is it really necessary?

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Why is it OK for you to spew your vitriol at those with whom you disagree, but when we do it, it's hate-mongering? Just curious...I usually "spew my vitriol" at your hate filled, petty bombastic posts. Show me any threads that I start with the kind of miserable hate you show in the VAST majority of your posts. Maybe we need to have a thread about the Pres' 2 daughters looking bored at the stupid Turkey pardoning event or if their skirts are too short.

And I happily plead guilty to hating Obama. All that hate is going to kill you.

Didn't read the rest of your thread bc obvisously it will be filled with the hate you usually throw out here.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Didn't read the rest of your thread bc obvisously it will be filled with the hate you usually throw out here.

Interpretation...rather than admit that I am 100% correct when I say that Obama is an d*ck for saying that Republicans hate all the time, you ignore my conclusion and call me a hate-monger. Got it.

Try making that wrong.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Interpretation... call me a hate-monger. Got it. Try making that wrong.

YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND OR "INTERPRET" THIS FROM ANOTHER ANGLE AND NOT TAKE IT PERSONALLY...UNDERSTAND THAT FOR MANY, FOLKS LIKE O ARE IDOLS....LOVED, ADORED AND WORSHIPED(FOR REASONS I'LL NEVER UNDERSTAND)...IF YOU CRITICIZE SOMEONE OR SOMETHING THAT IS LOVED, ADORED AND WORSHIPED, YOU ARE GUILTY OF THE OPPOSITE OF LOVE...WHICH IS NATURALLY, "HATE"...WHICH IS WHY THE TERM IS SO GENEROUSLY LADLED OUT WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE TRUE MEANING, USUALLY IN A DEFENSIVE MANNER INTENDED TO DEFLECT/DISMISS RATHER THAN PROVIDE REASONABLE OR RATIONAL ARGUMENT WHEN YOU CAN'T RATIONALIZE WHY YOUR "IDOL" HAS SO MISLED AND FAILED TO MEET YOUR HIGH EXPECTATIONS IT'S EASIER TO BLAME OTHER'S FOR HIS FAILINGS RATHER THAN BLAME THE ONE YOU LOVE....WE SEE THIS A LOT....

recall that Clinton's style of politics was referred to as "blood-sport", a label that they embraced and seemed proud of...and that was fine as long as his side was drawing the blood, criticism resulted in the label Clinton "hater"......with this administration it's very much the same...more like "Chicago thug politics"...sorry..."Chicago-bully"...funny that it was Clinton who first labeled Obama a "Chicago-Thug" from what I can recall....