The new and improved, fight-free Romney vs. Obama thread!

" " "

 

THIS GRAVE CONTAINS
ALL THAT WAS MORTAL OF
A SPORTSWRITER
WHO
ON HIS DEATH-BED
IN THE BITTERNESS OF HIS HEART
at the malicious power of his enemies
desired these words to be engraved
on his tomstone
"HERE LIES ONE WHOSE NAME
WAS WRIT IN WATER"

 

Thing is, Starman doesn't even disagree with you here.

 

WGACA

 

The other thing is, I can cite numerous journalists who DID change the world.

I can't cite a single espresso machine repairman or assistant to the traveling secretary who can say the same.

Well, maybe one of the latter.

 

Very few of us will establish a lasting legacy through the work we do, no matter how good we are at it. It's great to want your work to endure, but journalism doesn't lend itself to such a thing. Very few occupations do. That's the danger in defining yourself through your work. It takes a special person to pull that off.

 

Wait. Are people really concerned that I've treated Starman unfairly?

Starman opened this line of discussion, and doesn't want to back up his claim at all.

If folks want to turn this around and make it about me, I think you all know I'm fine with that. I'm secure in my place in life.

And, while there are examples of journalists changing the world, that doesn't mean Starman has.

Now, if he want's to continue to argue that Reagan was just a dunce, who just lived a charmed life, that's fine. He has a lot of successes for a dunce. Maybe he was just lucky.

But, what are all of these things 10-year-old Starman figured out? Or 22-year-old Starrman? Or 54-year-old Starman?

Fuck, if I had figured out the world by the age of ten, I might have amounted to something more than a lowly espresso machine repair man.

There must be some metric he can provide. Hell, I'll take SAT scores. High school GPA. Something.

 

You're the one who made it about Starman, because he deigned to insult the benevolent St. Ronnie.

How's this? Ronald Reagan was a racist bastard who sold arms to terrorists. If there is a Hell, I am confident Ronald Reagan is there.

 

I think the feeling may be that your pettiness in going after Starman because he took shots at Reagan was over the top. Your passion for Reagan seemed to blind you to gnerally accepted levels of discourse.

That being said Starman certainly does not need me or other posters to defend him (nor do you).

 

This is the kind of hateful partisan lunacy that would make Starman proud.

 

It's kind of sad when your only note is smarm.

 

So long as you don't say he's more racist than you, there's no reason for me to argue with you in a personal way.

Starman didn't just call Reagan dumb. He said he was smarter than Reagan by the age of 22, and then by the age of 10.

Why won't he just give us some examples of his genius? Then we can rightly proclaim him smarter than Reagan.