|
|
theseeker
Joined: 25 Jul 2000
Posts: 3403
Location: Damnit...I'm a doctor jim |
 Sun Jul 13, 2003 11:53 pm
|
 |
|
hey your not bad....fairly creative word twisting...and you use your own lack of self worth as a motivator...but I'm sorry I just don't have any time for angry 3rd string talent these days...
if you ever get an "issue" above charater assassination...maybe discussion would be possible...probably not...
pip pip 
|
| |
|
|
the professor
Joined: 10 Jan 2003
Posts: 1164
Location: heartland USA |
|
Mon Jul 14, 2003 1:20 am
|
|
|
Mech you call yourself a constitutionalist? I forget which post you put it in but a couple weeks ago you wanted to eliminate those in government the you deemed unconstitutional, (two birds with one stone) but yet the way you wanted it done was unconstitutional, further you stated that you would just put the people in power that you thought would work but yet you bypassed the parties own right to vote and elect who they want ahead of their party which would be constitutional for them to do so. So forgive me if I don't fall for your I'm a constitutionalist scheme because you don't even understand how the constitution works outside of Alex Jones. |
| |
|
|
CONSPIRACY_MAN
Joined: 23 Apr 2003
Posts: 190
Location: Canberra Australia |
|
Mon Jul 14, 2003 2:03 am
|
|
|
jerry springer has recently joined fedral politics maybe he will be the next president.
then we can all sit watching congress start shouting out jerry jerry jerry when the president walks into the room.
maybe ill even see it in my life time LoL.
[Edited 1 times, lastly by CONSPIRACY_MAN on 07-13-2003] |
| |
|
|
the professor
Joined: 10 Jan 2003
Posts: 1164
Location: heartland USA |
|
Mon Jul 14, 2003 2:08 am
|
|
|
This day and age you never know. |
| |
|
|
Fastwalker
Joined: 26 Mar 2003
Posts: 832
|
|
Mon Jul 14, 2003 9:06 am
|
|
|
Uh the photo with the binoculars was a Photoshop fake, btw. GW got higher scores than Gore in school, and has assembled a political strategic team that is running circles around Democrats. Only those who are severely lacking in intelligence (such as liberals, leftists and Democrats) fail to recognize it when it is so obviously there. This works to Bush’s advantage in any event…so by all means, keep it up.
Notice that no leftist, liberal and/or Bush hater here has yet to answer my questions which are the topic of this thread. They are not trick questions. They are not rhetorical...given that I am asking for an answer. They are simply meant to allow people to get their views on the table to build a foundation for conversation, and lead the leftists here to a logical conclusion by forcing a logical thought process (something that is proving extremely difficult…Seeker is absolutely right about liberals and their inherent inability to think)...But I’m a persistent guy. I have faith (misguided faith perhaps) in you libs. Let's try again. Here are those questions again;
quote:
Do you want liberal Democrats back in power, controlling the presidency, the majority in the House and Senate, and the judicial branch?
If not, then what do you hope to gain by demonizing conservatives and the right?
What do you think the effect would be of getting Bush out of power? Don't you realize that if Bush were not there, a liberal Democrat would be...perhaps Kerry, perhaps Hillary? Do you feel America would be better served by a liberal Democrat as president? If not, then why are you using all the propaganda and talking points originating from the Democrat party to demonize the right?
If you want liberals back in power, how do you feel they would do a better job?
Any leftist here, including Mech and Crazy Larry want to try and answer these questions honestly? Let's have a dialogue….(amazing that I still think a dialogue is possible, isn’t it?)
|
| |
|
|
KNOW-THIS
Joined: 14 Jul 2003
Posts: 3694
|
|
Mon Jul 14, 2003 2:50 pm
|
|
|
It's a fake? Yeah ok, Rush Limbaugh has been showing the picture AFTER he removed the lens covers. The picture was as real as day, repubes are always in denial. It's so much easier to just pretend that it isn't true. I cannot believe how gullible you are.
Wake up from your stupor, the president is an embarrassment to society. |
| |
|
|
KNOW-THIS
Joined: 14 Jul 2003
Posts: 3694
|
|
Mon Jul 14, 2003 3:16 pm
|
|
|
Higher scores in special ed maybe? Thats comparing apples to oranges though. DUUUH-bya Bush is a mental midget, a puppet, you can see the strings attached. You idolize a man(term used loosely) with the mind of a primate, I'm surprised he even walks fully upright and has thumbs. Monkey see, monkey do.....repube mindset. He regurgitates information, unaware of the meaning of his own words. That is why he rarely makes appearances, he doesn't have anything to say. And god forbid someone should ask him a question that the croney Cheney hasn't already prepared him for with a vague, generic response.
And hell no I'm not going to carry on about politics with any of you idiots. It's not about politics, it's about the difference between me and you. I don't need to degrade myself by lowering down to your sub-human levels of futile discourse.
|
| |
|
|
Fastwalker
Joined: 26 Mar 2003
Posts: 832
|
|
Mon Jul 14, 2003 6:20 pm
|
|
|
quote:
It's a fake? Yeah ok, Rush Limbaugh has been showing the picture AFTER he removed the lens covers. The picture was as real as day, repubes are always in denial. It's so much easier to just pretend that it isn't true. I cannot believe how gullible you are.
Wake up from your stupor, the president is an embarrassment to society.
Denial is something you obviously know well, as I will point out here. Even if the picture was true, it would be no big deal, nor would it be an indication of a person’s intelligence anyway. Think about it;
A.He was just handed a pair of binoculars by someone who is pointing out something to him. If a person hands you a pair of binoculars and says “look at that” the normal, human assumption is that the lens caps are off…..Duuuhhh. What kind of idiot hands another person a pair of binoculars to look at something with the lens caps on? Only an idiot liberal hypocrite would make such a big deal out of something so ordinary in human nature.
B. I do know that this was, in fact, a doctored photo. It is not denial…it is reality….a concept leftist are extremely challenged with accepting. And like all liberals or leftists, you get it 180 degrees wrong the majority of the time… Clinton was an example of an embarrassment to others of the human race and gender in particular…Bush, on the other hand, is a source of pride. But tell me, in your opinion, why you think the man is an embarrassment. The answer to that should be interesting.
quote:
Higher scores in special ed maybe? Thats comparing apples to oranges though.
No…Higher grades at Yale and higher scores on SAT tests than Gore. This is a matter of public record. Obviously you are in denial….Gore flunked out of divinity school, which one could almost pass by just showing up and breathing.
quote:
DUUUH-bya Bush is a mental midget, a puppet, you can see the strings attached.
Like I said, it takes a mental midget such as yourself not to recognize intelligence in others. Stated another way, it takes intelligence to recognize it when you see it.
quote:
You idolize a man(term used loosely) with the mind of a primate, I'm surprised he even walks fully upright and has thumbs. Monkey see, monkey do.....repube mindset.
The comments above are obviously not intended to be anything but juvenile, hateful rhetoric….a strong indication that KT never has had any intention in engaging in honest, adult, intellectual discussion. This is typical of a leftist or liberal who has no substance or fact or even reason to back up their opinions or commentary. They resort to insult because they have nothing else. Again, these are the qualities that KT demonstrates that he/she possesses but tries to attribute to others….but don’t take my word for it, let’s explore KT’s own words further….
quote:
He regurgitates information, unaware of the meaning of his own words. That is why he rarely makes appearances, he doesn't have anything to say.
He regurgitates information?…..Oh, let me write this down. I thought you guys were saying he was a liar. Which is it? Does he regurgitate INFORMATION or does he lie? If he regurgitates information, then he is informing. This is not consistent with your next statement in which you irrationally accuse him of having nothing to say. And I think Bush has had a lot to say that liberals don’t seem to like, if you‘ve been watching the news. The man has been making constant appearances….Just recently in Africa. Do you pay attention to the news?
quote:
And god forbid someone should ask him a question that the croney Cheney hasn't already prepared him for with a vague, generic response.
Let’s get specific…What questions would those be? I suppose, in your twisted mind (or facsimile thereof), Clinton was less vague……(It depends on what the meaning of IS is) or maybe you prefer the clear answers of Gore, the inventor of the internet…and pathological liar. And it takes a fairly stupid person to think that Cheney is writing Bush’s speeches or planning his strategy. Do you know who Karl Rove is? Do you know who appoints Bush’s strategists? Do you know who approves final strategies and press commentary?
