posted on May 1, 2002 09:46:56 PM new
Yellowstone: any Republican that wants to can come on here and say their piece as well. That you have noticed that I often bring up the political slant into seemingly unrelated topics is an observation not uniquely yours. And if you don't like it, there's an IGNORE feature at your disposal. Please feel free to use it. In the meantime, I'll feel free to exercise my First Amendment Right to Free Speech, regardless of how you might feel about it. And for the record, I don't just bash BUSH -- I bash all sides when it is appropriate. If you don't like Bush Bashing itself, then stick another President into that office.
posted on May 2, 2002 08:09:55 AM new
Borillar, I didn't want to be the one to say that I am not the only one that has noticed this about you. I was hoping that someone else would jump in and say it for me, but I never thought in my wildest dreams that, that person would be you.
By the way where's your buddy, you know who I am talking about. Yours and his posts usually follow each others closely. It's as if you and him are one in the same person.
By doing what you do, interjecting your political slant into normal conversations, those conversations tend to turn to crap.
I will say this though, you are entertaining. Even though your diatribe is getting a little old.
posted on May 2, 2002 08:21:45 AM new
Yellowstone, one of Borillar's favorite pet peeves is the Republican agenda. One of your pet peeves appears to be Borillar's rants about said agenda. Seems to fit the topic to me.
posted on May 2, 2002 08:23:45 AM new
I'm with Borillar on illegally-employed getting past "Justice" with a wink. What's the use of Capitalism without gains? Unfortunately, profit isn't enough. A nice profit isn't enough. Infinite returns aren't enough. Gravid's "megabucks" aren't enough. It's an illness...
posted on May 2, 2002 09:58:18 AM new
Well, yellowstone, you have to understand that not everyone is hired to entertain you -- like on television. This is not a television station. This is a public messageboard and I'm a real-world personality and I say what I like to say, maybe not like what you want to hear. This is a distinction that you are going to have to make for yourself if you want to enjoy this or any other messageboard.
Since I'm not being paid to entertain you, I don't have to be politically correct; nor wholesome or in good taste. Nor do I have to do or say what is going to put a smile on your face. That I am not affected by either Neilson ratings nor advertisers, I do not have to conform to any protocol; except for the Community Guidelines of AuctionWatch.
As far as how others feel about what I have had to say in the past, in the present, and most likely in the future, I couldn't care less. Use the IGNORE feature -- I endorse it. For the rest, those who hate my comments and run away screaming have other psychological problems related to expectations of being continuously entertained.
For the record also, I have always encouraged everyone to NOT chime in and to help me out of jambs. Although, in this thread, it isn't a jamb and I do appreciate others chiming in with their astute observations. But know this, yellowstone: these are the first folks to correct me when I make mistakes as well!
I encourage others to not support me because I tend to attract lighting and I enjoy it. I do not enjoy others getting hurt coming to my defense. I wouldn't say what I do without the thought (and hope) that someone else will get angry and object. The hopeful part is that they may contribute intelligently instead of just exerting steam. Under no circumstances do I want to be "popular" or make lots and lots of Internet friends! Some people like what I have to say, others do not and it's a free country - for a while longer, at any rate.
As far as my "buddy" is concerned, you must be referring to KRS. KRS happens to have some similar thoughts about our political situation, but that does not make us buddies by any measure. KRS can take care of himself when attacked (which he wants) and I can take care of myself when attacked (which I also want). We both want INTELLIGENT attacks, not lurkers dropping in only to make some rude noises and leaving bad smells and then disappearing. That's as far as a collaborative effort goes between KRS and I, which is none at all. And if I post in his threads (rarely) or he posts in mine (rarely), then what is that to anyone?
Or, maybe you meant saabsister, NYCY, Helen, or a host of regulars who like to put in their two cents when the topic gets heated and/or interesting enough? You tell me.
But truly, I've said it before: if every single poster on this messageboard hated my guts and couldn't stand a word that I say, I'd still do as I am doing and say what I am saying. I am not responsible for people who drop into my threads or posts, read them, then complain about the content. That any person who claims to avoid the RT because of me or that they ran away due to one or more of my posts or threads is a liar; or has the simple mind of a child. That's why they provide the IGNORE feature.
posted on May 2, 2002 10:23:37 AM new
Well, at least this is much more civilized than the bar fight I had upstairs. (Oh yeah, Helen, I told this wacko that my kid would take her two on too! I mean who of sound mind could take such a thing seriously?) Anyway, my rant was "change the channel! If you don't like what's on this one go to another thread. Change the channel, ferchrissake even my kid gets that!" To drive home the idea I even created a new thread for them so I could continue the conversation I was trying to have in thread one. "Bash NYCYN here" or some such. But noooooooo.
posted on May 2, 2002 11:03:54 AM new
Borillar, You sure seem to be grasping at straws and reading too much into my posts or should I say trying to read between the lines.
