24 thoughts on ““Unacceptable””

  1. They should really stop doing this. It just makes us look weak and ineffectual. If it’s really unacceptable, then you can’t accept it, and should be prepared to do something about it.

    Now can we please apply this logic to domestic issues as well as foreign ones? Conservative pundits often condemn Democrat acts of violence. Never do they do anything about it.

    Some people here have claimed I’m a “moby” because I advocate fighting back. Well, then, give me a better plan. I’m waiting.

  2. Some people here have claimed I’m a “moby” because I advocate fighting back. Well, then, give me a better plan. I’m waiting.

    You could go “Galt”.

  3. You see, you’re missing the nuance of the whole “unacceptable” argument, Rand.

    I mean, don’t you know that there’s a difference between merely “unacceptable”, and “totally/completely unacceptable”?

    I’m not saying that’s the way it SHOULD be, of course, but that’s likely the argument you’ll get. “English is a living language” and “words change meaning all the time”, after all. Or some such nonsense like that…

  4. Let’s assume you’re for real, Ken. The principle you miss here is “Let them swing first.” It’s ok to anticipate them as long as it’s clear that they started it and you aren’t provoking them into a fight. This prevents needless escalation and it gets everyone who isn’t involved onto your side.

    Second, by doing so, you can use their attack against them. For example, the Democrats spent most of the last Congress passing Obamacare. If it becomes unconstitutional then all that work is useless and they lost the better part of two years on a foolish quest. Even if not, it’s most likely going to be a shifty 5-4 decision with the decisive votes provided by the weak candidates which Obama was able to place with a Democrat majority in the last Congress.

    Either way there is yet more ammunition to strengthen the resolve of people who seek good, prudent governance, respect for the law, and responsibility for the future, while demoralizing those who come looking for a free lunch or feelgood political maneuvers.

  5. For example, Ken, someone recently on this site accused Democrats of being pedophiles. While there may be some strange sexual quirks (such as the bizarre obsession with the “tea bagger” slur or whether or not Palin was pregnant) that indicate strange machinery churning away in some of their minds, there is no grounds for calling them pedophiles.

    But by putting forth this attack, it gives rationalization to the other side for similarly baseless attacks or even escalation.

  6. “How did all this salt water get on my clothes?”

    Aha, we will “get you” on Federal law regarding the molestation of marine mammels . . .

  7. You kids with your hepcat lingo and your crazy music. Half the time I can’t understand what you’re saying. Can you tell me what a “moby” is?

    Then get off my lawn.

  8. See definitions 1, 3, and to some extent, 6. Though what they omitted is the term comes from the musician in definitions 2, 4, and 5. He said something on a web forum somewhere (I forget where, maybe Huffington Post) about how Obama supporters should go on right wing websites and pretend to be rightwingers in order to make said rightwingers look bad, either by using the “I’m a Republican and I support Obama” approach, or by just acting so crazy that supposedly ordinary people will be turned off by the crazy “rightwinger” and go over to the democratic side. Our moby has taken this latter approach, if he is indeed a moby and not just a really disturbed individual.

  9. Whoops, I need to read more closely, or drink more coffee. Or both. The first definition on that site does actually explain how the musician Moby was the one who came up with this activity.

  10. You kids with your hepcat lingo and your crazy music. Half the time I can’t understand what you’re saying. Can you tell me what a “moby” is?

    We are too cool for school.

    Insincerely troll that pretends to identify with a target group. They then either act outrageously to enable some future ad hominem attack (“Of course, you Republicans say hurtful things. Moby, here, called them all pedophiles.”) or claim to have rationally or thoughtfully considered a position antithetical to most of the target group (“I’m a teaba**er, just like you, but I found Obama to be a more honest and conservative choice than McCain.”).

    Basically, a moby is a shill or professional inciter.

  11. (Bilwick1, I’m glad you asked, I was clueless even after Dogpiling ‘moby’, I’m off ‘Googling’ now. That and they weren’t on my lawn so I didn’t care if they stayed or went)

    Too bad things are only unacceptable in certain countries to these clowns and past clowns.

    How long did Obama wait to acknowledge things in Tripoli? And AGAIN he’s letting the kids in Iran bear the brunt of their government without a word.

    What would the world be like today if Carter had gone into Iran, in force in 1979 to get the hostages back and lock up Khomeini. But we didn’t go to Iran, because 5 or so years after Viet Nam, fighting a war was, unacceptable to the country.

    How’s THAT decision doing for us and the world? I’m no genius, but denying them the ensuing 40 years to stir up crap hasn’t helped anyone.

    We saved “X” number of young men then at the expense of “Y” number young men now. I guess that’s definitive the answer to all of this verbiage.

    UNacceptable is YOUR kids dying for the country.

    ACCEPTABLE is THEIR kids doing it instead and alleviating you the necessity of a decision or close involvement.

  12. The Brits seem to have no trouble sending in special ops to get their people out. Glad someone has a spine.

  13. I’m reminded of the movie ‘Invention of Lying’ …in that world, if a world leader used the word unacceptable, those targeted would have to change their adult diapers as the bombers would already be on there way.

Comments are closed.