Obama Paradox
POSTED BY: Niki2
UPDATED: Thursday, July 29, 2010 03:01
VIEWED: 5897
PAGE 1 of 1
It's a paradox. In the past year and a half, the Obama Administration has tackled a number of "third-rail" issues o other president has been at all successful in dealing with...if they even tried. They've made strides in financial reform, health care, student loan reform, stimulus package, DADT, and at least tried on energy. And don't forget the Lilly Ledbetter. Yet all we hear is how "evil" they are.
You may not agree with what they've done--certainly I don't, in that the final bills have been so watered down as to be ineffective, and in some cases will have the opposite effect than intended, but it's a START, and some of it IS good.
So why do we hear nothing about that? Why is the grinding cry "bad President, bad President" ALL the time? Yeah, he's caved on too much, he hasn't done enough to repair the damages Dumbya left us with, and he's too wishy-washy. But how many Presidents have even TRIED this much in this short a time? And how much of it, now that it's law, can we improve to make what he (and we) wanted...which is the first step?
The hatred of Obama seems to be so strong that NOTHING is being seen as positive. Not only that, but the Repubs "party of no" tactics have made sure the bills ended up being only semi-helpful, even tho' they BACKED some of the ideas until he came into office. Anyone know who FIRST was in favor of Cap and Trade...who used it as a campaign promise? Clinton failed at health care; all Repub Presidents have wanted to do is privatize Social Security, Medicare, and keep the health-insurance companies Big Oil and Wall Street fat and happy. All three had carte blanche during Dumbya's time; Obama TRIED to get a moratorium to make sure things were safe and revisit the issue (anyone notice that judge's affiliations with Big Oil?).
Just think how GOOD those bills could have been if the Republicans had participated. As it was, a lot of their suggestions were incorporated, and still they voted "no".
What exactly is their platform on these issues, how do they suggest fixing things? I haven't heard anything from them except "Obama Bad"...I'd like to know what ideas they have, if any, to show their being in power would have improved this or WOULD improve things in the future.
Mind you, I am NOT happy, but I'm willing to give the man his due, and applaud him for at least TRYING.
Here are a few things he's begun or accomplished thus far:
•"Returning science to its rightful place" by lifting the Bush restrictions on federally funded embryonic stem cell research.
•Signing laws to expand children's health insurance (financed by a 61-cent per pack increase in the federal cigarette tax the adviser did not tout).
•Signing a law meant to improve the ability of women who allege pay discrimination to sue their employer.
•Lifting travel and remittance restrictions for Cuban Americans who seek to travel more frequently to the island and send more US currency to their immediate family.
•signed a law supporting increased financial aid to severely injured war veterans, and their caretakers.
•Put a hold on Artic oil exploratory digging until environmental impacts are clear.
•Passed health care reform.
•signed a hate crime bill.
•passed financial reform.
•Passing the "largest" economic stimulus bill in American history.
•Established a National Performance Officer charged with saving the federal government money and making federal operations more efficient. Reports to the deputy director of the Office of Management and Budgets. Specific duties require finding new efficient ways of operating.
•Ordered all federal agencies to undertake a study and make recommendations for ways to cut future spending.
•Ordered a review of all federal operations to identify and cut wasteful spending and practices.
•Initiated changes in federal procurement policies and procedures.
•Implemented 'PayGo' procedures by telling congress that no bill will be signed if there is not a way to pay for it.
•Placed limits on
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
It's a paradox. In the past year and a half, the Obama Administration has tackled a number of "third-rail" issues o other president has been at all successful in dealing with...if they even tried. They've made strides in financial reform, health care, student loan reform, stimulus package, DADT, and at least tried on energy. And don't forget the Lilly Ledbetter. Yet all we hear is how "evil" they are.
You may not agree with what they've done--certainly I don't, in that the final bills have been so watered down as to be ineffective, and in some cases will have the opposite effect than intended, but it's a START, and some of it IS good.
So why do we hear nothing about that? Why is the grinding cry "bad President, bad President" ALL the time? Yeah, he's caved on too much, he hasn't done enough to repair the damages Dumbya left us with, and he's too wishy-washy. But how many Presidents have even TRIED this much in this short a time? And how much of it, now that it's law, can we improve to make what he (and we) wanted...which is the first step?
The hatred of Obama seems to be so strong that NOTHING is being seen as positive. Not only that, but the Repubs "party of no" tactics have made sure the bills ended up being only semi-helpful, even tho' they BACKED some of the ideas until he came into office. Anyone know who FIRST was in favor of Cap and Trade...who used it as a campaign promise? Clinton failed at health care; all Repub Presidents have wanted to do is privatize Social Security, Medicare, and keep the health-insurance companies Big Oil and Wall Street fat and happy. All three had carte blanche during Dumbya's time; Obama TRIED to get a moratorium to make sure things were safe and revisit the issue (anyone notice that judge's affiliations with Big Oil?).
Just think how GOOD those bills could have been if the Republicans had participated. As it was, a lot of their suggestions were incorporated, and still they voted "no".
What exactly is their platform on these issues, how do they suggest fixing things? I haven't heard anything from them except "Obama Bad"...I'd like to know what ideas they have, if any, to show their being in power would have improved this or WOULD improve things in the future.
Mind you, I am NOT happy, but I'm willing to give the man his due, and applaud him for at least TRYING.
Here are a few things he's begun or accomplished thus far:
•"Returning science to its rightful place" by lifting the Bush restrictions on federally funded embryonic stem cell research.
•Signing laws to expand children's health insurance (financed by a 61-cent per pack increase in the federal cigarette tax the adviser did not tout).
•Signing a law meant to improve the ability of women who allege pay discrimination to sue their employer.
•Lifting travel and remittance restrictions for Cuban Americans who seek to travel more frequently to the island and send more US currency to their immediate family.
•signed a law supporting increased financial aid to severely injured war veterans, and their caretakers.
•Put a hold on Artic oil exploratory digging until environmental impacts are clear.
•Passed health care reform.
•signed a hate crime bill.
•passed financial reform.
•Passing the "largest" economic stimulus bill in American history.
•Established a National Performance Officer charged with saving the federal government money and making federal operations more efficient. Reports to the deputy director of the Office of Management and Budgets. Specific duties require finding new efficient ways of operating.
•Ordered all federal agencies to undertake a study and make recommendations for ways to cut future spending.
•Ordered a review of all federal operations to identify and cut wasteful spending and practices.
•Initiated changes in federal procurement policies and procedures.
•Implemented 'PayGo' procedures by telling congress that no bill will be signed if there is not a w
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Interesting article in the latest Washingtonian noting that he's got the Justice Department really going after reporters who publish articles containing classified information, and also the folks who leak the info. He apparently doesn't like the culture of leaking to the press that's so prevelant in D.C.
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Bottom line? Because he is a black man ane white conservative amwrica can't handle it.
I am on The List. We are The Forsaken and we aim to burn!
"We don't fear the reaper"
FORSAKEN original
Yes We Did!
“I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.” Mahatma Gandhi
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
wow, I have to stop posting from my phone!
I am on The List. We are The Forsaken and we aim to burn!
"We don't fear the reaper"
FORSAKEN original
Yes We Did!
“I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.” Mahatma Gandhi
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Are your posts from your computer less sweeping? 
It's not personal. It's just war.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
No, just spelled correctly.
I am on The List. We are The Forsaken and we aim to burn!
"We don't fear the reaper"
FORSAKEN original
Yes We Did!
“I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.” Mahatma Gandhi
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Obama has never stopped being just a candidate and campaigner. He's a total failure as President and leader of the nation. He's just a wind-up teleprompter useful idiot puppet for the Chicago thugs, socialists, communists, and left-wing radicals that permeate the entire Administration. His election was a fraud, his campaign a total lie. America has had enough of him and the rest of the smarmy Demtards in Congress.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I think you have a problem with your brain being missing.
I am on The List. We are The Forsaken and we aim to burn!
"We don't fear the reaper"
FORSAKEN original
Yes We Did!
“I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.” Mahatma Gandhi
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Every single thing Obama has done expands the size and power of the Federal Gov't at the expense of our freedom and at great financial cost.
This when we literally have no money to do so.
Obama has pushed on w/ his idealogical views, deaf,dumb and blind to the needs and wishes of the people.
There's no paradox here, what so ever.
He's just a community activist who lacks any real world experience, and it shows.
