|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 18, 2006 8:02 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: |
Don't forget Bonar Law and John A. McDonald.
|
Yeah, I was worried that if I used a British-born Canadian PM from that era, we'd get bogged down in some discussion about Canada allegedly being part of the UK at that time. I know that's BS, but I didn't feel like having to go through the whole history of it with someone. ("But how can you be an independent country if your constitution was in London blah blah blah?")
re: Bonar Law, I couldn't recall the name of the PM born in Canada. Thanks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 18, 2006 12:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm SO glad we're dealing with whether or not the Bush administration has acted within or without the law...
Criminy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 18, 2006 12:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| your maturity level is stunning. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 18, 2006 9:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yes, I'm sure the view from the sandbox is a bit ovewhelming.
Using sarcasm to point out a thread has gone off-topic is really only something children would do. And of course, claiming someone is being childish with a childish statement is, what was that word...? Hy... hippo... hippie.. hyoce.... hypotenu.... damn... all those greek words confuse me so... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 18, 2006 11:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BLT Lawyer wrote: |
| ...what was that word...? Hy... hippo... hippie.. hyoce.... hypotenu.... damn... all those greek words confuse me so... |
Not surprising, BLT. Not surprising at all for a guy who uses the "[sic]" device without even knowing how, when, and why it is used...
And why did you use it here, where you are not even quoting anyone's document or written statement.? And, as if that were not enough, there are no apparent (as far as I can see) spelling errors? And, moreoever, if you were "transcribing" something you were hearing, on television or the radio or whatever else it may have been, how did you pick up the mispelled words? Can people even spell words incorrectly when they talk (Dan Quayle notwithstanding)...?
| BLT Lawyer wrote: |
| That was a special case. I felt that if we could prevent Bush from winning we could avoid the erosion of the our rights and our international standing that has occurred as a result of his winning. [sic] |
So I must say, BLT, your lawyering skills are not as sharp as they ought to be, given your profession and your cantankerous nature. But, as a good litigator, you do bring up "the forum rules" for us to consider. And as you know, I am not as well versed in the law as you are. But it would seem to me rational, if not necessarily a matter of strict legal propriety, that a post should first be intelligible if one is to hold others accountable for strictly responding to it on its own merits.
Your OP here seems to fail that test miserably.
So I reiterate my earlier objection, call for clarification, and implied proposal for summary dismissal from the jury (if any care to respond): WTFAYTA in the OP? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 20, 2006 10:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| BLT Lawyer wrote: |
| ...what was that word...? Hy... hippo... hippie.. hyoce.... hypotenu.... damn... all those greek words confuse me so... |
Not surprising, BLT. Not surprising at all for a guy who uses the "[sic]" device without even knowing how, when, and why it is used...
And why did you use it here, where you are not even quoting anyone's document or written statement.? And, as if that were not enough, there are no apparent (as far as I can see) spelling errors? And, moreoever, if you were "transcribing" something you were hearing, on television or the radio or whatever else it may have been, how did you pick up the mispelled words? Can people even spell words incorrectly when they talk (Dan Quayle notwithstanding)...?
| BLT Lawyer wrote: |
| That was a special case. I felt that if we could prevent Bush from winning we could avoid the erosion of the our rights and our international standing that has occurred as a result of his winning. [sic] |
So I must say, BLT, your lawyering skills are not as sharp as they ought to be, given your profession and your cantankerous nature. But, as a good litigator, you do bring up "the forum rules" for us to consider. And as you know, I am not as well versed in the law as you are. But it would seem to me rational, if not necessarily a matter of strict legal propriety, that a post should first be intelligible if one is to hold others accountable for strictly responding to it on its own merits.
Your OP here seems to fail that test miserably.
So I reiterate my earlier objection, call for clarification, and implied proposal for summary dismissal from the jury (if any care to respond): WTFAYTA in the OP? |
By entering threads and/or following my posts with nothing but ad hominems and insults without addressing the issues even tangentially, you have rendered yourself irrelevant. And boring. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Yo!Chingo
Joined: 06 Dec 2005
Location: Seoul Korea
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 20, 2006 10:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| On the other hand wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Now, American nationalism is based on the notion that its social structure is superior to others and that American blood is superior (can you be president if you weren't born in the US?). |
I don't think the "born on the soil" rule for presidents is related to blood nationalism, or else they would have regulated it according to ancestry, not place of birth. I seem to remember reading that the rule had something to do with fears that foreign powers could take over the American political system by swamping it with unassimilated immigrants. But I can't recall for sure.
In any event, I agree that the rule makes no sense whatsoever at this point in history. |
Hell if that was the reason then it has failed miserably in the last 20 years!!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Privateer
Joined: 31 Aug 2005
Location: Easy Street.
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 21, 2006 12:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
If anyone reminds me of Hitler these days it isn't Bush, and it wasn't Saddam either, it's Ahmadinejad. Short, dishonest, disingenuous, prone to talking in grandiose abstractions, aggressive and controversial, and capable of being charming and charismatic.
He's also in charge of a real nation that we have to take seriously, unlike Iraq; although it still doesn't have the potential force of a powerhouse like Germany and this isn't 1941 so they've got no more chance against the US military than anyone else in the world.
But Ahmadinejad just looks the part of the little demagogue dictator. And Bush doesn't. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ddeubel
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 21, 2006 4:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
I think they both have a bit of the "stupidly manipulative" in them.....
Wide ideological agendas and basic extreme and simple views of life/history.
I would suggest Ahmandinejad is more apt to dialogue --but that may only be because his Air Force 1 isn't quite so grand. Both idiots and we must shake our heads how nations raise up these men, heil, golly gee or otherwise...
DD |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 21, 2006 8:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| BLT Lawyer wrote: |
| By entering threads and/or following my posts with nothing but ad hominems and insults without addressing the issues even tangentially, you have rendered yourself irrelevant. And boring. |
Let's clarify the issue you raise, shall we?
The issue is this: Is W. Bush "a Hilter"?
I can answer that right now, and I am fairly certain that it will be an answer that few here (except for you) will disagree with.
No, W. Bush is not a National-Socialist. He is a Republican. Moreover, his name is "George W. Bush" and not "Adolf Hitler."
And for all of his unpopularity and his problematic foreign policies in the Middle East (and elsewhere), he is no fascist dictator. He has not taken control of the legislature and the courts (or dissolved them), he has not outlawed or persecuted political opponents, he has not adopted a policy of subjecting or "coordinating" (that was the Nazi word, by the way) various institutions and groups within the United States (which would include placing personal representatives in control of each organ of the press), he has not required members of the armed forces to delcare personal oaths of allegience to him as the supreme leader (in case you did not know this, members of the armed forces swear allegience to the United States Constitution when they enlist or are commissioned), and he has given no indications at all that he plans on ignoring the next presidential elections so that he can seize power and remain in the Oval Office indefinitely.
I think if you were going to allege that W. Bush is "acting like a Nazi" or is "a Hitler," you would probably need to establish several, if not all, of the above criteria, as that is what makes a Nazi "a Nazi," and that, more specifically, that is what made Hitler "a Hitler."
You suffer an extreme form of anti-W. Bush hysteria, see only red when his name is mentioned, regardless of context, and, consequently, you have nothing to contribute to any discussion at all that treats him, his presidency, or even the United States in general except to launch into diatribe after diatribe, foaming at the mouth at times. And that, my howler-monkey friend, is what is boring. [sic] 
I strongly suggest that one of the things that is undermining you and the rest of the far, far left is their total unwillingness to deal with W. Bush in the context of his own times. Disagree with him. Fine. But have you nothing else in your vast arsenal but the "Nazi" allegation? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 21, 2006 11:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| BLT Lawyer wrote: |
| By entering threads and/or following my posts with nothing but ad hominems and insults without addressing the issues even tangentially, you have rendered yourself irrelevant. And boring. |
Let's clarify the issue you raise, shall we?
The issue is this: Is W. Bush "a Hilter"? |
Your belief that that is THE issue is due to the fact that you are a complete and utter idiot AND that your only purpose in entering this thread was to say some stupiftingly stupid and childish thing to/about me.
See PRIVATEER and DDEUBEL's (That latter does pain me a bit, but what ya gonna do?) comments for references as to what might be appropriate and/or useful posts on this thread. Dumbass. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 21, 2006 7:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BLT No-Brainer wrote: |
| Your belief that that is THE issue is due to the fact that you are a complete and utter idiot... |
Now, now, BLT.
You placed this grammatically-incorrect allegation in your thread's title...
| BLT No-Brainer wrote: |
| Bush acts like Nazi. |
Then you rambled incoherently on the war on terror, our endangered freedoms, something on the 2004 and 2006 elections, and how we must fight terrorism, but still, you objected, it was wrong to lump all so-called terrorists (that is the point of the quotation marks) together.
You also posed this question...
| BLT No-Brainer wrote: |
| But what about the comparison with Nazi Germany? |
And you used the "[sic]" device twice but not in connection with any person's written remarks that may or may not have contained any spelling errors. Indeed, it is impossible to decipher what you meant when you used "[sic]."
But, still, there is more...
On page two, you express your unhappiness that no one is treating "the issue" you allegedly raised, according to yourself, anyway, on "whether W. Bush acted within the law."
But you failed to cite a specific question. Did W. Bush act illegally in what? In acting as a Nazi, in the comparison you wish to raise about Nazi Germany, in the 2004 or 2006 elections...what exactly is your question?
I answered, actually in good faith, your question about Nazi Germany. You have no dismissed that as not being the real issue.
What then is your issue? And is there a method to your madness?
So, again, I ask: WTFAYTA in the OP?
Do you even know or are you just foaming at the mouth and screaming at your computer screen while drunk (again)...? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 21, 2006 7:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| EFLtrainer wrote: |
| Gopher wrote: |
| BLT Lawyer wrote: |
| By entering threads and/or following my posts with nothing but ad hominems and insults without addressing the issues even tangentially, you have rendered yourself irrelevant. And boring. |
Let's clarify the issue you raise, shall we?
The issue is this: Is W. Bush "a Hilter"? |
Your belief that that is THE issue is due to the fact that you are a complete and utter idiot AND that your only purpose in entering this thread was to say some stupiftingly stupid and childish thing to/about me.
See PRIVATEER and DDEUBEL's (That latter does pain me a bit, but what ya gonna do?) comments for references as to what might be appropriate and/or useful posts on this thread. Dumbass. |
Since the TITLE of this thread is comparing Bush to a nazi Mr Gopher's question is on topic.
And for you to accuse ANYBODY else be it Gopher or Bush of being a "complete and utter idiot" is a excellent example of the pot calling the kettle black. This post should be made a sticky to teach irony. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leslie Cheswyck
Joined: 31 May 2003
Location: University of Western Chile
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 21, 2006 8:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I think if BLT had a look at what FDR did in WWII he might just STFU about GWB. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 21, 2006 9:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The same old peanut gallery with the same tired, sandbox-level insults. Notice none of the intelligent posters here ever join your chorus? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
