Speaking Of..........

RichK.

You've made your political views apparent to anyone taking the time to read your last two blogs. So, why don't you give it a rest and stop trying to strike up a "Bash Bush" commentary. You don't walk in his shoes. You don't have the decisions to make that affect this country and you don't know the circumstances behind those decisions. All you have to worry about is what profound blog you're going to publish next.  You will have your chance to vote for whom you approve of soon.  The President is the President of these United States, like it or not!

Germanfrau,

Good advice.  But I must ask a question or two of you.  Are these restrictions you propose going to apply only to me.  Or does your philosophy of restriction apply to everyone?  And who gets to decide how your philosophy is applied? Who will decide what subjects should be accepted?  Does this apply only to the blogs, or does it also cover news organizations?  Yeah, I'll bet you didn't consider those questions.  But that's OK.  No one is perfect.  I offer myself as a prime example.

You might want to take a close look at the repeat subjects from the same people of the blogs & perhaps reconsider your philosophy.  Or perhaps check out the news, local, national & international to see if they don't report on the same story.  Yes, just another tip.

RichK

Germanfrau,

While I completely understand the overall message of your response to RichK I cannot agree with the suggestion.  I don't like the fact that he likes to pick on the Church but it's one of his favorite issues, just like George Bush is one.  We all have them. 

I think it's wrong to start policing subject matter, he's right that there are subjects that come up over and over again, it's not just him, and I am guilty of it as well.

If you see a topic you're not interested in, or are even tired of hearing about you have the choice to ignore it.  If there isn't a topic that is of interest to you maybe you have one that has not been brought up here, or even if it has, bring it up again.

The only thing that bugs me so far as subject matter is when someone comes in here trying to use the blogs for free advertising to sell something.

Be tolerant of others, it's the best way to lay the ground work for others to be tolerant in turn. 

Germanfrau -

Where have you been while I have been trying to present the fair and balanced side to Uncle R's constant barrage?  You will learn that you could post a blog about the mating habits of the fruit fly and good ol' UR will somehow interject his opionion on W.  The sooner you get over it the better -

However - comma - please help me in my efforts to keep him educated on the realistic view of life.  I just can't wait to see what he says about Billary when she is in office!  Will he give her a wide path (no pun intended), a license to raise millions through trickery (oh my gosh, I didn't realize he was a felon), a free pass to say 47 million "people in this country" (not Americans) don't have health insurance (but fail to say that about 33% of them are here illegally?).  Little things like that.  I just can't wait. 

In the meantime, join the fun - and remember the difference between opinion and fact.  Don't let him draw you into that one...whatever you do, don't go away!

Marsha,

Once again, (this is getting repetative) you have seved all of us well in an eloquent manner.  I will admit to human failings.  As I have stated before, my two main subjects of interest are politics & religion, specifically the separation issue.  Yes, I do pick on Bush.  But on the other hand, he was the one that initiated the issue, it was reported & I merely passed it along.  If you don't want to get shot at, don't provide the ammunition.

The one thing I did for which I patted myself on the back was the fact that I heavily self censored my reply to germanfrau.  No need to have the hood mentality in me come out.  But then, no person is perfect & I have no intention of getting blocked from the blogs.  I consider this venue to valuable to abuse.

I agree with your philosophy on passing something by.  I gave an example of this sometime back @ Supreme Court Justice Scalia.  I don't agree with it 100%, but in many circumstances, it does apply.

Thanks for the eloquent reply.  Sometimes I wonder how you have so much patience & understanding.  What's your secret?  An extra cup of coffee?

RichK

CCC,

Wouldn't any fair & balanced comment by me connecting a fruit fly & "W" depend on the political leanings of said fruit fly & its mate?  We do have to take that into consideration.

As to Bush, as I stated in the above reply, if you don't want to get shot at, don't provide someone like me with the ammunition.  Besides, who's a better target?

@ Billary.  I don't know @ you, but I don't consider them in office by any means.  It would be interesting, yes.  But we are no where near seeing them in the oval office yet.  Hey!  She's not that wide.  Besides, she's a home girl.

@ fact v opinion.  I still plead guilty.  If I don't provide a source, It's my opinion.  Just like every one else.  But even if my opinion is in the dumper, I never worry.  After all, who could have a better person than you to keep me on my toes & on the straight & narrow?

Bye the bye.  I once again thank you for presenting the FAB side of moi.  What!  Me worry?  JATFUR.

RichK

Marsha,

I too need to thank you for putting things so eloquently, I just can't picture you drinking coffee, more like a glass of wine, whilst you comment so politely and try to keep me and UR from getting barred from the blogs.  You are like the moderator (objective, not assigned by the Dems) in a debate.

And for the most part Rich, you are fair, stronly opinionated, but fair.  Occasionally you do get worked up and start using caps and punctuation, congrats for finding those by the way.

Germanfrau - one thing you will learn about me is I don't let anything get to me.  Life is too short, too much going in the world to get worked up about something UR or anybody says on these blogs.  Lets just say I've seen some of the worst this world has to offer.  These blogs are just a miniscule part of our day.  Can UR be irritating?  Darn straight!  Though so can the driver next to you, the kid screaming in the restaurant, and the neighbor who revs his Harley at midnight.  But the bottom line is we live in the best country in the world, no matter what some might think, and we get to vent on a forum like this because of it - so have fun, enjoy RichK's banter - I've learned something from him and I would like to think he has learned something as well.  The only thing I draw the line at is watching Katie Couric, instant nausea on the screen.  The other thing you will learn about me is I digress.....

CCC,

Don't look now, but I think that Marsha's style is rubbing off on you.  You are getting way too eloquent.  But maybe that's a good thing.

Hey the caps & stuff are fun.  Where the heck have they been all my life.  I do try to be fair & I have people like you, Marsha & the others to thank for keeping me there.  Yes, I am opinionated.  But most entries on the blogs have to do with opinions, so I am no different in that respect. 

I specialise in irritating.  If you haven't learned that by now, you just haven't been paying attention.  I've made no secret that I have learned much from all of the contributions to the blogs.  Some I agree with some, others, not so much.  There are also those in which I have no interest.  So I do what others do, I pass them by.

I'll watch Katie Couric or Ann Curry any time of the day or night.  I do have control of the volume & excellent eye sight.  OY!  We should start a digress club.

RichK

Thank you so much for the compliments but in reality I'm not that all that laid back or patient, just ask my husband!  I am a textbook redhead and I get ticked off just like the rest of you, especially when someone is just plain rude, trying to be superior or just looking to pick a fight. My first tendancy is always to give them one, and every once in awhile I don't think twice about it and say just exactly what I am thinking.  People normally duck when I lose my temper.    

It's easy to be the peacekeeper when you're not in the middle of it.  No doubt the day will come when one of you or someone else will be mine. 

This site and the integrity of it are just important to me as I believe it is to most of us.  I also think that although we may disagree vehemently at times we need to make this a "functional family" of sorts or it will just die off because people lose interest when there is nothing but bickering and petty nitpicking.

I like to write, I always have.  I like to spend time thinking about the different ways to say things so there is no room to misconstrue and to not tempt those who just want to find fault, and they are freaking everywhere you go!  

RickK, I thought you were very restrained if your reaction was anything like mine was, it just wasn't directed at me. 

CCC you sound like a very wise man who realizes what is worth getting worked up over and what isn't.  As I have gotten older I've done better in that realm but there is still much room for improvement. 

Like I said, y'all just haven't seen me lose my temper yet.  I hope that you never do, it isn't pretty.

Well, you good folks - as opinionated as I am, I couldn't stay away from this conversation even though I tried.

I have never been a W fan, nor will I ever be.  He never succeeded in anything prior to becoming our "leader", and if Sandra Day O'Connor hadn't been suckered in by the "family", he probably wouldn't be president (fact).  The supremes went way above and beyond on that one.  And, I must state to you what I have said to my "Bushie" family members - that just because I don't like Bush means I'm a Clinton fan.  I am registered as a "no party" and I mean it!! So many Republicans think that if you don't like Bush then you must like the Clintons (either one or both), and I don't understand that - it's not logical.  I asked on several blogs, "why do you like George Bush, what has he done for you and why did you vote for him?"  The only answers I get are bashing Clinton!  No one has EVER explained what qualifies W to be the leader of what was once the greatest country on the planet, or why they voted for him.  Did they not do their homework?  Do they not realize the VP put himself there (it was his responsiblity to find a VP candidate) and for a darned good reason?  Cheney has much to do with the cunundrum we find ourselves in today.

