Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-19-2009, 07:55 AM
 
12,436 posts, read 11,910,284 times
Reputation: 3159

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nomander View Post
Of course you think that, it is something you agree with. Ends justifies the means right? She can lie, cheat and act like a complete ass, but as long as you agree with her, it excuses her behavior. Again, typical elitist thinking.
I said I could forgive her RUDENESS. I personally don't like her, but yes how a person votes is more important to me than whether she is rude, cheats on their spouse etc. Certainly it would be better to have someone who votes correctly and is generally a nice person, but you take what you can get.

I don't know how this makes me an elitist. I vote for the person that I believe will serve in the best interest my country. That just means that I am intelligent. I don't vote for a person because I like them. Personally I think George Bush would be fun to play golf with, but that does not mean that I would vote for him.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-19-2009, 07:58 AM
 
Location: Raleigh, NC
9,059 posts, read 12,938,314 times
Reputation: 1401
He should address her by her proper title: "public servant"

With an emphasis on servant. One can only hope it would humble her.

I know one congressperson in TX who would be perfectly content with being called public servant for the rest of his life.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-19-2009, 08:07 AM
 
13,053 posts, read 12,910,576 times
Reputation: 2618
Quote:
Originally Posted by hotair2 View Post
I said I could forgive her RUDENESS. I personally don't like her, but yes how a person votes is more important to me than whether she is rude, cheats on their spouse etc. Certainly it would be better to have someone who votes correctly and is generally a nice person, but you take what you can get.

I don't know how this makes me an elitist. I vote for the person that I believe will serve in the best interest my country. That just means that I am intelligent. I don't vote for a person because I like them. Personally I think George Bush would be fun to play golf with, but that does not mean that I would vote for him.
The point is, you forgive her because you agree with her. Her rudeness is "acceptable" only because you agree with her. There are many people who agreed with the war. I did, but I separate the two as I think that one has nothing to do with the other. Whether she votes a way I like or not, she is still an arrogant elitist.

Now concerning attributing your comment to that of an elitist is that an elitist validates their actions based on their position. That is, it is ok for someone to be rude, cheat, lie, etc... because they believe themselves to be righteous in their position or above others. So, by you stating that you forgive her actions (when she makes no apologizes for he arrogance) because you agree with her voting, you are essentially holding to the elitist attitude that it is acceptable because she does what you want. I know you said you do not agree with it, but it is the fact that your forgiveness is contingent on her agreeing with you. That is elitist.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-19-2009, 08:11 AM
 
Location: Back in the gym...Yo Adrian!
10,168 posts, read 20,718,147 times
Reputation: 19858
What gets me is that this hag forgets she is a public servant, elected to serve the people, not the other way around. She is arrogant and crass. It's been well known she hates the military, except when the BRAC rolls around, then she becomes a patriot so her state won't lose jobs and revenue. It's a Senator, Congressman or even a judges call to either demand being referred to by a title or accept being addressed as sir or ma'am. Many a politician or judge allows themselves to be addressed as sir or ma'am. The uptight ones who have fragile ego's and need to be reminded of how self-important they are, are the the ones who make a fuss. She's a failure in terms of her job, California's budget is in the toilet.

What's ironic is that in the military, we typically address someone by their title or rank when we do NOT like them or respect them. Sir and ma'am is reserved for those who we like and/or respect. When I do not like an officer, I refer to them by their rank such as captain, major, colonel etc. If Ted Kennedy were to walk into my office I'd refer to his worthless self as Senator, not sir. He doesn't deserve the endearing term of sir, not to me anyway. She would know that if she cared in the least about military protocol or customs and courtesies. She can have her title, it's too bad she doesn't live up to it. Then again, most of them don't, regardless of party affiliation.

Those of your defending her are doing so out of bias and nothing more. You know damn well she was dressing down the general out of pettiness and disdain!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-19-2009, 10:28 AM
 
12,436 posts, read 11,910,284 times
Reputation: 3159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coolhand68 View Post
What gets me is that this hag forgets she is a public servant, elected to serve the people, not the other way around. She is arrogant and crass. It's been well known she hates the military, except when the BRAC rolls around, then she becomes a patriot so her state won't lose jobs and revenue. It's a Senator, Congressman or even a judges call to either demand being referred to by a title or accept being addressed as sir or ma'am. Many a politician or judge allows themselves to be addressed as sir or ma'am. The uptight ones who have fragile ego's and need to be reminded of how self-important they are, are the the ones who make a fuss. She's a failure in terms of her job, California's budget is in the toilet.

What's ironic is that in the military, we typically address someone by their title or rank when we do NOT like them or respect them. Sir and ma'am is reserved for those who we like and/or respect. When I do not like an officer, I refer to them by their rank such as captain, major, colonel etc. If Ted Kennedy were to walk into my office I'd refer to his worthless self as Senator, not sir. He doesn't deserve the endearing term of sir, not to me anyway. She would know that if she cared in the least about military protocol or customs and courtesies. She can have her title, it's too bad she doesn't live up to it. Then again, most of them don't, regardless of party affiliation.

Those of your defending her are doing so out of bias and nothing more. You know damn well she was dressing down the general out of pettiness and disdain!
I agree with everything that you wrote. I was also in the military and we did about the same thing. I am not defending her for being rude. I agree with her stand on Iraq
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-19-2009, 10:34 AM
 
12,436 posts, read 11,910,284 times
Reputation: 3159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nomander View Post
The point is, you forgive her because you agree with her. Her rudeness is "acceptable" only because you agree with her. There are many people who agreed with the war. I did, but I separate the two as I think that one has nothing to do with the other. Whether she votes a way I like or not, she is still an arrogant elitist.

Now concerning attributing your comment to that of an elitist is that an elitist validates their actions based on their position. That is, it is ok for someone to be rude, cheat, lie, etc... because they believe themselves to be righteous in their position or above others. So, by you stating that you forgive her actions (when she makes no apologizes for he arrogance) because you agree with her voting, you are essentially holding to the elitist attitude that it is acceptable because she does what you want. I know you said you do not agree with it, but it is the fact that your forgiveness is contingent on her agreeing with you. That is elitist.
I said I could forgive her not I forgive her. That does not mean that I agree with her. You should also pick up a dictionary. I think you are making up definitions of words as you go along. If there is a word that you don't understand, just look it up before you use it. I know Elitist is probably a catch phrase some blow hard commentator is probably using.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-19-2009, 11:11 AM
 
7,138 posts, read 14,600,792 times
Reputation: 2397
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nomander View Post
The point is, you forgive her because you agree with her. Her rudeness is "acceptable" only because you agree with her. There are many people who agreed with the war. I did, but I separate the two as I think that one has nothing to do with the other. Whether she votes a way I like or not, she is still an arrogant elitist.

Now concerning attributing your comment to that of an elitist is that an elitist validates their actions based on their position. That is, it is ok for someone to be rude, cheat, lie, etc... because they believe themselves to be righteous in their position or above others. So, by you stating that you forgive her actions (when she makes no apologizes for he arrogance) because you agree with her voting, you are essentially holding to the elitist attitude that it is acceptable because she does what you want. I know you said you do not agree with it, but it is the fact that your forgiveness is contingent on her agreeing with you. That is elitist.


"Elitist" is a euphemism for high school behavior.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-19-2009, 11:17 AM
 
27,206 posts, read 46,570,943 times
Reputation: 15661
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coolhand68 View Post
What gets me is that this hag forgets she is a public servant, elected to serve the people, not the other way around. She is arrogant and crass. It's been well known she hates the military, except when the BRAC rolls around, then she becomes a patriot so her state won't lose jobs and revenue. It's a Senator, Congressman or even a judges call to either demand being referred to by a title or accept being addressed as sir or ma'am. Many a politician or judge allows themselves to be addressed as sir or ma'am. The uptight ones who have fragile ego's and need to be reminded of how self-important they are, are the the ones who make a fuss. She's a failure in terms of her job, California's budget is in the toilet.

What's ironic is that in the military, we typically address someone by their title or rank when we do NOT like them or respect them. Sir and ma'am is reserved for those who we like and/or respect. When I do not like an officer, I refer to them by their rank such as captain, major, colonel etc. If Ted Kennedy were to walk into my office I'd refer to his worthless self as Senator, not sir. He doesn't deserve the endearing term of sir, not to me anyway. She would know that if she cared in the least about military protocol or customs and courtesies. She can have her title, it's too bad she doesn't live up to it. Then again, most of them don't, regardless of party affiliation.

Those of your defending her are doing so out of bias and nothing more. You know damn well she was dressing down the general out of pettiness and disdain!
You nailed it...respect and ego are different things.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-19-2009, 11:20 AM
 
Location: The D-M-V area
13,691 posts, read 18,370,156 times
Reputation: 9595
I have never voted for that woman why do people keep re-electing her?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-19-2009, 11:23 AM
 
Location: The Lakes Region
3,074 posts, read 4,710,678 times
Reputation: 2377
Quote:
Originally Posted by bentlebee View Post

He should have called her a corrupt Bi&*%$......that fits...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top