And Niki, after all that I've seen posted here by you, it's surprising to see you blindly fall into the role of Mouthpiece for this President. Did you even READ the list of crap you cut /copied before you pasted it on here ? For just about each and every item listed, there's a compelling counter point. There are reasons why Obama has done the exact wrong thing, or that the methods by which he chooses to accomplish can be such that it doesn't take a massive expansion of the Federal Gov't .
Then there are some things which are flat out bogus and false, and yet you dutifully report them as though they were chiseled on stone, and handed down from upon high.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Obama's a boob and a disaster and America agrees with me in every poll. I know it devastates and hurts with searing pain beyond sanity all you naive idiot Liberals that just seemingly so recently had so many weepy moments of love and hope and multiple orgasms for Obama, your own personal clean and articulate Harvard airhead-turned Chicago ghetto organizer. Obama has consistently shown how his total inexperience and radical ideas lead to ongoing Administration ineptitude and a growing nightmare for the country.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by FutureMrsFIllion:
Bottom line? Because he is a black man ane white conservative amwrica can't handle it.
That's not the "bottom line", not by a long shot. That's merely a simpleton's attempt to gloss over the very real issues which so many have concerns about this President.
From saying the Cambridge police dept acted " stupidly ", to the beer summit, from giving lame DVD box sets while returning gifts, ... to the firing of Shirley Sherrod ( who by way is no Mother Teressa or Rosa Parks ) there's a very long list of really stupid things which Obama has done that have zero to do w/ his skin color.
And you know it.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Geezer, I should think he'd go after CONGRESS...they're the ones who leak like a sieve!
I see the predicable mentality was here...obviously you lot are incapable of seeing any good whether it's there or not. I realize there are counter-arguments to some of the stuff I put up; I just don't agree with them.
The fact that you cannot point to even one thing you see as positive--or in some cases can't even address the facts, pretty much puts the cap on you attitude. 'Nuff said. I was actually talking to the people here who aren't blinded by their partisan jihad and can carry on a conversation.
I wonder what you'd do in a world where there was good and bad mixed together, where every opponent wasn't the Devil's spawn...how WOULD you survive!
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of __________________, code name ‘Nike”,
signing off
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
ObamaCare.
The government will now control your healthcare, will force you to buy into it.
The same people who control the terrorist watchlist, run the DMV, run the Fed Reserve, the CIA, the FBI, and control taxes...
will also control how, when and where you get health care.
Does anyone else have a problem with this?
For me, and those I associate with... yes, we have a huge problem with this.
Damn this government.
"Being called a racist by a Liberal is a badge of honor."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Even your girl is starting to be against Obama.
Replace AlQueda with Tea Party, BrownCoats, Libertarians, Republicans, anyone who doesnt agree with Obama.....
"Reshape the standards that apply..."
Im wondering when and where the final straw will happen.
"Being called a racist by a Liberal is a badge of honor."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Niki,
Thanks for the list. It's a place to start.
Rap pretty much nailed it here. We do not disagree that Obama did these things. We disagree that they were things that should have been done. (with a couple common sense exceptions)
So far my analysis of Obama's achievement:
1. 10% things that needed doing
2. 20% things that anyone would do as president, regardless of whether they needed doing.
3. 30% things that should have been done very differently
4. 30% things that probably shouldn't have been done
5. 10% really scary stuff that should never have been done
Here's the scary part: The left appears to actualyl believe that the right doesn't agree with Obama on the grounds of race. This sort of logic can lead to a level of blind obedience that will never be able to question the president.
Once more I'm reminded that the right in america has more guts: republicans could actually speak out against bush.
For the record, sure, there are a handful of loons who will oppose obama for being black. the media will make much of theses people, because the media loves obama, less than they did, but still a lot more than they would any republican.
Still, the racist opponents of obama are probably less numerous than people who oppose bush simply for being a southerner, or from texas. I have actually heard people say "bah ron paul=george bush=texas" so, yeah, i think that exists. Actually, probably the most racism you're hearing about obama is really coming from the "he's a secret muslim" corner of lunacy.
Still, that's not a debate, it's worrisome that some people's minds are there, on either side.
Oh, and River has a point as well: Obama is still campaigning, and never really kicked into management mode. He seems far more concerned with how a bill *looks* to the public than what it actually *does*. I think this is responsible for #3 above.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
You're forgetting a couple of things, Wulf:
a) She's not "my girl"...she's just the one journalist I've noted who has her people do her homoework, so I trust her more than I trust a lot of MSM. I don't trust the MSM in general, but history has shown she's pretty reliable most of the time.
b) She, and SOME others on MSM (I don't include that stupid Ed Whoever, but Chris Matthews, SOMETIMES Olbermann, and definitely Maddow), have ALWAYS been willing to call it like it is where Obama's concerned, and disagree with him quite openly when they feel it's appropriate.
c) The detention thing sickens me as much as anyone. As does his not dealing with Gitmo, the Patriot Act, "Homeland Security", the wars and more. She's also been quite vocal on those points and more.
I've yet to see such things on FauxNews, which is one reason I don't trust them.
Thank you, DT. Actually, I agree with your percentages for the most part, I'm no blind fan of Obama and never have been, my question was more "why is it all black and black?"
I believe he's done some good things that other Presidents haven't, be they needed doing or not in others' views.
I also disagree about campaigining. I see it differently, and have from the beginning. It is only to me my worst fears about Obama from the start proving themselves right (remember, I didn't vote for him in the Primary). I feared he was too much of a newbie and didn't have the experience dealing with Washington tactics; that he would be swayed by his desire to be "nonpartisan", accept too much compromise, and be pushed around by his advisors. That's what I see having come true, unfortuantely.
I think he actually DOES want to do some of the things he's proposed right...as in the public option for healthcare. I see him as having cowtowed to the right in almost everything in the hopes of getting agreements that were never going to happen, and given in to international pressure on things international (prime example being the whaling ban) in order to gain favor with countries who will never do so (and in turn, it just makes him look weak to the rest of the world). I think he IS weak, but I don't see it as "continuing to campaign", I see it as someone who's not getting things done the way they SHOULD be and not getting done some things that SHOULD be, because he's too stuck on compromise and too willing to follow his advisors.
I also see the Republicans, with their strategy of "party of no" as not being part of the process, of merely trying to stymie everything and corrupt what they couldn't stymie by playing on his (all too obvious) desire to be nonpartisan (as in healthcare, as only one example of many). IF they hadn't determined to be nothing but a roadblock, I think some of the things that have been done could have been done much better, and more having been able to be done.
At least I'm glad to hear from someone who acknowledges it's not all TOTALLY black. I'm sure you give him no points for at least trying to tackle things nobody else has, like the third rail of healthcare, education, infrastructure, DADT, etc. I do. C'est la vie.
I also agree about the racists being in the minority--tho' I would add the "subconscious racists" as making it a slightly bigger minority than you might believe. I believe they've been used by those with the agenda of destroying this administration without realizing they are acting against their own best interests.
I think the Tea Party has been the same, especially as in large part the people interviewed at the demonstrations can't clearly elucidate why they're against him and know little or nothing about policy. They've been fired up, they get press, but I discount them as WORSE newbies and some crackpots who aren't sure what they want and are less sure of what they believe (as in "he's taking away our guns" when gun laws have actually been expanded, and "he's raised taxes" when taxes have been lowered).
I believe there's enough blame to go all around, from Obama to administration
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The Tea Party deserves WHAT blame?
For what, exactly? Did they, (or I) create ObamaCare?
The Patriot Act?
Do we want comtinie the wars in Afghanistand and Iraq?
GitMo?
What?
"Being called a racist by a Liberal is a badge of honor."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The Tea Parties deserves the "blame" for daring to stand up to the ever expanding , free spending , hyper taxing Imperial Federal Gov't.
The Tea Party deserves the "blame" for attending town hall meetings, asking sincere and honest questions of their Representatives, and daring to not be treated like little children by over paid, glorified public servants.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The Tea Party people deserve the blame for standing up against a tyranical government, and doing it in the most democratic way, while allowing for their identities to be known.
Silly them. Trying to affect change in a non-violent way.
Well, we will see how it works.
There are always other ways.
"Being called a racist by a Liberal is a badge of honor."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The Tea Party has contributed to the divide in this country, the extremism that has encouraged other extremism, and is being used by the GOP and the right to inflame people FURTHER against the government.
If the Republicans were doing their job, and working for us (as much as they ever have), we could improve things. They are being pulled even further to the right by the Tea Party, being encouraged to stalemate everything even more, and so nothing can be accomplished to improve things.
