Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating

     

Left Nav S-B Home Register FAQ Members List S-B on Facebook Arcade WEAX Tides Buoys Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Right Nav

Left Container Right Container
 

Go Back   Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating » Striper Chat - Discuss stuff other than fishing ~ The Scuppers and Political talk » Political Threads

Political Threads This section is for Political Threads - Enter at your own risk. If you say you don't want to see what someone posts - don't read it :hihi:

 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 10-13-2020, 07:33 AM   #31
PaulS
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
PaulS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,190
Isn't it TDS when people defend name callers?
PaulS is offline  
Old 10-13-2020, 07:47 AM   #32
Pete F.
Canceled
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,067
I didn’t make a judgment on Barrett’s credentials. If Covita had nominated Matt Goethe or Louie Gohmert the Senate would confirm him, though Collins would have concerns.
Perhaps Olbermann was being sarcastic, humorous or you just misunderstand him.
Like Covita and the standard defense
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Pete F. is offline  
Old 10-13-2020, 08:01 AM   #33
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS View Post
The essense of TDS is defending the most vile scummy petty foul mouthed President that we have ever had.
But when Joe Biden tells a roomful of blacks that Mitt Romney (Mitt Romney!) "wants to put y'all back in chains", that's not dishonest, vile or scummy. That's OK. But when Trump does it, it's bad.

When Hilary says that Trump supporters are deplorable and irredeemable, that wasn't vile or scummy either.
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 10-13-2020, 09:24 AM   #34
wdmso
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Somerset MA
Posts: 9,097
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
But when Joe Biden tells a roomful of blacks that Mitt Romney (Mitt Romney!) "wants to put y'all back in chains", that's not dishonest, vile or scummy. That's OK. But when Trump does it, it's bad.

When Hilary says that Trump supporters are deplorable and irredeemable, that wasn't vile or scummy either.
There you go again Jim trying to make comparison that don't exist

1 insult is equal to 1000 insults how do you convince yourself of such nonsense
wdmso is offline  
Old 10-13-2020, 09:49 AM   #35
PaulS
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
PaulS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
But when Joe Biden tells a roomful of blacks that Mitt Romney (Mitt Romney!) "wants to put y'all back in chains", that's not dishonest, vile or scummy. That's OK. But when Trump does it, it's bad.

When Hilary says that Trump supporters are deplorable and irredeemable, that wasn't vile or scummy either.
Trump has insulted people thousands of times - Biden or Hillary not so much.

Even though she was probably thinking of the Repubs. who lied about Obama's religion and birth Clinton apologized the next day.


Edit - or what wdmso said.
PaulS is offline  
Old 10-13-2020, 10:31 AM   #36
detbuch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,688
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS View Post
Trump has insulted people thousands of times - Biden or Hillary not so much.

Even though she was probably thinking of the Repubs. who lied about Obama's religion and birth Clinton apologized the next day.


Edit - or what wdmso said.
So it's OK for you to call someone scummy because you didn't do it thousands of times?
detbuch is offline  
Old 10-13-2020, 10:43 AM   #37
PaulS
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
PaulS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch View Post
So it's OK for you to call someone scummy because you didn't do it thousands of times?
sometimes it is and sometimes it isn't. but I tend to let people slide when comparing that person to someone who does that sort of thing thousands of times.
PaulS is offline  
Old 10-13-2020, 11:41 AM   #38
detbuch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,688
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS View Post
sometimes it is and sometimes it isn't. but I tend to let people slide when comparing that person to someone who does that sort of thing thousands of times.
So name calling is OK if it isn't done thousands of times. I haven't counted, but I don't think anyone on the political forum in the past 10 years has name called thousands of times.
detbuch is offline  
Old 10-13-2020, 11:55 AM   #39
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS View Post
Trump has insulted people thousands of times - Biden or Hillary not so much.

