GOP'ish candidates

[randolph]

This might surprise some of our Liberal friends.

[transjen]

All you hear from the GOP is the rich create jobs and by cutting there taxes the rich in turn will create jobs
So W cut taxes for the rich not once but twice and those cuts are still in effect and unlike all the BS from the GOP the truth is Obama did not add or raise taxes on these so called job creating saints
So taxes on these job creaters has been cut for 12 years now so where are these jobs
All four wanna be GOP presidents are screaming make the Bush tax cuts periment and give them even more tax cuts and it will put everyone back to work
Why do people buy in to this BULLSHIT?
it hasn't worked so far so way by keeping this policy going will all of asudden work
So far all the GOP plans to restore America is keep the the failed agenda going by
the poor
deregalating rules for big bussiness and wallstreet
Doing away with social security and medicare
starting more wars
and make sure the top one percent never pay any taxes
just the same tired old GOP FU to the working class
been there seen it lived it done it 2001-2008, 1980-1992,1968-1976
WAKE UP AMERICA
A GOP whitehouse will make us a thrid world country
Jerseygirl Jen

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by transjen

All you hear from the GOP is the rich create jobs and by cutting there taxes the rich in turn will create jobs
So W cut taxes for the rich not once but twice and those cuts are still in effect and unlike all the BS from the GOP the truth is Obama did not add or raise taxes on these so called job creating saints
So taxes on these job creaters has been cut for 12 years now so where are these jobs

The unemployment rate during most of W's presidency has been pretty good - around 5-6%. Since financial collapse (a consequence of lending practices not taxing), Obama has decided to keep the Bush tax cuts not so much to create jobs but because he knows if he raises taxes that will increase unemployment. But you know that already.

[smc]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

The unemployment rate during most of W's presidency has been pretty good - around 5-6%. Since financial collapse (a consequence of lending practices not taxing), Obama has decided to keep the Bush tax cuts not so much to create jobs but because he knows if he raises taxes that will increase unemployment. But you know that already.

And you know that Obama decided to keep the tax cuts because it was the only way he could get the Republicans to agree to other measures that were necessary at the time.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

The unemployment rate during most of W's presidency has been pretty good - around 5-6%. Since financial collapse (a consequence of lending practices not taxing), Obama has decided to keep the Bush tax cuts not so much to create jobs but because he knows if he raises taxes that will increase unemployment. But you know that already.

Tracy Coxx: Friend of the Working Man. Fighting for Capital, the Commodification of Man and the American Way!

Can you see it ladies and gentlemen? Can you see those beautiful green pants and that brilliant white shirt emblazoned with dollar signs--a gaudy display that would make the Riddler squeal in joy?

[smc]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Tracy Coxx: Friend of the Working Man. Fighting for Capital, the Commodification of Man and the American Way!

Can you see it ladies and gentlemen? Can you see those beautiful green pants and that brilliant white shirt emblazoned with dollar signs--a gaudy display that would make the Riddler squeal in joy?

As you well know, I rarely agree with Tracy Coxx on anything political or economic. But he makes a claim in the post to which you refer, by inference, that raising taxes will increase unemployment. That is a position that can be debated and shown to be patently false. How about taking on that, Enoch Root? It would be a far greater contribution to the discussion.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by smc

As you well know, I rarely agree with Tracy Coxx on anything political or economic. But he makes a claim in the post to which you refer, by inference, that raising taxes will increase unemployment. That is a position that can be debated and shown to be patently false. How about taking on that, Enoch Root? It would be a far greater contribution to the discussion.

Low taxes are always spoken of in terms of a "keystone." That is, they are the most important part without which the rest of the system--the "arch" in the analogy--would not work. The way in which they work is namely raising employment: the lower the taxes the higher the employment. The corollary is obvious and has already been stated: raising taxes lowers employment. Bush instituted the cuts, they survive to this day, we still have an unemployment problem. All things which Jen has stated in the past.

But, if I understand smc's post correctly, there is a better way to go about this:
Tracy, by what method do lower taxes lead to higher employment?

[ulyssesgrant50]

Originally Posted by transjen

OK i'm sick to death of the various GOP bozos going on and on about actavist judges
Well let me fill you in on the true meaning of the term Actavist Judge an actavist judge is any judges ruling you don't like
Jerseygirl Jen

Jen - I LOVE your definition. You sum it up neatly.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by smc

And you know that Obama decided to keep the tax cuts because it was the only way he could get the Republicans to agree to other measures that were necessary at the time.

