Yep. And here's to a presidency where those in charge may actually listen to and thoughtfully consider that dissent, rather than willfully ignoring it.
No, the new guy. Is it okay if I insinuate that he should be killed on a TV comedy show, or make fun of his dialect? Because, you know, dissent is patriotic and all.
Thanks. I was afraid that people might object if I dissented against the new President in the same way most of the dissenters did under the previous administration, such as by implying that the president was/is a drughead or that he got his Harvard degree by other than honest means. I'll dissent with confidence from now on.
(Just wait until Muad'dib starts pushing his big Freedom To Kill Babies Real Good Act here in a few weeks. You ain't seen nothing yet!)
Of course, if you want to show real class, you will rise above the kind of low-brow mockery that Bush got and meet Obama's lucid and eloquent rhetoric with equally lucid and eloquent criticism.
You and I both know the difference between dissent, parody and asshattery.
*cocks head* Do you need me to clarify that for you or something? You're losing me here. (I seriously doubt it. You're smarter than that.)
Jim's still working on mimicking the dialect, BTW. He's getting pretty good at it, actually. *snaps fingers* I've got the YouTube account now - I can show you!
That makes - *counts on fingers* - at least five presidents he can do cold. On demand. So fun? Yeah - you wouldn't be the first, last or only.
Killed on a comedy show, hmmmm. I think just about every sitcom on these days should die a horrible death - but that's just me. I don't call it 'dissent.' I call it bad television.
Killing people is never good as entertainment value. Yanno.
(Oh dear. I'm going to have to retire my WHAT icon too.)
1) Bush did not finish his service during the Vietnam War and refused to have a flight physical (which includes a drug test) to recertify to fly (obsolete) jet aircraft. By any definition, that's desertion.
2) He ran 4 oil companies into the ground. He was bailed out time and again by his father's friends.
3) He has admitted an alcohol abuse problem. (Relapsed? Hard to say, but there is evidence to support it.)
4) Who looks more like a chimp? My vote, GWB.
You can do alot with parody and I'm sure there will be a lot of people parodying Mr. Obama very soon. However, let me remind you of one of the cardinal rules of comedy: Only bash your own gang.
If a comic calls Obama "Chimpy", he'd better damn well be black or the comic in question WILL be called a racist, and IMHO rightfully so.
You want to make that movie? Make sure you have coffee ready for when the Secret Service come to see you. Remember all the hoopla when someone was heard uttering the phrase 'burning bush'.
Oooooh, a racist! Someone might call me a racist! I'm so scared! Friend, I am a racist -- a human racist. Go ahead, call me whatever you like. It won't make one bit of difference. I'm going to keep right on doing what you guys did.
Question: Where was the Secret Service when this movie was made? Or when this novel was published?
Face it: you guys (liberals) have a double standard. I'm not a Republican, and I certainly wasn't a fan of former President Bush; in fact, I criticized him harshly from the very beginning of his term. However, my criticism was always limited to matters of POLICY -- I never made fun of his appearance, fantasized about his death, or implied that he was some kind or retard. Your side did all those things -- either directly, or by not denouncing those who did them. But now that it's your guy on the Throne, we dare criticize him only in Hushed Tones, lest we be deemed a racist by people on LiveJournal! There's a word for people like that, and that word is HYPOCRITE.
Well, you can forget the "playing nice" when it comes to me. I reserve the right to criticize the current President with the same basic level of respect and fair play as your side did his predecessor. Let's see how you like it.
PS - Believe it or not, I pray that God will bless and protect our president, Barack "Chimpy" Obama, and I promise to support him so long as he is in the right.
I think one of the oldest SCOTUS rulings involving libel (and/or slander) defined it by saying 'it ain't libel if it's TRUE' - so. The Secret Service laughs at you.
You'd like to have a double standard here. In all honesty, bad behavior is - well - BAD. It doesn't have a political orientation. So - that standard doesn't exist. Not based on political orientation, at least.
Also - you're labeling, and that's pretty dangerous. "My side?" What. You're fading. Overgeneralization - and in this case, it makes you look even angrier and desperate to make this argument (and not making it in the bargain) than ever.
You're welcome to identify Stupid where ever it lurks. Just don't hang a political orientation with an adjective and expect anyone to take you seriously. We're done with it. We'd like to see you get done with it too.
If you wish to behave as badly as individuals whose behavior you have found wanting...dude. You have got to be kidding. You're going to get it - just for making the South look bad, if nothing else.
