Bush Playing Us With "Withdrawal"

By Keith Olbermann
Countdown MSNBC

Tuesday 04 September 2007

"Revelation" contradicts every other rationale offered in the last 500 days.

Finally tonight, a Special Comment about Mr. Bush's trip, and his startling admission of the true motive for this war, which was revealed in his absence.

And so he is back from his annual surprise gratuitous photo-op in Iraq, and what a sorry spectacle it was.

But it was nothing compared to the spectacle of one unfiltered, unguarded, horrifying quotation in the new biography to which Mr. Bush has consented.

As he deceived the troops at Al-Asad Air Base yesterday with the tantalizing prospect that some of them might not have to risk being killed and might get to go home…

Mr. Bush probably did not know that, with his own words, he had already proved that he had been lying… is lying… will be lying.... about Iraq.

He presumably did not know, that there had already appeared those damning excerpts from Robert Draper's book "Dead Certain."

"I'm playing for October-November," Mr. Bush said to Draper.

That, evidently, is the time during which, he thinks he can sell us the real plan.

Which is, to quote him: "To get us in a position where the presidential candidates, will be comfortable about sustaining a presence."Comfortable" - that is - with saying about Iraq, again quoting the President, "stay... longer."

And there it is, Sir.

We've caught you.

Your goal is not to bring some troops home - maybe - if we let you have your way now;

Your goal is not to set the stage for eventual withdrawal;

You are, to use your own disrespectful, tone-deaf word, playing at getting the next Republican nominee to agree to jump into this bottomless pit with you, and take us with him, as we stay in Iraq for another year, and another, and another, and anon.

Everything you said about Iraq yesterday, and everything you will say, is a deception, for the purpose of this one cynical, unacceptable, brutal goal - perpetuating this war indefinitely.

War today, war tomorrow, war forever!

And you are playing at it!

Playing!

A man with any self-respect, having inadvertently revealed such an evil secret, would have already resigned and fled the country!

You have no remaining credibility about Iraq, Sir.

And yet, yesterday at Al-Asad, Mr. Bush kept playing - and this time, using the second of his two faces.

The President told reporters, quote - "They, (General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker) "tell me if the kind of success we are now seeing continues, it will be possible to maintain the same level of security with fewer American forces."

And so, Mr. Bush got his fraudulent headlines today.

"Bush May Bring Some Troops Home."

While the reality is, we know from what he told Draper, that the President's true hope is that they will not come home; but that they will stay there, because he is keeping them there now, in hope that those from his political party fighting to succeed him, will prolong this unendurable disaster into the next decade.

But, to a country dying of thirst, the President seemed to vaguely promise a drink from a full canteen - a promise predicated on the assumption that he is not lying.

Yet you are lying, Mr. Bush.

Again.

But now, we know... why.

You gave away more of yourself than you knew in the Draper book…

And you gave away more still, on the arduous trip back out of Iraq - hours in the air, without so much as a single vacation.

"If you look at my comments over the past eight months," you told reporters, "it's gone from a security situation - in the sense that we're either going to get out and there will be chaos, or, more troops. Now, the situation has changed, where I'm able to speculate on the hypothetical."

Mr. Bush, the only "hypothetical" here is that you are not now holding our troops... hostage.

You have no intention of withdrawing them.

But that doesn't mean you can't pretend you're thinking about it, does it?

That is your genius, Sir - as you see it, anyway.

You can deduce what we want - we, the people, remember us? - and then use it against us.

You can hold that canteen up and promise it to the parched nation.

And the untold number of Americans whose lives have not been directly blighted by Iraq - or who do not realize that their safety has been reduced and not increased by Iraq - they will get the bullet points: 'Bush is thinking about bringing some troops home. Bush even went to Iraq.'

You can fool some of the people all of the time, can't you, Mr. Bush?

You are playing us!

And as for the most immediate victims of the President's perfidy and shameless manipulation - those troops, yesterday sweating literally as he spoke at Al-Asad Air Base...

Tonight, again sweating figuratively in The Valley Of The Shadow Of Death...

The President saved, for them, the most egregious "playing" in the entire trip.

"I want to tell you this about the decision, about my decision about troop levels. Those decisions will be based on a calm assessment by our military commanders on the conditions on the ground - not a nervous reaction by Washington politicians to poll results in the media."

One must compliment Mr. Bush's writer.

That, perhaps, was the mostly perfectly crafted phrase of his Presidency.

For depraved indifference to Democracy, for the craven projection of political motives onto those trying to save lives and save a nation, for a dismissal of the value of the polls and the importance of the media… for a summary of all he does not hold dear about this nation or its people - nothing... could top that.

As if, Sir, you listened to all the "calm assessments" of our military commanders -rather than firing the ones who dared say The Emperor Has No Clothes, and The President, No Judgment;

As if, Sir, your entire presidency was not a "nervous reaction", and you yourself, nothing but a Washington politician;

As if, Sir, "the media" does not largely divide into those parts your minions are playing, and those others who unthinkingly and uncritically serve as your echo chamber, at a time when the nation's future may depend on the airing of dissent.