Are you sure about that? You might want to look up the numbers of republicans and democrats in the house at that time.

[smc]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

Are you sure about that? You might want to look up the numbers of republicans and democrats in the house at that time.

I don't need to, and neither do you. You know that majority does not rule in the United States Senate, but conveniently ignore that fact to make your point.

Further, I did not post anything that could be construed as stating that this was a simple vote on the tax measure. My post specifically states: "get the Republicans to agree to other measures that were necessary at the time."

I know you saw that in my post.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by smc

I don't need to, and neither do you. You know that majority does not rule in the United States Senate, but conveniently ignore that fact to make your point.

Further, I did not post anything that could be construed as stating that this was a simple vote on the tax measure. My post specifically states: "get the Republicans to agree to other measures that were necessary at the time."

I know you saw that in my post.

The majority does not rule in the senate? Huh?

[TracyCoxx]

This election year is going to the dogs...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nEBN8wOKjMo

[smc]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

This election year is going to the dogs...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nEBN8wOKjMo

In an electoral environment where people have claimed a legitimate place in the political arena while carrying signs of Obama made to look like Adolph Hitler, and even comparing him to Hitler, this kind of thing ... even in jest ... is absolutely disgusting and without merit.

Personally, as someone who counts 64 members of his family lost to the Nazis in death camps, I find this to be reprehensible.

I ask you, Tracy Coxx, do you repudiate all of your ideological cothinkers on so many issues who have made such comparisons?

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by smc

In an electoral environment where people have claimed a legitimate place in the political arena while carrying signs of Obama made to look like Adolph Hitler, and even comparing him to Hitler, this kind of thing ... even in jest ... is absolutely disgusting and without merit.

Personally, as someone who counts 64 members of his family lost to the Nazis in death camps, I find this to be reprehensible.

I ask you, Tracy Coxx, do you repudiate all of your ideological cothinkers on so many issues who have made such comparisons?

Uhhh, I take it you've completely missed this meme? This in no way compares Obama to hitler. There's a bunch of these videos on youtube with the same scene where Hitler's going ballistic about something. On Youtube people change the subtitles to all kinds of funny things, like this one where he doesn't like the ending to harry potter:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rytV6i6bSnA

There's another one where he finds out his car has a parking boot put on it, or that Santa isn't real or that someone blew up his death star. This is yet another one that someone made with the revelation (recent revelation if you haven't read Obama's book) that he's eaten dog before. Did you miss that too? Dog recipes are flying all over the internet now (golden fried retriever, etc) and of course the hitler meme is not immune to it either.

[smc]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

Uhhh, I take it you've completely missed this meme? This in no way compares Obama to hitler. There's a bunch of these videos on youtube with the same scene where Hitler's going ballistic about something. On Youtube people change the subtitles to all kinds of funny things, like this one where he doesn't like the ending to harry potter:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rytV6i6bSnA

There's another one where he finds out his car has a parking boot put on it, or that Santa isn't real or that someone blew up his death star. This is yet another one that someone made with the revelation (recent revelation if you haven't read Obama's book) that he's eaten dog before. Did you miss that too? Dog recipes are flying all over the internet now (golden fried retriever, etc) and of course the hitler meme is not immune to it either.

I missed none of it. There's nothing funny about Hitler. How about answering the question I posed.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by smc

I missed none of it. There's nothing funny about Hitler. How about answering the question I posed.

The joke obviously wasn't meant for you then.

[smc]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

The joke obviously wasn't meant for you then.

Answer my question.

Anyone else think Hitler is funny? How about in the context of Tracy Coxx's other political posts about Obama and Obama's positions, and given the Tuse of Hitler images at public Tea Party events. Or how about the recent statement by a Catholic bishop likening Obama to Hitler and Stalin?

[tslust]

Originally Posted by smc

In an electoral environment where people have claimed a legitimate place in the political arena while carrying signs of Obama made to look like Adolph Hitler, and even comparing him to Hitler, this kind of thing ... even in jest ... is absolutely disgusting and without merit.

Personally, as someone who counts 64 members of his family lost to the Nazis in death camps, I find this to be reprehensible.

I ask you, Tracy Coxx, do you repudiate all of your ideological cothinkers on so many issues who have made such comparisons?

Do you repudiate all of the liberals who made such comparisons about Bush?

[smc]

Originally Posted by tslust

Do you repudiate all of the liberals who made such comparisons about Bush?

