AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › When is the United States going to recover from Democratic Rule?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

When is the United States going to recover from Democratic Rule? - Page 5

Poll Results: When is the United States going to recover from Democratic Rule?

Poll expired: Jun 8, 2009  
  • 0% (0)
    2010
  • 16% (1)
    2012
  • 0% (0)
    2016
  • 33% (2)
    Never
  • 50% (3)
    When the Chinese cut up our credit card
6 Total Votes  
post #161 of 261
9/7/09 at 10:58am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

Just watched a special on 9/11 and its aftermath, lived through (and continue to live through) Iraq and Afghanistan, and have spent the past year watching the election, Sara, Glen, Rush, the Tea Parties, the Birthers, the health deniers and now the parents and schools refusing to show the president's speech tomorrow.

Forget this thread.

When will the world recover from Republican rule and influence?

About the time republicans wake up to the fact that certain factions of their party are making them look extra stupid. Then they can go back to being just the other party instead of trying so hard to grab the limelight.
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 #162 of 261
9/7/09 at 3:37pm
I didn't see a graph of how happy (or unhappy) people are, but how unemployed they are. Surely the two may correlate, but that's irrelevant.
Reply
Reply
post #163 of 261
9/7/09 at 4:27pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by involuntary_serf View Post

I didn't see a graph of how happy (or unhappy) people are, but how unemployed they are. Surely the two may correlate, but that's irrelevant.

Perhaps you could elaborate.
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 #164 of 261
9/7/09 at 4:27pm
But the good news is that Barack Obama is gearing up to micro-manage the manufacturing sector. And, even better, with someone who doesn't have any experience in manufacturing. But apparently he's good at looking out for unions and at least he attended a Labor Zionist summer camp when he was young.

I'm pretty sure this is a good idea.
Reply
Reply
post #165 of 261
9/7/09 at 4:28pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by involuntary_serf View Post

But the good news is that Barack Obama is gearing up to micro-manage the manufacturing sector. And, even better, with someone who doesn't have any experience in manufacturing. But apparently he's good at looking out for unions and at least he attended a Labor Zionist summer camp when he was young.

I'm pretty sure this is a good idea.

Hey it's better than " Hamburger manufactoring ".
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 #166 of 261
9/7/09 at 4:28pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Perhaps you could elaborate.

On what?
Reply
Reply
post #167 of 261
9/7/09 at 4:30pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by involuntary_serf View Post

On what?

What you were talking about. I'm sorry I know you're good at one sentence jabs but perhaps you could be more specific about what you were refering to.
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 #168 of 261
9/7/09 at 4:33pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by involuntary_serf View Post

Polls. Pffft.

You folks are putting far too much faith in an American public that was dumb enough to elect Obama.

I haven't seen you suggest something better.
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 #169 of 261
9/7/09 at 4:36pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

What you were talking about. I'm sorry I know you're good at one sentence jabs but perhaps you could be more specific about what you were refering to.

Can you be more specific about exactly which part of these statements you wish me to elaborate on?

Quote:
Originally Posted by involuntary_serf

I didn't see a graph of how happy (or unhappy) people are, but how unemployed they are.

This seems fairly straight forward. There is no graph here about how happy people are, only how unemployed they are. Is there some graph I'm missing?


Quote:
Originally Posted by involuntary_serf

Surely the two may correlate.

I would say that unemployment and unhappiness probably correlate with one another. But I don't know this, and furthermore...


Quote:
Originally Posted by involuntary_serf

that's irrelevant.

Well...it is irrelevant. The graph I saw was about how Barack Obama's "stimulus" plan to reduce unemployment, didn't actually reduce unemployment.
Reply
Reply
post #170 of 261
9/7/09 at 4:38pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by involuntary_serf View Post

Can you be more specific about exactly which part of these statements you wish me to elaborate on?



This seems fairly straight forward. There is no graph here about how happy people are, only how unemployed they are. Is there some graph I'm missing?




I would say that unemployment and unhappiness probably correlate with one another. But I don't know this, and furthermore...




Well...it is irrelevant. The graph I saw was about how Barack Obama's "stimulus" plan to reduce unemployment, didn't actually reduce unemployment.


Quote:
Can you be more specific about exactly which part of these statements you wish me to elaborate on?


It was one sentence you posted. If you can't read your own stuff I can't help you there.

There's more to unhappyness in a recession than unemployment. Fear of unemployment for one. And why would you want to know if people are happy?

Unless you were just posting to be posting.
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 #171 of 261
9/7/09 at 6:44pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

It was one sentence you posted. If you can't read your own stuff I can't help you there.

There's more to unhappyness in a recession than unemployment. Fear of unemployment for one. And why would you want to know if people are happy?

Unless you were just posting to be posting.

I can read and understand what I posted just fine. You clearly are engaged in some kind of game. Have fun playing with yourself.
Reply
Reply
post #172 of 261
9/8/09 at 6:57am
Quote:
Originally Posted by involuntary_serf View Post

I can read and understand what I posted just fine. You clearly are engaged in some kind of game. Have fun playing with yourself.

It is you sir who have been playing a game as you have posted statements without anything to back it up.

A game I'm all too familure with.
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 #173 of 261
9/10/09 at 9:41pm
Here's a real toe-tapper. Turn up the sound!

The Government Can

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #174 of 261
9/12/09 at 10:25am
And then...Barack Obama decided to raise prices on tires.
Reply
Reply
post #175 of 261
9/12/09 at 11:19am
Thread Starter 
I'm sure all the seniors who didn't get their COLA will be just thrilled.

When Obama was talking about COLA being bad for you, everyone thought he was talking about soda though.

"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 #176 of 261
9/12/09 at 11:53am
Quote:
Originally Posted by involuntary_serf View Post

And then...Barack Obama decided to raise prices on tires.

Not only is that NOT what he's doing, it's NOT what the article even says he's doing.

Let's look at what the article actually stated, before the feverish contortions of your spin:

"President Obama will place tariffs on imports of some Chinese tires for three years in an effort to curb a surge in exports that has rocked the U.S. tire industry."


Trying to protect US industry from predatory Chinese imports - more proof that Obama's a Commie Socialist, huh?

eye
bee
BEE
Reply
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
post #177 of 261
9/12/09 at 12:00pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by FormerLurker View Post

Not only is that NOT what he's doing, it's NOT what the article even says he's doing.

Let's look at what the article actually stated, before the feverish contortions of your spin:

"President Obama will place tariffs on imports of some Chinese tires for three years in an effort to curb a surge in exports that has rocked the U.S. tire industry."

What exactly do you think tariffs do? Not only do they directly raise the price on the tariffed good, they act as a price support for competitive products regardless of origin. The reason for the tariff is because the product is selling too cheaply.

Quote:
The tariffs will start at 35 percent in the first year, then would decline to 30 percent in the second year and 25 percent in the third.

What this means in plain english is that these specific tires will be 35%, 30% and 25% more expensive for the next three years. This also provides competitive cover for the American companies that cannot sell as cheaply.

And China says:

Quote:
"The case is neither supported by facts nor does it have valid legal grounds," he added.

Well welcome to Barack Obama's world Mr. Ziying. We're getting a lot of that here in the U.S.


P.S. Of course this demonstrates yet another clear and stark difference between Barack Obama and George W. Bush. For Bush it was steel, for Obama it's tires. (sigh)
Reply
Reply
post #178 of 261
9/12/09 at 2:05pm
Isn't it funny that the conservatives on this forum can throw all the clever quips they want and it still won't change the fact that as much as Obama's popularity has dropped a bit it's nothing compared to how unpopular the republicans are!

Of course his positive index has gone down a bit. That was to be expected. Now if things were to turn around ( which I suspect they will in the next year ) they'll be right back to looking like they did right after the election.

If I were them I'd stop now because it will only feed the fire for later.

Here's a poll from June oif this year.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/120815/Re...Own-Party.aspx
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 #179 of 261
9/12/09 at 2:34pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Isn't it funny that the conservatives on this forum can throw all the clever quips they want and it still won't change the fact that as much as Obama's popularity has dropped a bit it's nothing compared to how unpopular the republicans are!

Of course his positive index has gone down a bit. That was to be expected. Now if things were to turn around ( which I suspect they will in the next year ) they'll be right back to looking like they did right after the election.

If I were them I'd stop now because it will only feed the fire for later.

Here's a poll from June oif this year.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/120815/Re...Own-Party.aspx

You have an interesting worldview that seems to boil down to: "Whatever or whoever most people are favoring is best and right."

Huh. Well it's something I guess. That approach eliminates the need to think for one's self anyway.
Reply
Reply
post #180 of 261
9/12/09 at 3:01pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Isn't it funny that the conservatives on this forum can throw all the clever quips they want and it still won't change the fact that as much as Obama's popularity has dropped a bit it's nothing compared to how unpopular the republicans are!


http://www.gallup.com/poll/120815/Re...Own-Party.aspx

I think the Repubs are toast. Eight years of Bush then eight years of Obama is going to kill them off big time.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/0..._n_284408.html

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply
post #181 of 261
9/12/09 at 3:10pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by involuntary_serf View Post

You have an interesting worldview that seems to boil down to: "Whatever or whoever most people are favoring is best and right."

Huh. Well it's something I guess. That approach eliminates the need to think for one's self anyway.

That's one I've heard before and it's such an easy sudo argument to make.

1. I've never said that quantity makes right. But it does make elections go one way or another. It's called " Democracy ".

2. In order for this to be a valid argument on your side it assumes the majority is wrong and the minority is right. This argument proves no such thing.

In other words it's no argument at all.

See. I think for myself just fine and will continue to do so despite your worldview.

Something your side seems to think is volume ( loudness or making a big Tea party type stink ) makes right. Which it doesn't make up for numbers in an election and it doesn't make for lack of facts either. It has nothing to do with the facts which your side seems to be in short supply. It doesn't make you right as you would say. So they resort to making things up.

Then when called on it or they don't get their way they get angry ( like Joe Wilson's lack of professionalism ). Which doesn't help things either.
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 #182 of 261
9/12/09 at 3:33pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

1. I've never said that quantity makes right. But it does make elections go one way or another. It's called " Democracy ".

Perhaps not explicitly, but the general tenor of a bulk of your posts strongly indicates a conformance with this type of philosophy.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

2. In order for this to be a valid argument on your side it assumes the majority is wrong and the minority is right. This argument proves no such thing.

In other words it's no argument at all.

What argument? I was simply making an observation of the arguments you appear to be making, which appear to rely heavily on polls and what the majority are thinking or believing.

I actually don't believe that rightness or wrongness or truth or false are connected in any way to majority or minority opinion (except, perhaps, by coincidence). This is plainly fallacious. You, however, put much stock in majority opinion. Perhaps too much.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

See. I think for myself just fine and will continue to do so dispite your worldview.

Indeed my worldview should have no bearing on yours or your choices or opinions or conclusions. I was simply observing what yours appears to be based on the makeup of your posts.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Something your side...

My "side"? What is my "side" exactly? Why this us vs. them mindset? Why not simply deal with me as an individual? Why not deal with everyone as individual rather than trafficking in assumptions, prejudices, stereotypes, caricatures, simplistic labels, etc.?


Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

seems to think is volume ( loudness or making a big Tea party type stink ) makes right.

It's true that some think this. There are people like this from all political stripes. I am not one of them.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

...and it doesn't make for lack of facts either.

Nor does majority support.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

It has nothing to do with the facts which your side seems to be in short supply.

I don't know what "side" you're speaking of. You'd rather speak of some vague "side" and some caricature of me you've created in your mind. Fine. Have fun with that.

As far as facts, evidence and logical reasoning goes...I believe my opinions are supported by them.
Reply
Reply
post #183 of 261
9/12/09 at 3:39pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by involuntary_serf View Post

Perhaps not explicitly, but the general tenor of a bulk of your posts strongly indicates a conformance with this type of philosophy.




