Skip to main content

View Diary: BREAKING NEWS: Bush Covered Up 9/11 Report of Warnings (328 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Gump... (3.92)
    ...was a decent, honest, well-meaning, kind, gentle, brave, heroic, compassionate, generous soul. He even possessed a simple eloquence. And he could finish a sentence.

    The current occupant resembles him in no way what-so-ever.

    "Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it?" - Leon

    by JD SoOR on Wed Feb 09, 2005 at 10:02:56 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  A "2" Jobe? (none)

      "Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it?" - Leon

      by JD SoOR on Wed Feb 09, 2005 at 10:25:09 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  LOL, check out the ratings (none)
        jobe123 has been giving.  2's are par for the course.

        "But I don't want to go among mad people," Alice remarked. --- "Oh, you can't help that," said the Cat. "We're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad."

        by dnn on Wed Feb 09, 2005 at 10:54:34 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  My apologies. (2.00)
        My apologies that I didn't rate it as high as you thought it deserves. Still new here, and I didn't realize everyone could see what I rated posts, that just really makes me not want to rate posts, if I am going to have to explain each and everytime I do so. shrugs
        •  you ain't a theoCON now are you?! (none)
          made sure to knock my comments down a notch?  hell even Hitchens is doubting the scum these days...
          •  Last post about this. (2.25)
            This will be my last post about my ratings, as it distracts from the subject at hand.

            According to the FAQ (which I posted below), I surmised that a rating of a one is a troll (as it indicates on the radio button). Earlier today I read (on Daily Kos), sorry, don't know who said it, that you should only use 1's and 4's for the extreme posts, and instead use 2's and 3's, which I have been doing.

            Regardless, I will refrain from making any more comment ratings.

            As for the theoCON comment, I did a search on dKosopedia, and couldn't find it, so I have no clue what it means. Like I said, I am new here, and new to this type of enviroment.

            Comment Ratings - This is a huge issue within the DailyKos community, and it essentially boils down to two different things.  Whenever you see a Comment (and you are a registered user), you can "rate" that person's Comment.  You can rate it between a 1 and a 4 (or a 0 and a 4 if you are a Trusted User).  But the rating of Comments serves two purposes:

                * Troll Vaccination - A "troll" is an old internet term which means someone who writes deliberately inflammatory things to upset people.  Sometimes however people write crass or uncalled for things, and these are considered "troll" Comments (or Diaries).  If the combined Ratings for a Comment falls below 1.0, then the Comment is "hidden" from non-Trusted User users.  This is to keep people from hijacking this website.
                * Mojo - The way people Rate your Comment often is an indication of how they feel about either you, what you said, or the issue in general.  Sometimes this is an orgy of positive energy, with people giving you a high rating (4) or sometimes people get vindictive and give you a low rating (0 or 1) because they don't like you personally.

            •  New here... (none)
              ...yes, your user ID is in the mid 40 thousands - I guessed you were new. Nevertheless, you are of the opinion that my statement is not Troll, but otherwise of dubious merit?

              I am not telling you to stop rating, but there is no requirement to rate at all... and rating low is a way to a: communicate to a user that they are treading on thin ice, and b: rein back a user's ability to Super-troll, by keeping them from Trusted status.

              Now I have never been a trusted user. I'll bet I have the smallest user number without the status, but the fact of the matter is, if you read my above post and truly consider it marginal, then maybe you should take a hiatus from rating for a while until you have a better sense of what warrants what. I'll tell you the comments YOU have put up around the site are clearly in the same 'marginal range' as mine, and I'd be glad to go "2" the lot of them, but don't think there is a point.  

              Final note - you can alter a rating once you've made it. Just FYI

              "Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it?" - Leon

              by JD SoOR on Wed Feb 09, 2005 at 11:30:45 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  You are assigning 2 ratings (none)
              to many comments that all the other raters have given fours.  Disagreeing with others on occasion is cool but you are so out of step with other raters that you either haven't figured out the culture here or are engaging in some ratings subterfuge -- hope it's the former and you quickly catch on to the unwritten rules of the road.

              What FDR giveth; GWB taketh away

              by Marie on Thu Feb 10, 2005 at 12:00:22 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  Jobe123 (none)
              You might want to consider going back and up-rating your previous ratings (you have that option).  This often happens after a misunderstanding has been cleared up.

              I am pretty new here as well, but when I started, there was a diary that discussed the rating policies/philosophy.  I am not sure how to direct you to it, but you may want to try a search to find it. I would post the link here, but I am not sure how to do that.

            •  Live and learn... (none)
              There's this whole 'thing' about ratings, it's like giving someone a dirty look to rate them a "2", and since we can't see each other, it is the only thing we have to go on in evaluating our associates here, imagine how you would react if you had been at a party for some time and a new arrival walked in and immediately began casting frowns at everyone! Unintentional? Miscommunicated? O.K. -- but it's a generally good idea when dipping your toe into a new activity (and I tried this although not perfectly) to first watch, then imitate and finally (shortly thereafter) when you're fully acclimated to venture out under your own power, particularly if you want people to listen to your ideas and not focus on the frowns!

              Of course, drawing attention to yourself like this (although inadvertantly) is a good way to get people to click on your handle and read your comments as I'm about to do. Cheers.

              What happens if I push this bu....

              by PBJ Diddy on Thu Feb 10, 2005 at 04:20:15 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  45 Ratings your first day rating! (4.00)
              And not a single 4... ALL - 2s and 3s??!!?

              Was there not a single comment you really thought was well expressed, deserving of a hearty "Well said!", or that you even agreed summed up the writer's point in a concise and well-spoken manner? Why your need to rate so many at all?

              Guess you really haven't figured out the culture here yet. (And it isn't just you; some other 40's are rating in a similar fashion, so maybe our remarks will help some of you get more "settled in".)

              We discuss, we encourage, we argue, we debate, we kick and scream at each other - but most of us don't bother rating virtually every comment we read. What was the point of that?

              I do know what the result was - you dragged down the rating of many comments into "odd" decimals, which distracted me enough from the discussion to look for why, and find you, as others did.

              No offense, mate - just need to point out that you might want to exercise a little self-restraint in the future before going hog-wild into something so many here consider a valuable and integral part of the roundtable and feedback loop.

              And, to repeat what JD SoOR wrote, you CAN go back and alter your ratings, which would go a long way to restoring some balance. (hint)

              Theory is when we know everything and nothing works. Practice is when everything works and nobody knows why. (Einstein)

              by CodeTalker on Thu Feb 10, 2005 at 05:55:52 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Normally (3.40)
                I'd stay quiet about this, but what is with the pressure to rate high?  If someone started hinting that I should go back and change my rating of something, I would but the rating would probably be going down!

                Enough with the thought police!  You people are so sensitive, chill.  

                People have different standards, so be it.  If you post, you may receive a sub-standard rating, that's the chance you take!

                BTW, feel free to Super Troll this post if necessary!

            •  Tips (4.00)
              "i don't know where i read it, that you should only use 1's and 4's for the extreme posts, and instead use 2's and 3's, which I have been doing."

              The person who posted that in a comment (and I remember it) was also a new member.

              It takes a while to get used to the norms on the site.  Basically:

              "1"s : reserved only for flaming, troll behavior.  Unless someone is being an utter ass or is a troll.  "0" are rating you get after becoming a trusted users, and those are reserved for severely inflammatory posts by super-trolls.

              "2":  a "2" is an insult on this site.  Giving a "2" means "your comment sucked, but not enough to be a troll...but you were pretty damn close."  

              "3": ah, the dreaded "3".  "3" is supposed to mean "good", but it implies "not good enough" ... for a "4" that is.  "3"s are rarely used because they serve little purpose.  The gap between "2"'s quasi-troll and "3"'s "good enough" is such that giving out 3's is basically like rewarding someone for not making a troll post.  If you think a post is good, go on and give it a "4".  The mojo will be greatly appreciated and the karma will come back to you in ten-fold. :)

              Also, don't stop rating!  Remember, you can always change your rating, rating up or down accordingly.  Better to rate and be a more active member of this site than err on the side of caution.  We're all learning here!

              Welcome to the site, btw.

              If the people lead, the leaders will follow.

              by Georgia Logothetis on Thu Feb 10, 2005 at 06:09:34 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  OT: I like 3's (none)
                I like 3's for mild humor, or good points that are merely repeats of or links to information readily found elsewhere. A 3 acknowledges my belief that the reference/point is worth emphasizing.

                I usually reserve 4's for original thought. There's a tricky line, I know. And I'm sure most of us probably tire of ratings the closer we reach the bottom of the comments.

                I usually never rate off-topic discussions, like this, or personal gives-and-takes.

                (My dKos Public Email is altered. Swap "ve-riz-on" and "ace-pumpk-in", then remove dashes to email me.)

                by Ace Pumpkin on Thu Feb 10, 2005 at 08:05:30 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  hehe (none)
                  good strategy.

                  I did feel a bit bad about derailing the thread a bit, but I figured if anyone had a problem, they'd rate me a "3" or a "2" ;)

                  If the people lead, the leaders will follow.

                  by Georgia Logothetis on Thu Feb 10, 2005 at 10:23:14 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Newbies, the exception to these rules (none)
                    are the M-F Cheers and Jeers Diary by Bill in Portland Maine. It's a wacky mojo love thang everyday in that diary.

                    Tomorrow is Rum and Coke Friday, if you're in the neighborhood.  

                    Most Americans are a lot dumber than we give them credit for- George Carlin 2004

                    by maggiemae on Thu Feb 10, 2005 at 05:04:08 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

    •  Ratings abuse (none)
      How on earth does this merit a "2"? - a "warning shot" for a "marginal comment." Can we please stop complimenting the President by comparing him to a fundamentally decent person? Forrest deserves better.
    •  A 4 to offset the inappropriate 2 (n/t) (none)
    •  Don't get me started on Forest Gump (3.96)
      Uh oh, too late. I think Forest Gump was one of the most insidiously reactionary movies I've ever seen.

      Forest Gump was ignorant and compliant. He never did anything to improve himself or seek a higher understanding. He just did whatever he was told, up to and including going to fight in a war. He did not support the war. He just went because he was told to. And he stumbled through his life bumping into happy accidents that brought him good fortune. The moral of his story: Do what you're told, don't question authority, and all good things will magically come to you.

      And he did not "...know what love is." He had an obsession with Jenny, a 7 year old girl who let him sit next to her on the school bus. They hardly spent any time together in all the intervening years. Certainly not enough to develop anything like love.

      Jenny's life was the polar opposite of Forest's. She was adventurous and inquisitive. She reached out to many people and cultures and did not follow the path most travelled. And what she got was misery, pain, and ultimately, death. The moral of her story: If you stray too far from what society deems acceptable, you will be punished.

      And finally, life is not like a box of chocolates. Sure, with a box of chocolates you may not always know what you're going to get, but you are definetly going to get something CHOCOLATE. Its all good. Life is not like that.

      Clearly its past my bedtime - Goodnight.

      Composing The News While The Media Is Decomposing -

      by KingOneEye on Thu Feb 10, 2005 at 01:55:40 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  wow (4.00)
        Do you read that much into every movie you see?  

        Because I've never gotten any of those points from the movie.  I find it hard to buy what you assert is the moral of the story.  Morals of stories can't be so sublte that most people don't get them.  Otherwise their is not point to having a moral.

        Anyway, I would also disagree with you on your final point.  A box of chocolates is not all good.  Sometimes you go to bite into one and you find that the chocolate is covering shit (coconut, licorice, pick your poison).  Life is like that.  

        It's not Blue versus Red. It's Blue versus Gray.

        by Sedge on Thu Feb 10, 2005 at 03:20:45 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Actually (4.00)
          I think the analysis is spot on.

          The best way to get your message across is often subliminal.

          This is not to say that Gump is a carefully crafted plot by the writer/director/producers of course.

          •  Been saying it for years ... (4.00)
            ... The Shawshank Redemption was jobbed on Oscar night.

            Tom Hanks is a wonderful actor, but Morgan Freeman deserved the best actor award that year. Shawshank also deserved best picture. Not that I'm biased or anything :)= ....

            And, I wholeheartedly agree - that analysis from above is on target. Except, I do believe the plot was carefully crafted to that end.

            "All I really need is love, but a little chocolate now and then doesn't hurt!" ~ Lucy Van Pelt (Peanuts)
            •  Ah, Shawshank! (4.00)
              A friend of mine is a film critic for the local ABC affiliate, and a great person. Talking film with him is but one of the many perks of his friendship. But it's a huge perk.

              We were talking movies while cooking, and found out that we both share the notion that there is such a thing as a 'perfect film.' We even agree on what it is: a film that works on every level, a film where you can go bit-by-bit, piece-by-piece through it - directing, acting, cinematography, script, music - and find nothing you would do better or differently, a film that does all these things in such a way as to make it look effortless, and, most of all, it simply ...transcends.

              We absolutely agree that "The Shawshank Redemption" is an entirely perfect film. It was totally robbed by the Academy. Shame on them.

              If a 2nd Oscar could be given out that year, I'd like it to go to Quiz Show. And a third to Pulp Fiction. Both were damned good.

              I thought Forrest Gump was just boring as hell.

              •  shawshank (none)
                ranks up there with the (original) twelve angry men - it is one of those movies that is fresh even when you see it for the umpteenth time.

                try as i might, I could not pick out a single flaw, not one, in that movie.

                simply brilliant.

            •  Shawshank was awesome. Didn't know (none)
              it competed against Forrest. What a shame.

              BTW, NPR is talking about 9/11 - ex Homeland Security Deputy. Deriliction of duty at the FAA! No blame on Bush!

          •  Yup (none)
            Forrest was the perfect example of what the right wing fundies want everyone to be: do what you're told and don't think about things and you'll be happy and everything will go right for you.

            I liked the character and it's pretty true that ignorance can be bliss... but I don't want to make a role model out of him.

            "You're born naked and the rest is drag." -Ru Paul

            by cshardie on Thu Feb 10, 2005 at 12:30:01 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  First, I like the coconut ones (none)
          Second, I agree that the movie is totally reactionary. I don't think its nearly as subtle as suggested. Its something I've heard lots of people comment on. It was a projection of 50s conformism on an 80s mentality and an important cultural milepost on this country's march to the right.

          "Tell no lies. Claim no easy victories." -- Amilcar Cabral

          by Christopher Day on Thu Feb 10, 2005 at 05:47:13 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  "Morals of stories can't be so sublte (4.00)
          that most people don't get them."

          True, just like you.
          KingOneEye is right on target.

          "If at first you don't succeed, keep on sucking until you suck seed."--Curly Howard

          by JackAshe on Thu Feb 10, 2005 at 07:13:52 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Surprised to see these analyses of FG (none)
          How literal can you get? I saw it as a fairy tale.

          Not meant to convince anyone that a mentally, um, challenged person could become a successful entrepreneur, war hero, meet lots of famous people, or win a beautiful girl.

        •  yeah (4.00)
          it's the perfect movie for George Bush's America. I hated it too when I saw it.

          Life is like a box of chocolates?
          Somebody responded: "Life is like a jar of jalapeños: what you do today may burn your ass tomorrow."

          Though I guess I should be careful with that. Ward Churchill is being drawn and quartered for saying more or less the same thing...

        •  I read even more... (none)
          I'm late to the discussion, but I have to jump in because I've thought about how the movie does not work on various levels. At first the movie disturbed me because of gratuitous slams at antiwar activists and the cartoonish depictions of hippies.

          But then I read an awful op-ed by (who was that? Might have been Buckley) soon after Gump's release.  He analyzed the movie the same way, but as a vindication of rightwing morals.

          Gump's mother was the epitome of a good rightwing mom because she fought for her child's admission to school by doing it with the principal?   The vengeful Old Testament style death of Jenny irked me no end. What sins was she paying for? Evidently she deserved to die because of her sexually abusive father?  WTF?

          Last month on a whim, I picked up Forrest Gump at the library and found the answer to the puzzle.  Hugely broad satire. Humorous with a light touch.   Liberal- of course.

          My next thought- who was responsible for the screenplay?  Hope the book's author got a lot of money, because he could not have liked the movie.

      •  Thanks (none)
        You just nailed my thoughts on Forrest Gump, but much more lucidly than I could have explained.  F Gump is an insidious right-wing diatribe that made me sick the one time I watched it.

