Bad Political Poetry

[tzor]

There comes a point where I can't take it anymore; where I reach the boiling point. Yes I have an advanced case of acute punmanship, which has blossomed into outright bad punnative poetry. So with the most recent situation I posted it on Gather. I feel you deserve this as well. As the old Monty Pyton line went "I've suffered for my music; now it's your turn."

Reflections on emotional response to President's speech

You lie
You lie like a rug
Like a nice Kashmir rug
That I have in front of my fireplace
That I got from a seller
In India
It’s good
You can dance on it
Well sort of
It’s kind of small

You lie
Two
Your next shot can reach the green
I would suggest a pitching wedge
Shorten your grip
You will need backspin
Strike the ball conservatively
Oh, yea
I forgot
You can’t

You lye
So base
So crass
No class
I’d suggest some acid
To return to balance
But that would be wrong
Global warming
From the gas
So I’ll let it pass

Please note; that's not my "nice Kashmir rug" as I could not find a photo of it so I took a quick camera photo of my mouse rug. It's a replicia of Freud's rug.

[PhoneLobster]

When you reach the bottom let us know how the whole descent into insanity thing went for you.

edit: I'm now expecting to hear from you very soon.

[RobbyPants]

Where did that whole "you lied" outburst come from anyway? Something about switching sides on benefits for illegals or something?

I'm sure there are some good reasons not to revamp the health care system, but any good arguments seem to bet lost in all the name calling, paranoia, rhetoric, semantic arguments, and shouting.

So, what's the problem? He switched his stance on some minor issue of this whole thing? Hmmmm....

[Cynic]

I love this world. during bush's reign, the liberals did shit like this all the time and the conservatives did shit like tzor's detractors all the time.

Now during Obama's reign, the conservatives do shit like this all the time and the tzor's detractors among others go on and on. :-D

I want a libertarian government just to have everyone make bad poetry except the libertarians would actually enjoy it. FUCK.

[Koumei]

I love this world.

Funny, I hate it, but there you go.

during bush's reign, the liberals did shit like this all the time

Well yes, but I think it's somewhat justified to speak ill of Bush, unless he's entitled to his opinion that the great sky faerie demands tribute in the form of the blood of gays/women/black people/people in Ira... Iranaraqabia (it's hard to tell all them big places apart).

[Username17]

I love this world. during bush's reign, the liberals did shit like this all the time and the conservatives did shit like tzor's detractors all the time.

No. Actually Bush was allowed to make every single one of his addled, lie ridden speeches to Joint Sessions of Congress without once getting heckled by a member of congress.

There are totally forums for holding protest and dissent, and there are places where conventionally you are in fact supposed to let the fucking president fucking talk. Freedom of Speech goes both ways. You have to let the other guy talk in addition to getting your voice heard. Otherwise, it's not free.

Take your false equivalency and shove it right up your entire ass.

-Username17

[CatharzGodfoot]

Yeah, MoveOn.Org talking about General Betray Us may have been hilarious, but it is in no way comparable to a congressman yelling during a presidential speech to get more campaign contributions.

[The Vigilante]

I love this world. during bush's reign, the liberals did shit like this all the time and the conservatives did shit like tzor's detractors all the time.

No. Actually Bush was allowed to make every single one of his addled, lie ridden speeches to Joint Sessions of Congress without once getting heckled by a member of congress.

Sorry Frank but you're wrong this time. I can find at least two occasions where Bush was heckled by democrats during his State of the Union adress.
In 2005 : http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/ ... union.html
And then in 2006 : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mqSXsNJzRM

I'm not an american citizen and I could find these two instances. I'm pretty sure somebody who really wants to could find other occasions where this happened. I'm not saying it's OK to do this, just saying that Democrats did it before.

[Username17]

Booing during an applause line is not the same thing as substantively heckling a president during a speech. It's seriously not. One is a statement of dislike, the other is a breech of decorum. And the second one isn't even a heckling. People are giving him applause. Clearly sarcastic applause, but applause nonetheless. No rules are being broken, noone is crossing the line of congressional behavior.

