@atphantom, did what again? Disagree? something lol Interesting I just noticed which backs my theory
@Vance Astro said:
@Vaeternus said:Such as?Sure I did, I just prefer unbiased sources online.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_romney_vs_obama-1171.html
Numbers look pretty damn close to me...
I moved it because the thread was about Obama. Obama is real, so I don't think what appears in his forum has to be about his comic appearances.Also, can we get this moved back to off-topic? It's not a comic book thread, it has no place on the fictional Obama's page.
@AtPhantom,
Pretty sure I addressed your post. But yeah, let's just agree to disagree ;)
@Isaac, no just the truth which you refuse to digest. BTW, no you stop posting nonsense and stop responding to me when I'm not even addressing you. lol yeah you say I twist other people's words, oh the irony...There is no hypocrisy on my part. I'm not "forcing" or trying to influence others with my views...Awee, getting mad Hellos? Don't, it's a political debate, but seriously I'm shocked that you miss my point concerning common criminals with terror cells..guess it flew over your head. *sigh* I tried. But hey, keep on just repeating yourself like a parrot saying "I'm trolling" Not really, I just don't agree with you flat out but Whatever helps you sleep at night. In case you failed to realize, I'm 100% sure it was again YOU who decided to approach me with your initial witty comment which wasn't funny at all btw. Thus why you bait people, you may fool other people but you're not fooling me or those who read carefully.
LOL, AGAIN you're making ridiculous assumptions about my statements. When did I say "throw away the key"? What? That sounds like something a delusional person would say seriously...I never said that, but I'm not even going to waste my time on that. Clearly you don't get it, as for Ted yeah...you know I'm right and thus have no counterargument as to my "money/power" controlling everything point or apparently if you're a powerful liberal anyway like in Ted's case...I'm sure that girl's family was just dandy with that decision. How's that for your Have faith in the "Justice" system, that's what I thought. That's a prime example of the system being broken and you know it...but no worries, I won't hold my breath waiting for you to admit it.
I never said terrorism is stealing apples in the court of law, you said that. Not me, I'm arguing the opposite if anything. I merely asked you to quote me saying something YOU said that I said, which realistically indeed I never ACTUALLY said...clearly you misunderstood my point, I'm NOT comparing the too, that's exactly my point. You however want to treat terror cells " nicely and be sure to give them a trial" even if they are obviously guilty of such....sure, give em a trial then toss in a gas chamber if it makes you feel better. Either way they deserve it for killing thousands of innocents, to think differently would be moronic.
Please, humor me, nobody has been tearing anyone apart it's a political debate which 99% consists of personal views and 1% fact in here, and if so Roxy, Necro, Psychotic and I have done so with your posts time and time again. To be honest, I give her major props being patient with you. Assuming of course you're NOT him under a different name, but again who else in this entire topic agrees that "Obama is really a righty" yeah, didn't think so.
Sorry, only one person well two on here constantly call me a "troll" you and Nickhero, both of who I don't care for nor have credibility so ask me if I care. Yes, that's right I know a friend who's family was wiped on 9/11 since you know they worked in the WTC(along with my mother's ex boss) don't believe me? I do live in NYC you know...you know where the WTC was/is located? Manhattan, New York City to be exact.
You're missing my point. I never said to mistreat them, if you read my previous posts I even stated this. I said WHY transfer them to less secured facilities. Hey if anything it would be for their benefit staying in a more protected, isolated place since I'm sure people who lost those due to their involvement wouldn't think twice trying to kill them or get at them. Read the above concerning 3rd paragraph point.
What? lol wow I can't believe you didn't catch the fact that I was sarcastic that entire post....obviously there's different crimes, I was using that as a basis to show or tell you that "stealing something" isn't the same as committing a major crime, despite what it is. AGAIN, never said that stealing apples =all of those. *sigh* lol completely flew over your head I see.
@PsychoKnights said:
I'm not surprised he was putting words in your mouth.
He wasn't.
Personally, I'm fine with shooting terrorists like dogs...as long as they are not American citizens.
So as long as they aren't American, anything is on the table. How incredibly civilized.
@Vaeternus:
To be fair, both conservatives and liberals often used petty attacks rather than respond substantively.
@isaac_clarke:
I'm sure that your fully aware Marxism isn't a religious faith. But at least you admit that President Obama went to church.
I'm going to be brief with you because you never responded the first time I wrote to you which implies to me that you are not interested in having a genuine conversation.
The church Barack Obama attended admitted to teaching Black Liberation Theology which is Marxism wrapped in religion to make palatable to certain cultures. I believe it was originally constructed for African nations, but obviously it has popped up in the United States as well.
How does that separate him from his counter parts on the 'right'(given he's a lefty in your context).
You are deflecting the question and ignoring the issue that Obama is a hypocrite (something you have already done once the first time you posted in this thread), but to answer your question, studies have shown time and time again that conservatives are more generous than liberals. That being said, there are plenty of hypocrites on both sides of the aisle.
The entire thread's point of being is simply to bait the same people into the arguments they have every thread. If you had any measure of intent to create something of a thread that creates positive discussion - it would be far more generalized to all politicians - not simply President. It's troll bait.
By that reasoning, wouldn’t that make you a troll?
I posted this because I believe Obama is a bad person, and I want people to see that, but I am willing to discuss anything, and I have demonstrated that in all my posts.
There is no doubt everyone on this planet will at one time or another reveal themselves a hypocrite.
That’s a very sad view to have of the world.
Not just London.
I’ll watch the video later. I don’t have time at the moment.
As well as the slew of contradicting view points on camera - in particular his opinion of Blind Trust when he was Governor to now as a Presidential candidate. Happily gunning his opponent for saying the exact same thing he did not even a year ago
All of that makes him a hypocrite, but I do not see how it makes him particularly stupid.
or doing things like putting his dog on top of his vehicle in a crate (having so much fun apparently it urinated) - knowing full well he will be scrutinized for everything he does during this campaign.
So? Also, that incident happened back in the eighties. He had no reason to think that action would end up impacting a presidential run.
Doesn't help his campaign adds often under any scrutiny also reveal themselves to not be truthful - as a testament to how little his campaign thinks of the media's / voter intelligence.
You would have to give specific examples. Honestly, I would not be surprised if it is full of lies though.
@AtPhantom
Neocolonialism is an established fact by now. Havesomeexamples.
This isn't anything new or out of the ordinary. A nation's power is roughly correlated with its influence and ability to boss other nations around. Every nation naturally seeks to exert influence on other nations and reduce their own power.
I read the first article and skimmed through the second article, but I failed to see how the United States was currently forcing any nations to give us their resources. If there is such an example, please give it. I will not spend a lot of time trying to make your case for you.
Well that's great new for Saddam, guess you'll leave him alone no-Oh wait.
Yeah, I don’t support the actions in Iraq. We would have a much better conversation if you actually talked to me instead of talking to who you think I am.
All of those cases involved western powers attacking a country to acquire something the defending nation wouldn't give them. In Iraq and Libya's case it was oil (In Libya's case it was more that Europe had racked a collosal debt with Libya they wanted erased). In Egypt's it was control of the Suez Canal which Egypt had nationalized previously.
In regards to Iraq, we did not force them to give us their resources. We paid for them. Can you give me any examples of the Iraqis saying they do not want to sell their oil?
But that's contorting my point. I never claimed Obama is supporting policies of the current Republican party. Obviously he's not. But, as demonstrated, he is rather close to some previous, moderate republican presidents.
You said he was conservative. He is not.
This is, again, not my point. Whether you feel compromises are justified (and for the record I think they are not only justified but mandatory) or not doesn't change the fact that willingness (Or unwillingness, to be more precise) to compromise is a measure of radicalism. Radicalism by itself isn't good or bad. It's just there.
Perhaps.
Atheism and abortions are not the measure of social right wing. Social right wing is entirely defined by authoritarianism and desire to regulate the social lives of citizens. Stalin was as authoritarian as it gets. (And for the record, so are conservatives. Making abortions and gay marriage illegal, favoring stricter punishments, enforcing moral options, favoring one religion, all basically mean greater government involvement in people's lives. Right wing wants the government out of their businesses and in their houses. Left with, Ironically, wants the opposite).
Yeah, I could disprove all that, but I’m beginning to put together that you are not intellectually honest, so what is the point?
Great, so Obama's willingness to order executions of America's enemies is a reflection of his right wing tendencies. Glad we sorted that out.
Yeah, I said nothing to indicate that which is one of the reasons I now realize that you are not going to give me anymore worthwhile thoughts.
I think you lost something in translation there because that sentence really makes no sense.
It makes sense if you read the back and forth leading up to it, but I’m not going to spell it out for you again.
The why is everything. I've seen and listed several sources that clearly indicate his brother chooses to live like he does. Hell, the dude lived in South Korea for years, and I doubt anythingmade him return to Kenya. And if that's true, then the whole issue of Obama's morality is moot.
When given an offer of help, he accepted it. Therefore, you are wrong.
