Quote:

---

Besides, in my book I already won that one - ByteMite said the pic I posted was going on her fridge, which I take as a high compliment indeed, especially coming from one so uneasily impressed!

---

Quote:

---

Byte, by "those" I meant people who get into truly nasty snarking posts which go back and forth for a while before (hopefully) getting back to the original topic. Thanx for the snark, by the way...assuming is usually not a good idea.

I never called you or anyone else a "crazy conspiracy theorist" nor did I mean that. Merely that I'm not well versed enough to discuss or debate theories on who's really behind what or other theories people hold; not that they're "crazy" for having the theories, just that I don't know enough to discuss them.

You really feel that strongly against me that this was necessary? I'm sad to hear that. It's an example of what I was referring to, and is a pretty strong rebuttal to a simple comment not meant to offend anyone. Sorry you felt otherwise.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

By the way, are you one of the "fans" in this video?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Bytemite:
Thread just broke 200. Congratulations!

Weren't you supposed to be working though? >_> Oh well, it's the week of Thanksgiving. Who actually gets anything done the week of Thanksgiving or Christmas?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Ah, so the mask comes off at last.

Lookie here Riverlove, Jaynestown, Participant, OPPYH and however many other sockpuppet imaginary friends you have to pretend your not a lone wacko no one gives a shit about because your a ball of festering hate and rage angry that the world doesn't work the way YOU want it to and throwing petty tantrums like a two year old...

When I speak of a political career and character assassination, that is exactly how I mean it, although I must admit Palin isn't much of a choice for character assassination cause the target in question is so gawdawful damned SMALL...

But politically ?
Hell yes I'd want to ruin her political career, and it's got nothin to do with her personally other than the fact that she can NOT be trusted with a position like that, something proven out by her own actions with a lesser one.

Personally, I ain't got all that much against the woman - she's free to believe what she wants, say what she wants, so long as her and her ilk leave me alone - you MIGHT recall I stood up and flamed folk who made snarky comments about letting Piper walk around with one of her uber expensive handbags, cause what right does anyone got to bitch about what she does with her life and family, her bag, her kid and if it makes the kid happy good for her...

But when she wants to climb into a political office and shove HER "values" (which, like most of the GOP, she only pretends to have in public, and does not practice herself whatsoever) down MY throat using the machinery of Government as her weapon of delivery ?

Fuck yes, imma do all in my power to tank her career, and given the horrendous social and human carnage left in the wake of every GOP administration since that monster Lincoln, do you really think I much *care* if folks responsible for so much death get lynched ?

I've already stated this, I would not encourage that, but nor would I prevent it, I am completely neutral on that matter, and personally believe that removing them from political power is quite sufficient to neutralize such wackjobs and limit the harm they can do.

And before you get the idea that there's one ounce of partisanship to that, remember that the only reason I want the GOP smashed to pieces first (and afterwords, the Dems) is because they are both the party that causes slightly more damage, and they are ripe for the picking - bar fight rules, you get one down, you put the boot in and MAKE SURE before you move on, because failing to do so after Nixon cost us, and failing to do so after Bush is gonna cost us, and frankly every time we try to "negotiate" or reach out to them all we get for it is a bitten hand and a poisonous torrent of bile and hatred much like you've expressed at me for daring to not see the world the way YOU want me to.

And by your own behavior, as evidenced here beyond any doubt, if you COULD force me to, or slay me for refusing, you WOULD - which makes you in essence not one dimes different from the fucking Taliban, or any other branch of ideological psychos who oughta be kept far, far AWAY from the reins of power in order to deprive them of the means to cause atrocities, inquisitions and holocausts - because that is the inevitable result of letting such zealots as yourself have any control over other human beings.

Nice try with your sock puppet "pretending" to leave RWED and hiding under a rock, hoping for short memories and a forgiveness we'd be idiots to offer - it sure seems a theme with you types, doesn't it ?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by pizmobeach:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

By the way, are you one of the "fans" in this video?

---

---

"Why don't you like Czars?"
"I'm an American."
The standard answer for when you don't like something but don't know why is "I'm an American." So the name of our country is now synonymous with "I don't know."