What argument? I was simply making an observation of the arguments you appear to be making, which appear to rely heavily on polls and what the majority are thinking or believing.

I actually don't believe that rightness or wrongness or truth or false are connected in any way to majority or minority opinion (except, perhaps, by coincidence). This is plainly fallacious. You, however, put much stock in majority opinion. Perhaps too much.




Indeed my worldview should have no bearing on yours or your choices or opinions or conclusions. I was simply observing what yours appears to be based on the makeup of your posts.




My "side"? What is my "side" exactly? Why this us vs. them mindset? Why not simply deal with me as an individual? Why not deal with everyone as individual rather than trafficking in assumptions, prejudices, stereotypes, caricatures, simplistic labels, etc.?




It's true that some think this. There are people like this from all political stripes. I am not one of them.




Nor does majority support.




I don't know what "side" you're speaking of. You'd rather speak of some vague "side" and some caricature of me you've created in your mind. Fine. Have fun with that.

As far as facts, evidence and logical reasoning goes...I believe my opinions are supported by them.

Quote:
Perhaps not explicitly, but the general tenor of a bulk of your posts strongly indicates a conformance with this type of philosophy.

So?

Quote:
What argument? I was simply making an observation of the arguments you appear to be making, which appear to rely heavily on polls and what the majority are thinking or believing.

If by that you mean I rely on the facts and not hearsay then yes! You're right!

Quote:
My "side"? What is my "side" exactly? Why this us vs. them mindset? Why not simply deal with me as an individual? Why not deal with everyone as individual rather than trafficking in assumptions, prejudices, stereotypes, caricatures, simplistic labels, etc.?

The very nature of your posts define this.

Quote:
It's true that some think this. There are people like this from all political stripes. I am not one of them.

It's a free country ( thank god! ).

Quote:
I don't know what "side" you're speaking of. You'd rather speak of some vague "side" and some caricature of me you've created in your mind. Fine. Have fun with that.

Empty tit for tat type statement.

Quote:
As far as facts, evidence and logical reasoning goes...I believe my opinions are supported by them

Not that I've seen. They seemed to be laced with partisan reasoning.
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 #184 of 261
9/14/09 at 4:47pm
Huh. I bet no one could have predicted this.

Quote:
the ministry unexpectedly announced on Sunday night that it would take the first steps toward imposing tariffs on American exports of automotive products and chicken meat.
Reply
Reply
post #185 of 261
11/6/09 at 6:34am
It's that time again. Time to take another look at how well the Barack Obama "stimulus" is doing compared to its dire predictions and grand expectations with regard to employment and jobs.

http://michaelscomments.wordpress.co...te-again-10-2/

First, we'll look at an updated version of the famous Romer-Bernstein chart which was used to convince everyone that without the stimulus there would be an employment disaster, but with the stimulus, things would be just nifty and start getting better:



Oops. Someone guessed way wrong.

But, as the blog post (linked above) notes, the more important statistic, the one that brushes past the bullshit and the questions about who's still looking for a job, what jobless claims figures are () is the number of jobs available:



Oops again.


But don't feel bad if you feel misled and confused. Even some with Nobel prizes in economics were a little off their game:

Quote:
Kudos, by the way, to the administration-in-waiting for providing this — it will be a joy to argue policy with an administration that provides comprehensible, honest reports, not case studies in how to lie with statistics.

That said, the report is written in such a way as to make it hard to figure out exactly what’s in the plan. This also makes it hard to evaluate the reasonableness of the assumed multipliers. But here’s the thing: the estimates appear to be very close to what I’ve been getting.
Reply
Reply
post #186 of 261
11/7/09 at 9:43am
Thread Starter 
Losing is winning, unemployment is a staycation, debt is savings, comedians are newscasters and newscasters that ask questions are comedians.

Thanks to Involuntary for the updates.

"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 #187 of 261
11/19/09 at 9:16am
Stimulus job creation data flawed:

Quote:
The government watchdog overseeing economic stimulus spending said Thursday the White House was too quick to take credit for saving or creating 640,000 jobs.

The White House trumpeted job figures released last month as proof the administration was on track to save or create 3.5 million jobs by the end of next year.

But Earl Devaney, Inspector General for the Department of the Interior, the agency that collected and released the data, said Thursday there were too many errors to know how many jobs were created.

Wow. I am surprised by this.
Reply
Reply
post #188 of 261
11/23/09 at 3:30pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by involuntary_serf View Post

Stimulus job creation data flawed:



Wow. I am surprised by this.

MSNBC is reporting it. Must be true.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #189 of 261
11/29/09 at 11:08am
Thread Starter 
49.9

The majority no longer approves. They may not yet declare they disapprove (44% on that) but they no longer approve of President Obama.

What happens to that missing 6% in the middle? Good question. The other point is this which has been noted by many a political pundit, it is much harder to get someone to commit BACK to something after they have declared they no longer approve of it or desire it. It isn't impossible but people are initially making an impression on something largely unknown. Obama was new, historic, a breath of fresh are that was supposed to come in and change Washington.

Now a year later, the people know him, his administration and his actions. They have moved to the point of withdrawing their approval. The majority have not yet expressed disapproval but when approval has been withdrawn, the next step isn't that far away.

"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 #190 of 261
12/1/09 at 5:33am
Thread Starter 

"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 #191 of 261
12/1/09 at 5:45am
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post


Trumpetman, can we have a little clarification from you about when its OK to post satirical, mocking cartoons and when its not?

At the moment, it seems its Its fine if I do it and the target is that black bastard Barack Obama. It's a little confusing.

Could you let us know?

Thanks.

Edit: by the way, in the last-but-one square of your cartoon, the black guy into 'race-based' stuff seems to be giving a perfect, exact list of all George W. Bush's achievements whilst he was President! It's uncanny! Seriously! Read it through! :holyfuckingshit:
Reply
Reply
post #192 of 261
12/1/09 at 5:59am
It's called "projecting", MJ.

Quote:
In classical psychology, projection is always seen as a defense mechanism that occurs when a person's own unacceptable or threatening feelings are repressed and then attributed to someone else.

An example of this behavior might be blaming another for self failure. The mind may avoid the discomfort of consciously admitting personal faults by keeping those feelings unconscious, and redirect their libidinal satisfaction by attaching, or "projecting," those same faults onto another.
Reply
Reply
post #193 of 261
12/1/09 at 8:19am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mumbo Jumbo View Post

Trumpetman, can we have a little clarification from you about when its OK to post satirical, mocking cartoons and when its not?

At the moment, it seems its Its fine if I do it and the target is that black bastard Barack Obama. It's a little confusing.

Could you let us know?

Thanks.

Edit: by the way, in the last-but-one square of your cartoon, the black guy into 'race-based' stuff seems to be giving a perfect, exact list of all George W. Bush's achievements whilst he was President! It's uncanny! Seriously! Read it through! :holyfuckingshit:

Ah well it has been clarified for you a half dozen times but since you seem to get off on asking, I'll state it again.

It is fine to post satirical, mocking cartoons when you want to satirize someone or mock them. It is fine to do this any time you want to get a laugh.

Do not expect to be taken seriously when asked to provide proof of a contention and as proof, you offer up, a satirical mocking cartoon or comedy bit.

As an example, if you wanted to prove Sarah Palin was light on foreign policy experience, offering up Tina Fey dressed as Palin uttering she can see Russia from her house would not be proof of that. It might be funny, but it isn't proof.

I know you have a lot of trouble wrapping your brain around that. It is why you keep digging at the point because it seems really hard for you to understand that cartoons aren't real but I'll keep plugging away trying to improve your understanding in this area.

"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 #194 of 261
12/1/09 at 8:49am
Cartoons aren't real?

Wait...you mean G.I. Joe ISN'T always there?

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #195 of 261
12/1/09 at 8:59am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mumbo Jumbo View Post

Trumpetman...

Actually, it's Trumptman, not Trumpetman.

As in trumpt... which could be an abbreviation of "trumpet", but works equally as well as a common variation on "trumped".
Reply
Reply
post #196 of 261
12/1/09 at 10:17am
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

As an example, if you wanted to prove Sarah Palin was light on foreign policy experience, offering up Tina Fey dressed as Palin uttering she can see Russia from her house would not be proof of that. It might be funny, but it isn't proof.

So... when you posted this cartoon...



'quoting' something Al Gore never said and 'quoting' something Barack Obama never said, that's really different from people who offer up Tina Fey because..?

OH I GET IT!

It's because you hate Al Gore and Barack Obama, which means it doesn't have to have anything to do with the truth at all! Because you posted it, and you hate Al Gore!
Reply
Reply
post #197 of 261
12/1/09 at 11:00am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mumbo Jumbo View Post

So... when you posted this cartoon...



'quoting' something Al Gore never said and 'quoting' something Barack Obama never said, that's really different from people who offer up Tina Fey because..?

OH I GET IT!

It's because you hate Al Gore and Barack Obama, which means it doesn't have to have anything to do with the truth at all! Because you posted it, and you hate Al Gore!

No, sadly you still don't get it.

Sadder still, you continue to toss about all manner of accusations due to your inability to understand the matter.

You ask how this is different and assign hate to it because of the limited comprehension you have in the matter.

You are welcome to show where I attempted to link the cartoon as proof of any assertion. It was simply posted for enjoyment.

The difference between what I do and what you do is as follows. You assert something to the effect of Palin being mentally weak. I ask for proof and you link to SNL. You contend the comedians couldn't make a joke if it weren't true. Comedians are allowed to make untrue jokes and also unfunny jokes. They are in no form or fashion bound to any creed that prevents this.

I assert something about Obama, like the fact that his stimulus hasn't altered the rising rate of unemployment as was claimed by him. I present as proof, the actual chart from his proposal with the current rate of unemployment charted on top of it.

Later if I find a humorous picture about the scenario, say one where someone is noting Obama sure brought change, perhaps followed by the unemployment chart, we can all note the cartoon and choose to laugh or not laugh at it. The cartoon isn't proof though.

Why is that so hard for you to understand and worse still, why do you lash out at people and accuse them of all manner of things when you don't get it?

"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 #198 of 261
12/1/09 at 12:23pm
Yes, I am very beastly, and I have, as you say, a terribly hard time distinguishing reality from mockery, and so on. So please help me here.

Your objection is that people (some people, not all people alive) criticise Sarah Palin by pointing to Tina Fey's impression, a comic distortion of the truth, and quoting something she never said.



You were explaining how this cartoon, where you point to a comic misrepresentation of Al Gore quoting something he never said, is different, but you ended up telling me I do terrible things.

Here's your chance to explain.

How the two are different.

How it's OK when you do it.

Exactly the same thing.

Right here. Above. The cartoon.
Reply
Reply
post #199 of 261
12/1/09 at 1:14pm
I can help on this one!

Quote:
It is fine to post satirical, mocking cartoons when you want to satirize someone or mock them. It is fine to do this any time you want to get a laugh.

Do not expect to be taken seriously when asked to provide proof of a contention and as proof, you offer up, a satirical mocking cartoon or comedy bit.

As an example, if you wanted to prove Sarah Palin was light on foreign policy experience, offering up Tina Fey dressed as Palin uttering she can see Russia from her house would not be proof of that. It might be funny, but it isn't proof.

Whew, that was tough too!

Laugh or do not laugh at the cartoon, it was not meant to be proof in and of itself. Can we move on to something interesting now?
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #200 of 261
12/1/09 at 1:31pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoahJ View Post

I can help on this one!

Whew, that was tough too!

Laugh or do not laugh at the cartoon, it was not meant to be proof in and of itself. Can we move on to something interesting now?

Great. Thanks.

So, in other words, 'Tina Fey, bad; Al Gore cartoon OK different because...'

Go.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › When is the United States going to recover from Democratic Rule?