And as if, Sir, those polls were not so overwhelming, and not so clearly reflective of the nation's agony... and the nation's insistence.

But this President has ceased to listen.

This President has decided that night is day, and death is life, and enraging the world against us, is safety.

And this laziest of Presidents, actually interrupted his precious time off to fly to Iraq to play at a photo opportunity... with soldiers... some of whom will... on his orders... be killed before the year... maybe the month... is out.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Just over 500 days remain in this Presidency.

Consider the dead who have piled up on the battlefield.... in these last 500 days.

Consider the singular fraudulence of this President's trip to Iraq yesterday, and the singular fraudulence of the selling of The Petraeus Report... in these last 500 days.

Consider how this President has torn away at the fabric of this nation in a manner of which terrorists can only dream... in these last 500 days.

And consider again how this President has spoken to that biographer: that he is "playing for October-November"… the goal in Iraq is "To get us in a position where the presidential candidates will be comfortable about sustaining a presence"… and consider how this revelation contradicts every other rationale he has offered... in these last 500 days.

In the context of all that… now, consider… these next 500 days.

Mr. Bush, our presence in Iraq must end.

Even if it means your resignation.

Even if it means your impeachment.

Even if it means a different Republican to serve out your term.

Even if it means a Democratic Congress - and those true Patriots among the Republicans - standing up and denying you another **penny** for Iraq, other than for the safety and the safe conduct home of our troops.

This country cannot run the risk of what you can still do to this country... in the next 500 days…

Not while you, Sir... are playing.

Good night, and good luck.


http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/090507A.shtml

Awwww, shit. I'd hoped it was you leaving forever.

es347fan, who the hell asked you?

Hm, do you guys think the American public will put the Republicans back into power if it means keeping the war going?

7100 posts and counting means not having to wait to be asked.

Awwww, shit. I'd hoped it was you leaving forever.
es347fan, who the hell asked you?

hehe, it was kinda witty though wasn't it truth... cooome on... :D

Keith Olbermann is doing what he can do, what he's best at, and what will gather the most eyes and ears to think just for a minute about the nonsense coming from this administration. And his rising viewer ship shows that his approach is working, as the choir that he's preaching to is a rapidly expanding one.

And his rising viewer ship shows that his approach is working, as the choir that he's preaching to is a rapidly expanding one.I agree with you here. Look at the middling careers that soared after becoming predictable one trick ponies against the administration.
Michael Moore, John Stewart, Bill Maher, Al Franken, Keith Olbermann, etc....
You're right that his approach is working, but viewership is not proof of profundity.

This is the usual drivel from Olbermann.
If President Bush is using the war to benefit his side, then Olbermann MUST accuse the idiots Harry Reid and Charles of the same thing (except, unlike Schumer, the President doesn't marginalize members of the military in doing so).

Hm, do you guys think the American public will put the Republicans back into power if it means keeping the war going?

Absolutely.

With, of course, the proviso that the Party in question also promises to keep shoveling hundreds of billions of taxdollars into the bottomless pit of the Pentagon each and every year, and that they will forever prevent the e-ville gawdless queers from marrying one another.

Awwww, shit. I'd hoped it was you leaving forever.

I had hoped the same thing.

I agree with you here. Look at the middling careers that soared after becoming predictable one trick ponies against the administration.
Michael Moore, John Stewart, Bill Maher, Al Franken, Keith Olbermann, etc....
You're right that his approach is working, but viewership is not proof of profundity.

This is the usual drivel from Olbermann.
If President Bush is using the war to benefit his side, then Olbermann MUST accuse the idiots Harry Reid and Charles of the same thing (except, unlike Schumer, the President doesn't marginalize members of the military in doing so).

Isn't it normal and even necessary to KNOW beforehand why
someone should be called a Liar.
Now we know,what Keith the Kook's problem is.
He's such an A$$klown jerk,that he enjoys calling important
men ...LIARS.
How can one with such dedicated insistence,keep demading
on our TV's that Bush is a Liar,then until recently,has the gall
to tell us what his proof is.
The Litle Boy who Cried LIAR,just won't be satisfied until
everyone in the theatre of War,flees and uses a backdoor
motion.Like some kind of Hail Mary Pass,in the 4th quarter.
Only Keith the Kook,probablly has issues with even The Blessed
Virgin Mary.
He obviously was brought up to believe,absolutely Nothing is
Sacred in Life.
Except HIS Sacred right to Lie about Righteousness.

Brooks, you enjoy being in the minority? Pretty soon only Barney and Laura, (Bush's dogs) will be supporting the Smirkster.

Brooks, you enjoy being in the minority?
No, no one does. But this president, unlike his predecessor, will stay in that unpopular place rather than compromise what he believes is the right thing to do.

What exactly did I say that puts me in the minority in this thread? That Keith Olbermann sucks?
Based on his ratings I'm in the majority.

Keith's ratings are improving every night.

Bush's arrogance is getting us into deep shit ... and he knows it... and he does not care.

Absolutely.

