User Tag List

First 5678917 Last

Results 61 to 70 of 264

  1. #61
    IRL is not real Cimarron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ISTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Posts
    3,424

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ajblaise
    Repubs tend to be hawks, Dems tend to work more towards diplomacy
    True, they use different tools to accomplish the same goals.

  2. #62
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    681

    Default

    Alot of responses, i'll just reply to a few, i gotta do homework soon

    Quote Originally Posted by TrueHeart View Post
    That's a quite astonishingly ignorant statement. George Walker Bush was in the Texas Air National Guard, which has nothing to do with the Navy. Nor did he "abandon" any aspect of his service.
    Keep in mind I was 11-12 when this shit was happening so my memory isn't exactly spot on, the Idea is that he was in the military.

    Wiki search (George Walker Bush):

    In May 1968, Bush was accepted into the Texas Air National Guard, after scoring the lowest acceptable passing grade on the pilot's written aptitude test.[20][21][22] After training, he was assigned to duty in Houston, flying Convair F-102s out of Ellington Air Force Base.[23] Critics allege Bush was favorably treated because of his father's political standing, citing his lack of combat service and his irregular attendance.[24] The United States Department of Defense released all the records of Bush's Texas Air National Guard service, which remain in its official archives.[21] Although not accepted to the University of Texas School of Law in 1970,[25] he accepted a transfer to the Alabama Air National Guard in 1972 to work on a Republican senate campaign, and in October 1973 he was discharged from the Texas Air National Guard. Bush then attended Harvard University, where he earned his MBA,[26] and completed his six-year service obligation in the inactive reserve.[27]

    During this time Bush had multiple accounts of alcohol abuse.[28] In one instance, Bush was arrested near his family's summer home in Kennebunkport, Maine for driving under the influence of alcohol at the age of thirty on September 4, 1976. He pleaded guilty, was fined US$150, and had his Maine driver's license suspended until 1978.[29] Soon after, Bush entered the oil industry in Texas.

    ---------------------------------------------------------

    Main idea: Rep's attacked Kerry's military records, a below the belt move, while Bush himself didn't have a good military record.

    And btw, F-you for calling me ignorant, honestly wtf is wrong with some people.

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    No, I completely and totally disagree. They just try to hoodwink the public about different issues. If you read any of Obama's economic policy, for instance, it's not just counterproductive, it's flat-out misrepresentation meant to assuage economically illiterate malcontents.
    Obama and McCain are both shit on the economy, and when the economy is shitty like it is right now it isn't going to get cured from either of them.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
    That was my point, but some people are actually naive enough to think that's not possible for people of a particular political persuasion.

    My reaction to most of Didums' posts:

    Are you like, a 5-year old? Jw, cause you're acting like some troll who can't manage to intellectually beat a 16 year old and resorts to "lol *facepalm* link, man i got you!"

    Quote Originally Posted by reason View Post
    Mr Corporation has a lot of money.
    Mr Politician has a lot of legislative power.

    One day Mr Corporation and Mr Politician get together, and decide to trade. Mr Corporation trades money, resources and propoganda, and in return Mr Politician offers him subsidies, and protection from competition. Both think that this is an excellent arrangement.

    Mr Corporation doesn't like the market, because he has to convince the commoners to buy his product, and it would be so much easier if they simply had no choice. With this Mr. Politician can help him, and with a few penstrokes he can trade the freedom of the many for the wellbeing of the few. Both parties in this trade benefit, even though everyone else suffers--that's what politics is all about.


    ------------------------------------------------------------

    Some people aren't understanding that I don't support the Democrats, me hating the Republicans does not equate to supporting the Democrats, I don't know where the hell thats coming from but it doesn't follow logical sequence.

    The purpose of the video I linked, is soley to show that the republicans are taking the lower road this year, example:

    Obama's slogan was for "Change"
    Then McCain started saying he was for "Change"
    Obama called bullshit and directed the slogan "Thats not change, thats more of the same" to McCain
    Then McCain used this same slogan used against himself towards Obama, wtf? (I'm pretty sure I saw this in a mccain commercial)

    All i have to do is link this: YouTube - JohnMcCaindotcom's Channel

    and compare that to this:

    YouTube - BarackObamadotcom's Channel

    Example of McCain:

    [youtube=-b0pSXmT10I] Stupid ad [/youtube]

    What do I have to say to refute this, if anything, I did it in my head while it was playing.

    Example of Obama:

    [youtube=OHvb4O_bkoo] Slightly less stupid ad [/youtube]

    As you can see there is clearly less shit inside of the second toilet, shit nonetheless, but less of it, and its not from a large bull like the first one.

  3. #63
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Didums View Post
    As you can see there is clearly less shit inside of the second toilet, shit nonetheless, but less of it, and its not from a large bull like the first one.

    You must really be biased, because the second ad is clearly the smear ad, and it says absolutely nothing about policy. At least in the first one, they mention some of the things they are for. The second one is nothing but out-of-context quotations. Jeez, you've got blinders on.
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  4. #64
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    681

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    You must really be biased, because the second ad is clearly the smear ad, and it says absolutely nothing about policy. At least in the first one, they mention some of the things they are for. The second one is nothing but out-of-context quotations. Jeez, you've got blinders on.
    I grabbed the most recent vid, i'll find a better one one sec, and btw the mccain one I linked was rather generous, want me to find an even more retarded one?

  5. #65
    Senior Member reason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    1,211

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Didums View Post
    Obama's slogan was for "Change"
    Then McCain started saying he was for "Change"
    Obama called bullshit and directed the slogan "Thats not change, thats more of the same" to McCain
    Then McCain used this same slogan used against himself towards Obama, wtf? (I saw this in a commercial)
    To be fair to anyone who has a mouth: the slogan 'change' is so vague that it could mean anything (and therefore, is meaningless). It's the kind of slogan that can't not be "stolen", since everyone wants some kind of change or other. It's like having the word 'policies' as your campaign slogan, and then accusing your opponents of stealing your ideas when they propose a policy.

    Politicians love meaningless words, preferably words like 'change', 'justice' or 'equality', because they all mean something good, and entirely different, to whoever you're speaking to. The entire room can be nodding their heads in agreement with the politicians, when shaking their heads in disagreement with each other. The language is corrupted, absolutely nothing is proclaimed to great applause, and the blank cheque is granted. Later, when office has been gained, and the rhetoric of the campaign has died down, the blank cheque will be cashed in whatever way seems politically useful to those in charge.

    Do not expect Obama to be any different. He'll disappoint as much as McCain, because both will face much the same incentives once they are in office, and both are, first and foremost, politicians. The difference in rhetoric between Democrats and Republicans far outweighs the difference in action, so do not take any of them at their word.
    A criticism that can be brought against everything ought not to be brought against anything.

  6. #66
    Senior Member Lateralus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    3w4
    Posts
    6,276

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Didums View Post
    Obama and McCain are both shit on the economy, and when the economy is shitty like it is right now it isn't going to get cured from either of them.
    Whether he knows economics or not, the president does not have the power to 'cure' the economy. The Fed chairman (Bernanke) has more influence over the economy than the president.
    "We grow up thinking that beliefs are something to be proud of, but they're really nothing but opinions one refuses to reconsider. Beliefs are easy. The stronger your beliefs are, the less open you are to growth and wisdom, because "strength of belief" is only the intensity with which you resist questioning yourself. As soon as you are proud of a belief, as soon as you think it adds something to who you are, then you've made it a part of your ego."

  7. #67
    Senior Member Enyo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    xNTJ
    Posts
    443

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Didums View Post
    And btw, F-you for calling me ignorant, honestly wtf is wrong with some people.
    I'd like to point out that he called your statement ignorant, not *you* personally. Chill.

    It's called "attack the idea presented, but not the person." Disagreeing with an idea or statement that you put forth is just discourse.

    BTW, it's nice that you're only 16. However, do you think that anyone here should change their style of communicating with you simply because you are a child? Or would you prefer to be treated like everyone else?
    "If you can't be a good example, you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning." Catherine Aird

  8. #68
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    681

    Default

    changed the vid links.


    Quote Originally Posted by reason View Post
    To be fair to anyone who has a mouth: the slogan 'change' is so vague that it could mean anything (and therefore, is meaningless). It's the kind of slogan that can't not be "stolen", since everyone wants some kind of change or other. It's like having the word 'policies' as your campaign slogan, and then accusing your opponents of stealing your ideas when they propose a policy.

    Politicians love meaningless words, preferably words like 'change', 'justice' or 'equality', because they all mean something good, and entirely different, to whoever you're speaking to. The entire room can be nodding their heads in agreement with the politicians, when shaking their heads in disagreement with each other. The language is corrupted, absolutely nothing is proclaimed to great applause, and the blank cheque is granted. Later, when office has been gained, and the rhetoric of the campaign has died down, the blank cheque will be cashed in whatever way seems politically useful to those in charge.

    Do not expect Obama to be any different. He'll disappoint as much as McCain, because both will face much the same incentives once they are in office, and both are, first and foremost, politicians. The difference in rhetoric between Democrats and Republicans far outweighs the difference in action, so do not take any of them at their word.
    I'm not looking forward to either candidate getting elected, I agree that political rhetoric is BS. I just look at each candidates policies, and see that Obama would suit what I desire in a president more than McCain, or rather that McCain's policies actually go against what I want to happen, along with the fact that his smear campaign is 1 level of stupid and 1 level of bullshit above Obama's, not that Obama isn't full of shit, he is, it just doesn't reek as bad as McCain's.

  9. #69
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    681

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Enyo View Post
    I'd like to point out that he called your statement ignorant, not *you* personally. Chill.

    It's called "attack the idea presented, but not the person." Disagreeing with an idea or statement that you put forth is just discourse.

    BTW, it's nice that you're only 16. However, do you think that anyone here should change their style of communicating with you simply because you are a child? Or would you prefer to be treated like everyone else?
    Stating my age was relevent to the fact that I was much younger when the topic we were discussing occured. The 2004 election occured when I was 11-12 years old so I was stating that I didn't exactly remember the details on Bush's military services, but I remembered the Idea that they weren't so good (yet Kerry was attacked for his services).

    And btw, even if one is to say that a statement was Ignorant, Ignorant meaning Lack of Knowledge, that infers that the speaker of said statement was Ignorant to begin with to put forth such a statement. Were the person not to be ignorant about said subject, they would not have made an ignorant statment about it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
    Whether he knows economics or not, the president does not have the power to 'cure' the economy. The Fed chairman (Bernanke) has more influence over the economy than the president.
    True, but they are both claiming that they are the ones to fix the economy and I call bullshit on them both for that.

  10. #70
    Senior Member Enyo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    xNTJ
    Posts
    443

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Didums View Post
    Stating my age was relevent to the fact that I was much younger when the topic we were discussing occured. The 2004 election occured when I was 11-12 years old so I was stating that I didn't exactly remember the details on Bush's military services, but I remembered the Idea that they weren't so good (yet Kerry was attacked for his services).

    And btw, even if one is to say that a statement was Ignorant, Ignorant meaning Lack of Knowledge, that infers that the speaker of said statement was Ignorant to begin with to put forth such a statement. Were the person not to be ignorant about said subject, they would not have made an ignorant statment about it.
    And there's nothing wrong with ignorance about a particular subject. Ignorance is, as you'd said, lack of knowledge. Lack of knowledge can be corrected, but stupidity is forever.

    As you pointed out, you are sixteen. You are bound to be ignorant about certain subjects, just like everyone else. No point in crying foul over ignorance. Correct it when it is pointed out to you. *shrugs*

    Let's put it this way: Lat is one of my favorite people in this forum. I'm quite ignorant in regards to some of the things that he studies. But that's okay, because that has nothing to do with my worth as a person. Likewise, it's safe to assume that Lat is ignorant in regards to some of the things that *I* study. That's okay, too. He's still pretty cool.

    Everyone is ignorant about something. If it's a subject that is important to you, then learn and correct your ignorance. Just like everyone else does in life. If it's not a subject that is important to you, then accept your ignorance and move on. Just like everyone else does in life.
    "If you can't be a good example, you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning." Catherine Aird

Similar Threads

  1. [ENTP] entps: what's the worst thing to you of the things you hate ?
    By entropie in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 10-05-2014, 10:01 PM
  2. [MBTItm] Animals & MBTI (A thread brought to you via 'an attempt to satiate boredom')
    By FantailedWall in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 55
    Last Post: 07-01-2011, 06:47 AM
  3. [ENTP] entps: what's the worst thing to you of the things you dread ?
    By entropie in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-24-2009, 12:47 AM
  4. These sensations brought to you by Alcohol
    By UnitOfPopulation in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 04-11-2009, 08:37 PM
  5. Replies: 11
    Last Post: 10-26-2007, 07:23 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO