Headline juxtapositions....

LadyJazzer wrote: ZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzz.......... :Snooze

The OWS people are taking to the streets and trying to hold Barack's feet to the fire and you remain sleeping on the job, right? :thumbsup:

And just off the wire, the miilionaire tax has just failed again. What does Obama actually do other than raise campaign donations?

AspenValley wrote: [ this is from the Urban Dictionary:


The Man

1. n. (derogatory, semi-proper) Term used to describe any class of people who wield power and are seen as oppressive. See also whitey, big brother, corporate america, the establishment

So is this. Bold mine.

"The Man 583 up, 171 down
1. n. (derogatory, semi-proper) Term used to describe any class of people who wield power and are seen as oppressive. See also whitey, big brother, corporate america, the establishment (Please note, these synonyms are used as examples of groups who have been called "The Man," and should not be construed as a racist attack) "


http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.p ... =the%20man

The part in parentheses doesn't mean that the term The Man doesn't have racist implications, it means it DOES, and the author of the piece is trying to make clear that he doesn't share the sentiment. Apparently some people need more help with clarification than others.

So let me ask you, if someone had said "Obama is working for Whitey" (which is given here as a synonym for "The Man", would you call THAT racist? Or is racism just so last century you can't admit it exists at all?

AspenValley wrote: The part in parentheses doesn't mean that the term The Man doesn't have racist implications, it means it DOES, and the author of the piece is trying to make clear that he doesn't share the sentiment. Apparently some people need more help with clarification than others.

rofllol

neptunechimney wrote:

AspenValley wrote: The part in parentheses doesn't mean that the term The Man doesn't have racist implications, it means it DOES, and the author of the piece is trying to make clear that he doesn't share the sentiment. Apparently some people need more help with clarification than others.

rofllol

It's nice you have a sense of humor when you totally screw up like that.

But back to my point, if those headlines would have been happening under "W" or Reagan, the Lefties on the board would be screaming, blaming Bush, etc. But when it is "your guy", all is good.
Pres. Obama is looking really two-faced, he attacks the 1 per cent'rs verbally, but does little else and is taking money from the very people he is supposed to be protecting the middle class from.

And for those of you who want to blame Congress, Reagan was able to get stuff done with a Dem Congress and Clinton/Gingrich deadlocked only once with a Republican Congress, but it seems like every other month the Obama's goverment is facing shutdown.

Yeah, I remember the government getting shutdown because Newt had to ride in the back of the plane... Now, THAT was "adult behavior", and "getting stuff done."

rofllol rofllol

FredHayek wrote: But back to my point, if those headlines would have been happening under "W" or Reagan, the Lefties on the board would be screaming, blaming Bush, etc. But when it is "your guy", all is good.
Pres. Obama is looking really two-faced, he attacks the 1 per cent'rs verbally, but does little else and is taking money from the very people he is supposed to be protecting the middle class from.

And for those of you who want to blame Congress, Reagan was able to get stuff done with a Dem Congress and Clinton/Gingrich deadlocked only once with a Republican Congress, but it seems like every other month the Obama's goverment is facing shutdown.

This is rich.

First you complain that just because it is "our guy" in office "lefties" are supposedly saying "all is good" about things like the headlines that were posted. (And it's funny, but I seemd to have I missed that, who in this thread did that?)

Then you go on to defend "your" Congress and absolve them of all blame for the situation IMMEDIATELY after complaining that people shouldn't be defending "their" President". Again, which nobody did.

Does a glimmer of your own hypocrisy ever, ever trickle through to what passes for thought in your head?

Funny, I don't remember anything in any of those headlines that had to do with Congress or presidents...

What they DID point out was the hypocrisy between the "haves" and "have-nots" in our society....

Insert standard irrelevant "GOP good; Dems bad" snarky comment here: ______________________________

The 500 Foundation wrote: Thanks AV Its good to know you still exaggerate things greatly to try to make an
arguement out of nothing
good job

Both Aspen Valley and Lady Jazzer are top of their game of making sh** up and pulling it out of their asses. Still going strong after all these years. They don't fool anyone around here... just makes for good sport. If they like looking like fools and liars... hey... no skin off our teeth.