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Riverlove:
Your whole "angry-man act" is just a very sad freak show, not even up to PN's low standards.

...

You say you don't like politicians shoving their beliefs down your throat, but I don't see you railing against the Leftists who are actually doing just that to all of us. It seems like your rage at the machine has an ideological compass. So add hypocrite to the other labels I gave you.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AnthonyT:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by pizmobeach:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

By the way, are you one of the "fans" in this video?

---

---

"Why don't you like Czars?"
"I'm an American."
The standard answer for when you don't like something but don't know why is "I'm an American." So the name of our country is now synonymous with "I don't know."

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com]


Hello,

"I'm an American" is actually a valid answer to that question.

******************************************
Tsar or czar[1] (Bulgarian цар, Russian: ru-tsar.ogg царь (help·info), Ukrainian: цар, in Serbian: цар, in scientific transliteration respectively car' and car), occasionally spelled csar or Tzar in English, is a Slavic term with Bulgarian origins used to designate certain monarchs.
*******************************************

The United States was founded during a revolution to overthrow a monarch's control over one of his territories. In that historical context, it's natural for Americans not to want Kings, Queens, Tzars or Czars in control of any aspect of their government. It carries a negative connotation.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AnthonyT:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Riverlove:
Your whole "angry-man act" is just a very sad freak show, not even up to PN's low standards.

...

You say you don't like politicians shoving their beliefs down your throat, but I don't see you railing against the Leftists who are actually doing just that to all of us. It seems like your rage at the machine has an ideological compass. So add hypocrite to the other labels I gave you.

---

Hello,

I'm afraid that you seem to be wrong on these two points.

First, Frem is infinitely better and preferable to Piratenews. If you can't see that, then let me know where I can donate money to get you some new spectacles.

As for not railing against the left... I think I've noted Frem railing against almost everybody. I'm not sure how you got the idea that he cares much for one party or the other? His only efforts have been to keep either of them from getting too much power, and to prevent dangerous people from ascending to high positions.

As for his frequent suggestions of violence... He doesn't act on them because he knows it would be pointless. I do wonder sometimes (sorry Frem) what decisions I would have to make if Frem got the power to make all the changes he wanted. I might have to take up the mantle of the Scarlet Pimpernel.

Overall, though, I think he's a net positive force in the universe.

--Anthony



"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Niki2:
I may be vilified myself for not feeling like I’m part of a tribe, but so be it; I believe there are many, many people who got from Firefly considerably different feelings than what I see here, they just don’t come on forums and/or don’t come to RWED. I enjoy discussions and a good debate; that’s why I come here.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Riverlove:

Oh please, I think I'm gonna puke with that self-rightous crap Niki.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AnthonyT:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by pizmobeach:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

By the way, are you one of the "fans" in this video?

---

---

"Why don't you like Czars?"
"I'm an American."
The standard answer for when you don't like something but don't know why is "I'm an American." So the name of our country is now synonymous with "I don't know."

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Riverlove:
Nice job Anthony. I wish you could chime in to defend as well when others here attack me or any other Conservative. But you don't. You want to be liked here, I understand. So you sit back and let the Kwiko's spew whatever venom they like, whatever insults they like, whatever lies they like, whatever twisted manifestations they like, and you are just swell with it all. Congrats on defending the indefensible for your pal Frem.

---

Quote:

---

So you sit back and let the Kwiko's spew whatever venom they like, whatever insults they like, whatever lies they like, whatever twisted manifestations they like, and you are just swell with it all.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Riverlove:

Oh please, I think I'm gonna puke with that self-rightous crap Niki. You dish out the insults to Conservatives as good as any of them. You do not have one bone of fairness in you. I see how nice you can be to people who you agree with, but for anyone who does not agree, you simply dismiss them as being idiots and stupid, calling them mis-informed or naive in your attempt to demean and mock their positions, just like you do with Sarah Palin. The RWED has never in my experience had anything to do with Firefly. Shame on it if it did. Most here hate religion, hate Christianity. I guess they cheered when Shepherd Book bought the farm. After all Christianity is responsible for all the suffering int he world, right? Your beloved Obama is expanding the Govt. to new heights of personal intrusion, and due to ideology alone, you are just fine with that. Let's see a post from you one day that isn't as I've described.