We like you. That's why we keep talking to you.
We've also seen better out of you. Come on. And you do have something to offer - you always will.
We're not asking for nice. We're asking for adult, and high time we all got it, too.
Where was all this concern about the tenor and tone of political speech prior to the ascendance of Muad'dib? CURIOUSLY ABSENT, that's where it was.
Face it: those of you who are liberals ( = who hold individual liberty to be the greatest good ) want to smoke the peace pipe now that you're in power. "Come, let us reason together!" Well, the time for polite, reasonable discussion was November 2000, when W was elected -- and your side FAILED. As I said, I was never a fan of Bush 43 or a member of his party, and I never had the slightest problem with those who criticized him on the basis of policy. But there were damned few liberals who were able to contain their raw, visceral hatred of the man long enough to even get to a discussion of policy. "He stole the election!" "Send him more pretzels!" "Too bad he wasn't in New York!" "That smirking chimp!" "He should be arrested and frog-marched out of the White House" "He's not MY President!". Any of that sound familar? Well, all that and worse was said repeatedly by _self-labeled_ liberals everywhere from network TV to the most obscure website. DemocraticUnderground.com alone contains more hatred than a dozen white supremacist websites -- yet that's "free speech", so it's okay.
Now that Muad'dib is God-Emperor of Dune, however, all dissent must cease. "Can't we all just get along -- now that we have the whip hand?" is the cry.
Well, I won't get along. Despite his racist associations, his shady past, his lack of achievement, and his mysterious origins, I sincerely wish the new guy well. When he's wrong I intend to blister his rhetorical hide, but he's the one that won the race, and I'll support him as long as he's in the right. Did any of you open-minded, sweet-talking adults ever grant George W Bush the same courtesy during his time at the top? I'll answer for you: NO, YOU DID NOT.
In the end, I don't reaaly care who is president. I am a monarchist, a traditionalist conservative, and I hate both parties -- and representative government as a practice -- with a deep sincerity. What chaps my hide, however, is the double standard of those who preach couth and civility to their ideological opponents while practicing (or allowing the practice of) the worst sort of red-eyed hatred among their own. Well, I am not going to let it pass. You'd better believe that for the next four years I am going to point out the hypocrisy of the Left in this country every time I see it -- and in the most uncomfortable and annoying fashion possible.
And having said that, I've said what I have to say for now.
I wasn't blogging when Bush came into office. This thing started up in 2002, after 9/11, after a bunch of stuff had already come to be. But I think I can say with some reasonable confidence that the raw, visceral hatred took a few years.
Yup, he earned it.
I believe a lot more was mentioned than stealing an election, pretzels (need I remind you of calling Congress to special session over Teri Schiavo?), etc. Shall I start quoting from my own journal? I can, you know.
yeah, that's pretty much the best icon ever. you deserve a cookie. i can't send any over the internet, so.....i dunno. you have permission to break any dieting you might be on for one of those big, freshly baked cookies everyone loves from the local bakery.
go ahead and let your doctor know the internet said it was okay. they'll understand.
Guantanamo, Iraq, water boarding, "enhanced interrogations"...
The actions of the Bush Administration (please note the name there) were in clear violation of the Geneva Conventions. A treaty that we not only signed AND ratified (which makes it as binding as the Constitution BTW) but AUTHORED after the Second World War.
Alberto Gonzales may have thought the Geneva Conventions were "quaint", but they were binding. That's why Donald Rumsfeld had to be hustled out of his hotel room in Germany to avoid being hauled in front of the judges at the Hague for war crimes. That's what Bush and Cheney, et al, have to look forward to for the rest of their lives if we do not have the trials here first.
Case? The only case you might have is a case of beer.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
That said, yes. You can. This is still America, after all.
Though, if you do so right now, I'll accuse you of spite and bitterness. Let the man make his own mistakes before you begin to mock him.
no subject
(Just wait until Muad'dib starts pushing his big Freedom To Kill Babies Real Good Act here in a few weeks. You ain't seen nothing yet!)
no subject
no subject
Of course, if you want to show real class, you will rise above the kind of low-brow mockery that Bush got and meet Obama's lucid and eloquent rhetoric with equally lucid and eloquent criticism.
no subject
no subject
I said if you want to be classy, be classy. If you want to stoop, stoop.
