Tim Geithner: The White House Asked Me to Mislead the Public

[Ike Bana]

Originally Posted by 4-2-7

All the while seeing the intense abuse of monetary corruption of government agencies, blatant wast of tax payers dollars for "Party Time"

[Zeke]

Originally Posted by Ike Bana

I'm curious Zeke, if you were boss, would he be allowed to?

That's a coin flip and a difficult enough decision that I will -- in no way, shape or fashion -- deride current moderation for choices made. There is a principle to be supported implying that obtuse views must be tolerated, regardless of intent, and I applaud that.

There's also the inherent reality that if we were together at an open bar, -5 would have been "taken out back," either formally or informally, so that he no longer continues to disrupt the party for everyone else by standing on a table in the corner and screaming nonsense for no other reason than to do so.

Academic principle or societal realism? Putting up with assholes isn't the only area where this comes into play.

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by whell

Government press conferences are not exactly events where full disclosure takes place. There's spin, there's half truths, there's deference and talking points. But specific and intentional deception is quite another matter. I'm not so sure that this particular reference from Geithner's book rises quite to that level.

Holy crap! I'm going to put you on ignore if you keep on making sense Mike. That is something unexpected and with which I cannot put(t).

[mezz]

Originally Posted by 4-2-7

You see how you two act? this member longer than both of you said a general statement. Both of you pounced on them personally. We all can act like this and the site will not change. There are a tons of threads here that I never bother to comment on. Why? because I'm not interested, so a word of advice if the thread is BS, you don't like it why are you posting on it?

This is in fact troll behavior.

Ad hominem attacks are part of their weak and intellectually limited arsenal necessitated by their inability to digest facts and/or form an objective opinion. They also tend to be what they label anybody who disagrees with them. Some kind of defensive mechanism borne of issues with self esteem. Basically cowards.

[mezz]

Originally Posted by Tom Joad

Only one post and you made my ignore list!

Thanks for making it easy Dude!

The pride and pleasure are all mine. I would profess some elation at looking forward to your absence from reasonable discourse, but I'm pretty sure we were already there.

[4-2-7]

Originally Posted by mezz

Ad hominem attacks are part of their weak and intellectually limited arsenal necessitated by their inability to digest facts and/or form an objective opinion. They also tend to be what they label anybody who disagrees with them. Some kind of defensive mechanism borne of issues with self esteem. Basically cowards.

Agreed , stick around and maybe there will be a bunch of use, the ill-informed that is to counteract such intellect

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by mezz

Ad hominem attacks are part of their weak and intellectually limited arsenal necessitated by their inability to digest facts and/or form an objective opinion. They also tend to be what they label anybody who disagrees with them. Some kind of defensive mechanism borne of issues with self esteem. Basically cowards.

Coming from a plagerist, that's high praise.

[Ike Bana]

Originally Posted by Zeke

That's a coin flip and a difficult enough decision that I will -- in no way, shape or fashion -- deride current moderation for choices made. There is a principle to be supported implying that obtuse views must be tolerated, regardless of intent, and I applaud that.

There's also the inherent reality that if we were together at an open bar, -5 would have been "taken out back," either formally or informally, so that he no longer continues to disrupt the party for everyone else by standing on a table in the corner and screaming nonsense for no other reason than to do so.

Academic principle or societal realism? Putting up with assholes isn't the only area where this comes into play.

A tune up out back!!! OK, I'm in.

[Ike Bana]

Originally Posted by 4-2-7

Agreed , stick around and maybe there will be a bunch of use, the ill-informed that is to counteract such intellect

Are you really trying to say, "...a bunch of us..."????? You can't spell U-S ?? "...that is to counteract such intellect."

Or were you trying to say, "...a bunch of youse..." "Youse" being a term we still employ here in Chicago, depending on the neighborhood and the crowd. I differentiate neighborhood and crowd since there are some great old Italian neighborhoods that have been overrun by yuppie scum over the last several decades, and the use of such terms causes endless yuppie and other dismissive yuppified gesturing.

[piece-itpete]

Originally Posted by Ike Bana

Are you really trying to say, "...a bunch of us..."????? You can't spell U-S ?? "...that is to counteract such intellect."

Or were you trying to say, "...a bunch of youse..." "Youse" being a term we still employ here in Chicago, depending on the neighborhood and the crowd. I differentiate neighborhood and crowd since there are some great old Italian neighborhoods that have been overrun by yuppie scum over the last several decades, and the use of such terms causes endless yuppie and other dismissive yuppified gesturing.

There is a gesture I can think of that would work well in return.

Pete