PDA

View Full Version : Is John Kerry showing up Hillary Clinton?



genglandoh
08-07-2013, 10:27 PM
John Kerry started off poorly with his stupid statement about North Korea.
But recently he has stepped up and showed he is a better SOS then Hillary
1. Got the Israelis and Palestinians back into peace talks.
2. Saw a terrorist threat and took action by closing embassies about the world before an attack.
3. Got Obama to show a little backbone with Russia.

I think Kerry needs to start watching his back.

Gerarddm
08-07-2013, 10:29 PM
Too soon to tell.

Bobcat
08-07-2013, 10:34 PM
one swallow a summer does not make

Glen Longino
08-07-2013, 10:57 PM
No!

Cuyahoga Chuck
08-07-2013, 11:04 PM
John Kerry started off poorly with his stupid statement about North Korea.
But recently he has stepped up and showed he is a better SOS then Hillary
1. Got the Israelis and Palestinians back into peace talks.
2. Saw a terrorist threat and took action by closing embassies about the world before an attack.
3. Got Obama to show a little backbone with Russia.

I think Kerry needs to start watching his back.

I haven't read any criticisms like that in the NY Times. And, since your judgement is always slanted, have you got anybody who is worthy of mention that shares your vues?

hokiefan
08-07-2013, 11:04 PM
John Kerry started off poorly with his stupid statement about North Korea.
But recently he has stepped up and showed he is a better SOS then Hillary
1. Got the Israelis and Palestinians back into peace talks.
2. Saw a terrorist threat and took action by closing embassies about the world before an attack.
3. Got Obama to show a little backbone with Russia.

I think Kerry needs to start watching his back.

Just for starters, we've already discussed Kerry's statement about North Korea being a Nuclear State and he didn't make a stupid statement. You just don't understand it.

Waddie
08-07-2013, 11:13 PM
Hillary isn't a lock. It's a long time until the nominations.

regards,
Waddie

leikec
08-07-2013, 11:50 PM
Hillary isn't a lock. It's a long time until the nominations.

regards,
Waddie

Rudy Giuliani was once considered a lock for the republican nomination...right up to the point where people started voting.

Jeff C

Waddie
08-08-2013, 12:13 AM
Rudy Giuliani was once considered a lock for the republican nomination...right up to the point where people started voting.

Jeff C

Exactly...People thought she was a lock last time, too.

regards,
Waddie

seanz
08-08-2013, 12:24 AM
Just for starters, we've already discussed Kerry's statement about North Korea being a Nuclear State and he didn't make a stupid statement. You just don't understand it.

There you go again, using facts and logic. I admire your perseverance.
;)

Cuyahoga Chuck
08-08-2013, 12:26 AM
Hillary isn't a lock. It's a long time until the nominations.

regards,
Waddie

Repeat that over and over. You will be in sync with a lot of big-time Republican money men who don't want to pour, yet, more money down a losing rat hole.

hokiefan
08-08-2013, 12:29 AM
If John Kerry does show up Hillary Clinton then it will be a very good thing for this country, and possibly the rest of the world. He will have been an outstanding Secretary of State, because Hillary was very good.

Cheers,

Bobby

genglandoh
08-08-2013, 09:46 PM
If John Kerry does show up Hillary Clinton then it will be a very good thing for this country, and possibly the rest of the world. He will have been an outstanding Secretary of State, because Hillary was very good.

Cheers,

Bobby

You must be joking.

While Hillary was SOS the US foreign policy has fallen apart.
1. The Arab spring has turned into total chaos.
2. Iran has increased their nuclear program.
3. North Korea has not just increased their nuclear program but they conducted nuclear and missile tests.
4. The US stopped the missile shield program for Europe.
5. And to top it off we have 4 dead Americans because of her inaction in Libya.

In a short 6 months John Kerry has started to fix the mess Hillary left him.

PS I am happy that John Kerry is doing a good job.
He must be better in meeting and private discussion then he comes off in public.

genglandoh
08-08-2013, 09:50 PM
I haven't read any criticisms like that in the NY Times. And, since your judgement is always slanted, have you got anybody who is worthy of mention that shares your vues?

Just a little advice.
Try to think for yourself and form your own opinions.

Glen Longino
08-08-2013, 09:56 PM
You must be joking.

While Hillary was SOS the US foreign policy has fallen apart.
1. The Arab spring has turned into total chaos.
2. Iran has increased their nuclear program.
3. North Korea has not just increased their nuclear program but they conducted nuclear and missile tests.
4. The US stopped the missile shield program for Europe.
5. And to top it off we have 4 dead Americans because of her inaction in Libya.

In a short 6 months John Kerry has started to fix the mess Hillary left him.

PS I am happy that John Kerry is doing a good job.
He must be better in meeting and private discussion then he comes off in public.

So, can I assume that you hope Kerry is nominated for POTUS rather than Hillary in 2016 because you assume you Troglodytes will have a better chance?
Or are you simply a Big Kerry Fan?:DHa...LMAO!

genglandoh
08-08-2013, 10:03 PM
So, can I assume that you hope Kerry is nominated for POTUS rather than Hillary in 2016 because you assume you Troglodytes will have a better chance?
Or are you simply a Big Kerry Fan?:DHa...LMAO!

I just call them as I see them.
In this case John Kerry is doing a good job.

Nothing wrong with giving credit when credit is do.

hokiefan
08-08-2013, 10:05 PM
You must be joking.