Healtcare COULD have been good. Financial reform COULD have been good. But they ended up being watered down so much that they are virtually gimmes to those they were intended to restrain. If the Republicans had worked to help make them better, they would be better.
The further to the right the Tea Party pushes the Republicans, the more disention in this country, the less things improve. The Tea Party followers are being tricked into acting against their own welfare, to think in absolutes. The government isn't "tyrannical" except in WulfWorld...nor is it "imperial". That it has too much power is indisputable, but those are buzz words I don't accept; you are, without a doubt, the most prefect exampled on this forum of Tea Party mentality; unrealistic, unyielding, uncompromising, filled with buzz words, and more than willing to parrot every taking point that's been fed to you. Your posts are full of it, and as such, you represent perfectly the Tea Party mentality; the idea of black and white, good guys and bad guys, "heroes", "villains"...and none of it is related to reality or to making things work.
It is for that which I blame the Tea Party. For brainwashing people and using them; and trust me, they will discard you just as soon as they get in office, except for the wingnuts they've managed to win the primaries, who won't make it in the generals.
The Tea Party wants to go back 100 years, or more. They want "their" America back. Aside from being unrealistic, wanting literacy tests and other Jim Crow things back isn't something I admire. They say they want the Constitution followed, but they don't really; there are many examples of what they "want" being diametrically opposed to the Constitution. They want things to be the way THEY want, irregardless of the rest of society.
Someday maybe you'll see. Or not. Unfortunately there are too many like you, it's not helping.
I don't know where YOU were, Crappy, but Quote:
isn't what happened. They DISRUPTED town hall meetings and didn't ALLOW people to ask sincere and honest questions of their reps; that was the most infuriating thing about it. Town halls are a good thing, pertinent and probing questions SHOULD be asked, but none of that happened, instead people hollered and shouted and threw insults and threats. They were INSTRUCTED to do just that by their leaders. Like I said, I don't know where YOU were...if anywhere, no doubt at town hall meetings on the RIGHT, which were probably quite reasonable.
attending town hall meetings, asking sincere and honest questions of their Representatives
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of __________________, code name ‘Nike”,
signing off
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
A LOT more at http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE62H2YW20100318 group of white middle class conservatives, are in a collective mood feeling disgruntled and disillusioned by the way the government is working. They feel that those in their government are only looking out for themselves and not the people, this is a sentiment shared people all over the political spectrum. The Tea Partiers, in their disgruntled state have proved themselves susceptible to those looking to take advantage of them, the worst offenders being; Glenn Beck and his crazed rants as well as Sarah Palin and her petty brain dead talking points. Thanks to these people the Tea Party has been manipulated into thinking that all those who did not fit into their mold of a hardcore conservative are responsible for all the nations ills, disregarding the fact that diverse ideals are part of what makes are nation great.
Of the possible challenges ahead for the Tea Party movement the two main ones are not from the left, but from the right.
The first comes from social conservatives, or the religious right. The Tea Party movement is dominated by fiscal conservatives and leaders like Eric Odom of the American Liberty Alliance, who say social issues like abortion and gay marriage should be avoided.
When asked about abortion, for instance, Tina Dupont of the Tea Party of West Michigan says the group does not discuss it. "Most of us are probably pro-lifers," she said. "But we avoid the topic because it is so divisive."
This has been noted by some on the religious right. "At the national level you have people saying it is all about fiscal issues and not about social issues because they say they are divisive," said Tony Perkins, president of Christian lobby group the Family Research Council.
Chris Merrill said while Tea Partiers can avoid divisive issues at meetings, they cannot if they run for office. "Running a campaign is different," he said. "At some point they have to take a stand on social issues."
Some say a showdown between social and fiscal conservative groups may be inevitable. "Fiscal conservatives want to limit the size of government, social conservatives want to use government to further their agenda," Henson said. "That will likely cause problems."
(this from an op-ed about the Captain America/Tea Party fuss, at http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-30115-Atlanta-Comic-Books-Examiner~
y2010m2d12-OpEd-Captain-America-and-the-Tea-Party Quote:
Such is the zeal in portions of the “tea party” that it is not enough to sweep out living members of the establishment, such as U.S. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz. A brisk, ideological scrubbing must be applied to history as well.
So, Glenn Beck, speaking at the Conservative Political Action Conference this month, identified a great enemy of human freedom as ... Teddy Roosevelt. Beck highlighted this damning quote of the occupant of the Oval Office in 1901-1909: “We grudge no man a fortune in civil life if it is honorably obtained and well used.”
You don’t discern the scandal in this statement? Look closer. “This is not our Founders’ idea of America,” explains Beck. “And this is the cancer that’s eating at America. It is big government — it’s a socialist utopia.”
Evidently, Beck believes “real” conservatives defend wealth that is dishonorably gained and then wasted.
TR picked a number of fights with conservative Republicans, fight-picking being his favorite sport. But, he was a Republican who hated socialism. “It would spell sheer destruction,” he said. “It would produce grosser wrong and outrage, fouler immorality, than any existing system.”
Modern corporate capitalism, he believed, was inevitable, even admirable. He also believed that overly centralized and unaccountable power in a capitalist system creates destructive clashes of labor and capital, rich and poor. So, he busted monopolistic trusts, imposed health standards on filthy meat-packing plants and promoted a more professional, merit-based ci
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Oh, give it up, Wulf...you’re only a hero in your own mind; you have no concept what REAL revolution would do, and it would be horrific.
Well, we will see how it works.
There are always other ways.
As toQuote:
Uhhh, you are forgetting, it was the RIGHT who started all those things, with the approval and applause of the Republicans (bear in mind that it was we liberals who were out there protesting them from the start--and we still want them ended)... You’re also forgetting that Obama is the one who has put DEADLINES on those, while “your” candidate, McCain, wanted Iraq to continue for, what was it, 100 years? You think HE’d have done away with the Patriot Act? Wasn’t he in favor of Gitmo?
The Patriot Act?
Do we want comtinie the wars in Afghanistand and Iraq?
GitMo?
Crappy: “ever expanding , free spending”—so where were they when Dumbya was in office, doing comparatively twice as much of that as Obama is doing?
Don’t come back at me with “Stop blaming Bush”; the fact is Dumbya DID create the Patriot Act, Gitmo, START those two wars then ignore Afghanistan so it’s the problem it is today, expand government and the deficit incredibly (just look at our “intelligence” branch...I use the term advisedly), spent like a drunken sailor (hiding the cost of the wars as well), gave tax cuts that widened the gap between rich and poor; PUT US WHERE WE WERE when Obama took over. That you want Obama to “fix” everything immediately that it took Dumbya eight years to put in place is unrealistic. He’s not doing it fast enough for anyone, or ENOUGH for anyone, but that doesn’t change the reality of how it came to be.
I realize none of this means anything to you, they're not the proper "talking points" so they'll be refuted or ignored. Ergo; have fun, I'm off to dinner. I'm sure you will happily agree with each other forever, and anything done by this administration will be the "tyranny of President Barack Hussein Hitler". It's pretty much as I assumed this thread would turn out. At least I tried to introduce some perspective.
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of __________________, code name ‘Nike”,
signing off
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Nix,
Uh huh.
Well, bring on FFF.net 2.0
We cant learn anything from each other so we might as well sit in a circle congratulating other like minded folks on their wonderful revomiting of our own opinions.
Or, in other words, we are so intrenched in our own world view that challanging it threatens our self-esteem and by doing so causes us to retreat into our own delusional world view. Not that I havnt been guilty of it from time to time of course.
"Being called a racist by a Liberal is a badge of honor."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
The Tea Party people deserve the blame for standing up against a tyranical government, and doing it in the most democratic way, while allowing for their identities to be known.
Silly them. Trying to affect change in a non-violent way.
Well, we will see how it works.
There are always other ways.
"Being called a racist by a Liberal is a badge of honor."
I'm sorry, but the little children's games played by you tea-bagging scum ("We came unarmed - THIS TIME!") just really gets old. And the BS of going, "Hey we tried non-violent change, but remember - there ARE other ways!", really IS a form of violence. After all, if you rob someone by putting your gun in their face and demanding they comply, and you DON'T shoot them, it's still considered armed robbery. And if you threaten them while you're doing it, other charges will apply.
So knock it off already, Wulfie - we all see clearly what you're trying to do. You're trying to intimidate with your childish little veiled threats. Only we're not threatened by you; not even a little bit. Go sell your brand of crazy somewhere else; we ain't buyin'.
"Being called a Liberal by a racist is a badge of honor."
