I dont have enough interaction with scott to know, but I trust your judgement.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandomGuy
Printable View
I dont have enough interaction with scott to know, but I trust your judgement.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandomGuy
You had a problem with RON PAUL? Ron Paul is more conservative than anyone up there. Please define what your 'conservatism' consists of.Quote:
Originally Posted by ClingingMars
Yeah dumbasses! We have to attack Iraq to get back at those Saudi Arabian guys who flew the planes into our towers! DUHHHH!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by ClingingMars
He votes with the GOP over 90% of the time. That's fucking conservative. EVERY politician has recorded votes where they stray from their party. They'll buck their party in favor of voting in line with what their constituents or certain campaign contributors want. Right-wing radio just highlights the few instances in which McCain falls just short of complete allegiance to the GOP agenda and your lazy sheep ass dutifully gets in line and agrees that he's some sort of flaming moderate. Give me a fucking break.Quote:
Originally Posted by ClingingMars
This is the dumbest fucking thing I've ever read.Quote:
Originally Posted by ClingingMars
Okay, I was wrong, this is the dumbest fucking thing I've ever read. Nobody can ever explain how gay marriage in any way shape or form affects heterosexual marriage. If the only thing at stake were just semantics over "civil unions" and "gay marriage," everything would be fine. Prop 8 takes away rights. Get a fucking clue.Quote:
it's not fucking discrimination. they can have civil unions and be gay and do whatever, but they cannot change the institution of marriage. sorry. quite honestly it's not a priority in my book compared to abortion but it's still a conservative principle. and no, the GOP is for anyone who believes in the principles of limited government and the rule of law. not just white people, not just Christians. anybody. i love how Democrats just love to use the race/religion card all the time to paint the Republicans, but get all riled up when we call them out on it.
What passes for "conservatism" today is dismissing the work of Nobel Prize winning economists in favor of the financial acumen of Joe the Plumber, and eschewing diplomats and ambassadors in favor journalists that don't speak a foreign language and have never needed a passport. It is anti-knowledge and anti-reality. Their "conservatism" means aggression abroad, regressive and mean as hell economic policies at home, as well as for eliminating barriers to government sanction of Christianity. It's repugnant.Quote:
Originally Posted by LnGrrrR
In one breath, Clinging Dingleberry says he is for limited government and the rule of law, when his precious President Bush presided over the biggest expansion of government in history, while pushing the Patriot Act through Congress and instituting the torture of detainees. It's like, are you for fucking real????? When did conservatives go from George Will and William F. Buckley to being the Idiocracy Party?
Hell, even Goldwater was supporting Democratic candidates at the end of his life.
How the philosophical conservatives and ChristianHeritagePartyRepublicans can even fit inside the same tag is beyond me. I guess it's "strategic voting" for the most part, but the co-existence is near the end of its useful life cycle imho.
Are you directing this to me?Quote:
Originally Posted by ClingingMars
I'm not a conservative...I'm a moderate. I think people that live and die and vote by party affiliation are total idiots.
There are smart people in both parties, there are idiots in both parties...there are honest politicians in both parties, there are corrupt politicians in both parties. The more hardwired and inflexible they are into a set idology, IMO, the more corrupt and stupid they are...generally speaking.
Someone calling themself a Democrat doesn't automatically make them smart, or honest...and anyone that thinks that(as just about every party loyalist does)...is a moron.
I could care less about one party over the other...I care about who the leading voices are...I care about the world political climate is...I care about balance.
IOW...I am not going to do jack shit to improve the Republicans or Democrats fortunes...it's up to them to get their message out to me....it's up to them to get their message out to the voters.
I've been on the right for the simple reason that after Bush won in 2000 the Democrats could have remained exactly as they were and been the better party...instead they got stupider.
For all I know the Republicans are going to do the exact same thing over the next 4 years although I sincerely hope they won't...
As I definitely do not like the people in charge of the Democratic Party right now...I do not like the prominent voices in the Democratic Party...they are far left, they hardwired into that ideology...to me that means the potential for both corruption and stupidity is enormous. I can only hope Obama is not as far left as he seems...
If that is the case, with this government and this media...a section of Americans with every bit of the same rights as any other section of Americans...is about to get an enormous shit taken on them.
Not one single time have in history have we had an extermist President and Congress on the same side of the fence, that it hasn't completely sucked.
The last time we had this sort of polarity totally tilted towards one side was the Carter Administration...and good god did that suck hardcore.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwhitegocubs
I hate to tell you this slick...but our President elect practices a relgion that is a total and complete marriage of religion and politics.
Something for you guys to think about over the next 4 years...bitching about religious extremists is going to sound awful stupid coming from a segment of voters that just elected arguably the most religiously extremist President in history...and his religion is infected with agressive political aspirations. His religion is a political movement.
I hope you guys love theocrats...because you just put something awfully close to one in the whitehouse.
Bush OTOH could have given two shits about religion...
The election is over...step out of your bizzaro, opposite-world universe and join the rest of us in the real world.Quote:
Originally Posted by whottt
Yeah you evidentally didn't pay much attention to the church your candidate goes too...there's nothing bizzare about what I said...what's bizzare is you guys criticizing anyone else for their candidates zealotry.Quote:
Originally Posted by PixelPusher
You know I've been trying to think when the last time was that I miscalled the result of something this badly.....it finally came to me...the 94 NBA Finals right down to the game 7. I'd have bet both my nuts that the Rockets were going to choke, especially in the game 7.
Does anyone else long for the day when public opinion isn't formed by a bunch of high-profile soundbites taken out of context? *sigh*Quote:
Originally Posted by whottt
here's my favorite soundbite:Quote:
Originally Posted by MaryAnnKilledGinger
"If you care about my job you'll vote for McCain".
LOL @ Obama being a theocrat.
Whottt, its so obvious you have absolutely no clue about who Obama is. You've shown it time and time again. You can't get over the middle name I guess.
I didn't say he was one...I said he was close to one. The religious beliefs of his preacher certainly are complete fusion of church and state. It's ludicrous to even attempt to say otherwise.Quote:
Originally Posted by MannyIsGod
Exactly right...I don't know who he is because he has no track record of note to speak of...and because he had not made himself open, something any Presidential Candidate should have to do...and because the media buries any sort of negativity about him.Quote:
Whottt, its so obvious you have absolutely no clue about who Obama is.
It's not a matter of whether or not I can get over his middle...it's a matter of what his middle name represents, both within the country, and without. There is no way you convince me that thousands of Anti-American Terrorists don't consider this a sign of fear and symbolic victory for themselves...Quote:
You've shown it time and time again. You can't get over the middle name I guess.
That's why I considered electing him an act of appeasement, and capitulation.
I won't say that his middle name would have kept me from voting for him under any circumstance, because that would be untrue...I almost voted for him inspite of it...hoever that middle name symbolizes manything America is at odds with currently, and for me to have voted for him he'd have had to have easily been the better candidate...or perhaps be on the right side of the issue I consider most important...and that simply wasn't the case.
All that said...I'm actually encouraged by some of his recent cabinet appointees. They weren't as bad as I thought they would be...generally speaking.
Do not attempt to hold my openmindedness against me...
And BTW...I do know he's a lawyer that talks about championing the poor. Ugh...that particular template conjured up some horribly corrupt images in my mind...not just from history, but from my own experiences.Quote:
Originally Posted by MannyIsGod
With all due respect to FWDT...
You ever hear the expression about 99% of Lawyers giving the rest a bad name?
From my personal experience...that's one of the most accurate expressions ever.
It's easy to crack jokes about lawyers, cops, dentists, the supervisor at work, etc., but at some point in our lives we come to realize that they are all necessary for a well-functioning and civil society. Would your past experience had been better if there were no lawyers, and your adversary decided to hire thugs to get his or her way? Everyone loves a good one-liner, but to try and critique Obama with what is essentially a vaudeville toss-off seems silly to me, and as Voltaire said, clever sayings don't prove anything.Quote:
Originally Posted by whottt
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tully365
That's all well and good but I wasn't speaking of my experience with hiring one...I've never hired a laywer in my life and hopefully never will.
I was speaking of my experiences in working in a law office and being involved in the legal community for 5 years...
I worked for a Democrat defense attorney you see...one who championed the poor....and said the exact same thing guys like Obama and John Edwards say...
And they remind me of the guy I worked for(and many others I knew) in many significant ways...especially Edwards no-showing and Obama voting present.
Let me tell you something...the most bigoted elitist hypocritical dishonest and arrogant creatures I have ever met in my life...are Democrat attorneys that claim to champion the poor.
They have an unsurpassed and unconscionable capacity for prevarication...I won't say it borders on heartlessness...I will say it is the embodiment of heartlessness.
There are unquestionably many people in the world who behave deplorably. Martin Luther King had his personal faults, and had many around him that did not share his character, it's true... but he and his followers were still on the better side of history than a guy like Strom Thurmond, who thought it best to keep the races separate and unequal.Quote:
Originally Posted by whottt
I have this same type of argument with friends of mine who don't like basketball-- and there are unquestionably some players in the NBA whose lifestyles and behavior are indefensible to me-- but it still doesn't mean I'n going to stop loving basketball. Defending the poor is just like any other activity in life-- free throw shooting, money management, singing, mothering-- some are good at it and others are not. It in no way reflects the task itself. If you look at Obama and see a dishonest guy with malicious intent... well, I doubt I'll be able to change your mind on that. That's your perspective. But I simply don't see that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tully365
Dude...no one gets up every morning saying, I'm going to be malicious. I'm going to be the bad guy.
Most everyone thinks their actions are justified on some level...
I think Obama is definitely capable of malicious activity, at least as I term it...based on his responsibilities as President.
It's his slant that is malicious.
I'll give you an example of the most mentally corrupt and dishonest poster on this forum...boutons.
There is no bit of information concerning Democrats VS Republicans that will not become corrupted and slanted upon being filtered through boutons' brain....because of his extremist views.
I personally don't think boutons wakes up every morning saying I can't wait to have corrupted, extremist and terminally dishonest world view...
I think he wakes up every morning thinking he's a good guy trying to do the best he can...that doesn't mean his propensity for slant and corrupted interpretations and therefore his opinions, aren't malicious....
He's not even close to being a thoecrat Whottt. Pick up Audacity. He has a great section just on that subject. He's probably taken the best way to explain church and state that I've ever read. Hell, AngelLuv might even buy into it if she read it.
I think there are many people who actually get up every morning and know that they will do whatever is necessary to get their way, though I do agree that many will contort their philosophies to justify whatever it is they want. Nietzsche said, every philosophy is the rationalization of a temperament, which is something that for the most part, I believe. Of course, Tolstoy once said, Nietzsche is stupid and abnormal, and once again--mostly due to his temperament-- I have to at least partially agree. To me, Obama has a noble temperament. I understand the frustrations of those who think he is being looked upon as a cure-all savior-- not an opinion that I share at all-- but any attempt to somehow link Obama to the boutons-type mindset does not resonate with me at all, though I don't agree with your Misanthropic Independent image either, because I don't find misanthropy to be generally helpful.Quote:
Originally Posted by whottt
(But even misanthropy has its place for me too, I must admit, especially in literature and lighter fields like comedy... one of the best examples being Waldorf and Stadler, the two wise-cracking, insult-slinging muppets in the balcony.)
P.S. I don't like being called "Dude." :lol
Corrections in bold.Quote:
Originally Posted by whottt
Hey, I could have put them in red....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tully365
I used boutons as an example...not a direct comparison.
I find nothing noble about Obama's temperament...I find him secretive, of questionable judgement, and most importantly...I find his citizen of the world disposition to be one directly at odds with the job requirements of being the President of the United States.
Every war, every fight, every argument...in the history of man has been caused by at the minimum one human being interacting with another...it's the absolute pre-requisite for any and all conflicts.Quote:
(But even misanthropy has its place for me too, I must admit, especially in literature and lighter fields like comedy... one of the best examples being Waldorf and Stadler, the two wise-cracking, insult-slinging muppets in the balcony.)
Well dude...I don't like the Obama Presidency...I guess you just learn to live it...price you pay for living in a free country and interacting with other humans.Quote:
P.S. I don't like being called "Dude." :lol
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
So....did we ever find out if Chump is a lawyer or not?