--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog" <raunchy...@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog" <raunchydog@> wrote: > > <snip> > > > Just calling it like I see it, Bub. I didn't marry the > > > guy so I get to enjoy the view from the captains deck > > > that pilots the ship of state and warn of approaching > > > disaster. Guys like you are still on the poop deck drunk > > > on Cool Aid and twisting in the wind of Obama's sea > > > change on policies that matter to you like, FISA and > > > Habeas Corpus. > > > > "Barack Obama spoke for an hour in FF this morning. > > I found him very inspiring. I got a chance to ask > > a question:...what he would do to repair the > > constitutional erosion that had occurred under > > Bush/Cheney. He answered that...if he became > > president, his first move would be to call in his > > attorney general and have him/her review everything > > Bush has done in light of its impact on the > > Constitution. He would then reverse every decision > > which had eroded it. (Obama taught constitutional > > law for 10 years.)" > > > > --Rick Archer, Nov. 8, 2007 (#153957) > > If you ever met Rick you would know he looks like a > pretty flexible guy, probably from so many years of > yoga asnas. I wonder what kind of pretzel he has to > twist himself into these days if thinks only Hillary > supporters have a reason to criticize the One. Hmmm?
It seems to me that "flexible" Rick did to you and Sister Aloysius *exactly* what Vaj did earlier with his "Who does this photo remind you of" troll, and with similar effect. By merely suggesting that you were Hillarybots, you both stormed out of the Lust-After-Hillary closet and began waving your Hillary Dildos(tm) menacingly and protesting that that was not your "real" motivation. And that very defensive- ness and need to protect your self-image IMO serves to validate Rick's suggestion. If you *weren't* Hillarybots In Denial, WHY would you be so defensive? For example, try to find a post in which I (whom you both characterize as an "Obamanaut" have *ever* reacted self-defensively to criti- cism of Obama. I doubt you'll be able to find one (although the thought of Judy spending hours trying brings a smile to my lips). Some of us, after all, are able to hold opinions without feeling the need to "justify" them and "correct" other people's "misrepresentations" of those opinions. It is my contention that those who *do* feel such a need -- *especially* when it's on a regular basis -- are reacting to someone being Right On in their descriptions of them.
