TexasTiger 13,006 Posted August 31, 2004 Share Posted August 31, 2004 Mod edit: say what you will about the candidates, but let's leave the children out of it. No snide jokes about either candidate's children will be tolerated. Unless they involve the child of a certain Dem President, and then our administrators think they’re damn funny. But repeat after me, “there’s no double standard on this board.†http://www.aunation.net/forums/index.php?s...indpost&p=33077 http://www.aunation.net/forums/index.php?s...findpost&p=6733 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BamaGrad03 0 Posted August 31, 2004 Share Posted August 31, 2004 Q: What do you get when you cross a bad politician with a crooked lawyer?A: Chelsea. Thats not a slam on chelsea...its a slam on her parents...doesnt suggest shes a drunk thats for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 13,006 Posted September 1, 2004 Author Share Posted September 1, 2004 Q: What do you get when you cross a bad politician with a crooked lawyer?A: Chelsea. Thats not a slam on chelsea...its a slam on her parents...doesnt suggest shes a drunk thats for sure. How about the one saying a pig for Chelsea was a good trade? Spin that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ranger12 46 Posted September 1, 2004 Share Posted September 1, 2004 What is with all the whining? Is somebody putting a gun to your heads and making you post here and making you read all the posts? Are you made to reply to every post? You guys are really desperate when you try to turn the attention to the candidates daughters. The post about the VMAs was a post about the surprise about the boos and not a slam on anybody. Newsflash to the liberals, the daughters of either candidate or not running for office, so quit trying to make the subject into that and let's get back to the candidates and their issues. All I can say is that it is pitiful and shameful that this topic even came up and I hope this thread is locked also very soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 13,006 Posted September 1, 2004 Author Share Posted September 1, 2004 What is with all the whining? Is somebody putting a gun to your heads and making you post here and making you read all the posts? Are you made to reply to every post? You guys are really desperate when you try to turn the attention to the candidates daughters. The post about the VMAs was a post about the surprise about the boos and not a slam on anybody. Newsflash to the liberals, the daughters of either candidate or not running for office, so quit trying to make the subject into that and let's get back to the candidates and their issues. All I can say is that it is pitiful and shameful that this topic even came up and I hope this thread is locked also very soon. I don't know what the hell you're talking about, but your not responding to me. I haven't posted on anybody's child nor did I complain about the VMA silliness. I hadn't even read the "free speech" thread until after starting and responding on this one. Stop your own whining. Who made you reply to this post? Who put a gun to your head to make your read it in the first place? Your hypocrisy is on full display, once again. I know it is too much to get you to make a rational response to what I've actually posted, but at least take your meds and relax. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDM4AU 336 Posted September 1, 2004 Share Posted September 1, 2004 Q: What do you get when you cross a bad politician with a crooked lawyer?A: Chelsea. Thats not a slam on chelsea...its a slam on her parents...doesnt suggest shes a drunk thats for sure. How about the one saying a pig for Chelsea was a good trade? Spin that one. Well nice try on the first one. That wasn't a slam on Chelsea. That's expected of a dem of your kind. Guess that joke went over your head. Again, expected of someone like you. Finally, the joke about Chelsea and the pig was wrong. It didn't go into her private life like LE did with Bush's daughters, but none the less, the daughters of the candidates should be left out of the trash talk. There. Are we happy? I sure hope so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 13,006 Posted September 1, 2004 Author Share Posted September 1, 2004 Q: What do you get when you cross a bad politician with a crooked lawyer?A: Chelsea. Thats not a slam on chelsea...its a slam on her parents...doesnt suggest shes a drunk thats for sure. How about the one saying a pig for Chelsea was a good trade? Spin that one. Well nice try on the first one. That wasn't a slam on Chelsea. That's expected of a dem of your kind. Guess that joke went over your head. Again, expected of someone like you. Finally, the joke about Chelsea and the pig was wrong. It didn't go into her private life like LE did with Bush's daughters, but none the less, the daughters of the candidates should be left out of the trash talk. There. Are we happy? I sure hope so. Boy you were so close to just admitting it was wrong, but then you had to minimize it. "...didn't go into her private life..." Being arrested is not a private matter. Having sex, on the other hand...generally is, but that's another topic. I didn't see what Legal posted, but