Absolutely, without equivocation. Any such comparison, besides being wrong, is scurrilous and without historical merit. And please note that I do not consider myself to be a liberal, nor do I hold liberal views by any genuine definition of that term. My views are considerably to the left of any "liberal," whether the U.S. definition of the term or the more widespread definition of the term globally.

[tslust]

Originally Posted by smc

[COLOR="Black"]Absolutely, without equivocation. Any such comparison, besides being wrong, is scurrilous and without historical merit.[/COLOR

Thanks enough said.

[tslust]

I don't mind people offering criticism about specific actions. What I don't llike is people who make blanket statments (basically ammounting to, he's just stupid) based on political party lines, personal opinion, or (dare I even say it) race.

[smc]

Originally Posted by tslust

I don't mind people offering criticism about specific actions. What I don't llike is people who make blanket statments (basically ammounting to, he's just stupid) based on political party lines, personal opinion, or (dare I even say it) race.

The genesis of the ongoing dispute over the method of political discourse on this site can be traced to such blanket statements.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by tslust

Do you repudiate all of the liberals who made such comparisons about Bush?

See this is what smc does. The video I posted makes absolutely no comparison between Obama and Hitler. But what has smc turned this into? An accusation that I did precisely that. And now others are asking smc if he would repudiate liberals who would _compare_ Bush to Hitler. The topic has now been successfully changed and I will be accused of not responding to criticisms or direct questions about my posts when in fact you are now talking about something I never did: comparing people to Hitler which has now been attributed to me.

[ila]

Originally Posted by smc

...Anyone else think Hitler is funny? How about in the context of Tracy Coxx's other political posts about Obama and Obama's positions, and given the Tuse of Hitler images at public Tea Party events. Or how about the recent statement by a Catholic bishop likening Obama to Hitler and Stalin?

I don't think Hitler is funny, but I do think the posted video is funny. I've seen the same video with Hitler going to Sturgis on a Honda and another when Hitler found out that Toronto had been eliminated from the playoffs. I found all of them funny as they are just spoofs. I'm pretty sure the creators of these video clips did not intend to compare Hitler or his actions to anyone else. I'm equally sure that the videos were created to give others a laugh.

smc, I'm sorry for what happened to your family. It was a crime against humanity, but I don't see the video as attenuating the circumstances of what happened to your family and to the Jewish people. Nor do I see the video as making light of Hitler's and his regime's criminal acts.

[smc]

Originally Posted by ila

I don't think Hitler is funny, but I do think the posted video is funny. I've seen the same video with Hitler going to Sturgis on a Honda and another when Hitler found out that Toronto had been eliminated from the playoffs. I found all of them funny as they are just spoofs. I'm pretty sure the creators of these video clips did not intend to compare Hitler or his actions to anyone else. I'm equally sure that the videos were created to give others a laugh.

smc, I'm sorry for what happened to your family. It was a crime against humanity, but I don't see the video as attenuating the circumstances of what happened to your family and to the Jewish people. Nor do I see the video as making light of Hitler's and his regime's criminal acts.

Then it belongs in a "humor" thread, and not in a political discussion thread. Given the provocative nature of certain posts throughout this site in political threads, one reasonably can wonder whether it was posted exclusively for its humor.

[smc]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

See this is what smc does. The video I posted makes absolutely no comparison between Obama and Hitler. But what has smc turned this into? An accusation that I did precisely that. And now others are asking smc if he would repudiate liberals who would _compare_ Bush to Hitler. The topic has now been successfully changed and I will be accused of not responding to criticisms or direct questions about my posts when in fact you are now talking about something I never did: comparing people to Hitler which has now been attributed to me.

See this is what Tracy Coxx does. He writes that the video "makes absolutely no comparison between Obama and Hitler." But the title of the video is "Hitler Finds Out Obama Ate His Dog" (oh, my, there IS an Obama reference!).

My response to the posting was this:

In an electoral environment where people have claimed a legitimate place in the political arena while carrying signs of Obama made to look like Adolph Hitler, and even comparing him to Hitler, this kind of thing ... even in jest ... is absolutely disgusting and without merit.

Note that I did not attribute to Tracy Coxx the comparison he states I accuse him of. No, he makes that up, because he needs to accuse me of something that he thinks will make my point look illegitimate. Also, by doing so, he tries to shift the focus away from my point, which is precisely that given the political environment, and the comparisons made BY OTHERS, this kind of humor -- in my opinion -- is harmful.

[smc]

^ One more thing: if the Hitler video was just about humor, why was it posted in one of the political threads?