AURaptor's Greatest Hits:
Friday, May 28, 2010 - 20:32 To AnthonyT:
Go fuck yourself.
On this matter, make no mistake. I want you to go fuck yourself long and hard, as well as anyone who agrees with you. I got no use for you.
Friday, May 28, 2010 - 18:26 To President Obama:
Mr. President, you're a god damn, mother fucking liar.
Fuck you, you cock sucking community activist piece of shit.
... go fuck yourself, Mr. President.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
The Tea Parties deserves [sic] the "blame" for daring to stand up to the ever expanding , free spending , hyper taxing Imperial Federal Gov't.
I'm still wondering where all you tea-baggers were while the rest of us were out there protesting those things under YOUR imperial lord and savior Bush. I definitely didn't see you there.
Quote:
The Tea Party deserves the "blame" for attending town hall meetings, asking sincere and honest questions of their Representatives, and daring to not be treated like little children by over paid, glorified public servants.
Yeah, they were SO respectful and sincere at those town hall meetings... ;)
Oh, wait - no, they weren't. And you know it.
AURaptor's Greatest Hits:
Friday, May 28, 2010 - 20:32 To AnthonyT:
Go fuck yourself.
On this matter, make no mistake. I want you to go fuck yourself long and hard, as well as anyone who agrees with you. I got no use for you.
Friday, May 28, 2010 - 18:26 To President Obama:
Mr. President, you're a god damn, mother fucking liar.
Fuck you, you cock sucking community activist piece of shit.
... go fuck yourself, Mr. President.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Aww Kwick.. are we bothering you? Ok.
We'll stop trying to make things better. For you.
You poor thing. It must be tough. People have woken up and really, REALLY dont like your "savior".
Its tough for hard core liberalistas right now... I sympathize. I really do.
People arnt buying the whole government being your parent thingy... and its driving those who desperatly WANT the government to be their parent.... mad.
There there little one. You might, just MIGHT, have to grow up if we finally win.
But thats ok.
You can do it!
HUZZAH!
"Being called a racist by a Liberal is a badge of honor."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"I'm still wondering where all you tea-baggers were while the rest of us were out there protesting those things under YOUR imperial lord and savior Bush. I definitely didn't see you there."
Hello,
To be fair... *raises hand* I was here. Back when they were largely Libertarian. Ron Paul jumped to Republican, and a lot of us switched cards to follow him. The Ron Paul rEVOLution. With LOVE as its central theme. A powerful movement made powerful due to a backlash against the infringement of freedoms under the Bush administration.
But Ron Paul didn't win, and the movement seems to have lost a lot of the LOVE. It seems so angry, now. I feel like the Republicans purchased it. It doesn't feel the same today as it did in 2007-2008. It's bigger, but it's also less happy. Despite the major party financing and support, the Tea Party feels poorer.
--Anthony
P.S. Any chance we can cut out the tea-bagger stuff? Slapping folks who are already polarized isn't gonna mellow 'em out.
Due to the use of Naomi 3.3.2 Beta web filtering, the following people may need to private-message me if they wish to contact me: Auraptor, Kaneman, Piratenews. I apologize for the inconvenience.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Aww Kwick.. are we bothering you? Ok.
We'll stop trying to make things better. For you.
I'm sorry you think your dear and fluffy lord and savior Bush made things better for ANYONE, at least anyone who doesn't earn more than $250,000 a year.
Quote:
You poor thing. It must be tough. People have woken up and really, REALLY dont like your "savior".
Its tough for hard core liberalistas right now... I sympathize. I really do.
People arnt buying the whole government being your parent thingy... and its driving those who desperatly WANT the government to be their parent.... mad.
Is that what's eating you? Is that what you were raving about the other night, with all your "you owe me" blather? Do you REALLY want the government to be your mommy? I know you had a shitty childhood and shitty parents, but has it really driven you mad?
Quote:
There there little one. You might, just MIGHT, have to grow up if we finally win.
Y'know, YOU just might have to grow up, too. Ever think about that? No more playing little toy soldier anymore, tin man.
AURaptor's Greatest Hits:
Friday, May 28, 2010 - 20:32 To AnthonyT:
Go fuck yourself.
On this matter, make no mistake. I want you to go fuck yourself long and hard, as well as anyone who agrees with you. I got no use for you.
Friday, May 28, 2010 - 18:26 To President Obama:
Mr. President, you're a god damn, mother fucking liar.
Fuck you, you cock sucking community activist piece of shit.
... go fuck yourself, Mr. President.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
this talking point on the left to blame "Dumbya" for this abysmal, non existent 'recovery' just isn't holding water anymore. Obama isn't cleaning up any mess that the democrats weren't also equally responsable for. the democrats have had majorities in the house and senate for 4 years, and total control for almost 2 years now. not coincidentally, the deficits have exploded exponentially since then(although in conjunction with liberal republicans). but just under the current president, the trillion dollar stimulus was a failure, the healthcare bill is a nightmare, and financial reform and cap and trade will all be huge tax increases on everybody. and the Bush tax cuts expire soon, on top of everything. in other words, we've basically turned a crash, similar to '29, into what will become a another 15 year long great depression. and, just as it was then, this is the fault of flawed economic theories, wich will result in the same predictable outcome. so because i fundementally disagree with the agenda of the current party in power, i don't see a whole lot to be praiseworthy about towards president Obama and the dems
if he was a libertarian, as charasmatic a person as he is, you want to like him- he could be one of the greatest presidents in modern history. and how oppertune a time, when we need his abilities of persuasion and charisma to advocate the principles liberty. you notice he never talks about these concepts though.. he truly believes in a command and control, top down centralized society. and you just cant run peoples lives, in will never work
about the surpluses under Clinton, does any of that credit go to the republican party, who took control of the house and senate for the first time in 20-30 years? it was a generation of Reagan era conservatives who did that. eventually the power corrupted them though, and they became socially conservative liberals. but when Bush was elected in 2000, republicans had an oppertunity to decentralize this top heavy authoritarian government, purge the beauracracy and return back to classical laissez faire capitalism, and they blew it! and this perception among the left of massive deregulation during this period, what are you talking about? in fact, what regulations were put in place, such as in housing and banking, turned out to be counterproductive and harmful to the economy, as evidenced by our current situation.
and on the Bush tax cuts, if they were indeed only for the super rich, which is untrue but the common myth among the left, what is the left admitting is wrong with that? its an admission in premise that a tax cut is a benefit to people. why then does the left demonize the Bush tax cuts, which benefit a broad range of people of all tax and income brackets? or, why not propose tax cuts greater then 'Bushs'? i dont get it.. and out of pure partisanship you will let them expire, and punish everyone. but if you think letting these cuts expire will result in greater revenues to the federal government(maybe in hopes to pay off this massive deficit), you've got an important lesson in economics coming to you
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
You're forgetting a couple of things, Wulf:
a) She's not "my girl"...she's just the one journalist I've noted who has her people do her homoework, so I trust her more than I trust a lot of MSM. I don't trust the MSM in general, but history has shown she's pretty reliable most of the time.
I believe there's enough blame to go all around, from Obama to administration, Republicans, and the Tea Party.
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of __________________, code name ‘Nike”,
signing off
Maddow is a journalist? Really? I'm out of touch. I thought she was all opinion
Man, you are a piece of work. How does the tea party take any blame?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by antimason:
this talking point on the left to blame "Dumbya" for this abysmal, non existent 'recovery' just isn't holding water anymore. Obama isn't cleaning up any mess that the democrats weren't also equally responsable for. the democrats have had majorities in the house and senate for 4 years, and total control for almost 2 years now. not coincidentally, the deficits have exploded exponentially since then(although in conjunction with liberal republicans). but just under the current president, the trillion dollar stimulus was a failure, the healthcare bill is a nightmare, and financial reform and cap and trade will all be huge tax increases on everybody. and the Bush tax cuts expire soon, on top of everything. in other words, we've basically turned a crash, similar to '29, into what will become a another 15 year long great depression. and, just as it was then, this is the fault of flawed economic theories, wich will result in the same predictable outcome. so because i fundementally disagree with the agenda of the current party in power, i don't see a whole lot to be praiseworthy about towards president Obama and the dems
if he was a libertarian, as charasmatic a person as he is, you want to like him- he could be one of the greatest presidents in modern history. and how oppertune a time, when we need his abilities of persuasion and charisma to advocate the principles liberty. you notice he never talks about these concepts though.. he truly believes in a command and control, top down centralized society. and you just cant run peoples lives, in will never work
about the surpluses under Clinton, does any of that credit go to the republican party, who took control of the house and senate for the first time in 20-30 years? it was a generation of Reagan era conservatives who did that. eventually the power corrupted them though, and they became socially conservative liberals. but when Bush was elected in 2000, republicans had an oppertunity to decentralize this top heavy authoritarian government, purge the beauracracy and return back to classical laissez faire capitalism, and they blew it! and this perception among the left of massive deregulation during this period, what are you talking about? in fact, what regulations were put in place, such as in housing and banking, turned out to be counterproductive and harmful to the economy, as evidenced by our current situation.
and on the Bush tax cuts, if they were indeed only for the super rich, which is untrue but the common myth among the left, what is the left admitting is wrong with that? its an admission in premise that a tax cut is a benefit to people. why then does the left demonize the Bush tax cuts, which benefit a broad range of people of all tax and income brackets? or, why not propose tax cuts greater then 'Bushs'? i dont get it.. and out of pure partisanship you will let them expire, and punish everyone. but if you think letting these cuts expire will result in greater revenues to the federal government(maybe in hopes to pay off this massive deficit), you've got an important lesson in economics coming to you
Hello, I'm Kaneman and I approve this message....
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
P.S. Any chance we can cut out the tea-bagger stuff? Slapping folks who are already polarized isn't gonna mellow 'em out.
Shall I use Tea Party-backed candidate Ken Buck's words for them, and just call them "those dumbasses in the Tea Party"? After all, they still seem to be backing him, even after he referred to them as "dumbasses" when he was discussing them with a Democrat colleague.
AURaptor's Greatest Hits:
Friday, May 28, 2010 - 20:32 To AnthonyT:
Go fuck yourself.
On this matter, make no mistake. I want you to go fuck yourself long and hard, as well as anyone who agrees with you. I got no use for you.
Friday, May 28, 2010 - 18:26 To President Obama:
Mr. President, you're a god damn, mother fucking liar.
Fuck you, you cock sucking community activist piece of shit.
... go fuck yourself, Mr. President.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I’m going to try not to get caught up in the back-and-forthing, I’ll just refute a few things:
The Republicans had the triple-threat: House, Senate, President (and Supreme Court, too, actually) for six years. They had it under Bush and Clinton. The Dems had both House and Senate under Eisenhower, Nixon, Kennedy, Ford and Carter. Notice how the debt didn’t rise much.
It starts going up strongly when the Republicans got the Senate in 1980. It leveled off a bit during Clinton, when the Repubs had a double threat, and I give them all kinds of points for that (I also give Clinton some points, as he worked WITH them to bring it down), but had its single largest bump up until then under Bush, again triple threat.
The concept that the Dems could turn that around under a Repub President in four years, given where it had gotten to, is in my opinion fallacious. Yes, they haven’t done it, I don’t like that. And yes, they aren’t doing it, I don’t like that either. But if one takes into account how it got there, and that it was grown without any attention to infrastructure, with tax cuts and benefits to the rich, and by trashing the economy, that leaves a lot for anyone following Bush to “fix”. And yes, those “flawed economic theories” were begun under Bush, copying Reagan’s “voo doo economics”, as even Pappa Bush realized.
You cannot damn any one party without taking history into account, much as you’d like to, I know. No President acts within a vaccum.
I fully agree with your second paragraph, DT, except I think the reasons are different, as I posted before. Most of the third as well, except for the tax cuts part. I’ve shown over and over that trickle-down does NOT work; so there’s no debating, since you are convinced despite hefty evidence that it does. Tax cuts do increase the deficit, that’s also been shown over and over, despite Republican talking points that they “pay for themselves”—they simply do NOT.
Notice how the debt/GDP ratio was RAISED under Reagan, Bush I and Bush II—Reagan was the big believer in Tricke-Down, so if it works so well and tax cuts work so well, why is that the case?
I already explained the blame I place on the Tea Party, so won’t repeat myself. And I’ll put Maddow’s fact checking up against ANY fact checking done by FauxNews, happily. To say otherwise is to ignore the facts, or to be ignorant of who checks them and who does not. To say she is all opinion is pure partisan bullshit unless proven otherwise, which is impossible. It’s obvious such an opinion is garnered from other sources than actually checking anything out.
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of __________________, code name ‘Nike”,
signing off
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Good graphs Niki! Thanks for posting them.
Yeah, unbelievable that folks keep saying that those tax cuts for the wealthy will lead to more jobs and higher govt income. Duh! We've had those tax cuts for several years, and none of that happened! Rather the reverse...
-----------------------------------------------
hmm-burble-blah, blah-blah-blah, take a left
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
But if one takes into account how it got there, and that it was grown without any attention to infrastructure, with tax cuts and benefits to the rich, and by trashing the economy, that leaves a lot for anyone following Bush to “fix”.
im sorry Niki, i just disagree with your premise-cutting taxes is a good thing, and the Bush tax cuts cover a broad range of people, most importantly small businesses. with the tax code as it is, lower income people pay very little relative to people in higher brackets anyways. what is the argument against letting people keep as much of their earnings as possible? that is what promotes drive and incentive and innovation. then, the consumer, the individual, spends and invests his money as he chooses- rather then the government.
Milton Friedman once said that the principle behind taxation breaks down two ways- that government must use force, or coercion, in the first place, to collect the taxes from you, and the second is that government can spend that money better then you can.
in that respect, letting people keep what they rightfully earn is a net benefit to everyone. but just look at the increase in revenues after the Harding/Coolidge tax cuts, the Truman/Eisenhower era reductions, and the Kennedy(Lbjs) and later Reagan era tax cuts.
Quote:
And yes, those “flawed economic theories” were begun under Bush, copying Reagan’s “voo doo economics”, as even Pappa Bush realized.
You cannot damn any one party without taking history into account, much as you’d like to, I know. No President acts within a vaccum.
i completely agree, which is why we should drop this partisan bickering, and focus on simple principles that we can agree on. i cannot fathom why we as Americans will not rally behind the principles of liberty as invisioned by our founders, and return to that. im willing to bet that they did not intend us to be a highly centralized, secularized democracy with a command and control economy. i know Jefferson and Madison vehemently opposed the creation of a central bank, such as we now call the Fed, which facilitates this monolith of a collectivist government.
Quote:
I fully agree with your second paragraph, DT, except I think the reasons are different, as I posted before. Most of the third as well, except for the tax cuts part. I’ve shown over and over that trickle-down does NOT work; so there’s no debating, since you are convinced despite hefty evidence that it does. Tax cuts do increase the deficit, that’s also been shown over and over, despite Republican talking points that they “pay for themselves”—they simply do NOT.
Notice how the debt/GDP ratio was RAISED under Reagan, Bush I and Bush II—Reagan was the big believer in Tricke-Down, so if it works so well and tax cuts work so well, why is that the case?
are the deficits due to shortfalls in tax revenue, or increases in spending? i think there is an important distinction to make there. when i get a chance, i will look into it further, but i know that sales revenues increases dramatically when tax cuts have been tried.
in fairness, to pay for a government that attempts to regulate society equally and be everything to everyone, you need to collect as many taxes as possible; we already cant afford the government we have. i want government that doesnt infringe on people, therefore im willing to pay fewer taxes. so i understand why you on the left want to seize so much of people incomes, it's that you genuinely believe it would be better spent by government. not only better, there are grand goals that you would like to achieve, like a green energy eonomy, universal care, universal education. its expensive
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
P.S. Any chance we can cut out the tea-bagger stuff? Slapping folks who are already polarized isn't gonna mellow 'em out.
Shall I use Tea Party-backed candidate Ken Buck's words for them, and just call them "those dumbasses in the Tea Party"? After all, they still seem to be backing him, even after he referred to them as "dumbasses" when he was discussing them with a Democrat colleague.
AURaptor's Greatest Hits:
Friday, May 28, 2010 - 20:32 To AnthonyT:
Go fuck yourself.
On this matter, make no mistake. I want you to go fuck yourself long and hard, as well as anyone who agrees with you. I got no use for you.
Friday, May 28, 2010 - 18:26 To President Obama:
Mr. President, you're a god damn, mother fucking liar.
Fuck you, you cock sucking community activist piece of shit.
... go fuck yourself, Mr. President.
"Those dumb-asses that keep asking me about birth certificates"....Tea party is not birthers....Only idiots believe he was talking about the tea party and not birthers who are their own one issue morons.
Keep watching olberman and maddow. And next time when you use quotes don't make em up. You have zero credibility on this board. Why don't you go back and change your posts like you do with AuRaptor you little homosexual.
AT THE TEA PARTY.....is different than IN THE TEA PARTY.....birthers show up everywhere.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Notice how the debt/GDP ratio was RAISED under Reagan, Bush I and Bush II—Reagan was the big believer in Tricke-Down, so if it works so well and tax cuts work so well, why is that the case?
I already explained the blame I place on the Tea Party, so won’t repeat myself. And I’ll put Maddow’s fact checking up against ANY fact checking done by FauxNews, happily. To say otherwise is to ignore the facts, or to be ignorant of who checks them and who does not. To say she is all opinion is pure partisan bullshit unless proven otherwise, which is impossible. It’s obvious such an opinion is garnered from other sources than actually checking anything out.
Contracted Agent of __________________, code name ‘Nike”,
signing off
Nice table - the final column is the most significant (and hence the most damning). And the presidential terms with red numbers... 6/6 for Republicans!
Also note that Clinton needed two terms to significantly bring the debt down from the finances he inherited from his predecessor (or it took that long to rein in the spending). I expect this will be even more true in the aftermath of Bush II (and only next term's president will gain the credit).
It's not personal. It's just war.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by kaneman:Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
P.S. Any chance we can cut out the tea-bagger stuff? Slapping folks who are already polarized isn't gonna mellow 'em out.
Shall I use Tea Party-backed candidate Ken Buck's words for them, and just call them "those dumbasses in the Tea Party"? After all, they still seem to be backing him, even after he referred to them as "dumbasses" when he was discussing them with a Democrat colleague.
AURaptor's Greatest Hits:
Friday, May 28, 2010 - 20:32 To AnthonyT:
Go fuck yourself.
On this matter, make no mistake. I want you to go fuck yourself long and hard, as well as anyone who agrees with you. I got no use for you.
Friday, May 28, 2010 - 18:26 To President Obama:
Mr. President, you're a god damn, mother fucking liar.
Fuck you, you cock sucking community activist piece of shit.
... go fuck yourself, Mr. President.
"Those dumb-asses that keep asking me about birth certificates"....Tea party is not birthers....Only idiots believe he was talking about the tea party and not birthers who are their own one issue morons.
Keep watching olberman and maddow. And next time when you use quotes don't make em up. You have zero credibility on this board. Why don't you go back and change your posts like you do with AuRaptor you little homosexual.
FAIL. You just made up your own quote, right there. You and Rappy seem to follow the same mold. Maybe he's just another 14 year-old like you...
I really do appreciate being lectured about "credibility" from someone who admits to lying about who they are and how many usernames they're currently using. That's rich.
The CORRECT quote is:
Quote:
"Will you tell those dumbasses at the Tea Party to stop asking questions about birth certificates?"
The birthers ARE the Tea Party. They're the exact same dumbasses. You are one of them. Even Ken Buck thinks you're a dumbass. And you're here defending him for calling you a dumbass, futher proving his point that you ARE a dumbass.
AURaptor's Greatest Hits:
Friday, May 28, 2010 - 20:32 To AnthonyT:
Go fuck yourself.
On this matter, make no mistake. I want you to go fuck yourself long and hard, as well as anyone who agrees with you. I got no use for you.
Friday, May 28, 2010 - 18:26 To President Obama:
Mr. President, you're a god damn, mother fucking liar.
Fuck you, you cock sucking community activist piece of shit.
... go fuck yourself, Mr. President.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
The Tea Parties deserves the "blame" for daring to stand up to the ever expanding , free spending , hyper taxing Imperial Federal Gov't.
The Tea Party deserves the "blame" for attending town hall meetings, asking sincere and honest questions of their Representatives, and daring to not be treated like little children by over paid, glorified public servants.
And they deserve "blame" for being completely okay with the exact same shit under Dubya, even defending it endlessly, as you were well known for.
"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
It's a paradox.
Damn...I thought this thread was about going back in time and killing Obama's dad or Obama going back in time to kill Hitler or something like that.
"Hero. I have come to respect you." "I am forced to agree with Hero here."- Chrisisall, 2009.
"I find those statements amazing. I said I found your remarks 'amazing'" Niki2, 2010.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
After ramming an illegal and unConstitutional ObamaCare down the peoples throats... after spending their money to bail out compainies undeserving of continuation... after attempting to socialize everything... the free American people hate us?
How can THAT be?
"Being called a racist by a Liberal is a badge of honor."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
After ramming an illegal and unConstitutional ObamaCare down the peoples throats... after spending their money to bail out compainies undeserving of continuation... after attempting to socialize everything... the free American people hate us?
How can THAT be?
When you speak of bailouts for companies that shouldn't have been allowed to continue, you are no doubt speaking of Halliburton and Blackwater, right? After all, they wouldn't have continued to exist without their welfare handouts...
And again, I find it odd that you uttered not one peep in protest during the previous eight years. But, as you said before, you were "asleep". Maybe we should call you Rip Van Wulfie, since you're capable of sleeping through entire Republican administrations!
AURaptor's Greatest Hits:
Friday, May 28, 2010 - 20:32 To AnthonyT:
Go fuck yourself.
On this matter, make no mistake. I want you to go fuck yourself long and hard, as well as anyone who agrees with you. I got no use for you.
Friday, May 28, 2010 - 18:26 To President Obama:
Mr. President, you're a god damn, mother fucking liar.
Fuck you, you cock sucking community activist piece of shit.
... go fuck yourself, Mr. President.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Anti: we’ll have to agree to disagree. Facts have shown that tax cuts for the rich do NOT decrease the deficit, nor do they increase anyone else’s wealth but the already wealthy. Tax cuts for everyone, when the economy is stable, help everyone, granted. But trickle-down does not work, end of story, from all I have researched.
Take away the two wars Bush started and his tax cuts, and tax cuts, and look where we might be:
Iraq, Afghanistan, and the Bush tax cuts (along with the economic downturn) are what is driving the U.S. deficit, not stimulus spending.Quote:
Some critics continue to assert that President George W. Bush’s policies bear little responsibility for the deficits the nation faces over the coming decade — that, instead, the new policies of President Barack Obama and the 111th Congress are to blame. Most recently, a Heritage Foundation paper downplayed the role of Bush-era policies (for more on that paper, see p. 4). Nevertheless, the fact remains: Together with the economic downturn, the Bush tax cuts and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq explain virtually the entire deficit over the next ten years (see Figure 1).
The deficit for fiscal year 2009 was $1.4 trillion and, at nearly 10 percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), was the largest deficit relative to the size of the economy since the end of World War II. If current policies are continued without changes, deficits will likely approach those figures in 2010 and remain near $1 trillion a year for the next decade.
The events and policies that have pushed deficits to these high levels in the near term, however, were largely outside the new Administration’s control. If not for the tax cuts enacted during the presidency of George W. Bush that Congress did not pay for, the cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that were initiated during that period, and the effects of the worst economic slump since the Great Depression (including the cost of steps necessary to combat it), we would not be facing these huge deficits in the near term.
While President Obama inherited a dismal fiscal legacy, that does not diminish his responsibility to propose policies to address our fiscal imbalance and put the weight of his office behind them. Although policymakers should not tighten fiscal policy in the near term while the economy remains fragile, they and the nation at large must come to grips with the nation’s long-term deficit problem. But we should not mistake the causes of our predicament.
Recession Caused Sharp Deterioration in Budget Outlook
Whoever won the presidency in 2008 was going to face a grim fiscal situation, a fact already well known as the presidential campaign got underway. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) presented a sobering outlook in its 2008 summer update,[1] and during the autumn, the news got relentlessly worse. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the two government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) that became embroiled in the housing meltdown, failed in early September; two big financial firms — AIG and Lehman Brothers — collapsed soon thereafter; and others teetered. In December 2008, the National Bureau of Economic Research confirmed that the nation was in recession and pegged the starting date as December 2007. By the time CBO issued its new projections on January 7, 2009 — two weeks before Inauguration Day — it had already put the 2009 deficit at well over $1 trillion.[2]
The recession battered the budget, driving down tax revenues and swelling outlays for unemployment insurance, food stamps, and other safety-net programs.[3] Using CBO’s August 2008 projections as a benchmark, we calculate that the changed economic outlook accounts for over $400 billion of the deficit each year in 2009 through 2011 and slightly smaller amounts in subsequent years. Those effects persist; even in 2018, the deterioration in the economy since the summer of 2008 will account for over $2
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I don't get it?
Ok.
1. I don't agree with waterboarding, its pointless as an interogation tool (like all torture is.) Plus, in any war, you must always keep the moral high ground... and its just disgusting that we would do something like that.
2. The Patriot Act. I never supported it. Ron Paul never supported it. But to a T, almost every single Democrat AND Republican did.
3. Im not a Republican. Im center right overall, like the rest of the country. Some of my views are VERY conservative, but that doesnt make me a neo-con, a Republican or a Vulcan. They are just MY views.
4. back to the Patriot Act. Obama has not gotten rid of it, has he? In fact, if I remember correctly, he authorized the military to kill American citizens SUSPECTED of "terrorist" ties.
5. Continuation of bail-outs, holding the housing market in a stand-still, continuing unemployment benefits, and regulating business only DEEPEN our financial hole. Not to mention TRILLIONS spent on easily corrupted programs that do nothing.
Like ObamaCare. How much has been spent on that garbage already?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
5. continuing unemployment benefits, and regulating business only DEEPEN our financial hole.
For not being a lock-stepping neo-con, you sure do like to parrot their bullshit for them.
Sorry son, but math disagrees with you.
"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Well, I'll agree with your first three, although you're hardly "right" and you're DEFINITELY a high RWA. I'm glad you at least feel the way you do about the first two.
Once again, ignoring any potential good that's been done, you focus on your favorite talking points. The question was why hasn't Obama and his administration gotten ANY credit for the good things they've done, but I realize that's not the question you want to answer. So be it. You already know I feel the same about most of the things you enumerated in #4 & 5; that's not the question. Aren't you constantly complaining about people turning the subject and not answering the question(s) posed? Or did I miss something?
Regulating business increases the debt, eh? You don't see lack of regulation as being part of what put us here, you know, with derivatives and such, obviously. Huh, your reasoning escapes me.
If you want to know what I call you a high RWA, you said it yourself: "extending unemployment":Quote:
That about covers it.
What reasons do high RWAs give for giving equality short-shrift? Well, they say, ultimately complete equality is a pipe dream. Natural forces inevitably govern the worth of the individual. And people should have to earn their places in society, not get any free rides. The poor can pull themselves up by their bootstraps if they really want to. Lots of people have, haven’t they?
Given all of this, do you trust him when he says he’s in favor of a level playing field? He’s against programs that would give the disadvantaged a better chance. Does he really believe the poor can pull themselves up by their bootstraps, or is he content to let them face an uphill struggle that very few can overcome? It doesn’t bother the high RWA that masses of people are poor. That’s their tough luck. And some racial groups are just naturally inferior to others, he says.
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name ‘Nike”,
signing off
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
What is an RWA?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"The Patriot Act. I never supported it. Ron Paul never supported it. But to a T, almost every single Democrat AND Republican did."
Hello,
This is a place where I recall widespread dissent, so this statement would appear to be fallacious.
--Anthony
Due to the use of Naomi 3.3.2 Beta web filtering, the following people may need to private-message me if they wish to contact me: Auraptor, Kaneman, Piratenews. I apologize for the inconvenience.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
As to the "good" hes done. Its soo far outweighed by the bad as to not even be mentioned.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Ant, I meant lawmakers. Not the general public.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
To answer your question, "high RWA" is a term that offends some here, but it reflects what I see. It comes from a book called The Authoritarians, and in part is defined thus:Quote:
Obviously in your cases, "authorities" means those with your agenda; when Bush was in power, that meant the government. Now it means the anti-government, but it fits nonetheless.
Authoritarian followers usually support the established authorities in their society [which, in the case of those here, means the "right", not the government currently in power], such as government officials and traditional religious leaders. Such people have historically been the “proper” authorities in life, the time-honored, entitled, customary leaders, and that means a lot to most authoritarians. Psychologically these followers have personalities featuring:
1) a high degree of submission to the established, legitimate authorities in their society;
2) high levels of aggression in the name of their beliefs; and
3) a high level of conventionalism.
Because the submission occurs to traditional authority, I call these followers rightwing authoritarians. I’m using the word “right” in one of its earliest meanings, for in Old English “riht”(pronounced “writ”) as an adjective meant lawful, proper, correct, doing what the authorities said. (And when someone did the lawful thing back then, maybe the authorities said, with a John Wayne drawl, “You got that riht, pilgrim!”)
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name ‘Nike”,
signing off
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Wait a second... are you seriously calling me this?
"Authoritarian followers usually support the established authorities in their society [which, in the case of those here, means the "right", not the government currently in power], such as government officials and traditional religious leaders. Such people have historically been the “proper” authorities in life, the time-honored, entitled, customary leaders, and that means a lot to most authoritarians."
Me. Of ALL people.
Just because Im not a loony anarchist, a dirty hippie...that doesnt make me a goose stepping neo-con ready to bend my knee to anyone. Ever.
I dont trust cops, I dont trust the government, I dont give authority to anyone over me.
I allow for certain dealings with so-called authroity figures on the basis of social cohesion.. but really? Me?
Bend my knee? Never have, never will.
Ah, Nix. You have no idea.
But thats ok. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
You are not "center-right" and you do give someone authority over you in that you swallow whatever FauxNews saiys whole and parrot talking points, never checking the facts, and defend them to the death, even when refuted with facts.
And yes, you "conform" to virtually everything the right espouses, which is bending your knee to them. You don't check on your own, you repond almost universally with knee-jerk partisan jihad.
The words don't fit exactly, since the "authority" you follow is currently against the government in power. I wasn't here to see whether you bent your knee to Bush's administration, but the agenda you represent definitely speaks to the possibility you did.
However, I gave you the definition, not the explanation of the mentality. A more accurate description of you, which is also that of high RWAs, is:Quote:
There's also the mentality of aggression and insults, but I won't go into that part of it. You no doubt can't see yourself in the above, either, but others can.
A filing cabinet or a computer can store quite inconsistent notions and never lose a minute of sleep over their contradiction. Similarly a high RWA can have all sorts of illogical, self-contradictory, and widely refuted ideas rattling around in various boxes in his brain, and never notice it.
Authoritarians’ ideas are poorly integrated with one another. It’s as if each idea is stored in a file that can be called up and used when the authoritarian wishes, even though another of his ideas--stored in a different file--basically contradicts it. We all have some inconsistencies in our thinking, but authoritarians can stupify you with the inconsistency of their ideas. Thus they may say they are proud to live in a country that guarantees freedom of speech, but another file holds, “My country, love it or leave it.” The ideas were copied from trusted sources, often as sayings, but the authoritarian has never “merged files” to see how well they all fit together.
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Ah, whassamatta, Wulfie? Did someone upset your precious world-view by pointing out that you are every bit the lockstep collectivist you accuse everyone else of being?
You will ONLY list sources that are strongly right-wing in their agenda and ideology. You will ONLY listen to those who share those beliefs. That does indeed make you a drone of the neo-con collective.
You didn't bend *A* knee - you got down on BOTH knees, kneeling before whatever mouthpiece the right-wing puts up as their spokesperson this week. You kneeled on your shoes and pretended you were standing tall, but we all see you as that same scared little boy you've always been.
AURaptor's Greatest Hits:
Friday, May 28, 2010 - 20:32 To AnthonyT:
Go fuck yourself.
On this matter, make no mistake. I want you to go fuck yourself long and hard, as well as anyone who agrees with you. I got no use for you.
Friday, May 28, 2010 - 18:26 To President Obama:
Mr. President, you're a god damn, mother fucking liar.
Fuck you, you cock sucking community activist piece of shit.
... go fuck yourself, Mr. President.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Wulf = lightning rod for all the hate and anger libs have towards the "other side"
Its cool.
I can handle it.
Hopefully when they've blown out their "rage" they will be able to listen.
Maybe not.
Then again, I actually believe in REAL "HOPE and CHANGE".
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Nice try, Wulf...your usual shif to self-righteous declarations. Again, RWA to the core.
Problem is, IF you offered material that wasn't easily proven false or just partisan opinion, people would take you more seriously and WOULD listen.
You're no lightning rod for "libs" anger and hatred; you're just sad and somewhat amusing. There are others here who provide pertinent points and are able to debate, you just slide sideways with some irrelevant snark and don't face your opponents. Thus you ensure that your comments are not taken seriously.
There's no anger or hate in seeing you as an RWA; I don't hate them at all, I'm sad for them, as they are so blind and partioned that it's impossible to converse with them, and I think they're so locked in step with an ideology that they can't, and won't even LOOK AT, the facts. Not everyone on the right is an RWA, we have a few here as examples. You, however, are textbook.
In your case it's slightly worse; the fantasy land you live in would, I'd be willing to bet, be mocked even by real right wingers; they might even find you slighly embarrassing, except that they, like "libs" and "hippies" know all groups have their unthinking whackos and fringers, so they'd ignore you and move on. It's very sad; occasionally you show signs that make people hopeful, but they're brief and gone before you have a chance to grow and learn.
I HAVE listened, Wulf, it's just that 99% of the time, all you offer is fantasy. It's almost as if it's a game for you...give out a little sanity so people think you can be dealt with, then sock 'em with the real you...
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Wulf
What is an RWA?
It's BS term from a quack psychologist. The idea is that having a conservative mindset basically automatically sends you down a chain of events which makes you a fascist. It's utter hogwash from beginning to end. It stands for Right Wing Authoritarian.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Thanks DT.
Like believing that you are in charge of your own life, that government should be small and kept in check, that you have the ability to change things for the better, that you are responsible for your mistakes, that you should have conviction and determination, that believing in freedoms for everyone, that wanting people to stay out of your life, to even "go your own way", that you should keep what you earn, that you should be able to defend yourself and those you care about, that responsibility is not just a word
will SOMEHOW
lead to facism/Nazism(sp)?
Wow.
I guess, having a national, social "healthcare" bill doesnt count?
Oh yeah, I keep forgetting, its ok if its a liberal doing it.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The day you go your own way and take responsibility for yourself, everyone on this board will fall over in a faint.
Hell, the day you even HAVE a thought of your own would be enough to knock us over.Quote:
High RWAs typically think they’re way, way better. They are the Holy Ones. They are the Chosen. They are the Righteous. They somehow got a three-for-one special on self-righteousness. And self-righteousness appears to release authoritarian aggression more than anything else. Chronically frightened authoritarian followers, looking for someone to attack because fighting is one of the things people do when they are afraid, are particularly likely to do so when they can find a moral justification for their hostility. Authoritarian followers feel empowered to isolate and segregate, to humiliate, to persecute, because in their heads they can almost hear the loudspeakers announcing, “Now batting for God’s team, his designated hitter, (their name).”
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:Quote:
Originally posted by kaneman:Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
P.S. Any chance we can cut out the tea-bagger stuff? Slapping folks who are already polarized isn't gonna mellow 'em out.
Shall I use Tea Party-backed candidate Ken Buck's words for them, and just call them "those dumbasses in the Tea Party"? After all, they still seem to be backing him, even after he referred to them as "dumbasses" when he was discussing them with a Democrat colleague.
AURaptor's Greatest Hits:
Friday, May 28, 2010 - 20:32 To AnthonyT:
Go fuck yourself.
On this matter, make no mistake. I want you to go fuck yourself long and hard, as well as anyone who agrees with you. I got no use for you.
Friday, May 28, 2010 - 18:26 To President Obama:
Mr. President, you're a god damn, mother fucking liar.
Fuck you, you cock sucking community activist piece of shit.
... go fuck yourself, Mr. President.
"Those dumb-asses that keep asking me about birth certificates"....Tea party is not birthers....Only idiots believe he was talking about the tea party and not birthers who are their own one issue morons.
Keep watching olberman and maddow. And next time when you use quotes don't make em up. You have zero credibility on this board. Why don't you go back and change your posts like you do with AuRaptor you little homosexual.
FAIL. You just made up your own quote, right there. You and Rappy seem to follow the same mold. Maybe he's just another 14 year-old like you...
I really do appreciate being lectured about "credibility" from someone who admits to lying about who they are and how many usernames they're currently using. That's rich.
The CORRECT quote is:Quote:
"Will you tell those dumbasses at the Tea Party to stop asking questions about birth certificates?"
The birthers ARE the Tea Party. They're the exact same dumbasses. You are one of them. Even Ken Buck thinks you're a dumbass. And you're here defending him for calling you a dumbass, futher proving his point that you ARE a dumbass.
AURaptor's Greatest Hits:
Friday, May 28, 2010 - 20:32 To AnthonyT:
Go fuck yourself.
On this matter, make no mistake. I want you to go fuck yourself long and hard, as well as anyone who agrees with you. I got no use for you.
Friday, May 28, 2010 - 18:26 To President Obama:
Mr. President, you're a god damn, mother fucking liar.
Fuck you, you cock sucking community activist piece of shit.
... go fuck yourself, Mr. President.
Hey idiot you wrote in quotes"in the"
I wrote in quotes "at the" and explained the difference....You are a liar...my post is there for all to see. There is a huge difference between.. in the...and..at the....That you are posting MY interpretation in your post and not THE real point of my post is kinda funny and makes me think you are gay.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by kaneman:Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
P.S. Any chance we can cut out the tea-bagger stuff? Slapping folks who are already polarized isn't gonna mellow 'em out.
Shall I use Tea Party-backed candidate Ken Buck's words for them, and just call them "those dumbasses in the Tea Party"? After all, they still seem to be backing him, even after he referred to them as "dumbasses" when he was discussing them with a Democrat colleague.
AURaptor's Greatest Hits:
Friday, May 28, 2010 - 20:32 To AnthonyT:
Go fuck yourself.
On this matter, make no mistake. I want you to go fuck yourself long and hard, as well as anyone who agrees with you. I got no use for you.
Friday, May 28, 2010 - 18:26 To President Obama:
Mr. President, you're a god damn, mother fucking liar.
Fuck you, you cock sucking community activist piece of shit.
... go fuck yourself, Mr. President.
"Those dumb-asses that keep asking me about birth certificates"....Tea party is not birthers....Only idiots believe he was talking about the tea party and not birthers who are their own one issue morons.
Keep watching olberman and maddow. And next time when you use quotes don't make em up. You have zero credibility on this board. Why don't you go back and change your posts like you do with AuRaptor you little homosexual.
AT THE TEA PARTY.....is different than IN THE TEA PARTY.....birthers show up everywhere.
AT THE is different than IN THE...that was my point that KWICKO left that last part out shows he is a liar and gay
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:Quote:
Wulf
What is an RWA?
It's BS term from a quack psychologist. The idea is that having a conservative mindset basically automatically sends you down a chain of events which makes you a fascist. It's utter hogwash from beginning to end. It stands for Right Wing Authoritarian.
Yep, those who fit the term really hate it.
"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
By the way, it is most definitely NOT "having a conservative mindset basically automatically sends you down a chain of events which makes you a fascist". That's how you're interpreting it, not the reality. That also makes me think you recognize yourself in the definition, which makes you want to reject it. Nowhere does he say all conservatives are RWAs, nor that it leads to fasciam. Those are your interpretations, which is interesting.
You, by the way, do not embody a high RWA. Some aspects, true, but not all. But the aggression part sure does peg you!
To make my point, please specify where in here you find the words "conservative" or "fascist":Quote:
Authoritarian followers usually support the established authorities in their society, such as government officials and traditional religious leaders. Such people have historically been the “proper” authorities in life, the time-honored, entitled, customary leaders, and that means a lot to most authoritarians. Psychologically these followers have personalities featuring:
1) a high degree of submission to the established, legitimate authorities in their society;
2) high levels of aggression in the name of their authorities; and
3) a high level of conventionalism.
Because the submission occurs to traditional authority, I call these followers rightwing authoritarians. I’m using the word “right” in one of its earliest meanings, for in Old English “riht”(pronounced “writ”) as an adjective meant lawful, proper, correct, doing what the authorities said. (And when someone did the lawful thing back then, maybe the authorities said, with a John Wayne drawl, “You got that riht, pilgrim!”)
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Wulf = Paranoid Right Wing Nutjob
Fixed that for ya.
"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Story, sometimes you get too harsh for my liking, but other times, your sense of humor knocks me out. Just sayin'.
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Even more amusing is, as I said before, me banging heads with LWAs, cause they can be just as much assholes but we don't seem to have any of those around to play with - although DT on occasion wavers into that territory when he starts letting other offline issues cloud his judgement while posting, LWAs are a form of authoritarian, just one not in agreement with the CURRENT ruling "authority".
But DT could never hold with em for any length of time anyway, despite his noted partisanship, as a farmer he's got a dirt-level view of the universe, and is quite familiar with the aroma of bullshit.
I just wish he was a little more willing to call his own "side" on it, is all.
Me, well... I recognize no "Authority" but my own will, but I put up with a lotta shit cause it makes other people happy, and so long as it doesn't impinge on me TOO much, I can deal.
It's called Tolerance - and I wish more people had it.
-Frem
I do not serve the Blind God.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME