Office Software and the Politics of GWB - No Connection
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| antiskid Feb 19, 2007 8:36 AM EDT |
I agree in general with your main points regarding Microsoft and office suites/formats, but your swipe at GWB is gratuitous and in poor taste. Somehow today it is thought necessary to insult the president in order to gain credibility for any argument, no matter how unrelated to the conduct of the presidency. Please - get a grip. Focus on software, and its nexus with politics. GWB has nothing to do with office suites, office formats, or Microsoft's business strategy. Just because he belongs, with Microsoft, in the category of things you dislike, doesn't mean he or his office should be disrespected. The disrespect lies in your casual evaluation of what motivates him - as if he does everything for applause or approval, instead of for the good of the country. No serious person believes the president sets national policy solely in the hope that it will earn him plaudits. Policy decisions are often difficult and unpopular, even if correct. This is why the constitution provides an ample four-year term of office for the president, and makes it difficult to remove him while in office. Agree or disagree with the president, he is a serious person, and deserves respect. |
| jdixon Feb 19, 2007 8:43 AM EDT |
> Agree or disagree with the president, he is a serious person, and deserves respect. No. The office deserves respect. Whether or not the individual occupying the office deserves respect is a matter of each person to judge based on their evaluation of the actions of that individual. And, in any case, his "swipe" at the President is a fair summation of the administration's expectations in the Iraq conflict, and that expectation has been shown to have been wildly optimistic. |
| bigg Feb 19, 2007 9:06 AM EDT |
> Agree or disagree with the president, he is a serious person, and deserves respect. And did you say the same thing when Bill Clinton was president? If someone thinks the president's policy is dumb, they should be able to joke about it. |
| dinotrac Feb 19, 2007 9:23 AM EDT |
GOODNESS GRATIOUS!!! GIVE THE REV A BREAK!!! Look, I am a bright red got in a deep blue state, a lonely soul who voted for GW twice. I do not agree with the Bush-bashers, though I think there is plenty of fair criticism to be made. However - as a literary device, the Rev's reference was completely fair. He made a point in a clear, compact, and stylish way. Agree with or disagree with the politics, I cannot help but agree with the style points. There is such a thing as getting thin-skinned. Bad thing no matter which side of the aisle you inhabit. |
| gberardi Feb 19, 2007 9:24 AM EDT |
I think the supposed "swipe" was in reference to the idea that the people of Iraq would greet the US forces as liberators, that no one higher up seemed to anticipate an insurgency was even possible. Whether or not you agreed with Bush at the time, I think that it is obvious that such an expectation was not borne out. No one insulted the office of the President. I didn't read anything literal or implied in the article that suggested that the author does not like the idea of the US government or the idea of having specific positions. Making fun of Bush is fair game. He's a person. He just happens to be the President, and he just happens to be high profile. This isn't a fascist state. We're allowed to make fun of people in our government. We don't have to be afraid that someone will throw us in prison for treason when we call into question the education, intelligence, and social skills of an official, as much as some people might wish it were true. The best part? People are allowed to counter with their own opinions and arguments. But they can't be allowed to simply stifle the original argument and pretend that it doesn't exist simply because they don't think it is right or patriotic. |
| dinotrac Feb 19, 2007 9:28 AM EDT |
>Making fun of Bush is fair game Besides, it's a great way for people to show their ignorance. In many parts of Iraq, the coalition forces actually were greeted as liberators. The lousy follow-through changed a lot of perceptions. |
| DarrenR114 Feb 19, 2007 9:43 AM EDT |
>Look, I am a bright red got in a deep blue state, a lonely soul who voted for GW twice. Dino, tell me it ain't so ... j/k - although I am a registered republican in a state dominated by the Republican party (FL), I did vote against Bush in both elections (I didn't feel his military experience, his corporate experience, nor his gubernatorial experience showed that he was qualified to properly execute the duties of the President of the U.S.) Lampooning the sitting president for making poor decisions (even during time of war) has been an American tradition since the beginning of this constitutional republic. Any person making accusations of such exercise in free speech is not very well versed in our nation's history. |
| bigg Feb 19, 2007 9:58 AM EDT |
Alright guys, as someone who generally doesn't find politics very interesting (though, yes, I have been involved with individual campaigns and did cheer the outcome of the 06 elections) I vote that we avoid political discussions here, particularly about the Iraq War. I think the original comment was fine. |
| NoCaDrummer Feb 19, 2007 10:40 AM EDT |
Well, at least no one is disagreeing with the fact that Microsoft was NOT "greeted with cheers" at their developing an alternate (and competing) format. In typical Microsoft style, I'd guess that they received the ODF information, passed it along internally, took the parts that made sense to them, modified those parts to fit their existing structures, and had some poor bloke write the 6K page "documentation" for submittal. The latter person (or persons) may have been purposely ignorant of the ODF, so that it wouldn't look like a paper written by a highschooler with an encyclopedia in front of him (i.e. plagiarized like crazy). Am I wrong? |
| dcparris Feb 19, 2007 1:02 PM EDT |
> I agree in general with your main points regarding Microsoft and office suites/formats, but your swipe at GWB is gratuitous and in poor taste. You are certainly welcome to your opinion. However, my comment entails no disrespect. As a former US Marine, I fully understand what it means to show respect to the Office of the President. Most of the responses to your post have picked up the correct tone of my statement. George Bush, along with some of his aides, told us on national television that the Iraqis would greet us with open arms. That has not born out in reality. Likewise, Microsoft assumed they could just develop an alternate document format standard, and that everyone would jump on the bandwagon. The comparison is quite apt. :-) |
| jimf Feb 19, 2007 1:09 PM EDT |
> That has not born out in reality Government and Corporate both seem to love pushing fantasy when it's to their perceived advantage. It's all our responsibilities to haul them back to the real world... Whatever that takes. |
| dcparris Feb 19, 2007 2:16 PM EDT |
I specifically recall Bush, et. al., stating the Iraqis would love us, and thinking that it was stupid of them to tell the American people that. Microsoft is trying to sell the public on the idea that 2 standards are, what? I dunno, better than one? Something like that. Anyway, they say two standards are better for interoperability. How so? I have grave concerns about the intelligence of someone trying to tell me that continuing to have to convert between document formats, when we could all be using one, is a good thing. |
| swbrown Feb 19, 2007 5:00 PM EDT |
I'll show respect to GW when he shows respect to America. |
| dinotrac Feb 19, 2007 6:12 PM EDT |
>I'll show respect to GW when he shows respect to America. Well that's something I understand. I say the same thing about nearly every Democratic politician. So, far, I haven't had to show much respect. |
| dcparris Feb 19, 2007 7:23 PM EDT |
They're all pretty rotten, imo. BTW, what happened to the OP? Makes an accusation based purely on assumption and leaves? |
| dinotrac Feb 19, 2007 7:31 PM EDT |
>Makes an accusation based purely on assumption and leaves? Seems so. Sigh. it's so hard to find quality agitators these days. |
| galeru Feb 19, 2007 8:18 PM EDT |
>>I'll show respect to GW when he shows respect to America.
>
>Well that's something I understand. I say the same thing about nearly every Democratic politician. So, far, I haven't had to show much respect. Some guy once said that people who criticize of America is more patriotic than the people whom just blindly agree. While completely unrelated to your post, I needed something that I could bring to ask my questions. First, does anyone know the actual quote? And secondly, how do you quote things, in the little box thingy? |
| dcparris Feb 19, 2007 10:32 PM EDT |
> Sigh. it's so hard to find quality agitators these days. One of us has definitely been around the other entirely too long. > First, does anyone know the actual quote? Sorry, I'm lost on that one. As for quoting in the forums, I always just use the '>', but someone here who uses the blockquote can tell you how that's done. I think it's 'quote' inside '[' and ']': Quoting:This is a quote. Yep, that's it. don't forget the closing tag. |
| Aladdin_Sane Feb 20, 2007 12:56 AM EDT |
>First, does anyone know the actual quote? Quotes are among the easiest things to find on Internet since advent of the WWW and Google. And you can quote me on that. There is a whole page of quotes that express the sentiment you describe at http://www.betterworld.net/quotes/patriot-quotes.htm I found that page in 1.4 seconds (well, about that) by just googling your own key words like [url=http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=criticize America patriotic quote&btnG=Google Search]http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=criticize America patri...[/url] |
| jdixon Feb 20, 2007 2:25 AM EDT |
> So, far, I haven't had to show much respect. Of the Presidents I remember, I've respected one. I don't think any of the others have been worthy of the office. Unfortunately, I expect that ratio to continue. |
| number6x Feb 20, 2007 9:39 AM EDT |
The usual way to phrase your arguments without starting a flame war is: "Microsoft is telling us 'X'. If you believe that, I have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn." You can convey the meaning without pushing people's buttons. |
| DarrenR114 Feb 20, 2007 9:49 AM EDT |
So how much do you want for the bridge in Brooklyn? And would you throw in one of the two in San Francisco too? |
| number6x Feb 20, 2007 10:02 AM EDT |
Actually you get one in Cincinnati with the one in Brooklyn, They are the same model and builder, just slightly different scales. Here in Chicago we have 60 or so movable bridges, but you can only lease them, I'm not selling! |
| tuxchick Feb 20, 2007 10:05 AM EDT |
I too am disappointed in one-shot stinkbombers. Come on antiskid, have the courage of your convictions! Get back here and put up yer dukes! Haw. Chikken! buckbuckbuck. |
| dinotrac Feb 20, 2007 11:58 AM EDT |
N6x - But you remember -- a year or two back -- the guy who lived in the bridge tower? Ran an extension cord, had TV and everything. |
| jimf Feb 20, 2007 12:04 PM EDT |
> the guy who lived in the bridge tower? Yeah, but the down side is the ocasional homeless bum who, thinking he's found shelter, gets caught in the gears :( |
| number6x Feb 20, 2007 1:03 PM EDT |
Hey that guy was living under the LSD bridge. Thats the high rent district. Right by Oprah and all those rich folks. There was another guy living in the subways a few years back too. He had copies of a lot of the CTA keys! |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!