There still isn't evidence that he actually called him for help. Perhaps he didn't want to call him for help, specifically, because he's the president and all. Humans are strange like that. I don't know, but I see plenty of clues that what D'Souza is saying isn't the whole truth.
Though I do find it strange that the only links on the subject I can find are all from conservative sites. I too would expect someone else to report on the damn thing.
Of course not. Why would the liberal media ever pursue something that might make Obama look bad? Off the top of my head, I can’t think of a single time they have ever looked for dirt on Obama.
I've read it already. It's a nice conspiracy theory (Become president to destroy the country from the inside! Lex Luthor would be proud), but it is clearly in opposition to Obama's actions in the past four years. He also gets some historic facts wrong (Free market is anti-colonial? Lolno).
I really don’t care for this whole anti-colonial term. You and D’souza both have given it much more thought than I have, and I don’t see any reason to try to find which of you has the right understanding. As far as I’m concerned, Obama is someone who wants government to play a larger role in individuals lives, and that is enough reason for me to dislike him. You and D’souza can battle out the colonial issue.
@Vaeternus:
That was a very amusing and pretty accurate summary of AtPhantom's reasoning on Obama being a conservative...though actually, I'm not sure he's doing much reasoning.
Also, I would not try to reason with Vance Astro. He's not interested in discussing things. You are right that the polls show them neck and neck.
@AtPhantom:
It was my view that as a thread that has nothing to do with comics, it should be in Off-Topic, but apparently, Vance felt that my thread was getting too many views in that forum. Apparently, a thread about the actual Barack Obama properly deserves to be in a dead thread about the fictional Barack Obama. That makes sense, right?
@isaac_clarke said:
@PsychoKnights said:
I'm not surprised he was putting words in your mouth.
He wasn't.
Personally, I'm fine with shooting terrorists like dogs...as long as they are not American citizens.So as long as they aren't American, anything is on the table. How incredibly civilized.
Not anything. Just a quick execution.
Oh, and regarding who was putting whose words in whose mouth, I'm not getting into it. That is between you two. I was hoping to get some good conversation through this thread, but it seems everybody pretty much has their minds set. Too bad.
@PsychoKnights said:
I'm going to be brief with you because you never responded the last time I wrote to you which implies to me that you are not interested in having a genuine conversation.
Two things: It's hard to believe genuine conversation isn't the intent of this thread and what exactly didn't I respond to?
The church Barack Obama attended admitted to teaching Black Liberation Theology which is Marxism wrapped in religion to make palatable to certain cultures. I believe it was originally constructed for African nations, but obviously it has popped up in the United States as well.
So it's Marxism with Jesus and Black People? That doesn't sound like Marxism - at all. So I think it's fair to say Marxism is still not a religious belief. Glad we could clear that up.
"It's like a bicycle without wheels or a handlebar." - "Yeah, it's a chair. It's a !@#$ing chair.'"
You are deflecting the question and ignoring the issue that Obama is a hypocrite (something you have already done once the first time you posted in this thread)
It isn't a question I'm responding to, it's a statement "Like most leftists, he preaches generosity but does not practice it. (grins)" - which prompts the comment, why is this at all unique to this single individual when it's just as easily arguable for his 'right' counterparts. I'm struggling to see how you can actually believe the main issue / topic of this thread of how "I think President Obama is a hypocrite! (with a number of other additions)" is going to spur any meaningful conversation that won't consist of people arguing an opposing opinion that will not even phase this rock hard perception you have already. It's not going to spur any healthy conversation either way.
but to answer your question, studies have shown time and time again that conservatives are more generous than liberals. That being said, there are plenty of hypocrites on both sides of the aisle.
That doesn't answer my question in the least. I'm asking how that separates him from his counter-parts on the opposing aisle - instead I'm hearing about how "conservatives are more generous than liberals."
By that reasoning, wouldn’t that make you a troll?
I had someone else in mind when I said troll bait and thought myself best fitting in the 'same people' baited by said threads(namely why I try to ignore them). But hey, if you think that's the case feel free to argue as such.
I posted this because I believe Obama is a bad person, and I want people to see that, but I am willing to discuss anything, and I have demonstrated that in all my posts.
This thread simply doesn't at all provide any leeway to have positive / healthy discussion. It starts off with this clear fixed position, a perception that say only two or three posters on these boards are even going to take seriously and the latter that bother to post in this thread are going to argue with - really only perserving because of off-topic conversation - that more or less is consistently unhealthy conversation that will more than likely lead to a thread lock (given this was moved, that really only leaves MKF30 to argue - though it seems like he wants to jump ship early and not the reach the point of writing an entire post for select folks to ignore on their walls).
That’s a very sad view to have of the world.
It shouldn't be, inconsistency is one of the more consistent facet of humanity. Nothing to be all that entirely sad about, at times it can be quite hilarious from the observation of bystanders - say protesting something.
All of that makes him a hypocrite, but I do not see how it makes him particularly stupid.
Your acting like one's hypocrisy cannot make them look like a moron. The two can walk hand in hand.
So?
It's counter productive to his goal - the last thing you want while under scrutiny from the public is to do something outlandish like put your dog in a crate on the top of your vehicle and drive around with the family. Anyone with a pet is going to start scratching their head when they hear something like that and the non-controversial alternative is easily available to him - have the dog ride around in the actual car with the family. When your under this much scrutiny from the public, why do something this dumb?
You would have to give specific examples.
Most prominent to mind is the "Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander" defense. This expression has been used by Governor Romney in the events of running adds that involve taking things the President has said, while actually quoting John McCain, out of context:
And another time when questioned in regards to his Campaign's action of sending two-dozen hecklers to disrupt David Axelrod's (The President's Chief Campaign Strategist) Boston appearance. The man simply couldn't think less of the average voters intelligence when he does these actions - thinking that his campaign can do these things without someone - anyone questioning them. It's hard to believe your completely ignorant of that tactics used by Romney thus far.
Honestly, I would not be surprised if it is full of lies though.
What? My post or the examples? Do you honestly believe Governor Romney or those making adds against the President are going to play fair? They would lose if they kept their gloves on - pumping as much misinformation and disrupting anything his opponent's campaign is doing - is simply to Romney's benefit. When he's questioned or caught on any of it, he doesn't give a damn - then gets mad when his opponents did the same.
@PsychoKnights said:
@isaac_clarke said:
@PsychoKnights said:
I'm not surprised he was putting words in your mouth.
He wasn't.
Personally, I'm fine with shooting terrorists like dogs...as long as they are not American citizens.So as long as they aren't American, anything is on the table. How incredibly civilized.
Not anything. Just a quick execution.
Oh, and regarding who was putting whose words in whose mouth, I'm not getting into it. That is between you two. I was hoping to get some good conversation through this thread, but it seems everybody pretty much has their minds set. Too bad.
It's the idea of executing people like dogs, as long as they are not American, that I have issues with - because people aren't dogs, despite how much I love my fluffy companions that isn't the case.
The context of that is referring to Phantom - MKF30 has been accusing the both of us of that, as well as a slew of other things in my case.
@isaac_clarke
Two things: It's hard to believe genuine conversation isn't the intent of this thread
I agree.
and what exactly didn't I respond to?
I wrote the following to you on page 1.
“I will respond substanatively to your post IF your paragraph was meant in sincerity. If it was serious, then you are saying that you agree with my points and that Obama is hypocritical and wrong, but conservatives are just as bad. If that is the case, then we can have a good conversation about things.
On the other hand, if your first paragraph was just meant as sarcasm, then I see no point in substantively addressing your points since you never substantively addressed mine. If you were just being sarcastic, you basically said, "Yeah, yeah, but look at all the bad things these guys have done!" I would be happy to talk about the faults of the right, but I'm not going to waste the time if you are the kind of person who cannot admit to faults in your own camp.
I hope you understand my reasoning and that this does not sound to snooty.”
So it's Marxism with Jesus and Black People? That doesn't sound like Marxism - at all. So I think it's fair to say Marxism is still not a religious belief. Glad we could clear that up.
Yeah, you obviously didn’t look it Black Liberation Theology. I’m not surprised. You’ve already made it clear that you stick your fingers in your ears when you don’t want to hear something.
"It's like a bicycle without wheelsor a handlebar." - "Yeah,it'sa chair.It'sa !@#$ing chair.'”
(eye roll) Yes because politics and religion have never been combined before. It’s clearly an utterly absurd idea.
It isn't a question I'm responding to, it's a statement "Like most leftists,he preaches generosity but does not practice it.(grins)" - which prompts the comment, why is this at all unique to this single individual when it's just as easily arguable for his 'right' counterparts. I'm struggling to see how you can actually believe the main issue / topic of this thread of how "I think President Obama is a hypocrite! (with a number of other additions)" is going to spur any meaningful conversation that won't consist of people arguing an opposing opinion that will not even phase this rock hard perception you have already. It's not going to spur any healthy conversation either way.
I was giving information and hoping that people could discuss it from there. People have given examples of conservative hypocricy, and in many cases, I have agreed with them. I am willing to discuss opposing viewpoints, but yes, I am arguing for my viewpoint. There is no reason I should have to have an open ended topic to get worthwhile responses as long as other people would extend the same willingness to admit faults on their own side of the aisle.