Now personally, I think the world would be a better place if more people heckled the president. Certainly during the bullshit WMD lie parade we should have had people demanding pics or GTFO. But we didn't. We had people sit there and fucking let Bush talk during his joint congressional speeches. While he was murdering a million people. It should have been enough to break any possible rules of congenial conduct, but it wasn't.

So take your false equivalency and shove it right up your entire ass.

-Username17

[The Vigilante]

Booing during an applause line is not the same thing as substantively heckling a president during a speech. It's seriously not. One is a statement of dislike, the other is a breech of decorum. And the second one isn't even a heckling. People are giving him applause. Clearly sarcastic applause, but applause nonetheless. No rules are being broken, noone is crossing the line of congressional behavior.

Now personally, I think the world would be a better place if more people heckled the president. Certainly during the bullshit WMD lie parade we should have had people demanding pics or GTFO. But we didn't. We had people sit there and fucking let Bush talk during his joint congressional speeches. While he was murdering a million people. It should have been enough to break any possible rules of congenial conduct, but it wasn't.

So take your false equivalency and shove it right up your entire ass.

-Username17

Point taken. But I don't think it's a false equivalency when I read your past criterion for heckling and decorum :

There are totally forums for holding protest and dissent, and there are places where conventionally you are in fact supposed to let the fucking president fucking talk. Freedom of Speech goes both ways. You have to let the other guy talk in addition to getting your voice heard. Otherwise, it's not free.

To me, both situations are exactly the same, especially with regards to your previous post. It's simply not the first time a President has been ridiculed, heckled or booed in Congress. However, I think this whole argument is overall a little retarded.

[Crissa]

Wait, we're allowed to applaud only when he says we are?

And how is Code Pink == sitting Representative?

-Crissa

[IGTN]

Where did that whole "you lied" outburst come from anyway? Something about switching sides on benefits for illegals or something?

I'm sure there are some good reasons not to revamp the health care system, but any good arguments seem to bet lost in all the name calling, paranoia, rhetoric, semantic arguments, and shouting.

So, what's the problem? He switched his stance on some minor issue of this whole thing? Hmmmm....

This should explain it. It's actually much less than what you thought it was.

[Absentminded_Wizard]

To me, both situations are exactly the same, especially with regards to your previous post. It's simply not the first time a President has been ridiculed, heckled or booed in Congress. However, I think this whole argument is overall a little retarded.

The thing is, booing is basically a statement of disagreement with what's being said. Wilson insulted the president's character during a joint session of Congress. Historically, even if you think the president is totally lacking in character, you don't say so in that formal context.

Still, this whole thing wouldn't be so bad if Republicans weren't such hypocrites. When Bush was in office, they went on and on about how it's unpatriotic to criticize the president in any way while the nation was at war. But now that there's a Democrat in the White House, all rules are null and void, even though we're still at war twice over.

[Neeeek]

The thing is, booing is basically a statement of disagreement with what's being said. Wilson insulted the president's character during a joint session of Congress. Historically, even if you think the president is totally lacking in character, you don't say so in that formal context.

To be clear, if Wilson had been in the gallery and not a member of Congress, he'd have been arrested and removed from the premises.

Not even remotely joking. What Wilson did is illegal.

[Heath Robinson]

Still, this whole thing wouldn't be so bad if Republicans weren't such hypocrites. When Bush was in office, they went on and on about how it's unpatriotic to criticize the president in any way while the nation was at war. But now that there's a Democrat in the White House, all rules are null and void, even though we're still at war twice over.

Well, duh, that's because the Republicans don't stand for anything other than them winning. That's the way they are these days. Whilst they may have some remaining vestiges of ideals or whatever, they're mostly just working to keep ahold of whatever power they might have. That's why Obama has them so angry - they're scared of losing what they have left.

They don't have a leader, power retention is their holding pattern and hypocrisy is the only way they can do that without blatantly seeming like the power-obsessed jerks they are.

I expect tzor in 10... 9... 8...

[Maj]

Still, this whole thing wouldn't be so bad if Republicans weren't such hypocrites.

My mother-in-law was one of the 9/12 protesters in DC. I spent all yesterday ranting about it to my husband after she called.

[tzor]

Well, duh, that's because the Republicans don't stand for anything other than them winning.

I expect tzor in 10... 9... 8...

Actually I find it hard to believe the Republicans stand for “winning.” They may stand for “whining,” but that’s something entirely different. One can make an argument that under the two Bush administrations the party has drifted significantly from the “winning” standards of the Reagan administration, trying at times to be “Democrat-lite” (half of the socialism as regular Democrats for twice the price). It’s like Diet Pepsi going head to head with Classic Coke, only having the two of them defeated by Jolt (or Red Bull). Now they are screaming about all this caffeine and sugar!

Not that whining isn’t a good strategy! (CLICK HERE TO DONATE) More people donate out of fear than out of pleasure. Republican PACS have been using this idea for decades; now the party itself is doing likewise.

The party doesn’t have a “leader” in as much as it has a “manager.” Without a clear leader the party is in a holding pattern, at least until the next congressional elections.

(Happy now? Sorry for the delay!)

[PhoneLobster]

Aw. He still ignorantly worships Reagan, isn't he cute...

No wait. Maybe I'm thinking of stupid rather than cute.

[Crissa]

No, he just said that Reagan was a winning administration. And as things go, I can't really argue with that. W Bush may have gotten re-elected, but he lost the party's majority in Congress. Prior Bush didn't get re-elected.

At least Reagan figured out how to blame his mistakes on Carter and took up a Keynesian approach to fixing the economy. Can't say that for Bush I or II.

-Crissa

[Cynic]

To be clear, if Wilson had been in the gallery and not a member of Congress, he'd have been arrested and removed from the premises.

Not even remotely joking. What Wilson did is illegal.

Now, this is a little retarded. Not the fact that he shouldn't have be removed from premises. But the fact that it's illegal. Wait, I don't know if this is actually true or not that this is illegal. But if it is well then it is retarded.

Seriously heckling while disrespectful should not be illegal.

taking offense for it can be a matter for civil court and even then the offended shouldn't win, personally. But if this is illegal, then it's retarded.

I mean it for both sides of the board.

And, Frank, I'm not going to shove off. I still see equivalency because this system of decorum is fucked up. While impolite it should not have any standing in a legal sense.

[PhoneLobster]

Actually it probably should have some legal standing.

Theres some historical precedent for houses of government turning into actual literal violent all in brawls.

Those old guys need strict rules and a bunch of enforcers with truncheons standing around watching them like they were a herd of teenage delinquents.

[Cynic]

Actually it probably should have some legal standing.

Theres some historical precedent for houses of government turning into actual literal violent all in brawls.

Those old guys need strict rules and a bunch of enforcers with truncheons standing around watching them like they were a herd of teenage delinquents.

Let punches be illegal then and the old guys, too. :-D

[Neeeek]

Now, this is a little retarded. Not the fact that he shouldn't have be removed from premises. But the fact that it's illegal. Wait, I don't know if this is actually true or not that this is illegal. But if it is well then it is retarded.

The crime is "contempt of Congress". Protesters during the Bush administration were routinely arrested and removed for sitting in the nosebleeds and yelling at various members of Congress.

It isn't new and it isn't retarded. Disrupting Congress causes actual debate (when they bother to have any) to come to a halt. If you can't control yourself while in the chamber, don't go.

[Josh_Kablack]

I'm all for more people heckling the president when they in good conscience feel he deserves it - breach of decorum or not.

The thing that gets me is that while there are points where Obama lies ("not adding one dime to the deficit')), there are points where Obama is vague on details (what exactly he's doing to the public option), and there are points where Obama makes subjective statements (this will improve care) - what Wilson called a lie was none of these.

Joe Wilson did not see fit to scream about any such thing, but instead called the president a liar on a point that is both objectively and verifiably true.

When the president said the bill does not cover illegal immigrants, and we can go read the bill to see

Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States.

then anyone who says the president is lying on that particular point is ignorant if not delusional. Wilson's constituents should be embarrassed.