RSS Feeds
Contact Us |
|
|||||||||||||
Columnists » Clayson
Article rated a 0
by 0
users |
~ADVERTISING~
Clayson's Gang of Four
By DENNIS CLAYSON
Editor’s note: The following column was written by Dennis Clayson, who is a professor at the University of Northern Iowa.
We have decided that it is time to come clean. Clayson’s articles are actually written by four other people.
Almost 13 years ago, several of us became concerned over the lack of basic conservative knowledge on campus and in the community. We had colleagues who insisted there was no such thing as "political correctness," while condemning anyone as racist who questioned their motives for "diversity."
There were people, even professors, who believed that taxing the rich more would somehow help the poor, and some, as hard as this is to believe, thought that such taxes might even benefit the middle class.
Ignorance like this could only exist in isolation.
It sounds incredible now, but at the time there were people who thought that taking money from one person by force and then using that money to support bureaucrats with any left over going to people chosen by the bureaucrats, was a moral act, even an act they would vote for.
Fortunately, times have changed.
So four of use got together and began producing an article from the right. Several of us didn’t have tenure at the time, and two of us were Iowans, which meant that we had an aversion to standing out in a group.
So it is understandable that we didn’t want anyone to know who we were.
We called ourselves "The Gang of Four," but we needed a pen name, so we made up one. We wanted it to be easy to spell and easy to remember, but one that no one in Iowa would actually have. One of our group remembered seeing a name in England that we could use, "Clayson."
The first name was simply the first name of a deceased uncle of one of the Gang.
Other than our commitment to true and correct principles, we each had fun with our own areas of expertise.
But now we have run into trouble.
We had to place our fictitious person somewhere on campus. This turned out to be easier than we had thought. UNI treats its professors very well, but the university really doesn’t pay much attention to them.
We could have just said, "Professor Clayson is a Top Professor at UNI who teaches Important Stuff and the Tasting of Fine Wines," but that sounded a little pretentious.
We wanted to have a certain amount of prestige, so we chose to place our professor in the College of Business. But we also wanted him to be hidden, so we put him into the marketing department. One of the Gang thought this was the perfect place because nothing that happens there is ever noticed.
If the administrators and faculty at UNI had actually thought about this for a moment, they would have realized that they had never actually met Professor Clayson.
This worked well for years until the College of Business actually hired a Dennis Clayson. He was indeed a professor with a Ph.D. We contacted him, and he agreed that we could continue to use his name.
This created some confusion. We told him to simply say "thank you," if someone said something about a column. Once in awhile, someone will contact him or ask about his last column, or his upcoming column, and they seem a little surprised that he doesn’t know any of the details.
Although Dr. Clayson never reads any comments about our articles (after all, why should he?), he has been feeling a little heat lately, and we are feeling a little guilty.
In addition, there is a blogger who is getting close to discovering our secret. He hasn’t been able to identify us yet, but we can feel his hot and rather rancid breath on our necks. As one of the Gang mentioned some time ago, bloggers have very large egos and very small lives, so he appears to have a lot of time to spend on this.
As stated in other sources, many bloggers have all the bravery of an obscene phone caller, but none of the creativity. Yet this one, against all odds, seems to have figured it out, so we thought we should come clean before we are exposed.
Now, will we actually tell you who we are? No way. Since most of what passes for discourse in the Cedar Valley is anonymous, we thought we should stay the same.
We have decided that it is time to come clean. Clayson’s articles are actually written by four other people.
Almost 13 years ago, several of us became concerned over the lack of basic conservative knowledge on campus and in the community. We had colleagues who insisted there was no such thing as "political correctness," while condemning anyone as racist who questioned their motives for "diversity."
There were people, even professors, who believed that taxing the rich more would somehow help the poor, and some, as hard as this is to believe, thought that such taxes might even benefit the middle class.
Ignorance like this could only exist in isolation.
It sounds incredible now, but at the time there were people who thought that taking money from one person by force and then using that money to support bureaucrats with any left over going to people chosen by the bureaucrats, was a moral act, even an act they would vote for.
Fortunately, times have changed.
So four of use got together and began producing an article from the right. Several of us didn’t have tenure at the time, and two of us were Iowans, which meant that we had an aversion to standing out in a group.
So it is understandable that we didn’t want anyone to know who we were.
We called ourselves "The Gang of Four," but we needed a pen name, so we made up one. We wanted it to be easy to spell and easy to remember, but one that no one in Iowa would actually have. One of our group remembered seeing a name in England that we could use, "Clayson."
The first name was simply the first name of a deceased uncle of one of the Gang.
Other than our commitment to true and correct principles, we each had fun with our own areas of expertise.
But now we have run into trouble.
We had to place our fictitious person somewhere on campus. This turned out to be easier than we had thought. UNI treats its professors very well, but the university really doesn’t pay much attention to them.
We could have just said, "Professor Clayson is a Top Professor at UNI who teaches Important Stuff and the Tasting of Fine Wines," but that sounded a little pretentious.
We wanted to have a certain amount of prestige, so we chose to place our professor in the College of Business. But we also wanted him to be hidden, so we put him into the marketing department. One of the Gang thought this was the perfect place because nothing that happens there is ever noticed.
If the administrators and faculty at UNI had actually thought about this for a moment, they would have realized that they had never actually met Professor Clayson.
This worked well for years until the College of Business actually hired a Dennis Clayson. He was indeed a professor with a Ph.D. We contacted him, and he agreed that we could continue to use his name.
This created some confusion. We told him to simply say "thank you," if someone said something about a column. Once in awhile, someone will contact him or ask about his last column, or his upcoming column, and they seem a little surprised that he doesn’t know any of the details.
Although Dr. Clayson never reads any comments about our articles (after all, why should he?), he has been feeling a little heat lately, and we are feeling a little guilty.
In addition, there is a blogger who is getting close to discovering our secret. He hasn’t been able to identify us yet, but we can feel his hot and rather rancid breath on our necks. As one of the Gang mentioned some time ago, bloggers have very large egos and very small lives, so he appears to have a lot of time to spend on this.
As stated in other sources, many bloggers have all the bravery of an obscene phone caller, but none of the creativity. Yet this one, against all odds, seems to have figured it out, so we thought we should come clean before we are exposed.
Now, will we actually tell you who we are? No way. Since most of what passes for discourse in the Cedar Valley is anonymous, we thought we should stay the same.
More Stories from Columnists » Clayson
Independent wrote on Dec 14, 2008 10:03 AM:
" What good will knowing my name do, Clayson?
Clayson, if you want to have high tea with me, just ask. You don't have to devote column after column about me. "
Clayson, if you want to have high tea with me, just ask. You don't have to devote column after column about me. "
cross1242 wrote on Dec 14, 2008 10:06 AM:
" I am in a quandary this morning. Do I believe the the "Editor" who says that Prof. Denis Clayson wrote this? Or, do I believe "Denis Clayson" who says that the name is but a non de plume for four professors at UNI who are still afraid of daylight?
I do know that the contempt for readers of the column displayed here is the identical contempt shown all along in Prof. Clayson's columns.
/s/ Steve Cross "
I do know that the contempt for readers of the column displayed here is the identical contempt shown all along in Prof. Clayson's columns.
/s/ Steve Cross "
Brian B wrote on Dec 14, 2008 12:43 PM:
" The best yet. I can't wait to see who might believe themselves to be the person Professor Clayson writes of!!!!
This should be interesting. "
This should be interesting. "
chester11 wrote on Dec 14, 2008 1:29 PM:
" I can't imagine being a paper subscriber with little interaction with the online Courier and not being totally perplexed by this column.
As for the anonymous nature of blogging, Clayson gets to take a few jabs. He has that right. I have some hard opinions, and although I've posted my email address and am happy to exchange that way with anyone here, I also have business concerns and I'm just in a position where I'd prefer customers don't Google my name and politics then become a point of contention. Clayson's extremely partisan opinions don't seem to have as much impact on his tenured career. Kids have to take those courses to graduate, whether they agree with the professors worldview or not.
A long time ago, Clayson decided to wear his political ideology on his sleeve, regardless of his work situation, and he deserves credit for that.
But baiting people with different life circumstances to share their identities won't keep them from commenting on these columns, positive or negative. "
As for the anonymous nature of blogging, Clayson gets to take a few jabs. He has that right. I have some hard opinions, and although I've posted my email address and am happy to exchange that way with anyone here, I also have business concerns and I'm just in a position where I'd prefer customers don't Google my name and politics then become a point of contention. Clayson's extremely partisan opinions don't seem to have as much impact on his tenured career. Kids have to take those courses to graduate, whether they agree with the professors worldview or not.
A long time ago, Clayson decided to wear his political ideology on his sleeve, regardless of his work situation, and he deserves credit for that.
But baiting people with different life circumstances to share their identities won't keep them from commenting on these columns, positive or negative. "
Timberlake wrote on Dec 14, 2008 4:19 PM:
" Mr Clayson, or whomever you may all be.............out (deleted) standing! Your point has been made very well. "
Stan wrote on Dec 14, 2008 4:29 PM:
" Is there no end to the inane and pointless ramblings we must endure every week from this supposedly "educated" professional?
Each column seems to be less and less grounded in reality. It has become little more than a convenient vehicle for "Clayson's" quixotic and petty campaign against his critics and the evil forces of liberalism; a crusade that has done precious little to inform or otherwise enlighten the general public.
More importantly, when may we expect the Courier's editorial board to step in and replace "Clayson" with a columnist who actually dares to address issues that are of concern to the majority of the readership? "
Each column seems to be less and less grounded in reality. It has become little more than a convenient vehicle for "Clayson's" quixotic and petty campaign against his critics and the evil forces of liberalism; a crusade that has done precious little to inform or otherwise enlighten the general public.
More importantly, when may we expect the Courier's editorial board to step in and replace "Clayson" with a columnist who actually dares to address issues that are of concern to the majority of the readership? "
Leo46 wrote on Dec 14, 2008 4:44 PM:
" Stan...why in the world would the Courier replace Clayson? He has by far the most responces to his columns than all the otherscolumns put together. "
chester11 wrote on Dec 14, 2008 7:20 PM:
" Leo46 wrote on Dec 14, 2008 4:44 PM:
" Stan...why in the world would the Courier replace Clayson? "
Maybe a...bold sense of integrity?
But good point. "
" Stan...why in the world would the Courier replace Clayson? "
Maybe a...bold sense of integrity?
But good point. "
Independent wrote on Dec 14, 2008 8:25 PM:
" Hey Clayson!
George Bush called and he wants his spaceship back.
I, told him you were at the outter limits of space, and that you would contact him through the supernatural intellect you both share. Ok?
Oh, to be a fly on the wall when Clayson is reading the comment section of the WCF. "
George Bush called and he wants his spaceship back.
I, told him you were at the outter limits of space, and that you would contact him through the supernatural intellect you both share. Ok?
Oh, to be a fly on the wall when Clayson is reading the comment section of the WCF. "
Out-of-towner wrote on Dec 14, 2008 8:29 PM:
" This column reminds me of the M*A*S*H* episode where Trapper and Hawkeye "invented" Captain Tuttle... Gosh, I feel like Frank Burns. "
Independent wrote on Dec 14, 2008 10:19 PM:
" If we change the name of the Comment Section to, suggestion box, would Clayson be happy for a few hours? "
hetfield wrote on Dec 14, 2008 11:37 PM:
" I know how you feel Claysoners! it is time for me as well to bow out and sa la vie!
Oh I will be reading, and who knows may be back in some form or other. Why go? beat up by frodo? out attornied by cross eyed? cf, chester, joe, indy? nonsense!
what i have learned however is that regardless of the truth and regardless of the left's mindless, valueless disregard of the unborn, liberals love to be pantently unhappy, and envious of those of us who succeed.
they want what we got and are either too lazy to go get it, or too stupid to have the first incliniation on how to try.
either way, they have now tied their futures to a socialist who is so far over his head, he cant decide who to pay to get his last political post!
to all the good guys; keep up the good fight(ribbing these minions is far too easy) dont allow them to show others the blueprint on how to fail as well.
to barack hussein obama and liberal do-nothings everywhere. lying, stealing, aborting and creating welfare is not leadership. stick to community agitator!
peace "
Oh I will be reading, and who knows may be back in some form or other. Why go? beat up by frodo? out attornied by cross eyed? cf, chester, joe, indy? nonsense!
what i have learned however is that regardless of the truth and regardless of the left's mindless, valueless disregard of the unborn, liberals love to be pantently unhappy, and envious of those of us who succeed.
they want what we got and are either too lazy to go get it, or too stupid to have the first incliniation on how to try.
either way, they have now tied their futures to a socialist who is so far over his head, he cant decide who to pay to get his last political post!
to all the good guys; keep up the good fight(ribbing these minions is far too easy) dont allow them to show others the blueprint on how to fail as well.
to barack hussein obama and liberal do-nothings everywhere. lying, stealing, aborting and creating welfare is not leadership. stick to community agitator!
peace "
mayo wrote on Dec 15, 2008 8:38 AM:
" "Editor’s note: The following column was written by Dennis Clayson, who is a professor at the University of Northern Iowa.
We have decided that it is time to come clean. Clayson’s articles are actually written by four other people."
Both these statements cannot be true and it brings into focus if anyone involved in this situation has any integrity - Dennis Clayson for allowing his name to be used if he did not write the columns, the Courier for knowingly publishing them and the four professors who refused to write under their own names. Letters to the editor have to be signed and I think we should expect no less from the columnists. Not to mention that UNI has four professors who cannot write more cogent arguments than those presented in these columns. "
We have decided that it is time to come clean. Clayson’s articles are actually written by four other people."
Both these statements cannot be true and it brings into focus if anyone involved in this situation has any integrity - Dennis Clayson for allowing his name to be used if he did not write the columns, the Courier for knowingly publishing them and the four professors who refused to write under their own names. Letters to the editor have to be signed and I think we should expect no less from the columnists. Not to mention that UNI has four professors who cannot write more cogent arguments than those presented in these columns. "
Phil wrote on Dec 15, 2008 8:46 AM:
" Well if four professors are writing these columns, their styles are all remarkably similar.
No, this is Mr. Clayson having fun in his own way. And while he is at it he takes a few jabs at his favorite targets.
How about this line: "As stated in other sources, many bloggers have all the bravery of an obscene phone caller, but none of the creativity." Typcial Clayson.
And just what do you think you have Mr. Clayson? "
No, this is Mr. Clayson having fun in his own way. And while he is at it he takes a few jabs at his favorite targets.
How about this line: "As stated in other sources, many bloggers have all the bravery of an obscene phone caller, but none of the creativity." Typcial Clayson.
And just what do you think you have Mr. Clayson? "
cross1242 wrote on Dec 15, 2008 8:58 AM:
" After some thinking about it, it's my feeling (note: not "conclusion") that the column is another piece of satire and the one and only Prof. Clayson is still the sole author of the column.
However, I have absolutely no idea what the point of the satire is. And, by "no idea" I mean none, zero, zip, nada, 0. Earlier attempts at satire left me wondering but this one is confounding.
The other responses show that I'm not alone. It's really great writing when no one knows what you're talking about.
/s/ Steve Cross "
However, I have absolutely no idea what the point of the satire is. And, by "no idea" I mean none, zero, zip, nada, 0. Earlier attempts at satire left me wondering but this one is confounding.
The other responses show that I'm not alone. It's really great writing when no one knows what you're talking about.
/s/ Steve Cross "
xdfred wrote on Dec 15, 2008 9:27 AM:
" People, this is SATIRE! Hence the disclaimer at the top. What a bunch of nitwits.
Stan wrote on Dec 14, 2008 4:29 PM:
" Is there no end to the inane and pointless ramblings we must endure every week from this supposedly "educated" professional?" What a whiner. Who forces you to 'endure' anything in the newspaper. In the dictionary, under whining, it must say 'see Stan'. "
Stan wrote on Dec 14, 2008 4:29 PM:
" Is there no end to the inane and pointless ramblings we must endure every week from this supposedly "educated" professional?" What a whiner. Who forces you to 'endure' anything in the newspaper. In the dictionary, under whining, it must say 'see Stan'. "
timbrackett wrote on Dec 15, 2008 9:28 AM:
" hetfield--name-calling (the cross-eyed comment shouldn't have even been allowed, very disparaging towards those who have strabismus) and saying those on the left are the ones who are unhappy when your bitter vitriol dominates these boards leads me to simply say GOOD RIDDANCE!!!
i think the average IQ of the courier readership just increased several points with your departure. AND we won't have to worry about the courier's lack of a spine in refusing to publish your comments that disparage certain physical features (seriously, is this either 1950 or junior high--the courier lets people come on here and use the term "cross eyed"???). "
i think the average IQ of the courier readership just increased several points with your departure. AND we won't have to worry about the courier's lack of a spine in refusing to publish your comments that disparage certain physical features (seriously, is this either 1950 or junior high--the courier lets people come on here and use the term "cross eyed"???). "
xdfred wrote on Dec 15, 2008 9:40 AM:
" cross1242 wrote on Dec 15, 2008 8:58 AM:
"....However, I have absolutely no idea what the point of the satire is. And, by "no idea" I mean none, zero, zip, nada, 0. Earlier attempts at satire left me wondering but this one is confounding...." The point is making fun of the UNiversity system, and his critics. It's obvious.
"The other responses show that I'm not alone...." Birds of a feather.... "
"....However, I have absolutely no idea what the point of the satire is. And, by "no idea" I mean none, zero, zip, nada, 0. Earlier attempts at satire left me wondering but this one is confounding...." The point is making fun of the UNiversity system, and his critics. It's obvious.
"The other responses show that I'm not alone...." Birds of a feather.... "
xdfred wrote on Dec 15, 2008 9:41 AM:
" timbrackett wrote on Dec 15, 2008 9:28 AM:
" hetfield--name-calling (the cross-eyed comment shouldn't have even been allowed, very disparaging..." Speaking of dull writing.... "
" hetfield--name-calling (the cross-eyed comment shouldn't have even been allowed, very disparaging..." Speaking of dull writing.... "
Independent wrote on Dec 15, 2008 9:44 AM:
" Hetfield is leaving?
I find it hard to believe. However, I hope he stays true to his word. "
I find it hard to believe. However, I hope he stays true to his word. "
timbrackett wrote on Dec 15, 2008 10:58 AM:
" i understand this is an attempt at satire--but it is a rather poor attempt. "
Leo46 wrote on Dec 15, 2008 11:23 AM:
" Seems to me anyone (or any four) could write an op piece, put Clayson's name on it, and automatically certain people will attack it and him. And I think he proved his point admirably. "
cross1242 wrote on Dec 15, 2008 12:01 PM:
" xdfred @ Dec 15, 2008 9:40 AM said, "The point is making fun of the UNiversity system, and his critics."
Why on earth would anyone make fun of UNI -- especially since Clayson is a prof there. That's an even more doubtful explanation.
As for "his critics," he's clearly talking about people who are anonymous. But, I'm his biggest critic but I'm also identified to the public. It still doesn't add up.
/s/ Steve Cross "
Why on earth would anyone make fun of UNI -- especially since Clayson is a prof there. That's an even more doubtful explanation.
As for "his critics," he's clearly talking about people who are anonymous. But, I'm his biggest critic but I'm also identified to the public. It still doesn't add up.
/s/ Steve Cross "
Adversary wrote on Dec 15, 2008 12:23 PM:
" . . . This is the biggest bunch of B.S. Clayson has written yet. I know people at UNI who have taken his classes. I've been right past his office on the 3rd floor of the business building.
If anyone misses this unsavory individual, you can visit and debate with him at his office: #344. All four of him work there. ;) "
If anyone misses this unsavory individual, you can visit and debate with him at his office: #344. All four of him work there. ;) "
xdfred wrote on Dec 15, 2008 12:39 PM:
" Independent wrote on Dec 15, 2008 9:44 AM:
" Hetfield is leaving?
I find it hard to believe. However, I hope he stays true to his word. " You know what? I'm leaving too.........
.........OK, I'm back. "
" Hetfield is leaving?
I find it hard to believe. However, I hope he stays true to his word. " You know what? I'm leaving too.........
.........OK, I'm back. "
Independent wrote on Dec 15, 2008 1:22 PM:
" Save it xdfred, I know you are actually hetfield.
The way you two copy & paste, then write in your response is identical. No other poster does it like you two, hhmmmm?
And now that the hetfield character has been "retired" is obvious that xdfred is posting at nearly the same rate as the departed hatefield. "
The way you two copy & paste, then write in your response is identical. No other poster does it like you two, hhmmmm?
And now that the hetfield character has been "retired" is obvious that xdfred is posting at nearly the same rate as the departed hatefield. "
FedUp wrote on Dec 15, 2008 2:44 PM:
" 1) LMAO
2) 80% of you hate his messages, therefore;
3) He must be right about liberals' lack of tolerance.
4) I can't wait until he tips you over again. You're easy!!! "
2) 80% of you hate his messages, therefore;
3) He must be right about liberals' lack of tolerance.
4) I can't wait until he tips you over again. You're easy!!! "
xdfred wrote on Dec 15, 2008 2:57 PM:
" Adversary wrote on Dec 15, 2008 12:23 PM:
" . . . This is the biggest bunch of B.S. Clayson has written yet...." OK, but why is it the biggest, in your opinion.
"..I know people at UNI..." Oh goody
".... who have taken his classes..." And this has to do what with this atricle?
"...I've been right past his office on the 3rd floor of the business building..." Wow! So you can climb stairs! That's great.
"..If anyone misses this unsavory individual, you can visit and debate with him at his office: #344. All four of him work there. ;) " Why would you encourage someone to visit a person whom you consider unsavory? "
" . . . This is the biggest bunch of B.S. Clayson has written yet...." OK, but why is it the biggest, in your opinion.
"..I know people at UNI..." Oh goody
".... who have taken his classes..." And this has to do what with this atricle?
"...I've been right past his office on the 3rd floor of the business building..." Wow! So you can climb stairs! That's great.
"..If anyone misses this unsavory individual, you can visit and debate with him at his office: #344. All four of him work there. ;) " Why would you encourage someone to visit a person whom you consider unsavory? "
yermom wrote on Dec 15, 2008 2:59 PM:
" Hmmm... I could have sworn it was just last week that Mr. Clayson told readers that they could address their issues, "in a logical and fair fashion without name calling."
"But would that be any fun?" And, "Besides, how would anyone know how bright and superior you are if you did that".... "
"But would that be any fun?" And, "Besides, how would anyone know how bright and superior you are if you did that".... "
cross1242 wrote on Dec 15, 2008 3:22 PM:
" Just for information, today the Supreme Court rejected another of the wingnut complaints about Obama's citizenship. In the published list of orders today is the following:
"08A469
WROTNOWSKI, CORT V. BYSIEWICZ, CT SEC. OF STATE
The application for stay and/or injunction addressed
to Justice Scalia and referred to the Court is denied."
This is the second of three cases known to me to be considered by the court. However, this is not the Berg case that seems to be the one that wingnut hopes center on.
/s/ Steve Cross "
"08A469
WROTNOWSKI, CORT V. BYSIEWICZ, CT SEC. OF STATE
The application for stay and/or injunction addressed
to Justice Scalia and referred to the Court is denied."
This is the second of three cases known to me to be considered by the court. However, this is not the Berg case that seems to be the one that wingnut hopes center on.
/s/ Steve Cross "
cross1242 wrote on Dec 15, 2008 4:47 PM:
" xdfred @ Dec 15, 2008 9:27 AM said, "What a bunch of nitwits."
What would we all do without our daily reminder that we have good cause to be humble.
/s/ Steve Cross "
What would we all do without our daily reminder that we have good cause to be humble.
/s/ Steve Cross "
chester11 wrote on Dec 15, 2008 9:57 PM:
" For all you huge fans of this week's column I hope you'll be quick to list your first and last names after criticisms of any other writer's articles. "
timbrackett wrote on Dec 15, 2008 11:33 PM:
" cross is correct. i use my real name. cross uses his real name. cawelti always identifies himself when commenting on stories. the only people hiding their identities are the ones who actually agree with clayson.
again, this was a very poor attempt at satire. "
again, this was a very poor attempt at satire. "
cross1242 wrote on Dec 16, 2008 9:21 AM:
" For those who are seriously following the Obama birthplace non-story: Yesterday, each of the state delegations to the Electoral College met in their state capitols. I didn't hear about ANY votes for persons other than the candidates they were elected to vote for. In other words, nobody balked at voting for Obama because he wasn't a citizen. (As I recall, the electoral college was one of the places where the wingnuts said that his qualification for office was supposed to be challenged.)
/s/ Steve Cross "
/s/ Steve Cross "
timbrackett wrote on Dec 16, 2008 10:33 AM:
" what? the entire electoral college bought into the lie put on us by the great chicago shyster himself??? i can't believe so many people have fallen for this ruse--obama is clearly not a naturalized citizen. oh well, at least we have a congress full of integrity and sound judgment who will refuse to ratify the electoral college votes on jan. 6th.
(was that a good hetfield impersonation, given that he has 'retired' from commenting?) "
(was that a good hetfield impersonation, given that he has 'retired' from commenting?) "
hfrmack wrote on Dec 16, 2008 11:31 AM:
" Genius, absolute genius!!!
Professor Clayson is not only an excellent columnist with conservative principles; he is also an obvious marketing genius. Hence his colors show in being a professor of business and marketing.
The WCF Courier is lucky to have such a columnist.
The professor took a gamble in this weeks’ article to alienate the paper version of readers, (who have got to be completely perplexed), and address directly the “Gang of Four” in the blog version of his article on-line.
Anyone in business could see this!
All in one article, he promotes the on-line version, and invites more readers and comments to his on-line version of his column and blog.
And it is also obvious that Professor Clayson reads the blogs from the on-line version to smack-down the “gang-of-four” in this article who comment regularly in the weekly blogs, and often change the course of his points in his weekly articles.
I know that I’ve been guilty of this as well. And for this I sincerely apologize to the Professor for sometimes distracting from the point of his articles.
And because I am in business, and not to alienate any current or potential future customers, I will not disclose who I am either.
I don’t know if I’m one of the “Gang of Four” that the good Professor references either.
But I have a pretty good idea who is included.
-hfrmack "
Professor Clayson is not only an excellent columnist with conservative principles; he is also an obvious marketing genius. Hence his colors show in being a professor of business and marketing.
The WCF Courier is lucky to have such a columnist.
The professor took a gamble in this weeks’ article to alienate the paper version of readers, (who have got to be completely perplexed), and address directly the “Gang of Four” in the blog version of his article on-line.
Anyone in business could see this!
All in one article, he promotes the on-line version, and invites more readers and comments to his on-line version of his column and blog.
And it is also obvious that Professor Clayson reads the blogs from the on-line version to smack-down the “gang-of-four” in this article who comment regularly in the weekly blogs, and often change the course of his points in his weekly articles.
I know that I’ve been guilty of this as well. And for this I sincerely apologize to the Professor for sometimes distracting from the point of his articles.
And because I am in business, and not to alienate any current or potential future customers, I will not disclose who I am either.
I don’t know if I’m one of the “Gang of Four” that the good Professor references either.
But I have a pretty good idea who is included.
-hfrmack "
hfrmack wrote on Dec 16, 2008 12:43 PM:
" hetfield,
Come back!
You're one of the few sane ones who blog here that make reading this, and participating in this blog so much fun.
You're a good read!
-hfrmack "
Come back!
You're one of the few sane ones who blog here that make reading this, and participating in this blog so much fun.
You're a good read!
-hfrmack "
Phil wrote on Dec 16, 2008 3:10 PM:
" hfrmack - you are entitled to believe what you want to believe.
Just as I am - and I believe your analysis of Mr. Clayson's column this week is evidence of delusional thinking on your part.
I have a feeling I am not alone in this regard. "
Just as I am - and I believe your analysis of Mr. Clayson's column this week is evidence of delusional thinking on your part.
I have a feeling I am not alone in this regard. "
hfrmack wrote on Dec 16, 2008 3:40 PM:
" Let me guess...you're not a business man either, are you Phil.
-hfrmack "
-hfrmack "
cross1242 wrote on Dec 16, 2008 6:23 PM:
" hfrmack @ Dec 16, 2008 11:31 AM said, "And because I am in business, and not to alienate any current or potential future customers, I will not disclose who I am either."
hfrmack, perhaps if your views weren't so outrageous, maybe you wouldn't have to worry about people taking their business elsewhere. You're entitled to hold whatever opinions you want but maybe if you know that people would find them outrageous, they are also telling you that they are afraid of someone with views like yours.
/s/ Steve Cross "
hfrmack, perhaps if your views weren't so outrageous, maybe you wouldn't have to worry about people taking their business elsewhere. You're entitled to hold whatever opinions you want but maybe if you know that people would find them outrageous, they are also telling you that they are afraid of someone with views like yours.
/s/ Steve Cross "
hfrmack wrote on Dec 16, 2008 6:57 PM:
" cross1242 wrote on Dec 16, 2008 6:23 PM
hfrmack, perhaps if your views weren't so outrageous, maybe you wouldn't have to worry about people taking their business elsewhere. You're entitled to hold whatever opinions you want but maybe if you know that people would find them outrageous, they are also telling you that they are afraid of someone with views like yours.
/s/ Steve Cross
Well Steve, you're obvously NOT a business man either. Nice try in trying to corner me. Actually, I think it's the outrageous views of liberal lawyers that scare people the most. (Certainly in business, and especially in small business).
Newsflash: None of my customers are scared of me, or my views in my business.
I have an excellent customer base. I don't share my political views with them, because you get more customers if you pander to all customers. (There is your business lesson for the day, Counselor).
Maybe YOU should take one of Professor Clayson's business classes.
-hfrmack "
hfrmack, perhaps if your views weren't so outrageous, maybe you wouldn't have to worry about people taking their business elsewhere. You're entitled to hold whatever opinions you want but maybe if you know that people would find them outrageous, they are also telling you that they are afraid of someone with views like yours.
/s/ Steve Cross
Well Steve, you're obvously NOT a business man either. Nice try in trying to corner me. Actually, I think it's the outrageous views of liberal lawyers that scare people the most. (Certainly in business, and especially in small business).
Newsflash: None of my customers are scared of me, or my views in my business.
I have an excellent customer base. I don't share my political views with them, because you get more customers if you pander to all customers. (There is your business lesson for the day, Counselor).
Maybe YOU should take one of Professor Clayson's business classes.
-hfrmack "
Phil wrote on Dec 16, 2008 7:16 PM:
" hfrmack - I don't know how my line of employment has anything to do with my analysis of your posting, but if it makes you happy I have both owned a business and currently am employed by one.
If you want to believe Mr. Clayson's column is about you and others that post here that is - as I said before - your right.
Just as it is my right to believe your belief is a sign of delusional thinking.
Now please don't think I mean to imply you are a delusional person - just that this thought you are having about the column is delusional. "
If you want to believe Mr. Clayson's column is about you and others that post here that is - as I said before - your right.
Just as it is my right to believe your belief is a sign of delusional thinking.
Now please don't think I mean to imply you are a delusional person - just that this thought you are having about the column is delusional. "
Oboy wrote on Dec 16, 2008 9:31 PM:
" hafmack, I wonder if your "Product Line" is the reason, your customers put up with you? Your opinion of yourself is far too high in your writings here, to not spill over on the job. I suspect you are kidding your self, with your self analogy. I put 43 years in retail sales and in a few cases wondered how does this all-knowing sales person live with them self? "
jeroze wrote on Dec 16, 2008 9:56 PM:
" As we come to the end of an eight years of deceptions and lack of transparency in our nation, I am throwing a shoe at the Gang of four for their practice of deception and secrecy.
I think the original Gang of Four were from China. To think that something like this column's Gang of Four can be at UNI. I have two grandchildren attending there!!!!!
The whole thing can be summed up with one word...Incredible. "
I think the original Gang of Four were from China. To think that something like this column's Gang of Four can be at UNI. I have two grandchildren attending there!!!!!
The whole thing can be summed up with one word...Incredible. "
hfrmack wrote on Dec 16, 2008 10:53 PM:
" Phil,
Just the thoughts I have of this column are delusional, huh?
Do you still have that box you bought at auction a couple of weeks ago?
You know, the one that represents the space between your ears? (Don't take it personal, that was just plain funny).
I don't necessarily completely believe Prof. Clayson's article is partly about me and others that post here. I believe my interpretation is better than yours. Are YOU "on to" the "Gang of Four" in your "analysis"? Your ealier comment speaks otherwise in your initial "analysis" of Prof. Clayson's article.
You are correct in stating your "right" to your views. I am trying to correct you in that you're "wrong" (once again) in your views.
I am confident that I AM "Right" in my views.
Maybe some day, I can persued you to the "Right" in your way of thinking. It then might be easier for you to interpret Professor Clayson's articles. The first step would be for you to open your mind as you read his words.
I AM interested that you have actually owned a business though. What happened? Did you end up filing for bankrupcy, or sell out? I know it's tough in the world of business. Especially now-a-days with what we have to look forward to in our political leadership. It will be a VERY un-business friendly environment to work in.
Wait a minute....are you in the insurance industry????? Do you now work for "Progressive"????????
If so, NO sypathy from me!
-hfrmack "
Just the thoughts I have of this column are delusional, huh?
Do you still have that box you bought at auction a couple of weeks ago?
You know, the one that represents the space between your ears? (Don't take it personal, that was just plain funny).
I don't necessarily completely believe Prof. Clayson's article is partly about me and others that post here. I believe my interpretation is better than yours. Are YOU "on to" the "Gang of Four" in your "analysis"? Your ealier comment speaks otherwise in your initial "analysis" of Prof. Clayson's article.
You are correct in stating your "right" to your views. I am trying to correct you in that you're "wrong" (once again) in your views.
I am confident that I AM "Right" in my views.
Maybe some day, I can persued you to the "Right" in your way of thinking. It then might be easier for you to interpret Professor Clayson's articles. The first step would be for you to open your mind as you read his words.
I AM interested that you have actually owned a business though. What happened? Did you end up filing for bankrupcy, or sell out? I know it's tough in the world of business. Especially now-a-days with what we have to look forward to in our political leadership. It will be a VERY un-business friendly environment to work in.
Wait a minute....are you in the insurance industry????? Do you now work for "Progressive"????????
If so, NO sypathy from me!
-hfrmack "
hfrmack wrote on Dec 16, 2008 11:59 PM:
" cross1242 wrote on Dec 16, 2008 6:23 PM:
hfrmack, perhaps if your views weren't so outrageous, maybe you wouldn't have to worry about people taking their business elsewhere. You're entitled to hold whatever opinions you want but maybe if you know that people would find them outrageous, they are also telling you that they are afraid of someone with views like yours.
/s/ Steve Cross "
I'll bet you're "afraid of my views", aren't you, Steve?
Do you really want to wager again?????
I see that YOU have been following the events of the "Obama birth place, non-story" pretty closely. Are you beginning to get worried? Don't worry, your contribution will go to a needy charity in the "Cedar Valley Food Bank". It should put Christmas cheer into a cold heart like yours, in the likeness of Ebineezer Scrooge.
"God Bless us everyone".
-hfrmack "
hfrmack, perhaps if your views weren't so outrageous, maybe you wouldn't have to worry about people taking their business elsewhere. You're entitled to hold whatever opinions you want but maybe if you know that people would find them outrageous, they are also telling you that they are afraid of someone with views like yours.
/s/ Steve Cross "
I'll bet you're "afraid of my views", aren't you, Steve?
Do you really want to wager again?????
I see that YOU have been following the events of the "Obama birth place, non-story" pretty closely. Are you beginning to get worried? Don't worry, your contribution will go to a needy charity in the "Cedar Valley Food Bank". It should put Christmas cheer into a cold heart like yours, in the likeness of Ebineezer Scrooge.
"God Bless us everyone".
-hfrmack "
Phil wrote on Dec 17, 2008 7:21 AM:
" hfrmack - if you check the posts I haven't really offered any significant analysis of Mr. Clayson's column this week - just your viewpoint of it.
And while I was not one of the ones who wagered with you recently, don't you find it a little risky to start looking to do so again when it is becoming increasingly likely you will overwhelming lose the wager already in place? "
And while I was not one of the ones who wagered with you recently, don't you find it a little risky to start looking to do so again when it is becoming increasingly likely you will overwhelming lose the wager already in place? "
yermom wrote on Dec 17, 2008 10:00 AM:
" hfrmack is just hetfield posting under a different title if you haven't noticed by now. And it's best to ignore hfrmack's posts too. "
hfrmack wrote on Dec 17, 2008 10:22 AM:
" Phil wrote on Dec 15, 2008 8:46 AM:
" Well if four professors are writing these columns, their styles are all remarkably similar.
No, this is Mr. Clayson having fun in his own way. And while he is at it he takes a few jabs at his favorite targets.
How about this line: "As stated in other sources, many bloggers have all the bravery of an obscene phone caller, but none of the creativity." Typcial Clayson.
And just what do you think you have Mr. Clayson? "
Phil wrote on Dec 17, 2008 7:21 AM:
" hfrmack - if you check the posts I haven't really offered any significant analysis of Mr. Clayson's column this week - just your viewpoint of it.
Hmmm....
????????? "
" Well if four professors are writing these columns, their styles are all remarkably similar.
No, this is Mr. Clayson having fun in his own way. And while he is at it he takes a few jabs at his favorite targets.
How about this line: "As stated in other sources, many bloggers have all the bravery of an obscene phone caller, but none of the creativity." Typcial Clayson.
And just what do you think you have Mr. Clayson? "
Phil wrote on Dec 17, 2008 7:21 AM:
" hfrmack - if you check the posts I haven't really offered any significant analysis of Mr. Clayson's column this week - just your viewpoint of it.
Hmmm....
????????? "
cross1242 wrote on Dec 17, 2008 11:11 AM:
" Does anyone else see irony in hfrmack spewing discontent and then concluding, "God Bless us everyone"?
/s/ Steve Cross "
/s/ Steve Cross "
cross1242 wrote on Dec 17, 2008 11:41 AM:
" FLASH!
Here's an AP story today on the fake story about Obama's lack of natural citizenship:
"Justice Kennedy rejects 2 more challenges to Obama
"Dec 17th, 2008 | WASHINGTON -- Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy has rejected two more efforts to get the court to consider whether President-elect Barack Obama is eligible to take office.
"Kennedy on Wednesday denied without comment an appeal by Philip J. Berg, a Pennsylvania attorney, that claims Obama is either a citizen of Kenya or Indonesia and is ineligible to be president because he is not a "natural-born citizen" of the U.S. as required by the Constitution. Another appeal from California, based on Berg's claims, also was denied.
"Individual justices and the entire court have turned down emergency appeals over Obama's eligibility at least seven times in the past six weeks.
"Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961 to an American mother and a Kenyan father.
"Reacting to Internet-fueled conspiracy theories that Obama's birth certificate is a fake, Hawaiian officials have said they examined the document and have no doubt it is authentic."
So, the Berg case has now been rejected as well as one other case I wasn't even aware of. I believe that all of the court cases have now been disposed of.
At this point, all court contests to Obama have been summarily dismissed and the members of the electoral college have voted without anyone contesting Obama's qualifications. The only supposed barrier now is when Congress counts the electoral votes.
I point this out because it just shows how preposterous the whole matter of contesting Obama's citizenship really is. (Plus, how to spend my money when collecting on my bet is becoming an issue.)
BTW, is the Supreme Court now in on the "conspiracy" to make Obama President?
/s/ Steve Cross "
Here's an AP story today on the fake story about Obama's lack of natural citizenship:
"Justice Kennedy rejects 2 more challenges to Obama
"Dec 17th, 2008 | WASHINGTON -- Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy has rejected two more efforts to get the court to consider whether President-elect Barack Obama is eligible to take office.
"Kennedy on Wednesday denied without comment an appeal by Philip J. Berg, a Pennsylvania attorney, that claims Obama is either a citizen of Kenya or Indonesia and is ineligible to be president because he is not a "natural-born citizen" of the U.S. as required by the Constitution. Another appeal from California, based on Berg's claims, also was denied.
"Individual justices and the entire court have turned down emergency appeals over Obama's eligibility at least seven times in the past six weeks.
"Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961 to an American mother and a Kenyan father.
"Reacting to Internet-fueled conspiracy theories that Obama's birth certificate is a fake, Hawaiian officials have said they examined the document and have no doubt it is authentic."
So, the Berg case has now been rejected as well as one other case I wasn't even aware of. I believe that all of the court cases have now been disposed of.
At this point, all court contests to Obama have been summarily dismissed and the members of the electoral college have voted without anyone contesting Obama's qualifications. The only supposed barrier now is when Congress counts the electoral votes.
I point this out because it just shows how preposterous the whole matter of contesting Obama's citizenship really is. (Plus, how to spend my money when collecting on my bet is becoming an issue.)
BTW, is the Supreme Court now in on the "conspiracy" to make Obama President?
/s/ Steve Cross "
xdfred wrote on Dec 17, 2008 2:26 PM:
" cross1242 wrote on Dec 17, 2008 11:11 AM:
" Does anyone else see irony in hfrmack spewing discontent and then concluding, "God Bless us everyone"?
/s/ Steve Cross "
Given the effects of liberalism and the worst being yet to come, there's plenty of reason for discontent. And we will definately need God's blessing to get past the Carter 2 years. "
" Does anyone else see irony in hfrmack spewing discontent and then concluding, "God Bless us everyone"?
/s/ Steve Cross "
Given the effects of liberalism and the worst being yet to come, there's plenty of reason for discontent. And we will definately need God's blessing to get past the Carter 2 years. "
hfrmack wrote on Dec 17, 2008 3:14 PM:
" cross1242 wrote on Dec 17, 2008 11:11 AM:
" Does anyone else see irony in hfrmack spewing discontent and then concluding, "God Bless us everyone"?
/s/ Steve Cross "
Have you ever heard of a story called, "A Christmas Carol", Steve?
It is where I drew my comment from.
I'm your "Ghost of Christmas Future" under an Obama administration. It's a horrifying story. I'm the last and scariest ghost of three. You are Ebineezer Scrooge. Beware!...beware!!!
"God Bless us everyone" -Tiny Tim
-hfrmack "
" Does anyone else see irony in hfrmack spewing discontent and then concluding, "God Bless us everyone"?
/s/ Steve Cross "
Have you ever heard of a story called, "A Christmas Carol", Steve?
It is where I drew my comment from.
I'm your "Ghost of Christmas Future" under an Obama administration. It's a horrifying story. I'm the last and scariest ghost of three. You are Ebineezer Scrooge. Beware!...beware!!!
"God Bless us everyone" -Tiny Tim
-hfrmack "
Timberlake wrote on Dec 17, 2008 5:47 PM:
" hfrmack. If you think the ghost of christmas future has a host of surprises for us check this out: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=83364.
If that link doesn't get printed, it's about the Con Con lurking in the shadows..........the new Constitutional Convention.....google it up. "
If that link doesn't get printed, it's about the Con Con lurking in the shadows..........the new Constitutional Convention.....google it up. "
hfrmack wrote on Dec 17, 2008 7:48 PM:
" Timberlake,
Hey, thanks for bringing this issue to my attention. Wow! That is one scary proposition, isn't it?
I'm definately going to share this link with my friends and family. We definately need to get this word out. Their proposed changes are unacceptable. I'm going to drop a note to Grassley, Harkin, and Brailey about my opposition as well. It can't hurt.
Good post!
Thanks again,
-hfrmack "
Hey, thanks for bringing this issue to my attention. Wow! That is one scary proposition, isn't it?
I'm definately going to share this link with my friends and family. We definately need to get this word out. Their proposed changes are unacceptable. I'm going to drop a note to Grassley, Harkin, and Brailey about my opposition as well. It can't hurt.
Good post!
Thanks again,
-hfrmack "
Phil wrote on Dec 17, 2008 9:18 PM:
" xdfred wrote on Dec 17, 2008 2:26 PM:
And we will definately need God's blessing to get past the Carter 2 years. "
Well just about anything would be better than the Hoover II years we are experiencing now. "
And we will definately need God's blessing to get past the Carter 2 years. "
Well just about anything would be better than the Hoover II years we are experiencing now. "
hfrmack wrote on Dec 17, 2008 9:40 PM:
" yermom wrote on Dec 17, 2008 10:00 AM:
" hfrmack is just hetfield posting under a different title if you haven't noticed by now. And it's best to ignore hfrmack's posts too. "
Nope....hetfield and I are different people with like conservative values.
hetfield is a more colorful writer than I am, and he has opted to drop out of this thread. We have to respect his decision, but we don't have to like it. I wish he would chime in again too. He is a good read.
And personally, I could care less if you ignore my post. Keep your blinders on. Let your ignorance in your liberal views lead yourself like pigs to slaughter. Enjoy your ride on this unsinkable ship, "Titanic".
I'm not that naive...I will at least try to understand the argumentative points from the other side of the fence and where they are coming from before arguing their wrongs and my "rights".
If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen.
-hfrmack "
" hfrmack is just hetfield posting under a different title if you haven't noticed by now. And it's best to ignore hfrmack's posts too. "
Nope....hetfield and I are different people with like conservative values.
hetfield is a more colorful writer than I am, and he has opted to drop out of this thread. We have to respect his decision, but we don't have to like it. I wish he would chime in again too. He is a good read.
And personally, I could care less if you ignore my post. Keep your blinders on. Let your ignorance in your liberal views lead yourself like pigs to slaughter. Enjoy your ride on this unsinkable ship, "Titanic".
I'm not that naive...I will at least try to understand the argumentative points from the other side of the fence and where they are coming from before arguing their wrongs and my "rights".
If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen.
-hfrmack "
timbrackett wrote on Dec 17, 2008 11:44 PM:
" WHAT????
WHAT????
come on....really?
a new constitutional convention???
that link was for a garbage story concocted by small-minded fear-mongers. there was not one shred of evidence in the article that we are actually going to have a constitutional convention.
put down the freakin' kool-aid people and stop buying into every crazy, fanatical conspiracy theory just because your team lost.
ridiculous!!!
and yes, i hope my utter contempt and disbelief shines through in my comments to the full extent that i feel them right now. "
WHAT????
come on....really?
a new constitutional convention???
that link was for a garbage story concocted by small-minded fear-mongers. there was not one shred of evidence in the article that we are actually going to have a constitutional convention.
put down the freakin' kool-aid people and stop buying into every crazy, fanatical conspiracy theory just because your team lost.
ridiculous!!!
and yes, i hope my utter contempt and disbelief shines through in my comments to the full extent that i feel them right now. "
timbrackett wrote on Dec 17, 2008 11:52 PM:
" timberlake--you really use worldnetdaily.com as a source for your news??? the same worldnetdaily.com that published articles saying america brought 9/11 on itself because of moral depravity? the same worldnetdaily.com that claims god "raised up shiite islam as a sword against america"?
according to many on your side of the aisle president-elect obama is "un-american" because his former pastor expressed similar sentiments, but you use this hack-job website as a source? does that make you un-american? "
according to many on your side of the aisle president-elect obama is "un-american" because his former pastor expressed similar sentiments, but you use this hack-job website as a source? does that make you un-american? "
MAC wrote on Dec 18, 2008 6:02 AM:
" Ever since the election of 1984 conservatives have behaved as though they have had a God-given right to rule this country. It was then that 'liberal' turned into a dirty word. Talk radio hosts and right wing pundits such as Ann Coulter came forth with their venom against the 'failed experiment' of liberalism.
Fast forward to present day...a new millenium...and a new outlook. The great conservative 'mandate' has past. The American people spoke their mind in November. In their minds...and in their day to day lives....the experiment of conservatism has failed them miserably.
They have voiced their desire for change....and the conservatives cannot believe it.
Some friendly advice for you...believe it. The people of this country are fed up with you and your disregard for the majority of Americans. Get over it...and get used to it. Your day has come...and it has past. And one only has to look out their window onto Main Street American and see the effects of your efforts. Conservatives have held most of the power in government since 1984 for most of the time. Blaming the problems we now face on faceless liberals is ludicrous. But you cannot see it....because you are still stuck back in 1984. Wake up...your mandate has past. "
Fast forward to present day...a new millenium...and a new outlook. The great conservative 'mandate' has past. The American people spoke their mind in November. In their minds...and in their day to day lives....the experiment of conservatism has failed them miserably.
They have voiced their desire for change....and the conservatives cannot believe it.
Some friendly advice for you...believe it. The people of this country are fed up with you and your disregard for the majority of Americans. Get over it...and get used to it. Your day has come...and it has past. And one only has to look out their window onto Main Street American and see the effects of your efforts. Conservatives have held most of the power in government since 1984 for most of the time. Blaming the problems we now face on faceless liberals is ludicrous. But you cannot see it....because you are still stuck back in 1984. Wake up...your mandate has past. "
cross1242 wrote on Dec 18, 2008 10:11 AM:
" Mac: great comment.
You said, "The people of this country are fed up with you and your disregard for the majority of Americans." By way of stark proof of what you said, here's something in Salon today:
"Thursday, Dec. 18, 2008 10:31 EST
Trust in GOP tumbles
"One of the two major parties if facing a serious branding problem right now. Hmmmm . . . can you guess which one?
"Continuing a theme discussed recently in this Salon conversation with Alex Castellanos, Ron Christie and Reihan Salaam, the GOP has some serious image issues. The country just doesn't trust them, or at least not nearly as much as the Democrats. The GOP needs to find a partisan Dr. Phil, plop down on the couch, and get some counseling.
"According to the Washington Post/ABC News poll, by more than a 2-to-1 margin, 56 percent to 23 percent, Americans trust the Democrats to better to handle the "main problems" facing the country. That 23 percent? It's the lowest level on record for either party since the Post/ABC first started asking this question in 1982.
"Details -- including pie charts! -- here.
"― Thomas Schaller"
At 23%, it would seem that Bush's popularity, or lack thereof, transferred directly to the Republican brand name.
/s/ Steve Cross "
You said, "The people of this country are fed up with you and your disregard for the majority of Americans." By way of stark proof of what you said, here's something in Salon today:
"Thursday, Dec. 18, 2008 10:31 EST
Trust in GOP tumbles
"One of the two major parties if facing a serious branding problem right now. Hmmmm . . . can you guess which one?
"Continuing a theme discussed recently in this Salon conversation with Alex Castellanos, Ron Christie and Reihan Salaam, the GOP has some serious image issues. The country just doesn't trust them, or at least not nearly as much as the Democrats. The GOP needs to find a partisan Dr. Phil, plop down on the couch, and get some counseling.
"According to the Washington Post/ABC News poll, by more than a 2-to-1 margin, 56 percent to 23 percent, Americans trust the Democrats to better to handle the "main problems" facing the country. That 23 percent? It's the lowest level on record for either party since the Post/ABC first started asking this question in 1982.
"Details -- including pie charts! -- here.
"― Thomas Schaller"
At 23%, it would seem that Bush's popularity, or lack thereof, transferred directly to the Republican brand name.
/s/ Steve Cross "
xdfred wrote on Dec 18, 2008 10:20 AM:
" Phil wrote on Dec 17, 2008 9:18 PM:
" xdfred wrote on Dec 17, 2008 2:26 PM:
And we will definately need God's blessing to get past the Carter 2 years. "
Well just about anything would be better than the Hoover II years we are experiencing now. "
You obviously don't know your history. What made the depression so bad was massive government intervention. Hoover started it by freezing wages, which led to layoffs, and the tariffs, which made it global. Roosevelt made it even worse by huge tax increases to fund his government make work programs, (sound familiar?), which stifled the private sector even more. Unemployment stayed high. "
" xdfred wrote on Dec 17, 2008 2:26 PM:
And we will definately need God's blessing to get past the Carter 2 years. "
Well just about anything would be better than the Hoover II years we are experiencing now. "
You obviously don't know your history. What made the depression so bad was massive government intervention. Hoover started it by freezing wages, which led to layoffs, and the tariffs, which made it global. Roosevelt made it even worse by huge tax increases to fund his government make work programs, (sound familiar?), which stifled the private sector even more. Unemployment stayed high. "
xdfred wrote on Dec 18, 2008 10:24 AM:
" Independent wrote on Dec 15, 2008 1:22 PM:
" Save it xdfred, I know you are actually hetfield.
The way you two copy & paste, then write in your response is identical. No other poster does it like you two, hhmmmm?
And now that the hetfield character has been "retired" is obvious that xdfred is posting at nearly the same rate as the departed hatefield. "
For Halloween, you should dress up as Sherlock Holmes. THEN maybe you'll get a clue. "
" Save it xdfred, I know you are actually hetfield.
The way you two copy & paste, then write in your response is identical. No other poster does it like you two, hhmmmm?
And now that the hetfield character has been "retired" is obvious that xdfred is posting at nearly the same rate as the departed hatefield. "
For Halloween, you should dress up as Sherlock Holmes. THEN maybe you'll get a clue. "
hfrmack wrote on Dec 18, 2008 11:35 AM:
" Hey Steve Cross,
I got you some more reading for Christmas. I know it's early, but I couldn't wait to give it to you.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=83846
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=83851
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=83869
Enjoy!
Have a Merry Christmas!
-hfrmack "
I got you some more reading for Christmas. I know it's early, but I couldn't wait to give it to you.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=83846
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=83851
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=83869
Enjoy!
Have a Merry Christmas!
-hfrmack "
hfrmack wrote on Dec 18, 2008 12:53 PM:
" timbrackett wrote on Dec 17, 2008 11:44 PM:
Yada, yada....and yes, i hope my utter contempt and disbelief shines through in my comments to the full extent that i feel them right now. "
Okay, and how would you then feel if this story actually became true to the full extent that this "worldnetdaily" article suggest?
Some remorse perhaps for our Constitution?
By then it would be too late.
Are you "Comfortabley Knumb" Pink Floydd?...I mean timbrackett?
-hfrmack "
Yada, yada....and yes, i hope my utter contempt and disbelief shines through in my comments to the full extent that i feel them right now. "
Okay, and how would you then feel if this story actually became true to the full extent that this "worldnetdaily" article suggest?
Some remorse perhaps for our Constitution?
By then it would be too late.
Are you "Comfortabley Knumb" Pink Floydd?...I mean timbrackett?
-hfrmack "
cross1242 wrote on Dec 18, 2008 5:13 PM:
" hfrmack @ Dec 18, 2008 11:35 AM cites a couple of stories trying to bolster the legitimacy of his argument that Obama's place of birth is in doubt.
I remain about as concerned about the issue as I would upon hearing about press reports that gravity will disappear next week.
Dream on, hfrmack. Our reckoning on January 20th draws ever closer.
/s/ Steve Cross "
I remain about as concerned about the issue as I would upon hearing about press reports that gravity will disappear next week.
Dream on, hfrmack. Our reckoning on January 20th draws ever closer.
/s/ Steve Cross "
Independent wrote on Dec 18, 2008 5:33 PM:
" I think Clayson is tired of getting beat up by Phil, Independent, cross1242, and chester 11.
Add it up and it's four against one.
How can the esteemed prof. compete when the playing ground is so unequal?
Hop think...I got it, use reason and logic to illiterate. "
Add it up and it's four against one.
How can the esteemed prof. compete when the playing ground is so unequal?
Hop think...I got it, use reason and logic to illiterate. "
hfrmack wrote on Dec 18, 2008 10:42 PM:
" cross1242 wrote on Dec 18, 2008 5:13 PM:
" hfrmack @ Dec 18, 2008 11:35 AM cites a couple of stories trying to bolster the legitimacy of his argument that Obama's place of birth is in doubt.
Your welcome, Steve(Scrooge)....Merry Christmas.
cross1242 wrote on Dec 18, 2008 5:13 PM:
Dream on, hfrmack. Our reckoning on January 20th draws ever closer.
/s/ Steve Cross "
Boy, you DO sound awfully worried. Relax, and re-read my earlier post of comfort, in that your contribution will be for a good cause.
-P.S. When you fill out your check,
make it payable to the: Cedar Valley Food Bank. I'll even deliver it for you personally with pride.
-hfrmack "
" hfrmack @ Dec 18, 2008 11:35 AM cites a couple of stories trying to bolster the legitimacy of his argument that Obama's place of birth is in doubt.
Your welcome, Steve(Scrooge)....Merry Christmas.
cross1242 wrote on Dec 18, 2008 5:13 PM:
Dream on, hfrmack. Our reckoning on January 20th draws ever closer.
/s/ Steve Cross "
Boy, you DO sound awfully worried. Relax, and re-read my earlier post of comfort, in that your contribution will be for a good cause.
-P.S. When you fill out your check,
make it payable to the: Cedar Valley Food Bank. I'll even deliver it for you personally with pride.
-hfrmack "
hfrmack wrote on Dec 18, 2008 11:03 PM:
" Independent,
You make yourself more modest of yourself in your analysis of Professor Clayson's article than I did. Good for you.
I don't think his points are in the negative connotations you prescribe, however.
But that's just my analysis.
There may be more from others in this thread who have feelings about this this article who agree with me too.
-hfrmack "
You make yourself more modest of yourself in your analysis of Professor Clayson's article than I did. Good for you.
I don't think his points are in the negative connotations you prescribe, however.
But that's just my analysis.
There may be more from others in this thread who have feelings about this this article who agree with me too.
-hfrmack "
hfrmack wrote on Dec 18, 2008 11:30 PM:
" chester11 wrote on Dec 14, 2008 1:29 PM:
" I can't imagine being a paper subscriber with little interaction with the online Courier and not being totally perplexed by this column.
As for the anonymous nature of blogging, Clayson gets to take a few jabs. He has that right. I have some hard opinions, and although I've posted my email address and am happy to exchange that way with anyone here, I also have business concerns and I'm just in a position where I'd prefer customers don't Google my name and politics then become a point of contention. Clayson's extremely partisan opinions don't seem to have as much impact on his tenured career. Kids have to take those courses to graduate, whether they agree with the professors worldview or not.
A long time ago, Clayson decided to wear his political ideology on his sleeve, regardless of his work situation, and he deserves credit for that.
But baiting people with different life circumstances to share their identities won't keep them from commenting on these columns, positive or negative. "
This is possibly the best post I've read regrarding a reply to one of Clayson's articles. Regardless if we are in political agreement or not, it is to the point from many of us bloggers who have "real life" circumstances to consider when we blog our opinions.
Thank you chester11 for your eloquance in describing this to the good professor.
I care as much as the next blogger in the direction our county is going, politically. Yet many of us have our hands tied to "real world" circumstances that won't allow us to reveal our true identities, as much as I would love to share what mine is.
You just might have to put up with the "prank phone callers" just so that our voices get heard.
Dittos chester11,
-hfrmack "
" I can't imagine being a paper subscriber with little interaction with the online Courier and not being totally perplexed by this column.
As for the anonymous nature of blogging, Clayson gets to take a few jabs. He has that right. I have some hard opinions, and although I've posted my email address and am happy to exchange that way with anyone here, I also have business concerns and I'm just in a position where I'd prefer customers don't Google my name and politics then become a point of contention. Clayson's extremely partisan opinions don't seem to have as much impact on his tenured career. Kids have to take those courses to graduate, whether they agree with the professors worldview or not.
A long time ago, Clayson decided to wear his political ideology on his sleeve, regardless of his work situation, and he deserves credit for that.
But baiting people with different life circumstances to share their identities won't keep them from commenting on these columns, positive or negative. "
This is possibly the best post I've read regrarding a reply to one of Clayson's articles. Regardless if we are in political agreement or not, it is to the point from many of us bloggers who have "real life" circumstances to consider when we blog our opinions.
Thank you chester11 for your eloquance in describing this to the good professor.
I care as much as the next blogger in the direction our county is going, politically. Yet many of us have our hands tied to "real world" circumstances that won't allow us to reveal our true identities, as much as I would love to share what mine is.
You just might have to put up with the "prank phone callers" just so that our voices get heard.
Dittos chester11,
-hfrmack "
timbrackett wrote on Dec 18, 2008 11:41 PM:
" not numb at all...i'm fully alert. alert enough to know which sources to trust so that i don't fall for crazy conspiracy theories. remember berg's case? thrown out just like all of the other conspiracy theories coming from the right this past month and a half. "
hfrmack wrote on Dec 19, 2008 12:28 AM:
" MAC wrote on Dec 18, 2008 6:02 AM:
" Ever since the election of 1984 conservatives have behaved as though they have had a God-given right to rule this country. It was then that 'liberal' turned into a dirty word. Talk radio hosts and right wing pundits such as Ann Coulter came forth with their venom against the 'failed experiment' of liberalism.
MAC,
You have a twisted view of history, and the dates you list are incorrect. But that's okay, us Conservatives understand the misgivings and unorthodox thoughts of the little minds of liberals. F.Y.I., Reagan replaced Carter in 1980. He won re-election in 1984.
-hfrmack "
" Ever since the election of 1984 conservatives have behaved as though they have had a God-given right to rule this country. It was then that 'liberal' turned into a dirty word. Talk radio hosts and right wing pundits such as Ann Coulter came forth with their venom against the 'failed experiment' of liberalism.
MAC,
You have a twisted view of history, and the dates you list are incorrect. But that's okay, us Conservatives understand the misgivings and unorthodox thoughts of the little minds of liberals. F.Y.I., Reagan replaced Carter in 1980. He won re-election in 1984.
-hfrmack "
hfrmack wrote on Dec 19, 2008 9:12 AM:
" timbrackett wrote on Dec 18, 2008 11:41 PM:
" not numb at all...i'm fully alert. alert enough to know which sources to trust so that i don't fall for crazy conspiracy theories. remember berg's case? thrown out just like all of the other conspiracy theories coming from the right this past month and a half. "
Typical liberal. You're doing the dance around my questions again, Tim.
You ALWAYS have difficulty answering my questions, don't you?
Let me try again...
Okay, and how would you then feel if this story actually became true to the full extent that this "worldnetdaily" article suggest?
Some remorse perhaps for our Constitution?
Regardless of the "source". If this story came from CNN, or the AP, or any liberal news source of your choice...and it turned out to be true, how would you feel about it then???????
I know I've heard my share of "consiracy theories" from the left wing media. Remember Dan Rather's forgery?
If you can't answer my questions, I think we'll all know you're "Comfortabley Numb".
-hfrmack "
" not numb at all...i'm fully alert. alert enough to know which sources to trust so that i don't fall for crazy conspiracy theories. remember berg's case? thrown out just like all of the other conspiracy theories coming from the right this past month and a half. "
Typical liberal. You're doing the dance around my questions again, Tim.
You ALWAYS have difficulty answering my questions, don't you?
Let me try again...
Okay, and how would you then feel if this story actually became true to the full extent that this "worldnetdaily" article suggest?
Some remorse perhaps for our Constitution?
Regardless of the "source". If this story came from CNN, or the AP, or any liberal news source of your choice...and it turned out to be true, how would you feel about it then???????
I know I've heard my share of "consiracy theories" from the left wing media. Remember Dan Rather's forgery?
If you can't answer my questions, I think we'll all know you're "Comfortabley Numb".
-hfrmack "
xdfred wrote on Dec 19, 2008 9:24 AM:
" Independent wrote on Dec 18, 2008 5:33 PM:
" I think Clayson is tired of getting beat up by Phil, Independent, cross1242, and chester 11.
Add it up and it's four against one.
How can the esteemed prof. compete when the playing ground is so unequal?
Hop think...I got it, use reason and logic to illiterate. "
You must have watched way too much "pro" wrestling growing up.
Notice that Prof Clayson still writes an article every week. "
" I think Clayson is tired of getting beat up by Phil, Independent, cross1242, and chester 11.
Add it up and it's four against one.
How can the esteemed prof. compete when the playing ground is so unequal?
Hop think...I got it, use reason and logic to illiterate. "
You must have watched way too much "pro" wrestling growing up.
Notice that Prof Clayson still writes an article every week. "
xdfred wrote on Dec 19, 2008 9:26 AM:
" MAC wrote on Dec 18, 2008 6:02 AM:
" Ever since the election of 1984 conservatives have behaved as though they have had a God-given right to rule this country. It was then that 'liberal' turned into a dirty word. Talk radio hosts and right wing pundits such as Ann Coulter came forth with their venom against the 'failed experiment' of liberalism." Here's a little lesson on who's been stealing or trying to steal elections lately.
http://townhall.com/columnists/AnnCoulter/2008/12/18/one_plus_one_equals_20_extra_votes_for_franken "
" Ever since the election of 1984 conservatives have behaved as though they have had a God-given right to rule this country. It was then that 'liberal' turned into a dirty word. Talk radio hosts and right wing pundits such as Ann Coulter came forth with their venom against the 'failed experiment' of liberalism." Here's a little lesson on who's been stealing or trying to steal elections lately.
http://townhall.com/columnists/AnnCoulter/2008/12/18/one_plus_one_equals_20_extra_votes_for_franken "
hfrmack wrote on Dec 19, 2008 9:39 AM:
" It's nice to get along
The rest of the world cannot understand how after bitter election campaigns,
American politicians can return to reality. For Instance Sarah Palin has invited
to her great state of Alaska the men who defeated her, Barack Obama and Joe
Biden.
She has provided a moose hunting trip for their enjoyment and has hired two
other prominent men to assist them.
Dick Cheney will instruct them in safe gun handling and Ted Kennedy will drive
them back to their cabins in the evening.
What a gal, that Sarah is such a sport and thinks of everything.
God Bless America
LOL!!! I got this one in an e-mail and had to share!
-hfrmack "
The rest of the world cannot understand how after bitter election campaigns,
American politicians can return to reality. For Instance Sarah Palin has invited
to her great state of Alaska the men who defeated her, Barack Obama and Joe
Biden.
She has provided a moose hunting trip for their enjoyment and has hired two
other prominent men to assist them.
Dick Cheney will instruct them in safe gun handling and Ted Kennedy will drive
them back to their cabins in the evening.
What a gal, that Sarah is such a sport and thinks of everything.
God Bless America
LOL!!! I got this one in an e-mail and had to share!
-hfrmack "
Phil wrote on Dec 19, 2008 9:42 AM:
" xdfred - just so you know - I don't - and I doubt many others do either - read articles written by Ann Coulter.
Ann and the truth are like oil and water - they will never mix. "
Ann and the truth are like oil and water - they will never mix. "
MAC wrote on Dec 19, 2008 9:58 AM:
" hfrmack wrote on Dec 19, 2008 12:28 AM:
MAC,
You have a twisted view of history, and the dates you list are incorrect. But that's okay, us Conservatives understand the misgivings and unorthodox thoughts of the little minds of liberals. F.Y.I., Reagan replaced Carter in 1980. He won re-election in 1984.
-hfrmack "
My view of history is just fine. I KNOW Reagan defeated carter in 80. But the 'mandate' election of which I speak was 1984...when Reagan carried all states with the exception of Minnesota. The dates are correct. "
MAC,
You have a twisted view of history, and the dates you list are incorrect. But that's okay, us Conservatives understand the misgivings and unorthodox thoughts of the little minds of liberals. F.Y.I., Reagan replaced Carter in 1980. He won re-election in 1984.
-hfrmack "
My view of history is just fine. I KNOW Reagan defeated carter in 80. But the 'mandate' election of which I speak was 1984...when Reagan carried all states with the exception of Minnesota. The dates are correct. "
MAC wrote on Dec 19, 2008 10:14 AM:
" xdfred wrote on Dec 19, 2008 9:26 AM:
"Here's a little lesson on who's been stealing or trying to steal elections lately."
A) If you will re-read my post, I said NOTHING about stealing elections.
B) Ms. Coulter hardly qualifies as a "fair and unbiased" commentator...to use a phrase of which you conservatives seem so fond. Especially since she has advocated the shooting of liberals in the past.
Her brand of conservative venom has become passe. "
"Here's a little lesson on who's been stealing or trying to steal elections lately."
A) If you will re-read my post, I said NOTHING about stealing elections.
B) Ms. Coulter hardly qualifies as a "fair and unbiased" commentator...to use a phrase of which you conservatives seem so fond. Especially since she has advocated the shooting of liberals in the past.
Her brand of conservative venom has become passe. "
cubbies08 wrote on Dec 19, 2008 10:52 AM:
" Somebody answer me this...I watched keith Olberman for about 10 minutes last night. How in the world does this man have a TV show? Is there actually people who watch him and believe his bull? "
xdfred wrote on Dec 19, 2008 12:30 PM:
" Phil wrote on Dec 19, 2008 9:42 AM:
" xdfred - just so you know - I don't - and I doubt many others do either - read articles written by Ann Coulter.
Ann and the truth are like oil and water - they will never mix. "
Prove it. Cough up one lie she has ever written. You can't. There isn't one. She is one of the best researched writers there is. Go on. Cough one up. "
" xdfred - just so you know - I don't - and I doubt many others do either - read articles written by Ann Coulter.
Ann and the truth are like oil and water - they will never mix. "
Prove it. Cough up one lie she has ever written. You can't. There isn't one. She is one of the best researched writers there is. Go on. Cough one up. "
xdfred wrote on Dec 19, 2008 12:34 PM:
" MAC wrote on Dec 19, 2008 10:14 AM:
" xdfred wrote on Dec 19, 2008 9:26 AM:
"Here's a little lesson on who's been stealing or trying to steal elections lately."
A) If you will re-read my post, I said NOTHING about stealing elections." My error. I was wrong. I apologize. Sincerely.
The reason liberals were so incensed in 2000 was that they tried to steal the election and were stopped, and since liberals belive either democrats win, or republicans cheat, who really has the attitude you described?
"B) Ms. Coulter hardly qualifies as a "fair and unbiased" commentator...to use a phrase of which you conservatives seem so fond. Especially since she has advocated the shooting of liberals in the past." Vs Rando Rhodes advocating the assasination of president Bush? And I don't think she advocated, as you say. Do you have the article?
"Her brand of conservative venom has become passe. " As I mentioned earlier, she is one of the best researched writers there is. That's why the knee jerk reaction is to call her a liar, bigot, etc. and run away. Can you dispute anything she wrote in the article? "
" xdfred wrote on Dec 19, 2008 9:26 AM:
"Here's a little lesson on who's been stealing or trying to steal elections lately."
A) If you will re-read my post, I said NOTHING about stealing elections." My error. I was wrong. I apologize. Sincerely.
The reason liberals were so incensed in 2000 was that they tried to steal the election and were stopped, and since liberals belive either democrats win, or republicans cheat, who really has the attitude you described?
"B) Ms. Coulter hardly qualifies as a "fair and unbiased" commentator...to use a phrase of which you conservatives seem so fond. Especially since she has advocated the shooting of liberals in the past." Vs Rando Rhodes advocating the assasination of president Bush? And I don't think she advocated, as you say. Do you have the article?
"Her brand of conservative venom has become passe. " As I mentioned earlier, she is one of the best researched writers there is. That's why the knee jerk reaction is to call her a liar, bigot, etc. and run away. Can you dispute anything she wrote in the article? "
xdfred wrote on Dec 19, 2008 12:35 PM:
" hfrmack wrote on Dec 19, 2008 9:39 AM:
" It's nice to get along...." That's good. Really good. The Kennedy part, too. "
" It's nice to get along...." That's good. Really good. The Kennedy part, too. "
hfrmack wrote on Dec 19, 2008 1:52 PM:
" xdfred wrote on Dec 19, 2008 12:35 PM:
" hfrmack wrote on Dec 19, 2008 9:39 AM:
" It's nice to get along...." That's good. Really good. The Kennedy part, too. "
Yeah, I thought it was funny too. -Thanks!
-hfrmack "
" hfrmack wrote on Dec 19, 2008 9:39 AM:
" It's nice to get along...." That's good. Really good. The Kennedy part, too. "
Yeah, I thought it was funny too. -Thanks!
-hfrmack "
hfrmack wrote on Dec 20, 2008 12:39 AM:
" xdfred wrote on Dec 19, 2008 12:30 PM:
" Phil wrote on Dec 19, 2008 9:42 AM:
" xdfred - just so you know - I don't - and I doubt many others do either - read articles written by Ann Coulter.
Ann and the truth are like oil and water - they will never mix. "
Prove it. Cough up one lie she has ever written. You can't. There isn't one. She is one of the best researched writers there is. Go on. Cough one up. "
What's up Phil???? Can't you cough one up????????????????????????????????????
It's been over 12 hours!
-hfrmack "
" Phil wrote on Dec 19, 2008 9:42 AM:
" xdfred - just so you know - I don't - and I doubt many others do either - read articles written by Ann Coulter.
Ann and the truth are like oil and water - they will never mix. "
Prove it. Cough up one lie she has ever written. You can't. There isn't one. She is one of the best researched writers there is. Go on. Cough one up. "
What's up Phil???? Can't you cough one up????????????????????????????????????
It's been over 12 hours!
-hfrmack "
hfrmack wrote on Dec 20, 2008 1:00 AM:
" MAC wrote on Dec 19, 2008 9:58 AM:
My view of history is just fine. I KNOW Reagan defeated carter in 80. But the 'mandate' election of which I speak was 1984...when Reagan carried all states with the exception of Minnesota. The dates are correct. "
I'm curious, MAC....how did you vote in 80 & 84? Was it Carter and Mondale? The reason I ask is that it is in many peoples views, including my own, that Reagan was one of the "Top 10", (maybe even "Top Five", depending on who you ask), Presidents this country has ever seen.
The man was a political genious in ending the cold war with just two words, "Star Wars". Well, maybe also, "Mr. Gorbachev...tear down this wall!", from Berlin. (Six words) He's definately one of my favorites, and I'm proud to say that I voted for him.
-hfrmack "
My view of history is just fine. I KNOW Reagan defeated carter in 80. But the 'mandate' election of which I speak was 1984...when Reagan carried all states with the exception of Minnesota. The dates are correct. "
I'm curious, MAC....how did you vote in 80 & 84? Was it Carter and Mondale? The reason I ask is that it is in many peoples views, including my own, that Reagan was one of the "Top 10", (maybe even "Top Five", depending on who you ask), Presidents this country has ever seen.
The man was a political genious in ending the cold war with just two words, "Star Wars". Well, maybe also, "Mr. Gorbachev...tear down this wall!", from Berlin. (Six words) He's definately one of my favorites, and I'm proud to say that I voted for him.
-hfrmack "
MAC wrote on Dec 20, 2008 6:09 AM:
" hfrmack wrote on Dec 20, 2008 1:00 AM
"...Reagan was one of the "Top 10", (maybe even "Top Five", depending on who you ask), Presidents this country has ever seen.
The man was a political genious (sic) in ending the cold war with just two words, "Star Wars". Well, maybe also, "Mr. Gorbachev...tear down this wall!", from Berlin. (Six words) He's definately (sic) one of my favorites, and I'm proud to say that I voted for him."
I'm sure you are. So what? Whether or not Reagan was a great president and/or a genius was NOT my point. Nor was for whom I voted.
But with this, your latest serving of red herring, you have just validated what I stated in my original posting. Thank you.
And one more thing...
My wishes for a MERRY CHRISTMAS and a PROSPEROUS and HAPPY NEW YEAR to you and yours!! HAPPY HOLIDAYS! "
"...Reagan was one of the "Top 10", (maybe even "Top Five", depending on who you ask), Presidents this country has ever seen.
The man was a political genious (sic) in ending the cold war with just two words, "Star Wars". Well, maybe also, "Mr. Gorbachev...tear down this wall!", from Berlin. (Six words) He's definately (sic) one of my favorites, and I'm proud to say that I voted for him."
I'm sure you are. So what? Whether or not Reagan was a great president and/or a genius was NOT my point. Nor was for whom I voted.
But with this, your latest serving of red herring, you have just validated what I stated in my original posting. Thank you.
And one more thing...
My wishes for a MERRY CHRISTMAS and a PROSPEROUS and HAPPY NEW YEAR to you and yours!! HAPPY HOLIDAYS! "
jeroze wrote on Dec 20, 2008 8:01 AM:
" The proof of the pudding that Ann Coulter is unbiased is that Phil can not cough up one of her lies????? Are her generalizations truth or lies?
If I had written a book or appeared on Fox News and written or said "Liberals hate America" would you call me unbiased??
Maybe Ann Coulter should be made to cough up her birth certificate so we know for sure if she was born in 1961 or 1963. "
If I had written a book or appeared on Fox News and written or said "Liberals hate America" would you call me unbiased??
Maybe Ann Coulter should be made to cough up her birth certificate so we know for sure if she was born in 1961 or 1963. "
cross1242 wrote on Dec 20, 2008 10:53 AM:
" jeroze @ Dec 20, 2008 8:01 AM said, "The proof of the pudding that Ann Coulter is unbiased is that Phil can not cough up one of her lies?????"
You can always tell when Ann Coulter is lying: her lips are moving. (Not new but it is apt.)
/s/ Steve Cross "
You can always tell when Ann Coulter is lying: her lips are moving. (Not new but it is apt.)
/s/ Steve Cross "
timbrackett wrote on Dec 20, 2008 11:04 AM:
" hfrmack--i'm not gonna take the bait. if you would ask me real questions instead of questions about crazy conspiracy theories, i would respond.
WE ARE NOT GOING TO HAVE A NEW CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION!!! that article, as well as the entire conspiracy theory, is a scare tactic from those on the far fringes of the right. i've been hearing the same conspiracy theory for at least 17 years and it still hasn't happened. why? because it's NOT going to happen!!!
step outside of your little bubble of delusion for a minute and i'll answer your questions. but i'm not going to address crazy conspiracy theories anymore. "
WE ARE NOT GOING TO HAVE A NEW CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION!!! that article, as well as the entire conspiracy theory, is a scare tactic from those on the far fringes of the right. i've been hearing the same conspiracy theory for at least 17 years and it still hasn't happened. why? because it's NOT going to happen!!!
step outside of your little bubble of delusion for a minute and i'll answer your questions. but i'm not going to address crazy conspiracy theories anymore. "
hfrmack wrote on Dec 20, 2008 12:59 PM:
" jeroze wrote on Dec 20, 2008 8:01 AM:
If I had written a book or appeared on Fox News and written or said "Liberals hate America" would you call me unbiased??
No one here accused Ann Coulter as unbiased. She has very eloquant partisan views.
jeroze wrote on Dec 20, 2008 8:01 AM:
Are her generalizations truth or lies?
Truth. If the shoe fits, wear it.
Can YOU name one of her lies, jeroze?
You liberals just hate the fact that you are getting beat up by a girl when she states her political opinions/facts. In typical liberal fashion, if you can't debate the facts at face value, start with the personal attacks.
-hfrmack "
If I had written a book or appeared on Fox News and written or said "Liberals hate America" would you call me unbiased??
No one here accused Ann Coulter as unbiased. She has very eloquant partisan views.
jeroze wrote on Dec 20, 2008 8:01 AM:
Are her generalizations truth or lies?
Truth. If the shoe fits, wear it.
Can YOU name one of her lies, jeroze?
You liberals just hate the fact that you are getting beat up by a girl when she states her political opinions/facts. In typical liberal fashion, if you can't debate the facts at face value, start with the personal attacks.
-hfrmack "
hfrmack wrote on Dec 20, 2008 1:02 PM:
" MAC wrote on Dec 20, 2008 6:09 AM:
My wishes for a MERRY CHRISTMAS and a PROSPEROUS and HAPPY NEW YEAR to you and yours!! HAPPY HOLIDAYS! "
Thank you, and right back at you!
-hfrmack "
My wishes for a MERRY CHRISTMAS and a PROSPEROUS and HAPPY NEW YEAR to you and yours!! HAPPY HOLIDAYS! "
Thank you, and right back at you!
-hfrmack "
Independent wrote on Dec 20, 2008 1:39 PM:
" hetfield, xdfred, and hfrmack are all the same person. "
hfrmack wrote on Dec 20, 2008 2:19 PM:
" Independent wrote on Dec 20, 2008 1:39 PM:
" hetfield, xdfred, and hfrmack are all the same person. "
And Independent is clueless.
-hfrmack "
" hetfield, xdfred, and hfrmack are all the same person. "
And Independent is clueless.
-hfrmack "
hfrmack wrote on Dec 20, 2008 2:29 PM:
" timbrackett wrote on Dec 20, 2008 11:04 AM:
" hfrmack--i'm not gonna take the bait. if you would ask me real questions instead of questions about crazy conspiracy theories, i would respond.
My questions were NOT baited. I didn't expect you to answer anyway. I figured if you did, your cowardace would shine through. I was right. You're "Comfortabley Numb".
Any more on "Social Scripture"?
-hfrmack "
" hfrmack--i'm not gonna take the bait. if you would ask me real questions instead of questions about crazy conspiracy theories, i would respond.
My questions were NOT baited. I didn't expect you to answer anyway. I figured if you did, your cowardace would shine through. I was right. You're "Comfortabley Numb".
Any more on "Social Scripture"?
-hfrmack "
cross1242 wrote on Dec 20, 2008 3:38 PM:
" timbrackett @ Dec 20, 2008 11:04 AM said, "hfrmack--i'm not gonna take the bait. if you would ask me real questions instead of questions about crazy conspiracy theories, i would respond."
Tim, if he can't talk about a crazy conspiracy theory, I doubt that he can talk at all.
/s/ Steve Cross "
Tim, if he can't talk about a crazy conspiracy theory, I doubt that he can talk at all.
/s/ Steve Cross "
Oboy wrote on Dec 20, 2008 4:18 PM:
" hfmack, we will all see who the coward is when it comes time to pay off your bet. Steve will be left at the alter, wait and see. "
timbrackett wrote on Dec 20, 2008 6:10 PM:
" --hfrmack. also, i don't like pink floyd.
and what do you mean about "social scripture"?
--cross, i'm starting to believe you are correct. "
and what do you mean about "social scripture"?
--cross, i'm starting to believe you are correct. "
jeroze wrote on Dec 20, 2008 7:13 PM:
" I thought the subject was whether or not Ann Coulter was a "fair and unbiased" reporter. Then Hfmack replies that Phil is supposed to cough up a lie. So far Phil has not taken that bait so I will ask:
Did or did not Ann Coulter write the following in a book?
"Liberals hate America, they hate flag-wavers, they hate abortion opponents, they hate all religions except Islam, post 9/11. Even Islamic terrorists don't hate America like liberals do."
That is my cough up. Call it what you like. I do not think it is a very fair and unbiased statement.
I find much of the blogging this week and most weeks to be incredibly much like Ann Coulter's opinions. I think someone wrote a chapter of a book and called it Ann Coulter ...A Nutcase.
Such venom does not promote truth but neither does Ann Coulter.
I rest my case. "
Did or did not Ann Coulter write the following in a book?
"Liberals hate America, they hate flag-wavers, they hate abortion opponents, they hate all religions except Islam, post 9/11. Even Islamic terrorists don't hate America like liberals do."
That is my cough up. Call it what you like. I do not think it is a very fair and unbiased statement.
I find much of the blogging this week and most weeks to be incredibly much like Ann Coulter's opinions. I think someone wrote a chapter of a book and called it Ann Coulter ...A Nutcase.
Such venom does not promote truth but neither does Ann Coulter.
I rest my case. "
Due to the amount of spam and negative comments received, the Courier implement a registered-user system for participation in the comment portion of our site. In doing so, the Courier reserves the right to ban any user(s) at any time without notice if we feel they are not following the terms of agreement.
DISCLAIMER: The Courier provides our story commenting feature in order to solicit feedback, debate and discussion on topics of local interest. Please keep in mind that civility is a necessary component of productive conversation. All blatantly inflammatory or otherwise inappropriate comments (i.e. vulgarity, marketing, etc.) are subject to rejection and/or removal. Comments will appear if and when they are approved. For a more in-depth explanation of our policy, please see our Rules of the Road. Thanks for reading, and thanks for participating.
~ADVERTISEMENT~
NEWS |
SPORTS |
COMMUNITY |
BUSINESS |
ENTERTAINMENT |
FEATURES |
OPINIONS |
OBITUARIES |
CLASSIFIEDS |
PRIVACY POLICY |
CONTACT US |
CARRIER PAGES
|
jeroze wrote on Dec 14, 2008 7:53 AM:
Nevertheless I am liberal in compassion and so I have been called a part of the left by some of the bloggers. Since my life style is trying to live according to the teachings of the Sermon on the Mount, the more I succeed, the more satisfied I am to be called a liberal.
As this coming week plays out, I will try to analyze what it is about today's column that alarms me.
One question immediately came to the forefront. Is this the best that four compassionate conservatives can do? "