It's a choice you, and everyone else, can make. It has nothing to do with political alignments.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
I assure you, there's a reason for the question. Care to guess the answer?
no subject
You and I both know the difference between dissent, parody and asshattery.
*cocks head* Do you need me to clarify that for you or something? You're losing me here. (I seriously doubt it. You're smarter than that.)
Jim's still working on mimicking the dialect, BTW. He's getting pretty good at it, actually. *snaps fingers* I've got the YouTube account now - I can show you!
That makes - *counts on fingers* - at least five presidents he can do cold. On demand. So fun? Yeah - you wouldn't be the first, last or only.
Killed on a comedy show, hmmmm. I think just about every sitcom on these days should die a horrible death - but that's just me. I don't call it 'dissent.' I call it bad television.
Killing people is never good as entertainment value. Yanno.
(Oh dear. I'm going to have to retire my WHAT icon too.)
no subject
Well, buckle up, comrades. I aim to misbehave.
no subject
It is what it is. And your Mamma raised you better.
Here. Have an icon:
no subject
1) Bush did not finish his service during the Vietnam War and refused to have a flight physical (which includes a drug test) to recertify to fly (obsolete) jet aircraft. By any definition, that's desertion.
2) He ran 4 oil companies into the ground. He was bailed out time and again by his father's friends.
3) He has admitted an alcohol abuse problem. (Relapsed? Hard to say, but there is evidence to support it.)
4) Who looks more like a chimp? My vote, GWB.
You can do alot with parody and I'm sure there will be a lot of people parodying Mr. Obama very soon. However, let me remind you of one of the cardinal rules of comedy: Only bash your own gang.
If a comic calls Obama "Chimpy", he'd better damn well be black or the comic in question WILL be called a racist, and IMHO rightfully so.
You want to make that movie? Make sure you have coffee ready for when the Secret Service come to see you. Remember all the hoopla when someone was heard uttering the phrase 'burning bush'.
no subject
Question: Where was the Secret Service when this movie was made? Or when this novel was published?
Face it: you guys (liberals) have a double standard. I'm not a Republican, and I certainly wasn't a fan of former President Bush; in fact, I criticized him harshly from the very beginning of his term. However, my criticism was always limited to matters of POLICY -- I never made fun of his appearance, fantasized about his death, or implied that he was some kind or retard. Your side did all those things -- either directly, or by not denouncing those who did them. But now that it's your guy on the Throne, we dare criticize him only in Hushed Tones, lest we be deemed a racist by people on LiveJournal! There's a word for people like that, and that word is HYPOCRITE.
Well, you can forget the "playing nice" when it comes to me. I reserve the right to criticize the current President with the same basic level of respect and fair play as your side did his predecessor. Let's see how you like it.
PS - Believe it or not, I pray that God will bless and protect our president, Barack "Chimpy" Obama, and I promise to support him so long as he is in the right.
no subject
Way to fan the flames and encourage further behavior by "our side".
You're right that those who mocked Bush on a personal level went a bit too far. However, it's still within the realm of free speech.
If you disliked what you saw, and want to discourage it, imitating the very behavior you're denouncing is certainly not the way to do so.
It sounds like you're just looking for an excuse to act poorly.
no subject
I think one of the oldest SCOTUS rulings involving libel (and/or slander) defined it by saying 'it ain't libel if it's TRUE' - so. The Secret Service laughs at you.
You'd like to have a double standard here. In all honesty, bad behavior is - well - BAD. It doesn't have a political orientation. So - that standard doesn't exist. Not based on political orientation, at least.
Also - you're labeling, and that's pretty dangerous. "My side?" What. You're fading. Overgeneralization - and in this case, it makes you look even angrier and desperate to make this argument (and not making it in the bargain) than ever.
You're welcome to identify Stupid where ever it lurks. Just don't hang a political orientation with an adjective and expect anyone to take you seriously. We're done with it. We'd like to see you get done with it too.
If you wish to behave as badly as individuals whose behavior you have found wanting...dude. You have got to be kidding. You're going to get it - just for making the South look bad, if nothing else.
We like you. That's why we keep talking to you.
We've also seen better out of you. Come on. And you do have something to offer - you always will.