With, of course, the proviso that the Party in question also promises to keep shoveling hundreds of billions of taxdollars into the bottomless pit of the Pentagon each and every year, and that they will forever prevent the e-ville gawdless queers from marrying one another.
And then what will happen to the country? The debt load is preposterous. How will the war be supported? Will this not leave future generations crippled financially? How will they pay it back, one can only run on credit for so long. The interest on the loan per day must be staggering.

Truthie,

247 posts, and every one focused on bashing Bush, denegrating the right-wingers, and undermining the efforts of those who volunteered to fight in this war you so fanatically oppose.

Politics is politics, so you can hate this President and his political party all you want I guess, and it's no skin off my nose. I myself have little use for political parties.

But as regards the soldiers you are so concerned about dying in the next 500 days; have you actually gotten out and met with any of them?

PM me, if you like. Let me know generally what part of which State you call home. I have a great number of friends stationed in the military all over the world. Any number of them would be glad to sponsor you for a visit or tour of the US Armed forces facility nearest where you live.

You would have the opportunity to meet with real live Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, and Marines. The best place to meet and mingle would be at their PX, BX, or NEX food court. Have lunch, mingle, make friends, and pick the brains of these fine young men and women. See what makes them tick.

Ask the recently-returned war veterans what it was like over there.
Query them as to the living conditions, and the attitudes of the locals.
Get to know their feelings and motivitions, and find out how many of them are proud to have been in Iraq. Find out also how many are tired, pissed off, and ready to retire from uniformed service.

Good, bad, or indifferent; go find out the truth of how it is from those who have been there. I think it will be a healthy experience for you, and it will give you some perspective that you will never gain by hanging out on the internet, and cutting and pasting from MSNBC, www.antiwar.com, and www.iraqbodycount.org.

I am sincere in my offer, sir. PM me.

:thumbs:

olberman's viewership has gone from .001% to .002%, woohoo! Looks like truthout got his little sister to watch too.

Originally Posted by Freethinker
Absolutely. (the American public may well put the Republicans back into power)

With, of course, the proviso that the Party in question also promises to keep shoveling hundreds of billions of taxdollars into the bottomless pit of the Pentagon each and every year, and that they will forever prevent the e-ville gawdless queers from marrying one another.

And then what will happen to the country?

It will continue to falter and fail, and ultimately collapse. That's what happens when an electorate has been brainwwashed into voting for those things decidedly not in their best interests.

The debt load is preposterous.

Yes, it is. Those who are indoctrinated with the God-Guns-n-Guts ideology of the Right do not care in the slightest that the debt load is preposterous. They do not really care if military spending backrupts the country. They are craven, terrified cowards who believe that if the masters--the omnipotent Rightwing political leadership--- will only continue spending trillions on bombs and tanks and planes and missiles, it will somehow guarantee they will "be safe".

How will the war be supported?

By cutting out any and all spending of actual benefit to the People.

Will this not leave future generations crippled financially?

Yes.

But those who are indoctrinated with the God-Guns-n-Guts ideology of the Right do not care. Just keep spending trillions on "Defense", keep bombing the rest of the world into submission, and keep the evil queers from marrying; their overarching concerns.


How will they pay it back,....

They won't. The monetary structure is headed for total collapse.


....one can only run on credit for so long. The interest on the loan per day must be staggering.

Truly. It is.

Those who are indoctrinated with the God-Guns-n-Guts ideology of the Right do not care. Stick your heads into the sand and pray, is their motto. Pass the insurmountable debt to future generations. Let the country go backrupt. They do not care. Just keep bombing the rest of the world into submission, and keep the evil queers from marrying.

God-Guns-n-Guts ideology of the Right do not care in the slightest that the debt load is preposterous.
.....and keep the evil queers from marrying; their overarching concerns.

Most of the right wingers here never talk about God or Guns. The only one who seems utterly preoccupied by such is you.

Also, we almost never talk about gay marraige. And the only person here who uses slurs to describe them is, again, you.

In the deep south, where FT lives, I assure you they actually do talk like that.

In the deep south, where FT lives, I assure you they actually do talk like that.

That wouldn't be THE same " Deep South " Whoopi used as
New Host of - The View - to literally explain away Michael Vick's
Dog Fighting obsession.
Y'see the thingy IS,Flamin Liberals Like Whoopi or Rosie can
literally LIE the day away,w/o much mores danny a snicker
of disapproval or conflict.
I guess Whoopi considers Virginia part of the *Deep South.
NO,i think it more to do with making huge presumptions that
sound about right,and then just wing-it.
Yeah,sure...Whoopi.Vick was just acting out what anyone from the
Deep South does regarding dogs.As she said about them fellars
from Puerto Rico and cockfighting.Humans are just victims of
their communities and culture.
Whoopi also said,she doubted if Vick came from New York,like her,
he'd be involved with Dog Fighting.
I guess he'd be a Jiunkie,like she was.
I wonder who'll take Whoopi's latest batch of Bullshit ON.
Certainly No Liberals.
I just Proved how Liberals Lie,wing-it and face NO challenge.




* Comprises the states of Alabama,South Carolina,Louisianna
and Mississippi.
How close is Virginia.?
As close as Whoppi's education level to the nearest educated imbecile.
Which means she's at a disadvantage with even an educated imbecile.
She's that clueless and Ignurnt.