That doesn't answer my question in the least. I'm asking how that separates him from his counter-parts on the opposing aisle - instead I'm hearing about how "conservatives are more generous than liberals."
You asked what makes Obama different than conservatives in this specific area, I told you that conservatives are more generous. That is what separates them in some cases, but obviously it varies from individual to individual.
I had someone else in mind when I said troll bait and thought myself best fitting in the 'same people' baited by said threads(namely why I try to ignore them). But hey, if you think that's the case feel free to argue as such.
I think troll is a word people throw out when they do not like what others are saying. I generally try to avoid it. I just thought it was ironic that you considered OP troll bait, yet you were one of three people who have continually posted on this forum. If the shoe fits, wear it. I really don’t feel troll is a useful term myself.
This thread simply doesn't at all provide any leeway to have positive / healthy discussion. It starts off with this clear fixed position, a perception that say only two or three posters on these boards are even going to take seriously and the latter that bother to post in this thread are going to argue with - really only perserving because of off-topic conversation - that more or less is consistently unhealthy conversation that will more than likely lead to a thread lock (given this was moved, that really only leaves MKF30 to argue - though it seems like he wants to jump ship early and not the reach the point of writing an entire post for select folks to ignore on their walls).
If you posted an opinion OP that was negative about Romney, would that mean that there would be no positive/healthy discussion possible off of that? Of course not! You seem to be implying that I cannot state an opinion and expect reasonable responses.
It shouldn't be, inconsistency is one of the more consistent facet of humanity. Nothing to be all that entirely sad about, at times it can be quite hilarious from the observation of bystanders - say protesting something.
In my view, there is a large difference between not always living up to your own standards and consistently going against your own standards. The latter is hypocrisy, the former is humanity, but you are free to have your own understanding.
Your acting like one's hypocrisy cannot make them look like a moron. The two can walk hand in hand.
No, I am saying that most politicians are hypocrites, but that does not necessarily make them stupid. I could find nearly as many examples of flip-flopping on political issues for Barack Obama, but I would not call President Obama a stupid man.
It's counter productive to his goal - the last thing you want while under scrutiny from the public is to do something outlandish like put your dog in a crate on the top of your vehicle and drive around with the family. Anyone with a pet is going to start scratching their head when they hear something like that and the non-controversial alternative is easily available to him - have the dog ride around in the actual car with the family. When your under this much scrutiny from the public, why do something this dumb?
The dog incident happened in 1983. He was not under tight scrutiny at the time, and even if it were a recent incident, I have no problem with the behavior, and I don’t think most people would. I would assume they either did not have enough room in the car. He was in a sealed dog container. It was not like he was being beaten by the wind.
Most prominent to mind is the "Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander" defense. This expression has been used by Governor Romney in the events of running adds that involve taking things the President has said, while actually quoting John McCain, out of context:
Yep, that’s dishonest all right. Thank you for sharing. However, spin does not equal stupidity. You know that almost every politician does crap like that, right? Does it make them creeps? Yes. Does it make them stupid? No. Barack Obama's "McCain can't type" add comes to mind.
And another time when questioned in regards to his Campaign's action of sending two-dozen hecklers to disrupt David Axelrod's (The President's Chief Campaign Strategist) Boston appearance. The man simply couldn't think less of the average voters intelligence when he does these actions - thinking that his campaign can do these things without someone - anyone questioning them. It's hard to believe your completely ignorant of that tactics used by Romney thus far.
Can you give me some evidence that Romney is responsible for the hecklers? Just because they were Romney supporters does not mean he or his campaign had anything to do with sending them there. You must know that there are douche bags on both sides of aisle who do these sorts of things, and I think it is fair to say that the left is far more skilled in the disruptive protest than the right.
What? My post or the examples? Do you honestly believe Governor Romney or those making adds against the President are going to play fair?They would lose if they kept their gloves on- pumping as much misinformation and disrupting anything his opponent's campaign is doing - is simply to Romney's benefit. When he's questioned or caught on any of it, he doesn't give a damn - then gets mad when his opponents did the same.
I don’t think I am being unclear in my writing, so I am confused about how I am so frequently misunderstood. I meant that I would not be surprised if Romeny’s campaign ads are full of lies. I’m not a fan of Romney. I think he and Obama are both sleaze balls.
It's the idea of executing people like dogs, as long as they are not American, that I have issues with - because people aren't dogs, despite how much I love my fluffy companions that isn't the case.
Terrorists are worse than dogs. Dogs have no real morality. When they kill, they do it out of instinct. A terrorist on the other hand is human and has the capacity to reason, yet he decides that it would best serve his goal to strap a bomb to a young man or woman, send them into a crowded marketplace, and blow everyone to H***. I have much more compassion for the dog, and I don't even really like dogs.
I don’t think there is much more that can be learned from our exchange. You used sarcasm out of the gate and refused to address my original post in any substantive way. Several times in your latest comment alone, you have suggested that I am not actually trying to have a good conversation with people. You dismiss the concept of Black Liberation Theology without consideration even though it answers your question about Obama’s religion. You seem unable or more likely unwilling to grasp the simplest of points such as the differences between liberals and conservatives on financial generosity. You frequently leap to conclusion such as suggesting that I do not believe that hypocrisy and stupidity can go hand in hand. Though you have provided some good thoughts such as more information on Romney’s hypocrisy, you are missing a lot more than you are hitting. I’m guessing that my original instincts were correct and you simply lack the willingness to see anything that looks bad for your political views. Regardless, I think we would both be better served going out separate ways.
Adios, and thank you for your substantive thoughts.
@Roxanne Starr said:
It's amusing and kinda sad at the same time. There are those who will stick up for Obama no matter how pathetically inept he is. I think those who have been doing that on this thread are just regurgitating what their professors have told them...professors who have no idea what the real world is all about.
It is quite funny that you consider the places from where you get your information to be somehow accurate descriptors of the "real world," while places that liberals get their information, people even you admit to be educated, are somehow out of touch.
Demonizing education and educators is a bad call. That stance equates to a support of ignorance. That isn't a position that anyone, conservative or liberal, ought to be taking.
@Hatutzeraze said:
@Roxanne Starr said:
It's amusing and kinda sad at the same time. There are those who will stick up for Obama no matter how pathetically inept he is. I think those who have been doing that on this thread are just regurgitating what their professors have told them...professors who have no idea what the real world is all about.
It is quite funny that you consider the places from where you get your information to be somehow accurate descriptors of the "real world," while places that liberals get their information, people even you admit to be educated, are somehow out of touch.
Demonizing education and educators is a bad call. That stance equates to a support of ignorance. That isn't a position that anyone, conservative or liberal, ought to be taking.
I doubt Roxanne was trying to say education is bad. Rather, she was saying that liberal college professors that constantly shove their views down their student's throats are bad. Throughout my many years of college, I had one conservative professor, and I recall him making one conservative point all semester. On the other hand, I had over a dozen openly liberal and hostile college professors who scoffed at all conservative opinions. Sorry, let me be accurate, all of the liberal college professors pushed their world view while teaching, but not all of the openly scoffed at conservative ideas, but many of them did.
@PsychoKnights said:
@Hatutzeraze said:
@Roxanne Starr said:
It's amusing and kinda sad at the same time. There are those who will stick up for Obama no matter how pathetically inept he is. I think those who have been doing that on this thread are just regurgitating what their professors have told them...professors who have no idea what the real world is all about.
It is quite funny that you consider the places from where you get your information to be somehow accurate descriptors of the "real world," while places that liberals get their information, people even you admit to be educated, are somehow out of touch.
Demonizing education and educators is a bad call. That stance equates to a support of ignorance. That isn't a position that anyone, conservative or liberal, ought to be taking.
I doubt Roxanne was trying to say education is bad. Rather, she was saying that liberal college professors that constantly shove their views down their student's throats are bad. Throughout my many years of college, I had one conservative professor, and I recall him making one conservative point all semester. On the other hand, I had over a dozen openly liberal and hostile college professors who scoffed at all conservative opinions. Sorry, let me be accurate, all of the liberal college professors pushed their world view while teaching, but not all of the openly scoffed at conservative ideas, but many of them did.
Thanks for making my point clear, Psycho. I was very ill the past couple of days with a urinary tract infection, and am just now well enough to check out what happened in my absence.
Isaac keeps calling me a xenophobe, which is absurd...since I, myself, was foreign born. I just want the President of the United States to be better than just anyone one runs into on the street. I want him to be like a Marco Rubio, who has a profound love for the principles that made the USA the greatest country in history...and the free market system that made it that way.
@Roxanne Starr said:
@PsychoKnights said:
@Hatutzeraze said:
@Roxanne Starr said:
It's amusing and kinda sad at the same time. There are those who will stick up for Obama no matter how pathetically inept he is. I think those who have been doing that on this thread are just regurgitating what their professors have told them...professors who have no idea what the real world is all about.
It is quite funny that you consider the places from where you get your information to be somehow accurate descriptors of the "real world," while places that liberals get their information, people even you admit to be educated, are somehow out of touch.
Demonizing education and educators is a bad call. That stance equates to a support of ignorance. That isn't a position that anyone, conservative or liberal, ought to be taking.
I doubt Roxanne was trying to say education is bad. Rather, she was saying that liberal college professors that constantly shove their views down their student's throats are bad. Throughout my many years of college, I had one conservative professor, and I recall him making one conservative point all semester. On the other hand, I had over a dozen openly liberal and hostile college professors who scoffed at all conservative opinions. Sorry, let me be accurate, all of the liberal college professors pushed their world view while teaching, but not all of the openly scoffed at conservative ideas, but many of them did.
Thanks for making my point clear, Psycho. I was very ill the past couple of days with a urinary tract infection, and am just now well enough to check out what happened in my absence.
Isaac keeps calling me a xenophobe, which is absurd...since I, myself, was foreign born. I just want the President of the United States to be better than just anyone one runs into on the street. I want him to be like a Marco Rubio, who has a profound love for the principles that made the USA the greatest country in history...and the free market system that made it that way.
No problem. Sucks about the urinary tract infection. I had one of those a long time ago, and I still remember the pain. Like peeing fire.
(sigh) I tried to have good conversations with Isaac and Phantom, but I don't think it is possible. They are either unwilling or unable to be intellectually honest. I would not suggest wasting time trying to reason with either of them.
I don't know much about Marco Rubio, but I'm with you on the free market.
Where are you from?
@PsychoKnights said:
@Roxanne Starr said:
@PsychoKnights said:
@Hatutzeraze said:
@Roxanne Starr said:
It's amusing and kinda sad at the same time. There are those who will stick up for Obama no matter how pathetically inept he is. I think those who have been doing that on this thread are just regurgitating what their professors have told them...professors who have no idea what the real world is all about.
It is quite funny that you consider the places from where you get your information to be somehow accurate descriptors of the "real world," while places that liberals get their information, people even you admit to be educated, are somehow out of touch.
Demonizing education and educators is a bad call. That stance equates to a support of ignorance. That isn't a position that anyone, conservative or liberal, ought to be taking.
I doubt Roxanne was trying to say education is bad. Rather, she was saying that liberal college professors that constantly shove their views down their student's throats are bad. Throughout my many years of college, I had one conservative professor, and I recall him making one conservative point all semester. On the other hand, I had over a dozen openly liberal and hostile college professors who scoffed at all conservative opinions. Sorry, let me be accurate, all of the liberal college professors pushed their world view while teaching, but not all of the openly scoffed at conservative ideas, but many of them did.
Thanks for making my point clear, Psycho. I was very ill the past couple of days with a urinary tract infection, and am just now well enough to check out what happened in my absence.
Isaac keeps calling me a xenophobe, which is absurd...since I, myself, was foreign born. I just want the President of the United States to be better than just anyone one runs into on the street. I want him to be like a Marco Rubio, who has a profound love for the principles that made the USA the greatest country in history...and the free market system that made it that way.
No problem. Sucks about the urinary tract infection. I had one of those a long time ago, and I still remember the pain. Like peeing fire.
(sigh) I tried to have good conversations with Isaac and Phantom, but I don't think it is possible. They are either unwilling or unable to be intellectually honest. I would not suggest wasting time trying to reason with either of them.
I don't know much about Marco Rubio, but I'm with you on the free market.
Where are you from?
I had never had one of those infections before, but I know that they are common in old cats. LOL! Yes, very painful...and pretty much constant...since one has no control over urinating just about constantly.
I don't know that much about Rubio either, other than the news clips I've seen of him...but everything I've ever heard him say is testament that he is an honorable man who is appreciative that he had the opportunity to be an American.
I was born in France of German parents. I am not even a 1st-Generation American.
@Roxanne Starr: Ooooh. So you actually work in the industry. Awesome!
What are you working on currently?
I suggest wariness of all politicians. Anything that wants to hang out in a viper pit is probably a snake.
Any strong feelings on the European financial crisis, or are you too far removed from all that?
@PsychoKnights said:
@Roxanne Starr: What are you working on currently?
Any strong feelings on the European financial crisis, or are you too far removed from all that?
http://www.comicvine.com/roxanne-starr/26-27486/a-sneak-peek-at-the-new-mystery-project/92-687198/
At first I didn't really have any strong feelings about the EU...but that hasn't worked out very well has it? Obama loves the concept of the EU. That why I told Isaac that Obama won't be satisfied with his total financial destruction of the US until this whole nation turns into Greece.
@Roxanne Starr said:
@PsychoKnights said:
@Roxanne Starr: What are you working on currently?
Any strong feelings on the European financial crisis, or are you too far removed from all that?
http://www.comicvine.com/roxanne-starr/26-27486/a-sneak-peek-at-the-new-mystery-project/92-687198/
At first I didn't really have any strong feelings about the EU...but that hasn't worked out very well has it? Obama loves the concept of the EU. That why I told Isaac that Obama won't be satisfied with his total financial destruction of the US until this whole nation turns into Greece.
He is certainly following the path of Greece. Do you think Obama's motives are sinister or that he is just blind to the obvious harm he is doing?
I'm generally for keeping power as close to the people as possible, and smaller is usually better when it comes to that therefore I am cynical of the E.U. in general. Greece, and some other nations, have certainly screwed things up royally.
Interesting. I saw that the other day, but I was not sure what to make of it. Is this an independent project, or are you working for a non-mainstream comic company.
@PsychoKnights said:
@Roxanne Starr said:
@PsychoKnights said:
@Roxanne Starr: What are you working on currently?
Any strong feelings on the European financial crisis, or are you too far removed from all that?
http://www.comicvine.com/roxanne-starr/26-27486/a-sneak-peek-at-the-new-mystery-project/92-687198/
At first I didn't really have any strong feelings about the EU...but that hasn't worked out very well has it? Obama loves the concept of the EU. That why I told Isaac that Obama won't be satisfied with his total financial destruction of the US until this whole nation turns into Greece.
He is certainly following the path of Greece. Do you think Obama's motives are sinister or that he is just blind to the obvious harm he is doing?
I'm generally for keeping power as close to the people as possible, and smaller is usually better when it comes to that therefore I am cynical of the E.U. in general. Greece, and some other nations, have certainly screwed things up royally.
Interesting. I saw that the other day, but I was not sure what to make of it. Is this an independent project, or are you working for a non-mainstream comic company.
I think Obama's motives are sinister, but he doesn't. In his mind he thinks he is doing the right thing, in his own Anti-Imperialist mind.
As far as Flip Flap Flop goes...yes, it is an independent project. But more than that, it is the first of many future projects that will have comic book marketing done in a whole new way. In the future, "Big Companies" (and all the Middlemen that go with them) will all go out of business...and comic projects will be handed straight from the creators to the consumers...so there is no one making money who doesn't deserve to.
@PsychoKnights said:
@Vaeternus:
To be fair, both conservatives and liberals often used petty attacks rather than respond substantively.
@Vaeternus:
That was a very amusing and pretty accurate summary of AtPhantom's reasoning on Obama being a conservative...though actually, I'm not sure he's doing much reasoning.
Also, I would not try to reason with Vance Astro. He's not interested in discussing things. You are right that the polls show them neck and neck.
Exactly, of course I've seen both righties and lefties go at it... although just from my personal experience thus far I've noticed liberals seem to refer to the petty insults far more then conservatives. Example, you ever say "I'm not too fond of Obama's policies" then someone immediately accuses you of being a racist? lol it's happened to me so many times with people in this very topic in the past as well as on youtube. Yet, I'll never mention anything about race, color etc just policies or that I don't like their character, way someone's handling something. I won't ever accuse someone of something unless it's true or I see hypocrisy on their end. All good dude lol, I find it funny when people put words in my mouth. You know it's legal to kill someone technically if they're trespassing on your property (even if they're there for harmful reasons) but we must treat those that don't belong "civilized"! lol
Thanks, exactly that's why I provided the links. This whole "Obama is destroying Romney in the polls" I don't know where people are getting this from.
@Roxanne Starr said:
@PsychoKnights said:
@Roxanne Starr said:
@PsychoKnights said:
@Roxanne Starr: What are you working on currently?
Any strong feelings on the European financial crisis, or are you too far removed from all that?
http://www.comicvine.com/roxanne-starr/26-27486/a-sneak-peek-at-the-new-mystery-project/92-687198/
At first I didn't really have any strong feelings about the EU...but that hasn't worked out very well has it? Obama loves the concept of the EU. That why I told Isaac that Obama won't be satisfied with his total financial destruction of the US until this whole nation turns into Greece.
He is certainly following the path of Greece. Do you think Obama's motives are sinister or that he is just blind to the obvious harm he is doing?
I'm generally for keeping power as close to the people as possible, and smaller is usually better when it comes to that therefore I am cynical of the E.U. in general. Greece, and some other nations, have certainly screwed things up royally.
Interesting. I saw that the other day, but I was not sure what to make of it. Is this an independent project, or are you working for a non-mainstream comic company.
