To My Fellow Liberals, Including President Obama, Quit Yer Whinin'! - Comments Page 4

Part of: There, I Said It!

Was it really a Republican tsunami? In the long view of American political history, no.

We Democrats, progressives, and other liberals got "shellacked" in the words of President Obama, and maybe we did if we go by the standards of today's 24/7 news cycle. But you know what? If we hold the 2010 midterm election up to the light of history, it becomes less of a shellacking by the Republicans and more of a Democratic victory!  That's just sour grapes and desperate political spin after a devastating loss, you say? Again, in the harsh light of American political history, not so!…
Read comments below, or read this article from the beginning.

Article comments

  • 126 - Dan

    Nov 07, 2010 at 2:55 pm

    belated hi to Jet. I heard you've got a project. Sounds intriguing. I'm going to look for it, but I haven't got around to it yet.

    hope your health is not a cause for concern.

  • 127 - roger nowosielski

    Nov 07, 2010 at 3:12 pm

    No, you ain't got it. The point is to make a persons comprehend what he is unwilling to, in order to advance communication and understanding, not to win an argument. Your arguments, on the other hand, are mostly for the purpose of winning an argument. And there ain't no point doing that.

  • 128 - Alan Kurtz

    Nov 07, 2010 at 3:18 pm

    Splitting hairs there, aren't you, Roger? When you "make a person comprehend what he is unwilling to," you've won your argument.

  • 129 - zingzing

    Nov 07, 2010 at 3:36 pm

    you assume a lot, roger. i don't necessarily argue to win arguments. i know that's hopeless a lot of the time. i have no doubt that you've come to what is probably an unchangeable opinion of me, but that doesn't mean it's not wrong. you can take all the time you want to unpack that sentence. you give yourself a lot of credit and charity, but are unwilling to pass it on to me. from your impregnable fortress of reverse integrity, you've reasoned away any chance of a win against you. so what point is there in bothering? that said, i'll continue to argue people on things they actually say, rather than on flimsy conclusions drawn from the ether.

  • 130 - roger nowosielski

    Nov 07, 2010 at 3:52 pm

    That;s how I read you. No offense meant.

  • 131 - handyguy

    Nov 07, 2010 at 4:04 pm

    Roger, zing and I have this in common, I think: unfair, unreasonable 'arguments,' aka right-wing propaganda, make us crazy and we feel a need to respond.

    I find that the process helps me clarify my own thinking, and double checking the facts before I post something is a good thing too. We all think we know so much, but we all have room to learn.

  • 132 - zingzing

    Nov 07, 2010 at 4:07 pm

    roger: "That;s how I read you. No offense meant."

    so if i tell you i'm a liar, you believe me?

  • 133 - roger nowosielski

    Nov 07, 2010 at 5:09 pm

    Missing the point, Kurtz. It's not about winning the argument but winning the person. And there's no splitting hairs when it comes to that.

    Zing, don't play a fool. I said that's how I read you. I said nothing about what parts of your speech I believe. Not have I said anything about making an assumption. That's you verbiage, not mine.

    Again, presuming now you have a decent comprehension of English, that's how I read you. I may be mistaken, of course, but that's a subject for another time.

    I apologize if it causes you discomfort.

  • 134 - zingzing

    Nov 07, 2010 at 5:35 pm

    well, you're the one making the assumption. i'd have to be stupid and a bit masochistic to keep coming here if i really wanted to win arguments. but you assume that i do. nothing could be further from the truth.

    it's a pretty rare thing to "win the person," and even rarer still that they'll let you know if you have. trying to change people is a bit of a fool's game. i'd say your (universal) words have done more to change you than anyone else. you get to think things through and hear counter-arguments that shift you own opinions ever so slightly. it's a chance to argue with people you don't know and who hold vastly different opinions and won't hold back and you don't care if they don't like you afterwards. it's about enriching yourself rather than imparting some wisdom which only very rarely will be taken.

    when i say i like to argue, it's not without reason, like as in i'm just argumentative... it's how you learn things, even if that thing is that you're always right. then you gotta think about that fact.

  • 135 - roger nowosielski

    Nov 07, 2010 at 6:09 pm

    Again, zing, yout English skills are lacking. Tune your ear.

    It's not an assumption I'm making when I say "that's how I read you" but an inference based on your many comments and exchanges. As I said, I may be wrong in my reading (or the inference I'm drawing), but that's another matter.

    So let's get our language straight first because thus far you're speaking a tongue I don't understand.

  • 136 - zingzing

    Nov 07, 2010 at 6:37 pm

    jesus. i'm telling you you're wrong. enough with the word games (they aren't even real). if that (that being that i just want to win arguments) is the inference you came to, it was something i never actually implied. you jumped to the conclusion that i like to argue because i like to win. that was the assumption you made. if you had bothered to ask why, you'd have had the facts straight.

    i'm telling you something and you're pretending like i'm misunderstanding you. i'm not. do you recognize the pattern?

  • 137 - Jet Gardner

    Nov 07, 2010 at 7:39 pm

    Thank's Dan it's Jet's General Store, just click my link and then the ad.

  • 138 - roger nowosielski

    Nov 07, 2010 at 7:40 pm

    Again, your reading comprehension deserts you when you get excited. I haven't said the inference was drawn on the basis of any single remark you had made but scores and scores of your exchanges with me and others. That's why it's not an assumption but a judgment that I've reached.

    No word games here, zing, but your obstinate refusal to come to terms with my meaning simply because you disagree with my judgment.

    Have a nice evening.

  • 139 - Jet Gardner

    Nov 07, 2010 at 7:45 pm

    Zing and Roger.... Do you really want me to get out the leather or are you going to behave?

  • 140 - Jordan Richardson

    Nov 07, 2010 at 7:56 pm

    Roger, you judge bloody well everyone here and then lose your marbles when they don't agree with your personal assessment. And now you're completely splitting hairs over "assumption" and "judgment," but you don't realize that your judgment is based on a damn assumption. All you can do is assume because you don't actually know any of us.

    Why is that so hard to understand? You've been through this shit with me and claimed you were "misreading for effect." Now here you are doing the exact same shit with someone else and, once again, relying on idiotic traps to cover your ass because you've realized your patent wrongness.

    Why is it so fucking difficult for you to "be a man, not a mouse" and admit that you're wrong about someone or something?

    "your obstinate refusal to come to terms with my meaning..."

    What utter arrogance. YOU'RE WRONG! Your meaning is wrong. Coming to terms with your wrongness is something you stubbornly refuse to do.

    Bloody hell. "Win the person" all you like, but the fact is that you make no efforts to "understand the person." You just assume you know and work from that incorrect foundation. No wonder you're "misunderstood" around here so often.

  • 141 - zingzing

    Nov 07, 2010 at 8:05 pm

    roger: "I haven't said the inference was drawn on the basis of any single remark you had made but scores and scores of your exchanges with me and others."

    i never said that you did. never once. you're arguing something i never said.

    "That's why it's not an assumption but a judgment that I've reached."

    and it's poor judgment, which has been my point every time i've said it...

    "No word games here, zing, but your obstinate refusal to come to terms with my meaning simply because you disagree with my judgment."

    i do disagree with your judgment! how many times do i have to say it?

  • 142 - handyguy

    Nov 07, 2010 at 8:40 pm

    The question then arises: why do you care so much about the opinions of someone with such demonstrably poor judgment?

  • 143 - Dr Dreadful

    Nov 07, 2010 at 8:43 pm

    Jet @ #139: Very possibly both, I shouldn't wonder.

  • 144 - roger nowosielski

    Nov 07, 2010 at 8:54 pm

    Excellent question, Handy. Zing shouldn't.

  • 145 - Jet Gardner

    Nov 07, 2010 at 9:01 pm

    Doc, if this keeps up, I might actually write and article... God help us

  • 146 - zingzing

    Nov 07, 2010 at 9:06 pm

    "why do you care so much about the opinions of someone with such demonstrably poor judgment?"

    i just like arguing?

    what did you expect?

    jet, leather does make me behave. that's why i pay for it. sheeeesh.

  • 147 - Jet Gardner

    Nov 07, 2010 at 9:10 pm

    Oh Zing that's so gay

  • 148 - zingzing

    Nov 07, 2010 at 9:14 pm

    that was a little phony. i don't pay for the leather. i got the leather paying me. how they love to whip. countin ma benjamins...

  • 149 - Dr Dreadful

    Nov 07, 2010 at 10:04 pm

    @ #147: He's so gay, he probably thinks this blog is about him.

  • 150 - zingzing

    Nov 07, 2010 at 10:07 pm

    well, i am a liberal. non-classical. or however dave doesn't define it. i'm right there in the title. so n'yah. (also that song sucks.)

  • 151 - Baronius

    Nov 08, 2010 at 6:47 am

    "Why is that so hard to understand? You've been through this shit with me and claimed you were "misreading for effect." Now here you are doing the exact same shit with someone else and, once again, relying on idiotic traps to cover your ass because you've realized your patent wrongness."

    Correct, Jordan. Although, I do think Roger sometimes does complicate conversations with misreadings in some Zen attempt to attain a higher truth. I just can't recall it ever attaining anything more than confusion.

    The real problem comes when the comments are confrontational. They burn more bridges in the short run than they could ever build in the long run.

  • 152 - Clavos

    Nov 08, 2010 at 6:53 am

    So does Carly Simon...

  • 153 - Clavos

    Nov 08, 2010 at 6:53 am

    Um 152 refers to 150...

  • 154 - Jet Gardner

    Nov 08, 2010 at 7:18 am

    ...so it goes without saying that I have every Carly Simon CD & LP on the market today and consider her one of the all time greats....

    Doesn't it?

  • 155 - Christopher Rose

    Nov 08, 2010 at 7:34 am

    Jet, it goes without saying that your musical taste is "special"...

    ;-)

  • 156 - Jet Gardner

    Nov 08, 2010 at 7:38 am

    I love the mamas & the papas too Chris

  • 157 - Jet Gardner

    Nov 08, 2010 at 7:39 am

    I keep waiting for lightning to strike me in punishment; according to most people here I only comment on my own articles....;)

  • 158 - Christopher Rose

    Nov 08, 2010 at 8:10 am

    There is no comparison between them and CS. Some of the M&P stuff is truly great, Jet...

  • 159 - handyguy

    Nov 08, 2010 at 8:49 am

    Carly Simon sings off key, but she has done half a dozen or so good songs. "You're So Vain" is very clever, and brilliantly recorded by Richard Perry.

  • 160 - Clavos

    Nov 08, 2010 at 9:14 am

    CS's voice is nasal, annoying and grating to me.

  • 161 - Jet Gardner

    Nov 08, 2010 at 9:28 am

    Clavos if Carly Simon sang right-wing dirges you'd declare her the most wonderful voice in the world.

  • 162 - zingzing

    Nov 08, 2010 at 10:20 am

    well, i'll say that once upon a time (dunno about these days), carly had a ridiculously nice body. and she did have at least one great song, that being "why?," which was produced by chic (GOAT) and featured on the soup for one soundtrack. tribe called quest sampled it for "bonita applebum."

  • 163 - Baronius

    Nov 08, 2010 at 10:39 am

    I don't know why, but I associate Carly Simon with all the baggage from her split with James Taylor much more than I associate the M&P with all their crazy stuff. Maybe because Carly and James wore it on their sleeves. Either way, the Mamas & the Papas recordings will stand up longer than Carly Simon's.

  • 164 - Clavos

    Nov 08, 2010 at 2:45 pm

    Clavos if Carly Simon sang right-wing dirges you'd declare her the most wonderful voice in the world.

    Don't be a smartass, Jet.

    If CS sang nothing but paeans to Clavos I would still be ungrateful enough to say she has a shitty, grating voice.

    Because, IMO, she does.

  • 165 - Unimpressed

    Nov 11, 2010 at 12:28 pm

    I think this article does liberals a disservice.

    First of all, it's a mistake of the American left to call Obama a liberal. What has he done to diserve that discription? Be black?

    His stimulus is right down the middle being half tax cuts, his budget commission is mostly conservatives who want to cut social secruity to lower taxes for the rich, Obamacare is really BobDolecare, he's let George W. off the hook for war crimes plus continued a lot of Bush's complete and utter distruction the 4th amendment.

    Americans, rightfully so, HATE these things. I understand that Obama is working with a bunch of knuckle-draggers and flat-earthers, but many of his policies are going to fail (or at least not live up to expectations) and will take the good name of liberalism dowm with them.


  • 166 - Lisa

    Mar 22, 2011 at 3:21 pm

    I would live in the black neighborhood. Black neighborhoods are noisy and dangerous to live because of high in crimes.

Add your comment, speak your mind

Personal attacks are NOT allowed.
Please read our comment policy.
Please preview your comment.