posted
If I'm not free to spell shit wrong, the terrorists win! Our founding fathers spelled "color" with a "u" for God's sake- it's an implicit American freedom! Glen Beck was right- George Soros is trying to limit our grammarical freedoms ....and then take away our precious, precious guns!
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: Yeah? What about that other nut that killed someone? You know...the one that flew his plane into the IRS building? That guy was "Mr. anti-tax" and was as right wing as they come.
There are a lot of things I like about you, but good grief you are so politically misinformed. I don't know who you've been listening to, but if you ever bothered to read his manifesto, you would very quickly realize that Stack was not a right-winger.
To him, corporations were thugs and plunderers, the Catholic Church was vulgar and corrupt, he was against bailouts but only because the little guy (read: him) wasn't included, he dissed "GW Bush and his cronies", and, the trump card, of course, is that the man was explicitly anti-capitalism.
Surely you don't really think those are right-wing beliefs? Isn't it possible, just possible, that you have been misled into the fabulously false claim that Stack was "as right wing as they come"?
quote:the same election she recieved death threats in and where Palin put crosshairs on her district.
Oooooh! Crosshairs on the district! No doubt for her followers to target ICBMs! Of course, Kossacks putting bulls-eyes on states and so on is completely harmless.
Give me a break. I'd bet hard cash that Sarah Palin has received more death threats than this poor lady.
Hell, I've received more than my fair share from my (predominately-leftist) adversaries over a frickin' science fiction debate. You'll be hard-pressed to convince me of the sanity of such types.
quote:You take someone with mental illness and feed them such "facts" like "they want to take your guns away" or "They want to put people in concentration camps" and you get violence.
Please feel free to demonstrate to me that a "liberal" "left-wing" flag-burning pot-smoking reject obsessed with mind control and 2012 nonsense was getting such information from right-wingers like Limbaugh.
Seems more likely to me that he was listening to the Daily Kos types who had literally targeted Giffords, decried her as too conservative, and called Giffords "dead to me" and so on a mere 48 hours before the shooting.
I mean, seriously, just pull back for a moment. I realize that the left has tried to make Limbaugh and Palin polarizing figures, holding them up as examples of the right and then lying like hell about them to make them seem as evil as possible . . . that is part of the Alinsky playbook. But in the process of buying into that you're getting sucked into so many other lies that you're being told it's just sad.
Step back, ignore that tripe, and look at the original sources before blindly accepting anyone's statements, be it from right-wingers like Limbaugh, Beck, or Palin or from left-wingers like Kos, MSNBC's gang, and the like.
You'll find things are a lot different than you've been led to believe.
-------------------- . . . ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: President Obama today took a higher moral stand {...} Meanwhile, Sarah Palin issued a teleprompted speach
I'm sorry, but that's funnier'n hell, there. I mean, to contrast TOTUS with someone and decry that someone for using a teleprompter . . . you can't buy irony like that.
Jon Stewart and Joe Biden and everyone else on the planet have joked about Obama's dependency on teleprompters, but all of the sudden he's somehow flawless in this regard?
quote:which all but decalred herself the victim- calling it a "Blood Libel" against her. Fuck, could she be more offensive?
Yeah, she could've held a pep rally at the memorial, filled with applause and cheering. Oh, wait, that was Obama.
In any case, you are contrasting someone NOT blamed for the event with someone who WAS blamed for the event. You can hardly expect the same attitude, and you can hardly expect her to not respond (and if she hadn't responded, you'd have bitched about that anyway).
So respond she did, while also outclassing Obama in regards to the moral high ground.
quote:Look up "Blood Libel"
Why? It describes the libel correctly, and the use of "blood" as an adjective is as correctly used as it is for such recent ideas as "blood diamonds". It may be something of a play on words, but it is both a correct description and also correctly conveys the fact that conservatives (like Palin) are improperly persecuted by the leftist media's lies.
-------------------- . . . ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.
Teh PW
Self Impossed Exile (This Space for rent)
Member # 1203
posted
uh, IMHO, palin would have us fuck sheep for the benifite for the rich, if such beastiality helped the rich. That's why i agree with some of Jason's POV.
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: President Obama today took a higher moral stand {...} Meanwhile, Sarah Palin issued a teleprompted speach
I'm sorry, but that's funnier'n hell, there. I mean, to contrast TOTUS with someone and decry that someone for using a teleprompter . . . you can't buy irony like that.
Jon Stewart and Joe Biden and everyone else on the planet have joked about Obama's dependency on teleprompters, but all of the sudden he's somehow flawless in this regard?
I point it out because the biggest critic of Obama using a teleprompter is Palin herself. You recall, the night she got caught with her notes written on her hand? I guess she decided teleprompters were not so bad after all.
quote:Yeah, she could've held a pep rally at the memorial, filled with applause and cheering. Oh, wait, that was Obama.
You can call it a "pep rally" if you want to- the families of the victims sure did not see it that way- anymore than those gathered at the site the World Trade center did when Bush delivered his speech there. Funny how no one from the supposedly "leftist" media critiqued Bush's speech while hawks on the right had started talking trash before Obama's speech ended.
quote:In any case, you are contrasting someone NOT blamed for the event with someone who WAS blamed for the event. You can hardly expect the same attitude, and you can hardly expect her to not respond (and if she hadn't responded, you'd have bitched about that anyway). So respond she did, while also outclassing Obama in regards to the moral high ground.
Yeah it was pretty classy to deliver a taped message about how she's the victim on a day reserved for honoring the dead. Of course, you probably also buy that those were “surveyor’s marks” and not crosshairs too.
quote:Look up "Blood Libel"
Why? It describes the libel correctly, and the use of "blood" as an adjective is as correctly used as it is for such recent ideas as "blood diamonds". It may be something of a play on words, but it is both a correct description and also correctly conveys the fact that conservatives (like Palin) are improperly persecuted by the leftist media's lies. [/QUOTE] Sure. And if she said she was a victim of a media "Holocaust" instead, that would have been just fine with you too, right? After all, even though it describes a particular thing, the words could mean anything if you don’t know their context. But for people affected by that type of slander, it's pretty offensive.
It's laughable that people like Palin and Limbaugh can decry the power and consequence of their own words while playing the victim when confronted with them- Rush Limbaugh said "words have power" when reporters asked him about his drug addiction but blatantly telling lies that the Democrats are trying to het Gifford's assailant freed from prison is okay? You talk of media's lies. well, there it is. hardly from "'the Left".
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Guardian 2000: Please feel free to demonstrate to me that a "liberal" "left-wing" flag-burning pot-smoking reject obsessed with mind control and 2012 nonsense was getting such information from right-wingers like Limbaugh.
You calling Stack a "liberal "does not make him one. Stack was obsessed with the government supposedly "taking over" and how he wanted people to "rise up and revolt". -add to that mix people like Glen Beck airing three hours of "investigation" on "Obama's concentration camps" and Sharon Angle talking of "Second amendment alternatives to big government" and Rick Perry pondering secession from "government takeover", Darrell Issa calling Obama "the most corrupt president in history" or Limbaugh telling his audience that Obama is going to take their guns away and you have a small sampling of the right wing hate and fear mongering that provokes nuts too violence.
It's not a hard line to draw between such vitriol and the actions of nutters.
And, YES, there is and has been trash talk from both sides, but right wing fringe is far more extreme- or at least they have a far more visible platform in FOX News to spew their ideas than the leftists do. On FOX, no accuzation or conspiracy theory is to extreme to go on the air- no vetting or checking of facts required. Their own pet racist Brian Kilmeade has said such obvious lies as "Ten percent of muslims are terrorists" on numerous occasions. really? Ten percent? that's 150 million muslims, Brian. Fear sells- sometimes it provokes.
To the President's credit, he's calling for civility from BOTH sides- and, as usual, getting villified on the Right (Pat Buchanan in particular in last Sunday's op ed)for doing so. Guilty consience, I guess.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
Teh PW
Self Impossed Exile (This Space for rent)
Member # 1203
posted
quote:Originally posted by Guardian 2000: Not sheep, moose! Get it right. ;-)
Anyway, that whole class warfare garbage is part of the problem with liberalism/Marxism/otherstupidisms.
But that's a topic for another thread.
it's not stupid when there are more folks making less than 30k a year than folks making 3mil a year just farting. It's always been like that, always will. i just dislike those who only give a shit about the 3mil+ people...
I don't want extreme leftist shit (Free rein!) but i also don't want the Extreme right where the rich rule absolute, either. I just want the majority to rule, and to me, the majority is lower-to-middle class. i want THEM to prosper. the rich can prosper simply because they can buy morality (and anything else). i just dont want the rich to have too much (which is what they have now)...
and because of the all the shit that both sides spew, the only ones who win are the politicians. Assassins might not kill for political reasons mostly (just fame) but politicans still reap from the actions of assassinations...
in other words, Operation Mindcrime. always a patsy, always a suicide bomber for someone else's benifite...
posted
What's funny is that it's the defenders of the uber rich and big corporations that decry "class warfare"- if it's warfare to make the super wealthy pay their fair share, then the super wealthy are winning the war easily.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: You calling Stack a "liberal "does not make him one. Stack was obsessed with the government supposedly "taking over" and how he wanted people to "rise up and revolt".
I'm sorry, I tried to give you an "out" insofar as being misinformed. But despite proving yourself misinformed, you've only dug in your heels regarding Stack.
To him, corporations were thugs and plunderers, the Catholic Church was vulgar and corrupt, he was against bailouts but only because the little guy (read: him) wasn't included, he dissed "GW Bush and his cronies", and, the trump card, of course, is that the man was explicitly anti-capitalism.
And yet you are calling him a right-wing terrorist.
That can only suggest to me two possibilities:
1. That people of that calibre aren't left-wing enough for you, which would make you so uber-left that you'd probably already be violent, instead of just loony-angry.
2. You aren't even trying to maintain a grip on reality. Which, of course, is the same thing in the end as #1.
Put simply, you've lost all credibility you might've ever had with me. It can still be regained provided you start by admitting that Stack is no right-winger, but the fact that you're digging your heels in on that settled question makes me worry.
Your "the sky's not blue!"-isms and always-feigned-outrage-at-righties thing may persuade some, but you'll never have dibs on reality at the rate you're going.
And reality, young man, is the final arbiter. Even if loonie lefties like Stack kill us all, the truth will remain the truth even if no one alive recognizes it.
-------------------- . . . ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: What's funny is that it's the defenders of the uber rich and big corporations that decry "class warfare"- if it's warfare to make the super wealthy pay their fair share, then the super wealthy are winning the war easily.
I'm not defending the uber rich and big corporations, though I like that well-poisoning. I simply think that individual rights don't stop based on how big your bank account is, or how small. I want individual rights for all, applying equally to all. You have no interest in equal rights.
There's a flawed philosophical notion that if you steal a dollar from a poor man you've harmed him more than if you steal it from a rich man. That's a foolish idea, because you've stolen the same value from each.
That "rich pay their fair share" thing is completely retarded, because the only way to do that is to have everyone do a flat tax, rich and poor alike. This graduated tax system, with something like 40% not paying anything at all, only hurts us all.
It will destroy our democratic republic, because as soon as the majority can vote themselves the money and property of a minority then we're on our way to nothing but corruption. And while it's been happening only in little nibbles that slowly increase in size, make no mistake that it's happening more and more
-------------------- . . . ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: And if she said she was a victim of a media "Holocaust" instead, that would have been just fine with you too, right? After all, even though it describes a particular thing,
I'll be kind and assume you knew that holocaust /= The Holocaust. The latter is the evil Nazi thing, the former is not.
-------------------- . . . ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.
"There's a flawed philosophical notion that if you steal a dollar from a poor man you've harmed him more than if you steal it from a rich man. That's a foolish idea, because you've stolen the same value from each."
Okay, differences of opinion on how wealth should be distributed are one thing, but that statement was patently absurd. If you steal a dollar from a man who only has a dollar, you've stolen all his money. If you steal a dollar from a man who has $10 billion, he probably won't even notice. If you honestly believe that stealing 100% of someone's money is exactly as harmful as stealing 0.00000001%, just because the absolute number of dollars is the same, that's really messed up.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
"There's a flawed philosophical notion that if you steal a dollar from a poor man you've harmed him more than if you steal it from a rich man. That's a foolish idea, because you've stolen the same value from each."
Okay, differences of opinion on how wealth should be distributed are one thing, but that statement was patently absurd. If you steal a dollar from a man who only has a dollar, you've stolen all his money. If you steal a dollar from a man who has $10 billion, he probably won't even notice. If you honestly believe that stealing 100% of someone's money is exactly as harmful as stealing 0.00000001%, just because the absolute number of dollars is the same, that's really messed up.
That's the mantra of the ultra right- that big corportions and super wealthy people are hurting as much as everyone else in a recession- those "poor" billionaires should not have to "suffer" by paying the same taxes they did waaaaaay back under the Clinton administration.
Also, the right complains about letting the tax break for billionaires expire (which they stopped)while, for the first time in history, we have LOWERED taxes during a war. Fuck- TWO wars- with hawks on the right calling for attacks on Iran to bring it up to THREE. All this while decrying how the Democrats supposeldy are "big spenders".
Guardian, you want a Flat tax, fine- first you'll have to get all those corporations and billionaires to declare all their assets instead of being incorporated overseas. Many big businesses pay less in taxes than small ones because of that crap- and that's what paying their fair share is all about- paying what they REALLY owe, If they did that, and paid 2%, they would be paying far more than they did under Clinton and so the notion, while popular in conservative circles, will never happen. The very people you're defending will never allow it.
quote:Originally posted by Guardian 2000:
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: And if she said she was a victim of a media "Holocaust" instead, that would have been just fine with you too, right? After all, even though it describes a particular thing,
I'll be kind and assume you knew that holocaust /= The Holocaust. The latter is the evil Nazi thing, the former is not.
Bullshit. Really, go look up the use of the term- it's almost completely a slander against jews. Only this year, from republicans, has the term been applied as a gerneral term.
quote:To him, corporations were thugs and plunderers, the Catholic Church was vulgar and corrupt, he was against bailouts but only because the little guy (read: him) wasn't included, he dissed "GW Bush and his cronies", and, the trump card, of course, is that the man was explicitly anti-capitalism.
A sick mind believing all those things does NOT make him Liberal- he was not for social justice or elevating poor people- he just hated some of the things the far Left rail against, and so the right calls him "Liberal" as some slander against those who are.
Liberals are not "anti-capitalism", and if that's what you tink, then it's time to watch someting besides FOX News. you're confusing "socialism" with "Liberalism"- just like you've been told to do by the right's spin machine. They aren't interchangable.
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