I called it as I saw it. You made a comment that I felt was WRONG or in your words a mistake and I corrected you on it, plain and simple. You seem to be taking this whole thing just a little too seriously.
You may not be paid to entertain me but nevertheless you are entertaining.
I do not feel like I am in a jamb. I have noticed in other threads your feeble attempts at baiting or should I say trolling with your political slants as have others that post here. I just think that your shtick is getting old.
Am I criticizing you, yes I guess I am, but then you DO invite it don't you? And then you cry foul.
posted on May 2, 2002 11:35:43 AM new
No, yellowstone, I am bored. B-O-R-E-D. That's why the verbose response. Of course, while I may have pointed it at you, it actually is for anyone else who reads it as well.
I understood your kindly effort to let me know that I am being obnoxious; if not downright offensive with my constant old harping about Bush. My reply is simple: if you don't like it, either change the current President to someone new or hit the IGNORE feature or find a third alternative. That Clinton Bashing got old never seemed to stop Republicans and conservatives from gumming up every conversation, every topic no mater how unrelated on every messageboard on the Internet for years and years. That Bush has LOADS more bad stuff to talk about than Clinton-haters ever managed to conjure up means that I will NOT stop bashing him until he is completely out of office and the Corporate Fascists have been overthrown.
>I do not feel like I am in a jamb
Great! Because I was talking about me being in jambs, not you or others. I said that I get myself in all on my own and I expect to get myself out by myself: if I can't do that, I may as well quit.
> I have noticed in other threads your feeble attempts at baiting or should I say trolling with your political slants
Feeble? Say, Mild, not feeble! Yellowstone, I have in the past for over a decade now, on many a messageboard, engaged Republicans, Fundies, and conservatives of every stripe and caliber into meaningful and not so meaningful discussions. I find that 99.99% of them can hardly spell their own name or remember what they had for breakfast, let alone carry their own weight in real political and/or religious discussions. That Bush and the GOP have done so many nasty and dreadful things means that Republicans and Conservatives can't point to one single good thing that they can be proud of makes it further unlikely that meaningful discussions will take place. Many have tried in here in the RT and many have died away to go elsewhere where they can live their fantasy lives in peace means that few lurkers are brave enough. Yes, my attempts to lure them in do seem senile, but that is how you have to trap Republicans and conservatives if you want to catch them in debate. If I took your advice, I assure you, none would engage me in meaningful debate if it was offered that way - it's been tried time after time. Can you see where I am at now?
posted on May 2, 2002 12:03:56 PM new
Allright then Borillar, I'll say this for you (and I mean it as a compliment) at least you know what you are and what you do and you readily admit it. I think thats more than most folks would be willing to do or say about themselves here on this board.
I just want to say something about the ignore feature. In my opinion it is a cowards way out.
Why don't we just agree to disagree and leave it at that ok?
posted on May 2, 2002 12:12:06 PM new
Women who pee on toilet seats and women who pee on toilet seats and don't bother to wipe up their piss. This is a nearly constant occurrence, not occassional. Women: Do you really think you are going to catch something if you sit on the seat? In the history of medical journals is there a "toilet seat transmittal" article?
Borillar: Republicans are maniacs. Creeps. Psychos even. But with those exceptions, do you believe there is much of a two-party system in this country anymore. I wonder.
posted on May 2, 2002 12:32:34 PM new "To drive home the idea I even created a new thread for them so I could continue the conversation I was trying to have in thread one. "Bash NYCYN here" or some such. But noooooooo.
Good one, Nycyn!!!
If I started one it would problably go on forever.LoL..."Bash Helen, aka hjw here" HaHaHa. What a bunch of fools.
posted on May 2, 2002 12:44:11 PM new
Thank you for the compliments Helen, but I'd really like to know if you pee in the US as if you were peeing in some of those place in Paris that still have the more primitive plumbing?
posted on May 2, 2002 01:12:09 PM new
yellowstone, I'll certainly agree to disagree when and where apllicable. I'm all for calm discussions of a rational nature when you and I must disagree on something. I think that if you read my commentaries (and rants) long enough, you'll see that I'm just trying to stir up conversation and that there really is little for us to disagree upon.
But yellowstone, I really have to draw the line at Republican voters. I don't know what to make of them because I can't really understand their thinking. They remind me of the policeman who finds this guy lying on the ground, bleeding. Obviously, the guy was mugged. When asked who did it, the guy tells the policeman that he PAID the guy to beat him to a bloody pulp!
They vote for representatives who clearly do not represent them; their representatives have often in the media shown such distain for their voters that their voters pretend not to hear it; that their elected leaders look down their noses at them and throw them the occasional bone that they know will get rejected during processing describes to me a certain mind-set among Republican voters. To be sure, there are old-time Republican voters who haven't realized that their party was taken over and overthrown in the early 1990's and they still are rooting for their party which clearly no longer has the same platform that it used to. Those Republican Voters aside, I can't imagine anyone wanting their representatives to look down their noses at them! Isn't that some sort of mental illness on their parts? So all I do is try to chastise them for being so silly and naieve: I want them to vote, but I would like to see them vote for someone who WILL represent them and their needs instead of voting for those who are clearly against them.
posted on May 2, 2002 01:19:54 PM new"do you believe there is much of a two-party system in this country"
No. There is not.
You see, there was a time when leaders of the Democratic Party were willing to picket with striking workers, willing to risk getting injured when the police came to bash heads in. Those Democrats were hardliners who EARNED the people's trust because they were willing to sacrifice themselves to do what needed to be done.
These days, Democratic politicians are paid off. Simple as that. Most Democratic Politicans these days walk the picket line for just enough of a distance to get media coverage and get the hell out of there before the bashing starts. In California, I recall some Democratic politicians marching and picketing with their constituants, and getting bloody once in a while and that's recently, the past few years. But most of them are more worried about being reelected and how rich they can get in office rather than sticking up for the little guy and getting their hands dirty with the rest of humanity that they are supposed to be representing. That's why the DNC is loosing so many voters and the rest stay at home.
I don't have to mention the Republican party and who THEY represent: just look at all of the proposals and legislation and whatnot that comes from them and their regeime.
No, no one is left to represent the people of this nation.
posted on May 2, 2002 01:31:34 PM new
I agree with that Borillar. We are being screwed by the Republicans and forgotten by the Democrats. This is a country without a leader anywhere.
posted on May 2, 2002 01:45:21 PM new
Can we take the political stuff to another thread? I should have asked for non-political/religious pet peeves as this was intended to be a "lighter" thread. Sometimes people who would like to post get turned-off by such discussions and choose not to post thinking that everything will be related to politics/religion etc. when there are more than enough such threads.
posted on May 5, 2002 05:00:36 AM new
Back to pet peeves. 1. The fact that my mother who worked her butt off for 45 years paid over $600 last month for prescriptions and this is after a discount from the ins. company she pays $100 a month to. She's 71 and it really irks me that other people who haven't worked an honest day in their lives get theirs for free. 2. People who let their dogs ride unrestrained in the back of a pickup. If your dog was really your best friend he'd be up front with you. 3. People who get a dog and then chain them up or put them in a kennel and never pay attention to them. (BTW, I'm not referring to people who only contain their dogs while at work). 4. People who don't say thank you. It's only 2 words and it's just common courtesy.
I hear ya on the prescriptions. My parents have just reached that age where they no longer have insurance coverage for their Rx. As soon as that stopped, my Dad ended up in the hospital several times needing many Rx. Add to that the Rx my Mom needed for various ailments.
Pet peeve: When I smile a greeting at a stranger, and they stare me down.
lurking is not an option
posted on May 5, 2002 08:04:56 AM new... you have to understand that not everyone is hired to entertain you.
And you have to understand that trying to interject your own lunatic-fringe political opinions into EVERY unrelated thread isn't free speech, it's plain rudeness. You've had your say. How about letting others have theirs?
posted on May 5, 2002 09:10:02 AM new
The scope of the topic, "pet peeves", is boundless, ranging from trivial to profound. When this topic was posted there were no instructions to post only silly pet peeves.
My pet peeve is looking at the TV and seeing the face of George Bush whose image epitomizes the political evil that Borillar so effectively describes.
posted on May 5, 2002 10:10:13 AM new
Helen- All were kindly asked to take the political stuff elsewhere. Borillar and others obliged- but I guess anything non-political is "silly" to you and I guess you have a compulsion regarding Bush to the extent that you feel it necessary to inject the political chat anywhere. Although I share your anti-Bush sentiments, I believe they are appropriate for some threads and not others. It is getting tired, Helen.
Another pet peeve that I have are posters who start threads and try to maintain some kind of proprietorial control over the content and the flow that threads have a tendency to make.
Ignore me, stusi. But I will say whatever I want to say as long as it conforms to the community guidelines. I have never seen anyone chastised for straying off topic or for presenting a unique viewpoint.
posted on May 5, 2002 11:53:22 AM new
No, stusi, it's a matter of twinsoft being rude enough to ignore your request to take it elsewhere. I notice that you slam Helen for it, but not twinsoft who started it? Sounds like bias to me!