        "You beat on this prick enough, he'll tell ya he started the Chicago fire - that don't necessarily make it so!" -Nice Guy Eddie, Reservoir Dogs

        by Subterranean on Thu Feb 10, 2005 at 04:41:34 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Thank you! (none)
        I hated that movie with the passion of a thousand suns. I think you said better than I ever have what is was that really bothered me about it.
      •  My whole family HATES Forrest Gump (none)
        I think Forest Gump was one of the most insidiously reactionary movies I've ever seen.
        This is exactly the take my entire family has on it. I didn't get around to seeing it for months, so I never felt like I got to see it with my own eyes -- just through their lens, and boy do they hate it. They considered it a big sloppy wet kiss to the Gingrich revolution: cripples don't need leg braces, they could run if they were better people, like Forrest; developmentally disabled kids can be brilliant entrepreneurs, why waste resources on special education; if you're a hippie, you get aids and die, and you brought it on yourself but that doesn't mean we don't love you.

        Like I said, I never really got the opportunity to form my own opinion about it: that's the lens that was put in front of me.

        "Ah, you come from one of those Americas. You have my sympathy." - Neil Gaiman

        by PatrioticallyIncorrect on Thu Feb 10, 2005 at 05:58:24 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  yes (none)
        I hated Forrest Gump too.  Idiotic kitsch.
      •  thank you (none)
        I always hated that freakin movie, but could never articulate why.  

        Primum non nocere: look it up!

        by mayandjay on Thu Feb 10, 2005 at 07:17:53 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Life is More Like a Box (4.00)
        of Bertie Botts Every-Flavour Jelly Beans.

        Sometimes you get the sweetest confection imaginable.

        Sometimes you get earwax.

        The Bush Empire is sort of like a never-ending supply of earwax. And that's being charitable.

      •  I've never forgiven Tom Hanks ... (none)
        ... for being involved in that piece of Reaganesque tripe.

        And it was right on the heels of "Philadelphia" -- another embarrassment of his. Ah, but I'm a New Yorker and I despised the squirmy way the subject matter of the latter film was handled.

        "You don't lead by pointing and telling people some place to go. You lead by going to that place and making a case." - Ken Kesey

        by Glinda on Thu Feb 10, 2005 at 11:58:20 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  I have a different take (none)
        Forrest Gump was a simple guy, who stood by his mom, his country, and did what he thought was right in his heart. He didn't feel any anxiety about going to war, playing football, or helping out the black panther party, because ultimately he trusted his heart to do the right thing. And most of the time he did.
        Jenny was well intentioned, but full of pain. She could never come to peace with her life, and was addicted to tumult, which was ultimately her undoing. She viewed Forrest as naiive, but never really understood how happy he was. She could never trust the simplicity of life forrest embraced. She thought there was more out there, but I think she realized at the end that for her a simple life would have given her all she wanted.

        John Kerry 2008, the leader of the youth of America.

        by desiunion on Thu Feb 10, 2005 at 06:19:14 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Forest Gump ... (none)
      is what every American who voted for Bush aspires to be.

      The movie was pure right-wing propaganda. Make heroes out of those that are very content to look at the shadows on the cave wall and claim that is reality. Acceptance to that mentality empowers the Bushes of this world.

      Forest Gump is the anti "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington".

      "You don't lead by pointing and telling people some place to go. You lead by going to that place and making a case." - Ken Kesey

      by Glinda on Thu Feb 10, 2005 at 11:47:44 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  its what I aspire to be (none)
        But I think the movie deals with the hypocrasy of the right wing, as well as the left wing. It takes jabs at both sides, by showing how ridiculous the war was, how stupid it was to not embrace civil rights, or by showing how hypocritical the Jenny's boyfriend who beat her was.

        John Kerry 2008, the leader of the youth of America.

        by desiunion on Thu Feb 10, 2005 at 06:22:42 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  It's what you aspire to be? (none)
          I sincerely hope not! Aspiring to be a happy idiot is not noble in any way, shape, or form.

          "You don't lead by pointing and telling people some place to go. You lead by going to that place and making a case." - Ken Kesey

          by Glinda on Thu Feb 10, 2005 at 07:27:23 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Im already halfway! (none)
            Im already an idiot! But what i mean is, having a sense of calm with who you are, and what you believe in.

            John Kerry 2008, the leader of the youth of America.

            by desiunion on Thu Feb 10, 2005 at 08:20:46 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site