I think Obama's motives are sinister, but he doesn't. In his mind he thinks he is doing the right thing, in his own Anti-Imperialist mind.
As far as Flip Flap Flop goes...yes, it is an independent project. But more than that, it is the first of many future projects that will have comic book marketing done in a whole new way. In the future, "Big Companies" (and all the Middlemen that go with them) will all go out of business...and comic projects will be handed straight from the creators to the consumers...so there is no one making money who doesn't deserve to.
Awe, hope you feel better. Yeah, same here I wasn't born in America either but came here and got my citizenship legally. This is why it annoys me when people tell me "why aren't you liberal, for illegal immigrants from all over" uhh because I did it the right way, legally? So my question is, what makes anyone else special? Now Obama is allowing illegals to drive...gotta love that, what happens when one of them kills someone? Such a chode lol.
@Vaeternus said:
Awe, hope you feel better. Yeah, same here I wasn't born in America either but came here and got my citizenship legally. This is why it annoys me when people tell me "why aren't you liberal, for illegal immigrants from all over" uhh because I did it the right way, legally? So my question is, what makes anyone else special? Now Obama is allowing illegals to drive...gotta love that, what happens when one of them kills someone? Such a chode lol.
I'm feeling a lot better...thanks, Pete!
And as far as illegal drivers killing people...I don't know it happens much in New York, but here in the South where we are closer to the Mexican border, we have illegals who can't speak the language and don't know the rules of the road killing people left and right. And in more than half the cases of hit-and-run these days, the perp is an illegal.
@Roxanne Starr
Interesting. So you are basically saying that the internet and other technologies will allow groups of talented individuals to work together and bypass the big companies to bring comics directly to the consumer? Cool. Have you ever worked for one of the big companies? I'm curious what is is like.
Do you believe Obama is trying to undermine the United States' power in order to form a more equitable balance of power between the nations?
@Vaeternus:
I guess they stick to only left sources. I didn't even find Obama winning when looking at a variety of sources. At most, Obama was up by two points, but most the polls showed a one point spread.
I do not understand how the comment about trespassing fits into anything.
I also tend to find more liberals going for the offensive attacks more often, but since I stand a more conservative position, it makes sense that I would encounter more liberal hostility.
Your comment about attacks in youtube comments made me think of an old post I did on facebook. I'm going to see if I can find it and make a new thread.
@Roxanne Starr said:
@Vaeternus said:
Awe, hope you feel better. Yeah, same here I wasn't born in America either but came here and got my citizenship legally. This is why it annoys me when people tell me "why aren't you liberal, for illegal immigrants from all over" uhh because I did it the right way, legally? So my question is, what makes anyone else special? Now Obama is allowing illegals to drive...gotta love that, what happens when one of them kills someone? Such a chode lol.
I'm feeling a lot better...thanks, Pete!
And as far as illegal drivers killing people...I don't know it happens much in New York, but here in the South where we are closer to the Mexican border, we have illegals who can't speak the language and don't know the rules of the road killing people left and right. And in more than half the cases of hit-and-run these days, the perp is an illegal.
Oh I've heard, it's sad. Here in NYC we have a lot of illegals from all over in general, not just mexico but asia, russia etc you name it I've seen it. My tenant's marriage I'm sure is fake and is only legal to make him legal here, the "wife" has different last names and first names and he has the same name. What's up with that? lol Think they're from romania or russia(one or the other) I mean what the hell, right? I'm surprised the libs aren't pushing for illegals to "vote" if it hasn't happened already.
@PsychoKnights said:
@Roxanne Starr
Interesting. So you are basically saying that the internet and other technologies will allow groups of talented individuals to work together and bypass the big companies to bring comics directly to the consumer? Cool. Have you ever worked for one of the big companies? I'm curious what is is like.
Do you believe Obama is trying to undermine the United States' power in order to form a more equitable balance of power between the nations?
@Vaeternus:
I guess they stick to only left sources. I didn't even find Obama winning when looking at a variety of sources. At most, Obama was up by two points, but most the polls showed a one point spread.
I do not understand how the comment about trespassing fits into anything.
I also tend to find more liberals going for the offensive attacks more often, but since I stand a more conservative position, it makes sense that I would encounter more liberal hostility.
Your comment about attacks in youtube comments made me think of an old post I did on facebook. I'm going to see if I can find it and make a new thread.
Pretty much my diagnosis as well lol. If you read up via your own research now, several links, articles will tell you it's a dead heat or one barely leading the other.
As for the trespassing, I'm merely using that as a same principle point as to why liberals will defend "those who even do things illegally" whether it's coming here illegally, someone trespassing being defended or in this case "terrorists" getting a slap on the wrist. I mean, like you said before...they're not here with good intentions, probably not here legally(some may, but others aren't), trying to kill people so why NOT shoot a terrorist on site? Afterall that can be considered trespassing since they don't belong there doing ill intentions.
Oh of course I expect the same thing but after a while, you know the whole thing with "oh you're a bigot, racist blah, blah" just gets old real fast. If anything I think those who instantly accuse conservatives or libertarians or anyone opposed to liberal views are indeed "racists" themselves otherwise why bring that up? Ever see diehard 3? lol when Bruce Willis's character works with Samuel L's? The whole movie Samuel thinks Bruce's character hates him because "he's black" mean while Bruce never mentioned race, Sam did constantly and even admits it in the beginning of the movie telling his kids to not depend or ask help from the white man lol. Now, the movie is fiction obviously the but message there is real, true and happens all the time out there. People sadly use that as a crutch for argument when discussing politics. "oh you don't like this guy, you must be racist" get the hell out of here with that nonsense, no I don't like this guy because he's an idiot with flawed policies lol.
lol Oh boy yeah dude, FB is just as bad as YT if not worse. I have a friend on mine, she's a big conservative, every time she posts Obama's hypocrisy. Her liberal friends come out in full force lol.
@Vaeternus: http://www.comicvine.com/forums/off-topic/5/dumb-youtube-comments/690376/
That's a link to a post I just made compiling a lot of stupid comments from liberals. Enjoy.
Yeah, I tend to believe that those who make arguments about things all the time that have no real relevance are the ones who have issues with that thing. For instance, how many preachers have fallen into sexual scandal after constantly preaching against sexual morality. They think about it all the time because it is THEIR hang up. Similarly, the liberals are often quick to condemn conservatives as racists, yet the only party advocating that we treat people differently on the basis of race is the Democrats. Affirmative action and hate crime legislation come to mind immediately. There is also President Obama's comment that he does not support reparations for slavery because it does not go far enough.
To be fair, none of the liberals that have discussed things with me in this thread have accused me of racism.
The erosion of self-defense rights is ridiculous. It drives me crazy that I could see someone outside my house burning my cat at the steak or using a baseball bat to smash up my car, yet I have no right to shoot him. That's stupid.
@PsychoKnights said:
@Vaeternus: http://www.comicvine.com/forums/off-topic/5/dumb-youtube-comments/690376/
That's a link to a post I just made compiling a lot of stupid comments from liberals. Enjoy.
Yeah, I tend to believe that those who make arguments about things all the time that have no real relevance are the ones who have issues with that thing. For instance, how many preachers have fallen into sexual scandal after constantly preaching against sexual morality. They think about it all the time because it is THEIR hang up. Similarly, the liberals are often quick to condemn conservatives as racists, yet the only party advocating that we treat people differently on the basis of race is the Democrats. Affirmative action and hate crime legislation come to mind immediately. There is also President Obama's comment that he does not support reparations for slavery because it does not go far enough.
To be fair, none of the liberals that have discussed things with me in this thread have accused me of racism.
The erosion of self-defense rights is ridiculous. It drives me crazy that I could see someone outside my house burning my cat at the steak or using a baseball bat to smash up my car, yet I have no right to shoot him. That's stupid.
Yeah, I hear ya lol. Wow, that looks like comedy gold right there with your link ;)
For the preacher thing, yeah especially when they target Catholic Priests(because they're the only pedos in the world) and I think they all get a bad rap due to a few, stupid incidents. It's funny, you can bash the church..and priests but don't bash the President, or you're racist...you prove my point exactly, well said dude. Couldn't have said it better myself, so you see where I'm coming from. Oh yeah, I hear ya well in this topic(nobody has done so) but let's just say some of the same users in here have accused me of such in the past for disagreeing with Obama.
I know, I hear ya. It's like I always say, "It's not guns that kill people, it's people that kill people" It is stupid indeed.
BTW, found this photo from a friend's update on their FB. So true, isn't it?
@Vaeternus:
Still waiting to hear your latest video, Pete!!! Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr...
I showed you mine (and least as much as I could), now it's your turn to show me yours!
@Roxanne Starr said:
I had never had one of those infections before, but I know that they are common in old cats. LOL! Yes, very painful...and pretty much constant...since one has no control over urinating just about constantly.
Well that stinks. I'm glad you are now past that.
@PsychoKnights said:
@Roxanne Starr
Interesting. So you are basically saying that the internet and other technologies will allow groups of talented individuals to work together and bypass the big companies to bring comics directly to the consumer? Cool. Have you ever worked for one of the big companies? I'm curious what is is like.
Do you believe Obama is trying to undermine the United States' power in order to form a more equitable balance of power between the nations?
Yes...creators will no longer need big companies to pimp their stuff. LOL! Yes, I've lettered for dozens of companies both big and small. I guess that Wikipedia article kinda dwells on the independents that I have worked on. Working for Marvel and DC is fine. At least one is likely to get paid in a timely manner. But all you will ever get is a page rate out of the big companies. You can't even dream of getting a cut of the action for just being a letterer.
Obama wants the US to BE like Europe...socialistic. From each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs. With no incentive to be excellent for someone with an entrepreneurial spirit.
@PsychoKnights said:
I agree.
Bummer - that wasn't at all what I meant to say. Must have been when I reworded it to be a little nicer about it.
Correction: It's hard to believe genuine conversation is the intent of this thread.
I wrote the following to you on page 1.
“I will respond substanatively to your post IF your paragraph was meant in sincerity. If it was serious, then you are saying that you agree with my points and that Obama is hypocritical and wrong, but conservatives are just as bad. If that is the case, then we can have a good conversation about things.
On the other hand, if your first paragraph was just meant as sarcasm, then I see no point in substantively addressing your points since you never substantively addressed mine. If you were just being sarcastic, you basically said, "Yeah, yeah, but look at all the bad things these guys have done!" I would be happy to talk about the faults of the right, but I'm not going to waste the time if you are the kind of person who cannot admit to faults in your own camp.
I hope you understand my reasoning and that this does not sound to snooty.”
So the initial response to my sarcasm that went over your head? Because the intent wasn't just to point my finger at the other crowd - but the actually individuals you should be cautious of - the ones putting them in power.
Yeah, you obviously didn’t look it Black Liberation Theology. I’m not surprised. You’ve already made it clear that you stick your fingers in your ears when you don’t want to hear something.
(eye roll) Yes because politics and religion have never been combined before. It’s clearly an utterly absurd idea.
You're trying to spin something into something it isn't. Marxism isn't a faith - that is what I gathered from your response. Though it is tough to type with my fingers in my ears.
Marxism is Marxism - it isn't going to be something you can worship. Trying to say otherwise is being dishonest and dishonesty isn't something I care for. Call something what it is.
I was giving information and hoping that people could discuss it from there. People have given examples of conservative hypocricy, and in many cases, I have agreed with them. I am willing to discuss opposing viewpoints, but yes, I am arguing for my viewpoint. There is no reason I should have to have an open ended topic to get worthwhile responses as long as other people would extend the same willingness to admit faults on their own side of the aisle.
The reality of the situation is - this thread and any discussion within it is entirely pointless to the participants. You can't honestly think you're changing anyone's minds with that heavy-slew-of opinion / perception and no one is going to change your mind. So the question becomes 'why' - in the sense what is your intent. And that's exactly why I provided that brief summary of essentially what your opening post was about - I doubt the sincerity behind this thread. If your intent was for any meaningful conversation to be had - this wouldn't have been how you started it - instead looks like you want people to argue with you.
You asked what makes Obama different than conservatives in this specific area, I told you that conservatives are more generous. That is what separates them in some cases, but obviously it varies from individual to individual.
This was the question: (Quoting on these boards is all wonky these days - so sorry for something that isn't more reflective of how it actually looks in the post.)
You: Some people are still worshiping at the cult of Obama, and there is really no reason to see this man as a moral leader. Like most leftists, he preaches generosity but does not practice it. (grins)
Me: How does that separate him from his counter parts on the 'right'(given he's a lefty in your context).
Instead of measuring it against his actual counterparts - other politicians on the right - your providing this general consensus of Liberals vs Conservatives in some sort of generosity competition. More or less sidestepping what I actually want to know.
No disagreement with how that little bit of info you keep tossing around varies from individual to individual; one of the easiest things you can probably do to save someone's life is donate blood - I honestly can't get a drop out of friends in the military or air-force (the ones that at least call themselves conservative in the political leanings). Although I'd imagine your generosity competition has more to do with actual revenue than anything someone can consider an act of generosity to another person. The reality of actually gathering that kind of information would be a staggering effort.
I think troll is a word people throw out when they do not like what others are saying. I generally try to avoid it.
That isn't the context I'd use it in. Whenever you see someone intentionally being a nuisance in some form, whether that is taking something out of context they're saying, making something entirely up or completely sidestepping what your saying as they trail off in another direction that further creates more conflict. Maybe even avoiding arguments altogether - MKF30 on the other page edited one of his posts, 19 hours later, likely in the hopes I wouldn't notice it and in a year - no one won't be able to see when it was edited and it looks like I'm just not bothering to respond.
Or you can chalk it up to someone making an account to specifically send you a PM or write on your wall to insult you before inevitably being banned after insulting more people on the boards.A solid real-life example of what I'd call trolling could be when, say, a politician knowing full well what a bill will be named, making another bill with said name, to prevent the other bill from actually being introduced - all for the purposes of being a nuisance. I generally don't nonchalantly toss it out to describe individuals.
I just thought it was ironic that you considered OP troll bait, yet you were one of three people who have continually posted on this forum. If the shoe fits, wear it. I really don’t feel troll is a useful term myself.
Not so much continuosly on this forum, sometimes in threads like this - but that isn't remotely consistent. For example if MKF30 hadn't just made a new account after his previous ban (that and his 'friends' account) I wouldn't have felt to continue posting here and likely Phantom would be the only bothering to argue with you; rather than wasting his time with MKF30.
If you posted an opinion OP that was negative about Romney, would that mean that there would be no positive/healthy discussion possible off of that? Of course not!
I would say no, at least if people actually had a discussion (mainly because it would turn int Obama vs Romney nonsense or just Obama). Outside that potential scenario you might see some puns about him, then the thread would fall into the pit of threads no one gives a damn about. Not sure if your "off course not!" is sarcasm, if it isn't your agreeing with me that this thread is poised to have unhealthy discussion, which honestly with a bit of alteration could have been far more avoidable with the potential to have some measure of positive discussion.
You seem to be implying that I cannot state an opinion and expect reasonable responses.
Depends on the opinion, this one clearly not - as it invites trolling. At least it does in this environment.
In my view, there is a large difference between not always living up to your own standards and consistently going against your own standards. The latter is hypocrisy, the former is humanity, but you are free to have your own understanding.
When you aren't living up to the standards that you champion - that reads as hypocrisy - it doesn't quite matter if it is once or twice (which it will be far more than that - without doubt). But if you feel you disagree, go for it.
No, I am saying that most politicians are hypocrites, but that does not necessarily make them stupid. I could find nearly as many examples of flip-flopping on political issues for Barack Obama, but I would not call President Obama a stupid man.
You said this:
All of that makes him a hypocrite, but I do not see how it makes him particularly stupid.
But in-fact when someone is acting an a hypocritical manner - it can make them look like a moron. Calling someone a hypocrite doesn't invalidate the air of stupidity pervasive throughout the entirety of the situation.
The dog incident happened in 1983. He was not under tight scrutiny at the time, and even if it were a recent incident,
For some reason I was under the impression it was more recent. While it may appear cruel by out standards today (and maybe even then) it isn't entirely as relevant as it should be. Although the argument:
A 12 hour trip from the US to Canada, that has this reaction from the animal in question, that doesn't at all sound too pleasurable to the animal in question.
I have no problem with the behavior, and I don’t think most people would. I would assume they either did not have enough room in the car. He was in a sealed dog container. It was not like he was being beaten by the wind.
Then I suppose you don't have a dog or pet of any kind and if most people didn't care - this story wouldn't be haunting Romney to this day. Either he should have found room or had the animal properly taken care of - not make it, as it clearly did, suffer on a 12 hour trip to Canada. I really don't see how anyone can defend this behavior - sorry.
Yep, that’s dishonest all right. Thank you for sharing. However, spin does not equal stupidity. You know that almost every politician does crap like that, right? Does it make them creeps? Yes. Does it make them stupid? No. Barack Obama's "McCain can't type" add comes to mind.
The idea no one would question him on this ad and this response of clearly not giving a damn doesn't make him look all that intelligent to me. Not so much the ad itself.
Can you give me some evidence that Romney is responsible for the hecklers? Just because they were Romney supporters does not mean he or his campaign had anything to do with sending them there. You must know that there are douche bags on both sides of aisle who do these sorts of things, and I think it is fair to say that the left is far more skilled in the disruptive protest than the right.
That was part of his "Sauce for the Goose is Sauce for the Gander" defense:
“Many of the events I go to, there are large groups of, if you will, Obama supporters there heckling me. And at some point you say, ‘You know what, sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander,’” Romney said.
“If they’re going to be heckling us, why, we’re not going to sit back and play by very different rules. If the president is going to have his people coming to my rallies and heckling, why, we’ll show them that, you know, we conservatives have the same kind of capacity he does.” -http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/05/obama-campaign-calls-romney-hecklers-juvenile/
That would be his response to be questioned about it - his believe that President Obama's campaign is sending people to heckle him - and while there was several instances of heckling prior to said response from Governor Romney - there's nothing to indicate it's from his opponent's campaign. He's had no issue admitting having done this. Hecklers are a pain - however a campaign sending them with the intent to be disruptive is eye-brow raising.
I don’t think I am being unclear in my writing, so I am confused about how I am so frequently misunderstood. I meant that I would not be surprised if Romeny’s campaign ads are full of lies. I’m not a fan of Romney. I think he and Obama are both sleaze balls.
There was a measure of ambiguity of what you were referring to.
Terrorists are worse than dogs. Dogs have no real morality. When they kill, they do it out of instinct. A terrorist on the other hand is human and has the capacity to reason, yet he decides that it would best serve his goal to strap a bomb to a young man or woman, send them into a crowded marketplace, and blow everyone to H***. I have much more compassion for the dog, and I don't even really like dogs.
Morality is far from set in stone(namely the difference between our moral compasses); their morality either doesn't pose much of an issue towards their actions or they feel that is simply what must be done. I'd say it's more of an intelligence issue for them, rather than a moral issue; generally strapping a bomb to one's self is counter productive to imposing any real change - without realization of this - it's just idiots blowing themselves up. Although I guess it's a good measure of weeding out the stupid.
I don’t think there is much more that can be learned from our exchange. You used sarcasm out of the gate and refused to address my original post in any substantive way. Several times in your latest comment alone, you have suggested that I am not actually trying to have a good conversation with people. You dismiss the concept of Black Liberation Theology without consideration even though it answers your question about Obama’s religion.
Adios, and thank you for your substantive thoughts.
There wasn't much to be learned to begin with; your quite happy with your perceptions and those perceptions aren't reflective of mine - to the point I questioned your sincerity to begin with. It wasn't a question to begin with towards the President's religious faith.
You seem unable or more likely unwilling to grasp the simplest of points such as the differences between liberals and conservatives on financial generosity.
Two things:
You frequently leap to conclusion such as suggesting that I do not believe that hypocrisy and stupidity can go hand in hand.
Frequently? Really?
Though you have provided some good thoughts such as more information on Romney’s hypocrisy, you are missing a lot more than you are hitting. I’m guessing that my original instincts were correct and you simply lack the willingness to see anything that looks bad for your political views. Regardless, I think we would both be better served going out separate ways.
I thought it was more so my being living here in reality, because your far too quick to look at the President as the puppet master, rather than the individuals that control your life. But I guess it's all just personal bias.
Bravo.
@PsychoKnights said:
@Hatutzeraze said:
@Roxanne Starr said:
It's amusing and kinda sad at the same time. There are those who will stick up for Obama no matter how pathetically inept he is. I think those who have been doing that on this thread are just regurgitating what their professors have told them...professors who have no idea what the real world is all about.
It is quite funny that you consider the places from where you get your information to be somehow accurate descriptors of the "real world," while places that liberals get their information, people even you admit to be educated, are somehow out of touch.
Demonizing education and educators is a bad call. That stance equates to a support of ignorance. That isn't a position that anyone, conservative or liberal, ought to be taking.
I doubt Roxanne was trying to say education is bad. Rather, she was saying that liberal college professors that constantly shove their views down their student's throats are bad. Throughout my many years of college, I had one conservative professor, and I recall him making one conservative point all semester. On the other hand, I had over a dozen openly liberal and hostile college professors who scoffed at all conservative opinions. Sorry, let me be accurate, all of the liberal college professors pushed their world view while teaching, but not all of the openly scoffed at conservative ideas, but many of them did.
She didn't say liberal college professors. And apparently your experience with "Liberal" college is more or less defined as them being hostile.
@Roxanne Starr said:
Isaac keeps calling me a xenophobe, which is absurd...since I, myself, was foreign born.
You're openly saying four years outside the country, as well as being born in Hawaii / being in Hawaii defaults someone from being from your perception a 'real' President. How is that not incredibly xenophobic?
And being foreign born defaults one from being xenophobic?
I just want the President of the United States to be better than just anyone one runs into on the street. I want him to be like a Marco Rubio, who has a profound love for the principles that made the USA the greatest country in history...and the free market system that made it that way.
This wasn't your justification for him not being a 'real' president. Your previous posts are focused on justifying this perception that the President is a 'threatening outsider' - one you have a great deal of fear and hate towards.
@PsychoKnights said:
(sigh) I tried to have good conversations with Isaac and Phantom, but I don't think it is possible. They are either unwilling or unable to be intellectually honest. I would not suggest wasting time trying to reason with either of them.
It's clearly a problem on our end.
@Vaeternus said:
Don't suppose you could find that quote President Obama says above his head, I know full well you wouldn't dare criticize someone for something they haven't said.
BTW do you want me to respond to:
I figure since you edited one of your posts nearly 20 hours later, to avoid me actually getting a PM or even seeing it - that you wanted me to not see / reply to it. I know how much you enjoy having the last word as it justify's your 'debating' skills.
@isaac_clarke said:
@Roxanne Starr said:
Isaac keeps calling me a xenophobe, which is absurd...since I, myself, was foreign born.
Your openly saying four years outside the country, as well as being born in Hawaii / being in Hawaii defaults someone from being from your perception a 'real' President. How is that not incredibly xenophobic?
And being foreign born defaults one from being xenophobic?
I just want the President of the United States to be better than just anyone one runs into on the street. I want him to be like a Marco Rubio, who has a profound love for the principles that made the USA the greatest country in history...and the free market system that made it that way.This wasn't your justification for him not being a 'real' president from your perception. Your previous posts justify him being this 'threatening outsider' from your perception.
O.K., I'll stop talking about who was and wasn't born in this country...since you were the one who brought up the whole xenophobia issue to begin with. Let's just get back on point and YOU tell ME how Obama's economic policies haven't been anything less than a dismal failure.
@Roxanne Starr said:
O.K., I'll stop talking about who was and wasn't born in this country...since you were the one who brought up the whole xenophobia issue to begin with.
I brought it up as an honest response to this perception you have. To me it sounds like text-book Xenophobia.
Let's just get back on point andYOUtellMEhow Obama's economic policies haven't been anythinglessthan a dismal failure.
Few things:
@isaac_clarke said:
@Roxanne Starr said:
O.K., I'll stop talking about who was and wasn't born in this country...since you were the one who brought up the whole xenophobia issue to begin with.
I brought it up as an honest response to this perception you have. To me it sounds like text-book Xenophobia.
Let's just get back on point and YOU tell ME how Obama's economic policies haven't been anything less than a dismal failure.Few things:
- Is that the point of this thread? Or really what we were discussing in the first place?
- I think it's more important for you to first tell me how would you define his policy as a dismal failure. If your referring to banks not being frivolous with loans to individuals, after their previous practices required major government intervention to keep the banks from bringing the entire economy down with them, I'm not entirely sure I'm inclined to bother. No offense.
You're right! The topic is Obama's character.
I entered the thread late and didn't even read the OP until after I had posted...in my drifting manner.
But that being said, to return to the topic, "Obama's Character." Well, Obama's character sucks!
@Roxanne Starr said:
You're right! The topic is Obama's character.
I entered the thread late and didn't even read the OP until after I had posted...in my drifting manner.
But that being said, to return to the topic, "Obama's Character." Well, Obama's character sucks!
And I thought this would be your moment to shine, oh well. I guess I'll check back later if something actually interesting is posted here, rather than the usual crowd chatting among themselves.
@isaac_clarke: He dissed his own brother...he's a scumbag.
@Roxanne Starr said:
@isaac_clarke: He dissed his own brother...he's a scumbag.
First thing that comes to mind and speaking as a brother to a brother; I've punched my brother square in the face and have had fights were we have thrown each other around the room or into walls, with little regard to anything or anyone outside our fights. Under the same breath I'd happily give him both my lungs should he ever require them. And I've actually known my younger brother for most of my life. So bickering between brothers doesn't particularly move me one way or another.
And from what I understand of the relationship between these two half-brothers, they've never had one and neither of them care enough to have one. One wonders why the President would even speak of his half-brother, given they are more or less strangers; much less insult him. More context would help.
@isaac_clarke said:
@Roxanne Starr said:
@isaac_clarke: He dissed his own brother...he's a scumbag.
First thing that comes to mind and speaking as a brother to a brother; I've punched my brother square in the face and have had fights were we have thrown each other around the room or into walls, with little regard to anything or anyone outside our fights. Under the same breath I'd happily give him both my lungs should he ever require them. And I've actually known my younger brother for most of my life. So bickering between brothers doesn't particularly move me one way or another.
And from what I understand of the relationship between these two half-brothers, they've never had one and neither of them care enough to have one. One wonders why the President would even speak of his half-brother, given they are more or less strangers; much less insult him. More context would help.
He makes a big deal about his father. He even wrote a book about him (well, Bill Ayres did, but Obama claims to have). This dude was also fathered by his dad and lives in Barack's beloved Kenya.
That would be reason enough in Barack's politically-correct noggin to give George a few bucks.
Barack's a scumbag any way you look at it.
There may be some aspect of truth to this? I don't know, but it is is irrevocably the case that the right controls the public consensus when it comes to insulting catchphrases. Remember the World Trade Center Mosque? Which was neither at the World Trade Center nor a mosque. Or how about the terms bleeding heart liberal, big L liberal, tree hugger, feminazi, hug-a-thug? Or how about the (false) statement that not all Muslims are terrorists, but all terrorist are Muslims? The right's ability to control keywords in the elections serves it well, and these phrases are politically charged and to many quite insulting.Exactly, of course I've seen both righties and lefties go at it... although just from my personal experience thus far I've noticed liberals seem to refer to the petty insults far more then conservatives. Example, you ever say "I'm not too fond of Obama's policies" then someone immediately accuses you of being a racist?
@Roxanne Starr said:
@isaac_clarke said:
@Roxanne Starr said:
@isaac_clarke: He dissed his own brother...he's a scumbag.
First thing that comes to mind and speaking as a brother to a brother; I've punched my brother square in the face and have had fights were we have thrown each other around the room or into walls, with little regard to anything or anyone outside our fights. Under the same breath I'd happily give him both my lungs should he ever require them. And I've actually known my younger brother for most of my life. So bickering between brothers doesn't particularly move me one way or another.
And from what I understand of the relationship between these two half-brothers, they've never had one and neither of them care enough to have one. One wonders why the President would even speak of his half-brother, given they are more or less strangers; much less insult him. More context would help.
He makes a big deal about his father. He even wrote a book about him .
Outside said book, how often do you hear the President talk about his father? Generally when I think someone makes a "big deal" out of something, it's going to have itself repeated fairly often.
(well, Bill Ayres did, but Obama claims to have)
I know, he admitted it on camera: (00:57)
Then without sarcasm(clearly!) he asks and begs the audience to help him prove it - promising to split the royalties with them if they do.
Don't let anyone tell you different Rox.
This dude was also fathered by his dad and lives in Barack's beloved Kenya.
Beloved Kenya? You'd think he'd visit more often though. I think he secretly hates it there too (and will make himself president of Kenya after revealing he was born there!).
That would be reason enough in Barack's politically-correct noggin to give George a few bucks.
That sounds a little liberal - giving out handouts to George - I mean. Has he been asking for any handouts from his half brother?
Barack's a scumbag any way you look at it.
Might be using that word a tad bit too freely, at least with the justification your giving it.
@RazzaTazz said:
I am not very keen on getting in on the discussion here, it seems to have transformed from a dog chasing its tail kind of "he said, she said" between left and right into a big circular pat on the back for the right wing adherents that are still sticking around this thread.
That defines most of these threads - I suggest making a run for it or forever having thy sanity trapped in Tartarus with them.
There may be some aspect of truth to this?
It's personal opinion, based off his experiences - evidence doesn't go beyond his good word. Which in all honesty, if I found myself being consistently called racist after criticizing the President like MKF30 does apparently, it might be time to sit down and consider "Maybe it's not them?".
@k4tzm4n said:
The pity party is just sad. Liberals say this! Conservatives say this! At the end of the day, both sides are guilty of having terribly ignorant supporters who make brash, unjust, and totally offensive statements. Those few shouldn't be used to label the entire party.
It's kinda been this way since Dante wrote Inferno - politicians simply find no love from society - whatever decent men or women(a tad bit more recent) will be lumped in with the other offenders or crooks in their parties.
@isaac_clarke:
The fact that Barack didn't share any royalties with Ayers is just further proof of what cheap SOB he is. ^_^
Oh, and he has the character of a bottom-feeding catfish! :b
@Roxanne Starr said:
@isaac_clarke:
The fact that Barack didn't share any royalties with Ayers is just further proof of what cheap SOB he is. ^_^
Oh, and he has the character of a bottom-feeding catfish! :b
Sharing money does sound a little socialist Rox - he should hold onto those Royalties without simply "spreading the wealth" IMO.
I can't believe how low you will sink, to put a bottom-feeding catfish, at his level. It's despicable Rox - that fish deserves better.
@RazzaTazz
Thank you for moving this thread back to Off-Topic. I felt that it was a poor choice for an article on the real Barack Obama to be placed on a character page.
I am not very keen on getting in on the discussion here, it seems to have transformed from a dog chasing its tail kind of “he said, she said” between left and right into a big circular pat on the back for the right wing adherents that are still sticking around this thread. I would like to address one thing though.
I agree with your former point that this discussion has devolved into a circular useless discussion. I was hoping we could get some honest debate, but that seems to have failed which is why I am not trying to debate with the main posters anymore. I've already exhausted myself trying to get a meaningful discussion. On the other hand, I think you are wrong to single out the right wing as the ones who are patting themselves on the back. There is that, yes, but I can cite several examples of Phantom and Isaac declaring victory on points despite the fact that a counterpoint was just made to their arguments.
There may be some aspect of truth to this? I don't know, but it is is irrevocably the case that the right controls the public consensus when it comes to insulting catchphrases. Remember the World Trade Center Mosque? Which was neither at the World Trade Center nor a mosque. Or how about the terms bleeding heart liberal, big L liberal, tree hugger, feminazi, hug-a-thug? Or how about the (false) statement that not all Muslims are terrorists, but all terrorist are Muslims? The right's ability to control keywords in the elections serves it well, and these phrases are politically charged and to many quite insulting.
As Orwell pointed out in 1984, one way to manipulate people’s political views is to control the language they use to describe the political discussion. Surely you must know that the liberals are at least just as guilty as the conservative on this point, right? Illegal immigrants are undocumented workers. Those who disagree with homosexuality are homophobes. Those who have ties to business are a puppet for big business (or one of any variation of this theme, big oil, big tobacco, big pharmaceutical), those who attend Tea Party rallies are Teabaggers. Conservatives who mention the Bible are the religious right. War Monger, Religious Reich, Faux News, Sarah Failin, John McSame, fascist, global warming holocaust denier, corporate puppet, gun nut, birther, religious freaks, anti-abortion extremists, anti-choicers, ect. Of course, all of this is an addition to more run of the mill insults such as racist, sexist, and stupid which frequently get thrown onto conservatives by the left wing.
The point is, both sides use these tactics. It’s not a conservative thing.
Also, as somebody who listens to talk radio on a regular basis and has exclusively conservative minded friends, I have never heard “Big L Liberal” or “Not all Muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslims,” before the mentioned them.
@k4tzm4n:
Agreed, and I have probably been guilty of generalizing myself on this very thread no less. I try to avoid that though. Regardless, anybody who is unwilling to admit that their own side has faults is living in a fairy tale world.
Liberals per se are not hypocrites... But the majority of politically-inclined people are. Liberals, conservatists, everyone. Hypocrites.
@ssejllenrad said:
Liberals per se are not hypocrites... But the majority of politically-inclined people are. Liberals, conservatists, everyone. Hypocrites.
"Hypocrite"...another one of those words. Sigh...
A friend of mine who is gay and in favor of "Gay Marriage" is vehemently anti-abortion...and considered a hypocrite by most women when they find out this fact.
The women snipe, "He's a MAN! He'll never have to endure 9 months of pregnancy. He's doesn't even deserve to have an opinion on the matter!"
Well, everyone deserves to have an opinion on ANY matter...that's why God gave us brains.
And all the word "Hypocrite" means these days is that you are not following a certain demographic's party line.
If most conservatives are against Gay Marriage, and you are a conservative who is NOT against Gay Marriage...you are a hypocrite.
If most liberals are O.K. with abortion, and you are a liberal who is VEHEMENTLY OPPOSED to abortion...you are a hypocrite.
If you have an opinion...express it!
The one thing that I have learned since I've been posting on ComicVine is that the younger (or dumber) a poster is...the more close-minded that individual is to the opinion of others.
@ssejllenrad said:
Liberals per se are not hypocrites... But the majority of politically-inclined people are. Liberals, conservatists, everyone. Hypocrites.
I don't know that being interested in politics makes you a hypocrite, but I would agree that most politicians are hypocrites.
@Roxanne Starr:
Young people generally adopt the ideals of their parents or someone else who they admire and repeat the arguments they have heard for their view without actually considering things. Usually, their eyes slowly open through their teen years and early twenties.
I agree that anyone should have the right to express an opinion on any topic, but I, unlike you, have not found the word hypocrite to be often abused or misused as you have stated. I'm not sure that is what Ssej meant by his/her comment either.
Politics suck and it's not worth anyone's time. Reps/Dems/3rd Parties are not people to look up to. They all suck and don't give a crap about the American people.
Following politics tends to make most people into @$$holes as they start to believe everything they say is truth and those not agreeing with them are blind to said truth.
Anyone reading Amazing Spider-Man?
@inferiorego said:
Politics suck and it's not worth anyone's time. Reps/Dems/3rd Parties are not people to look up to. They all suck and don't give a crap about the American people.
Following politics tends to make most people into @$$holes as they start to believe everything they say is truth and those not agreeing with them are blind to said truth.
Anyone reading Amazing Spider-Man?
First I agree. Second, no I haven't been reading Spider-man. Is it good right now?
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment