I second that... +1 Kmarionusmarine wrote:
you just described like 80% of the people in this section. very well put.Kmarion wrote:
You need to point the finger at one single man. The rest is just too complicated for you. So go ahead, have a ball.
Quit being so stubborn, if anything Bush has made use more vulnerable for attack by demolishing our economy. Now we have to spend more money on our economy, thus lowering our spending on the military, thus making us more vulnerable. I just don't understand how Bush has made us ANY safer, hes just some dude in an office, he isn't actively protecting us like say a police officer or air marshal.[TUF]Catbox wrote:
Bush is evil... lol... and i wan't to thank Iraq for oil they gave us for free...
you forgot about the fact there have been no attacks on US soil... but i'm sure you or the other anti Bush anti US folks will figure out a way to discredit this... lol
lol[TUF]Catbox wrote:
he single-handedly demolished our economy...lol... awesome...
Barney and the democrats wan't to cut military spending by 25 percent... are they bad?
usmarine wrote:
you just described like 80% of the people in this section. very well put.Kmarion wrote:
You need to point the finger at one single man. The rest is just too complicated for you. So go ahead, have a ball.
Last edited by SealXo (2008-12-10 17:40:49)
I do have a fault on these forums, and it is a penchant for hyperbole. You accuse me of failing to understand government; a charge I find mildly insulting.Kmarion wrote:
You completely ignored my last post. There was plenty of substance in there. It's obvious that you only see what you want to see. I'm not saying that there isn't some degree of culpability for Bush, it's just that your idea that "the ultimate blame goes to Bush" is wrong. You don't understand the roles of government... at all. Your response is to call me a Republican cheerleader. I understand that's a natural defense for you, it seems the world has to be black or white for you to make sense of it. I haven't called you one name. I truly feel that you are ignorant when it comes to the actual job of the President. I am charactering your opinion on the topic. I've seen your confusion more than once here when it comes to how the government works. You mask it with emotional words and flamboyancy.ATG wrote:
I have heard you state in many threads that george bush is not culpable for what is going on. I've yet to hear one thing he did to stop any of it, and as there was more to the op than the spitzer article I think I've spent enough time here on this with you. Unless you have something of substance, that is.
Well we did elect the fucking morons that did do it, and you know what fuck it, if you are going to buy shit on credit you should get charged 29% it would force people to stop and take a look to see if they really need it, but you should not get a penalty for paying it off early.ATG wrote:
And, we are the ones who deregulated the banks to the point that they were charging 29.99% interest on those cards?
nope, that would be the GOP.
The lack of independent thought was a reference to you repeating the same tired old rhetoric. There is a fundamental flaw behind it and I explained that. It had nothing to do with your families history of religious fanaticism. To some degree Bush did warn. You say the majority of the blame falls on the President. That like watching a house burn and putting most of the blame on a neighbor that did not call the fire department, not the people who actually set the fire or the firemen who never showed up. It's illogical.ATG wrote:
I do have a fault on these forums, and it is a penchant for hyperbole. You accuse me of failing to understand government; a charge I find mildly insulting.Kmarion wrote:
You completely ignored my last post. There was plenty of substance in there. It's obvious that you only see what you want to see. I'm not saying that there isn't some degree of culpability for Bush, it's just that your idea that "the ultimate blame goes to Bush" is wrong. You don't understand the roles of government... at all. Your response is to call me a Republican cheerleader. I understand that's a natural defense for you, it seems the world has to be black or white for you to make sense of it. I haven't called you one name. I truly feel that you are ignorant when it comes to the actual job of the President. I am charactering your opinion on the topic. I've seen your confusion more than once here when it comes to how the government works. You mask it with emotional words and flamboyancy.ATG wrote:
I have heard you state in many threads that george bush is not culpable for what is going on. I've yet to hear one thing he did to stop any of it, and as there was more to the op than the spitzer article I think I've spent enough time here on this with you. Unless you have something of substance, that is.
If Bush is but a spokesperson, fine. He is supposed to speak for us.
I demonstrated the simple yet awesome power of the presidents words leading the price of oil to begin falling.
All that douche had to do was talk about the problems we were beginning to face, and given the sheep like mentality of our society, many of those qualifying for these toxic mortgages would have thought twice about jumping on the bandwagon.
You accuse me of lack of independent thought, yet you are the one that voted for Obama. Perhaps you forget that I am the agnostic son of a religious fanatic. With my ' connections ' I could have a 3000 square foot house provided for me free of charge in Short Crick, aka Colorado City.
I choose to forge my own destiny.
I did not support Obama because I know about the history of the politics of his state, btw, the basis for political characters on The Simpsons. I also cannot excuse a man who sat in a church for twenty years that spewed hate about America. I also have the experience to recognize that his election was as much the intentional actions of the GOP as it was his messianic qualities. I swear I have typed this at least six times in six different threads; putting John McCain up was like when they put up Dole against Clinton; a through away. Thinkers will ponder why this is, realize the pile of shit that is disguised as meat loaf for what it is and OPT OUT.
I caught much flak for advocating armed revolution, and for the overall benefit of the forums, as a policy I do not discuss this.
But Jesus Christ, never since George Washington contemplated leading an ill trained, ill equipped army against the British has the case ever been clearer.
As California nears BK and complete meltdown you accuse me of lack of understanding on how it all works.
Again, I fault my own hyperbole and ' shock-jock " tendencies as reason for my current level of repugnance on these forums. If I had sugar coated the message, the sheep would be bleating and blathering their way to the battlefield because I am confident my message is true, and that of our forefathers.
I think you, tiring of the mask of moderator diplomacy, have chosen to turn to old hand regulars to beat up on. Fine, I know the noobs fear the mods. The consensus, gleaned from the few karma messages relating to this thread vindicate my notion that, lacking a coherent honest argument on why george W. bush is not a epic disaster, you have decided to pick a fight with me. It's not about having thin skin, it's about naming calling in place of a point.
Kmarion wrote:
that you are now making up fictitious name calling.
Kmarion wrote:
You've never been an independent thinker, this is just more of the same.
Kmarion wrote:
... you've got this absurdly simple minded ...
Kmarion wrote:
I'm not defending him. I, unlike you, know the role of the executive branch. ...you lack the ability to apply your own critical thought.
Kmarion wrote:
You are borderline going over the edge.. the only problem is nobody know which edge that is.
Ya know, I watch you spar with FM and get a kick out of it, but I feel like this whole discussion is taking place on a merry-go-round. I think you have done a much better job against him.Kmarion wrote:
Are you trying to score sympathy in place of a point? I am having a conversation with you and I've never hidden behind or used my mod status to influence opinion. That is not to say that people like you haven't used it in some speculative and manipulative manner. Thinkers will play the best hand they have been dealt. The irresponsible and reckless will fold when faced with challenges. Giving up requires very little thought. That is the destiny you have forged. It's not "opting out", it's abandonment.. the same thing you have charged this President with.ATG wrote:
I haven't called you one name. I truly feel that you are ignorant...
Last edited by ATG (2008-12-10 22:50:30)