We're not asking for nice. We're asking for adult, and high time we all got it, too.
no subject
Face it: those of you who are liberals ( = who hold individual liberty to be the greatest good ) want to smoke the peace pipe now that you're in power. "Come, let us reason together!" Well, the time for polite, reasonable discussion was November 2000, when W was elected -- and your side FAILED. As I said, I was never a fan of Bush 43 or a member of his party, and I never had the slightest problem with those who criticized him on the basis of policy. But there were damned few liberals who were able to contain their raw, visceral hatred of the man long enough to even get to a discussion of policy. "He stole the election!" "Send him more pretzels!" "Too bad he wasn't in New York!" "That smirking chimp!" "He should be arrested and frog-marched out of the White House" "He's not MY President!". Any of that sound familar? Well, all that and worse was said repeatedly by _self-labeled_ liberals everywhere from network TV to the most obscure website. DemocraticUnderground.com alone contains more hatred than a dozen white supremacist websites -- yet that's "free speech", so it's okay.
Now that Muad'dib is God-Emperor of Dune, however, all dissent must cease. "Can't we all just get along -- now that we have the whip hand?" is the cry.
Well, I won't get along. Despite his racist associations, his shady past, his lack of achievement, and his mysterious origins, I sincerely wish the new guy well. When he's wrong I intend to blister his rhetorical hide, but he's the one that won the race, and I'll support him as long as he's in the right. Did any of you open-minded, sweet-talking adults ever grant George W Bush the same courtesy during his time at the top? I'll answer for you: NO, YOU DID NOT.
In the end, I don't reaaly care who is president. I am a monarchist, a traditionalist conservative, and I hate both parties -- and representative government as a practice -- with a deep sincerity. What chaps my hide, however, is the double standard of those who preach couth and civility to their ideological opponents while practicing (or allowing the practice of) the worst sort of red-eyed hatred among their own. Well, I am not going to let it pass. You'd better believe that for the next four years I am going to point out the hypocrisy of the Left in this country every time I see it -- and in the most uncomfortable and annoying fashion possible.
And having said that, I've said what I have to say for now.
no subject
Yup, he earned it.
I believe a lot more was mentioned than stealing an election, pretzels (need I remind you of calling Congress to special session over Teri Schiavo?), etc. Shall I start quoting from my own journal? I can, you know.
Like - Thank you for allowing Colin Powell to make a complete fool of himself by showing the UN Security Council photos which, one week later, were publicly challenged by Hans Blix, the inspector responsible for disarming Iraq.
Thank you for adopting your current position and thus ensuring that, at the plenary session, French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin's antiwar speech was greeted with applause - something, as far as I know, that has only happened once before in the history of the UN, after a speech by Nelson Mandela.
Thank you too, because, after all your efforts to promote war, the normally divided Arab nations, at their meeting in Cairo during the last week in February, were, for the first time, unanimous in their condemnation of any invasion.
Thank you for your rhetoric stating that "the UN now has a chance to demonstrate its relevance," a statement which made even the most reluctant countries take up a position opposing any attack on Iraq. VINTAGE 2003.
Oh, there was no reason. None. Ever.
Over Bush? Yup. Still would.
...ghaaaad March and April of 2003 were grim. Thanks. If I ever had any doubt, it's GONE NOW.
Pretzels. Feh. Pikers if they wasted their time on PRETZELS.
no subject
Who said this? Obama himself said he welcomes opinions from all sides.
This is the last time I'm going to say this. I'll even say it in caps so you know I'm serious.
OTHER PEOPLE'S POOR BEHAVIOR DOES NOT JUSTIFY YOUR OWN.
That applies no matter who you are. Period.
If you're going to act annoying, don't try to blame others for your actions.
That finger belongs squarely between your own eyes.
If you can't or won't understand that, all I can do is post this here...
...and walk away.
no subject
no subject
how'bout now?
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
go ahead and let your doctor know the internet said it was okay. they'll understand.
no subject
no subject
The actions of the Bush Administration (please note the name there) were in clear violation of the Geneva Conventions. A treaty that we not only signed AND ratified (which makes it as binding as the Constitution BTW) but AUTHORED after the Second World War.
Alberto Gonzales may have thought the Geneva Conventions were "quaint", but they were binding. That's why Donald Rumsfeld had to be hustled out of his hotel room in Germany to avoid being hauled in front of the judges at the Hague for war crimes. That's what Bush and Cheney, et al, have to look forward to for the rest of their lives if we do not have the trials here first.
Case? The only case you might have is a case of beer.
no subject
no subject
no subject
Yeah. I'm THAT old. I remember that crap.
*sighs* Try again.