Jump to content

Hahahaha!


Imoutgoodbye

Recommended Posts

"But pumping money into public-sector unions is always good for businesses, communities and workers? Obama is peddling a "jobs" bill right now that features one pinch of protectionism, one pinch of feel-good veteran help and a few hundred cups' worth of wealth-sucking, union-growing debt inducement. Can anyone name a single policy proposal by his administration that even pretends to clear the way for private-sector wealth creation?"

You do read the things I link to first, right? :D

*facepalm* My apologies for missing a very vague, unspecific couple of sentences out of an editorial that otherwise is essentially just repeating the mantra of "govt. doesn't create jobs!" Normally when someone says that an article "mentions" something, I expect something a bit more substantive than an offhand reference. The Daily Show piece had more information regarding it.

Also, there is nothing pragmatic about voting for a candidate you do not support, especially when broken down line by line, Romney and Obama are nearly identical in policy and voting behavior. Vote for who you think would make the best president, and encourage others to do so as well. There's no such thing as a wasted vote.

When it comes to things like women's rights, gay rights, and respect for science, I see vast gulfs between the two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 115
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

*facepalm* My apologies for missing a very vague' date=' unspecific couple of sentences out of an editorial that otherwise is essentially just repeating the mantra of "govt. doesn't create jobs!" Normally when someone says that an article "mentions" something, I expect something a bit more substantive than an offhand reference. The Daily Show piece had more information regarding it. [/quote']

It really wasn't vague, and I never said the article was solely an information piece on the bill. You said you didn't know anything about it but that it seemed like a good idea. I told you it wasn't, and linked a piece on why all job "creation" bills are bad ideas. Don't make mountains out of molehills. ;)

When it comes to things like women's rights' date=' gay rights, and respect for science, I see vast gulfs between the two.[/quote']

Well, I'm glad that any Democrat is guaranteed to have your vote, regardless of what atrocities he commits and even if he is responsible for the exact same things you condemned a certain Republican president for, so long as he supports gay marriage (at least when its election season)... Hypocrisy at its finest. Speaking of women's rights, I don't see many people talking about this little bit of social engineering from DC. Ironically, it was Bush who at least tried to address the issue, but Obama supports bringing back. Toe those party lines!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It really wasn't vague' date=' and I never said the article was solely an information piece on the bill. You said you didn't know anything about it but that it seemed like a good idea. I told you it wasn't, and linked a piece on why all job "creation" bills are bad ideas. Don't make mountains out of molehills. ;)[/quote']

*facepalm* Next time, then, when I say that I have little information regarding a specific bill, please do me the courtesy of not wasting my time by linking me to an article that barely mentions said bill and contains no specific information regarding it but is simply another blanket condemnation of govt. action in the economic sphere (edit: it's not like I've never seen such articles before). Had the article had even a TINY amount of specific information regarding why this bill had been a bad one, or had even named it, I'd be less annoyed by the link to it.

It'd be like if we were discussing the pros and cons of Wicca, I said I didn't know much about it, and you sent me a link to a fundy Christian site condemning witchcraft as satanic as part of a larger bit of proselytizing and defended doing so by saying "Well, it mentions witchcraft and says its bad!"

Well, I'm glad that any Democrat is guaranteed to have your vote, regardless of what atrocities he commits and even if he is responsible for the exact same things you condemned a certain Republican president for, so long as he supports gay marriage (at least when its election season)...

Yes, because that's what I said. :rolleyes: My having previously stated that I think Mitt Romney will be equally bad if not worse in regards to civil liberties has nothing to do with this judgment call. My having mentioned numerous times over numerous threads that I am not a fan of Obama, that I do not like a lot of what he has done, that I consider him the lesser of two evils in this case, that does not factor in at all. It's simply that I always will vote Democrat no matter what, because they say they like the gays and therefore I am unquestioningly on their side.

And please, continue to bring up pieces of policy that we've not discussed here as if that somehow constitutes evidence that someone's being hypocritical.

*sigh* This thread's served its purpose in my books. I'm done with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You all really seem to believe that your vote actually matters? And I thought people who played FL were smart. Hrrm. I'm a firm believer that the president is only a puppet for the public to point a figure at, and that the shadow powers that actually control things, hide behind their curtain of money and power, never to be seen by anyone not in the know. Not only do I find it hilarious that you guys are arguing over politics, but also the fact that you think either of these guys hold any power to make a difference in our country. I don't vote. I know it doesn't matter. The powers that be will place who ever they want into office, and it matters not what lever you pull. I believe it is summed up best by the man himself, George Carlin....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And I thought people who played FL were smart. Hrrm. I'm a firm believer that the president is only a puppet for the public to point a figure at' date=' and that the shadow powers that actually control things, hide behind their curtain of money and power, never to be seen by anyone not in the know.[/quote']

Those two sentences back to back were a lot of fun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

*facepalm* Next time' date=' then, when I say that I have little information regarding a specific bill, please do me the courtesy of not wasting my time by linking me to an article that barely mentions said bill and contains no specific information regarding it but is simply another blanket condemnation of govt. action in the economic sphere (edit: it's not like I've never seen such articles before). Had the article had even a TINY amount of specific information regarding why this bill had been a bad one, or had even named it, I'd be less annoyed by the link to it.[/quote']

*facepalm* Wow....

*facepalm again for good measure*

It'd be like if we were discussing the pros and cons of Wicca' date=' I said I didn't know much about it, and you sent me a link to a fundy Christian site condemning witchcraft as satanic as part of a larger bit of proselytizing and defended doing so by saying "Well, it mentions witchcraft and says its bad!"[/quote']

No, it'd be like if you mentioned not knowing anything about Wicca but thought that it sounded cool, and I linked you an article about why religions in general are a waste of time, and mentioned Wicca in particular as an example. Terrible analogy. You are really running out of things to argue about here. ;)

Yes, because that's what I said. :rolleyes: My having previously stated that I think Mitt Romney will be equally bad if not worse in regards to civil liberties has nothing to do with this judgment call. My having mentioned numerous times over numerous threads that I am not a fan of Obama, that I do not like a lot of what he has done, that I consider him the lesser of two evils in this case, that does not factor in at all. It's simply that I always will vote Democrat no matter what, because they say they like the gays and therefore I am unquestioningly on their side.

And please, continue to bring up pieces of policy that we've not discussed here as if that somehow constitutes evidence that someone's being hypocritical.

*sigh* This thread's served its purpose in my books. I'm done with it.

Are you not voting for Obama? It was my impression you were. If you are... then you support him and all that he's done and all that he stands for, end of story. A vote for a lesser of two evils is still a vote for 'evil'.

We've discussed all of his policies at some point, Pali. Everything's fairplay, especially when discussing which candidate will have your vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

See, we don't have to agree with every aspect of what Obama does. Obama does, however, do more to promote more of our specific needs and social desires than Romney does.

If you can change the political system, then you can probably change our votes. Until then, your argument about us supporting a certain candidate holds no weight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Voting again for Obama, or not voting at all, will do nothing to help change and fix what he's done to our country, Pali.

Always voting democrat is foolish, especially when you look at which side or candidate might be the better choice. That's like saying, "I don't like getting sun burned while Skiing, because I don't like wearing sun tan lotion, but I'll do it again and again and again because I like not wearing sun screen."

I mean, really...?

(and before anyone asks if I've done the same thing, I haven't: I've voted democrat a lot in local gov't, simply because I agreed more with their stances and views than the current or runner-up republican. I vote for who I believe will be the better choice in the long run, fix things, and make things better for the country/state/whatever. I don't vote a particular party just because I dub myself a member of that party. That's just.. dumb.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You all really seem to believe that your vote actually matters? And I thought people who played FL were smart. Hrrm. I'm a firm believer that the president is only a puppet for the public to point a figure at' date=' and that the shadow powers that actually control things, hide behind their curtain of money and power, never to be seen by anyone not in the know. Not only do I find it hilarious that you guys are arguing over politics, but also the fact that you think either of these guys hold any power to make a difference in our country. I don't vote. I know it doesn't matter. The powers that be will place who ever they want into office, and it matters not what lever you pull. I believe it is summed up best by the man himself, George Carlin.... [url']

There aren't any 'shadow powers' dude. The kind of people that make a career in politics just aren't smart enough to pull that off. It's just a matter of some people thinking they know whats best for everyone else.

You're vote does matter, but you cast a lot of votes, not just the one in November. How you spend your money, what media you give your attention to, who you associate with... pretty much every thing you do is casting a vote for something. The federal government is really just a reflection of our culture; before any real change occurs, you need to see change at a cultural level. Sad to say, but our culture is no longer one of a freedom at any cost, triumph of the individual, nothing is impossible attitude that it once was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

See, we don't have to agree with every aspect of what Obama does. Obama does, however, do more to promote more of our specific needs and social desires than Romney does.

If you can change the political system, then you can probably change our votes. Until then, your argument about us supporting a certain candidate holds no weight.

So everyone else needs to change the system for you, then you'll vote for who a candidate you agree with. That's great reasoning. ;)

You might not have to agree with every aspect of a candidate, but there are always deal breakers, and its up to you to decide where the line for that is. Whatever the line is for you, though... Obama has crossed it. Please explain what 'social desires' he promotes so I can dismiss it for you. :P

I posted this earlier, but it bares repeating. And his examples are just a small sample! Guantanamo Bay? Not only is it not closed... it's far worse now than it ever was before.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/09/why-i-refuse-to-vote-for-barack-obama/262861/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So everyone else needs to change the system for you, then you'll vote for who a candidate you agree with. That's great reasoning. ;)

You might not have to agree with every aspect of a candidate, but there are always deal breakers, and its up to you to decide where the line for that is. Whatever the line is for you, though... Obama has crossed it. Please explain what 'social desires' he promotes so I can dismiss it for you. :P

I posted this earlier, but it bears repeating. And his examples are just a small sample! Guantanamo Bay? Not only is it not closed... it's far worse now than it ever was before.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/09/why-i-refuse-to-vote-for-barack-obama/262861/

Romney has more deal breakers. :) I also believe we have all, at one time or another, stated the system is broken and we needed a better system. Until one comes along, you can't fault me for my choice between what is a two-party system, as much as you'd like to. The change has to start there. Disbelieve it all you want, but, when you look at America, do you see any hope of changing it from the bottom up? I don't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Romney has more deal breakers. :) I also believe we have all' date=' at one time or another, stated the system is broken and we needed a better system. Until one comes along, you can't fault me for my choice between what is a two-party system, as much as you'd like to. The change has to start there. Disbelieve it all you want, but, when you look at America, do you see any hope of changing it from the bottom up? I don't.[/quote']

You're responsible for making it change. Vote third party, or just don't vote at all until a decent candidate is presented. The problem is, everyone thinks like you. Be the one to start the change. Gary Johnson gathered huge support the election cycle with only a $2mil budget, even going so far to get three of the ten Presidential Debate sponsors to drop their support. Hell, there is even a communist party candidate on the ballot in many states, which I'd love to see in the debates even though he is about as far from my views as you can possibly get. Stop using the excuse that the system is broken and take responsibility that your mentality is partly to blame for it. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Individualism is dead. It's why one vote doesn't put a dent in anything, why people need to be persuaded to vote other ways, and why we try to prop up campaigns with canvassing.

It's not going to change in my life time. My energy is being directed elsewhere in teaching reform and getting religion and government out of schools. That's the best I can offer and that's to remove the gags on the teachers that will allow them to present factual information along with scenarios to give kids a chance to critically think beyond the Civics and Government textbooks that are put in front of them, to think past the Bible thumping they get on Sunday morning, to think past what their parents were indoctrinated into believing...

You're right about my way of thinking (kinda...remember, I'm the Old Man on the Mountain with his pet chicken), in that it is defeatist. I voted for Bush, twice. Now I'm going to vote for Obama twice. I'd rather vote for Bush again than vote for Romney. I might know a thing or two in my old age and one thing I know is that my time is passing. Putting the same thing into a classroom over and over and over...education itself is indoctrinating. I'm not sure where I'm going right now, but it's somewhere in the direction of knowledge creation and social constructs of culture.

No matter what I put here on the forum as my personal opinion, it has little to do with the classroom. My political opinions don't have a place there. I had so many tenured teachers spouting off about Democrats, I didn't like my teachers. I didn't pay attention to them. Not that they had any business doing that crap. It would have been better to give me a better education (mathematics for a reason beyond crunching numbers, economics classes that applied to theory, not just how it works in U.S., etc...) and to prepare me for something instead of letting me loose into a world where I had no tools to do anything with.

All right, I'm done rambling and I'm going to work, smile, and be a good little cog so I can get a paycheck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Voting again for Obama' date=' or not voting at all, will do nothing to help change and fix what he's done to our country, Pali.[/quote']

I don't see how Romney would do in any way a better job. From my limited knowledge I'd agree that Gary Johnson might, depending on how Congress turns out, but the fact of the matter is that he won't because he won't win. Were I not in a currently heavily divided state, I'd bother spending the time to look into him more and probably would toss my vote his way - but I am.

And as annoyed as I am with Obama, everything Obama's done that actually pisses me off Romney has never once challenged him on. Romney has said not a word about ending drone attacks, about releasing executive powers, about backing off on govt. surveillance, about not continuing pointless wars - when it comes to Iran, he seems rather interested in starting another. Obama may be moving slowly when it comes to gay rights, but Romney wants to stop and back up. Obama may not be perfect when it comes to foreign policy, but Romney has stuck his foot in his mouth every time he's left the country and barely says a word on the subject.

If you're going to try to convince me to vote for someone who will not win, don't bother. If you're going to try to convince me to vote for one of the potential winners - well, nobody here has tried to convince me to vote for Romney, all they've done is try to convince me not to vote for Obama. And I am not going to not vote.

Always voting democrat is foolish

I don't. Where the hell have I ever said I was a Democrat or always vote Democrat?

Inscribed... I'm not interested in continuing a pointless argument. Apologies for my part in it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...