lolKmar wrote:
Republicans were once largely seen as the party of civil liberties and individual rights.
Fuck Israel
That milf was dead weight.Dilbert_X wrote:
And if McCain had been President and had a supermajority as well as a hot MILF for VP?Then its somewhat dumb to be saying Obama shares some of the blame.Clinton left Bush in a downward trajectory. Granted it was not nearly as developed as what Obama inherited, but it could have been. The economy for the most part is cyclical. That's why we so often see the pendulum swing from left to right and vice versa. However, I will say, it does take a long time for massive economies to show the result of any government intervention.
It's not that simple. You have to dissect each decision. Some economical maneuvers will result in a relatively quick effect. Those are readily available for criticism or praise. However, my point was on the whole it does take a long time to reverse course. That's not to say the administration is untouchable when it comes to scrutiny.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
lrn2 US history. democrats were traditionally segregationists and full of the south will rise again crap.Dilbert_X wrote:
lolKmar wrote:
Republicans were once largely seen as the party of civil liberties and individual rights.
lol all you want. It was around the time Southern Dems were calling Lincoln a ni**er lover.Dilbert_X wrote:
lolKmar wrote:
Republicans were once largely seen as the party of civil liberties and individual rights.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
dixiecrats they were called if im correct?Kmar wrote:
lol all you want. It was around the time Southern Dems were calling Lincoln a ni**er lover.Dilbert_X wrote:
lolKmar wrote:
Republicans were once largely seen as the party of civil liberties and individual rights.
but yeah southern dems tried to keep slavery.
Yes. Some Dems, like Stephen Douglas, were constantly trying to preserve and even expand slavery.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
"I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world." Richard Dawkinslowing wrote:
Sure they can, "God wills it", "God works in mysterious ways" etc....Spark wrote:
Let's just say you're not going to be working out why chloroquine isn't working any more based on creationist theory.
Or why flu vaccines designed in 2007 are basically useless now.
So its so far in the past as to not matter.Kmar wrote:
lol all you want. It was around the time Southern Dems were calling Lincoln a ni**er lover.Dilbert_X wrote:
lolKmar wrote:
Republicans were once largely seen as the party of civil liberties and individual rights.
Glad we cleared that up.
Fuck Israel
At what point does history become irreverent? So I guess that means you will never bring up slavery as being relevant in American history ever again on the forums
You mean irrelevant?
Depends, what the Republican policy 200 years ago is not too relevant to whether Palin would make a good President.
The issue of slavery does still have some echoes, even segregation continued to the 1960s and racist discrimination is alive and well today.
Depends, what the Republican policy 200 years ago is not too relevant to whether Palin would make a good President.
The issue of slavery does still have some echoes, even segregation continued to the 1960s and racist discrimination is alive and well today.
Fuck Israel
I did not differentiate between left or right, black or white etc. I addressed ALL who seem to think theres is no problem with the hypocrisy I addressed.tuckergustav wrote:
lowing, can you understand here that there are several people here with opinions that are very specific to themselves and that we are not all one big mob of left wingers? (and actually, pretty sure kmar leans a little to the right, yes?)
I think maybe the misconception here is that we all are blindly following the messiah. When in fact that type of generalization is what I think you are trying to argue against.
I also think it would be completely false if anyone ever tried to claim they did not have double standards. I have never personally claimed otherwise.
Never assumed that either. It could be any issue or any politician, it just so happens the current administration, and the prevailing attitude that he's all right and Bush was all wrong, when they are doing the same things, is a convenient example.
Well then whoever claims that is a hypocrite. I do not have double standards. I am a conservative/libertarian, that is my yardstick. Right is right, and wrong is wrong and we can debate that, but to say right is right and wrong is wrong, only if person X said it or did it is inconsistent and leaves your motives for your opinions questionable at best and not creditable at worse . I simply can not think of a single example where I gave or would give a pass if it went against my core beliefs or values.
Why can't some blacks get over it? The past is the past, we should learn from our mistakes and move on.
The irony of guns, is that they can save lives.
I already said in the beginning of all of this that the only reason Palin gets so much attention is she is good looking with big tits. If she were fat and ugly she would have disappeared a long time ago and i dare say probably never would have appeared in the first place.Jaekus wrote:
It is because she has shown time and time again she is unable to respond in a way that makes her look much better than a contestant at a beauty pagent. Obama at least appears articulte and intelligent, thus the due to the differences in their character it's not hard to see why one is considered to have had a gaffe, and the other would be considered unknowledgeable. You know, this little thing called precedence.lowing wrote:
yes the context does matter, and if Palin gave the 57 states answer, that would be used as proof of 'retardation" and a "lack of critical thinking" and not a gaffe. I think you know that however.Kmar wrote:
That's you assuming that I am making my judgement on the person and not the question. That is not the case. I've even said earlier in this thread that some of the Palin criticism is undeserving. If I were committed to bringing her down simply for who she is then why would I believe she is unfairly attacked?
I did explain it. You don't understand. .. or you just ignored it. The content of the question does matter.
You give way too much credit for a guy that can not think or speak on his own without a rehearsal or staged questions or a teleprompter. Plenty of examples of this. Obama has appeared quite unintelligent "time and time again". and by you denying it, forgiving it, dismissing it etc is just another example of your hypocrisy. and since nothing he has done as president proves his superior intellect, how exactly can you draw the conclusion he is intelligent, unless of course you are considering his cunning and manipulation skills. If you are, then you gotta give props to Palin as well, right?
another double standard. according you 911 was Bushes fault 9 months after he was elected, and here 2 years in, nothing is Obamas fault yet?Dilbert_X wrote:
No doubt it has worsened. Downward trajectories do tend to trajectorise down.
Is it Obama's fault?
Is Palin the GOPs best and only hope to fix it?
Or is Obama still less made of fail than whoever leads the GOP into the election?
Also, lol mormons.
You get called out point blank and your retort is simply now "it doesn't matter"? It does matter as it relates to my point. How long ago is irrelevant. I stated that political platforms change. Period. That is a fact that can be demonstrated conclusively.Dilbert_X wrote:
So its so far in the past as to not matter.Kmar wrote:
Kmar wrote:
Republicans were once largely seen as the party of civil liberties and individual rights.lol all you want. It was around the time Southern Dems were calling Lincoln a ni**er lover.Dilbert_X wrote:
lol
Glad we cleared that up.
The only thing that was cleared up was you loling about something you apparently know nothing about.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
You're equating a steady economic collapse with a unique single event?lowing wrote:
another double standard. according you 911 was Bushes fault 9 months after he was elected, and here 2 years in, nothing is Obamas fault yet?
Bush was warned about Bin Laden, by Clinton and numerous others.
The financial mess was fully in place when Obama took over - how could that be his fault?
Last edited by Dilbert_X (2011-06-22 06:26:50)
Fuck Israel
Its irrelevant to the question of whether Palin is Presidential material, and a lot of other things too.lowing wrote:
You get called out point blank and your retort is simply now "it doesn't matter"? It does matter as it relates to my point. How long ago is irrelevant. I stated that political platforms change. Period. That is a fact that can be demonstrated conclusively.
Fuck Israel
We're talking about Palin running for President, how is it irrelevant?Dilbert_X wrote:
Its irrelevant to the question of whether Palin is Presidential material, and a lot of other things too.lowing wrote:
You get called out point blank and your retort is simply now "it doesn't matter"? It does matter as it relates to my point. How long ago is irrelevant. I stated that political platforms change. Period. That is a fact that can be demonstrated conclusively.
The irony of guns, is that they can save lives.
Did fail English in school? I said he appears intelligent. Palin does not.lowing wrote:
I already said in the beginning of all of this that the only reason Palin gets so much attention is she is good looking with big tits. If she were fat and ugly she would have disappeared a long time ago and i dare say probably never would have appeared in the first place.Jaekus wrote:
It is because she has shown time and time again she is unable to respond in a way that makes her look much better than a contestant at a beauty pagent. Obama at least appears articulte and intelligent, thus the due to the differences in their character it's not hard to see why one is considered to have had a gaffe, and the other would be considered unknowledgeable. You know, this little thing called precedence.lowing wrote:
yes the context does matter, and if Palin gave the 57 states answer, that would be used as proof of 'retardation" and a "lack of critical thinking" and not a gaffe. I think you know that however.
You give way too much credit for a guy that can not think or speak on his own without a rehearsal or staged questions or a teleprompter. Plenty of examples of this. Obama has appeared quite unintelligent "time and time again". and by you denying it, forgiving it, dismissing it etc is just another example of your hypocrisy. and since nothing he has done as president proves his superior intellect, how exactly can you draw the conclusion he is intelligent, unless of course you are considering his cunning and manipulation skills. If you are, then you gotta give props to Palin as well, right?
How is who called who what in the time of Lincoln relevant to whether Palin is qualified to be President?
Fuck Israel
Appearance does not matter.Jaekus wrote:
Did fail English in school? I said he appears intelligent. Palin does not.lowing wrote:
I already said in the beginning of all of this that the only reason Palin gets so much attention is she is good looking with big tits. If she were fat and ugly she would have disappeared a long time ago and i dare say probably never would have appeared in the first place.Jaekus wrote:
It is because she has shown time and time again she is unable to respond in a way that makes her look much better than a contestant at a beauty pagent. Obama at least appears articulte and intelligent, thus the due to the differences in their character it's not hard to see why one is considered to have had a gaffe, and the other would be considered unknowledgeable. You know, this little thing called precedence.
You give way too much credit for a guy that can not think or speak on his own without a rehearsal or staged questions or a teleprompter. Plenty of examples of this. Obama has appeared quite unintelligent "time and time again". and by you denying it, forgiving it, dismissing it etc is just another example of your hypocrisy. and since nothing he has done as president proves his superior intellect, how exactly can you draw the conclusion he is intelligent, unless of course you are considering his cunning and manipulation skills. If you are, then you gotta give props to Palin as well, right?
The irony of guns, is that they can save lives.
Work on your quoting buddy.Dilbert_X wrote:
Its irrelevant to the question of whether Palin is Presidential material, and a lot of other things too.lowing wrote:
You get called out point blank and your retort is simply now "it doesn't matter"? It does matter as it relates to my point. How long ago is irrelevant. I stated that political platforms change. Period. That is a fact that can be demonstrated conclusively.
It's relevant to the point of our two party system, which you brought up.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
If someone appears ignorant and stupid then I'd say it does.War Man wrote:
Appearance does not matter.
Last edited by Dilbert_X (2011-06-22 06:30:59)
Fuck Israel
Whatever, its still a two party system, that hasn't changed.Kmar wrote:
Work on your quoting buddy.Dilbert_X wrote:
Its irrelevant to the question of whether Palin is Presidential material, and a lot of other things too.lowing wrote:
You get called out point blank and your retort is simply now "it doesn't matter"? It does matter as it relates to my point. How long ago is irrelevant. I stated that political platforms change. Period. That is a fact that can be demonstrated conclusively.
It's relevant to the point of our two party system, which you brought up.
Fuck Israel
I go by policy, views, and strength, not appearance or eloquence. I'd vote for a very fucking ugly fat person if I agreed with him or her.Dilbert_X wrote:
If someone appears ignorant and stupid then I'd say it does.War Man wrote:
Appearance does not matter.
The irony of guns, is that they can save lives.