I think anyone with half a brain can figure out the answer.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by smc

See this is what Tracy Coxx does. He writes that the video "makes absolutely no comparison between Obama and Hitler." But the title of the video is "Hitler Finds Out Obama Ate His Dog" (oh, my, there IS an Obama reference!).

It took you a week to find the reference to Obama in the title? Hopefully it doesn't take you another week to realize that reference does not mean comparison.

Originally Posted by smc

Note that I did not attribute to Tracy Coxx the comparison he states I accuse him of.

Fine. Then leave me out of it and whine about jpjoiner, the person who posted the video on youtube if you're not attributing the comparison to me.

Originally Posted by smc

Also, by doing so, he tries to shift the focus away from my point, which is precisely that given the political environment, and the comparisons made BY OTHERS, this kind of humor -- in my opinion -- is harmful.

Your point shifted focus away from the humor of the video. Have you considered that?

Originally Posted by smc

One more thing: if the Hitler video was just about humor, why was it posted in one of the political threads?

You've said that before and no one took it seriously. It's funny that you say it again... which is ironic if there's no humor allowed in political threads.

[TracyCoxx]

Just passing this on...
""Of course jokes are posted in the political thread.
Anything posted about the big "O" or by smc."

You don't think this has serious readers do you?"

[smc]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

It took you a week to find the reference to Obama in the title? Hopefully it doesn't take you another week to realize that reference does not mean comparison.

Ooh, should I go complain to the site owner or another moderator about you insulting me in a post? I've always wondered how it would feel to be Tracy Coxx, and this could be my chance to live the Tracy Coxx life vicariously, if even for a brief moment. (By the way, I saw the title when I first saw your post, but don't let that get in the way of trying to make me look stupid.)

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

Fine. Then leave me out of it and whine about jpjoiner, the person who posted the video on youtube if you're not attributing the comparison to me.

Once again, I didn't attribute the comparison to you. But keep making that claim. Say it enough times, and eventually -- truth be damned -- someone other than you will believe it.

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

Your point shifted focus away from the humor of the video. Have you considered that?

I stand by what I wrote about Hitler earlier.

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

You've said that before and no one took it seriously. It's funny that you say it again... which is ironic if there's no humor allowed in political threads.

I didn't write that humor wasn't allowed in the political threads. But, as is typical, you dodge the main point I did make on this particular subtopic of the argument: why did YOU choose to put it in a political thread? I don't expect you to answer, or address the issues about the comparisons made by others that make it so disgusting.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by smc

Once again, I didn't attribute the comparison to you. But keep making that claim. Say it enough times, and eventually -- truth be damned -- someone other than you will believe it.

And once again leave me out of it and whine about jpjoiner, the person who posted the video on youtube if you're not attributing the comparison to me.

Originally Posted by smc

I didn't write that humor wasn't allowed in the political threads.

Then you're just nitpicking again? Thanks for clarifying.

[smc]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

And once again leave me out of it and whine about jpjoiner, the person who posted the video on youtube if you're not attributing the comparison to me.

I know you're not stupid, so why do you keep pretending to be?

And once again, I didn't attribute the comparison to you. You know it, I know it, and anyone with half a brain reading this knows it. As I wrote earlier, keep making that claim. Say it enough times, and eventually -- truth be damned -- someone other than you will believe it.

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

Then you're just nitpicking again? Thanks for clarifying.

Then you're just dodging the issue again. Thanks for clarifying.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by smc

And once again, I didn't attribute the comparison to you. You know it, I know it, and anyone with half a brain reading this knows it.

Fine, and I'll say again, you should make comments like the following:

Originally Posted by smc

In an electoral environment where people have claimed a legitimate place in the political arena while carrying signs of Obama made to look like Adolph Hitler, and even comparing him to Hitler, this kind of thing ... even in jest ... is absolutely disgusting and without merit.

to someone else. You're not attributing it to me. Ok, I believe you. I thought you raised that point because it had something to do with the video I posted, but apparently it's just some random trivia. So you have a problem with some people comparing Obama to Hitler. That is #1, irrelevant to anything mentioned before, and #2 irrelevant to me. Again, take it to someone else, I don't care who.

Originally Posted by smc

I didn't write that humor wasn't allowed in the political threads. But, as is typical, you dodge the main point I did make on this particular subtopic of the argument: why did YOU choose to put it in a political thread? I don't expect you to answer, or address the issues about the comparisons made by others that make it so disgusting.

