. The facts bear out lady's words.
So, you think it's an acceptable tactic, when conversing with an individual, to make assumptions about their beliefs based upon some negative stereotype?
Based upon your response, that seems to be what you think, but you can correct me if I am wrong. You know, people with opposing ideas actually do have rational conversations with each other and arrive at solutions to serious problems.
Somehow, I manage to do it in real life quite a lot. I seriously doubt that LaLo ever does.
You don't know a thing about LaLo, obviously. Any more than she knows about you. It is arrogant and insane to think that you do. You people make these constant personal comments as if you were little gods who can read minds and peer into people's lives.
Furthermore, my comment was about a political ideology and the practices used by those who cleave to it and the clearly visible results that can be ascribed to those practices. I wasn't TALKING ABOUT YOU.
NOT LIKE YOU TALK ABOUT PEOPLE AS IF YOU KNOW SQUAT ABOUT THEM. AND AS IF THAT IS THE PURPOSE OF A POLITICAL DISCUSSION BOARD.
Sigh... I'm trying to get you to see that in an attempt to have a rational conversation, interjecting what liberals think and what conservatives think, as though they all think alike, instead of responding to the individual is not productive and effectively damages any attempt at conversation.
I am basing my assessment on trying to have a conversation with her and her inability to address me as in individual, that's all. You're right; I could be completely wrong, but I don't think it's an illogical conclusion given her online persona. Do you?
Of course we are not discussing individuals, except of course, you did ask about LaLo, who is an individual. That's how this all started, remember?
But, aside from that, how can you have a productive discussion about anything--current events, policies, whatever--if you view other people on a forum as representatives of an ideology instead of intelligent individuals who may have something worthwhile to say?
Hmmm...look at Texas, run by conservatives, and have a larger deficit than California. In fact, California is run by a conservative. Actually, I think most of the states are...AAAAANNNNNDDDDD, they are broke. Nice.
I'm sure lady_love158 was banned. I never saw an instance of her snapping back despite all the personal attacks and badgering but there you go. If she did snap back, she'd be banned.
I've experienced that myself. I was called a liar today. No ban that I know of. I called someone a liar. Banned. I asked someone if they checked for news behind his eyelids since he so clearly was not aware of the news concerning the particular situation. Banned. It's clearly not a level playing field.
But that's what happens when you espouse Christian values or conservative values. Look at what you liberals do to Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachman. Amazing. And you don't even feel a sting of conscience about it. You'd say these things in front of your children. You'd teach them to say these things and have this attitude. You'd be frothing if 1/100th of that poisonous venom and vile innuendo were directed at a liberal atheist.
I was banned for calling someone pathetic. I'm sure the playing field is level. This was after she accused me of hating soldiers (I am married to a veteran who retired from the military) and calling them murderers, when I did not. Which is worse?
You think liberals and democrats who oppose Palin don't suffer consequences? Have you forgotten Gabrielle Giffords and the people who were murdered at her rally so quickly? Because their families have not.
AnnCee, You talk about christian values and about what liberals do to Palin and Bachman, and how they do not feel a sting of conscience about it.
How quickly you forget! What about that rant of yours on the Obama family attending church just to hear a pro-palestinian speaker, when they in fact attended an earlier church service! You twisted the article you were quoting, into something it didn't say, just to put bad light on the 1st family.
You yourself admitted to asking someone if he checked for news behind their eyelids, since he so clearly was not aware of the news concerning the particular situation!
Doesn't this ring of (THE POT CALLING THE KETTLE BLACK)?
You are complaining about others because they, in your eyes, are doing the same things you do!
And that right there is an excellent way of calling me mealy-mouthed without actually saying it. Well done!
But check it out: what I said in my previous post explains the difference between attacking someone's position or someone's ideas, and attacking the person himself or herself. In a political debate, people expect to have their ideas attacked, or they should expect that, anyway. People also reasonably expect that their characters will not be attacked (though this is becoming more unrealistic, reasonable though it may be).
So, are you willing to satisfy my curiosity? Did the non-banned person call you a liar, or did he merely say that one of your statements is false? One attacks the idea, the other attacks the person.
"The sky is red." "You're a lying liar who tells lies." vs "The sky is red." "That's not true; the sky is blue. Go look."
Actually, I called you a liar, and I was banned....so, again, you are incorrect.
However, as long as corporations skate the tax code, I can skate a ban.
Now, in this same thread, you are called out for distorting an article, and you just ignore it. The proof is actually right in your posted thread, and in the article you list. So, tell me....what does that make you?
I appreciate what you are saying, PP. However, I am interested in ideas, events and political figures. I want to talk about facts and ideas and opinions. I am not interested in getting to know people. That is a dangerous thing to do online. And it quickly spills over into personal discussions rather than more general discussions in an open forum. The only thing I want to know about you is your opinions about specific political topics and ideas. Political discussion.
And yes, I did bring up lady_love158 because I am troubled by all the personal attacks against her on this forum.
She was banned for a month because she went off on Moonbeam apparently. I can't find the post in question or if I have found it I sure as hell don't recognize it as any sort of personal attack.
I think you misunderstand the point I am trying to make. I'm not talking about getting to know people personally. I'm talking about treating them as individuals, not ideologies. Reading their posts and trying not to leap to wild assumptions based upon what you think a liberal or a conservative believes.
Oh sure Doug. Compare yourself to LaLo. Ha ha! You may have been banned 639 times. That seems about right, although it's probably way low (sorry to say). But .. have you ever been banned for a whole MONTH? Imagine 30 long days and nights without any forum contact. THAT'S serious bannage reserved for only the most specialest offenders. So if it's true that that is where LaLo is, there's really no disputing that she IS the biggest victim evah !
That is a very sick statement. There is no proof. The man is crazy and he has nothing to do with Palin. People who say such things should be ashamed of themselves. But as liberals I understand that shame went overboard long ago.
Actually Ann, there is a link between the two. As a conspiracy-believer, you might like this!
A college professor in San Fransisco was getting threats very much like the ones Giffords was getting...so much so, that the police went there to investigate. Turns out, this professor had gotten in Palin's cross-hairs, because he was questioning the amount of money she wanted to speak at an event.
And I have a general question on the "lies & liars" point. It is quite common here to see generalized LIARS statements. Example: Liberals LIE. Liberals are LIARS. Liberals need to stop spreading LIES. Now, if I identify myself with that political persuasion, is that accusation personal against me? Am I not being called a LIAR by virtue of affiliation?
I can't remember the name for this logic but it goes like this: All Ds are Liars You are a D Therefore, you are a Liar.
"Then, at the last moment, after Kloppenburg was unofficially claimed to be the winner, Waukesha County Clerk Kathy Nicklaus reportedly found thousands of unsaved votes on her personal computer, similar to the cases of late discovered and “dimpled chad” ballots that pushed Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris into the public’s eye"
My MY...like a little Mighty Mouse, huh? "Here I come to save the day!!"
Let's see if SHE gets a make-over and a promotion....