Most of the right wingers here never talk about God or Guns. The only one who seems utterly preoccupied by such is you.

I am not talking about the **right wingers here**, who can actually figure out how to power up a computer and access the internet.

I am talking about the brain-dead RightWing faction throughout America, collectively........whose primary focus, politically, is exactly that; God, Guns, and Guts.

Those who think some invisible Daddy-in-the-Sky is watching over them, who think that global warming and tobacco’s link to cancer are "junk science", but that creationism should be taught in the schools, those who never heard of an umpteen billion dollar military spending bill they did not wholeheartedly approve of, those who think that a president lying about a private sexual liason is an impeachable offense but a president lying to foment a war is patriotic and admirable.

Also, we almost never talk about gay marraige.

I seem to recall a thread that had many many responses on the topic.

And the only person here who uses slurs to describe them is, again, you.

I am speaking from a third person viewpoint......I only refer to them as *evil queers* in sarcasm, purely as an echoing of the sentiments of the religious Rightists and Conservatives and the loathing and fear with which they generally regard them.

But you knew that.

I just Proved how Liberals Lie,wing-it and face NO challenge.
Did you now?

Did you now?

There ARE exceptions.Like Bernie Shaw { Former CNN anchor }
He went out of his way to be responsible and neutral.
That was last decade,though.
Todays Liberal is marked,like a Vampire with GOTCHA Fang-glee
and sneering,leering lOOks.
Ford to bee Liberal,transforms one from inside out into a
nasty Ogre that seems to thrive on dividing America,like
Dracula did his Gravesites.
To be Liberal is tantamount to being a Toady for Dracula.
You'll constantly be given few if any FREE choices.
You will have to tow the Vampyre's line,Night AND Day,
and then face the added effrontery of being watched whilst
in the midst of actual Toady suckings.

It will continue to falter and fail, and ultimately collapse.
Maybe.

But I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you.

Hey - since when did liberals catch an interest in finance and business? It's certainly not their forte....

Originally Posted by Freethinker
It will continue to falter and fail, and ultimately collapse.

Maybe.

But I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you.

When stated that way Prae, you make it seem as if it were something I desired to happen. IF that is what you're hinting at (although maybe it isn't. I don't know) I assure you that you're wrong.

The LAST thing that I want is for this nation to falter and to collapse.

1. Brooks:Also, we almost never talk about gay marraige.
Freethinker: I seem to recall a thread that had many many responses on the topic.
2. I am speaking from a third person viewpoint......I only refer to them as *evil queers* in sarcasm, purely as an echoing of the sentiments of the religious Rightists and Conservatives1. Exactly. If it's in a thread it will be discussed. You repeatedly bring it up, replete with anti-gay slurs, to show how much the right-wing thinks about it.
Did you notice we don't bring it up?

2. You can say that all you want. Most people, even when satirizing or parodying, will not use words with which they are not comfortable.
If frequency means anything, you seem way too comfortable slurring homosexuals (and we can also throw in your use of the C word for women).

1. Exactly. If it's in a thread it will be discussed. You repeatedly bring it up, replete with anti-gay slurs, to show how much the right-wing thinks about it.
Did you notice we don't bring it up?
That's a very good point.

The LAST thing that I want is for this nation to falter and to collapse.
Why not? Is it a silly presumption on my part? This isn't about accusing every liberal of hating the US (or invoking some tired Rush Limbaugh talking point); it's about accusing YOU of hating the US. You've said so in no uncertain terms ad infinitum. From the vitriol you spew about it, I'd be willing to bet that's EXACTLY what you'd like to see happen - well, aside from "forcing every conservative to live on another planet where the existence of breathable oxygen is left up to chance", that is. Hell, the ONLY reason I'm guessing you wouldn't like to see us bankrupt is because you LIVE here, and you cherish the value of your cash. IOW, I have a bigger emotional investment in my boxer shorts than you do in the welfare of this country. You hate our politics - you always have, and you always will. In a nutshell, THAT'S the issue here. You can't change it, and you know it, hence you HATE it - end of story.

FT, do me a favor - don't bullshit me; I wasn't born yesterday.

Awwww, shit. I'd hoped it was you leaving forever.

This is the kind of crap that keeps this from being a discussion board and escalates all the threads into little pissing contests.

Where are the mods?

:confused:

1. Exactly. If it's in a thread it will be discussed.

REALLY?!?!

A couple of posts ago, you were claiming --""we almost never talk about gay marraige"".

How soon the worm turns.

You repeatedly bring it up, replete with anti-gay slurs, to show how much the right-wing thinks about it.

Yes, I repeatedly point out how the Rightwing faction of homophobes and dimwitted religious bigots in this country despise gays and fear them being able to marry.

Did you notice we don't bring it up?

So? The Rightwingers keep making a huge issue of it politically, and adamantly oppose equal rights for gays. THAT is the point.

You just don't like seeing the RightWing faction being called on it so often.

2. You can say that all you want. Most people, even when satirizing or parodying, will not use words with which they are not comfortable.

The gay community itself ---in similar fashion to the black community taking back the word "n*gger*--- have taken back the word "queer", and use it often to describe themselves. It is the GLBT community's backhanded way of deriding and ridiculing the closed-minded Conservative crowd that thinks of them as "queers" and "perverts".

I refer to them as *evil queers* only as an echo of and parody of the sentiments of the religious Rightists and Conservatives who loathe and fear gays so much.

Yes, and black people sometimes call each other nigger. Do you think that means the term is okay for general use, Freethinker?

This is the kind of crap that keeps this from being a discussion board and escalates all the threads into little pissing contests.

Where are the mods?

:confused:

I'm right here dharma.

You'll note that ES didn't call anyone a name, use any slurs or profanity, and he did express an opinion in his post. You may not like what he said, and I may not like what he said, but he certainly has done nothing to attract the attention of the mods. Besides, it was at least mildly humorous, don't you think? :)

Besides, it was at least mildly humorous, don't you think? :)

Ok, you are right, that comment was mildly humorous, especially when compared to another comment in another thread from the same poster telling someone he disagreed with to "STFU".

Ok, you are right, that comment was mildly humorous, especially when compared to another comment in another thread from the same poster telling someone he disagreed with to "STFU".

ROFL...I'm afraid I can't comment on a vague reference like "another comment in another thread"...you and Frogger should get married.

ROFL...I'm afraid I can't comment on a vague reference like "another comment in another thread"

I didn't expect you to.


...you and Frogger should get married.

Too late. I got married last week.

:thumbs:

I didn't expect you to.

Ok.


Too late. I got married last week.


Congratulations. :thumbs:

Congratulations. :thumbs:

Thank you.

:)

Yes, I repeatedly point out how the Rightwing faction of homophobes and dimwitted religious bigots in this country despise gays and fear them being able to marry.

I refer to them as *evil queers* only as an echo of and parody of the sentiments of the religious Rightists and Conservatives who loathe and fear gays so much.Free, you can say you're parodying, or the Reich Wing are the true haters, or whatever.

But I personally wouldn't use your language no matter who I was parodying (and calling Ann Coulter a C wasn't during any parody). The other people here with the same anti-right feelings you have don't use those words to parody the right.

You use them comfortably and often. That says a lot.

Congratulations, Dharma.

Free, you can say you're parodying, or the Reich Wing are the true haters, or whatever.

Thank you for permitting that.

I refer to them as *evil queers* only as an echo of and parody of the sentiments of the religious Rightists and Conservatives who loathe and fear gays so much.

But I personally wouldn't use your language no matter who I was parodying.....

By ALL fucking means, sir!!.......you have MY express permission to do as it suits you.

(and calling Ann Coulter a C wasn't during any parody).

Never said it was, bub.

It is my opinion.

I have never refered to another human being as a *cunt* in my life. I used the word *cunt* specifically to refer to Ann Coulter for one reason; it was the most extreme epithet I could think of. And I was speaking of a person who is IMO the lowest form of life on the planet.

The other people here with the same anti-right feelings you have don't use those words to parody the right.

yaaaaaaaawn. Ok. They probably do not despise the RightWing as much as I do.

You use them comfortably and often.

?!?!?!?

So; using the word *cunt* once in over 8600 posts is "often"......?

Using the term *evil queers* a half dozen times (and, it should be noted, using it strictly in parody of the RightWing's attitude toward homosexual people) in over 8600 posts is "often"........?

ROTFL. What a clueless little twit you are.

I have never refered to another human being as a *c___* in my life. I used the word *c___* specifically to refer to Ann Coulter for one reason; it was the most extreme epithet I could think of. And I was speaking of a person who is IMO the lowest form of life on the planet.
So; using the word *c___* once in over 8600 posts is "often"......?
That's absolutely amazing. What are the odds?
You have never used this word for anyone else. That was the only time.
And we are there to witness it.

And then you use it three more times in this thread.

Okey dokey, Free.

Too late. I got married last week.
FT wanted me to ask you his name. There he was railing on about homosexuality again, and all the sudden he sent me a PM DEMANDING to know who the (and I quote) "Motherfu$K%& asshole" was that stole you from him. You better fess up. He sounded pissed.

FT wanted me to ask you his name. There he was railing on about homosexuality again, and all the sudden he sent me a PM DEMANDING to know who the (and I quote) "Motherfu$K%& asshole" was that stole you from him. You better fess up. He sounded pissed.

Prat,

That was extremely childish and completely uncalled for.
I don't care how much you dislike me, leave my wife out of it.

Vile,

This goes back to what I told yo before about how it seems certain posters on here are allowed to say whatever they want with no repercussions whatsoever.
If this isn't deserving of some time off, then what is? What does this jerk have to do? And people wonder why it becomes so uncivil around here. Posts like this, personal insults and slurs, are exactly how that sort of thing escalates.

And no, I don't find this even mildly humorous.

This goes back to what I told yo before about how it seems certain posters on here are allowed to say whatever they want with no repercussions whatsoever.
And Evakian said something about cumming all over the face of Frogger's daughter. Get over it.
And no, I don't find this even mildly humorous.
Take it up with FT.

I think it's hilarious how dharma is insinuating in this thread that the mods are biased towards rightwingers, while simultaneously in another thread moderate is suggesting that Vile favors liberals.

Well, he didn't earn the nickname Drama for nothing.

Vile hates all of us equally. ;)

No DF, I never said anything about right wingers.

I said "certain posters".

Prat is one of the most blatently and consistently insulting people on these boards and I have never seen him get so much as a repremand for his instigatory crap. It wouldn't matter if he were right or left wing, he is just childish and insulting.

Originally Posted by dharmabum
And no, I don't find this even mildly humorous.



Take it up with FT.

Uhhh........I think he is well aware of the fact that you fabricated the claim of my having sent you the PM you described.

Prat is one of the most blatently and consistently insulting people on these boards
At least he's good at it.

At least he's good at it.

That is not something to be proud of or to aspire to.

You can do much better than that Jester.

.

That is not something to be proud of or to aspire to.

You can do much better than that Jester.

.
I'm just saying you could take a page out of his book, or anyone else's book, when it comes to insults.

I'm just saying you could take a page out of his book, or anyone else's book, when it comes to insults.

Anyone could.

But why?

I choose not to.

So should you.

No DF, I never said anything about right wingers.

I said "certain posters".

It's easy to be vague, but difficult to reply to. :)


Prat is one of the most blatently and consistently insulting people on these boards and I have never seen him get so much as a repremand for his instigatory crap. It wouldn't matter if he were right or left wing, he is just childish and insulting.

Now that's specific.

Praetorian can accurately be described as "blatently and consistently insulting", but he can also be described as a contributing member of this forum as evidenced by his join date, his post count, and if I may point out, your sig line. :)

I do agree with you however insofar as his post is just meant as a jab at you, and as such it's probably inappropriate.

It's easy to be vague, but difficult to reply to. :)

which is why I pointed out this specific incident to you now.





Praetorian can accurately be described as "blatently and consistently insulting", but he can also be described as a contributing member of this forum as evidenced by his join date, his post count, and if I may point out, your sig line.

So that excuses his slurs against family members?
Frogger is a contributing member too but you reprimanded him.
Why is Prat different?


I do agree with you however insofar as his post is just meant as a jab at you, and as such it's probably inappropriate.

I am glad you agree. :)

Aren't you a mod?

You have the ability to do something.

So are you going to do something or not?

If not, you are setting a terrible precedent for what is acceptable behavior on here.

Prat,

That was extremely childish and completely uncalled for.
I don't care how much you dislike me, leave my wife out of it.

Well said.


Vile,

This goes back to what I told yo before about how it seems certain posters on here are allowed to say whatever they want with no repercussions whatsoever.

As I've stated in the past, just because you didn't see any "repercussions" doesn't mean there weren't any. Some time ago, I exchanged PM's with you. No one else is aware of what was said between us, yet you don't seem to consider the same might be true of others. For what it's worth, Prae has been a member long enough to have become the recipient of several PM's from me regarding moderation issues, and in all of them, he's been deferential, and even contrite on occasion.


If this isn't deserving of some time off, then what is?

You seem to be suggesting that people should be banned for rudeness. You might want to look at some of your own posts again. :)


What does this jerk have to do? And people wonder why it becomes so uncivil around here. Posts like this, personal insults and slurs, are exactly how that sort of thing escalates.

And no, I don't find this even mildly humorous.

Excellent points all, and I agree completely. That's why I've been taking notice of posts where the poster posts nothing but an insult to another poster without, as Borg put it some time ago, "wrapping it in some kind of point". I think you'll find that the PM's between us that I mentioned previously were about that very subject. You might find it interesting to re-read your response to my PM. I can forward it to you if you'd like, or even better, with your permission, I can post it here. :)

Vile,

The relevent question right now is, did you repremand Prat for this post?

Yes or no?

.

I think it's hilarious how dharma is insinuating in this thread that the mods are biased towards rightwingers, while simultaneously in another thread moderate is suggesting that Vile favors liberals.


Sorry there sweetness. I have not suggested any such thing. I flat out said he's a hypocrite and inconsistent in his duties as a moderator. Whether he favors the right or left, I have not considered, nor do I give a sh*t.

You seem to be suggesting that people should be banned for rudeness. You might want to look at some of your own posts again. :)

Vile,

Can you point me to a time when I ever went after someone's family members in such a personal way?

There is no comparison between anything I have said and the kind of personal attacks Prat makes on an increasingly common basis.

which is why I pointed out this specific incident to you now.

Umm...yeah.


So that excuses his slurs against family members?

I must've missed that one...whose family member did he slur?


Frogger is a contributing member too but you reprimanded him.
Why is Prat different?

Trust me, as a mod one of the first things you learn is just how different everyone is. :)


Aren't you a mod?

Technically, I'm an admin, but you may call me a mod. ;)


You have the ability to do something.

Yep, I can post something publicly, or privately. I can take away sig or avatar privileges, I can ban, temporarily or permanently....that pretty much covers it.


So are you going to do something or not?

The entire exchange you had with Prae took place while I was having my evening meal. Give me a chance to digest, please. My doctor said I shouldn't do any moderating until an hour after I eat. ;)


If not, you are setting a terrible precedent for what is acceptable behavior on here.

Actually I think I set a pretty decent precedent for that with my posts. All I ask is that you, and every other poster, try to do the same.

I must've missed that one...whose family member did he slur?


Um... yeah apparently.

Go back and read post #43 so you know what I am talking about. Ok?

Thanks. :)

Um... yeah apparently.

Go back and read post #43 so you know what I am talking about. Ok?

Thanks. :)

I read it...I'm still lost.

I read it...I'm still lost.

Are you trying to tell me you don't see any slurs against my wife in Prat's post, or that what slurs you do see are acceptable in your opinion?

Are you trying to tell me you don't see any slurs against my wife in Prat's post, or that what slurs you do see are acceptable in your opinion?
Your humor appreciation gland appears to have failed. We'll have to get you to humor dialysis immediately.

Your humor appreciation gland appears to have failed. We'll have to get you to humor dialysis immediately.

If you think that was funny Borg, then you have issues.

If you think that was funny Borg, then you have issues.
I didn't say it was particularly tactful, but I grinned at it for a bit.

I didn't say it was particularly tactful, but I grinned at it for a bit.

Well then how about if I rip into your family for a while and we can see how funny you find it then?
:rolleyes:

You either support that kind of behavior or you do not.

Which is it going to be?

Are you trying to tell me you don't see any slurs against my wife in Prat's post,

Not unless you married a guy...

"FT wanted me to ask you his name. There he was railing on about homosexuality again, and all the sudden he sent me a PM DEMANDING to know who the (and I quote) "Motherfu$K%& asshole" was that stole you from him. You better fess up. He sounded pissed." (emphasis mine)


or that what slurs you do see are acceptable in your opinion?

I already gave you my opinion of his post. :)

I already gave you my opinion of his post. :)

Ok then, it is duely noted that you are telling me that going after people's families is now A-OK on Allforums.

Don't come whining to me later about how rude you think I am.

Your humor appreciation gland appears to have failed.
I disagree... my diagnosis is that his scrotum is empty.

Well then how about if I rip into your family for a while and we can see how funny you find it then?
:rolleyes:

You either support that kind of behavior or you do not.

Which is it going to be?
Go for it; I'm unlikely to care. Why should I care what some random stranger on the Intartubes says about my family, whom he has never met?

Ok then, it is duely noted that you are telling me that going after people's families is now A-OK on Allforums.

While you're at it why don't you make up more shit I'm supposedly telling you. You're stretching the limits of credulity by claiming your "wife" was insulted since "she" was never mentioned. Take your own advice and leave your wife out of it.


Don't come whining to me later about how rude you think I am.

Nobody's "whining" here except you (and moderate). I know very well how rude you can be yourself, I have sent you a PM about it in the past. BTW, you never did say whether or not I should post that PM...I wonder why?

I disagree... my diagnosis is that his scrotum is empty.

While I can understand your frustration, that really doesn't help Jester. That kind of post is sort of what we're talking about here.

Go for it; I'm unlikely to care.

Then you are a piss poor discussion moderator.


Why should I care what some random stranger on the Intartubes says about my family, whom he has never met?

Because part of your JOB as a moderator is to moderate the discussion so it remains somewhat civil.

If you don't care, why should anyone else?

Then you are a piss poor discussion moderator.

Because part of your JOB as a moderator is to moderate the discussion so it remains somewhat civil.

If you don't care, why should anyone else?
That's not how I view it. You should consider yourself lucky that I don't, because if I did, you (and Prae, to be fair) would have been tossed permanently long ago.

My job is to clean up spam, help people with technical problems, and maintain the proper infrastructure for people to chat efficiently. Enforcing politeness and decency is not in my job description.

While you're at it why don't you make up more shit I'm supposedly telling you. You're stretching the limits of credulity by claiming your "wife" was insulted since "she" was never mentioned. Take your own advice and leave your wife out of it.

You are missing the entire point.
Your job is supposed to be to moderate the discussion, not enforce a popularity contest which is what it appears you actually do.


Nobody's "whining" here except you (and moderate).

That is childish and uncalled for. Both Moderate and myself have a point. You are not even handed in who you go after for rudeness. This is just another example.

I know very well how rude you can be yourself,

Nowhere near as rude as posters like Prat are to me on a regular basis, but the difference is that you refuse to do anything to moderate their behavior because you find it "mildly humorous." You have stated you do not like me and I have to assume that is why you choose to go after me disproportionately.


I have sent you a PM about it in the past.

Yes and I called you a hypocrite for exactly this sort of behavior. Prat gets away with saying whatever he wants with impunity because he knows you will never do anything because you dislike me more than you do him.


BTW, you never did say whether or not I should post that PM...I wonder why?

Because it is completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

While I can understand your frustration, that really doesn't help Jester. That kind of post is sort of what we're talking about here.
Ok, I'll stay out of it. I just think people need to quit whining to the moderators about everything and bitching about the job you guys are doing.

Enforcing politeness and decency is not in my job description.

Thanks for proving my point.

Thanks for proving my point.
You're welcome. And by the way, I and everyone else knows I don't enforce politeness and decency. I don't stifle discussion, albeit occasionally heated. I stand by that. If you don't like that I choose to let people be adults and work things out amongst themselves, you can either live with it, or find another forum.

Dharma, how could you possibly know whether Prae was reprimanded?

Dharma, how could you possibly know whether Prae was reprimanded?

I specificly asked Vile if he was and Vile declined to answer. The logical assumption is that he was not, since answering that he was would have been all he had to say to satisfy me.

You're welcome. And by the way, I and everyone else knows I don't enforce politeness and decency.

Ok, you are merely the spam mod.

Duly noted.

Good lord, not another one of these.

Go Cubs!

Go Cubs!
And to think, all this thread needed was a non sequitur.

Wow.

Wow.
Number two! (Though thoroughly predictable. ;))

You are missing the entire point.

No, you keep changing "the point". You were complaining that Prae insulted your wife. As it happens, you apparently didn't read his post very closely, and you were mistaken about that.


Your job is supposed to be to moderate the discussion, not enforce a popularity contest which is what it appears you actually do.

You're entitled to your opinion.


That is childish and uncalled for.

I suppose it was "called for" when you said I shouldn't "come whining to you when you're rude".


Both Moderate and myself have a point.

You don't speak for moderate. You're not even doing a good job speaking for yourself.


You are not even handed in who you go after for rudeness. This is just another example.

That's because your perception is skewed. You don't see your own bad behavior, only that of others.


Nowhere near as rude as posters like Prat are to me on a regular basis, but the difference is that you refuse to do anything to moderate their behavior because you find it "mildly humorous."

False.


You have stated you do not like me and I have to assume that is why you choose to go after me disproportionately.

That's a lie. Reread my last PM to you.


Yes and I called you a hypocrite for exactly this sort of behavior.

You have shown you like to call people that, yes.


Prat gets away with saying whatever he wants with impunity because he knows you will never do anything because you dislike me more than you do him.

Unbelievable that a grown man would utter such a thing.


Because it is completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

Not at all, it's completely on point.

I specificly asked Vile if he was and Vile declined to answer. The logical assumption is that he was not, since answering that he was would have been all he had to say to satisfy me.

Why would I want to satisfy you? You bitch and moan about the behavior of others, all the while being just as bad when it comes to tossing out insults, and then you go whining to the mods you bad-mouth for protection.

Honestly dharma, if it's as bad as all that here, why are you still here? Do you like to bitch about things?

You bitch and moan about the behavior of others, all the while being just as bad when it comes to tossing out insults,

:upyours:

That is simply a lie. I have never been anywhere near as consistently insulting as some of the regular posters such as Prat, Trav and Decka.

I may have lost my temper occasionally but they do it consistently and with impunity thanks to useless, bigoted moderators who refuse to do anything about it as long as they are attacking someone the mods do not like.


Honestly dharma, if it's as bad as all that here, why are you still here?

I have been asking myself that same question lately, which is why I have not been around as much of late.

Uhhh how did I get tossed into this convo?

http://www.djkworld.co.uk/humor/pictelo/crybaby_thumb.jpg

:rolleyes:



Vile, for what it's worth, I think you do a fine job. Especially when you consider what you have to deal with on a daily basis. Yeeeesh.

Borg is right on target in this discussion. The moderators are not here to enforce politeness or decency. Grow up and deal with it.

What a bunch of little girls on this thread.... I dont know if I should poke fun of you guys or ask one of you to the dance. Who puts put on the first date?

:upyours:

That is simply a lie.

ROFL. Way to prove me wrong.


I have never been anywhere near as consistently insulting as some of the regular posters such as Prat, Trav and Decka.

That's a matter of perspective.


I may have lost my temper occasionally but they do it consistently and with impunity thanks to useless, bigoted moderators who refuse to do anything about it as long as they are attacking someone the mods do not like.

You mean like this?

Trav recently said this to you in the midst of a discussion:

"So what does that make you qualified to do? operate a hot dog stand?"

Eight posts later, I posted this to Trav:

"Trav...that wasn't necessary, or desirable."

Trav's response to that gentle admonishment was, and pay very close attention here:

"Sorry pagan. I apologize to you and dhrama."

http://www.allforums.net/showthread.php?p=360359

A little earlier in this thread I also told Jester that his comment to you regarding the vacuum that is in your nutsack was probably not helpful to the discussion. His response was also much better than some others I can think of when I've told them as a mod that they may have stepped over the line a tad.

So you see, your claims that I don't moderate people when they attack you is just a figment of your imagination. As is your belief that I don't like you. I like everybody, dharma.


I have been asking myself that same question lately, which is why I have not been around as much of late.

Well...I can only repeat something I said to you privately.

"...I do so only because I think you like it here, and I like having you here. I think you have much to contribute, but I also think you need to find a less aggressive way to make that contribution.

Regards,

Vilepagan"

Not exactly the words of an enemy, dharma.

This is getting tiring, and good God, how many times have we had to suffer through this particular string of point/counter-point, 'who's a bigger asshole' histrionics??

I'm bored with it, quite frankly.

Thread closed!!

:cool: