or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › The Preemptive Betrayed by the Messiah Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Preemptive Betrayed by the Messiah Thread - Page 3

post #81 of 132
You forgot this one, too.

Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #82 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hassan i Sabbah View Post

You forgot the Bush halos?

How convenient. They were everywhere in 2002 when we were all saying 'If we go into Iraq it will be a disaster'.

AWESOME! Two of those do look like halo photos.

Two points, first I have no doubt someone can create a Bush Halo. My examples clearly show them in context, ie on the cover of Time and Rolling Stone as examples. Who ran yours?

Second, how does this support the "preemptive" thread assertion that "a messiah" is being built up by the right so that in being imperfect he can be torn down.

You can't have it both ways. If "everyone does it" then the premise (by addabox) that everybody doesn't do it, just the right is doing it as a means of tearing Obama down, is full of shit.

You do realize that my claim to Adda was that both right and left have used this messiah imagery and thus it isn't some right-wing conspiracy, correct?

I think you have helped prove my point so thanks.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #83 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

AWESOME! Two of those do look like halo photos.

Two points, first I have no doubt someone can create a Bush Halo. My examples clearly show them in context, ie on the cover of Time and Rolling Stone as examples. Who ran yours?

snip

I think you have helped prove my point so thanks.

I remember the Bush is lord thing. It was really horrible. It was a sort of right wing internet thing, and it was... horrid. The best I can do is that retakeamerica "Is Bush a saint?" thing right now.

But your pictures don't look like they're trying to give Obama haloes to me any more than mine do to you, so hey ho nonny no and Rush Limbaugh's a crack ho.
post #84 of 132
By the way, everyone forgot the fundies that worshiped cardboard cutouts of Bush at Jesus Camp.

I could also post many images of other messianic imagery of many presidents through history.

But I will agree that there are people that are over-hyped about Obama, but you have to take into consideration some things. His election was historic any way that you look at it, and it's a special kind of 'watershed-like' historic so that makes it even more significant.

Especially when you have many people that were so disillusioned with Bush for the past 8 years, and in steps Barack Obama.

I'm not the type of person who likes fanfare of any kind, and I found myself excited over the prospect of not just an Obama presidency, but a Bush-less presidency.

So on one hand, yes people choose to exert this level of hysteria, but the current events create an environment where this kind of reaction is likely. We saw some of the same fanfare and exaltation for Sarah Palin didn't we trumptman?

Or did you choose to ignore that. Oh wait, you did.
post #85 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

By the way, everyone forgot the fundies that worshiped cardboard cutouts of Bush at Jesus Camp.

I'm sure you would label those at Jesus Camp as fanatics. Would you do the same to anyone who behaves in that fashion with regard to Obama?

Quote:
I could also post many images of other messianic imagery of many presidents through history.

But I will agree that there are people that are over-hyped about Obama, but you have to take into consideration some things. His election was historic any way that you look at it, and it's a special kind of 'watershed-like' historic so that makes it even more significant.

Especially when you have many people that were so disillusioned with Bush for the past 8 years, and in steps Barack Obama.

I'm not the type of person who likes fanfare of any kind, and I found myself excited over the prospect of not just an Obama presidency, but a Bush-less presidency.

So on one hand, yes people choose to exert this level of hysteria, but the current events create an environment where this kind of reaction is likely. We saw some of the same fanfare and exaltation for Sarah Palin didn't we trumptman?

Or did you choose to ignore that. Oh wait, you did.

I never say Palin portrayed as any sort of religious icon. Maybe I just don't run in the same circles as some of you. However again, you've helped my point and disproven the point of this thread so thanks. Obama and religious iconography is not just part of some vast right wing conspiracy to help rip him down later. If everyone does it, then the it isn't something new and part of the conspiracy.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #86 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

I'm sure you would label those at Jesus Camp as fanatics. Would you do the same to anyone who behaves in that fashion with regard to Obama?

Er, I did. In my reply.

Quote:
I never say Palin portrayed as any sort of religious icon. Maybe I just don't run in the same circles as some of you. However again, you've helped my point and disproven the point of this thread so thanks. Obama and religious iconography is not just part of some vast right wing conspiracy to help rip him down later. If everyone does it, then the it isn't something new and part of the conspiracy.

Dude, you always "agree to disagree". You are never wrong. You're perfect. Everyone's wrong, you're right.

The only reason this forum exists is because of that.

AND TO ADD:

Just because YOU don't watch or listen to FoxNews or Rush Limbaugh doesn't discount the fact that MILLIONS of others do.

Your media argument is bullshit for this very reason. Your ignorance of that FACT.
post #87 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

The only reason this forum exists is because of that.

Actually, the only reason this forum exists, is because people (mentioning no one in particular) actually bother to reply to the trolling...

...except when its joke trolling by their own side pointing out the stupidity....

Of course, I know that you cant see this post, so I'll press my thumbs into my ears and wiggle my fingers at you, while poking out my tongue.
post #88 of 132
nordkapp, whenever you come up with saying something worthwhile, let us know.

But I'm damn sure everyone has you on their ignore list, so good luck with that.
post #89 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

nordkapp, whenever you come up with saying something worthwhile, let us know.

But I'm damn sure everyone has you on their ignore list, so good luck with that.

I don't. I only have three people on mine, and two of them no longer post here.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #90 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

I don't. I only have three people on mine, and two of them no longer post here.

Well, one can only hope.
post #91 of 132
We could have intelligent conversations but the reality of this place is that since the new roolz, we can only operate in the domain of lowest common denominator.