You see, you leftist idiots want it both ways, and that’s why you are disingenuous and very dishonest, and really dishonorable, disgusting human beings who are not interested in reality or truth, only the demonization of a good man whose views you disagree with. On the one hand, you want to say Bush lies….and then on the other hand, you want to say Bush just regurgitates everything he is told. A lie takes conscious knowledge, in order to manipulate the truth. This is logically inconsistent. Either Bush understands everything he says……(which he would need to do in order to consciously lie)…or he doesn‘t. On the one hand, you liberals want to blame him for mindlessly repeating questionable CIA approved intelligence regarding Saddam’s attempted purchase of Uranium from Africa…..but on the other hand you want to accuse him of consciously distorting the facts. Which is it?
It takes a person with a fairly severe lack of intelligence or care for detail not to realize their own inconsistency in their own arguments. One way I would define intelligence is having some form of consistent, logical reasoning process. Obviously, as I have pointed out, we can see that there is very little logical reasoning process in your commentary…..nor is it consistent or truth based.
Let’s summarize here;
A. You first assume a possibly faked photo is true, without question, without any investigation……and you accuse Republicans of being gullible. You attribute to others those qualities which you possess (as demonstrated in your very accusations here) such as gullibility and a state of denial to others. This is an old tried and true liberal tactic. It is a quality so consistent among liberals, a tactic so often used, that I’m beginning to think it must be genetic.
B. You make the assumption that a joke photo is an indication of person’s intelligence, and draw irrational implications as to Bush’s ability as a leader, which indicates your lack of intelligence, btw. Once again, you are attributing qualities that you possess, such as stupidity, and irrationality, to others where it does not apply.
C. You accuse Bush of being stupid but ignore the facts that he actually got higher scores than your liberal “idol” , Gore, in school. You ignore the facts that he has literally run circles around the best Democrat strategy to demonize and destroy him. (Hardly, the accomplishment of a person lacking intelligence). He has led several of the most successful and astonishing military victories in human history, with strategic implications that leftists still fail to see or even comprehend, despite repeated attempts to explain it to them. Once again, you are attributing qualities that you possess, such as stupidity, and an inability to think logically to others where it does not apply.
But this final quote sums it up best, I think;
quote:
And hell no I'm not going to carry on about politics with any of you idiots. It's not about politics, it's about the difference between me and you. I don't need to degrade myself by lowering down to your sub-human levels of futile discourse.
So, let’s get this straight; KT is talking on a thread where the subject is political, with no intention to engage in rational discussion and answer honest questions regarding the subject of the thread? KT feels that by simply identifying his/her political reasoning and bias that this is somehow degrading by lowering to sub-human levels of futile discourse? (What does this say about his/her political bias?)
Then, of course, a thinking person has to question the intelligence and rationality of an individual who would respond on a thread in which they had no intention of engaging in discourse regarding the topic of the thread. Why respond at all? DUHHHHH….(and this person accuses GW of lacking intelligence)….LOL…....Now THAT'S funny!
[Edited 1 times, lastly by Fastwalker on 07-14-2003] |
| |
|
|
Dizzer
Joined: 20 Jun 2003
Posts: 25
Location: Netherlands, The Hague |
|
Mon Jul 14, 2003 7:08 pm
|
|
|
Hey Fastwalker, what's your age?
|
| |
|
|
Fastwalker
Joined: 26 Mar 2003
Posts: 832
|
|
Mon Jul 14, 2003 7:18 pm
|
|
|
quote:
Hey Fastwalker, what's your age?
That's irrelevent and classified information. I could tell you, but then I'd have to have you dipped in a hot vat of bacon grease, and forced to listen to ten years of taped Rush Limbaugh shows over the course of 2 months.....unless, of course, you are a fellow member of the vast right wing conspiracy.
Must go now since it is the end of my debunking shift. Will return to see what liberal fluff and sewage has transpired since my last commentary in around 13 hours...0200 |
| |
|
|
KNOW-THIS
Joined: 14 Jul 2003
Posts: 3694
|
|
Mon Jul 14, 2003 8:34 pm
|
|
|
It's funny how Clinton is brought into every discussion, regardless of the topic. Repubes seem to have a bleeding hard on for the guy. Fastwalker, I think you ought to give him oral yourself. After all, you can't seem to get him out of your head.
There's nothing more amusing than seeing someone frantically defending their precious idol. Making fun of little baby bush is taken as such a personal threat. How insecure can a person be? Grow a pair man, Fastwalker is like a nagging wife I swear. I can picture you staring at your computer right now with such contempt. I love it, your instability is my entertainment. "Where's the facts", "you don't even know me". Go ahead and say it, who cares if you don't like what I have to say. The entire bush family is a perpetual, genetic mutation, you needed to be told. Sometimes the truth hurts doesn't it? Oh thats right, I forgot, your the only person in the world with access to "facts". Everyone else is wrong, they have to be, O'reilly told you so.
