your bad
you're bad
Printable View
your bad
you're bad
I hate online political discussion, but I need to pop in here and ask a few questions of some of the left-leaning guys here for some real answers before I have some kind of nervous breakdown (haven't slept too well the last year). Conservatives are easy to write off because they are insane prudes who believe a bearded man is sitting on a cloud making sure they aren't touching themselves. Liberals are baffling to me, so please help me out:
1) Why are the 9-11 plotters be tried in a civilian court? The military caught them and due process for civiilans was not followed, and its very likely the case will be thrown out or won by the defendents (as it should be if proper protocol is followed). I cannot fathom a logical reason to grant them such an easy way out. Is this to disprove their involvement and thus suggest Bush plotted the attacks?
2) How do you reconsile the fact liberal icons like Obama, Sean Penn, Michael Moore, and Streissand are multimillionaires? Is it not hypocritical of them to push "equal pay/outcome for all" on society when they are so rich?
3) Before 9-11, I always looked to liberals as fellow secularists in favor of a society devoid of religious superstition influencing policy. Why is Islamic extremism not treated with the same fervor as Christian extremism (abortion shootings, creationism)? Is Islamic Law not oppressive to women and homosexuals- who can and are legally stoned to death? Why do leftists come to the defense of extremist Islam? Is this more about skin color than ideaology?
4) How is labeling anyone who opposes Obama's policy a racist any different than the bullshit accusations that those who questioned Bush was "anti-American"? What makes it different this time around? On that note, why are Blacks who are ciritcal of Obamacare (for lack of a better term) not really "Black"? Is that not another form of racism?
5) Why do so many Liberals hold dictators who often have horrible human rights reps (supression of free speech, mass killings, etc) in such high esteem? Stalin, Mao, Castro, and Sadaam Hussein did horrible things. Hugo Chavez and Vlad Putin aren't on track to be champions of freedom or human rights. How are liberal cornerstones like personal freedom and free speech reconciled with the actions of these "heroes"?
6) Gay Marriage, gender/racial equality, legalized drugs, etc are things that more than just card-carrying leftists can get behind. However, why do liberals who promote things like freedom so opposed to economic freedom to choose your own career, how long you work, etc?
WTF planet are you living on, most of those things you say make no sense. IN order
1) I actually don't know anything about this happening so not going to comment.
2) It's liberalism, not socialism. Nobody is pushing equal pay/equal outcome for all society. There's nothing wrong with making money, the liberal view is just the more you work the more you should try to put back to help, that doesn't mean you give back all or even most.
3) Islamic Extremism = Terrorists. I can't think of anyone saying that Islamic Extremism isn't a problem.
4) Um, it is the same and I don't believe anyone here is saying anything like that.
5) Who is holding Stalin, Mao, Castro and Hussein in high esteem? It's pretty well agreed that they were all pretty fucking horrible, Castro the least of the bunch, but still not great. I've never met or heard of anyone who saw any of them as heroes.
6) Once again you have this insane idea that liberalism = socialism. Who the fuck is opposed to people being able to choose their own career or how long they work?
So in conclusion. What the fuck are you on and what the fuck is wrong with you?
So he writes off conservatism for one idiotic reason but can't write off liberalism even with all of the horseshit beliefs he just showed us with those questions?
CLASSIC zerodash.
This is the most accurate typo ever.Quote:
Originally Posted by bbobb
ZD's post seems like a result of listening to too much talk radio or.. listening to their grandfather talk about politics or something.
As opposed to all the liberal posts that are a result of watching CNN, MSNBC, or The Daily Show? This thread is not exactly full of well thought out ideas.
You could make a fortune selling such high quality strawmen.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zerodash
BITCH, THAT AIN'T MEQuote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
Well it sort of is.
Look, don't you have an oil baron's pockets to line? or a war to start for fun?
Quote:
Originally Posted by bbobb
- John Holden you know the Attorney General of the US., HAS decided that the 9/11 terrorists will be tried in Federal Court in NYC. Mostly all of the advisors on TV agree that the terrorists will be released, due to the lack of miranda rights, waterboarding for interrogation, and the list goes on and on. The only one who says they have to be tried in Fed court is a Fox News Journalist Judge Andrew Napolitano.
- Its more funny how they will be taxed more, since they are in that huge taxable bracket for healthcare.
- This is just semi-racist thought.
- To Bbobb: Jesse Jackson said a few days ago that any black man who does not support the presidents healthcare plan is not really black. I can find the quote.
- To Bbobb: Anita Dunn, White House Director of Communications:
yadda yadda glenn beck and fox news. watch the video itself.
6. Who cares about gay marriage. They don't realize they will be placed in a different tax bracket and will be taxed more heavily.
Here's the Jesse Jackson quote:
More from Obama's cabinet who adore Socialistic figures.Quote:
The Rev. Jesse Jackson on Wednesday night criticized Rep. Artur Davis (D-Ala.) for voting against the Democrats’ signature healthcare bill.
“We even have blacks voting against the healthcare bill from Alabama,” Jackson said at a reception Wednesday night. “You can’t vote against healthcare and call yourself a black man.”
FCC Mark Llyod and his adoration of Hugo Chavez.
http://speakmymindblog.com/2009/09/0...d-hugo-chavez/
Ron Bloom(fun starts at the 1:00 mark.):
1. Hrmm, going to need to look into it more.Quote:
Originally Posted by Advocate
4. And Jesse Jackson is batshit insane.
5. Can't watch the video at work, will watch later but if it's Beck I'm certain something is being taken out of context.
Don't confuse Opposition to the Far Right with People Who Don't Vote for Whatever Idiot is on Their Side.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
Ha ha, i was reading the last post not knowing it was Advocate and thinking, "Where is this coming from?" and then i saw who it was and it was okay.
Really, this thread has gotten lame recently. Someone compare something historical but debatable. Presidents are more fun when they're out of office.
Obama? Shit, i don't care. He's the Democratic party with a face until he's out of office. That Bush fellow? He's polite and a classy fellow!
I'll help you with the first one.Quote:
Originally Posted by bbobb
http://news.google.com/news?source=i...ed=0CBIQsQQwAA
I will say that Obama's first year in office is pretty historical no matter what party you support.Quote:
Originally Posted by Finch
Passed a Trillion Dollar stimulus, bailed out two auto makers, getting closer to passing something; neither Teddy Roosevelt, FDR, Truman, or LBJ, could do (read: Health Care). Also, Cap and Trade coming up, thereby diminishing our dependence on foreign oil.
My expectation at this point is that Obama will be a completely average president. He will do something big, he will do some bad things and then he'll just be another precedent to be used out of context for certain things.
saved for posterity!Quote:
Originally Posted by Thief Silver
I'm not actually certain why you'd save that but ok!
He probably thought you misspelled "president".Quote:
Originally Posted by Thief Silver
lol, no I most certainly meant precedent.
In case any of you were still so naive that you think we should give a cent to the UN:
http://www.pleaseblock.us/entry/isla...nited_nations/
MSNBC did an interview with the dude who made this billboard:
http://www.kdvr.com/media/photo/2009...0-20160512.jpg
http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/node/33011
In case you still think Yoshi's literate and isn't just pushing keysQuote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
http://www.pleaseblock.us/entry/isla...nited_nations/
Don't forget that we have our own major religion that has its sticky tendrils wound around our government. And it won't shut the fuck up. Remind me what's going on when news outlets start running pictures of Jesus blowing up abortion clinics and shooting gays.
that would make for a pretty good music video
Didn't Hawaii already produce a birth certificate?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr-K
Yes, the BC was produced quite a while ago.
Then how does that rumor have legs that big?Quote:
Originally Posted by Thief Silver
because the republican party is supported at least in part by racist old white people that are scared darkies?
The idea is that the BC was a forgery.
Yeah, that's what we call a conspiracy theory founded by nutjobs.
More like Conspiracy Theory founded by the mentally retarded.
There's actually been quite a bit of intelligent criticism re: Obama on TDS. I like it but the studio audience still needs to be trained some nights.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
1. The trial is a forgone conclusion, they'll be tried and either executed or in prison for life. If there even is one. We're still on new legal ground here and if you think there's going to be a criminal trial with the exact same rules as a shoplifter or murderer you're out of you damn mind. LAW DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY /morbo.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zerodash
2. Liberalism is a pretty big umbrella. Not all leftists are liberals and not all leftists agree on much. Not all right wingers are nazis, though all nazis are right wingers by definition. Thus not all leftists are communists but all communists are leftists. There is a huge amount of internal dissent and argument within the mainstream American left. Just as I'm sure not all Republicans are nazis. Despite all evidence to the contrary.
3. How about no. No one likes Islamic extremists, and only certain politicians bother to cater to Christian extremists for either votes and/or because they're one of them (Rick Sanatorum). Politicians would cater to Islamic extremists if they thought it would help them win votes.
4. And we're back to the strawman. Fuck you. However there's a certain brand of critics who will complain about Obama without end simply because he's a black President. These are the same guys who want to see a birth certificate and will claim that Obama honestly wants to execute their grandmothers and indoctrinate their children on Marx.
5. Fuck you. Legitimately you can compare America to other countries and suggest there is room for improvement but that doesn't mean I idolize Olafur Grimsson (best presidential name evar) because I feel his country has better healthcare than us.
6. Because the only party that has ever supported (well the politicians) these things is the Democrats. Which is sad, the current national political climate has been certifiably insane since Washington.
I can never get enough of Cindy Sheehan.
Apparently Miss Sheehan and her harpies aren't pleased with the president's plans for Afghanistan. And if they're against it, I'm forced to conclude that Mr. Obama is doing something right.
Man I never realized how small # of troops we put out in these places were though, like I always thought before like a year ago we had a couple hundred thousand, and that thousands die every year, not hundreds.
I dunno it sounds nice but I feel 20,000 more troops even with the 32,000 more troops isn't enough. Why not around 50,000? And why wait till spring?
Quote:
HE PUSHED ME, HE PUSHED HER, HE'S PUSHING US
Waiting until spring is a matter of logistics (training, manning, and so on). The problem is that we drastically drew down our forces at the end of the Cold War, and the minor upbuild since 9/11 has been a drop in the bucket; we're still nowhere close to where we were in the 80s.
In other words, we're fighting a two-front war with a peacetime military.
I think South Park did something to that effect ten years ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by Finch
<thinks>Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
I don't remember that episode.
Here, a thoroughly shitfaced Sen. Baucus reflects on the health care debate. Kind of ironic, considering that (the very similarly named) Bacchus was the god of wine and intoxication:
Ironic or appropriate?
Both?
You should make look up the meaning of irony.
I wouldn't know how to begin making that.Quote:
Originally Posted by bbobb
(it would be ironic if his name was Max Sober or perhaps Ferrimagnetic Hematite)
(like rain on your wedding day)
(Kinda like a free ride, but hey man you already paid!)
(it's just the good advice you just didn't take)
SHUT UP
Been watching the talking heads ... Especially Fox. I disagree that the NJ election was a referedum on Obama. Most of the state did not like how Corzine was running it. His platform was a bit different than what we got. His second year in office was his most troubling, his policies were going against what most of the state wanted ... especially the southern half.
The Massachusetts election (I call it The Massachusetts Disaster) was more an issue of Coakley being the scapegoat of the Presidency and the issues of the Senate. She ran a campaign, from the outside view, as one that would have won when Obama ran for office. It seemed like she wasn't listening to the public, but she was the public want Health Care reform. The question is what kind and at what cost? Sadly, now she is being blamed by the Dems for losing, aka she was a weak candidate. Interstingly enough, she was elected in the Primary by an overwhelming majority. I don't think it was her fault. She had a fine platform, she was just torpedoed by her party. I kinda feel bad for her.
Massachusetts is the state that elected Mitt Romney. They're more than a bit bipolar. And now, they're going to get what they asked for, which should be interesting to watch. I'm glad I don't live there.
-edit- Forgot to add- A "Fuck you, set both candidates on fire" option was desperately needed in this vote.
James
Perhaps the "Fuck you, set both candidates on fire" option will be more popular in the future.
My brother voted for Brown, and he's for healthcare. People voted against Coakley because of dislike of the Obama administration etc, but she lost because of a variety of factors, including kind of coming off as a bitch.
She also criticized Brown for shaking hands at the Winter Classic Hockey game. And saying on radio that Curt Schilling is a Yankees fan.
and misspelling Massachusetts.
Is anyone seriously against health care?Quote:
Originally Posted by Finch
Snake handlers and faith healers are.
Republicans?
I want healthcare reform, just not in its current form in Congress and the Senate.
Maybe that's why Catholics shouldn't work in emergency rooms...
Every Republican I know is in favor of health care. In fact, some of them have even seen a doctor before.
That's laughable. Everyone has acknowledged the issues with Healthcare. I just find it hilarious that now Drug Companies and Health insurance corps. are for the House and Senate bill. Why are they for it, if the point of the bill is to hurt them?Quote:
Originally Posted by bbobb
The Nebraska kickback and Louisiana purchase didn't help Obama's cause. The other factor in Massachusetts is this ...
Massachusetts already has Universal Healthcare. Its been admitted that if either HC bill passed. Massachusetts would have been taxed for the federal bill. I know Mass. would have probably stopped their current healthcare plan, but gee would they have stopped that tax? Probably not.
This is something I actually have no problem with, since, ya know, it isn't unconstitutional or something.Quote:
Originally Posted by Advocate
I'm not saying its bad. I was bringing up the fact that Massachusetts would have been taxed twice.
Someone start writing the filibuster material for the next 11 or so months. I can't believe MA came through. Burn in hell, Kennedy.
It is unconstitutional ... federally. States can do whatever they want ... theoretically. It just depends on their state constitution.Quote:
Originally Posted by squall_vb
I was using your quote to make a separate point. Sorry for the mix-up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Advocate
Precisely. I have no problem with mandates or even a single-payer system... at the state level. Because that's perfectly legal.Quote:
Originally Posted by Advocate
I didn't vote. Coakley came off as totally vile (in the Pelosi mold), and Brown didn't seem in line with anything I was wanting to vote for, so fuck it.
Can we talk about boning Brown's daughters now?
Sure their hot and he said both are single.
And I don't really see this as a MAJOR win for the Republicans. Brown seems, Mass residents could probably correct me if I'm wrong, reasonably moderate. Anti-Gay marriage, but pro civil union; pro-choice (despite being pro-life); and was for requiring health care in Mass. He may be against the current health bill, but I could see him being won over by Senate dems on many issues.
Could be wrong though, that's just based on my wiki-research.
It's not like Michele Bachmann went and won Massachusetts
He's the kind of dude the "tea party" is trying to purge from the party, basically.
Given the choice between him and the remarkably cold, and shrewish Martha Coakley... Hell, I would probably vote for him.
That and I want to bone his daughter.
Coakley made a lot of Red Socks reletated gaffes, which helped wreck her chances with the populace.
Tea Partiers aren't for either party actually. They encompass disgruntled 'Pubs, disgruntled Dems, and Libertarians.
He broke the filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, so Obamacare is toast. It's an enormous win for the GOP.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr-K
And battery powered Rascal scooters.Quote:
Originally Posted by Advocate
No, they're mostly people like my parents who will only vote Republican.Quote:
Originally Posted by Advocate
The bill as is is probably toast, but with some concessions I'm willing to bet they could get some beneficial reform through. That is fine with me, frankly, some reform is better than none at all. Bush managed to get his stuff through without a filibuster-proof supermajority, Clinton worked with a Republican majority! I don't see why it would be impossible for Obama to work his agenda with a paltry 18 seat majority.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
I actually like the Hooverround scooters myself.Quote:
Originally Posted by YellerDog
Also, Yoshi is right, but I'm afraid that they will employ the nuclear option and force it through anyway.
Don't confuse republican for conservative. Most Libs do and its wrong. Which is why in the NY District 23rd race had Conservative Party Hoffman supported by the Tea Party and Republican Scozzafava supported by noone. She eventually bowed out, but stayed on the ballot.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr-K
That is true, though if I were the Republicans, I would stall until January. They will almost certainly regain the majority in the House, so they can shit can Pelosi and write their own bill from that side.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr-K
Shitcanning Pelosi needs to happen regardless of what happens in the elections. She's bad for the liberal agenda.
Harry Reid needs to go too.
EVERYBODY hates Pelosi.
I have a friend that is a huge Nancy Pelosi fan.
He's also a communist, and an idiot.
Seriously. Fuck. Nanci. Pelosi.
Don't know/care if this has been posted yet. I thought it was an interesting way to track whether he's doing anything he said he would.
That was in the local free paper this morning!
EDIT: NO, it was http://www.tabsonobama.org/ , more of a polling thing.
Brown will become a RINO or a turncoat when people realize that he's pretty moderate. Because all moderate Republicans are RINOs and turncoats.
You just said the same thing three times.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr-K
Wait, what? Clinton did something of note?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr-K
He blew up some tents.
Oh, right, he rode the tech bubble too. My bad.
He was also the creator of the Housing Crisis we just went through.
LOLOLOLOLQuote:
Originally Posted by Advocate
He blew up on some tits.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
Please stop.Quote:
Originally Posted by Advocate
Explain what's funny? I can prove that it is disgruntled Republicans, Moderate dems, and a lot of libertarians/independents.Quote:
Originally Posted by bbobb
Eric Odom Co-Founder denied RNC Chair Micheal Steele to speak at a Chicago rally. Saying "It’s obvious they’re trying to ride on the brand that we created... It’s somewhat insulting."
Massachusetts just elected a Republican to a Senate seat. Check the constituency of Massachusetts.