their citation for using a fake ID was the result of their choices and actions. Chelsea's looks are largely a result of what God gave her. You think comparing her to a pig is somehow less insulting that joking about someone's illegal choices? Of course you do. Guess the complexity of this matter just went over the head of someone like you. Happy? Just the same, I agree that slamming kids AND spouses is pointless, small-minded and petty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDM4AU 336 Posted September 1, 2004 Share Posted September 1, 2004 Q: What do you get when you cross a bad politician with a crooked lawyer?A: Chelsea. Thats not a slam on chelsea...its a slam on her parents...doesnt suggest shes a drunk thats for sure. How about the one saying a pig for Chelsea was a good trade? Spin that one. Well nice try on the first one. That wasn't a slam on Chelsea. That's expected of a dem of your kind. Guess that joke went over your head. Again, expected of someone like you. Finally, the joke about Chelsea and the pig was wrong. It didn't go into her private life like LE did with Bush's daughters, but none the less, the daughters of the candidates should be left out of the trash talk. There. Are we happy? I sure hope so. Boy you were so close to just admitting it was wrong, but then you had to minimize it. "...didn't go into her private life..." Being arrested is not a private matter. Having sex, on the other hand...generally is, but that's another topic. I didn't see what Legal posted, but their citation for using a fake ID was the result of their choices and actions. Chelsea's looks are largely a result of what God gave her. You think comparing her to a pig is somehow less insulting that joking about someone's illegal choices? Of course you do. Guess the complexity of this matter just went over the head of someone like you. Happy? Just the same, I agree that slamming kids AND spouses is pointless, small-minded and petty. Nice try again, Ace. I did say, it was wrong. And I mean that. The offspring of the candidates should be left out of the trash talking. I like the way you tried to continue to trash them while complaining about such matters. Oh, the hypocrisy! I do feel the two are different. A joke about one's looks and delving (sp?) into the personal lives of others is quite different. No one said anything about doing anything illeagal. You just pulled that out of your rear since you didn't even read the post. Guess you had to get that jab in there on the daughters of the President. :unsure: And having sex is a private matter until you turn the Oval Office (paid for by all tax payers) into your own personal brothel. And once again for the mentally challenged, the issue was about lying under oath during a sexual assault case. But as you said, that's another topic about a public official and not his kids. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Al 0 Posted September 1, 2004 Share Posted September 1, 2004 If we just called the Bush girls test tube babies would that be acceptable??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 13,006 Posted September 1, 2004 Author Share Posted September 1, 2004 Q: What do you get when you cross a bad politician with a crooked lawyer?A: Chelsea. Thats not a slam on chelsea...its a slam on her parents...doesnt suggest shes a drunk thats for sure. How about the one saying a pig for Chelsea was a good trade? Spin that one. Well nice try on the first one. That wasn't a slam on Chelsea. That's expected of a dem of your kind. Guess that joke went over your head. Again, expected of someone like you. Finally, the joke about Chelsea and the pig was wrong. It didn't go into her private life like LE did with Bush's daughters, but none the less, the daughters of the candidates should be left out of the trash talk. There. Are we happy? I sure hope so. Boy you were so close to just admitting it was wrong, but then you had to minimize it. "...didn't go into her private life..." Being arrested is not a private matter. Having sex, on the other hand...generally is, but that's another topic. I didn't see what Legal posted, but their citation for using a fake ID was the result of their choices and actions. Chelsea's looks are largely a result of what God gave her. You think comparing her to a pig is somehow less insulting that joking about someone's illegal choices? Of course you do. Guess the complexity of this matter just went over the head of someone like you. Happy? Just the same, I agree that slamming kids AND spouses is pointless, small-minded and petty. Nice try again, Ace. I did say, it was wrong. And I mean that. The offspring of the candidates should be left out of the trash talking. I like the way you tried to continue to trash them while complaining about such matters. Oh, the hypocrisy! I do feel the two are different. A joke about one's looks and delving (sp?) into the personal lives of others is quite different. No one said anything about doing anything illeagal. You just pulled that out of your rear since you didn't even read the post. Guess you had to get that jab in there on the daughters of the President. :unsure: I didn't read Legal's post, but the thing that brought them into the media in the first place was not drinking at a private party, but using a fake ID at one of my favorite restaurants. I didn't pull it out of anywhere. You raised the issue by claiming what happened to Chelsea was wrong, but somehow less wrong because it didn't delve into her private life. If you hadn't insisted on drawing some kind of distinction, I wouldn't have responded to it. I've had over 900 posts on this board and I hadn't brought up Bush's daughters in a derogatory fashion yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDM4AU 336 Posted September 1, 2004 Share Posted September 1, 2004 If it makes you feel better to try and rationalize your post, that's fine. I don't really care. Maybe we can finally agree (to end this debate) that the daughters should be left out of the trash talking (as I said in my original post). Kerry's, Bush's, and Clinton's. Fine with you? I'll let you have the last word... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TitanTiger 20,510 Posted September 1, 2004 Share Posted September 1, 2004 I apologize for reprinting a joke about Chelsea. I honestly didn't even remember it but I've also modified my position on that kind of thing in the 11 months since that was posted. I don't think the kids should be fodder for your or my disagreement or disdain for their fathers. So, I made the call, I believe it was the appropriate one, and if it happens again toward the Kerry or Bush girls, I'll pull the trigger again without regret. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BamaGrad03 0 Posted September 1, 2004 Share Posted September 1, 2004 Crap i didnt even notice that it was in october of 2003...man that is the best you could come up with in almost a year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Al 0 Posted September 1, 2004 Share Posted September 1, 2004 I apologize for reprinting a joke about Chelsea. I honestly didn't even remember it but I've also modified my position on that kind of thing in the 11 months since that was posted. I don't think the kids should be fodder for your or my disagreement or disdain for their fathers. So, I made the call, I believe it was the appropriate one, and if it happens again toward the Kerry or Bush girls, I'll pull the trigger again without regret. Flip-flopped, huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BamaGrad03 0 Posted September 1, 2004 Share Posted September 1, 2004 I apologize for reprinting a joke about Chelsea. I honestly didn't even remember it but I've also modified my position on that kind of thing in the 11 months since that was posted. I don't think the kids should be fodder for your or my disagreement or disdain for their fathers. So, I made the call, I believe it was the appropriate one, and if it happens again toward the Kerry or Bush girls, I'll pull the trigger again without regret. Flip-flopped, huh? Thank goodness he changed his position on something as insignificant as this...as opposed to say...sending 87 billion dollars to troops. At least he had the stones to come out and explain it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LegalEagle 22 Posted September 1, 2004 Share Posted September 1, 2004 I guess I should accept your apology TT, but I'm not that kinda guy. *grin* My post was so mild. Yet through "non-governmental censorship" you have prevented others from seeing what I said. It's just the Republican way - We know what's best for you, so we'll just go ahead and do it. You really don't need to know why. I thought about the political parties last night, and I came to realize that the party members are like fans of a football team. They do not care which team is best (or candidate) they just want to win and beat the other team every time. In the framework of AU and UA that is easy to understand and defensible. Heck, we're fighting over a year of braggin' rights. However, when it comes to electing a President (or any public official for that matter) I can't justify blindly following and supporting any team. The choice is too important, much more than braggin' rights. Lives will be preserved or lost based on that decision. Our grandchildren's future will be shaped. They will either be saddled with the bill for our drunken spending spree or be able to have a fresh start based on our fiscal responsibility. They will either be exposed to the concept of tolerance for others or intolerance for others. Intolerance leads to war and distrust among the nations, tolerance leads to peace and respect among the nations. Even if you see it differently, how can you argue that you should go into the voting booth with a "team mentality" regardless of which team you support. Finally, on the news last night, I saw a little 'ol lady say she was voting for Bush as the lesser of two evils. Go figure; I'm voting for Kerry as the lesser of two evils. Hell, now that the little 'ol lady is votin', PT's vote may wind up counting after all! *grin* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TitanTiger 20,510 Posted September 1, 2004 Share Posted September 1, 2004 I stand by my decision. If you want to discuss this further, you can PM me. Otherwise we're moving on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.