While Hillary was SOS the US foreign policy has fallen apart.
1. The Arab spring has turned into total chaos.
2. Iran has increased their nuclear program.
3. North Korea has not just increased their nuclear program but they conducted nuclear and missile tests.
4. The US stopped the missile shield program for Europe.
5. And to top it off we have 4 dead Americans because of her inaction in Libya.

In a short 6 months John Kerry has started to fix the mess Hillary left him.

PS I am happy that John Kerry is doing a good job.
He must be better in meeting and private discussion then he comes off in public.

Not a bit.

Keith Wilson
08-08-2013, 10:07 PM
While Hillary was SOS . . . Gee, I didn't realize that one requirement to be Secretary of State was omnipotence. http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

Ms. Clinton did a very good job IMHO, far better than I expected. I had thought she would let her ego get in the way and grandstand; she didn't do that at all. Mr. Kerry has done well so far, but it's too early to say much.

No, she's not a sure thing for the Democratic nomination in '16; that's WAY too far away to make predictions.

ljb5
08-08-2013, 10:08 PM
You must be joking.

While Hillary was SOS the US foreign policy has fallen apart.

3. North Korea has not just increased their nuclear program but they conducted nuclear and missile tests.

That's odd. In your earlier thread, (http://forum.woodenboat.com/showthread.php?161599-John-Kerry-makes-a-fool-of-himself) you pointed out that North Korea has conducted nuclear tests going back to 2006.

And you're still trying to blame that on Hillary? Who was Secretary of State in 2006?

LeeG
08-08-2013, 11:00 PM
Oh fart

David G
08-08-2013, 11:08 PM
Is genglandoh showing up Thud?

Glen Longino
08-08-2013, 11:14 PM
Is genglandoh showing up Thud?

:D Yep!

Waddie
08-09-2013, 01:51 AM
Hillary looks like an old hag now. Kerry can beat her. And whomever the Dems nominate will win, they have the demographics.

regards,
Waddie

Mrleft8
08-09-2013, 05:30 AM
Just a little advice.
Try to think for yourself and form your own opinions.

LOL! Classic! :D
When was the last time you followed your own advice, Graham?

genglandoh
08-09-2013, 09:52 AM
That's odd. In your earlier thread, (http://forum.woodenboat.com/showthread.php?161599-John-Kerry-makes-a-fool-of-himself) you pointed out that North Korea has conducted nuclear tests going back to 2006.

And you're still trying to blame that on Hillary? Who was Secretary of State in 2006?

I have never blamed Hillary for North Korea Nuclear tests back in 2006.
I said is that under her watch as SOS North Korea has INCREASED their Nuclear Program.

Keith Wilson
08-09-2013, 10:10 AM
. . under her watch as SOS North Korea has INCREASED their Nuclear Program.And exactly how is the American Secretary of State supposed to get the North Koreans to do or not do anything? We haven't been able to do that for 60 years, and not much has changed. If you know how to do that, please drop them a line in Washington; I'm sure they'd be pleased to have some strategy that works.

genglandoh
08-09-2013, 10:12 AM
LOL! Classic! :D
When was the last time you followed your own advice, Graham?

Well in fact I do form my own opinions.

Most of the time I give multiple links to different news sources with difference points of view on a subject.
Then I read this material and develop my own opinion.

Some on this forum do not understand this process because many will point to a statement in one of these stories that do not support my opinion.

LOL Many think if you post a news story you have to agree with everything in the story.

Sorry but I am not dead zombie like so many on this forum.

genglandoh
08-09-2013, 10:14 AM
And exactly how is the American Secretary of State supposed to get the North Koreans to do or not do anything? We haven't been able to do that for 60 years, and not much has changed. If you know how to do that, please drop them a line in Washington; I'm sure they'd be pleased to have some strategy that works.

Thank you for agreeing with me that Hillary failed in North Korea.

Keith Wilson
08-09-2013, 10:22 AM
I'm not agreeing with you. I'm saying that the standard by which you appear to be judging her job performance is, in this case, completely ridiculous.

I'm an engineer. I have not yet invented a cheap room-temperature superconductor, a car that runs on sea water, nor a perpetual-motion machine. That does not mean I'm doing a bad job.

Cuyahoga Chuck
08-09-2013, 10:24 AM
Thank you for agreeing with me that Hillary failed in North Korea.

He said, correctly, nobody before her was able to bring North Korea to the table. It may have been that Hillary saw no reason to plumb that problem when so many other problems were in need of immediate attention. If you want to class that as failure be my guest. All of us, including you have been in that situation unless you are in contact with The Almighty, Himself.

ljb5
08-09-2013, 11:39 AM
I have never blamed Hillary for North Korea Nuclear tests back in 2006.
I said is that under her watch as SOS North Korea has INCREASED their Nuclear Program.

Even by that standard, I'm not sure your statement stands up to scrutiny.

In 2005, Condoleeza Rice was Secretary of State and North Korea had never conducted a nuclear test.

In 2006, Condoleeza Rice was still Secretary of State and North Korea had conducted a nuclear test.

By any reasonable standard, this was the biggest increase in North Korean nuclear capability.

Long before Hillary Clinton ever took office, North Korea had made an enormous and unprecedented increase in their nuclear capability.

That's not Hillary's fault.

If you were using increase in nuclear capability as the metric to measure Secretaries of State, you could not possibly have commented on Hillary without mentioning Rice.

genglandoh
08-09-2013, 12:32 PM
I'm not agreeing with you. I'm saying that the standard by which you appear to be judging her job performance is, in this case, completely ridiculous.

