CONSENSUS of OPINION

[rigney]

Differing Presidential Releases

 

George W. Bushs speech after the capture of Saddam:

 

The success of yesterday's mission is a tribute to our men and women now serving in Iraq. The operation was based on the superb work of intelligence analysts who found the dictator's footprints in a vast country. The operation was carried out with skill and precision by a brave fighting force. Our servicemen and women and our coalition allies have faced many dangers in the hunt for members of the fallen regime, and in their effort to bring hope and freedom to the Iraqi people. Their work continues, and so do the risks. Today, on behalf of the nation, I thank the members of our Armed Forces and I congratulate 'em.

 

Barack Obamas speech after the killing of bin Laden:

 

And so shortly after taking office, I directed Leon Panetta, the director of the CIA, to make the killing or capture of bin Laden the top priority of our war against al Qaeda, even as we continued our broader efforts to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat his network.

Then, last August, after years of painstaking work by our intelligence community, I was briefed on a possible lead to bin Laden. It was far from certain, and it took many months to run this thread to ground. I met repeatedly with my national security team as we developed more information about the possibility that we had located bin Laden hiding within a compound deep inside of Pakistan. And finally, last week, I determined that we had enough intelligence to take action, and I authorized an operation to get Osama bin Laden and bring him to justice. Today, at my direction the United States launched a targeted operation against that compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan.

 

Isn't it amazing how one President gives credit to those who deserve the credit, and the POS we have now; takes all the credit?

Edited May 30, 2011 by rigney

[pwagen]

 

Because they certainly don't have speech writers or anything.

 

[Moontanman]

Differing Presidential Releases

 

George W. Bush speech after the capture of Saddam:

 

The success of yesterday's mission is a tribute to our men and women now serving in Iraq. The operation was based on the superb work of intelligence analysts who found the dictator's footprints in a vast country. The operation was carried out with skill and precision by a brave fighting force. Our servicemen and women and our coalition allies have faced many dangers in the hunt for members of the fallen regime, and in their effort to bring hope and freedom to the Iraqi people. Their work continues, and so do the risks. Today, on behalf of the nation, I thank the members of our Armed Forces and I congratulate 'em. Barack Obamas speech after the killing of bin Laden:

 

And so shortly after taking office, I directed Leon Panetta, the director of the CIA, to make the killing or capture of bin Laden the top priority of our war against al Qaeda, even as we continued our broader efforts to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat his network.

Then, last August, after years of painstaking work by our intelligence community, I was briefed on a possible lead to bin Laden. It was far from certain, and it took many months to run this thread to ground. I met repeatedly with my national security team as we developed more information about the possibility that we had located bin Laden hiding within a compound deep inside of Pakistan. And finally, last week, I determined that we had enough intelligence to take action, and I authorized an operation to get Osama bin Laden and bring him to justice. Today, at my direction the United States launched a targeted operation against that compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan.

 

Isn't it amazing how one President gives credit to those who deserve the credit, and the POS we have now; takes all the credit?

 

 

Yeah, it is amazing, Bush was so soft spoken and humble, never taking credit for anything, the POS did what Bush couldn't do and and no where in that speech do I read him taking responsibility for anything but directing his people to get Bin Laden, I guess our current POS should have flown to the aircraft carrier and under a huge banner of Mission completed told the Nation the mission of killing Bin Laden was finished, wearing a navy seal unifrom while Bin Ladin's body was dumped over board, yeah, that would have been the way to go, take full responsibility in a outragous fashion instead of simply stating the facts of how it went down... oh and interrupting the guy with the dead squirrel on his head when the POS announced that Bin ladin had been killed....

[swansont]

Isn't amazing how selective quoting can skew a message?

 

——————

http://articles.cnn.com/2011-05-02/world/bin.laden.announcement_1_qaeda-bin-afghan-border/3?_s=PM:WORLD

 

A small team of Americans carried out the operation with extraordinary courage and capability.

…

Then, last August, after years of painstaking work by our intelligence community

…

For over two decades, bin Laden has been al Qaeda's leader and symbol, and has continued to plot attacks against our country and our friends and allies. The death of bin Laden marks the most significant achievement to date in our nation's effort to defeat al Qaeda.

…

Yet his death does not mark the end of our effort. There's no doubt that al Qaeda will continue to pursue attacks against us. We must --- and we will -- remain vigilant at home and abroad.

…

Tonight, we give thanks to the countless intelligence and counterterrorism professionals who've worked tirelessly to achieve this outcome. The American people do not see their work, nor know their names. But tonight, they feel the satisfaction of their work and the result of their pursuit of justice.

————

 

Did the president not do the things he mentioned? (i.e. did he not meet with the people and be briefed, did he not authorize the operation? Was there a "we" that can be put there?)

 

Haters gonna hate. All you have to do is come up with reasons to justify it.

[John Cuthber]

If I were responsible for an illegal war like the one in Iraq, I'd probably not want to be seen to accept that responsibility.

[rigney]

Because they certainly don't have speech writers or anything.

 

Both of them are just people, aren't they?

[Marat]

No verbal characteristics of a speech can compare with the utter bombast of Bush arriving in a jet pilot's suit on the aircraft carrier after the illegal invasion of Iraq. The egocentricity of that act surely trumps the self-focus in Obama's address. Perhaps also Obama can find an excuse in the fact that there is an election coming up in which the traditional charge of his opponents -- that the Democrats are weak on defense -- would otherwise have been heard again and again.

[swansont]

If I were responsible for an illegal war like the one in Iraq, I'd probably not want to be seen to accept that responsibility.

 

Yeah, I see the "we" in that light as well. Especially in the speech just prior to the invasion, when he was trying to make it look like all of the US supported the war, and was smearing anyone who opposed it as unpatriotic. "I" takes responsibility for certain conduct. This was a covert action. "We" would have implied that the decisions were not made by the president. Obama had been criticized in the past for being timid in his decision-making. Now he's being criticized for making some bold decisions.

 

Haters gonna hate.

[lemur]

The use of "I" can be narcissistic or an explication of personal responsibility. People who avoid using "I" are often the ones who associate it most strongly with narcissism, provided they're not just avoiding taking personal responsibility. This suggests to me that people who talk authoritatively but avoid using "I" are closet narcissists trying to come across as humble to look better in other people's eyes. If they would take personal responsibility, they would say "I'm taking personal responsibility for my narcissism by explicitly acknowledging it in this statement."

[DrRocket]

 

Haters gonna hate.

 

That, by inuendo, is an extraordinary display of bigotry.

 

No one else has used the word "hate" in this thread.

 

Those who disagree with Obama are no more "haters" than those who disagreed with Bush.

 

I hesitate to think what categorization must apply to those of us who disagree with both of them.

[rigney]

Heck, I can see your point without even looking! I had just picked up a nice nasty about Bush and wanted to attribute it to his poor showing as an Air Force Officer. So here.

 

The Clouds Set In

The newly-released records reveal that 1st Lt. Bush was credited with 46 days of flight duty from June 1970 to May 1971, expected Guard weekend duty and 'extra' runway standby alert time for that year. However, that would be the last time that Bush fully met his qualified jet fighter pilot obligation to serve four complete years as a fully trained and qualified fighter pilot.

Beginning sometime after May of 1971, Bush stopped living up to his sworn obligation to the Texas Air National Guard and thereby his country. By May of 1972, he was credited with only 22 flight duty days, 14 days short of the minimum 36 days he owed the Guard for that year. And then things went from bad to worse.

But I honestly do believe the lad knew how to fly airplanes. On the other hand, we still really don't know for sure if Obama is a natural born citizen or not????

Edited May 30, 2011 by rigney

[DrRocket]

Heck, I can see your point without even looking! I had just picked up a nice nasty about Bush and wanted to attribute it to his poor showing as an Air Force Officer. So here.

 

 

 

Your point is clear as mud.

 

Bush has been out of office for over two years. His National Guard record is now about as relevant as Teddy Roosevelt's organization of the Bull Moose party. It is several years too late to worry about pecadillos of Bush (eitheer one).

 

As far as Obama's birth certificate goes, I have a hard time understanding why it took so long to produce one. I was required to produce an original birth certificate to renew my driver's license. Is a birth certificate too much to ask of the Presdent of the United States ?

 

As your citation carries no date, and as Obama only very recently released a certificate, it is not unlikely that the cited article is not timely in any case.

 

Why flog dead horses ?

[swansont]

That, by inuendo, is an extraordinary display of bigotry.

 

No one else has used the word "hate" in this thread.

 

Those who disagree with Obama are no more "haters" than those who disagreed with Bush.

 

I hesitate to think what categorization must apply to those of us who disagree with both of them.

 

So you are of the opinion that referring to Obama as "the POS we have now" (POS = piece of shit) is not an example of a passionate dislike? And a baseless one, not following from the argument presented? I'm afraid I have to disagree.

 

Where's the bigotry?

[DrRocket]

So you are of the opinion that referring to Obama as "the POS we have now" (POS = piece of shit) is not an example of a passionate dislike? And a baseless one, not following from the argument presented? I'm afraid I have to disagree.

 

Assuming that the poster used "POS" as you suggest (a reasonable assumption), one would conclude that he does not like Obama. The degree of passion is not something that I can judge from the post, as idioms used by the young don't seem to connote the degree of passion that one might ascribe to the speaker were he older. The epithet did not seem sufficiently repulsive to Moontanman to preclude its use in his response.

 

It is not at all clear that the dislike of the poster is directed towards the person of Obama as opposed to the policies and actions of Obama. The content, as opposed to vitriol, in this thread has been rather sparse from the beginning. While the attack may have been against the person, it also may not have been.

 

Lacking anything approaching a basis for anything in this thread, no opinion of any gravitas could follow "from the argument presented". However, the poster could well have formed a valid opinion from other sources. It is not hard to form a perfectly logical position in opposition to the policies of virtually any modern politician. I cannot therefore accept that the opinion of the poster is baseless, only that the basis is not presented in this thread.

 

Where's the bigotry?

 

It lies in several places:

 

1} The choice of the words "hater" and "hate". These words have in recent times come to connote feelings and actions taken against minority groups with no reason other than their minority status. "Hate crimes' are seen as particularly heinous. But who ever heard of an "empathy crime" ? Calling someone a hater in modern parlance is every bit as serious as are racial slurs. I have seen real haters, modern Nazis and KKK members, first hand and I would consider being lumped with them as a "hater" as much an insult as would a black man being labeled with the "N" word.

 

2) Passionate dislike is not, in modern context, the same thing as hatred. One can have a passionate dislike for the principles represented by a politician without hating the individual. One ought to be given the benefit of the doubt, particularly given the imperfect nature of communication in a forum such as this, that one's stated opinions are not based on racism or any other manifestation of hatred without clear evidence to the contrary. To do otherwise is a version of bigotry seen in some groups of intellectuals. It is not redneck bigotry, but it is bigotry nonetheless.

 

3) Labeling the OP as a hater, suggests that his opposition to Obama is based on Obama's membership in a minority group (as I understand it he is either black or Hawaiian), one of the groups against which "hate crimes" can be committed. There is no basis evident for such a characterization of the OP. I don't know why he opposes Obama, but lacking any clear evidence of racism, I am unwilling to even imply such motivation. By refering to him as a "hater" he is so described, by inuendo. Employment of such inuendo, lacking evidence in the same manner that you ascribe to the OP in the formation of his opinions, is itself a form of bigotry.

 

In no way am I defending the OP's labeling of the President as a POS. I certainly defend his right to do so (not necessarily here). I deplore his choice to exercise that right in such a fashion.

 

BTW, I think Obama's decision to send the Seals after Osama was exactly the right decision in the situation as presented. It was important to get Osama and to know that is was indeed Osama that was killed or captured. Special Operations was the right choice. On the other hand the pictures of Obama and his ctowardabinet watchingreferringinnuendoinnuendo the TV while the operation unfolded were a bit gratuitous. I could not care less about his speech -- if you've seen one political spin, you've seem 'em all.

Edited May 31, 2011 by DrRocket

[rigney]

So you are of the opinion that referring to Obama as "the POS we have now" (POS = piece of shit) is not an example of a passionate dislike? And a baseless one, not following from the argument presented? I'm afraid I have to disagree.

 

Where's the bigotry?

 

 

Gotta ask you SOT, where did I refer to President Obama as a "POS", as you put it? Until your annotation and Moontans acronym in bringing it up, it could have had many meanings since i've never used the phrase or acronym before. Obama is our president! Do I dislike his policies?, absolutely. Vote for him? Never. But the word 'hate" fits into a category I'd rather not associate myself with.

Edited May 31, 2011 by rigney

[pwagen]

Gotta ask you SOT, where did I refer to President Obama as a "POS", as you put it?

First post, at the bottom. It would take a mastermind to figure out a way that is NOT calling him a POS.

Isn't it amazing how one President gives credit to those who deserve credit, and the POS we have now; takes all the credit?

[rigney]

First post, at the bottom. It would take a mastermind to figure out a way that is NOT calling him a POS.

I would make one hell of Defense Attorney expecting anyone to not believe that I didn't write that into the message on purpose, but honestly; I didnt. That was the exact text I received and copied. I knew ir was an acronym of some sort and tried to google it up after Swansont brought it to my attention. After the broughaha, it was too late. In using SOT when referring back to Swansonts post was also meant as an acronym. "I do retract the POS slur" even though it was done through my ignorance, not malice or to be insulting or harmful. And if someones feelings were rankled, I am sorry. But I'm sure the Presidents back is made of much stronger stuff. Below is a single list of acronmys for POS. I didn't even bother looking at the others.

 

Acronym Definition

POS Point-Of-Sale

POS Positive

POS Parent(s) Over Shoulder (chat)

POS Position (sports statistics)

POS Point-Of-Service

POS Political Science

POS Part of Speech

POS HIV Positive

POS Packet Over SONET

POS Plan d'Occupation des Sols (French: Estate Layout Policy)

POS Program of Study

POS Plan of Study

POS Place of Service

POS Polycystic Ovary Syndrome

POS PPP Over SONET

POS Plan Obligatorio de Salud (Spanish; Colombia)

POS Power of Suggestion

POS Port Of Seattle

POS Probability Of Success

POS Public Opinion Strategies

POS Positive Organizational Scholarship

POS Position of Strength

POS Period Of Service

POS Poselok (Russian, small town; used in postal addresses)

POS Preliminary Official Statement

POS Polytechnische Oberschule (Germany)

POS Palm Operating System

PoS Priory of Sion

POS Personal Operating Space (IEEE 802.15 TG1)

POS Public Open Space (UK)

POS Product of Sums

POS Partially Ordered Set (abstract algebra)

POS Probability of Survival

POS Primary Operating System

POS Persistent Object Service

PoS Plane of Sky (gaming)

POS Pivoting Optical Servo

POS Positively Outrageous Service

POS Planet Of Sound (UK nightclub)

POS Listening Position

POS Position Played (baseball)

POS Public Offering Statement (bond financing)

POS Political Opportunity Structure

POS Plasma Opening Switch

POS Place of Skulls (band)

POS Porcelain-On-Steel (cookware)

POS Player Owned Station (Eve-Online MMORPG)

POS Proof of Shipment

POS Polar Orbiting Satellite

POS Pennsylvania Orthopaedic Society

POS Piece Of Stuff (polite form)

PoS Plane of Storms (gaming)

POS Project Overview Statement

POS Policyowner Service (insurance industry)

POS PERQ Operating System

POS Post Oil Solutions (Brattleboro, Vermont)

POS Peacetime Operating Stock(s)

POS Prince of Space (movie)

POS Perspectives on Slavistics (linguistic conference)

POS Polyorganosiloxane

POS Pictures on Site

POS Port Of Spain, Trinidad, Trinidad And Tobago - Piarco International Airport (Airport Code)

POS Phoenix Online Studios

POS Partial Order Schedule

POS Priority of Support

POS Proof of Stock

POS Peninsula Orchid Society (San Mateo, CA)

POS Ports Of Support

POS Pacific Orchid Society (Hawaii)

POS Peacetime Operational State

POS Persistent Object Server

POS Pacific Oceanographic Synopsis

POS Purchase Order Specification (quality assurance)

POS Process Operating Station

POS Prime Orbital System (gaming)

POS Plant Operating Specification

POS Path-Over-SONET (synchronous optical network)

POS Portable Oxygen Subsystem

POS Procedings of Science

POS Purchased Operator Service

POS Process Override Switch

POS Programmable Object/Option Select

POS Pre-Operational Support (US DoD)

POS Pair with Overall Shield (cabling)

 

submit new definition

Edited May 31, 2011 by rigney

[swansont]

Right. Because calling him a Pivoting Optical Servo makes soooo much sense. You copied and posted it, and while you won't retract it you deny responsibility for the slur by admitting to plagiarism. Out of the frying pan, into the fire.

 

I'd suggest looking up "haters gonna hate" to get a better understanding of how it is meant in context. It's a reference to someone who will always find a negative about someone else, when nothing the target does could ever be good enough to earn any kind of positive comment.

 

Passionate dislike is not, in modern context, the same thing as hatred.

 

"Passionate dislike" is the primary definition in several dictionary references. If you want to argue about the modern context of the phrase, I've given it above, and here's the contextual modern definition of "hater"

 

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=hater

 

A person that simply cannot be happy for another person's success. So rather than be happy they make a point of exposing a flaw in that person.

 

Hating, the result of being a hater, is not exactly jealousy. The hater doesnt really want to be the person he or she hates, rather the hater wants to knock somelse down a notch.

[rigney]

ote name='swansont' timestamp='1306834968' post='609953']

Right. Because calling him a Pivoting Optical Servo makes soooo much sense. You copied and posted it, and while you won't retract it you deny responsibility for the slur by admitting to plagiarism. Out of the frying pan, into the fire.

 

I'd suggest looking up "haters gonna hate" to get a better understanding of how it is meant in context. It's a reference to someone who will always find a negative about someone else, when nothing the target does could ever be good enough to earn any kind of positive comment.

 

 

 

"Passionate dislike" is the primary definition in several dictionary references. If you want to argue about the modern context of the phrase, I've given it above, and here's the contextual modern definition of "hater"

 

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=hater

 

A person that simply cannot be happy for another person's success. So rather than be happy they make a point of exposing a flaw in that person.

 

Hating, the result of being a hater, is not exactly jealousy. The hater doesnt really want to be the person he or she hates, rather the hater wants to knock somelse down a notch.

 

But I did retract the slur in post # 17 explained why, and thought it more than apologetic. If copying that post from an acquaintance of mine in it's entirely is plagiarism, then I'm guilty as charged. Is that enough eating crow and humble pie for now?

 

Quote]"I do retract the POS slur" even though it was done through my ignorance, not malice or to be insulting or harmful. And if someones feelings were rankled, I am sorry. But I'm sure the Presidents back is made of much stronger stuff.

Edited May 31, 2011 by rigney

[john5746]

After reading both speeches, Obama did take some credit for this mission, but as Swansont mentioned, taking it out of context makes it appear egregious. But, perhaps worse is giving the appearance that the two missions are the same. Obama should take credit - this was a mission out of the bounds of the current war, it required his direct involvement. I don't think Bush had to approve troop movements and raids within Iraq once they had invaded. He couldn't even say that was his primary goal at the time, because WMD was the primary goal, not removing that idiot. But, now that is seen as one of the main justifications for the Iraq war - the ouster of Saddam. They took plenty of political capital from that.

Edited May 31, 2011 by john5746

[swansont]

But I did retract the slur in post # 17

 

Yes, I missed that. My mistake.

[JohnB]

Re "Haters gonna hate".

 

I must admit that as explained the meaning makes sense. And in the light of the current poor state of American politics it can be applied to both sides.

 

However I think that it should be used carefully. It is a dismissive throw away used to imply that the person referred to has no credible argument. If we use Obama as an example; Person A makes a comment about policies and Person B responds with "Haters gonna hate". This is used to imply that Person A is defective and therefore the claim is not credible and in no way actually addresses the claim. It is a purely rhetorical device used to prevent reasonable discourse and discussion and should be avoided. It is an Ad Hom and nothing more.

 

I add that it is a more general version of "Denier" as used in the climate debate and is used for the same purpose. To malign the opposing person rather than their arguments and observations.