Originally Posted By fkurucz >>Like I said before, the best thing that I can do for my kid is to make sure that she can emigrate when she's old enough.<< We will be procuring German/EU Passports/Citizenship for for our other two kids this summer. We've already done this for one of them.
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>The ones that don't are being drummed out of the party.<< Which is why I bailed out.
Originally Posted By utahjosh <A stereotype is a caricature. We're not doing that. We're just portraying conservatives as they really are. Happy to provide examples if you like, including within Republican leadership.> I could provide you with plenty of examples of negative stereotypes of any kind. Want a few flamboyant promiscuous gay men examples? I know some. How about a butch lesbian cowboy? I have an aunt just like that. How about a drug-dealing kid from mexico? Once lives down the street. Of course, not all gay men, lesbians, and Mexicans are as pictured above.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>I could provide you with plenty of examples of negative stereotypes of any kind.<< False equivalency. We are not talking about a few extreme examples. We are talking about a well-documented effort by the GOP to drown out any dissent around specific issues. I can point to dozens of elected officials in the Republican party who believe and promote crazy ideas. I can point to dozens of polls that show rank and file Republicans believe crazy things (birtherism, for example), etc. You can try and obfuscate the issue by claiming a couple of anecdotal examples. But while you have anecdotes, we have data. Both sides, of course, have their fringes. The difference is, the fringe in the Republican party are the sane ones being drowned out by the crazy ones.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <I love this one size fit all stereotype posters on this board use for Conservatives. > Since that came right after my post... All I did was point out two facts. That liberals here and on the web are criticizing this heavily. That is true. And that, by and large (or "not as much" as I put it), conservatives did not do the same when Bush and Co. were putting these mechanisms in place, and also doing warrantless searches and data mining. Which is also true. Some did. But not many. Most excused it. We saw it right here in our little microcosm, and in dozens of still-extant web pages I could link to. On the other hand, most liberals are condemning this. These are facts.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>Most excused it. We saw it right here in our little microcosm<< I wish I had a dollar for everytime I heard, "Well the government can look into my library books or listen in on my phone calls all they want. They'll just be bored." Nevermind the false assumption that an innocent person has nothing to fear, it was a total dismissal of any concerns about our civil liberties being infringed upon.
Originally Posted By DDMAN26 It's kind of surprising the administration would do this, since the media is usually in the tank for them
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 It's amazing how many things can be wrong with a single sentence.<< The media does generally give the President a pass on certain things.. Well the media minus Fox News...
Originally Posted By ecdc >>The media does generally give the President a pass on certain things.<< Such as?
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 >>The media does generally give the President a pass on certain things.<< Such as?<< The expensive vacations he goes on, but anytime President Bush went anywhere he was criticized...
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 Before I get slammed and criticized for my comment, I could care less about how many vacations the President goes on, he deserves to get away, and the President has to have a strong security contingent when he travels. But President Bush was criticized a lot for his vacations...
Originally Posted By ecdc Can you link to the mainstream media's criticisms of Bush's vacation and spending?
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/02/AR2005080201703.html" target="_blank">http://www.washingtonpost.com/...703.html</a> <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2008/12/29/34190/bush-vaca-middle-east/?mobile=nc" target="_blank">http://thinkprogress.org/polit...obile=nc</a> <a href="http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/bushjokes/a/bushvacation_2.htm" target="_blank">http://politicalhumor.about.co...on_2.htm</a> I could go on...Just do a google search specifying 2000 to 2008 and the word Bush vacation... The only people whining about Pres. Obama's vacations are right leaning blogs and Fox News...
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Did you actually read those links, William? They had nothing to do with Bush's vacations being expensive. They had to do with them being extensive. From the first: "President Bush is getting the kind of break most Americans can only dream of -- nearly five weeks away from the office, loaded with vacation time. The president departed Tuesday for his longest stretch yet away from the White House, arriving at his Crawford ranch in the evening to clear brush, visit with family and friends, and tend to some outside-the-Beltway politics. By historical standards, it is the longest presidential retreat in at least 36 years. The August getaway is Bush's 49th trip to his cherished ranch since taking office and Tuesday was the 319th day that Bush has spent, entirely or partially, in Crawford -- roughly 20 percent of his presidency to date" In other words, he took a lot of time off. More than other presidents. AFAIK, more than Obama. That was the criticism. The amount of time off he gave himself, not the amount of money.
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 I had over 10,000 articles to choose from, do your own Google research, they criticized him from everything from going on vacation when a crisis was going on, to wasting money on trips to Texas, to using the wrong toilet paper on Air Force 1 (OK the last one I think I made up)
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Weak. The only criticism you linked to was quite legitimate criticism; Busch took a lot more vacation than previous presidents, or than Obama has. If you want to show that other stuff, then show it, preferably from mainstream media sources and not some angry blogger. You can't just complain that the mainstream media criticized Bush for the expense of his vacations, and then present three links that don't do that.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 And why the AutoCorrect spelled his name one way once and the other way the other time, I don't know.
Originally Posted By ecdc See, that's what I thought. I figured it wouldn't be hard to dig up something from think progress or Mother Jones. That's like me citing Breitbart as an example of the media criticizing Obama. The Obama admin hasn't gotten any breaks at all from the media. They've been hammered plenty of times. It's also possible (actually, it's very likely) that they are more competent than the Bush admin, therefore causing less reasons to be hammered by the press.
