- #1
- 8,143
- 1,761
Did anyone see this joker - Rep. Dennis Hastert, (R-Ill.), Speaker of the House - on Meet the Press this morning? Holy snake oil salesman Batman!
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5640412/
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5640412/
Janitor said:And would you ride in a used car driven by The Honorable Ted Kennedy?
We sure do. The honorable Kennedy Clan called in some IOU's and their drunken lush embarrassment avoided a manslaughter charge.Gokul43201 said:Or by the Strong and Determined President Bush ?
At least we know what happened with Teddy...but nobody knows about Bush's Texas Driving Records because they've been vanished. We only know about his DUI in Maine, where he was not Governor.
Robert Zaleski said:Ivan, are you asking a question or are you making a political statement from your wobbly soap box?
I watched it. This was the first interview that I saw of Hastert. I remember thinking that he came off as completely unbelievable and extremely "sneaky" looking. His eyes never looked at ohers, but were positioned in a way, I can't think of a word to describe it, that I associate with untrustworthiness.Ivan Seeking said:Did anyone see this joker - Rep. Dennis Hastert, (R-Ill.), Speaker of the House - on Meet the Press this morning? Holy snake oil salesman Batman!
He made many disingenuous comments, such as this one. Although I will not dispute this statement, I consider that it is far MORE true in the case of the Republicans. In other words, while stating a truth, he is being deceiving and attempting to hide a greater truth.Many Democrats, including presidential candidate John Kerry, look first for a political criticism rather than what is best for our country.
JohnDubYa said:Then why did you post the link?
Prometheus said:I did not get a good impression of this guy in this interview. His tone of voice, his facial expression, and his body movements were extremely unappealing to me.
Ivan Seeking said:It really helps to actually watch and listen to the people that you support. Reading only provides one dimension of perspective.
I watched it. This was the first interview that I saw of Hastert. I remember thinking that he came off as completely unbelievable and extremely "sneaky" looking. His eyes never looked at ohers, but were positioned in a way, I can't think of a word to describe it, that I associate with untrustworthiness.
He made many disingenuous comments, such as this one. Although I will not dispute this statement, I consider that it is far MORE true in the case of the Republicans. In other words, while stating a truth, he is being deceiving and attempting to hide a greater truth.
I did not get a good impression of this guy in this interview. His tone of voice, his facial expression, and his body movements were extremely unappealing to me.
I did not realize that you are a first name basis with Dennis.JohnDubYa said:Sounds like Bill Clinton. Did Dennis also shed a tear to indicate passion and sympathy, or has his phoniness worked his way up to that level yet?
Heh. Body movements... as in finger wagging. "I did not have sex with that woman." Heh.
Everything is this forum is a matter of opinion. You are certainly free to think the world of "Dennis". You should not expect that all people as up on the issues as you obviously are must necessarily like him as well.That is merely a matter of opinion.
I suppose that this means that from now on we can take every single comment that you make, divorce it from anything else that you have said, and then suggest that you are trying to use this as the complete justification for your entire argument. As well, like you, perhaps we can dream that others might find such a statement funny, or at least meaningful is some very small way.loseyourname said:All right, you guys are going to have to clarify here, because this is really coming across as if you would rather judge a politician based on the way he looks than the way he thinks.
I did not realize that you are a first name basis with Dennis.
Excellent manuever. By contrasting every point with your perceived faults of Bill Clinton, we are sure to come to the obvious conclusion that "Dennis" is really a wonderful guy after all.
Everything is this forum is a matter of opinion.
You make very poor suppositions, and then you treat them as though there was no doubt as to their truth. All right.JohnDubYa said:I suppose you apply
Are you saying that you consider those others to be hypocritical, and therefore that you should be able to join them, and even surpass them? All right.JohnDubYa said:I suppose you apply the same reasoning to those that call our President George W.. What about Condi, as in Condeleeza Rice? Arnie, as in Arnold Schwarzenegger? Rosie, as in Rosie O'Donnell?
Hypocrisy, everywhere.
In your dreams, I am sure that you think that you were successful.You misunderstand my strategy: I was pointing out the hypocrisy in those that are Clinton fans and ridicule Hastert. Was my strategy successful? I will let you decide for yourself.
You make very poor suppositions, and then you treat them as though there was no doubt as to their truth. All right.
Are you saying that you consider those others to be hypocritical, and therefore that you should be able to join them, and even surpass them? All right.
In your dreams, I am sure that you think that you were successful.
You claim that you are attempting to point out hypocrisy, where none exists.
If you could somehow ask the dead if they are better off now than under Saddam, what do you think that they might say.
You say that when you say that you suppose something, it is meant to be a question. In the same breath, you call it a claim, which I must accept or deny. All this for a point that is meaningless anyway.JohnDubYa said:The statement was intended to be a question. So what is your answer? If you are denying my claim, say so.
I see. You are being completely irrelevant on purpose. You are using what you consider that some people do, however hypocritical you consider it, as justification for doing the same thing. You suppose that I must do it as well. Now, you are asking me if I do it. Sure.No, I am saying that there is nothing wrong with calling a politican by his first name in a political forum, and I offered examples to support my claim. And those that object to my calling the speaker by his first name, and yet call our president by his first name, are hypocrites. Are they not? Do you fall in that category?
I see. You consider yourself a hypocrite, and you are trying to lump me in your boat. Let me see if I can find a way to extricate myself, at least in my mind, such that you remain the hypocrite that you claim yourself to be, yet I am not. Much of the world refers to Saddam Hussein as Saddam, and not as Hussein, when using a single name to refer to him. Although no means universal, it is a common custom. I am sorry that you are not aware of this fact, and that you used your mistaken understanding in this respect to add to your justification of your hypocrisy.Oh, the hypocrisy exists. Since when did you become on a first name basis with Saddam Hussein? Did you write the following?
Extricate yourself from that one, Mr. First-Name-Basis.
Much of the world refers to Saddam Hussein as Saddam, and not as Hussein, when using a single name to refer to him.
My quote: No, I am saying that there is nothing wrong with calling a politican by his first name in a political forum, and I offered examples to support my claim. And those that object to my calling the speaker by his first name, and yet call our president by his first name, are hypocrites. Are they not? Do you fall in that category?
How humerous. You are going to try to defend yourself on this. Almost everyone calls Saddam by his first name. Certainly, no one uses his last name. Do you even know his last name? Your attempt to equate calling Saddam Hussein by Saddam with calling Dennis Hastert by Dennis is really a desparate action on your part. You must be joking. You surely can't be serious in attempting to justify your ridiculous claim, are you?JohnDubYa said:That doesn't make it acceptable. The fact is that you called Saddam Hussein by his first name, then pointed out that I was in error for calling Dennis Hastert by his first name.
A true gem. Can you explain your basis for this?First, only Dennis can truly object.
Good for you. Get vulgar. You blew it, with your mistaken analogy. You have only yourself to blame for that. There is no need to get vulgar with me about your error. Just regroup, if you can, and try again.Second, I will let the other readers in this thread judge for themselves the level at which are you terminally full of ****.
How humerous. You are going to try to defend yourself on this. Almost everyone calls Saddam by his first name. Certainly, no one uses his last name. Do you even know his last name? Your attempt to equate calling Saddam Hussein by Saddam with calling Dennis Hastert by Dennis is really a desparate action on your part.
My quote: First, only Dennis can truly object.
A true gem. Can you explain your basis for this?
Good for you. Get vulgar. You blew it, with your mistaken analogy. You have only yourself to blame for that. There is no need to get vulgar with me about your error. Just regroup, if you can, and try again.
Now, you are just being incredibly defensive. You don't need to be so defensive. You don't need to get vulgar as a way to show your displeasure. We all understand your position.JohnDubYa said:Tell it to the other readers in this thread that might buy your line of bull****. The truth to me is obvious.
I notice that you did not call him Dennis. Now, you say that it is none of my concern. Is this as polite a manner as you can muster to back off of your Saddam ploy?Whether or not I choose to call Dennis Hastert by his first name is none of your concern. Period.
Sure. The fact that you tried to beat it down my throat is not a good reason to make it my concern.And I really don't care what reasoning you incorporate to make it your concern.
Now, you are just being incredibly defensive. You don't need to be so defensive...
As a scientist, I cannot make a judgment on the trustworthiness of an individual. However, the Speaker of the House is a public figure and is held to a high standard of ethics and integrity. It is important to research the car and its history before making a purchase decision.
Yes, it is legal for the Speaker of the House to sell a used car. As long as they follow all applicable laws and regulations, they are allowed to engage in private transactions, including selling a used car.
As a scientist, I cannot comment on the specific situation of the Speaker of the House. However, it is important to be aware of any potential conflicts of interest and to ensure that all transactions are conducted ethically and transparently.
The condition of a used car sold by the Speaker of the House would depend on the specific car and its history. It is important to thoroughly inspect the car and obtain a vehicle history report before making a purchase decision.
Yes, you can negotiate with the Speaker of the House when buying a used car, just as you would with any other private seller. However, it is important to be respectful and fair in your negotiations.