Westy: You never had to say it. It’s a subtle context you leave in everything you do. You’re talented at passive-aggressiveness, so it screams of it without you being so bold as to have those words strike your keyboard.
I know because I’m passive-aggressive too, and I can smell my own.
Simon: First of all, I’m doing homework and had figured I’d shoot you a message later tonight when I had more time to tell you I respected how you handled things earlier and how we’re really not that much different. And then I come on here just to see what’s up on my page and you start all of this up again? What the hell? You were the one that wanted things to settle.
She’s brave? Brave for what? All she’s done is bitch. If you want to say she doesn’t hate the place, fine. But so far she’s done nothing but say negative things about journalspace. So regardless of where you stand on opinions, I’m basically saying stop bitching: either leave the place or stay here and make best of a bad situation. That seems to be the solution many people have taken.
For a guy that claims to be neutral, you sure do have sides.
And cut the “in your face” shit. I’ve told you before it doesn’t intimidate me.
I show people the respect they show me and others, bottom line. And this debate ended hours ago. Those “barbs” you’re talking about, as Amanda mentioned, had long ago come to a close. You opened them up again for reasons I can’t comprehend.
I could sit here and tell you why I posted this about Westy (and others…there were others), and how I find it endlessly interesting she immediately became defensive. I never said her name. Admission of guilt? But none of it is relevant now. Again, it ended long ago. So the way I see it, you’re coming over here and starting shit.
I’m not an intimidating person. I have a degree in bullshit (political science). No more than an hour ago I was eating Captain Crunch cereal and laughing at cartoons. But I can tell you this without reservation: I only give it to people that step across the line. Westy has been for awhile, and I regret nothing. She got what she deserved.
That’s my piece. Why the hell you brought any of this up again is something I’ll never know.
Simon: No worries. I don’t think less of you or anything like that, and the way you acted on Westy’s page is how I would have reacted as well if I had walked in on two friends of mine fighting. I thought you handled it very well, which is what I was going to write to you privately later.
I don’t think you’re a bad person and I don’t think Westy is a bad person. Far from it. And just as you responded to what was occuring, I responded to how Westy was acting. Again, we don’t need to get into it. Everyone has had their say and that’s fine. A person can call another person out and still not have a problem with them overall, which is what you and I have both done today.
No worries on the time. That’s why I was confused…I had no idea why you surfaced all of a sudden saying the same things that had been discussed before.
In my book, I’m fine with everyone. Whether or not people are fine with me is up to them. And not to burst their bubble, but odds are I don’t care.
Amanda: Yeah, the commercial from PETA surprised me. What I find kind of funny, yet sad at the same time, is the fact PETA has a problem with human beings exploiting animals, yet they have no problem with women being exploited for money in their commercials.
A couple of quick hits. First of all, the idea that a president should have been in the military is not only false, it’s patently anti-historical. Thirty-nine of forty-four American presidents have never had military duty in a combat zone. I’d say Abraham Lincoln, a Republican, handled himself quite well, as did FDR during World War II.
The second point is that Bill Clinton never gave an order to kill Bin Laden, not Obama. That would be awkward for everyone. But what you’re advocating is hindsight – American public opinion for the Serbian expedition was very low, and the aim of that was to stop ethnic cleansing. If Americans were opposed to bombing intervention when ethnic cleanings was occurring, they wouldn’t have been pleased with launching a few missiles at Bin Laden BEFORE he had attacked the United States. Hell, the vast majority of Americans had never heard his name prior to September 11th. Though, if it helps, I would have supported Clinton attacking Bin Laden back then, just as I supported the bombings in Serbia.
Blaming the CIA for the justification for Iraq is a copout. Ultimately it’s the president’s decision to go to war, and the president’s alone. You can blame surrounding circumstances but he made a choice for war, not the CIA, and he must live with it. That’s part of being a leader. President Obama has inherited a terrible economy which wasn’t his doing, but ultimately it’s his job to turn it around. And he has four years to do so or risk getting kicked out of office, and that responsibility is his to shoulder regardless of whose fault it was prior. That’s what it means to be a leader – no excuses no matter what.
Killing terrorists holed up in homes is a war crime when innocent civilians are involved, and I’m sad to see you condone committing atrocities. Some of those innocent civilians are exactly what you said – aiding and abetting – while others are truly innocent people being intimidated by individuals that may be threatening their family. The point is this: the United States should have shown more foresight than putting themselves in that position in the first place.
Talking to enemies is not seen as weakness. Ronald Reagan spoke with the Soviet Union often and managed to reduce nuclear weapons on both sides through diplomacy, not military action. Is he a wuss?
Westy: All good points. You gave them a week. How patient of you.
Commented on the post I Hate Journalspace on the blog http://cartguyforever.journalspace.com.Westy: You never had to say it. It’s a subtle context you leave in everything you do. You’re talented at passive-aggressiveness, so it screams of it without you being so bold as to have those words strike your keyboard.
I know because I’m passive-aggressive too, and I can smell my own.
Commented on the post I Hate Journalspace on the blog http://cartguyforever.journalspace.com.Simon: I said I’d be willing to let things slide, but I won’t stand by and let comments like that slide.
She’s the only brave one? Give me an effing break. I think we’ve had enough of a lovefest of one person for the day, don’t you?
Commented on the post I Hate Journalspace on the blog http://cartguyforever.journalspace.com.Simon: First of all, I’m doing homework and had figured I’d shoot you a message later tonight when I had more time to tell you I respected how you handled things earlier and how we’re really not that much different. And then I come on here just to see what’s up on my page and you start all of this up again? What the hell? You were the one that wanted things to settle.
She’s brave? Brave for what? All she’s done is bitch. If you want to say she doesn’t hate the place, fine. But so far she’s done nothing but say negative things about journalspace. So regardless of where you stand on opinions, I’m basically saying stop bitching: either leave the place or stay here and make best of a bad situation. That seems to be the solution many people have taken.
For a guy that claims to be neutral, you sure do have sides.
And cut the “in your face” shit. I’ve told you before it doesn’t intimidate me.
Commented on the post I Hate Journalspace on the blog http://cartguyforever.journalspace.com.I show people the respect they show me and others, bottom line. And this debate ended hours ago. Those “barbs” you’re talking about, as Amanda mentioned, had long ago come to a close. You opened them up again for reasons I can’t comprehend.
I could sit here and tell you why I posted this about Westy (and others…there were others), and how I find it endlessly interesting she immediately became defensive. I never said her name. Admission of guilt? But none of it is relevant now. Again, it ended long ago. So the way I see it, you’re coming over here and starting shit.
I’m not an intimidating person. I have a degree in bullshit (political science). No more than an hour ago I was eating Captain Crunch cereal and laughing at cartoons. But I can tell you this without reservation: I only give it to people that step across the line. Westy has been for awhile, and I regret nothing. She got what she deserved.
That’s my piece. Why the hell you brought any of this up again is something I’ll never know.
Commented on the post I Hate Journalspace on the blog http://cartguyforever.journalspace.com.Simon: No worries. I don’t think less of you or anything like that, and the way you acted on Westy’s page is how I would have reacted as well if I had walked in on two friends of mine fighting. I thought you handled it very well, which is what I was going to write to you privately later.
I don’t think you’re a bad person and I don’t think Westy is a bad person. Far from it. And just as you responded to what was occuring, I responded to how Westy was acting. Again, we don’t need to get into it. Everyone has had their say and that’s fine. A person can call another person out and still not have a problem with them overall, which is what you and I have both done today.
No worries on the time. That’s why I was confused…I had no idea why you surfaced all of a sudden saying the same things that had been discussed before.
In my book, I’m fine with everyone. Whether or not people are fine with me is up to them. And not to burst their bubble, but odds are I don’t care.
Commented on the post I Hate Journalspace on the blog http://cartguyforever.journalspace.com.Amanda: Yeah, the commercial from PETA surprised me. What I find kind of funny, yet sad at the same time, is the fact PETA has a problem with human beings exploiting animals, yet they have no problem with women being exploited for money in their commercials.
Are they anti-women?
Commented on the post Oh, my on the blog http://cartguyforever.journalspace.com.Lone Wolf: They belong to PETA? As in they’re objects that can be owned? That’s just racist, man.
Commented on the post Oh, my on the blog http://cartguyforever.journalspace.com.Alcones hit it right on the head.
Commented on the post Oh, my on the blog http://cartguyforever.journalspace.com.A couple of quick hits. First of all, the idea that a president should have been in the military is not only false, it’s patently anti-historical. Thirty-nine of forty-four American presidents have never had military duty in a combat zone. I’d say Abraham Lincoln, a Republican, handled himself quite well, as did FDR during World War II.
The second point is that Bill Clinton never gave an order to kill Bin Laden, not Obama. That would be awkward for everyone. But what you’re advocating is hindsight – American public opinion for the Serbian expedition was very low, and the aim of that was to stop ethnic cleansing. If Americans were opposed to bombing intervention when ethnic cleanings was occurring, they wouldn’t have been pleased with launching a few missiles at Bin Laden BEFORE he had attacked the United States. Hell, the vast majority of Americans had never heard his name prior to September 11th. Though, if it helps, I would have supported Clinton attacking Bin Laden back then, just as I supported the bombings in Serbia.
Blaming the CIA for the justification for Iraq is a copout. Ultimately it’s the president’s decision to go to war, and the president’s alone. You can blame surrounding circumstances but he made a choice for war, not the CIA, and he must live with it. That’s part of being a leader. President Obama has inherited a terrible economy which wasn’t his doing, but ultimately it’s his job to turn it around. And he has four years to do so or risk getting kicked out of office, and that responsibility is his to shoulder regardless of whose fault it was prior. That’s what it means to be a leader – no excuses no matter what.
Killing terrorists holed up in homes is a war crime when innocent civilians are involved, and I’m sad to see you condone committing atrocities. Some of those innocent civilians are exactly what you said – aiding and abetting – while others are truly innocent people being intimidated by individuals that may be threatening their family. The point is this: the United States should have shown more foresight than putting themselves in that position in the first place.
Talking to enemies is not seen as weakness. Ronald Reagan spoke with the Soviet Union often and managed to reduce nuclear weapons on both sides through diplomacy, not military action. Is he a wuss?
Commented on the post Obama and Hillary Open Mouth and Insert Foot:Open Dialogue With Middle East on the blog http://thecerebralgarage.journalspace.com.