The Rose Garden and White House happenings: Listening to voters’ concerns

Harsh and unnecessary;  that type of comment is never necessary. 

it was rude and uncalled for.  And it's not even descriptive of the arguments he's criticizing.  There's no indication that mtierney's POV is different from many Republicans of any age.

ml1 said:
it was rude and uncalled for.  And it's not even descriptive of the arguments he's criticizing.  There's no indication that mtierney's POV is different from many Republicans of any age.

 Even if her POV was different, that was over the line.

Now that many have expressed outrage over how our resident die hard supporter of the lying, racist, xenophobic and fascist right wing, can we move on? 

Or will we be treated to additional outrage expressions?

BG9 said:
Now that many have expressed outrage over how our resident die hard supporter of the lying, racist, xenophobic and fascist right wing, can we move on?

 I wasn’t so outraged that I couldn’t complete a sentence, but, yeah, it bothered me. Still does. 

See? Sentence fragments. I must be angrier than I thought.

DaveSchmidt said:

BG9 said:
Now that many have expressed outrage over how our resident die hard supporter of the lying, racist, xenophobic and fascist right wing, can we move on?

 I wasn’t so outraged that I couldn’t complete a sentence, but, yeah, it bothered me. Still does. 
See? Sentence fragments. I must be angrier than I thought.

But it really shouldn't bother you.

She's shown on this site, anyway, that she's tough as nails, hard as iron. I'm sure she can take what Dave dished and is quite capable of responding on her own.

A little backup from the community never hurts.

(I guess I should anticipate being told that some people don’t deserve backup. Rest assured, the righteousness of the individual crusades against mtierney has been noted in the Grand Scheme of Things. Excelsior!)

BG9 said:
Now that many have expressed outrage over how our resident die hard supporter of the lying, racist, xenophobic and fascist right wing, can we move on? 
Or will we be treated to additional outrage expressions?

I'm not outraged.  I just don't think it's necessary to land a low blow in order to argue with someone.

so who's gonna ban Dave?

drummerboy said:
so who's gonna ban Dave?

Jamie.  Will probably make for an awkward Thanksgiving dinner.

Ban Dave? Why? 

In case you missed Dave’s most recent attack. His animosity  toward me really started around 2000 at the time of first Maplewood tax reveal in 20 years. In 18 years, I have never spoken a harsh or demeaning word to him or in reference to him. This last verbal attack is really beyond the pale in so many ways. He is a very angry man.

Oct 14, 2018 at 9:52pm

“This entire thread is a pointless waste of time.  Mtierney has demonstrated time and time again that she is out of touch with reality and borders on dementia.  She needs medication and care.”

mtierney said:
Ban Dave? Why? 


In case you missed Dave’s most recent attack. His animosity  toward me really started around 2000 at the time of first Maplewood tax reveal in 20 years. In 18 years, I have never spoken a harsh or demeaning word to him or in reference to him. This last verbal attack is really beyond the pale in so many ways. He is a very angry man.


Oct 14, 2018 at 9:52pm
“This entire thread is a pointless waste of time.  Mtierney has demonstrated time and time again that she is out of touch with reality and borders on dementia.  She needs medication and care.”

Sorry but I can't relate his animosity as anything but a healthy reaction toward someone who is  willing to overlook sexual assault, misogyny, and horrific child abuse (children kept in cages) as long as THEIR needs are met.

I could have expressed myself better and for that I am sorry.  In truth, I thought I had erased that part of my comment and had only included the link beneath the quote.  My only defense is that I may have dementia and am on meds.

dave said:
I could have expressed myself better and for that I am sorry.  In truth, I thought I had erased that part of my comment and had only included the link beneath the quote.  My only defense is that I may have dementia and am on meds.

 Ambien?

this op-Ed — https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/15/opinion/nationalism-trump-globalization-immigration.html?rref=collection%2Fissuecollection%2Ftodays-new-york-times — is a new take on how the world turns..

dave said:
I could have expressed myself better and for that I am sorry.  In truth, I thought I had erased that part of my comment and had only included the link beneath the quote.  My only defense is that I may have dementia and am on meds.

 Thank you.

Does Chardonnay count as medication?

Then count me in.

Really hard to believe no one has talked about Hillary’s defense of Bill in this #metoo era!

https://www.vox.com/2018/10/15/17978156/hillary-clinton-monica-lewinsky-interview-bill-clinton-sexual-misconduct-metoo

mtierney said:
Really hard to believe no one has talked about Hillary’s defense of Bill in this #metoo era!
https://www.vox.com/2018/10/15/17978156/hillary-clinton-monica-lewinsky-interview-bill-clinton-sexual-misconduct-metoo

 Who the "fick" cares? Deal with real world. Not to mention the trumpian ignorance of his transgressions.

mtierney said:
Really hard to believe no one has talked about Hillary’s defense of Bill in this #metoo era!
https://www.vox.com/2018/10/15/17978156/hillary-clinton-monica-lewinsky-interview-bill-clinton-sexual-misconduct-metoo

 The silence is largely because the Clintons are yesterday's news trying to stay relevant.

It is relevant because she was considered the only “winnable” Democratic candidate in 2016. Where is the list of potential DNC prospects today?

mtierney said:
It is relevant because she was considered the only “winnable” Democratic candidate in 2016. Where is the list of potential DNC prospects today?

 are you going to start this again?  Three years ago you were crowing about the GOP's "deep bench" with their 17 or whatever presidential candidates.  And not one of the passengers in that clown car was able to prevent a completely unqualified, malignant narcissistic celebrity reality show host from becoming president.

The presidential election is more than two years away.  There are plenty of Democrats who will come forward who are qualified and competent.

We might remember the "qualities" of a few past conservative voices here and appreciate the give-and-take offered by mtierney. 16,000 posts and counting. The thread serves.

mtierney said:
It is relevant because she was considered the only “winnable” Democratic candidate in 2016. Where is the list of potential DNC prospects today?

 Your mind works in strange ways.  2016 was a million years ago and is not relevant.  The Clintons are history.  Anyway, if there was a real crime buried in the email kerfuffle, I am sure that HRC would have  been prosecuted.

GL2 said:
We might remember the "qualities" of a few past conservative voices here and appreciate the give-and-take offered by mtierney. 16,000 posts and counting. The thread serves.

 Hmm, this is a compliment, right? I get so few that I have difficulty recognizing one,  

NYT editorial today kinda sees it my way....

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/17/opinion/hillary-clintons-master-class-in-distraction.html?rref=collection%2Fissuecollection%2Ftodays-new-york-times

mtierney said:

GL2 said:
We might remember the "qualities" of a few past conservative voices here and appreciate the give-and-take offered by mtierney. 16,000 posts and counting. The thread serves.

 Hmm, this is a compliment, right? I get so few that I have difficulty recognizing one,  

 Yes, and not my first.  

mtierney said:
NYT editorial today kinda sees it my way....
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/17/opinion/hillary-clintons-master-class-in-distraction.html?rref=collection%2Fissuecollection%2Ftodays-new-york-times

What's your point.  My take on the editorial, and a lot of people would agree with me, is that HRC needs to head to the home for failed politicians and submit to the judgement of history.

She a distraction.  Yesterday's news.  Pathetically trying to figure out why she lost to a truly awful person.

mtierney said:
NYT editorial today kinda sees it my way....
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/17/opinion/hillary-clintons-master-class-in-distraction.html?rref=collection%2Fissuecollection%2Ftodays-new-york-times

 You understand that this is an op ed piece and not an editorial?