Bush Clock
This guy has some issues.
How do I get in on this marketing opportunity! What a great way to separate rabid liberals from their money…
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 01, 2008 at 1258 hrs
You right-wing whiners can dish it out but you can’t take it. Too bad!
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 01, 2008 at 1310 hrs
You right-wing whiners can dish it out but you can’t take it. Too bad!
Oh I think we can take it quite well. I got a good laugh out of it. You libs and your laughable notion that the countries… check that… the worlds problems started and ended with the Bush administration is amusing.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 01, 2008 at 1333 hrs
No, the problems of the world can all be blamed on Bill Clinton, remember?
How quickly you forget.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 01, 2008 at 1348 hrs
That must be Adam in the picture.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 01, 2008 at 1418 hrs
Something tells me that if a Republican wins in November, that’s gonna be a pretty dour “Bush’s Last Day” party they’re all going to be throwing in 384 days.
Posted by Recess Supervisor on January 01, 2008 at 1459 hrs
I am willing to bet $100 right now that a Democrat will occupy the white house after Bush leaves. Any takers?
Besides, even if a Republican did win, there’s little chance of him being as terrible as Bush has been. Guiliani’s totalitarian leanings are concerning, but given the whole package, he’s not even in the same league as Mr. Bush.
If a Republican wins, I’ll still celebrate Bush’s departure.
As far as Bush clocks, they don’t amuse me personally. What gets under my skin, however, is hearing conservatives whine about such things—as if they didn’t do the exact same thing for Mr. Clinton. Hell, they were selling Clinton-hating calendars and stuff within the man’s first six months in office, and it only got much worse as his tenure went on. So stop your whining and your finger-pointing.
Posted by scott on January 01, 2008 at 1533 hrs
another BDS sufferer heard from
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 01, 2008 at 1615 hrs
Whether a Democrat or Republican wins in November, we haven’t seen anything yet when it comes to pardons from Dubya.
Bush will make Clinton look like a piker in the pardon department.
You read it here first.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 01, 2008 at 1619 hrs
oh you mean pardoning someone who is wanted in the U.S. but living in another country to avoid trial. Who refused to go to trial? And his wife who made contributions financially and maybe in other ways to Bill?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 01, 2008 at 1627 hrs
Dan,
Clinton explains his pardons, and addresses head on the issue of Marc Rich and his wife’s campaign contributions:
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/02/18/opinion/18CLIN.html?ex=1199336400&en;=0dd919beaa5062f3&ei;=5070
My point is, the real scandal with Dubya will unfold with his last minute pardons, to say the least.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 01, 2008 at 1639 hrs
Wow, this one only took until the seventh post to completely degenerate into another worthless Bush/Clinton discussion that nobody but basement dwellers care about anymore.
Let’s get the third usual suspect in the mix and just kill this thread for good.
I bet Hitler wouldn’t have pardoned as many people as Clinton.
Thank me later.
Oh, and Adam, are you the same one that works for Hilgenberg? If yes, does he know you made those crazy ass comments about gun owners on here a few days ago? It’d suck if someone had to point that out on a blog, because you know, a lot of people in Hilgenberg’s district own guns. Crazy anti-gun nuts don’t play well outside of Spring Green.
Posted by Recess Supervisor on January 01, 2008 at 1717 hrs
Ack! One of the main symptoms of Bush Derangement Syndrome is the level of stupidity to which the sufferers go to to express their animus: The ‘Buck Fush’ bumper sticker is a case in point, as well as these ‘1/20/09’ items. Whoever is making and selling these items is channeling the great P.T. Barnum who had stated about ‘a sucker being born every minute.’ What’s even more amazing is that people will spend money on these items-utterly pathetic.
Happy New Year Owen and long may Boots and Sabers march on!
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 01, 2008 at 1731 hrs
Do you know those little calendars are made in China?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 01, 2008 at 1813 hrs
I’m honestly not surprised Lee, just about everything’s made in China.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 01, 2008 at 2102 hrs
Whether a Democrat or Republican wins in November, we haven’t seen anything yet when it comes to pardons from Dubya.
Bush will make Clinton look like a piker in the pardon department.
You read it here first.
Will we read your admission you were wrong if it doesnt happen?
I seem to remember many similarly triumphal comments made about the changeover of the Congress as though the new Pax Americana was about to begin.
Ried and Pelosi have underperformed to the Lefts expectations I would have to say.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 01, 2008 at 2124 hrs
Let’s see, bleeding us white in a useless war, can’t respond to natural disasters, driving the economy into the toilet, neglecting our crumbling infrastructure, turning the dollar world-wide into play money—what’s not to like about Bush?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 01, 2008 at 2200 hrs
I clearly remember the Clinton backwards-running watches that were so popular eight years ago. But what would politics be if not for the hypocrisy?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 02, 2008 at 0039 hrs
Right, capper, and you are one of the biggest hypocrites.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 02, 2008 at 0954 hrs
Nobody wants to take my bet? A crisp $100 bill is yours to keep if a Republican wins the white house in 08. Anyone?
Posted by scott on January 02, 2008 at 1037 hrs
Nobody wants to take my bet? A crisp $100 bill is yours to keep if a Republican wins the white house in 08. Anyone?
I just don’t think anyone is childish enough to take a bet over the internet.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 02, 2008 at 1118 hrs
Nobody wants to take my bet? A crisp $100 bill is yours to keep if a Republican wins the white house in 08. Anyone?
As McBride would say: “Bawk, BAAAWK, Bawk, Bawk”
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 02, 2008 at 1146 hrs
Bush countdown clocks like the one pictured have been on sale at the Downer Ave Schwartz Books for more than a year…and they sell well.
Thought about buying one for my wife. She would have gotten more than enough enjoyment out of it to justify the cost.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 02, 2008 at 1158 hrs
“bleeding us white in a useless war, can’t respond to natural disasters, driving the economy into the toilet, neglecting our crumbling infrastructure, turning the dollar world-wide into play money—what’s not to like about Bush”
and Buh did n’t get any help. If he was bad in all those areas, he must be very powerful.
Please explain how a president can drive the economy in the toilet. Is he really that powerful?
And the Democrats have no blame.
Hopefully there will be some medication on the market soon for BDS, but then the liberals want to tax the drug industry, R&D;will have to wait.Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 02, 2008 at 1223 hrs
Translation: yes, all those things are really bad, but Democrats are partly responsible for it, too!
Typical of the “personal responsibility” crowd. They’re always there to wag a finger at someone else—usually a poor someone—but when their own chickens come home to roost, suddenly things are different!
It still makes me laugh when you all use the term Bush Derangement Syndrome. It’s not that it doesn’t exist—it does. I’ve seen it. There are people who hate Bush, and who can get pretty irrational about it. Two things to keep in mind, though: 1) people like myself who honestly believe Bush is probably the worst president in history and who can give you some pretty rational reasons for that assessment do not have this syndrome. Saying that we do is just a cheap way to divert attention from the message by criticizing the messenger. 2) Christ, don’t you guys remember Bill Clinton? The murder accusations? The sheer insanity of it all? Acting as if those kinds of excesses are not found on the conservative side just doesn’t hold any water.
Posted by scott on January 02, 2008 at 1305 hrs
Absolutely Scott. I don’t agree he is the worst Prez ever, but it may only be because I haven’t seen enough evidence (in a personal sense). I think that comparison can’t be made until at least 4 years after his Presidency. Presidents always foist the blame for the prior President’s mistakes, but take credit for reforms and innovations that were made by the last President. Economically, we won’t see Bush’s depredations or triumphs until well after his Presidency is over. Similarly, I won’t verbally crucify him for the Iraq war until I see how the next president gets us out of Iraq. I did not think it was a bad idea at the time, but he had a terrible (nonexistent?) exit strategy. If the next President still takes 2-3 years to exit, I won’t be as harsh on him as you will be. Conservative idiots are not any better or worse than liberal idiots in my opinion.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 02, 2008 at 1609 hrs
I can pretty much guarantee that ‘ADAM’ doesn’t have one of these. He is a cheap skate..
Look at his return email.
Using the UW Alum email system.
Adam do you even have a job? Or are you still on the public dole?
Probably a lazy good for nothing teacher…
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 02, 2008 at 1631 hrs
Oh yeah, I do take umbrage at the “personal responsibility” jibe. Just because Charlie Sykes made the phrase popular, shouldn’t mean the concept has no value. I heard a commercial for a credit/bankruptcy firm say “Credit card companies don’t want you to hear this, but it is your RIGHT to pay pennies on the dollar for your credit card debts…” There was more, but the whole mentality that set up credit cards and bankruptcy, then more loopholes to get out of paying for something you get to keep is just one small cog in the “It is someone else’s fault/problem” crowd.
Thinking that more people should take responsibility for their actions and that there should be less laws protecting people from taking responsibility for their actions should not be a conservative/liberal contention no matter who brought the idea in to prominence. I don’t think many of the commenters on this post were of the ‘PR crowd’.
And 3rd way, it is not chicken to make a bet against a Democrat for President, it is fiscal responsibility.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 02, 2008 at 1633 hrs
it is not chicken to make a bet against a Democrat for President, it is fiscal responsibility
Can quotes of the week be nominated?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 02, 2008 at 1639 hrs
Scott,
Ill take your bet..
Go ahead and put $105.00 in a paypal account. The extra $5.00 is to cover the transfer costs, and send me the reciept to solidify our bet.
Can you say: “Bawk, BAAAWK, Bawk, Bawk”
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 02, 2008 at 1655 hrs
I’m not putting anything anywhere—unless you win the bet, in which case i’ll put cash in your hand, mail you a check, paypal, whatever you prefer.
Consider the bet engaged.
My payment options aren’t so flexible: cash only.
Posted by scott on January 02, 2008 at 1701 hrs
If you both are serious, I will be glad to be witness to the bet.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 02, 2008 at 1706 hrs
I guess I can afford to wager $100. Besides, I am fairly confident in my chances of winning. Either way it’ll make a hell of a blog entry.
Posted by scott on January 02, 2008 at 1711 hrs
Sorry Scott, but the only person I trust is my Grampa and he has been dead for 23 years.
‘I’m not putting anything anywhere—unless you win the bet, in which case i’ll put cash in your hand, mail you a check, paypal, whatever you prefer.
Consider the bet engaged.
My payment options aren’t so flexible: cash only.”
Right.. And i wont come in your .......
Another Bill Clinton cliché
I gave you my terms so either accept it or “Bawk, BAAAWK, Bawk, Bawk” ..
Your a bleeding liberal, who would trust you…
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 02, 2008 at 1721 hrs
Your grampa my butt. You either take the bet or you don’t. I’m not meeting any of your odd little preconditions, and I’m certainly not locking $100 in a paypal account for a year. Here’s an idea: we bet like men of our word. You lose, you pay me; I lose, I pay you.
So is your money really where your mouth is, or are you just playing games?
Posted by scott on January 02, 2008 at 2123 hrs
Scott,
Maybe you should keep the $100.00 and invest in a better website hosting solution.
www.scottfeldstein.net, its down…
I could recommend several I have used in the last 5 years or so with 100% uptime.
Keep trying, technology is challanging.
What a putz…
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 02, 2008 at 2210 hrs
I’m in the middle of moving, asshole. I host my own web site, as I have done for six years.
So, bet or no bet. The cheddarsphere is waiting to see if you have the balls to put your money where your big mouth is.
Posted by scott on January 02, 2008 at 2242 hrs
Very nice, I can see where your reputation came from..
Choke on some Cheddar.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 02, 2008 at 2245 hrs
P.S.
You would think that after hosting your own website for 6 years you would have learned how to keep it up.
But that is the problem with most liberals they cant keep it up.
Try some Levitra, or a popcycle stick and some duck tape..
And again choke on some cheddar….
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 02, 2008 at 2248 hrs
Or the cheddarsphere is waiting to see if I take the bait from a liberal piece of crap such as yourself.
So if I dont take the bet, what? I cant be nominated for Blogger of the year like yourself.
Maybe you should ask your mom if you can take your service provider to business class, so when your downloading your donkey porn your website wont crash..
Again with the cheddar…
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 02, 2008 at 2251 hrs
damn. and I thought I was the only who did not like scott so much. I look like a piker compared to overtaxed.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 03, 2008 at 0159 hrs
You two lovebirds want to get a room? Trust me, neither of you looks very good right now.
And Overtaxed, you still haven’t told Scott whether you’d take his bet. He seems serious. If you’re going to call him a bunch of names, why not take his money too? Wouldn’t that feel even better?
Posted by Recess Supervisor on January 03, 2008 at 0258 hrs
Recess
And to whom dont we look good right now.
And why would I care?
He is a liberal.
Take a look at my first post, I gave him an opportunity. He didnt take it.
Now back to work..
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 03, 2008 at 0758 hrs
So all that talkin’ and insultin’ and you won’t take the bet because he won’t put money in to a paypal for a year? Sorry overtaxed, but…loser. Conservatives are always saying among other things that liberals have no balls…huh.
By the way, your first ‘post’, assuming you meant comment, was belittling Adam and had no opportunities for anyone.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 03, 2008 at 0825 hrs
My money’s still on the table. Overtaxed doesn’t seem to have the constitutional fortitude to match his big mouth, but that doesn’t mean my offer’s gone.
Posted by scott on January 03, 2008 at 0944 hrs
I can still hear McBride: “Bawk, BAAAWK, Bawk, Bawk”
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 03, 2008 at 1215 hrs
Hey ot, you sound just like your buddy Bush, all hat and no cattle.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 03, 2008 at 1244 hrs
Nice Try guys
Paypay or shove it
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 03, 2008 at 1256 hrs
The idea that I have to take $100 of my money—today—and lock it up online somewhere in order for you to “feel comfortable” with making this bet with me is rigoddamndiculous. We are two people who are making a very public agreement. The only reason you’re not taking the bet is because you know damned well that I’ll win, and you’re too much of a chickenshit asshole to just admit it. Instead, you attack me personally and come up with this stupid Paypal thing.