So when I come to AI, while we could have intelligent conversations - say for instance, the implications of the recently discovered 'dark flow' into the universe from beyond its visible horizon....

but all we are really concerned is, is with proving Nick's ridiculous arguments wrong...

Its funny, I dont see you calling for 'everyone' to put Nick on ignore like me (i know im being a twat - but at least its by intent) - so I can conclude that this state of affairs, ie, having to have the last word with someone who has stated on record that his presence here is not to have a conversation with anyone!!!! ie, its all winger propaganda with the intent of provoking response.

So I concluded that the current set up is actually keeping you both (and a few others) amused because neither of you have anything better to do...so from time to time, when I have nothing better to do, I think its perfectly OK to come in and join in with the fun however I feel is suitable.

Its OK as long as you dont ad-hom anyone. That much is clear. I even personally asked Lundy if its ok to Troll. The reply was, that there is no such thing as trolling, and If you disagree with someones post, then you should prove that they are wrong by providing facts - a million times if necessary.

Im sorry for this, but then again, I voted not to turn the forum into a cartoon joke - I seem to recall that I was the only one who voted against the inevitable consequences of the roolz, which if all those who voted for the new-roolz had thought it through for one second would have realised that the inevitable consequence of the roolz was only going to be a cartoon forum, full of trolls, the only agenda being to wind someone up enough to force them to ad-hom to get themselved banned, in which they would only come back under different alais's, deny all knowledge of previous life, repeat the same arguments ad-infinitum and make rational discussion impossible.

So here we are....and you want everyone to ignore me, because....I want to have a laugh at the state of affairs. When did I need Artmans permission to have a laugh?

Im sorry, I forgot, that things are only funny, when Nick makes the joke, or Pictures are only funny when Artman posts them,

and so what if im not funny, or a bit sad, or have no friends, or cant get a shag, and take myself far too seriously for words, because thats the same premise that the rest of the forum runs under...
post #92 of 132
Apology accepted. My suggestion? Stay serious. You haven't been funny.

If you want to discuss dark matter, there is another forum here where you can. As far as I know, dark matter isn't a political issue.
post #93 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

Er, I did. In my reply.

Alright! Susan Sarandon is a fanatic!

Susan Sarandon compared him to Jesus. “He is a community organizer like Jesus was,” she said, “and now we’re a community and he can organize us.”


Quote:
Dude, you always "agree to disagree". You are never wrong. You're perfect. Everyone's wrong, you're right.

The only reason this forum exists is because of that.

AND TO ADD:

Just because YOU don't watch or listen to FoxNews or Rush Limbaugh doesn't discount the fact that MILLIONS of others do.

Your media argument is bullshit for this very reason. Your ignorance of that FACT.

This is a strange bit of reasoning. See we (once again) have two bits of incongruent reasoning being put forward. The first claim by midwinter and a few others who chime in or more appropriately, pile on, is that media bias cannot be detected because no one is impartial and even though there could be, like most things the standard noise in the sample and measurements above that, we can't have that in this example.

In addition to that, people can't be driven at all by this lack of bias.

Then we have the flip side of this, humorously enough often pushed by the same people that state we know folks like Rush with his "dittoheads" and Fox News are ridiculously biased and that bias clearly informs the views and actions of those who partake of their programming.

Much like the messiah argument, either it can be measured and done by both sides or it can't be measured and thus isn't done by any side. There cannot be it cannot be measured but damn it we just know the one side does it and absolve the other side.

So which is it? I'll let you pick. If bias can be measured and can inform the actions of those who watch the programming, that isn't just true of Fox News, but of CBS, CNN, NPR, ABC, NBC, MSNBC, NY Times, Washington Post, LA Times, Newsweek, etc.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #94 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Alright! Susan Sarandon is a fanatic!

Susan Sarandon compared him to Jesus. “He is a community organizer like Jesus was,” she said, “and now we’re a community and he can organize us.”

Sigh.

And again, context is irrelevant when trumptman really has a point to make.

You might remember when your gang had your big convention, just before you lost the election for reasons you still don't understand.

Guiliani and Palin and Huckabee all had cracks at 'community organisers' and everyone on the other side was predictably outraged. People made t-shirts saying 'Jesus was a community organiser' and stuff.

Susan Sarandon is making the point that Obama WAS a community organizer, and that is good, because community organisers are good. Even Jesus was a community organiser. The attacks on Obama are stupid. Community organisers have a long and proud history, so fuck off."

She is not saying 'Obama is like Jesus, semi-divine, and we should worship him."

But I know you're not going to let this one go, conveniently having forgotten Saint George of the Photo-Op, so whatever.
post #95 of 132
^
What he said.

Trumptman, you don't honestly think she was comparing him to Jesus, do you? You do remember the "community organizer" bullshit your party spewed like venom, right?

Or you do know she wasn't comparing him to Jesus, and you dishonestly used this to pretend it supported your weak argument.
post #96 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hassan i Sabbah View Post

Sigh.

And again, context is irrelevant when trumptman really has a point to make.

You might remember when your gang had your big convention, just before you lost the election for reasons you still don't understand.

Guiliani and Palin and Huckabee all had cracks at 'community organisers' and everyone on the other side was predictably outraged. People made t-shirts saying 'Jesus was a community organiser' and stuff.

Susan Sarandon is making the point that Obama WAS a community organizer, and that is good, because community organisers are good. Even Jesus was a community organiser. The attacks on Obama are stupid. Community organisers have a long and proud history, so fuck off."