I'm an engineer. I have not yet invented a cheap room-temperature superconductor, a car that runs on sea water, nor a perpetual-motion machine. That does not mean I'm doing a bad job.

I think you picked a poor example.

If you were assigned to develop these products and you did not then yes you did a bad job.

North Korea is one of the major problem areas in the world.
And under Hillary the situation has gotten worst.
So she failed.

Can you name a single accomplishment that Hillary has as SOS?

S.V. Airlie
08-09-2013, 12:37 PM
Kerry has no charisma at all. He appears to be the most droll person, I've ever listened to. At least Hillary has a little

ljb5
08-09-2013, 02:28 PM
North Korea is one of the major problem areas in the world.
And under Hillary the situation has gotten worst.

Not nearly so much as it did under Rice.


Can you name a single accomplishment that Hillary has as SOS?

Sometimes, the accomplishments of the diplomatic corps can be counted in what doesn't happen, rather than what does.

She didn't call in air strikes on the civilian population of Benghazi, despite the claims by many here that she should have done that.

We aren't at war with Libya. We aren't at war with Syria.

We got bin Laden in Pakistan and we're not at war with Pakistan.

That's really not a bad record.

Keith Wilson
08-09-2013, 02:35 PM
If you were assigned to develop these products and you did not then yes you did a bad job.Excuse me? If I were assigned to develop those products, the person who assigned me to do it is a flaming idiot. But nobody "assigned" North Korea as a problem; it's just there, and it's been an intractable problem for the last ten administrations.

wardd
08-09-2013, 02:35 PM
Too soon to tell.

not for a potential 16 prez candidate

never too soon to trash hillery

wardd
08-09-2013, 02:38 PM
Kerry has no charisma at all. He appears to be the most droll person, I've ever listened to. At least Hillary has a little

jamie, you need to teach kerry charisma

S.V. Airlie
08-09-2013, 02:41 PM
You're saying you can't!!!!

wardd
08-09-2013, 02:44 PM
You're saying you can't!!!!

can't

S.V. Airlie
08-09-2013, 02:47 PM
Figures. Just showing me that you have less charisma than Kerry. Must be tough since Kerry doesn't have any to speak of.

genglandoh
08-10-2013, 09:17 AM
Excuse me? If I were assigned to develop those products, the person who assigned me to do it is a flaming idiot. But nobody "assigned" North Korea as a problem; it's just there, and it's been an intractable problem for the last ten administrations.

If you took a job and KNEW that developing these products were part of the job then you would be the idiot.

North Korea is a big part of the SOS job and Hillary knew it before she took the job.

So you are calling Obama an idiot?
Or is Hillary Clinton an idiot?

PS you may have noticed I did not say flaming idiot only liberals can use terms like flaming without being called anti-gay.

Gerarddm
08-10-2013, 09:31 AM
Jeesh, like a stupid dog chasing its own tail. Enough, geng.

Massive international problems are like large ships, it takes a lot of time to turn them around.

It took 40 years for George Kennan's containment theory to work regarding the Soviet Union, for example. It took 600 years to arrive at detente in Northern Ireland.

Hillary Clinton as SecState did not commit an unpardonable screw up, like ignoring the warning that Osama bin Laden was about to strike the US.

ljb5
08-10-2013, 09:52 AM
So you are calling Obama an idiot?
Or is Hillary Clinton an idiot?

I thought he made his point perfectly clearly.

Neither Obama nor Hillary Clinton set the criteria that solving North Korea is a requirement of the job of SecofState.

You are the only person who pushing the idea that resolving the 60 year-old North Korean problem is a required duty of the Secretary of State**.

So can you tell who he's calling an idiot? I sure can.

**(Only, of course, for Secretaries in office after January 2009. All previous administrations are, of course, given a pass, no matter how much North Korea may have developed their nuclear ambitions during that time. :rolleyes:)

He made that point perfectly clearly. You might not agree with it, but if you can't read and understand what he said, the problem here isn't just your extreme and ridiculous politics, it's that you can't be honest about what other people have said and written.

hokiefan
08-10-2013, 10:05 AM
I'm not agreeing with you. I'm saying that the standard by which you appear to be judging her job performance is, in this case, completely ridiculous.

I'm an engineer. I have not yet invented a cheap room-temperature superconductor, a car that runs on sea water, nor a perpetual-motion machine. That does not mean I'm doing a bad job.


I think you picked a poor example.

If you were assigned to develop these products and you did not then yes you did a bad job.

North Korea is one of the major problem areas in the world.
And under Hillary the situation has gotten worst.
So she failed.

Can you name a single accomplishment that Hillary has as SOS?

Jeebus dude. If you think any of those are even possible you need to turn in your engineering degree...

Keith Wilson
08-10-2013, 11:28 AM
North Korea is a big part of the SOS job and Hillary knew it before she took the job.Any Secretary of State under any administration has to deal with problems that are essentially impossible to solve, like North Korea (or the Palestinians and the Israelis, for that matter). It is absurd to judge any of them negatively because they didn't solve one of the impossible problems. I think the criteria for success with North Korea is that there hasn't been another war on the peninsula; that's about the best we can do.

And FWIW, 'flaming' is a general intensifier. A "flaming idiot' is more idiotic than a garden-variety 'idiot'; nothing to do with sexuality at all.

S.V. Airlie
08-10-2013, 12:23 PM
I'm not judging what he does, I'm only pointing out his lack of charisma or any real personality to get anything accomplished. Some like him and thinks he is great but I don't. I think his efforts have been all he can do.

genglandoh
08-10-2013, 12:24 PM
I thought he made his point perfectly clearly.

Neither Obama nor Hillary Clinton set the criteria that solving North Korea is a requirement of the job of SecofState.

You are the only person who pushing the idea that resolving the 60 year-old North Korean problem is a required duty of the Secretary of State**.

So can you tell who he's calling an idiot? I sure can.

**(Only, of course, for Secretaries in office after January 2009. All previous administrations are, of course, given a pass, no matter how much North Korea may have developed their nuclear ambitions during that time. :rolleyes:)

He made that point perfectly clearly. You might not agree with it, but if you can't read and understand what he said, the problem here isn't just your extreme and ridiculous politics, it's that you can't be honest about what other people have said and written.

Once again you are misreading my posts.
I did not say that Hillary failed because she did not solve the North Korean problem.
I said that Hillary failed because the North Korean problem got worst during her term as SOS.

Facts
In 2007 North Korea shut down its nuclear reactor because of the good work of Condoleeza Rice.
In 2009 North Korea started back up its nuclear reactor.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korea_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction
On March 17, 2007, North Korea told delegates at international nuclear talks that it is preparing to shut down its main nuclear facility. The agreement was reached following a series of six-party talks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six-party_talks), involving North Korea, South Korea, China, Russia, Japan and the U.S. begun in 2003. According to the agreement, a list of its nuclear programs will be submitted and the nuclear facility will be disabled in exchange for fuel aid and normalization talks with the U.S. and Japan.[53] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korea_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction#cite_n ote-53) This had been delayed from April due to a dispute with the United States over Banco Delta Asia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banco_Delta_Asia), but on July 14, International Atomic Energy Agency (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Atomic_Energy_Agency)inspectors confirm the shutdown of North Korea's Yongbyon nuclear reactor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yongbyon_nuclear_reactor).[54] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korea_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction#cite_n ote-54)

On April 25, 2009, however, the North Korean government announced that the country's nuclear facilities have been reactivated,[58] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korea_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction#cite_n ote-58) and that spent fuel reprocessing for arms-grade plutonium has been restored.[59] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korea_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction#cite_n ote-59)

ljb5
08-11-2013, 10:12 AM
In 2007 North Korea shut down its nuclear reactor because of the good work of Condoleeza Rice.


That's one way to look at it.

Another way to look at it is that Condoleeza Rice responded to North Korea's 2006 nuclear test by offering them fuel and leverage, thereby creating an incentive for North Korea to continue making nuclear threats as a means to acquire further concessions from the US.

Gee, diplomacy isn't easy when you stop pretending everything is black and white.

It's obvious that you have no concept of the complexities of the real diplomacy of a problem like North Korea. You try to break everything down into simple little judgments like good/bad or pass/fail, because that's the only thing you can comprehend and it fits your bias. But reality is so much more complicated than that.

Earlier, you accused Kerry of being an idiot because of something he said about North Korea. But apparently you've now forgiven him for that because it doesn't suit your new narrative which is purely anti-Hillary. Kerry's only been Secretary of State for a few months. Not even a year.

It might be a bit early to declare his tenure a success or a failure, unless you're the type of person who likes leaping to simple conclusions with far too little data. I have a hard time believing that any competent engineer would be so foolish.

North Korea's nuclear tests started under Rice (although their nuclear program probably started many years before). They continued during Clinton and will probably continue during Kerry and every subsequent Secretary of State from here to the end of time until something big and drastic changes.

You cannot break history down into nice, little four-year packets and label each alternating one as a win or a loss. History is a continuum in which each event flows into the next.

I'm honestly astounded at the juvenile way you try to make everything fit your simple black/white narrative.

genglandoh
08-11-2013, 10:27 AM
That's one way to look at it.

Another way to look at it is that Condoleeza Rice responded to North Korea's 2006 nuclear test by offering them fuel and leverage, thereby creating an incentive for North Korea to continue making nuclear threats as a means to acquire further concessions from the US.

Gee, diplomacy isn't easy when you stop pretending everything is black and white.

Well once Hillary Clinton took over her she decided to insult North Korea instead of using diplomacy.
Not the smartest thing to do for the smartest women in the world.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/07/23/us.north.korea/
North Korea launched a scathing personal attack on U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Thursday after she likened the leadership in Pyongyang to "small children and unruly teenagers and people who are demanding attention."

wardd
08-11-2013, 10:45 AM
Well once Hillary Clinton took over her she decided to insult North Korea instead of using diplomacy.
Not the smartest thing to do for the smartest women in the world.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/07/23/us.north.korea/
North Korea launched a scathing personal attack on U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Thursday after she likened the leadership in Pyongyang to "small children and unruly teenagers and people who are demanding attention."

she forgot to include republicans

genglandoh
08-11-2013, 11:01 AM
she forgot to include republicans

I think you are right.
Hillary has always insulted and attacked her opponents.

But that does not work when you are SOS.
She should have been smarter.

David G
08-11-2013, 11:25 AM
I think you are right.
Hillary has always insulted and attached her opponents.

But that does not work when you are SOS.
She should have been smarter.

Do you mean attached herself to her opponents... or are you suggesting she attaches something else to her opponents? Or are you making some other assertion entirely. I just don't get what your point is.

genglandoh
08-11-2013, 11:49 AM
Do you mean attached herself to her opponents... or are you suggesting she attaches something else to her opponents? Or are you making some other assertion entirely. I just don't get what your point is.

Thanks for finding my typo.
I fixed it.

David G
08-11-2013, 12:00 PM
Thanks for finding my typo.
I fixed it.

OH... it was a typo. Got it. I was worried, though. That little snippet was the closest you've ever come to making sense.

My world-view is restored <phew>

Paul Girouard
08-11-2013, 12:38 PM
OH... it was a typo. Got it. I was worried, though. That little snippet was the closest you've ever come to making sense.

My world-view is restored <phew>

Nice game of obfuscation! It added to your post count, if that was the objective , well done!

If you're that dull of brain power that you couldn't figure out it was the wrong word spelled right , well I guess maybe you are that dull / lacking , sad but true.

David G
08-11-2013, 12:44 PM
Nice game of obfuscation! It added to your post count, if that was the objective , well done!

If you're that dull of brain power that you couldn't figure out it was the wrong word spelled right , well I guess maybe you are that dull / lacking , sad but true.

Squid - kindly recalibrate your Irony-Meter to spec. Then get back to me. Wait... you did get the Sarcasm2.0 upgrade installed - dincha?

bobbys
08-11-2013, 12:45 PM
What differential. does it make?

Paul Girouard
08-11-2013, 12:51 PM
Squid - kindly recalibrate your Irony-Meter to spec. Then get back to me. Wait... you did get the Sarcasm2.0 upgrade installed - dincha?


No need to upgrade IMO. Like Full tilt , everyone's got a axe a grind , when one side does it , it's laughed at , people are diminished, called names. When the other side does it they are cheered on , think they are smarter then everyone else.

It's the WBF way, I should just except it, but no, I have to kick against the goad.

David G
08-11-2013, 01:26 PM
Squid - I'll be serious for a moment in response to your well-considered and thoughtful comments.

Yes, my 'clever' snottiness IS indeed a low form of humor. My darling minister wife would smack me right upside the head (well... actually... she'd probably just give me a disappointed look - maybe you know the one?) for not taking the high road and simply ignoring idiocy when it's posted here.

But I probably shall not decease. At least not in this case. Why? Because I see a distinction to be drawn. If a fella is not all that knowledgeable about any given topic - he's ignorant. That's not an insult (though it is often used as such), it's just a fact. We're all ignorant about something. Usually lots of things. Likewise - if a fella is not very bright, he's stupid. Again... not meant as an insult - just a fact. There's nothing particularly wrong with being either of those... or both. We are what we are until/unless we are able to improve ourselves.

BUT - suppose you take a fellow who is ignorant about a topic he wants to talk about... and yet refuses to be educated by those who are in possession of more and better information. His repeated actions indicate disinterest in educating himself. And imagine that the same fellow is a bit stupid - in that he lacks good analytical and critical thinking skills. Let us further notice that the fellow is both loud and persistent in his ignorance & stupidity. Then... wrap that whole package up in a package whose sole purpose seems to be scoring partisan political points.

Pinata Boy is gone. But I could easily imagine someone like I describe above becoming the New Pinata Boy. If such a fella insists on hauling himself up high... yelling, and waving a slogan-bearing banner... he's liable to attract some Pinata action.

And - to my mind - he deserves it. YMMV, of course.

bobbys
08-11-2013, 01:46 PM
Squid - I'll be serious for a moment in response to your well-considered and thoughtful comments.

Yes, my 'clever' snottiness IS indeed a low form of humor. My darling minister wife would smack me right upside the head (well... actually... she'd probably just give me a disappointed look - maybe you know the one?) for not taking the high road and simply ignoring idiocy when it's posted here.

But I probably shall not decease. At least not in this case. Why? Because I see a distinction to be drawn. If a fella is not all that knowledgeable about any given topic - he's ignorant. That's not an insult (though it is often used as such), it's just a fact. We're all ignorant about something. Usually lots of things. Likewise - if a fella is not very bright, he's stupid. Again... not meant as an insult - just a fact. There's nothing particularly wrong with being either of those... or both. We are what we are until/unless we are able to improve ourselves.

BUT - suppose you take a fellow who is ignorant about a topic he wants to talk about... and yet refuses to be educated by those who are in possession of more and better information. His repeated actions indicate disinterest in educating himself. And imagine that the same fellow is a bit stupid - in that he lacks good analytical and critical thinking skills. Let us further notice that the fellow is both loud and persistent in his ignorance & stupidity. Then... wrap that whole package up in a package whose sole purpose seems to be scoring partisan political points.

Pinata Boy is gone. But I could easily imagine someone like I describe above becoming the New Pinata Boy. If such a fella insists on hauling himself up high... yelling, and waving a slogan-bearing banner... he's liable to attract some Pinata action.

And - to my mind - he deserves it. YMMV, of course..

Of Course if someone in Australia says something dumb it is attributed to SP by libs and makes perfect sense.

So a lib can find a gaffe or misspelled word by anyone and apply it to a Conservative as one sees fit for partisan political points../

Not that you have but this is common practice here.

David G
08-11-2013, 01:52 PM
.

Of Course if someone in Australia says something dumb it is attributed to SP by libs and makes perfect sense.

So a lib can find a gaffe or misspelled word by anyone and apply it to a Conservative as one sees fit for partisan political points../

Not that you have but this is common practice here.

You're tilting at the wrong windmill. None of that has anything to do with the point Paul raised, not my comments, nor - as you say - my own particular style.

bobbys
08-11-2013, 02:19 PM
You're tilting at the wrong windmill. None of that has anything to do with the point Paul raised, not my comments, nor - as you say - my own particular style..

Im sorry i thought you were looking for some pinata action with your long essay and i lost my head!.

can only hope glenn do not see this...

Glen Longino
08-11-2013, 02:39 PM
.

Im sorry i thought you were looking for some pinata action with your long essay and i lost my head!.

can only hope glenn do not see this...

You're busted! :)

Paul Girouard
08-11-2013, 02:41 PM
Squid - I'll be serious for a moment in response to your well-considered and thoughtful comments.




Pinata Boy is gone. But I could easily imagine someone like I describe above becoming the New Pinata Boy. If such a fella insists on hauling himself up high... yelling, and waving a slogan-bearing banner... he's liable to attract some Pinata action.

And - to my mind - he deserves it. YMMV, of course.



Thanks for the thoughts.

It's pretty clear there is ALWAYS a NPB ( New Pinata Boy) , my guess is your "original" PB was Milo?

I liked Milo , I think he was a great contributor to WBF, I know he helped me out on the "fish bench" with a design idea , AND he mailed me some graphite to use IF I mixed some epoxy for a filler. I really miss Milo's contributions here on the forum, you on the other hand more than likely are equally happy he's no longer here! So again, like many other things, one persons perspective is VERY different than another persons.

The current NPB is Phillip , he's on a self imposed time out , although he did sneak in a thread today. Jamie's ANOTHER NPB . although neither member is really "new" here , IMO THEY have become the latest NPB in place of Milo.

So who would you say, in your opinion in other words the "current" NPB?

David G
08-11-2013, 02:54 PM
Yup - Milo.

Nope - I'm not glad he's gone. I kinda liked him, too. You really, seriously, ARE far too quick to demonize those who don't agree with you. Milo could be a reasonable sort if he felt like it. When he was in that mode, he could really contribute to a conversation, by supporting a position... or by forcing those who disagreed to consider their logic. He could also be a ridiculously stubborn intransigent ass at times. Thus drawing the ire of anyone with a scrap of logic and fair-mindedness to their names. Even those who'd be inclined to support him on ideological grounds smacked him around at times because of that pattern. Everyone KNEW he could do better.

I don't see any clearly obvious NPB.

Paul Girouard
08-11-2013, 03:05 PM
Yup - Milo.

You really, seriously, ARE far too quick to demonize those who don't agree with you.



So I assume by the above sentence you "feel" /(((( I shouldn't use that word , but "feel" is commonly used where "think" is really the proper word))) that I am "demonizing" you? REALLY???

I THINK you are way to quick to think some one is attacking you / demonizing you / IF they simple disagree with your "far superior", (hows that for a ice breaker,) ability to think , comprehend and analyze different situations.

We all bring different life experiences to the table , and we ALL apply or come to different opinions due to this personalized perspective we bring to the forum.

David G
08-11-2013, 03:13 PM
No... my comment about demonizing had little to do with having it directed at me (my hide is tougher than that), and more to do with having been stuck by your seemingly extreme responses over years. I wouldn't have said anything about a pattern if it has simply been an isolated instance.

Paul Girouard
08-11-2013, 03:23 PM
No... my comment about demonizing had little to do with having it directed at me (my hide is tougher than that), and more to do with having been stuck by your seemingly extreme responses over years. I wouldn't have said anything about a pattern if it has simply been an isolated instance.

Humm , well your responses , in my opinion, have become extremely left leaning in the past year as well. And I'll repeat your " I wouldn't have said anything about a pattern if it has simply been an isolated instance. " sentence So how do you like that? LOL.

ETA: And lets look at your sentence "anything about a pattern" and "isolated instance" , IF it where isolated , would it even be a pattern? To add, how can things like brick pavers ever be laid in a "random pattern"???

So many questions , so little time! Gotta love this place, or well hate it! LOL

genglandoh
08-11-2013, 03:39 PM
Squid - I'll be serious for a moment in response to your well-considered and thoughtful comments.

Yes, my 'clever' snottiness IS indeed a low form of humor. My darling minister wife would smack me right upside the head (well... actually... she'd probably just give me a disappointed look - maybe you know the one?) for not taking the high road and simply ignoring idiocy when it's posted here.

But I probably shall not decease. At least not in this case. Why? Because I see a distinction to be drawn. If a fella is not all that knowledgeable about any given topic - he's ignorant. That's not an insult (though it is often used as such), it's just a fact. We're all ignorant about something. Usually lots of things. Likewise - if a fella is not very bright, he's stupid. Again... not meant as an insult - just a fact. There's nothing particularly wrong with being either of those... or both. We are what we are until/unless we are able to improve ourselves.

BUT - suppose you take a fellow who is ignorant about a topic he wants to talk about... and yet refuses to be educated by those who are in possession of more and better information. His repeated actions indicate disinterest in educating himself. And imagine that the same fellow is a bit stupid - in that he lacks good analytical and critical thinking skills. Let us further notice that the fellow is both loud and persistent in his ignorance & stupidity. Then... wrap that whole package up in a package whose sole purpose seems to be scoring partisan political points.

Pinata Boy is gone. But I could easily imagine someone like I describe above becoming the New Pinata Boy. If such a fella insists on hauling himself up high... yelling, and waving a slogan-bearing banner... he's liable to attract some Pinata action.

And - to my mind - he deserves it. YMMV, of course.

Interesting point of view.
If someone does not agree with you then they are ignorant and stupid giving you justification to call them the New Pinata Boy and attacking them.

This sounds a lot like the wife beater who justifies that she deserved the beatings.
Maybe you should try discussing the issues.

Paul Girouard
08-11-2013, 03:52 PM
Interesting point of view.
If someone does not agree with you then they are ignorant and stupid giving you justification to call them the New Pinata Boy and attacking them.

This sounds a lot like the wife beater who justifies that she deserved the beatings.
Maybe you should try discussing the issues.


Let me go out on a limb and say David G will come back with a well written , read long winded, self aggrandizing , post about how he's tried and tried. Much like one of his idols Bill Clinton, who some years back "tried and tried and worked the hardest he ever had" to cut taxes. Yup , it'll be a thing of beauty to read , how hard he tried to straighten those poor "stupid, homophobic , regressive , cavemen" into seeing the light of liberal tax and spend policies! If only given more money, time , blood sweat and tears , the (insert program here) would surely have solved (insert problem here). Yes , I can almost channel elf , Glen Longino and a Keith Wilson chart to compliment the fine aroma of the post!

Glen Longino
08-11-2013, 04:04 PM
Let me go out on a limb and say genglandoh will start another thread with a question and when ANSWERS begin to show up he will respond with more questions and attacks upon anybody who is not a Troglodyte!
I've seen it happen over and over and over!

bobbys
08-11-2013, 04:08 PM
Let me go out on a limb and say genglandoh will start another thread with a question and when ANSWERS begin to show up he will respond with more questions and attacks upon anybody who is not a Troglodyte!
I've seen it happen over and over and over!.

Hey not a bad idea, thanks glenn!

Paul Girouard
08-11-2013, 04:09 PM
Troglodyte!



Saved for spelling purposes , I just can never get that word spelled close enough for the spell checker to correct it for me.

I'm sure you use it as a term of endearment , and not as a demeaning word that could be considered rude by forum rules. Or do you use it AS a demeaning word to lessen the "humanity" of the people you refer to as being troglodytes?

And yes , this is for the record.

genglandoh
08-11-2013, 04:09 PM
Let me go out on a limb and say genglandoh will start another thread with a question and when ANSWERS begin to show up he will respond with more questions and attacks upon anybody who is not a Troglodyte!
I've seen it happen over and over and over!

If you read my posts you will see that I do not attack people.

You on the other hand you have attacked me many times.

Glen Longino
08-11-2013, 04:25 PM
If you read my posts you will see that I do not attack people.

You on the other hand you have attacked me many times.

Ha! Go back and read your posts#13 and #27, responses to hokiefan and Lefty!
In the first, the responder "must be joking" because he disagrees with you, and in the other, those who disagree with you are "dead zombies"!
If you want your questions answered the way you choose, answer them yourself!
If you don't want your statements argued, don't post them!
When you ask questions, you don't get to control the answers...sorry!

ljb5
08-11-2013, 04:35 PM
Well once Hillary Clinton took over her she decided to insult North Korea instead of using diplomacy.
Not the smartest thing to do for the smartest women in the world.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/07/23/us.north.korea/
North Korea launched a scathing personal attack on U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Thursday after she likened the leadership in Pyongyang to "small children and unruly teenagers and people who are demanding attention."

That's funny.

If Condoleeza Rice had said the same thing, I have no doubt you'd come here today to praise her Tough Talk and Firm Stance in the face of the Enemy.

You wingnuts have spent the last five years complaining about the Obama "Apology Tour".... and now here you are complaining that Hillary wasn't nice enough.

The worst thing about you isn't your monotonous and illogical right-wing droning.... it's that you think you're fooling anyone with it.

Let's just call it like it is: You are going to complain about Hillary no matter what she does. You'd complain if she were too nice. You'd complain if she weren't nice enough.

That doesn't say much about Hillary, but it says a heck of a lot about you.

genglandoh
08-11-2013, 04:38 PM
Ha! Go back and read your posts#13 and #27, responses to hokiefan and Lefty!
In the first, the responder "must be joking" because he disagrees with you, and in the other, those who disagree with you are "dead zombies"!
If you want your questions answered the way you choose, answer them yourself!
If you don't want your statements argued, don't post them!
When you ask questions, you don't get to control the answers...sorry!

Here are the posts you are talking about.
As you can see I did not attack anyone.

So when someone posts an opinion that I do not agree with I am not allowed to point out why I disagree?



You must be joking.

While Hillary was SOS the US foreign policy has fallen apart.
1. The Arab spring has turned into total chaos.
2. Iran has increased their nuclear program.
3. North Korea has not just increased their nuclear program but they conducted nuclear and missile tests.
4. The US stopped the missile shield program for Europe.
5. And to top it off we have 4 dead Americans because of her inaction in Libya.

In a short 6 months John Kerry has started to fix the mess Hillary left him.

PS I am happy that John Kerry is doing a good job.
He must be better in meeting and private discussion then he comes off in public.



Well in fact I do form my own opinions.

Most of the time I give multiple links to different news sources with difference points of view on a subject.
Then I read this material and develop my own opinion.

Some on this forum do not understand this process because many will point to a statement in one of these stories that do not support my opinion.

LOL Many think if you post a news story you have to agree with everything in the story.

Sorry but I am not dead zombie like so many on this forum.

genglandoh
08-11-2013, 04:40 PM
That's funny.

If Condoleeza Rice had said the same thing, I have no doubt you'd come here today to praise her Tough Talk and Firm Stance in the face of the Enemy.

You wingnuts have spent the last five years complaining about the Obama "Apology Tour".... and now here you are complaining that Hillary wasn't nice enough.

The worst thing about you isn't your monotonous and illogical right-wing droning.... it's that you think you're fooling anyone with it.

Let's just call it like it is: You are going to complain about Hillary no matter what she does. You'd complain if she were too nice. You'd complain if she weren't nice enough.

That doesn't say much about Hillary, but it says a heck of a lot about you.

Glen take notes this is how to attack someone.

Tom Montgomery
08-11-2013, 05:05 PM
What? This turkey isn't done yet?

Glen Longino
08-11-2013, 07:09 PM
If you read my posts you will see that I do not attack people.

You on the other hand you have attacked me many times.

See my post #4 on this thread!
No attack! No rudeness!
You can't stand the simple truth.

David G
08-11-2013, 07:54 PM
Interesting point of view.
If someone does not agree with you then they are ignorant and stupid giving you justification to call them the New Pinata Boy and attacking them.

This sounds a lot like the wife beater who justifies that she deserved the beatings.
Maybe you should try discussing the issues.

Your response gave me pause. So I reviewed my post #59... and am still at a loss. Nowhere in it, or other posts, as I recall, do I state - or even suggest - that disagreeing with me automatically means "they are ignorant and stupid". Can you point out the words or phrases that led you to that interpretation?

I have to say, though, that the fact you managed to parse my comments to arrive at that conclusion certainly argues for your interpretation.

Paul Girouard
08-11-2013, 08:28 PM
Your response gave me pause. So I reviewed my post #59... and am still at a loss. Nowhere in it, or other posts, as I recall, do I state - or even suggest - that disagreeing with me automatically means "they are ignorant and stupid". Can you point out the words or phrases that led you to that interpretation?

I have to say, though, that the fact you managed to parse my comments to arrive at that conclusion certainly argues for your interpretation.

You should re-read your post and put it in the context that I was the writer, I'm sure then you'd see where he got the idea that if they disagree with you they are stupid and ignorant , or ignorant and stupid as you wrote it. I'm sure it makes a significant difference :D at least to you.

David G
08-11-2013, 08:45 PM
You should re-read your post and put it in the context that I was the writer, I'm sure then you'd see where he got the idea that if they disagree with you they are stupid and ignorant , or ignorant and stupid as you wrote it. I'm sure it makes a significant difference :D at least to you.

OK... done. I still see nowhere that equates disagreement with me... as de facto ignorance and stupidity - which is his contention (see quote below). I'll ask you the same thing I asked him. Please point out the words or phrases that lead you to that impression.


Interesting point of view.
If someone does not agree with you then they are ignorant and stupid giving you justification to call them the New Pinata Boy and attacking them.

ljb5
08-11-2013, 09:01 PM
Glen take notes this is how to attack someone.

Sorry, Graham, no attack was intended.

I was merely pointing out the obvious deficiencies in your line of attack: namely that you use a criteria so transient and flexible that it allows you to arrive at any conclusion you want, regardless of the facts.

North Korea started their nuclear tests under Rice's tenure, but now you tell us that doesn't really count.

Earlier, you accused John Kerry of stupidity about North Korea, but you seem to be willing to forgive that now, so long as it suits your current line of attack.

You accused Hillary of being too tough on North Korea, but if the other card had been dealt, you'd accuse her of being too soft and accommodating.

There's really nothing mysterious or complicated about what you're doing. No one here is confused about it. You dislike Hillary and you're willing to say anything to attack her.

That might be good enough for you to stoke your fires of Hillary-hate, but it does not a convincing argument make.

If you'd like to try making a convincing argument, might I suggest you pick a clear and consistent line of reasoning, apply it equally to all subjects and try to show a bit of integrity.

But as long as you're giving Condoleeza Rice a pass on two of the most ill-advised and mismanaged wars in US history and the start of the North Korean nuclear missile program, no one here is ever going to think you're anything more than just another right-wing troll.

David G
08-11-2013, 10:34 PM
Let me go out on a limb and say David G will come back with a well written , read long winded, self aggrandizing , post about how he's tried and tried. Much like one of his idols Bill Clinton, who some years back "tried and tried and worked the hardest he ever had" to cut taxes. Yup , it'll be a thing of beauty to read , how hard he tried to straighten those poor "stupid, homophobic , regressive , cavemen" into seeing the light of liberal tax and spend policies! If only given more money, time , blood sweat and tears , the (insert program here) would surely have solved (insert problem here). Yes , I can almost channel elf , Glen Longino and a Keith Wilson chart to compliment the fine aroma of the post!

Interesting point of view.

Thanks for the compliment about my writing. "Well written". I like that. "... a thing of beauty to read." I like that (puffs out chest... and buffs nails) <G>

But - beyond that lovely compliment, the bulk of your comment seems to spring from the notion that Bill Clinton is one of my idols. I can't help but wonder what led you to THAT conclusion. Did I say that at some point? I'll go out on a limb and say... no, I never did, and never would have. Or did I, perhaps, make some sort of approving comment about a particular action of Clinton's that made you suspect that I held him in some level of regard... and which you have now expanded into idolatry?

Throwing around such inaccurate, insupportable, characterizations is just plain sloppy, squid. It almost makes me wonder how much weight to give to those lovely compliments <G> More importantly - as it impacts a conversation - it's a tedious waste of time.

genglandoh
09-10-2013, 07:24 AM
Well Kerry has done it again.

Obama and Hillary Clinton get the US into this mess and Kerry fixes it with a gaffe.

skuthorp
09-10-2013, 07:34 AM
I don't know about a gaffe Geng, more an afterthought that he probably reckoned was unrealistic. But the Russians would have been looking for a way not to have a big US force of the Syrian coast and jumped at it. But as I have noted elsewhere, it may be just a delaying tactic.