---

Quote:

---

Very glad to see you've posted this. It should remove any possible doubt by anyone here that you are hopelessly insane. Your talent for writing maniacal mini-manifestos rivals that of your fellow kindred spirits Ted Kaczinski & Bin Laden.

I repeat what I posted this morning; that you are just a punk-ass pussy with a big stupid mouth. You posted that you want to kill Sarah Palin, yet you don't have the balls to go out and do it. Your whole "angry-man act" is just a very sad freak show, not even up to PN's low standards.

You say you don't like politicians shoving their beliefs down your throat, but I don't see you railing against the Leftists who are actually doing just that to all of us. It seems like your rage at the machine has an ideological compass. So add hypocrite to the other labels I gave you.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Niki2:
Oh, Mike, you DO just love to go after people, don't you? An awful lot of the snarking I see gets started by you and carries on through enough posts that my finger gets ALMOST as tired scrolling down to some "meat" a it does when passing one of PN's posts.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Niki2:
Getting away from the snarking and back to Palin, I posted this in another thread (which wasn't about Palin), so will repost it here where it belongs. To those so enamored of her and convinced she's a feasible candidate for 2012 and that her poll numbers rival that of Obama's:

Quote:

---

Sixty-six percent of Americans do not want to see Sarah Palin run for President in 2012 and 62 percent don't believe she has the ability to be effective in the office, according to a CBS News poll conducted Nov. 13-15.

Republicans don't want to see her run by 48 percent to 44 percent, independents pan the idea by 62 percent to 26 percent and you can guess what Democrats say.

The results are a little different for Republicans on the question of whether she has the ability to be an effective president with 43 percent saying "yes" and 39 percent saying "no." Independents say "no" by 58 percent to 29 percent.

Thirty-eight percent see Palin unfavorably compared to 37 percent who have a positive view of her with 37 percent saying they "have not heard enough," which is kind of a remarkable figure given her place in the spotlight since John McCain chose her as running-mate last year. An ABC News/Washington Post poll released earlier on Monday found 52 percent seeing her unfavorably and 43 percent regarding her favorably.

Republicans see her favorably by a 52 percent to 16 percent margin with 32 percent saying they haven't heard enough to express an opinion. Democrats view her unfavorably by 57 percent to 4 percent with 37 percent in the no opinion camp, and independents see her unfavorably by 36 percent to 21 percent with 40 percent expressing no opinion.

---

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/11/16/even-republicans-are-dubious-a
bout-palin-running-for-president/ Palin: new chapter, same challenges
If Sarah Palin's book tour is an opening salvo in a run for the presidency in 2012, she faces a steep uphill climb: a majority of Americans in a new Washington Post-ABC News poll say they would "definitely not vote for her."

Most - 60 percent - in the new poll say the former Alaska governor is not qualified to serve as president, and her favorability rating remains stuck well below what it was when she first emerged on the national scene at last year's Republican convention.

But she continues to have strident supporters, particularly among the Republican base, lifting her political influence. Overall, 52 percent of those polled say they see Palin in unfavorable terms, but among Republicans, her positive rating soars to 76 percent. Nearly two-thirds of all white evangelical Protestants hold favorable views of her.

If the goal is the White House, public opinion is now tilted against the idea: asked if they would consider voting for Palin in 2012, 53 percent say they would not. Just 9 percent say they would definitely vote for her; another 37 percent say they would consider it. The 53 percent who say they would definitely not vote for Palin now is nearly twice the percentage who said so of her 2008 running mate John McCain in the spring of 2006 (28 percent). Back then, 42 percent said they would definitely not support Hillary Clinton for the presidency.

Women tend to be more critical of Palin than are men, with female Democrats and independents more apt than their male counterparts to view her unfavorably, see her as not qualified for the presidency and say they would not support her candidacy.

---

Quote:

---

"Certain of Roosevelt's Cabinet secretaries were called "czars", despite having been duly confirmed by the Senate, at the point that their powers were increased by statute.[5]

Since then, a number of ad hoc temporary as well as permanent United States Executive Branch positions have been established that have been referred to in this manner. The trend began again in earnest[1] when President Richard Nixon created two offices whose heads became known as "czars" in the popular press: drug czar in 1971,[10] and especially energy czar in December 1973[11] referring to William E. Simon's appointment as the head of the Federal Energy Administration.[12] Nixon told his cabinet that Simon would have "absolute authority" in his designated areas, and compared the intended result to Albert Speer's role as the person in unquestioned charge of armaments for the Third Reich.[13] Simon found both the informal title "czar" and the Speer comparison unsettling.[13]"

---

Quote:

---

"The appointment of "czars" serving the executive branch has been a source of controversy through the years. As early as 1942, an editorial cartoon depicted "Czar of prices" Leon Henderson, "czar of production" Donald Nelson, and "czar of ships" Emory S. Land sharing a throne."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by dreamtrove:
The constitution does not specify that the candidate be either human or alive.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Hello,

Sorry to veer off again, but I learned a bit more about Czars. From wikipedia:

Quote:

---

"Certain of Roosevelt's Cabinet secretaries were called "czars", despite having been duly confirmed by the Senate, at the point that their powers were increased by statute.[5]

Since then, a number of ad hoc temporary as well as permanent United States Executive Branch positions have been established that have been referred to in this manner. The trend began again in earnest[1] when President Richard Nixon created two offices whose heads became known as "czars" in the popular press: drug czar in 1971,[10] and especially energy czar in December 1973[11] referring to William E. Simon's appointment as the head of the Federal Energy Administration.[12] Nixon told his cabinet that Simon would have "absolute authority" in his designated areas, and compared the intended result to Albert Speer's role as the person in unquestioned charge of armaments for the Third Reich.[13] Simon found both the informal title "czar" and the Speer comparison unsettling.[13]"

---

Here we see how Czars were used in the past, and how actual appointed Czars found their own title unsettling.

Now we will see how people did criticize the term even back then:

Quote:

---

"The appointment of "czars" serving the executive branch has been a source of controversy through the years. As early as 1942, an editorial cartoon depicted "Czar of prices" Leon Henderson, "czar of production" Donald Nelson, and "czar of ships" Emory S. Land sharing a throne."

---

A political cartoon of this type appears to validate my exact complaint about Czars. The title carries an unpleasant and uncomfortable connotation.

By all means, create administrative positions as needed to handle special problems of interest to the administration. I just don't like Czar. It's a matter of taste.

You might as well appoint the Despot of Transportation and the Dictator of the Environment.

On the other hand, if the point is not to defend the title of Czar, but to say that a title is not that important- you're right. The government is on a fast track to the cliff's edge. There certainly czar more important things to worry about.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AnthonyT:
http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=wish_upon_a_czar

Hello,

Another old article about Czars blasting the Bush administration with verbiage very similar to the blasting of Obama's Czars.

It's like they just change the names and a few details in their rants when they pass them from party to party.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AnthonyT:
"Splitting hairs maybe, but one seems in jest, while the other seems to vilify. I have been aware of the rights attempt to make Obama into a lesser human, at the very least a subAmerican in attempts to lower the threshold for respect for the office."

Hello,

I hear what you are saying, but I distinctly remember the "Bush is a Monkey" posters. And the "Bush holds his phone upside down" posters. And the "Bush can't tell the binoculars have the cover on them" posters. And etc. ad nauseum.

The "Not born in the USA" is a new one, I'll grant. But the rest of it is old hat, stale and worn and conveniently forgotten the minute it's used by the opposition. Then you hear the, "I am aghast! What villainy! Why didn't we get this kind of rediculousness when X was in office?!"

You did. It was just funnier back then, because you didn't like the guy.

Incidentally, I agree that the office of the President has lost a great deal of respect. I also believe that the people most responsible for that have been the people holding the office. Republican and Democrat.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AnthonyT:
It's like they just change the names and a few details in their rants when they pass them from party to party.

---