Even though she was probably thinking of the Repubs. who lied about Obama's religion and birth Clinton apologized the next day.


Edit - or what wdmso said.
I have no possible way to deny that Trump insults more often. Obviously that's correct. So a president is allowed a certain number of insults before he's unfit, and by an amazing outcome, Biden and Hilary are below that number, Trump is above. Funny how that always works.

Similarly, it was OK when Obama put kids in cages, but Trump does it too often. Again, the maximum allowable number, coincidentally and not because of politics, is more than Obama did, but less than Trump.
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 10-13-2020, 11:56 AM   #40
PaulS
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
PaulS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch View Post
So name calling is OK if it isn't done thousands of times. I haven't counted, but I don't think anyone on the political forum in the past 10 years has name called thousands of times.
whatever
PaulS is offline  
Old 10-13-2020, 11:58 AM   #41
PaulS
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
PaulS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
I have no possible way to deny that Trump insults more often. Obviously that's correct. So a president is allowed a certain number of insults before he's unfit, and by an amazing outcome, Biden and Hilary are below that number, Trump is above. Funny how that always works.So would you treat one of your sons the same way when he says something for the first time vs if he repeatedly does that egregious thing over and over? How about if he apologizes for doing/saying that egregious thing?

Similarly, it was OK when Obama put kids in cages, but Trump does it too often. Again, the maximum allowable number, coincidentally and not because of politics, is more than Obama did, but less than Trump.
The difference bt when Obama did it and Trump has been explained to you many times.
PaulS is offline  
Old 10-13-2020, 12:24 PM   #42
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS View Post
The difference bt when Obama did it and Trump has been explained to you many times.
"would you treat one of your sons the same way when he says something for the first time vs if he repeatedly does that egregious thing over and over?"

I happily concede that doing something once, and doing it constantly, are different. I didn't dispute that.

My observation, and I m correct, is that there a long string of negative behavior that most politicians engage in. It's funny that for each negative behavior, Obama/Biden/Hilary all engage in that behavior below the acceptable maximum number of times allowed, and Trump is always over the maximum. Like putting kids in cages. Right? No one gave a crap when Obama did it, no one even noticed. But when Trump does it, it's monstrous.

As I said, I'm sure that's all just a coincidence and not a moving of the goalposts.

"The difference bt when Obama did it and Trump has been explained to you many times. "

Right. Trump did it too many times. But I don't recall seeing a threshold as to how many times you could do it, before it was problematic. But that threshold, again, was higher than the number of times Obama did it, and below the number of times Trump did it.

It's funny how none of these things are any kind of an issue until Trump came along.
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 10-13-2020, 12:38 PM   #43
PaulS
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
PaulS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post

I happily concede that doing something once, and doing it constantly, are different. I didn't dispute that.

.
That is the key
PaulS is offline  
Old 10-13-2020, 01:13 PM   #44
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS View Post
That is the key
bill clinton is still
worshipped on the left. is he a much better person han trump?

they’re very different, as clinton is the poster boy of an oily smooth politician, and trump is the opposite.

but the reason i support trump, is because for 8 years when clinton was president, democrats said personal conduct didn’t matter, what mattered was results. i agree with that when evaluating a president. i still do. democrats have flip flopped, and all of a sudden character matters. i wish we could
set the tules, and leave them
in place regardless of party. that goes for both sides.

clinton was disbarred. when lawyers decide you’re too sleazy to associate with, that’s an accomplishment.

i don’t feel inclined to get a lecture about ethics from anyone who supports bill clinton. you can’t have it both ways.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 10-13-2020, 01:19 PM   #45
PaulS
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
PaulS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,190
Didn't Bill Clinton say he was sorry and take ownership? Trump hasn't owned anything.

Yes, Bill is a far better person than Trump.

it is not having it both ways it is you trying to make a case for one of the worse people anywhere.
PaulS is offline  
Old 10-13-2020, 01:48 PM   #46
detbuch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,688
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS View Post
Didn't Bill Clinton say he was sorry and take ownership? Trump hasn't owned anything.

Yes, Bill is a far better person than Trump.
Clinton is a far better person because he said he was sorry? All will take for Trump is to say he is sorry?

About the Access Hollywood tape, Trump said:
"I’m not proud of it. I apologize to my family. I apologize to the American people. Certainly I’m not proud of it." And "I was wrong and I apologize."
detbuch is offline  
Old 10-13-2020, 02:05 PM   #47
PaulS
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
PaulS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch View Post
Clinton is a far better person because he said he was sorry? All will take for Trump is to say he is sorry?

About the Access Hollywood tape, Trump said:
"I’m not proud of it. I apologize to my family. I apologize to the American people. Certainly I’m not proud of it." And "I was wrong and I apologize."
Good for him for saying that. Did he ever later try to walk that back?

Let him say he is sorry for the thousands of lies, thousands of insults, etc. and I'll no longer say Clinton is a far better person than Trump.
PaulS is offline  
Old 10-13-2020, 02:15 PM   #48
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS View Post
Didn't Bill Clinton say he was sorry and take ownership? Trump hasn't owned anything.

Yes, Bill is a far better person than Trump.

it is not having it both ways it is you trying to make a case for one of the worse people anywhere.
Oh good lord. So if Trump apologized, that would be good enough for you? THAT'S what you're saying?
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 10-13-2020, 02:18 PM   #49
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS View Post
it is not having it both ways it is you trying to make a case for one of the worse people anywhere.
Yes it is having it both ways. Unethical behavior is only a problem for all of you, when it comes from the right. In some case it's the same exact behavior - no complaints when the left does it, horror when the right does it. Infidelity, putting kids in cages, nominating judges in an election year...how many examples would you like?
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 10-13-2020, 02:31 PM   #50
PaulS
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
PaulS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
Yes it is having it both ways. No, its notUnethical behavior is only a problem for all of you, when it comes from the right. In some case it's the same exact behavior - no complaints when the left does it, horror when the right does it. Infidelity have Trump say he is sorry and for all his thousands of lies, sound sincere and I won't mention it again., putting kids in cagesas has been explained to you many, many times there where major differences, nominating judges in an election year.I have no problem w/nominating judges in an election year - it is the not bringing them up for a vote that I find scummy..how many examples would you like?
Trump said sorry but some question the sincerity and supposedly he later questioned if it was him on the tape.
PaulS is offline  
Old 10-13-2020, 02:41 PM   #51
detbuch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,688
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS View Post
Trump said sorry but some question the sincerity and supposedly he later questioned if it was him on the tape.
I don't believe either one. But if they said they were sorry, then they met the original criteria for your absolution. Of course, if you keep putting add-ons and stipulations, you can finally figure a way to make their apologies different and make Trump worse.
detbuch is offline  
Old 10-13-2020, 03:01 PM   #52
Pete F.
Canceled
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,067
On to Pennsylvania


Frasier: Niles, I’ve just had the most marvelous idea for a website! People will post their opinions, cheeky bon mots, and insights, and others will reply in kind!

Niles: You have met “people”, haven’t you?

Lets Go Darwin
Pete F. is offline  
Old 10-13-2020, 03:35 PM   #53
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS View Post
Trump said sorry but some question the sincerity and supposedly he later questioned if it was him on the tape.
"I have no problem w/nominating judges in an election year - it is the not bringing them up for a vote that I find scummy"

Oh my God, do you know what the 'Biden rule' is which the republicans relied in when denying the vote?

BIDEN HIMSELF, when Bush was president, said famously that if a president nominates a SCOTUS candidate in an election year, that the senate should refuse a hearing. Biden said that, they call it the Biden Rule!!

So, unless you have no principles, that must mean you think that Biden is scummy.

You really shot yourself in the foot there.

Can't wait to hear your explanation as to why it was OK for Biden to suggest blocking a vote during an election year!
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 10-13-2020, 03:37 PM   #54
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS View Post
Trump said sorry but some question the sincerity and supposedly he later questioned if it was him on the tape.
so if a president apologizes, you forgive him. Unless "some" doubt the sincerity of the apology, in which case you don't forgive them.

And it's just a coincidence that none of those "some" doubted the sincerity of Bill Clinton's apologies, because he just reeks of sincerity.
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 10-13-2020, 03:39 PM   #55
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch View Post
I don't believe either one. But if they said they were sorry, then they met the original criteria for your absolution. Of course, if you keep putting add-ons and stipulations, you can finally figure a way to make their apologies different and make Trump worse.
he already did. In Trumps case "some" doubted the sincerity of his apology, and that was good enough to ignore the apology and declare Trump worse. I guess the "some" who say Clinton wasn't sincere, aren't as credible as the "some" who determined that Trump isn't sincere. Because that's an exact science.
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 10-13-2020, 04:41 PM   #56
PaulS
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
PaulS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
"I have no problem w/nominating judges in an election year - it is the not bringing them up for a vote that I find scummy"

Oh my God, do you know what the 'Biden rule' is which the republicans relied in when denying the vote?

BIDEN HIMSELF, when Bush was president, said famouslzy that if a president nominates a SCOTUS candidate in an election year, that the senate should refuse a hearing. Biden said that, they call it the Biden Rule!!

So, unless you have no principles, that must mean you think that Biden is scummy.

You really shot yourself in the foot there.

Can't wait to hear your explanation as to why it was OK for Biden to suggest blocking a vote during an election year!
because Biden was trying to convince people not to do something versus the Republicans who actually refused to do what they were supposed to do, It was much later in the election year and there was no SC vacancy. He was saying they should wait until after the election.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Last edited by PaulS; 10-13-2020 at 05:04 PM..
PaulS is offline  
Old 10-13-2020, 05:37 PM   #57
detbuch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,688
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS View Post
because Biden was trying to convince people not to do something versus the Republicans who actually refused to do what they were supposed to do, It was much later in the election year and there was no SC vacancy. He was saying they should wait until after the election.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
I'm not getting why you are stuck on what Biden or the Republicans said. The Constitution doesn't rely on their versions or when they said their versions or who said what first or who was scummier. What the Republicans are doing is constitutional. I think a "period! End of story." after that would be called for.
detbuch is offline  
Old 10-13-2020, 07:40 PM   #58
Pete F.
Canceled
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,067
Why is it that writings written in a professional capacity on a specific issue aren’t relevant or instructive to how that person will execute their job, but private personal texts are THE SMOKING GUN for the intention and state of mind of how others did theirs?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Pete F. is offline  
Old 10-13-2020, 08:01 PM   #59
detbuch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,688
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F. View Post
Why is it that writings written in a professional capacity on a specific issue aren’t relevant or instructive to how that person will execute their job, but private personal texts are THE SMOKING GUN for the intention and state of mind of how others did theirs?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Well, because if that is how it is in politically driven hearings, then that is how it is.
detbuch is offline  
Old 10-13-2020, 08:16 PM   #60
Pete F.
Canceled
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,067
Sen. Hawkeye to Barrett: "I'm surprised that the Democrats haven't criticized you about your religion today. So let ME go ahead and bring up your religion now and make it an issue."
That's 7 Trumplican Senators that have mentioned her faith repeatedly over two days, and not a word from the D's.
He has nothing else to bring to the table. Just another guy using the GOP playbook of dividing the country through religion, race, and culture. They have absolutely nothing else to run on. Just look at the past 4 years.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Pete F. is offline  
 

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:41 AM.


Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Please use all necessary and proper safety precautions. STAY SAFE Striper Talk Forums
Copyright 1998-20012 Striped-Bass.com