Take it or leave it, big man. Agree to the $100 bet right here, right now—or STFU.
Posted by scott on January 03, 2008 at 1347 hrs
Leave it.
Nice language.
You must be really pissed off because your website is still down.
Keep working on it.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 03, 2008 at 1401 hrs
scott, many Republicans also agree with you, and i tend to agree with you. Do you want to put up the $100 that the Dem’s will totally control congress and presidency? Are you going to that far?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 03, 2008 at 1407 hrs
Ow, my feelings!!!
So I notice you’re no longer interested in my little wager. You could have saved us all a lot of time by keeping your mouth shut earlier.
Posted by scott on January 03, 2008 at 1408 hrs
You should have just kept your mouth shut OT. By agreeing to a bet only under your burdensome preconditions you come off looking disengenious.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 03, 2008 at 1414 hrs
While I suspect that neither body will change hands, I’m not $100 worth of sure about it. So, no, I’m not interested in betting on congress.
Posted by scott on January 03, 2008 at 1416 hrs
Scott,
I wasnt aware that you were the supreme blogger king.
Does the 3rd amendment mean anything to you..
What I am interested in is reading your thoughts on your website, but you cant get it up.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 03, 2008 at 1416 hrs
Me, the blogger king? I realize it’s after noon, but have you been drinking that much already?
PS. The third amendment is about not being forced to put soldiers up in your home during peacetime. Yeah, I’ve heard of it.
Posted by scott on January 03, 2008 at 1423 hrs
Take it or leave it, big man. Agree to the $100 bet right here, right now—or STFU.
What an idiotic exchange this is. Love all the internet bravery on display.
The fact no one will take your bet proves nothing about whether you may be right, only that no one trusts a guy who apparently doesnt have the money to get their website running to actually come through if they lose.
If you want to deal with the upcoming elections, why dont you say something substantive about why you think certain things will come to pass instead of trying to demonstrate how manly and committed you are to your viewpoint? Nobody cares.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 03, 2008 at 1427 hrs
Dan, someone brought up the possibility that a Republican might win the white house in 08. I think it’s perfectly warranted for me to say that it is extremely unlikely—and that I’m willing to bet on it.
Did I make anyone take the bet? No. It was OT who said he’d take the bet, but then effectively withdrew by putting stupid and unnecessary stipulations on it. It is not my fault that he couldn’t bring himself to just admit he’d rather not bet on it.
As far as internet bravery, it’s my policy not to say things on the internet that I could not say to someone’s face. Frankly, it’s a policy I urge more people to adopt.
As far as making this about my web site, I appeal to your sense of forthrightness and ask you to leave it alone. It has absolutely nothing to do with this discussion and everyone knows it. Thanks for caring, everyone. Really. But it’s not up because a) I just had a horrific move, b) I’ve spent the last two days dealing with a pretty scary family emergency, and c) i’ve just returned to work and I’m in the middle of an enormous project. So thanks for your concern, but the site should return tonight or tomorrow. (Like anyone here actually visits it!)
Posted by scott on January 03, 2008 at 1441 hrs
scott, despite our not liking each other much, good luck with the move, I’ve been there 4 times in 2 years and good luck with the family emergency.
And I have been to your site 2 times.Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 03, 2008 at 1452 hrs
Scott, I have visited it on occasion. I don’t visit it more often because the posts are often a statement that does not require or lend itself to comment and I like that part best. I like hearing thoughts from liberals without BDS though, because that is the only type of liberal I happen to know personally so I begin to think all liberals are like that. Of course I know they are not, but I am sure most liberals think that conservatives are all Bush/Sykes lovers on occasion.
It isn’t so Scott, and it would behoove us all to treat individuals as individuals…or we can all continue the stereotypes. It is true that some of us deserve it.
For instance, I am not normally as pompous as I just sounded… or am I?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on January 03, 2008 at 1505 hrs
Total Entries: 19997
Total Comments: 134029
Most Recent Entry: 05/24/2012 06:25 am
Most Recent Comment on: 05/24/2012 03:59 pm
Total Members: 9751
Total Logged in members: 0
Total guests: 100
Total anonymous users: 1
Most Recent Visitor on: 05/24/2012 04:10 pm
The most visitors ever was 538 on 12/01/2007 02:11 pm
Protected and licensed under a Creative Commons License (some rights reserved).