Aaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 7626 posts, RR: 28 Posted (2 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1303 times:
Poor California - as if the Whitman and Brown gubernatorial race weren't bad enough - voters are forced to look at Barbara Boxer and ex-HP CEO Carly Fiorina. Tom Campbell, where are you??
Boxer proved that at least some of her marbles are even more scattered than they've always been with this display of absolute nonsense on CNN today:
"I voted for over $2 trillion of tax cuts, the largest one was in the stimulus bill," Boxer said. Blitzer, confused, thought she meant $2 trillion in the stimulus, when she meant over her career.
Then Boxer got confused: "No, no, no -- $1.2 trillion with the stimulus."
That confused Blitzer even more, since the entire stimulus was about $800 billion. He asked, "There was $1.2 trillion in tax cuts in the stimulus?"
Boxer replied, "There was a lot. About, well, I will put it this way, over time, that's what it will be, when you figure all the tax cuts over time. And what we did for the senior citizens, giving them back those refunds. So there was a lot."
Uhm, come again Babs?? Hopefully people now realize that there is no discernible reason for this woman's political career to continue a second longer.
Mudboy From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 1167 posts, RR: 5 Reply 1, posted (2 years 7 months 1 week 1 day ago) and read 1294 times:
I learned all I needed to know about this woman, when she disrespected a General by being offended he called her Maam, instead of Senator, and chastized him for it.
Airstud From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 1855 posts, RR: 1 Reply 2, posted (2 years 7 months 1 week 1 day ago) and read 1286 times:
Ooh! Ooh!! Ooh!!
While we're on the subject of Barbara Boxer's idiocy , let me remind everyone of this little gem, which should erase any lingering doubts anyone might have about whether Senator Boxer ought to be booted out of Washington with a cartoon-caliber kick...
Mudboy From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 1167 posts, RR: 5 Reply 4, posted (2 years 7 months 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 1238 times:
Quoting Superfly (Reply 3): He disrespected her as well so I guess they're even.
I don't see how, in the Military it is proper and respectful, to address a female as Maam? I think she is just on a power trip, and was trying to push her authority. I think this goes with the saying, if you have to tell people who you are, you are usually not as important as you think! Scolding a General for something as petty as that, makes her look like an idiot. She could have told him this in private, instead of chastizing in public.
JBirdAV8r From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 4459 posts, RR: 22 Reply 5, posted (2 years 7 months 1 week 17 hours ago) and read 1228 times:
Quoting Mudboy (Reply 4):
I don't see how, in the Military it is proper and respectful, to address a female as Maam?
"Ma'am" is accepted even when subjects are addressing the Queen.
It was squarely aimed at putting the sniveling little military man in his place.
UH60FtRucker From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 6, posted (2 years 7 months 1 week 17 hours ago) and read 1215 times:
Quoting Superfly (Reply 3): He disrespected her as well so I guess they're even.
How so? In the expanded video, the general was using Sir and Ma'am for everyone.
But more importantly, in the military, referring to someone as sir/ma'am is a sign of deference and respect. I suppose people unfamiliar with the military culture would be deaf to the subtle differences in how one addresses a superior. For instance, we must all respect the rank, but we are not required to respect the person. So for example, when addressing someone you do not necessarily respect as a person as "Yes, Captain / Yes, Sergeant/ Yes, Senator" etc. you are meeting the minimum of simply respecting their rank. But on the flip side, using Sir/Ma'am can be a subtle way of showing respect to the person.
connies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 3854 posts, RR: 13 Reply 7, posted (2 years 7 months 1 week 17 hours ago) and read 1211 times:
Quoting JBirdAV8r (Reply 5): "Ma'am" is accepted even when subjects are addressing the Queen.
Not quite. "Your Majesty" when first responding to the Queen (you speak only after she has spoken to you first).
If HRH decides to continue the conversation, and the topic is less than official business, "Ma'am" can be used.
seb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 9803 posts, RR: 17 Reply 8, posted (2 years 7 months 1 week 17 hours ago) and read 1196 times:
Quoting Aaron747 (Thread starter): Uhm, come again Babs?? Hopefully people now realize that there is no discernible reason for this woman's political career to continue a second longer.
These same arguments can be made for ALL politicians. I am so sick of everyone running around blaming only one party for absolutley everything and trying to prove by one sound byte that an entire mess is entirely the fault of one party. Every chance I get, I encourage people to vote third party. I did in key races. Meg Whitman vs. Jerry Brown? Neither. Barbara Boxer vs. Carly Fiorina? Neither. Lynn Woolsey vs Jim Judd? Neither.
BTW, in the "faces" commercial for Carly Fiorina, we think she looks like Maude.
JBirdAV8r From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 4459 posts, RR: 22 Reply 9, posted (2 years 7 months 1 week 17 hours ago) and read 1191 times:
Quoting connies4ever (Reply 7): Not quite. "Your Majesty" when first responding to the Queen (you speak only after she has spoken to you first).
If HRH decides to continue the conversation, and the topic is less than official business, "Ma'am" can be used.
So, like I said, "ma'am" IS accepted then....
I left out the protocol because it wasn't germane, not because I didn't know it, but thanks for adding your two cents...
JBirdAV8r From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 4459 posts, RR: 22 Reply 10, posted (2 years 7 months 1 week 17 hours ago) and read 1189 times:
Quoting seb146 (Reply 8): I am so sick of everyone running around blaming only one party for absolutley everything
Like you do, you mean?
Quoting seb146 (Reply 8): and trying to prove by one sound byte that an entire mess is entirely the fault of one party.
How was the OP trying to do that? It's just another clear indication of how Boxer is a career politician rubber-stamping her way through a job.
Airstud From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 1855 posts, RR: 1 Reply 13, posted (2 years 7 months 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 1071 times:
Quoting Mudboy (Reply 4): I think she is just on a power trip, and was trying to push her authority. I think this goes with the saying, if you have to tell people who you are, you are usually not as important as you think!
‎"You wouldn't worry so much about what others think of you if you realized how seldom they do." -- Eleanor Roosevelt
Sponsor Message: 
From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 7626 posts, 
Tom Campbell, where are you??
From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 1167 posts, 
, let me remind everyone of 
From Thailand, joined May 2000, 38485 posts, 
From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 3854 posts, 
That's too funny, I've been thinking the same thing! Every time that spot comes on, I think "...and then there's Carly!"
Printer friendly format 