I am also not a Hillary fan, and because she voted on October 11, 2002 to give Bush all the power to invade a country that had nothing to do with 9/11, I cannot ever vote for her.  I've always thought everything that has been done since the election of 2000 has had no logic or common sense...none whatsoever. I worked for change in 2006 and apparently got nadda.  But, don't get me started on the Dems.

Oh - one more thing.  I have to say how much I enjoy knowing people in this area have some of the same thoughts and opinions as I have or can discuss topics intelligently whether we agree or disagree.  We've been here in Clay County for eleven years and most of the time we've worked in Jacksonville and haven't been able to connect with anyone in Clay Co. who agrees with us at all concerning politics, including my sister and family. I must admit I didn't realize when we moved here (didn't do my homework), what a hugely conservative area Clay Co. is, as well as all of NE FL.  I found out really quickly however.  There's nothing wrong with being conservative, just closed minds.  And politics should NEVER go hand-in-hand with religion...absolute separation of church & state - I will never budge on that.

So there you have it.  I jumped right in with both feet and spoke my piece...at least a portion of it.  It's probably very obvious that I have strong feelings - not only on this issue, but many others.  I shall try to contain myself so that I don't get kicked off the blog site. 

Everyone, please keep contributing your various insights to important (and also fun) topics and keep the dialogue above board and informative.  I do enjoy this part of my day.  Thanks.

PEACE

Mein Frau -

UR has paid his dues here and has earned our respect (if you couldn't tell).  UR - irritating? No.  Provocative - yes.  Hardheaded - yes also.  But, you'll soon realize, we're all hard headed.  But good looking though.

Sunflower - happy to meet you.  Welcome aboard.  I'm an RR (Registered Republican), hopefully somewhat open minded, and wouldn't trade all the money in the world for George Bush's job.  What qualifies him to be President?  He was elected.

Some may question the outcome of the election, a wonderful American right, but the process worked.  A free, open election occurred, and a too-tight-to-call race was analyzed for days by every manner of election examiner - including your buddies on the Supreme Court - and GW was handed the keys to the palace.  The best part - no one lost their life. Try that with most of the countries in the Middle East, or Africa, or Asia, or South America.

I don't agree with all that has happened in D.C. during GW's terms, but I do support strong policies to keep dictators and terrorists at bay.  When I vote in Nov. '08 my security, and peace, are going to be in the forefront of my mind.  Whoever - Democrat or Republican - gets to play King of the World for the next four years will, WILL, have to deal with terrorism.  Period.  Trying to lay that at the feet of GW alone, is no different than trying to lay it at the feet of Bill Clinton, or any other former President. The blame lies with religious zealots who think their way is the only way, and that somehow innocent Americans (and others) should be killed - in the name of God/Allah.

John Wayne - where are you when we need you?  Maybe John Wayne with Jimmy Stewart as Vice-President.  I know - quit eating that pie-in-the-sky.  Clinton-Edwards?  Obama-Richardson?  Thompson-McCain? (death watch would start the day of the election.)  Jan. 29 will be here before you know it.  I have no idea who to vote for in the primary?

Fellow Bloggers,

First, a thanks to all for your understanding, eloquence, understanding & encouragement.  A few things need to be brought  out in the light. But a note to all, including me.  While I, as you have seen, disagree with germanfraus suggestion, I agree with her opinion on Bush.  None of us walk in his shoes or have to make the decisions he, or any other politician makes.  I think we all can agree on that.

Part of my comments were true, even if confused with my sarcastic/humerous manner of stating them.  Yes, I think he was being a nice guy in warning candidates.  Yes, he wouldn't have had to do that if he didn't get himself into the position that basically he, & those around him created.  I'm not talking @ the attacks on 9-11, but how he has handled the country since.

Most of the problems we have concerning his administration were caused by him & his administration.  Those problems were exacerbated by a totally unprofessional press & by an overwhelmingly apathetic or zealous public.  As far as problems caused by Bush & his administration, he is not alone.  I would be willing to bet that if we did a deep probe, a class one diagnostic, on any president, we would find pretty much the same thing.  But for the life of me, I can't think of another president who's actions have so adversely affected the country, not only in the present, but also for future generations, not even Nixon.  So do I pick on him?  Is he a repeated subject of my blogs?  Yes.  As goes with other bloggers.

As to germanfrau.  Baxley, among others, mentioned in another blog that we tend to police ourselves fairly well & I guess this would be a good example of it.  I would also maintain that we shouldn't be to hard on anyone who makes, what the French would call, le boo boo.  We have all made mistakes, this one coming in the category of not only what was being said but how it was said. Bottom line being, I hope that this is the extreme of being in possibly bad taste.  As we have seen, we all have pretty thick skins & it would be a shame to loose the contribution of any person.  None of us is perfect.  CCC, I just know that you're thinking of me & you're right.

As Bax said above, we have earned the respect of our fellow bloggers & I think the trend will continue.  (I also don't have a clue as to who I will fote for next year.  No, Hillary is not a shoe in with me)

So, once again, thanks, keep the ideas roling in & have a great Wed.  JATFUR.

RichK

RichK I have to say after reading your last entry that you are a bit of a blogging contradiction.  That isn't said to be critical, I think we all have moments where we contradict ourselves.

With that being said, while you acknowledge that George Bush does not control the world and there are many people all over the world that has contributed to global events you still pretty much always bash George Bush the man.  The same with issues regarding the Church.  You acknowledge that not everyone is a self righteous hypocrite yet when you blog about the subject it is always worded to attack religion as a whole.  You go from blogging about a specific incident to an all inclusive condemnation. 

I am a Registered Republican (how I got there is another story) who votes her conscience, not her party.  I did not vote for him in the last election. I am not happy with the decisions the President has made, and I regret the irreversible damage that has been done yet I still refuse to bash the man.  I have too much respect for the Office, and for all his mistakes, misjudgements, or worse I cannot bring myself to say that he is a bad man.  The negative outweighs the positive for many, me included but while he is in Office he is still our President and for the good of our Nation we need to walk that line of saying how we feel about the issues without attacking him personally.  How can we expect any respect from the world when we have none for each other, including our President. 

There is more to George Bush then the politician, his opponents would better serve their country by trying to remember that when taking him to task on things they don't agree with.  His days are numbered, we cannot change the past, we cannot stop the path he has chosen to take our nation.  There are no doubt good and positive things he has accomplished but no one wants to talk about that.

I Pray for President Bush, as I will pray for our next President whether I vote for them or not.  I believe it is the right thing to do, not only for the good of this Nation, but for my own spirit. 

I speak my mind with no holes barred in my own home.  As an American I will not give the enemy the satisfaction of tearing apart our President in a public forum.  I may not agree with George Bush the President, but I will not be so arrogant as to attack the man.  The image of standing in front of his wife and his daughters and saying such horrible things, they know the man, we only know the Politician. 

Marsha - I agree with your comments about respect for the office.  I liken the current unparalleled types of criticism of the Man, George Bush - to the criticisms heard in our everyday society when people don't get their way.  The Dems lost the election, and their response is to criticize the man for everything they can possibly fathom, including natural disasters.  Much like what you hear now of somebody getting in an accident and finding everybody else to blame, i.e. bushes in the way, road not maintained, street sign in the wrong place, .....    Saw an article the other day about colleges having problems with parents getting too involved, actually flying in to help settle spats with friends, meet with professors over bad grades, etc...  Can you imagine?  Same mentality.

I just started a blog sure to interest Rich - about a recent book released in defense of the President and his decisions.  

It does help if we could picture ourselves for a moment, sitting in the Oval Office, knowing we've had to compromise our ideals to politics in order to achieve anything, with an entire nation and sometimes the world wondering why we don't have the answer to every single problem without ever pausing to consider we're really no more omniscient than a plumber or cop or crossing guard or stay-at-home mom.

And I don't care if W skipped out on the Reserves and never doged bullets in a war zone.  Sending American citizens into harm's way has to be a torturous personal decision for anyone.  The confidence and smiling announcements of progress are just the politician part of the president playing to the crowd.

Now that I've defended the president, I don't consider criticizing him in a public forum out of bounds.  To me, his biggest failures have been in choosing which of his political advisors and appointees to trust and keep and which to dismiss.  As Mike Vick says, choosin' the wrong friends can get you in trouble.

Marsha,

Two things @ your points.  The first is a question, the likes of which I'm not sure have been addressed.  What is the dividing line between "bashing," and stating criticism based on facts & opinions?  If this has been defined, I missed it & would be happy to hear from fellow bloggers.  For instance, some may have thought that germanfrau bashed me, but I don't think she did.  I have said on these blogs that I bash Bush, but yet I'm not sure the term has been defined.  And lest we forget, I have also defended him at times.

Second is your point that I go from the particular to the general, an, "all inclusive condemnation," were your words.  And you are correct.  In certain instances, where the circumstances warrant, I carry out the particular complaints to the general.  But once again, if, & only if I have the facts right.  I assume you are referring to the blog I wrote @ tax increase in Jax & the reaction of the faith community.  If you weren't, throw an example to me so I can explain.

You refuse to bash (criticize?) Bush & that is certainly your right.  But I detect a tacit implication that to do so is wrong.  I could be wrong.  Like that's never happened before.  It's also my impression that part of the validity of your points is that I not only criticize him for his political life, but have also attacked the man & his character.  If I am wrong, well, once again.  But I have done just that.  Like you & most every one else, I have respect for the office, the demands of the job & the moral walls that must be overcome.  But considering his official actions, and actions alone, (I really don't care @ his personal life.  For one thing, it's none of my business unless it becomes official) I don't consider him a person of moral character.  I don't consider that arrogance.  I consider that my responsibility and apparently, so do the courts.

I know that you're not the only person who doesn't like it when I or any one else, "bashes," Bush.  But #1, I have the right, along with every one else in this country to express my opinion.  #2, as long as there are those out there, whether on the blogs or on the news, who paint the opposite picture of Bush or any other politician, I'll keep saying what my opinion is.  Heck, the truth &/or the facts gotta be somewhere in the middle, don't they.  Besides, the man, or woman, who sits in that chair holds all of our lives in the balance.  It is not only our right to comment, it's our duty.   JATFUR.

RichK

I don't know where the line between bashing and criticizing is, don't even know how you go about drawing the line.  Perhaps it is a misused adjective.  Whether it's the words themselves, the context in which they're used or the overall "perceived" attitude, or that the word bash itself when it comes to words is subjective.

What you blog about doesn't really bother me, most of the stuff about George Bush I don't even read.  I only jumped into the blog because I was supporting your right to write about anything your heart desires, it kind of went on from there. 

The comments about the Church, yes, they bother me.  Not because you bring up real issues (yes I was talking about the blog on Jax & the faith community) that deserve some scrutiny, just the way you always end up lumping us all into the same mold. How many people at that day of Faith meeting had any clue as to the financing involved or thought about it?  A fraction compared to the number who did not but in the end you made the sweeping generalization.  However much it bothers me I realize that you are going to continue to do it so I leave it alone most of the time.  Again, I joined this blog over your rights to talk about what is important to you, not to single you out for crticisim.

It was your last entry yesterday titled thought to ponder that made me want to say something more, don't know why, it just did.  I was not calling you arrogant, that was a self pointed awareness of my own failings rather then focusing on pointing out somone else's.

I think the time has come for me to vacate this thread because I think I have contributed all I can to it.  Again, it was in defense of your right to speak your mind that I got into it to begin with, I just got sidetracked as is easy to do here, no challenge intended.

Marsha,

Please don't ever think that I consider a challenge a bad thing.  On the contrary, I welcome a challenge for a number of reasons.  It forces me to re read what I wrote to make sure of its integrity.  A challenge opens new ways at looking at another point of view & that has to be a good thing.  Ultimately, it is another opportunity to learn.  So please, take a cue fromm CCC & challenge whenever you think I or any one else is wrong, misguided, confused or just plain goofy in the head.

I went back & read my blog comments on the day of prayer & you are right.  I worded that very poorly & it does sound like a gross generalization & condemnation of Christians in Jax.  I understand that reading that, the way I wrote it would be the only conclusion one could draw & I apologise.  I was directing my accusation at two entities.  The leaders of not only the faith community, but the leaders in political community who brought the event to the public.  I would like to hear the explanation from anyone of how none of the people involved hadn't had a thought that there might be Constitutional issues involved in using public funds.  What really set me off was the interview I saw on Ch. 4 where a man, I didn't get his name but he was from the Baptist Ministers Conference.  He was referring to the posibility that churches might have to pay a fee for garbage pick up & water treatment & immediately claimed it was a Constitutional issue & specifically mentioned the separation of church & state.  That was the hypocrisy.  That was what I was objecting to.

So don't worry @ a challenge to me.  It's like getting knocked out by a velvet glove.  Besides, you're proving to be a good influence on CCC & me.  JATFUR.

RichK