Ok, so we're done with the comparison thing, and you'll take that up with someone else. I wish you luck in resolving that. I think that just leaves why I chose to put a humorous youtube video in a political thread. You've eliminated forum rule violations as your motivation for asking this, so I guess it's just a curiosity of yours.

Sure. We can do that. The issue we're now discussing is why TracyCoxx wanted to post a Hitler spoof video where it makes it look like Hitler is angry about discovering that Obama ate his dog Fluffy. Yes smc, I will do that for you. Would you prefer to split this thread into this new discussion or should we just continue along in here to discuss this issue?

[smc]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

Fine, and I'll say again, you should make comments like the following:


to someone else. You're not attributing it to me. Ok, I believe you. I thought you raised that point because it had something to do with the video I posted, but apparently it's just some random trivia. So you have a problem with some people comparing Obama to Hitler. That is #1, irrelevant to anything mentioned before, and #2 irrelevant to me. Again, take it to someone else, I don't care who.


Ok, so we're done with the comparison thing, and you'll take that up with someone else. I wish you luck in resolving that. I think that just leaves why I chose to put a humorous youtube video in a political thread. You've eliminated forum rule violations as your motivation for asking this, so I guess it's just a curiosity of yours.

Sure. We can do that. The issue we're now discussing is why TracyCoxx wanted to post a Hitler spoof video where it makes it look like Hitler is angry about discovering that Obama ate his dog Fluffy. Yes smc, I will do that for you. Would you prefer to split this thread into this new discussion or should we just continue along in here to discuss this issue?

Here's what I'm going to do for you, Tracy Coxx. I'm going to concede to you that you have successfully dodged discussing the core of any of the points I made. You win. Now you can boast about your Pyrrhic victory to your friends, or your mommy, or whomever. Why Pyrrhic? Because by continually denigrating discourse, posting provocative crap and then pretending there's nothing to it, and so on, you denigrate yourself.

As I wrote somewhere else on this site, you make me want to vomit. It's not your political positions. I respect the opinions that differ from mine, when they're serious. I respect people who have them, too, if they own up to them and discuss them honestly. But you only do that if you don't get challenged. Then you pull this crap, and you make me want to vomit.

[TracyCoxx]

I merely took your odd accusations and demands to their logical conclusions.

Originally Posted by smc

Now you can boast about your Pyrrhic victory to your friends, or your mommy, or whomever. Why Pyrrhic? Because by continually denigrating discourse, posting provocative crap and then pretending there's nothing to it, and so on, you denigrate yourself.

You're right in one sense - it is not a victory I would want to celebrate. Not because of the enormous cost of winning or the devastated state I now find myself in but because this petty argument you insisted on having could have ended up no other way. By becoming so indignant over trivial things like a headmaster demanding little Johnny share his joke with the rest of the class you put yourself in this position.

Originally Posted by smc

As I wrote somewhere else on this site, you make me want to vomit.

Might I suggest the addition of this for the site?
http://planetsmilies.net/vomit-smiley-9529.gif

[smc]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

I merely took your odd accusations and demands to their logical conclusions.
You're right in one sense - it is not a victory I would want to celebrate. Not because of the enormous cost of winning or the devastated state I now find myself in but because this petty argument you insisted on having could have ended up no other way. By becoming so indignant over trivial things like a headmaster demanding little Johnny share his joke with the rest of the class you put yourself in this position. ...

Of course, you can call things trivial as a means of ignoring their substance. It's what cowards do when they can't really answer in an argument. Yes, I called you a coward. Go complain to the site owner.

You're a master at ignoring the substance of the points and then trying to make it look as if you're being accused, or harassed, or whatever. I salute your "skill," which I assume must work in some parts of your life since you employ it with such aplomb here.

Whoops, I threw up on your shoes.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by smc

Of course, you can call things trivial as a means of ignoring their substance.

On the contrary I said I would go so far as split this thread or devote my time in this one to discuss your issue. In response you waved the white flag. I am still open to discuss it if you'd like. It can only get better lol.

Originally Posted by smc

Whoops, I threw up on your shoes.

LOL well wha-d'ya know... smc made a funny. Well played.

[smc]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

On the contrary I said I would go so far as split this thread or devote my time in this one to discuss your issue. In response you waved the white flag. I am still open to discuss it if you'd like. It can only get better lol.

My "issue" doesn't need to be split off from this thread; you simply need to address the substantive points, instead of continuing to post transparent bullshit like the above designed to make it look like I'm the one who is dodging.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

The issue we're now discussing is why TracyCoxx wanted to post a Hitler spoof video where it makes it look like Hitler is angry about discovering that Obama ate his dog Fluffy. Yes smc, I will do that for you. Would you prefer to split this thread into this new discussion or should we just continue along in here to discuss this issue?

Originally Posted by smc

My "issue" doesn't need to be split off from this thread

Ok, attention everyone following this thread. This thread that I started was intended to be a place to discuss the GOP candidates. I posted a spoof video that had nothing to do with GOP candidates. I know that was poor form. Neither Hitler, Obama or Obama's dog eating past have anything to do with the GOP, but I thought well it's just one quick post. I figured people would look at it, laugh, or not, and go on with their lives. Yeah I know, I keep forgetting about smc. So the posted video and the following posts are now one tenth of a 6 page thread on GOP candidates. smc sees nothing wrong with continuing with his hitler spoof video interrogations in this same thread so fine. There's only one GOP candidate now anyway. At least only Romney has more than a snowball's chance in hell. So fine, might as well.

Why did I post a Hitler spoof video where it looks like Hitler is angry about discovering that Obama ate his dog Fluffy?

BECAUSE I THOUGHT IT WAS FUNNY! And as I mentioned before, I figured I'd just post it and people would look at it, laugh, or not, and go on with their lives. And you know what? Other people thought it was funny too. Now you know. Shall we make it one fifth now?

[smc]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

Ok, attention everyone following this thread. This thread that I started was intended to be a place to discuss the GOP candidates. I posted a spoof video that had nothing to do with GOP candidates. I know that was poor form. Neither Hitler, Obama or Obama's dog eating past have anything to do with the GOP, but I thought well it's just one quick post. I figured people would look at it, laugh, or not, and go on with their lives. Yeah I know, I keep forgetting about smc. So the posted video and the following posts are now one tenth of a 6 page thread on GOP candidates. smc sees nothing wrong with continuing with his hitler spoof video interrogations in this same thread so fine. There's only one GOP candidate now anyway. At least only Romney has more than a snowball's chance in hell. So fine, might as well.

Why did I post a Hitler spoof video where it looks like Hitler is angry about discovering that Obama ate his dog Fluffy?

BECAUSE I THOUGHT IT WAS FUNNY! And as I mentioned before, I figured I'd just post it and people would look at it, laugh, or not, and go on with their lives. And you know what? Other people thought it was funny too. Now you know. Shall we make it one fifth now?

If I believed humans had souls, I'd wonder what happened to yours. But I don't.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by smc

If I believed humans had souls, I'd wonder what happened to yours. But I don't.

What can I say, some moderators bring the best out of people. Don't stop now. We have arrived here at your insistence. I've tried ignoring you in the past, so now I'm indulging you. People are wondering why one tenth of this thread is filled with this nonsense. Show them what is so important about your issues that make turning one insignificant post into a 30 post train wreck. We are dying to know!

[smc]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

What can I say, some moderators bring the best out of people. Don't stop now. We have arrived here at your insistence. I've tried ignoring you in the past, so now I'm indulging you. People are wondering why one tenth of this thread is filled with this nonsense. Show them what is so important about your issues that make turning one insignificant post into a 30 post train wreck. We are dying to know!

Attention all readers of this thread: Here's what has actually transpired. All you have to do is read the record -- that is, the existing posts -- to see what TracyCoxx has done.

First, TracyCoxx posted the link to the video. I wrote:

In an electoral environment where people have claimed a legitimate place in the political arena while carrying signs of Obama made to look like Adolph Hitler, and even comparing him to Hitler, this kind of thing ... even in jest ... is absolutely disgusting and without merit. ...

I ask you, Tracy Coxx, do you repudiate all of your ideological cothinkers on so many issues who have made such comparisons?

I never accused TracyCoxx of making the comparison.

TracyCoxx posted no response to my direct question. Instead, TracyCoxx posted:

The joke obviously wasn't meant for you then.

When I asked the question again, tslust asked me if I similarly repudiated all liberals who compared Bush to Hitler? I did, unequivocally. In response, tslust posted: "Thanks enough said."

Then TracyCoxx twisted the thread into being about me accusing TracyCoxx of making the comparison, which I never did. All I did was raise a question about the comparison in the context of the GOP -- a question legitimate to the thread.

The record is there for all to see.

Oh, by the way, TracyCoxx has never answered the question I originally posed.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by smc

First, TracyCoxx posted the link to the video. I wrote:

In an electoral environment where people have claimed a legitimate place in the political arena while carrying signs of Obama made to look like Adolph Hitler, and even comparing him to Hitler, this kind of thing ... even in jest ... is absolutely disgusting and without merit. ...

I ask you, Tracy Coxx, do you repudiate all of your ideological cothinkers on so many issues who have made such comparisons?

I never accused TracyCoxx of making the comparison.

If you're not accusing me of making the comparison, then what does the obama/hitler comparison have to do with anything? It's not me or something I said, and it's not the video -there's no obama/hitler comparison at all in the video. If you can show how the random fact that some people somewhere carry signs of Obama made to look like Adolf Hitler has anything to do with a Hitler spoof video made to look like Obama ate Hitler's dog then I'll answer your question. Otherwise you're trying to derail the discussion again. And no, I'm not dodging. I'm not going to answer every random inflammatory, extraneous, off-topic remark you make. The Obama/Hitler comparison has nothing to do with the video. You're just flinging crap to see what sticks.

[smc]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

If you're not accusing me of making the comparison, then what does the obama/hitler comparison have to do with anything? It's not me or something I said, and it's not the video -there's no obama/hitler comparison at all in the video. If you can show how the random fact that some people somewhere carry signs of Obama made to look like Adolf Hitler has anything to do with a Hitler spoof video made to look like Obama ate Hitler's dog then I'll answer your question. Otherwise you're trying to derail the discussion again. And no, I'm not dodging. I'm not going to answer every random inflammatory, extraneous, off-topic remark you make. The Obama/Hitler comparison has nothing to do with the video. You're just flinging crap to see what sticks.

This is a thread about GOP candidates, every one of whom during the primary season kowtowed to the Tea Party. At Tea Party rallies, these comparisons have been made through signs carried. No candidate has disavowed this. It is a legitimate discussion for the thread.

Your continued refusal to answer the question and your continued effort to suggest that it has been posted illegitimately or that it is "random" or "extraneous" or whatever speaks volumes. Your accusation that I am "just flinging crap to see what sticks" is not only untrue, but it is an insult to everyone who reads this thread, because it suggests that they are stupid and even, perhaps, functionally illiterate.

You should take a lesson from tslust, who more often than not agrees with your political positions. tslust didn't see the point as extraneous, but instead turned the question back at me. We both thus had an opportunity to repudiate these comparisons.

The only defense you seem to have left, as stated in this latest post, is that what you posted is extraneous itself, and has nothing to do with anything relevant to the thread. No one believes that. You're just saying that because you're too much of a coward to own up to the facts as stated in my earlier post and your own responsibility in derailing this thread, which you cynically sought to assign to me.

[GRH]

I've pretty much tuned out this entire Hitler back-and-forth. But for what it's worth, Tracy, you DO have a pretty well established history of dodging the meat and potatoes of a post and trying to change the topic. Presumably this is because you don't have a substantive argument to back up your beliefs.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by smc

This is a thread about GOP candidates, every one of whom during the primary season kowtowed to the Tea Party. At Tea Party rallies, these comparisons have been made through signs carried. No candidate has disavowed this. It is a legitimate discussion for the thread.

Impressive associative reasoning, no doubt invented right before you wrote the above post, but you made the link. A tenuous one, but a link, so I'll indulge you some more.

So are you saying you're asking my thoughts about the Obama/Hitler comparison because this is a GOP candidates thread, and the Hitler video reminded you that some supporters of the tea party, a political movement that the GOP candidates gave varying degrees of lip service to, have made Obama/Hitler comparisons? And not because the video itself compares Obama to Hitler in any way?

Originally Posted by GRH

I've pretty much tuned out this entire Hitler back-and-forth. But for what it's worth, Tracy, you DO have a pretty well established history of dodging the meat and potatoes of a post and trying to change the topic. Presumably this is because you don't have a substantive argument to back up your beliefs.

In other words, you haven't read this post, but you're going to say because you've seen me dodge smc in the past I have no point now. Yes, I've dodged him in the past when he's used administrative measures to settle an argument. He's doing better now so I'm indulging his attempts to derail the topic. I don't know if you've noticed, but I've always done my best to answer your posts to me. I know smc has a habit of answering for you, as he does for other people, so maybe you think me avoiding him and his attempts to derail topics equates to me avoiding answering you. But as far as I know, I have always responded to you. I don't expect you to notice every nuance between smc and me, because frankly, most if it is pretty juvenile, so I cut you slack for your perception of me, and your rude posts to me and answer calmly and to the best of my ability because you seem like an intelligent person that I'd like to have a conversation with if you know who wouldn't keep getting in the middle of it.

prediction: smc will now accuse me of wanting private conversations. I am not though. It would just be nice to have a conversation with other people on this forum without being interrupted by the same person every single time.

[smc]

^^^ NOTICE ABOVE that TracyCoxx continues to post justifications for what can now only be construed as troll-like behavior (as generally defined with respect to Internet forums) rather than address the questions posed to him about politics in a political thread. NOTICE ABOVE how TracyCoxx tries to denigrate GRH with his inferences and charges (and especially by trying to tie her to me in a scurrilous way). NOTICE ABOVE that TracyCoxx once again seems to reserve some right to post one-to-one conversations on this Forum, in public threads, and by inference wants anyone who TracyCoxx doesn't agree with to be denied the right to participate in those public conversations. And finally, NOTICE ABOVE that TracyCoxx is still dodging the substantive political issue raised in this discussion that TracyCoxx provoked.

[TracyCoxx]

uh oh... smc is using font size 3 now. This must be serious! I'd hate to get him up to font size 4

Originally Posted by smc

NOTICE ABOVE how TracyCoxx tries to denigrate GRH with his inferences and charges (and especially by trying to tie her to me in a scurrilous way).

Careful GRH, you wouldn't want to read my response to you without being properly framed by smc. smc, you are denigrating GRH and everyone else here you answer for by presuming they cannot think for themselves.

And did I nail it or what?

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

prediction: smc will now accuse me of wanting private conversations. I am not though. It would just be nice to have a conversation with other people on this forum without being interrupted by the same person every single time.

more font size 3 stuff...

Originally Posted by smc

NOTICE ABOVE that TracyCoxx once again seems to reserve some right to post one-to-one conversations on this Forum, in public threads, and by inference wants anyone who TracyCoxx doesn't agree with to be denied the right to participate in those public conversations.

LOL it shouldn't amuse me so much to predict the oh so predictable. But seriously... I'm not saying conversations have to be private at all, but after 4-5 years on here I just wonder what it's like to talk to someone without being interrupted by the moderator. Just wondering... Can I wonder?

Originally Posted by smc

And finally, NOTICE ABOVE that TracyCoxx is still dodging the substantive political issue raised in this discussion that TracyCoxx provoked.

No, now hold on. I'm going to have to get you on that one. You said:

Originally Posted by smc

This is a thread about GOP candidates, every one of whom during the primary season kowtowed to the Tea Party. At Tea Party rallies, these comparisons have been made through signs carried. No candidate has disavowed this. It is a legitimate discussion for the thread.

So in your round-about reasoning this is a legitimate discussion for the thread. Fine, you go and discuss it. I still don't see how this is a discussion I provoked.

[smc]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

Careful GRH, you wouldn't want to read my response to you without being properly framed by smc. smc, you are denigrating GRH and everyone else here you answer for by presuming they cannot think for themselves.

Dodge and dissemble. Your name must be Tracy D. Coxx.

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

And did I nail it or what?

Sure, it looks like you did since you use the time-honored trick of doing something, calling it something else, and then making a big issue of it as the "something else" every time you're called on doing the "something" it really is.

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

LOL it shouldn't amuse me so much to predict the oh so predictable. But seriously... I'm not saying conversations have to be private at all, but after 4-5 years on here I just wonder what it's like to talk to someone without being interrupted by the moderator. Just wondering... Can I wonder?

More dodge and dissemble. You just don't want to have to answer when you can't ... just as GRH wrote in her response to you above.

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

So in your round-about reasoning this is a legitimate discussion for the thread. Fine, you go and discuss it. I still don't see how this is a discussion I provoked.

Of course you "don't see" because you choose not to see, and because doing so requires that you answer the simple question I posed, and that tslust saw as a simple question, and that the two of us were able to answer to each other quite easily. I've lost track of how many times you've dodged the question now.

By the way, where's your post excoriating tslust for intervening in the discussion?

[smc]

^ Come to think of it, I think we can conclude that because Tracy Coxx will not answer the question about Hitler, the Tea Party, and GOP candidates, we have to assume that Tracy Coxx is unwilling to repudiate the comparisons that others draw. I can think of no other reason not to answer the question. No one put on the spot would be likely to say that she or he legitimizes these comparisons (except maybe someone at a Tea Party rally or on Fox "News"), and only Tracy Coxx seems to think the question is illegitimate (in Tracy Coxx's case, though, we don't really know if that's an honest opinion or just an excuse for not having to answer).

Process of elimination can sometimes be a powerful thing in finding the truth.