Hurry up now, this is the part where you get really upset and attempt to convince me that curious Georgey bush is a god. And I'll be laughing it up all the way. Quote each sentence again, one by one, choke on my every word. Give me a few more examples of issues that Bush takes credit for, even though he's not the one making the decisions. Tell me more....... |
| |
|
|
suckingeggs
Joined: 28 Mar 2003
Posts: 351
|
|
Mon Jul 14, 2003 11:03 pm
|
|
|
Inverted Totalitarianism
by Sheldon Wolin
The war on Iraq has so monopolized public attention as to obscure the regime change taking place in the Homeland. We may have invaded Iraq to bring in democracy and bring down a totalitarian regime, but in the process our own system may be moving closer to the latter and further weakening the former. The change has been intimated by the sudden popularity of two political terms rarely applied earlier to the American political system. "Empire" and "superpower" both suggest that a new system of power, concentrated and expansive, has come into existence and supplanted the old terms. "Empire" and "superpower" accurately symbolize the projection of American power abroad, but for that reason they obscure the internal consequences. Consider how odd it would sound if we were to refer to "the Constitution of the American Empire" or "superpower democracy." The reason they ring false is that "constitution" signifies limitations on power, while "democracy" commonly refers to the active involvement of citizens with their government and the responsiveness of government to its citizens. For their part, "empire" and "superpower" stand for the surpassing of limits and the dwarfing of the citizenry.
The increasing power of the state and the declining power of institutions intended to control it has been in the making for some time. The party system is a notorious example. The Republicans have emerged as a unique phenomenon in American history of a fervently doctrinal party, zealous, ruthless, antidemocratic and boasting a near majority. As Republicans have become more ideologically intolerant, the Democrats have shrugged off the liberal label and their critical reform-minded constituencies to embrace centrism and footnote the end of ideology. In ceasing to be a genuine opposition party the Democrats have smoothed the road to power of a party more than eager to use it to promote empire abroad and corporate power at home. Bear in mind that a ruthless, ideologically driven party with a mass base was a crucial element in all of the twentieth-century regimes seeking total power.
Representative institutions no longer represent voters. Instead, they have been short-circuited, steadily corrupted by an institutionalized system of bribery that renders them responsive to powerful interest groups whose constituencies are the major corporations and wealthiest Americans. The courts, in turn, when they are not increasingly handmaidens of corporate power, are consistently deferential to the claims of national security. Elections have become heavily subsidized non-events that typically attract at best merely half of an electorate whose information about foreign and domestic politics is filtered through corporate-dominated media. Citizens are manipulated into a nervous state by the media's reports of rampant crime and terrorist networks, by thinly veiled threats of the Attorney General and by their own fears about unemployment. What is crucially important here is not only the expansion of governmental power but the inevitable discrediting of constitutional limitations and institutional processes that discourages the citizenry and leaves them politically apathetic.
No doubt these remarks will be dismissed by some as alarmist, but I want to go further and name the emergent political system "inverted totalitarianism." By inverted I mean that while the current system and its operatives share with Nazism the aspiration toward unlimited power and aggressive expansionism, their methods and actions seem upside down. For example, in Weimar Germany, before the Nazis took power, the "streets" were dominated by totalitarian-oriented gangs of toughs, and whatever there was of democracy was confined to the government. In the United States, however, it is the streets where democracy is most alive--while the real danger lies with an increasingly unbridled government.
Or another example of the inversion: Under Nazi rule there was never any doubt about "big business" being subordinated to the political regime. In the United States, however, it has been apparent for decades that corporate power has become so predominant in the political establishment, particularly in the Republican Party, and so dominant in its influence over policy, as to suggest a role inversion the exact opposite of the Nazis'. At the same time, it is corporate power, as the representative of the dynamic of capitalism and of the ever-expanding power made available by the integration of science and technology with the structure of capitalism, that produces the totalizing drive that, under the Nazis, was supplied by ideological notions such as Lebensraum.
In rebuttal it will be said that there is no domestic equivalent to the Nazi regime of torture, concentration camps or other instruments of terror. But we should remember that for the most part, Nazi terror was not applied to the population generally; rather, the aim was to promote a certain type of shadowy fear--rumors of torture--that would aid in managing and manipulating the populace. Stated positively, the Nazis wanted a mobilized society eager to support endless warfare, expansion and sacrifice for the nation.
While the Nazi totalitarianism strove to give the masses a sense of collective power and strength, Kraft durch Freude ("Strength through joy"), inverted totalitarianism promotes a sense of weakness, of collective futility. While the Nazis wanted a continuously mobilized society that would not only support the regime without complaint and enthusiastically vote "yes" at the periodic plebiscites, inverted totalitarianism wants a politically demobilized society that hardly votes at all. Recall the President's words immediately after the horrendous events of September 11: "Unite, consume and fly," he told the anxious citizenry. Having assimilated terrorism to a "war," he avoided doing what democratic leaders customarily do during wartime: mobilize the citizenry, warn it of impending sacrifices and exhort all citizens to join the "war effort." Instead, inverted totalitarianism as its own means of promoting generalized fear; not only by sudden alerts" and periodic announcements about recently discovered terrorist cells or the arrest of shadowy figures or the publicized heavy-handed treatment of aliens and the Devil's Island that is Guantánamo Bay or the sudden fascination with interrogation methods that employ or border on torture, but by a pervasive atmosphere of fear abetted by a corporate economy of ruthless downsizing, withdrawal or reduction of pension and health benefits; a corporate political system that relentlessly threatens to privatize Social Security and the modest health benefits available, especially to the poor. With such instrumentalities for promoting uncertainty and dependence, it is almost overkill for inverted totalitarianism to employ a system of criminal justice that is punitive in the extreme, relishes the death penalty and is consistently biased against the powerless.
Thus the elements are in place: a weak legislative body, a legal system that is both compliant and repressive, a party system in which one party, whether in opposition or in the majority, is bent upon reconstituting the existing system so as to permanently favor a ruling class of the wealthy, the well-connected and the corporate, while having the poorer citizens with a sense of helplessness and political despair, and, at the same time, keeping the middle classes dangling between fear of unemployment and expectations of fantastic rewards once the new economy recovers. That scheme is abetted by a sycophantic and increasingly concentrated media; by the integration of universities with their corporate benefactors; by a propaganda machine institutionalized in well-funded think tanks and conservative foundations; by the increasingly closer cooperation between local police and national law enforcement agencies aimed at identifying terrorists, suspicious aliens and domestic dissidents.
What is at stake, then, is nothing less than the attempted transformation of a tolerably free society into a variant of the extreme regimes of the past century. In that context, the national elections of 2004 represent a crisis in its original meaning, a turning point. The question for citizens is: Which way?
This article can be found on the web at:
http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20030519&s=wolin
|
| |
|
|
graeme
Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 171
Location: Sebastopol, CA, USA |
|
Tue Jul 15, 2003 12:08 am
|
|
|
While making a good point and being hilarious while accomplishing that, I recommend checking out:
http:/www.comedycentral.com/mp/play.php?reposid=/multimedia/tds/stewart/jon_7131.html
This man is not the quietly brilliant man that you so dearly grasp on to. After watching that link, there's no argument you can make to prove so- none.
Enjoy.
Sorry it's not coming up so that you can link right to it. I'm typing it in as is and that's how it's turning out. Can any moderator fix it- thanx.
[Edited 5 times, lastly by graeme on 07-14-2003] |
| |
|
|
shatoga
Joined: 23 Nov 2002
Posts: 1291
|
|
Tue Jul 15, 2003 10:31 am
|
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by graeme:
While making a good point and being hilarious while accomplishing that, I recommend checking out:
http:/www.comedycentral.com/mp/play.php?reposid=/multimedia/tds/stewart/jon_7131.html
This man is not the quietly brilliant man that you so dearly grasp on to. After watching that link, there's no argument you can make to prove so- none.
Enjoy.
Sorry it's not coming up so that you can link right to it. I'm typing it in as is and that's how it's turning out. Can any moderator fix it- thanx.
[Edited 5 times, lastly by graeme on 07-14-2003]
Sorry,
I only moderate at five other forums.
However:
http://www.comedycentral.com/mp/play.php?reposid=/multimedia/tds/stewart/jon_7131.html
should work just fine
|
| |
|
|
 
|
|
 Goto page Previous
1, 2
All times are GMT. The time now is Sat May 26, 2012 7:38 am
|
|
|
|
|
Login
