Page 7 of 9 FirstFirst ... 56789 LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 87

Thread: Borders to Shut Down

  1. #61
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Seen
    03-16-12 @ 11:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,624

    Re: Borders to Shut Down

    Quote Originally Posted by Singularity View Post
    And I chimed in by listing the bankruptcies under Bush's Administration (hence answering your Enron question), and made the observation that, since bankruptcies also occured under the former President's administration, would it not be accurate for him to label Bush as being "against saving jobs" since he didn't bail them out as well?
    Kal'Stang's point is that the government has no business butting in for one company but not the others. Nobody in government jumped in the save Enron or those other companies. the BUT BUSH arguement is the ultrapartisan arguement especially when you refuse to address the actual complaint.

    The complaint is not "why not help Borders" but "why not help Borders when you have jumped in to help others". I'm sure you can understand the difference.

    He subesequently ignored this and continued in with Obama, incorrectly attributing the bailouts as all Obama's doings, and not acknowledging that Bush was the one who implemented the bailouts - not Obama. Add to this that he is both against the bailouts yet would dislike it if Obama bailed out Borders, then there is nothing that the President could do in this situation to meet with his approval.
    I've not seen him ever defend what Bush did BUT Bush is not the president. Bush currently can not carry out hypocritical policies. Now do you want to address why it is that Obama can jump in and save one company and not the other or do you just want to continue with the arguement, BUT BUSH?

    So, given all this, now you can see why I pointed out the ultrapartisanship displayed in that original comment.[/QUOTE]

  2. #62
    Hung like Einstein
    Singularity's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    San Diego
    Last Seen
    12-12-17 @ 05:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    1,058

    Re: Borders to Shut Down

    Quote Originally Posted by 1Perry View Post
    Kal'Stang's point is that the government has no business butting in for one company but not the others. Nobody in government jumped in the save Enron or those other companies. the BUT BUSH arguement is the ultrapartisan arguement especially when you refuse to address the actual complaint.
    No. I clearly illustrated exactly why his statement was ultrapartisan. His post was clearly a slam at Obama in a thread that had nothing whatsoever to do with our current President, and his subsequent arguments offer weak - if any - justification for it. While I appreciate your attempt to help clarify, I understood his position perfectly, and besides, it doesn't really change anything.

    If he was after a more balanced approach, he would have demonstrated this by acknowledging the real culprits in both administrations, rather than finger pointing at just one.

    Quote Originally Posted by 1Perry View Post
    I've not seen him ever defend what Bush did BUT Bush is not the president. Bush currently can not carry out hypocritical policies. Now do you want to address why it is that Obama can jump in and save one company and not the other or do you just want to continue with the arguement, BUT BUSH?
    No, that's not the argument at all. His attempt to portray the current President as the one who is at fault for the bailouts while simulataneously ignoring the previous administrations involvement here displays not only ultrapartisanship, but is not correct. He clearly stated that Bush had no involvement with the bailouts (his exact words in that post were, "...I brought up the simple fact that Bush never tried to bail out any companies.". This is in error, as it was President Bush who did just that).

    His earlier ultrapartisan comment aside, if anything, you should both take away from this thread the knowledge of what parties are responsible here for the sake of accuracy when engaging in future debates on the subject.

    Thanks.

  3. #63
    Slayer of the DP Newsbot
    danarhea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:02 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    39,751

    Re: Borders to Shut Down

    You know, I really misunderstood this thread. When I saw the title, I thought that our illegal alien problem had permanently ended. LOL.
    The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016

  4. #64
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,858
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Borders to Shut Down

    Quote Originally Posted by Singularity View Post
    Actually what you are doing here is simply trying to rationalize your ultrapartisan comment. You yourself said it - you are opposed to the bailouts, but by not bailing out Borders, you are opposed to that as well. This is a lose-lose for our CIC in your eyes, and since there is no avenue that he could take to win your approval here, it's reasonable to assume that you entered this thread to simply bash on the President. In addition, you dodged my comment about Gee Dub. If you were as non-partisan as you claim to be, and if you really despise the gub'mint for not being 'neutral', then you must have had an absolute field day with Cheney and the no bid contracts back in '04. When I listed the bankruptcies that took place under our former President's administration, you turned the conversation back to Obama without any mention of Bush's involvment in and support of such an endeavor back in '08.

