|
|
On August 11 2012 14:29 Zahir wrote:
Anyone got any idea how the surveillance program revealed by wikileaks is going to effect the election? I can see Obama taking quite a hit if Romney hits hard on this one.
LOL wikileaks didn't tell you anything you didn't know. Not counting the truther/9/11 kids, Wikileaks ended up having America look good. Reactions range from "wow America has a really good handle on it's foreign intel" to "wow I thought it was a lot worse".
|
On August 11 2012 14:31 sam!zdat wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2012 14:26 xDaunt wrote:On August 11 2012 14:21 sam!zdat wrote:
Can you explain the thinking behind that position? I don't really understand. Is it because of demographic that is skewed in terms of military-related employment? The military is the most respected government institution in the country. Among conservatives, there is a very strong sense of patriotism, if not outright nationalism. We want a strong military, we like knowing that our troops are the best in the world, and we want to keep it that way. Do you have a recommended way to dissuade people from this absurd ideology? edit: I mean, I feel like we already had ww1, it was fun and all, but more of that?
Why would I want to dissuade myself? =p
|
On August 11 2012 14:37 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2012 14:31 sam!zdat wrote:On August 11 2012 14:26 xDaunt wrote:On August 11 2012 14:21 sam!zdat wrote:
Can you explain the thinking behind that position? I don't really understand. Is it because of demographic that is skewed in terms of military-related employment? The military is the most respected government institution in the country. Among conservatives, there is a very strong sense of patriotism, if not outright nationalism. We want a strong military, we like knowing that our troops are the best in the world, and we want to keep it that way. Do you have a recommended way to dissuade people from this absurd ideology? edit: I mean, I feel like we already had ww1, it was fun and all, but more of that? Why would I want to dissuade myself? =p
Damn, I was hoping to trick you into revealing a good strategy 
gg wp
|
On August 11 2012 14:38 sam!zdat wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2012 14:37 xDaunt wrote:On August 11 2012 14:31 sam!zdat wrote:On August 11 2012 14:26 xDaunt wrote:On August 11 2012 14:21 sam!zdat wrote:
Can you explain the thinking behind that position? I don't really understand. Is it because of demographic that is skewed in terms of military-related employment? The military is the most respected government institution in the country. Among conservatives, there is a very strong sense of patriotism, if not outright nationalism. We want a strong military, we like knowing that our troops are the best in the world, and we want to keep it that way. Do you have a recommended way to dissuade people from this absurd ideology? edit: I mean, I feel like we already had ww1, it was fun and all, but more of that? Why would I want to dissuade myself? =p Damn, I was hoping to trick you into revealing a good strategy gg wp
If you really want to dissuade people like me, the way to go about it is to remind people of how ungrateful the rest of the world is to us, and that it is really in our best interest to tell everyone else to go fuck themselves.
|
that is really quite clever
edit: I forget you people think you're doing the world a favor 
|
On August 11 2012 14:12 xDaunt wrote:
I don't know what y'all are smoking; Ryan is a great pick. He's one of the few picks that will inspire moderate republicans, conservatives, and the tea party members. More importantly, he helps create a clear ideological contrast between a Romney presidency and the Obama presidency, which has been lacking thus far. Just watch. There's going to be a whole helluva of lot of talk about the national debt and deficit in the coming weeks.
I agree. Ryan is strategically a good pick and will likely increase Romney's chances of winning.
But Ryan is also a fraud, his deficit plan is a big magic asterisks, he says he would cut trillions of dollars, yet doesn't say how he would do so.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/03/paul-krugman-paul-ryan-budget-plan_n_1566362.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/09/opinion/krugman-the-gullible-center.html?_r=1
Let's see what the market things of the US national debt:
![[image loading]](http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-H9TF6XfL4-k/TdzPr0AII2I/AAAAAAAAF4Q/b7UarvMA98Q/s1600/FRED_10-Year-Treasury-Yield.png)
Answer: they don't give it shit.
|
|
|
On August 11 2012 14:31 sam!zdat wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2012 14:26 xDaunt wrote:On August 11 2012 14:21 sam!zdat wrote:
Can you explain the thinking behind that position? I don't really understand. Is it because of demographic that is skewed in terms of military-related employment? The military is the most respected government institution in the country. Among conservatives, there is a very strong sense of patriotism, if not outright nationalism. We want a strong military, we like knowing that our troops are the best in the world, and we want to keep it that way. Do you have a recommended way to dissuade people from this absurd ideology? edit: I mean, I feel like we already had ww1, it was fun and all, but more of that?
name one powerful empire in the history of the world that got it's status without a renown military.
one.
go.
|
On August 11 2012 13:59 Tarot wrote:
Is there anything particularly bad about him? From a glance at wikipedia, it seems like he's one of the more sane republicans.
Nah, he's sane, and he's from Wisconsin (which might swing that state Romney's way). He's very popular in our state.
|
On August 11 2012 14:58 BluePanther wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2012 14:31 sam!zdat wrote:On August 11 2012 14:26 xDaunt wrote:On August 11 2012 14:21 sam!zdat wrote:
Can you explain the thinking behind that position? I don't really understand. Is it because of demographic that is skewed in terms of military-related employment? The military is the most respected government institution in the country. Among conservatives, there is a very strong sense of patriotism, if not outright nationalism. We want a strong military, we like knowing that our troops are the best in the world, and we want to keep it that way. Do you have a recommended way to dissuade people from this absurd ideology? edit: I mean, I feel like we already had ww1, it was fun and all, but more of that? name one powerful empire in the history of the world that got it's status without a renown military. one. go.
I'm kinda against the whole "powerful empire" thing
|
On August 11 2012 14:24 DannyJ wrote:
Well, he's well spoken and doesn't seem like someone pulled out of a trailer park. It's certainly a step up from past republican picks. I don't think it's a bad choice considering the options. There's some sticking points that could bother people on both sides, but at least this guy can hold his own overall.
He's very well respected amongst fiscal matters (he's educated and has a degree in economics). He's the leader of the only serious austerity plan in the United States. Romney has just made this an election about substance instead of semantics, finally. He picks Ryan, I might swap my vote back to him.
|
On August 11 2012 15:00 sam!zdat wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2012 14:58 BluePanther wrote:On August 11 2012 14:31 sam!zdat wrote:On August 11 2012 14:26 xDaunt wrote:On August 11 2012 14:21 sam!zdat wrote:
Can you explain the thinking behind that position? I don't really understand. Is it because of demographic that is skewed in terms of military-related employment? The military is the most respected government institution in the country. Among conservatives, there is a very strong sense of patriotism, if not outright nationalism. We want a strong military, we like knowing that our troops are the best in the world, and we want to keep it that way. Do you have a recommended way to dissuade people from this absurd ideology? edit: I mean, I feel like we already had ww1, it was fun and all, but more of that? name one powerful empire in the history of the world that got it's status without a renown military. one. go. I'm kinda against the whole "powerful empire" thing
Then you're rather foolish. If you're not powerful, you're weak, and other armies will trample all over you (like we do to others). I'd rather be the giver than the receiver.
|
On August 11 2012 15:04 BluePanther wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2012 15:00 sam!zdat wrote:On August 11 2012 14:58 BluePanther wrote:On August 11 2012 14:31 sam!zdat wrote:On August 11 2012 14:26 xDaunt wrote:On August 11 2012 14:21 sam!zdat wrote:
Can you explain the thinking behind that position? I don't really understand. Is it because of demographic that is skewed in terms of military-related employment? The military is the most respected government institution in the country. Among conservatives, there is a very strong sense of patriotism, if not outright nationalism. We want a strong military, we like knowing that our troops are the best in the world, and we want to keep it that way. Do you have a recommended way to dissuade people from this absurd ideology? edit: I mean, I feel like we already had ww1, it was fun and all, but more of that? name one powerful empire in the history of the world that got it's status without a renown military. one. go. I'm kinda against the whole "powerful empire" thing Then you're rather foolish. If you're not powerful, you're weak, and other armies will trample all over you (like we do to others). I'd rather be the giver than the receiver.
Or, you know, we could have a world order that wasn't anarchy.
|
On August 11 2012 15:06 sam!zdat wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2012 15:04 BluePanther wrote:On August 11 2012 15:00 sam!zdat wrote:On August 11 2012 14:58 BluePanther wrote:On August 11 2012 14:31 sam!zdat wrote:On August 11 2012 14:26 xDaunt wrote:On August 11 2012 14:21 sam!zdat wrote:
Can you explain the thinking behind that position? I don't really understand. Is it because of demographic that is skewed in terms of military-related employment? The military is the most respected government institution in the country. Among conservatives, there is a very strong sense of patriotism, if not outright nationalism. We want a strong military, we like knowing that our troops are the best in the world, and we want to keep it that way. Do you have a recommended way to dissuade people from this absurd ideology? edit: I mean, I feel like we already had ww1, it was fun and all, but more of that? name one powerful empire in the history of the world that got it's status without a renown military. one. go. I'm kinda against the whole "powerful empire" thing Then you're rather foolish. If you're not powerful, you're weak, and other armies will trample all over you (like we do to others). I'd rather be the giver than the receiver. Or, you know, we could have a world order that wasn't anarchy.
You think the intricate global chess moves going on between the East and West is anarchy? Syria is a perfect demonstration of world powers using it as a buffer pawn zone with intense arms shipments, secret negotiations and money funneling in the hundreds of millions.
You may have a point if you chose to make it in that physical war dominance is becoming archaic and financial, automation, and cyber imperialism is the way forward in the distant future. As of now though the world remains too primitive since a large section of countries haven't even finished industrializing.
|
I think we're using different definitions of "anarchy"
edit: no, I'm anti-imperialism, period.
|
On August 11 2012 15:14 sam!zdat wrote:
I think we're using different definitions of "anarchy"
edit: no, I'm anti-imperialism, period.
if we're not, someone else will be. I'd rather be the one pulling those strings.
|
On August 11 2012 15:22 BluePanther wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2012 15:14 sam!zdat wrote:
I think we're using different definitions of "anarchy"
edit: no, I'm anti-imperialism, period. if we're not, someone else will be. I'd rather be the one pulling those strings.
I reject your premise.
I would like to see the united states use its power to work towards a unified humanity. Frankly, I think it's embarrassing that we can't work together.
|
On August 11 2012 15:27 sam!zdat wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2012 15:22 BluePanther wrote:On August 11 2012 15:14 sam!zdat wrote:
I think we're using different definitions of "anarchy"
edit: no, I'm anti-imperialism, period. if we're not, someone else will be. I'd rather be the one pulling those strings. I reject your premise. I would like to see the united states use its power to work towards a unified humanity. Frankly, I think it's embarrassing that we can't work together.
then i'll just have to acknowledge your naivete.
|
On August 11 2012 15:03 BluePanther wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2012 14:24 DannyJ wrote:
Well, he's well spoken and doesn't seem like someone pulled out of a trailer park. It's certainly a step up from past republican picks. I don't think it's a bad choice considering the options. There's some sticking points that could bother people on both sides, but at least this guy can hold his own overall. He's very well respected amongst fiscal matters (he's educated and has a degree in economics). He's the leader of the only serious austerity plan in the United States. Romney has just made this an election about substance instead of semantics, finally. He picks Ryan, I might swap my vote back to him.
Most people (economists) wouldn't call it a "serious austerity plan." IIRC, the revenue portion is essentially what Romney put forward in his tax plan (tax rate decrease, reduction in tax credits), but promises much larger revenue generation, seemingly out of nowhere.
|
On August 11 2012 15:34 BluePanther wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2012 15:27 sam!zdat wrote:On August 11 2012 15:22 BluePanther wrote:On August 11 2012 15:14 sam!zdat wrote:
I think we're using different definitions of "anarchy"
edit: no, I'm anti-imperialism, period. if we're not, someone else will be. I'd rather be the one pulling those strings. I reject your premise. I would like to see the united states use its power to work towards a unified humanity. Frankly, I think it's embarrassing that we can't work together. then i'll just have to acknowledge your naivete.
I like to plan for the long term.
I find it intellectually impoverished, as well as unethical, to abandon the future to the present.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