She is not saying 'Obama is like Jesus, semi-divine, and we should worship him."

But I know you're not going to let this one go, conveniently having forgotten Saint George of the Photo-Op, so whatever.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

^
What he said.

Trumptman, you don't honestly think she was comparing him to Jesus, do you? You do remember the "community organizer" bullshit your party spewed like venom, right?

Or you do know she wasn't comparing him to Jesus, and you dishonestly used this to pretend it supported your weak argument.

It is really sad and profoundly hypocritical to watch those on the left, who have a party that sees floating subliminal crosses, would deny actual religious iconography with regard to Obama.

It isn't like halos and light shining off a figure explicitly states "this man is Jesus and messiah" as well yet we all get the association. Perhaps I should say those of us not wearing party blinders get the association.

The definition of "like" is resembling or similar. Sarandon says he is resembling or similar to Jesus, but of course, as is always the case in irrational discourse, it is excused because of those damn Republicans. It is that wonderful toxin that you can poor into any liberal discussion to end all rational discourse. Just shout "REPUBLICAN" and the hate centers turn on and the higher thought processing centers shut down. Anyone who wants to even deny the comparison is just delusional and has given up on word definitions. We might be able to debate whether she "son of God" is included in the similarities but to deny the comparison at all is just not in possible.

Considering how many community organizers there have been throughout the centuries, anyone with half a brain will recognize the primary characteristic of citing Jesus is association with declaring himself messiah.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #97 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

It is really sad and profoundly hypocritical to watch those on the left, who have a party that sees floating subliminal crosses, would deny actual religious iconography with regard to Obama.

It isn't like halos and light shining off a figure explicitly states "this man is Jesus and messiah" as well yet we all get the association. Perhaps I should say those of us not wearing party blinders get the association.

The definition of "like" is resembling or similar. Sarandon says he is resembling or similar to Jesus, but of course, as is always the case in irrational discourse, it is excused because of those damn Republicans. It is that wonderful toxin that you can poor into any liberal discussion to end all rational discourse. Just shout "REPUBLICAN" and the hate centers turn on and the higher thought processing centers shut down. Anyone who wants to even deny the comparison is just delusional and has given up on word definitions. We might be able to debate whether she "son of God" is included in the similarities but to deny the comparison at all is just not in possible.

Considering how many community organizers there have been throughout the centuries, anyone with half a brain will recognize the primary characteristic of citing Jesus is association with declaring himself messiah.

I refer you to my pre-emptive 'whatever' given above.

You are intentionally ignoring the context to win an argument.

Edit: also, your party, the Republican party, lost the election. Shouldn't you do the patriotic thing and get behind your President in this time of crisis?
post #98 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

The first claim by midwinter and a few others who chime in or more appropriately, pile on, is that media bias cannot be detected because no one is impartial

That's not what I claimed.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #99 of 132
Watched an old clip from before the election where Hannity is blabbing about Palin getting it by an impartial media... realized that he must think Fox is not a media outlet and thus it is just a propaganda machine.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #100 of 132
It is always strange to watch people on the most popular news channel in America rant about how they can't catch a break in the media.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #101 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

Watched an old clip from before the election where Hannity is blabbing about Palin getting it by an impartial media... realized that he must think Fox is not a media outlet and thus it is just a propaganda machine.

Hannity, "moral crusader" at the Bunny Ranch...where's the halo here though?



I guess as soon as something is legal, it ceases to be immoral. Unless we're talking abortions or gay marriage...
post #102 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

It is really sad and profoundly hypocritical to watch those on the left, who have a party that sees floating subliminal crosses, would deny actual religious iconography with regard to Obama.

It isn't like halos and light shining off a figure explicitly states "this man is Jesus and messiah" as well yet we all get the association. Perhaps I should say those of us not wearing party blinders get the association.

The definition of "like" is resembling or similar. Sarandon says he is resembling or similar to Jesus, but of course, as is always the case in irrational discourse, it is excused because of those damn Republicans. It is that wonderful toxin that you can poor into any liberal discussion to end all rational discourse. Just shout "REPUBLICAN" and the hate centers turn on and the higher thought processing centers shut down. Anyone who wants to even deny the comparison is just delusional and has given up on word definitions. We might be able to debate whether she "son of God" is included in the similarities but to deny the comparison at all is just not in possible.

Considering how many community organizers there have been throughout the centuries, anyone with half a brain will recognize the primary characteristic of citing Jesus is association with declaring himself messiah.

trumptman you are making too much out of this. What the hell does it matter?

If you have something to say about Obama or the Democrats why not try and find something that really matters? I know you probably can't but talking about Susan Sarandon's comparason is pretty irrelevant. So what if she thinks he's similar to anyone? How does that matter in the scheme of things?

Have you ever heard anyone outside of right wing circles use " Messiah " or " Utopia " when refering to Obama? And yet you use them all the time.

What gives?

These were some of the nitpicking little things we were talking about before. I imagine lots of people compared George W Bush to lots of different things ( heh ) but you didn't see anyone carrying on about it specifically. An example : " Horse's Ass ". Well they didn't go on and on about the ramifications of Dubbya being compared to a " Horse's Ass " ( he's round and soft, has a fluffy tail, and you'd better carry a shovel ). They did talk alot about his actions. And well they should.


Quote:
Just shout "REPUBLICAN" and the hate centers turn on and the higher thought processing centers shut down.

They brought this down on themselves and were warned ahead of time. They wouldn't listen and here we are.

And you know what? They're still not listening which means the time for their recovery will take even longer.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #103 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

That's not what I claimed.

Well I asked you to clarify and you were content to watch the piling on and picture crew.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

Watched an old clip from before the election where Hannity is blabbing about Palin getting it by an impartial media... realized that he must think Fox is not a media outlet and thus it is just a propaganda machine.

Maybe at Fox he wasn't sitting at the news anchor desk unlike Olbermann and Matthews.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

trumptman you are making too much out of this. What the hell does it matter?

Ask the guy who started the thread and made the claim. I'm just the guy that disproved it.

Quote:
If you have something to say about Obama or the Democrats why not try and find something that really matters? I know you probably can't but talking about Susan Sarandon's comparason is pretty irrelevant. So what if she thinks he's similar to anyone? How does that matter in the scheme of things?

Have you ever heard anyone outside of right wing circles use " Messiah " or " Utopia " when refering to Obama? And yet you use them all the time.

What gives?

I talk about different topics in different threads. I've brought up spending for example in the boomer thread. Perhaps this is a foreign concept to some, but actually replying with substance to the thread topic is what we are supposed to do. Dismissing every point made with "Busk lost, Obama won, get over it" is what we are NOT supposed to do.

Quote:
These were some of the nitpicking little things we were talking about before. I imagine lots of people compared George W Bush to lots of different things ( heh ) but you didn't see anyone carrying on about it specifically EG : " Horse's Ass ". Well they didn't go on and on about the ramifications of Dubbya being compared to a " Horse's Ass " ( he's round and soft, has a fluffy tail, and you'd better carry a shovel ). They did talk alot about his actions. And well they should.

Actually I'm pretty sure I watched links to him pushing on a pull door, him flubbing words and also you guys taking every little phrase and parsing it for intent.

Quote:
They brought this down on themselves and were warned ahead of time. They wouldn't listen and here we are.

And you know what? They're still not listening which means the time for their recovery will take even longer.

Wrong again. Democrats were elected on promises of Paygo and are now spending trillions. Bush was their cover, now they will be exposed. Watch the surge, death toll and same non-U.N. sanctioned actions take place in Afghanistan and it will be on Team Obama now.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #104 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Wrong again. Democrats were elected on promises of Paygo and are now spending trillions. Bush was their cover, now they will be exposed.

Not that I support the Republican's retarded trickle down strategy either, but the Republicans were heavily opposed to the stimulus package. I recall that the first time the stimulus package went through the Democrats voted for it but a majority of Republicans did not and as a result it did not pass. It was not until they added additional billions in pork did it actually pass.

That's exactly what is going to happen this time too. We're going to turn down a bad idea and wait for it to be worse.

Will the Republicans even be able to filibuster? I mean, assuming all the Democrats support this, if the Republicans lose two votes, probably from Snowe, Collins, Specter, Gregg or even McCain....then no filibuster.

Fucked up situation indeed. Worthy of more discussion.

Quote:
Watch the surge, death toll and same non-U.N. sanctioned actions take place in Afghanistan and it will be on Team Obama now.

That's because he said he would. He has always said that military action against Al-Qaeda and the Taliban would continue. He also promised to remove the US from Iraq as soon as possible, which it looks like he is doing. Delicate balance, much concern for myself, but it's something he inherited from the Bush administration.
post #105 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Wrong again. Democrats were elected on promises of Paygo and are now spending trillions. Bush was their cover, now they will be exposed. Watch the surge, death toll and same non-U.N. sanctioned actions take place in Afghanistan and it will be on Team Obama now.

Good lord.

George Bush was a failure. His policies, which were Republican policies when you voted for him, twice, and defended him, for years, have brought America to the brink of disaster. His administration was a catastrophic failure, and it was a failure for his polices, which were Republican policies.

He was not 'cover'. He was a disaster. The Republican candidate ran an awful campaign and selected an incompetent running mate who scared people.

And you still have absolutely no idea why you lost.
post #106 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

Not that I support the Republican's retarded trickle down strategy either, but the Republicans were heavily opposed to the stimulus package. I recall that the first time the stimulus package went through the Democrats voted for it but a majority of Republicans did not and as a result it did not pass. It was not until they added additional billions in pork did it actually pass.

I can't find the actual bills but it would be interesting to look at the dynamics of the vote switching as you mentioned. There had to be some Democrats that didn't sign on as well because the Republicans alone are not a majority that could turn back a vote. I'm thinking (but can't find the link to prove it) that some RINOS and Blue Dogs came along for the ride the second round.

Quote:
That's exactly what is going to happen this time too. We're going to turn down a bad idea and wait for it to be worse.

Will the Republicans even be able to filibuster? I mean, assuming all the Democrats support this, if the Republicans lose two votes, probably from Snowe, Collins, Specter, Gregg or even McCain....then no filibuster.

Fucked up situation indeed. Worthy of more discussion.

So start the thread man.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hassan i Sabbah View Post

Good lord.

George Bush was a failure. His policies, which were Republican policies when you voted for him, twice, and defended him, for years, have brought America to the brink of disaster. His administration was a catastrophic failure, and it was a failure for his polices, which were Republican policies.

He was not 'cover'. He was a disaster. The Republican candidate ran an awful campaign and selected an incompetent running mate who scared people.

And you still have absolutely no idea why you lost.

Yep. Yet the first Bush had insane approval ratings, won the war in the approved manner and with the approved timeframe, was very moderate on judge selection and even raised taxes. He was tossed out at the end of the first term due to a recession.

People try something different when the economy is bad. They pretty much do this regardless of whether it is right or wrong or will get the proper result. They just go with whoever can't be blamed.

A vote against someone isn't a vote FOR someone.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #107 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

So start the thread man.

Oh gods no. I'm not an expert on this. I'd rather read more about it than write/argue.

But I will rant...

<rant>So make them filibuster. Make them stand up and recite from the phone book for 24 hours. I'm sick of this bullshit about "secret holds" and "gentleman's agreements." If the Republicans want to block this, then make them block it. Don't let them just tell Harry Reid that they have the votes to prevent cloture. Make the bastards stay on the floor nonstop so the country can see their obstruction.

Either make them filibuster, or do away with the filibuster. There is nothing in the Constitution that says you need 60 votes in the Senate to pass legislation. If Republicans aren't will to actually work to block legislation, why should we let them?</rant>

\ Yet...

Obama has already given them more than they deserved considering the drubbing they got in November. If they aren't satisfied he and the Democrats should say, "Fine, we'll rewrite it to give you even less that you will like."

Obama's polling is nearly 80% right now. There is no way the Republicans can win this fight if the Democrats actually decided to fight. That is the big question mark in this.
post #108 of 132
I'm pretty sure that was Obama's point with "I won" and then that crack about Limbaugh. He's telling them that they can have their input heard if they won't act like obstructionist jackasses. If they want to act like obstructionist jackasses, then they can enjoy the wilderness.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #109 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

Oh gods no. I'm not an expert on this. I'd rather read more about it than write/argue.

But I will rant...

<rant>So make them filibuster. Make them stand up and recite from the phone book for 24 hours. I'm sick of this bullshit about "secret holds" and "gentleman's agreements." If the Republicans want to block this, then make them block it. Don't let them just tell Harry Reid that they have the votes to prevent cloture. Make the bastards stay on the floor nonstop so the country can see their obstruction.

Either make them filibuster, or do away with the filibuster. There is nothing in the Constitution that says you need 60 votes in the Senate to pass legislation. If Republicans aren't will to actually work to block legislation, why should we let them?</rant>

\ Yet...

Obama has already given them more than they deserved considering the drubbing they got in November. If they aren't satisfied he and the Democrats should say, "Fine, we'll rewrite it to give you even less that you will like."

Obama's polling is nearly 80% right now. There is no way the Republicans can win this fight if the Democrats actually decided to fight. That is the big question mark in this.

Last I checked you were entitled to your opinion and no one here is an economist. Even if someone were all we would have to do is find a second one and they would be in disagreement.

So don't hold back, have some fun.

As for the filibuster bit, I mostly agree. These things should be forced to happen, but just suggested.

I would suggest though that part of the reason Democrats made some gains were claims that they would be bipartisan. It would be just another broken promise, but Americans do not hesitate to divide their government if they think someone is pursuing something too strongly.

Lastly, Obama was at 80% on the DAY of inaugeration. He is already 60-62% with the first Gallup and Rassmussen poll and could just as quickly drop if he has some contentious fights.

Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

I'm pretty sure that was Obama's point with "I won" and then that crack about Limbaugh. He's telling them that they can have their input heard if they won't act like obstructionist jackasses. If they want to act like obstructionist jackasses, then they can enjoy the wilderness.

Yippee wilderness. I think President Obama should take your advice. It worked so well for President Clinton in 1992.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #110 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

People try something different when the economy is bad. They pretty much do this regardless of whether it is right or wrong or will get the proper result. They just go with whoever can't be blamed.

A vote against someone isn't a vote FOR someone.

Yup. That's right. Right on, Nick.

Bush did a bang-up job. No-one's particularly enthusiastic about Barack Obama. It's just the recession, which is... somebody else's fault. Boomers. Clinton. Jimmy Carter. Rahm Emanuel.

I would encourage you to put a post to this effect on your blog.
post #111 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Well I asked you to clarify and you were content to watch the piling on and picture crew.



Maybe at Fox he wasn't sitting at the news anchor desk unlike Olbermann and Matthews.



Ask the guy who started the thread and made the claim. I'm just the guy that disproved it.



I talk about different topics in different threads. I've brought up spending for example in the boomer thread. Perhaps this is a foreign concept to some, but actually replying with substance to the thread topic is what we are supposed to do. Dismissing every point made with "Busk lost, Obama won, get over it" is what we are NOT supposed to do.



Actually I'm pretty sure I watched links to him pushing on a pull door, him flubbing words and also you guys taking every little phrase and parsing it for intent.



Wrong again. Democrats were elected on promises of Paygo and are now spending trillions. Bush was their cover, now they will be exposed. Watch the surge, death toll and same non-U.N. sanctioned actions take place in Afghanistan and it will be on Team Obama now.

Quote:
Ask the guy who started the thread and made the claim. I'm just the guy that disproved it

Where did you do that? Plus I said alot more in my post that you didn't address. Your response said basically nothing. Any of the fun made about Dubbya was made after he'd fucked up a lot. You started judging Obama and making fun of him, nitpicking, and predicting what he was going to do before he was even in office. Between the way Dubbya was treated by the republicans and Obama there's no comparison. Much more nitpicking, much more scrutiny, many more little things.

And another thing trumptman we're having to take expensive measures to get out of this economic crisis and you're talking about how expensive Obama will be? Well why do you think that is? Who's been in power for 8 long years? A hint : It's not the Boomer's fault. I'd say the buck stops at 1600 Pennsylvannia avenue.

But I know you don't want to hear that.

In reply to your statement :

Quote:
Just shout "REPUBLICAN" and the hate centers turn on and the higher thought processing centers shut down.

I said :
Quote:
They brought this down on themselves and were warned ahead of time. They wouldn't listen and here we are.

And you know what? They're still not listening which means the time for their recovery will take even longer.

Your reply :

Quote:
Wrong again. Democrats were elected on promises of Paygo and are now spending trillions. Bush was their cover, now they will be exposed. Watch the surge, death toll and same non-U.N. sanctioned actions take place in Afghanistan and it will be on Team Obama now.

Quote:

So the democrats don't meet your expectations and that's why the republicans are so hated? Uh yeah!

trumptman we have been warning people about what would happen if the republicans followed their usual course on this forum for years! And here we are. I'm sorry if it's time to pay the piper! But the real sorrow comes from the fact that we must all pay for their mismanegement.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #112 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hassan i Sabbah View Post

Yup. That's right. Right on, Nick.

Bush did a bang-up job. No-one's particularly enthusiastic about Barack Obama. It's just the recession, which is... somebody else's fault. Boomers. Clinton. Jimmy Carter. Rahm Emanuel.

I would encourage you to put a post to this effect on your blog.

If you ever read it instead of just being jealous of it, you'd know I have already mention such things there often.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Where did you do that? Plus I said alot more in my post that you didn't address. Your response said basically nothing. Any of the fun made about Dubbya was made after he'd fucked up a lot. You started judging Obama and making fun of him, nitpicking, and predicting what he was going to do before he was even in office. Between the way Dubbya was treated by the republicans and Obama there's no comparison. Much more nitpicking, much more scrutiny, many more little things.

And another thing trumptman we're having to take expensive measures to get out of this economic crisis and you're talking about how expensive Obama will be? Well why do you think that is? Who's been in power for 8 long years? A hint : It's not the Boomer's fault. I'd say the buck stops at 1600 Pennsylvannia avenue.

But I know you don't want to hear that.

Of course you say a lot more in your posts but that doesn't make it relevant. Just like there, you acknowledge the fun made of Bush, but attempt to excuse it. That is just the moving goal posts. People claimed it didn't happen. It did. You declare it wasn't until he "screwed up" but that is bullshit. I can remember the "gravitas" talking point which was repeated so often by the media after he selected Cheney that Limbaugh made a clip about it that someone sent me via email. So move those goal posts some more. Claiming that no one made fun of or nitpicked about Bush is just pure lunacy. I mean holy fuck he was only the "illegitimate" president and you want to claim that Obama has been given a harder look here at the beginning. Are you high?

Obama, Bush and Clinton are all Boomers. This "crisis" is no where near the depression. It is the boomers looking at their lack of savings and watching their already meager 401k's shrink even more as they begin to ponder old age for the first time. No matter what you want to declare even about Clinton, there has been deficits for 14 of the 16 years with Clinton and Bush and Obama is going to blow the doors off what everyone else has done. The plan has been shown and it isn't some trillion dollar bet to get America off oil, smarten up our grid or repair our infrastructure. It is just a big income transfer giveaway that will be the third strike for our nation.

I guess if I don't whether I "don't want to hear that" then you'll complain that you typed a bunch of crap I didn't even address. Crap is crap. Claims about me are ad-homs.

Let me break it down to sooth your whining and yes Bergermeister and others who get off on noting the return serve is actually hitting back, enjoy yourselves.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

trumptman you are making too much out of this. What the hell does it matter?

Hmmmmmm..... a claim about me and a claim not to care while pressing your case. Bullshit.

Quote:
If you have something to say about Obama or the Democrats why not try and find something that really matters? I know you probably can't but talking about Susan Sarandon's comparason is pretty irrelevant. So what if she thinks he's similar to anyone? How does that matter in the scheme of things?

Closing Gitmo doesn't show that the people there are going to be released nor does it say where they will go. It is a year off and makes good headlines while doing nothing.

Obama made more wonderful headlines today because they are allowing a state with nearly double digit unemployment (9.3%) and a $40+ BILLION dollar hole in the budget that has had it's bond rating cut and that will begin issuing warrants (IOU's) for tax refunds, bills and so forth to legislate on that very pressing matter, carbon dioxide. It is a blue state with Dems in every executive office except for Governor where Arnold started as a RINO and moved more left. The NY Times which has a corporate debt rating lower than junk and which is borrowing money from a Mexican billionaire at usury rates just to continue reporting their bullshit, reported on it favorably.

I'm sure you want to address all those points. I'm sure you will with "Bush lost, Obama won, get over it."

The media won't even question Obama. The comics won't even joke about Obama. The cartoonists won't even draw him. Tossing some stones might wake them up from their collective dream state and make something happen before another couple trillion rolls down the drain.

Quote:
Have you ever heard anyone outside of right wing circles use " Messiah " or " Utopia " when refering to Obama? And yet you use them all the time.

What gives?

I've seen plenty of people use religious iconography with Obama on both sides. The claim was only the right and only for the purpose of tearing him down. We now know that is not true. Showing that Bush was addressed that way, showing that the left and right do it to both makes it something EVERYONE does and not just something that fits the little conspiracy theory that is the premise of this thread. It has been disproven. If the right or left made little halo pictures of Bush, then it isn't just something done to tear down Obama now is it?

(What gives, why does it matter, you don't really mean that, why is it important, why can't you see why you lost, enjoy staying down lalalalalala)

Quote:
These were some of the nitpicking little things we were talking about before. I imagine lots of people compared George W Bush to lots of different things ( heh ) but you didn't see anyone carrying on about it specifically. An example : " Horse's Ass ". Well they didn't go on and on about the ramifications of Dubbya being compared to a " Horse's Ass " ( he's round and soft, has a fluffy tail, and you'd better carry a shovel ). They did talk alot about his actions. And well they should.

They brought this down on themselves and were warned ahead of time. They wouldn't listen and here we are.

And you know what? They're still not listening which means the time for their recovery will take even longer.

Nonsense. Everyone votes their pocketbook and there isn't anyone that is immune to it. As I noted (that would be called disproving the point) in 1992 the Democrats had one more seat than they have now in the House. They had one less seat in the Senate and they had the presidency. In other words same shit, different decade. Bush I(41) raised taxes, he did not cut them. He fought a U.N. sanctioned war that stopped at freeing Kuwait while bringing along all our allies. He didn't torture, he didn't have have any of the baggage claimed about how W screwed up. Even in terms of judges he gave us Clarence Thomas but also David Souter.

In other words, there really isn't much a guy like you could fault him for and he lost to Clinton because of a recession. His approval rating in the midst of that recession, 37%. No torture, no wrong wars, no tax cuts, no bailouts and working with a Democratic Congress all four years. He got 38% of the popular vote as a result of following the Jimmac advice.

History, not hypotheticals show your claims are complete and utter bullshit. Republicans decided to address this not by becoming RINOs but by rallying behind Newt Gingrich and the Contract with America which won them their first majority in in the house in 40 years.

1992 - 258
2008 - 257

Republicans have to stay away from this stimulus plan and be willing to stop the Democrats from spending us into the POR (Pelosi, Obama, Reid) house to the tune of a trillion a year. They can have a majority very quickly if they do this.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #113 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

If you ever read it instead of just being jealous of it, you'd know I have already mention such things there often.



Of course you say a lot more in your posts but that doesn't make it relevant. Just like there, you acknowledge the fun made of Bush, but attempt to excuse it. That is just the moving goal posts. People claimed it didn't happen. It did. You declare it wasn't until he "screwed up" but that is bullshit. I can remember the "gravitas" talking point which was repeated so often by the media after he selected Cheney that Limbaugh made a clip about it that someone sent me via email. So move those goal posts some more. Claiming that no one made fun of or nitpicked about Bush is just pure lunacy. I mean holy fuck he was only the "illegitimate" president and you want to claim that Obama has been given a harder look here at the beginning. Are you high?

Obama, Bush and Clinton are all Boomers. This "crisis" is no where near the depression. It is the boomers looking at their lack of savings and watching their already meager 401k's shrink even more as they begin to ponder old age for the first time. No matter what you want to declare even about Clinton, there has been deficits for 14 of the 16 years with Clinton and Bush and Obama is going to blow the doors off what everyone else has done. The plan has been shown and it isn't some trillion dollar bet to get America off oil, smarten up our grid or repair our infrastructure. It is just a big income transfer giveaway that will be the third strike for our nation.

I guess if I don't whether I "don't want to hear that" then you'll complain that you typed a bunch of crap I didn't even address. Crap is crap. Claims about me are ad-homs.

Let me break it down to sooth your whining and yes Bergermeister and others who get off on noting the return serve is actually hitting back, enjoy yourselves.



Hmmmmmm..... a claim about me and a claim not to care while pressing your case. Bullshit.



Closing Gitmo doesn't show that the people there are going to be released nor does it say where they will go. It is a year off and makes good headlines while doing nothing.

Obama made more wonderful headlines today because they are allowing a state with nearly double digit unemployment (9.3%) and a $40+ BILLION dollar hole in the budget that has had it's bond rating cut and that will begin issuing warrants (IOU's) for tax refunds, bills and so forth to legislate on that very pressing matter, carbon dioxide. It is a blue state with Dems in every executive office except for Governor where Arnold started as a RINO and moved more left. The NY Times which has a corporate debt rating lower than junk and which is borrowing money from a Mexican billionaire at usury rates just to continue reporting their bullshit, reported on it favorably.

I'm sure you want to address all those points. I'm sure you will with "Bush lost, Obama won, get over it."

The media won't even question Obama. The comics won't even joke about Obama. The cartoonists won't even draw him. Tossing some stones might wake them up from their collective dream state and make something happen before another couple trillion rolls down the drain.



I've seen plenty of people use religious iconography with Obama on both sides. The claim was only the right and only for the purpose of tearing him down. We now know that is not true. Showing that Bush was addressed that way, showing that the left and right do it to both makes it something EVERYONE does and not just something that fits the little conspiracy theory that is the premise of this thread. It has been disproven. If the right or left made little halo pictures of Bush, then it isn't just something done to tear down Obama now is it?

(What gives, why does it matter, you don't really mean that, why is it important, why can't you see why you lost, enjoy staying down lalalalalala)



Nonsense. Everyone votes their pocketbook and there isn't anyone that is immune to it. As I noted (that would be called disproving the point) in 1992 the Democrats had one more seat than they have now in the House. They had one less seat in the Senate and they had the presidency. In other words same shit, different decade. Bush I(41) raised taxes, he did not cut them. He fought a U.N. sanctioned war that stopped at freeing Kuwait while bringing along all our allies. He didn't torture, he didn't have have any of the baggage claimed about how W screwed up. Even in terms of judges he gave us Clarence Thomas but also David Souter.

In other words, there really isn't much a guy like you could fault him for and he lost to Clinton because of a recession. His approval rating in the midst of that recession, 37%. No torture, no wrong wars, no tax cuts, no bailouts and working with a Democratic Congress all four years. He got 38% of the popular vote as a result of following the Jimmac advice.

History, not hypotheticals show your claims are complete and utter bullshit. Republicans decided to address this not by becoming RINOs but by rallying behind Newt Gingrich and the Contract with America which won them their first majority in in the house in 40 years.

1992 - 258
2008 - 257

Republicans have to stay away from this stimulus plan and be willing to stop the Democrats from spending us into the POR (Pelosi, Obama, Reid) house to the tune of a trillion a year. They can have a majority very quickly if they do this.

See there you go again. Can't you sum up? Sometimes I think you depend on making your reply so convoluted people give up half way trying to decipher what you're getting at!

Look let's just take one thing. During 911 people were very pro Bush. His ratings soared.

Here's a comparison : http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/12/...adership.poll/

Quote:
Just six in 10 felt that Bush was a strong leader when he took office in 2001. After the attacks of September 11,that number rose to three in four.


As a side note I see Obama's preoffice popularity as partially due to the fact that he's not Bush!


But then when they saw how Bush handled things that's when it started to hit the fan.

No OSBL!

Attacking another country that didn't have anything to do with it.

No WMD.

Wire tapping!

Money and lives spent on a useless war that didn't have any connection at all ( although he and Cheney tried really hard to connect the dots ).

No wonder Bush was so unpopular and people made fun of him!

And trumptman this is just one item!

Oh! Your Boomer theory is stupid and insulting. Just an attempt to get people to look the other way ( again ) when the real blame is obvious. And Trumptman according to polls the american people feel this way also.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #114 of 132
Wow. You didn't hit a single point I made. You just complained it was confusing to you. Sorry if the quote feature is confusing to you.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #115 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Wow. You didn't hit a single point I made. You just complained it was confusing to you. Sorry if the quote feature is confusing to you.


I could almost say " What points? "

But let me take everything you said and do something you obviously can't and sum up.

The reason everyone is predisposed to liking Obama from the get go is because it's such a relief to have someone in charge that isn't George Bush or a Neocon. After 8 long years it's a relief! It's like someone's at the wheel again.

The reason people don't like the Neocons and the republican party has fallen out of favor is because they're lame. They're for themselves. They're not for the american people as a whole ( only those on their team ). They don't tell the truth on a regular basis.

And most of all trumptman the American people are fed up with them. They're supposed to not be for big government but something went wrong with the traditional republican ideology. I'd call wiretapping a case of goverment getting really too big!

This is why.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #116 of 132
It would be sort of like saying "what polls?"
Quote:
Consumer confidence has now fallen for four straight days. Forty-five percent (45%) support Obama’s economic recovery plan and 34% are opposed. Still, voters overwhelmingly expect the Obama plan to become law during his first 100 days in office.

Forty-nine percent (49%) of voters say that the President is more liberal than they are. Fifty-nine percent (59%) worry that Congress and the President will increase government spending too much while only 17% have the opposite concern and are more worried that the politicians will cut taxes too much.

Quote:
They're lame

Is this high school?

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #117 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

It would be sort of like saying "what polls?"




Is this high school?

What hogwash!

From your link :

Quote:
As he nears the end of his first week in the new job, Barack Obama is getting very positive reviews from the nation’s voters.



Look we all know you're trying desperately to turn defeat into victory some how.

Searching! Endlessly searching for some little thing you can pin your hopes on to see Obama go down in flames.

Well don't hold your breath.

Obama may do somethings I don't like. He may screw up on somethings. But if you're waiting for that big disaster don't. unlike some leaders I think he's way too smart for that.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #118 of 132
It is easy to like a person but not a plan. THAT is what the polls make clear. Soon the two will converge and Obama will stand for a trillion in spendin instead of just hope and change.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #119 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

It is easy to like a person but not a plan. THAT is what the polls make clear. Soon the two will converge and Obama will stand for a trillion in spendin instead of just hope and change.

I don't know Obama good enough to say I like him as a person. However my intuition says he may be. And that he may be right on the mark.

You know. The intuition that said he's probably win the election and before that maybe he's the sort of thing we need. Young blood. Almost not a Boomer!

" Soon the two will converge "! Soon! Soon! Wait for it!

Well we'll see won't we?

Of course if Obama's plans do succeed you'll give something else the credit.

Better get your excuses or diversion ready.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #120 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

If you ever read it instead of just being jealous of it, you'd know I have already mention such things there often.

Is this high school?

Anyway. Excellent. Please, continue to post this kind of stuff. As long as the consensus in your party remains that George Bush was really great, Sarah Palin is the answer and no-one's really that into Barack Obama you have absolutely no chance of retaking the White House and that's absolutely fine by me.

Oh, and yes, I'm deeply jealous of your blog.

You've taken it off your sig. Here it is, so everyone else can get jealous of it too. www.newredmajority.com (I'm deeply jealous of the name.) And you've got this one: http://www.obamaparsed.com/

Keep it it.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › The Preemptive Betrayed by the Messiah Thread