    So, we can answer the following question. What do you call blasting the current President for not bailing out Borders, and admitting that you despise the bailouts and would also disapprove of Obama if he engaged in such an action while simultaneously ignoring the fact that Dubya is just as guilty as Obama here? I'd label any such comments as definitely ultrapartisan.
    Why should I blast Bush if he is not the one in charge? Should I also blast every other president that is not in charge? What is the point in blasting someone 2 years after they are no longer in charge? Is that going to do any good? If so what?

    Quote Originally Posted by Singularity View Post
    First off, let me correct you on a little history. Bush presented his $700 bailout proposal to Congress back in '08. For sake of any future debate on the subject, it would behoove you know that President Bush - not President Obama - is the one who got the bailout ball rolling (source: Poll: Most Americans Against Bush's Bailout Plan - Politics | Republican Party | Democratic Party | Political Spectrum - FOXNews.com). All Obama is guilty of doing is supporting (and continuing) the Bush proposal. Right or wrong, both are to blame.

    And Bush's plan failed...and wasn't directed directly at companies but at buying up distressed assets. A round about way of helping companies yes. But it wasn't directly. But all that aside I didn't approve of that either. But again, Bush is no longer in charge. Hasn't been for over 2 years. So why should I bring him up?

    Quote Originally Posted by Singularity View Post
    Secondly, I don't need to know your post history nor who you are as a poster to recognize an ultrapartisan comment when one is presented. And I didn't accuse you of being a birther or labelling our President as a Muslim. I made a joke about your ultrapartisan comment, saying that if you are going to engage in such silliness, you could at least add those two things to make it humorous for the rest of us. Perhaps we should dissect both your comment and my reply in order to get us both on the same page.
    Actually if you are calling me partisan you should know, or study up at least, on my posting history as Bush is not the one in charge. So again, why should I bring him up? Obama did his own bailout plan that called for directly supporting private buisnesses. As such I need only direct my comments at him as he is also the one in charge and his bailout plan more is more directly related to this subject and my point than Bush's bailout plan.

    Quote Originally Posted by Singularity View Post
    Anyhow, after this post, I am going to assume that you realize why your earlier comment was ultrapartisan, that President Bush was the one behind the bailouts, and that you will avoid any such errors or ultrapartisan comments in any future debates.

    Thanks.
    Yes Bush is the one that started the bailout crap. Where does it say that Obama had to follow in his footsteps? In fact wasn't Obama's whole campaign was based on NOT being like Bush? That he was going to "change" how things were done? Obama did his own bailout plan. Trying to bring Bush into this as the one that started it all is to do nothing more than deflect from that fact.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  5. #65
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,858
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Borders to Shut Down

    Man...I'm really wondering when people are going to start hold Obama responsible on the things that he has done instead of trying to bring up Bush all the friggen time. :P
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  6. #66
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Last Seen
    03-03-17 @ 10:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    13,813

    Re: Borders to Shut Down

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeezy View Post
    For a second I thought you meant like...the country's borders.
    Me too. I was hoping...

  7. #67
    Hung like Einstein
    Singularity's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    San Diego
    Last Seen
    12-12-17 @ 05:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    1,058

    Re: Borders to Shut Down

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    Why should I blast Bush if he is not the one in charge? Should I also blast every other president that is not in charge? What is the point in blasting someone 2 years after they are no longer in charge? Is that going to do any good? If so what?

    And Bush's plan failed...and wasn't directed directly at companies but at buying up distressed assets. A round about way of helping companies yes. But it wasn't directly. But all that aside I didn't approve of that either. But again, Bush is no longer in charge. Hasn't been for over 2 years. So why should I bring him up?
    Well for one, it would back up your assertion that your comment wasn't ultrapartisan, which is now something that can definitively be proven not only by your failure to mention our former President, but your padding of it all in this particular post. Seriously - "[it] wasn't directed directly at companies but at buying up distressed assets. A round about way of helping companies yes. But it wasn't directly"? In addition to that being totally false (it was directly targetting companies, and it was a direct - not roundabout - way of bailing them out), the fact that you are continuing to make excuses for the former administration should tell anyone reading your post exactly what you're trying to do here.

    What you need to take away from this thread is that Bush is just as responsible as the very President you are blasting. Your failure to do that, as well as your attempted justification here, is exactly why I labelled your post as ultrapartisan, and correctly so. You did not know that the former President was responsible for the bailouts, and attempted to pin the whole thing on Obama ("You even tried to show me as being partisan because I didn't ask the same question of Bush. But failed when I brought up the simple fact that Bush never tried to bail out any companies." Kal'Stang, Post #55) . If you learn nothing else from this thread, you should learn that your belief here was wrong.



    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    Actually if you are calling me partisan you should know, or study up at least, on my posting history as Bush is not the one in charge. So again, why should I bring him up? Obama did his own bailout plan that called for directly supporting private buisnesses. As such I need only direct my comments at him as he is also the one in charge and his bailout plan more is more directly related to this subject and my point than Bush's bailout plan.
    I don't have to study up on your posting history to recognize an ultrapartisan comment when one is posted. If you don't wish to be called out on it, don't post it. If you are against the bailouts, you should have mentioned the one who was responsible for them first. Your failure to do so when prompted tells me all I need to know about your comment, and why I labelled it so.



    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    Yes Bush is the one that started the bailout crap. Where does it say that Obama had to follow in his footsteps? In fact wasn't Obama's whole campaign was based on NOT being like Bush? That he was going to "change" how things were done? Obama did his own bailout plan. Trying to bring Bush into this as the one that started it all is to do nothing more than deflect from that fact.
    The important thing is that you have now learned from your previous error. In this post, you say "Yes Bush is the one that started the bailout crap". In post number 55, you claimed the opposite: "You even tried to show me as being partisan because I didn't ask the same question of Bush. But failed when I brought up the simple fact that Bush never tried to bail out any companies."

    Now you are free to go forth a more enlightened debater on this subject. Use your new found knowledge wisely.

  8. #68
    Hung like Einstein
    Singularity's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    San Diego
    Last Seen
    12-12-17 @ 05:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    1,058

    Re: Borders to Shut Down

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    Man...I'm really wondering when people are going to start hold Obama responsible on the things that he has done instead of trying to bring up Bush all the friggen time. :P
    Probably when the folks that hold Obama responsible acknowledge the faults of the previous administration.

  9. #69
    Sage
    SheWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,508

    Re: Borders to Shut Down

    Quote Originally Posted by MrVicchio View Post
    Borders to Shut Down - WSJ.com

    As an avid reader and book buyer, this makes me most sad.
    The one by my house has been gone for a long time, but we still have Barnes and Nobles...

  10. #70
    Sage
    SheWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,508

    Re: Borders to Shut Down

    Quote Originally Posted by DiAnna View Post
    Blame E-books. The Authors Guild, et al, saw this coming a decade ago, when otherwise unpublishable writers began flinging their crap on line to sell via the internet. To compete, successful writers had to offer their own works as E-books. The moment a cheap, portable, convenient E-book reader hit the market, the fate of nearly all bookstores was sealed. As a writer myself, it breaks my heart to say it but the day isn't far away when paper books will be relegated to musems and trash heaps. It's the end of an era.
    I saw it coming too, and you can buy used books real cheap on Amazon... Paying the shipping is the only thing though.

Page 7 of 9 FirstFirst ... 56789 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •