On April 25 2012 23:20 Obamanation666 wrote: It's kinda sad that the worst you can do is attack me for not making use of paragraphs. How about you pay less attention to the way I format a post and more attention to its content. Can we focus on the substance and refrain from personal attacks? The only one who is out of line here is you. If you would like to dispute anything I've written, I'd be more than happy to hear your facts and opinions. "Truth is the mother of all hatred," Ausonius.
It's kinda of sad that you can be so pretentious and lazy that you expect people to read or care about your block of text.
Learn how to format your posts properly if you want to be taken seriously. It's nothing personal, it's standard board etiquette around here.
On April 19 2012 17:46 Jay Chou wrote: * Obama’s strategy is clear – he has no substantive successful record to run on so they are running with any distraction that the obliging media will broadcast such as spinning the fight with the Catholic church over mandated contraception as a GOP war on women a tactic that finally spectacularly backfired with Hilary Rosen’s comments about Ann Romney being a stay at home mum.
As an outside observer, this strikes me as a strange point to claim. Obama has a reasonably good claim to economic performance, having taken over at a time when the American economy was in a horrifying tailspin and presided over a gradual improvement. He's also gone a long way towards concluding the problem of being mired in multiple wars and terrorist hunts. Presumably those are some results he can point to when campaigning starts in earnest.
People have short memories. How soon we forget how bad things were under Bush. At least Obama can string together a coherant sentence.
It's sort of interesting, he's really trying to mirror Reagan's rhetoric against Jimmy carter from the 1979 election:
]“To all of the thousands of good and decent Americans I’ve met who want nothing more than a better chance, a fighting chance,” Romney added. “To all of you, I have a simple message: Hold on a little longer. A better America begins tonight.”
It will be interesting to see if he sticks with this Reagan style lofty rhetoric, and how it reflects in the polls.
On April 25 2012 17:59 Defacer wrote: Just a reminder for all you potential voters out there: this is what a Mormon actually believes.
judging someone because of his religious belief? not cool...
Pretending that religious beliefs should somehow be immune to criticism, when scientific, mathematic, artistic, political and every other kind of belief isn't?
Not cool either.
Sam Harris is a dick, but he's absolutely right when he argues that religious beliefs should be subject to the same level of criticism and scrutiny as everything else.
It's sort of interesting, he's really trying to mirror Reagan's rhetoric against Jimmy carter from the 1979 election:
]“To all of the thousands of good and decent Americans I’ve met who want nothing more than a better chance, a fighting chance,” Romney added. “To all of you, I have a simple message: Hold on a little longer. A better America begins tonight.”
It will be interesting to see if he sticks with this Reagan style lofty rhetoric, and how it reflects in the polls.
Unfortunately, Romney just doesn't connect as well as Reagan. Reagan seemed genuine while Romney just gives this fake aura.
On April 19 2012 18:24 murphs wrote: Dear America,
Vote Obama.
Sincerely, Rest of the fucking world.
It's funny that this is still the case despite Obama not being quite the same level of 'hero' everyone expected him to be. A few years ago it was all hype and awesomeness and Obama was going to cure all the worlds ills. While its not turned out like that, the alternative of Romney is... well it's just not nice to think about.
Thre reason for this is, quite simply, that many people had expectations of what Obama could do that were completely unreasonable. He has done well considering the hand he was delt and the relatively crude methods by which a president can actually effect real change. People don't realize that the president is not a dictator. He has congress and special interests to contend with, and even then he has only a limited grant of power under the constitution. The president is not responsible for the price of your gasoline, etc. A lot of college kids got pumped up for the campaign and were bored by the day-to-day grinding realities of governing, so they either lost interest or "felt let down" by Obama, although many cannot articulate the exact reason that they feel let down to begin with.
It's sort of interesting, he's really trying to mirror Reagan's rhetoric against Jimmy carter from the 1979 election:
]“To all of the thousands of good and decent Americans I’ve met who want nothing more than a better chance, a fighting chance,” Romney added. “To all of you, I have a simple message: Hold on a little longer. A better America begins tonight.”
It will be interesting to see if he sticks with this Reagan style lofty rhetoric, and how it reflects in the polls.
"A better America", "A fighting chance". Lofty statements with no substance. (Obama is guilty of the same--see "Hope and Change")
On April 19 2012 20:01 FlyingToilet wrote: Pisses me off Ron Paul is out, all presidential candidates maybe corrupt to some extent but IMHO Ron Paul is definitely most deserving. and i hate Mitt Romney 100% hes one fucked up ass senator, his ideals are completely appalling and disgusting, Barack maybe a shithead too, but Romney is the ass end of american politics...
Romney is not and never has been a senator. He was governer of massachusetts.
On April 25 2012 09:57 xDaunt wrote: Hah, great line from Romney during his speech: "The past few years are the best that President Obama can do. They are not the best that America can do."
On April 25 2012 10:00 xDaunt wrote: Another great line: "It's still about the economy, and we're not stupid."
If those are great quotes I have another one that might impress you... "My fellow Americans. As a young boy, I dreamed of being a baseball, but tonight I say, we must move forward, not backward, upward not forward, and always twirling, twirling, twirling towards freedom." - Kodos
On April 25 2012 09:57 xDaunt wrote: Hah, great line from Romney during his speech: "The past few years are the best that President Obama can do. They are not the best that America can do."
On April 25 2012 10:00 xDaunt wrote: Another great line: "It's still about the economy, and we're not stupid."
If those are great quotes I have another one that might impress you... "My fellow Americans. As a young boy, I dreamed of being a baseball, but tonight I say, we must move forward, not backward, upward not forward, and always twirling, twirling, twirling towards freedom." - Kodos
Sorry, but it's all hollow rhetoric.
Obama got pretty far on "hollow rhetoric" in 2008.
On April 19 2012 18:24 murphs wrote: Dear America,
Vote Obama.
Sincerely, Rest of the fucking world.
It's funny that this is still the case despite Obama not being quite the same level of 'hero' everyone expected him to be. A few years ago it was all hype and awesomeness and Obama was going to cure all the worlds ills. While its not turned out like that, the alternative of Romney is... well it's just not nice to think about.
Thre reason for this is, quite simply, that many people had expectations of what Obama could do that were completely unreasonable. He has done well considering the hand he was delt and the relatively crude methods by which a president can actually effect real change. People don't realize that the president is not a dictator. He has congress and special interests to contend with, and even then he has only a limited grant of power under the constitution. The president is not responsible for the price of your gasoline, etc. A lot of college kids got pumped up for the campaign and were bored by the day-to-day grinding realities of governing, so they either lost interest or "felt let down" by Obama, although many cannot articulate the exact reason that they feel let down to begin with.
Perhaps the fact that Obama is nearly inseperable from Bush in terms of governance, and in many cases much worse, that would give enough reason for young progressives to take pause and especially plenty of ammo to articulate the case why Obama has been horrendous. It doesn't really matter though, both the parties are nearly identical and have been for a long time and especially so on the issues that really matter (and we ain't talking BS wedge crap here). Both support bailouts, both support Corporatism, both support TSA/DHS/Domestic spying/internet suppression, both support nation building and aggressive wars abroad, both support the monetary policy (Federal Reserve), etc. etc.
I could go on and on. So many people get so riled up and end up fighting each other over stupid shit while the truth is completely oblivious to them. If they stopped treating each other like enemies over stupid shit maybe we could actually target the actual criminals and their institutions.
The left has a massive agenda for the state at home, and yet complains bitterly, with shock and dismay, that the same tools are used to start wars and build imperial structures abroad. The right claims to want to restrain government at home (at least in some ways) while whooping it up for war and global reconstruction abroad ... It's one thing for the left to grudgingly support international intervention. It makes some sense for a group that believes that government is omniscient enough to bring about fairness, justice, and equality at home to do the same for people abroad. In fact, I've never been able to make much sense out of left-wing antiwar activism, simply because it cuts so much against the idea of socialism, which itself can be summed up as perpetual war on the liberty and property of the people. What strikes me as ridiculous is the right-wing view that government is incompetent and dangerous domestically — at least in economic and social affairs — but has some sort of Midas Touch internationally such that it can bring freedom, democracy, and justice to any land its troops deign to invade. Not that the right wing is principled enough to pursue its domestic views, but I'm speaking here of its campaign rhetoric and higher-level of critique of government that you find in their periodicals and books. The precise critique of government that they offer for the welfare state and regulatory measures — they are expensive, counterproductive, hobble human energies — applies many times over to international interventions.
I say a pox on both their houses. I do have to give it to the Corporate thuggers who run the show, boy have they pulled a good one over the eyes of the so-called Left. Cheer for their man who gave them the NDAA, American asssassinations, new wars abroad, massively ramped up drone strikes across the globe, the Treasury over to the Fed and Goldman Sachs, more torture and rendition abroad, etc. etc. I mean I could go on and on at length. Glenn Greenwald does a good enough job though -- at least I respect him. Cheerio.
On April 25 2012 09:57 xDaunt wrote: Hah, great line from Romney during his speech: "The past few years are the best that President Obama can do. They are not the best that America can do."
On April 25 2012 10:00 xDaunt wrote: Another great line: "It's still about the economy, and we're not stupid."
If those are great quotes I have another one that might impress you... "My fellow Americans. As a young boy, I dreamed of being a baseball, but tonight I say, we must move forward, not backward, upward not forward, and always twirling, twirling, twirling towards freedom." - Kodos
Sorry, but it's all hollow rhetoric.
Obama got pretty far on "hollow rhetoric" in 2008.
Never said he didn't. It's funny how the process hasn't changed since this episode aired in 1996. You won't hear the specifics or details of any plans because they aren't needed. Just mention talking points like "freedom" and "moving forward" and the crowd eats it up. Tell the crowd they are intelligent, they know better than to trust the other guy. It amounts to nothing.
I would much rather have a candidate who isn't afraid to lay out the details of their plans and let it be subjected to scrutiny from the other side. That would be a great line in a speech, a policy that is unassailable.
In semi-related news, it looks like the Supreme Court is poised to shit on Obama again and uphold the Arizona immigration law. Obama's solicitor general had another rough day at oral arguments. Surprisingly, even Sotomayor expressed skepticism of the government's position.
It will be interesting to see how this issue plays out in the general election. Sure, Hispanics may not like the law, but it is popular with very sizable majority of Americans.
As for the solicitor general, I know that he's been catching a lot of flak from people on the left for not adequately championing their causes before the Court, but I think he should be cut a break. He's stuck in the unenviable position of having to advance flawed, if not completely indefensible arguments to very smart people whose job it is to tear his arguments apart. That is really, really hard to do.
I doubt anyone on the left is going to like it, but it is well done.
"I muster a straight face to teach the next generation that they are causing global warming. And when it's cold out, call it climate change instead."
Is such a laughable misunderstanding of climate science that I can't take the video seriously. And that's a single example, nearly every statement in this sentence is a glossy misunderstanding.
I doubt anyone on the left is going to like it, but it is well done.
"I muster a straight face to teach the next generation that they are causing global warming. And when it's cold out, call it climate change instead."
Is such a laughable misunderstanding of climate science that I can't take the video seriously.
Are you denying that that is what the man-made global warming advocates did?
Global warming is simply a fact, the earth is getting hotter by the decade, the is the evidence, stats and historical record to prove it. Scientists that stand against now spend time claiming the rise is irrelevant, not that it isn't happening. A cold week one particular week doesn't offset trends that last decades. Hell, we could have a 5 year span of colder than average winters and it wouldn't come close to offset everything that has changed since 1900.
I doubt anyone on the left is going to like it, but it is well done.
"I muster a straight face to teach the next generation that they are causing global warming. And when it's cold out, call it climate change instead."
Is such a laughable misunderstanding of climate science that I can't take the video seriously.
Are you denying that that is what the man-made global warming advocates did?
Global warming is simply a fact, the earth is getting hotter by the decade, the is the evidence, stats and historical record to prove it. Scientists that stand against now spend time claiming the rise is irrelevant, not that it isn't happening. A cold week one particular week doesn't offset trends that last decades. Hell, we could have a 5 year span of colder than average winters and it wouldn't come close to offset everything that has changed since 1900.
Yeah, I understand what the theory is. However, if you look at news headlines over the course of the 2000s, you'll see a fairly remarkable change in terminology somewhere in the middle of the decade where the term "global warming" was abandoned in favor of "climate change."
I doubt anyone on the left is going to like it, but it is well done.
"I muster a straight face to teach the next generation that they are causing global warming. And when it's cold out, call it climate change instead."
Is such a laughable misunderstanding of climate science that I can't take the video seriously.
Are you denying that that is what the man-made global warming advocates did?
Global warming is simply a fact, the earth is getting hotter by the decade, the is the evidence, stats and historical record to prove it. Scientists that stand against now spend time claiming the rise is irrelevant, not that it isn't happening. A cold week one particular week doesn't offset trends that last decades. Hell, we could have a 5 year span of colder than average winters and it wouldn't come close to offset everything that has changed since 1900.
You are highly overstating your case. Most of the data that is coming out recently is contradicting the AGW mantra alarmism (Ice shelfs expanding, polar bear populations expanding, a static temperature trend that contradicts models, etc. etc.).
The climate is a complex system regulated by so many factors and variables that we will more than likely never understand. At best we make observations, but that's not how theories, at least scientific ones, are proposed. You don't take data then make a theory, you make a theory then you see if the observations and data correlate, and if you happen to be in the realm of the physical world (say physics) you can make experiments to test that theory. I think we can say we are pretty sure that the natural universe is bound by certain laws since it's never been observed that what comes up stays up, or that objects with mass are not attracted to each other for instance. So, you can make experiments knowing that by mere observation you aren't changing the variables and conditions (like say you do in social sciences).
Don't take it from me, take it from your own 'guru' and side:
“The problem is we don’t know what the climate is doing. We thought we knew 20 years ago. That led to some alarmist books – mine included – because it looked clear-cut, but it hasn’t happened,” Lovelock said.
“The climate is doing its usual tricks. There’s nothing much really happening yet. We were supposed to be halfway toward a frying world now,” he said.
“The world has not warmed up very much since the millennium. Twelve years is a reasonable time… it (the temperature) has stayed almost constant, whereas it should have been rising -- carbon dioxide is rising, no question about that,” he added.
For my money, I'm more concerned with observing our climate cycles with the Sun, as that seems to be the most obvious to me. Without the sun, there is no climate. Everything is lifeless, cold, and dark. Sure, it is one part of the variable, but the most important. The fact that it has almost been entirely dismissed from the equation and instead the entirity of the alarm put on one gas, and in particular humans, is to me the most upsetting aspect. The gall then to enact radical ludditism change on a mass scale in particular the reduction of available energy as well as 'population control' with a massive Police State to enforce...
You shouldn't wonder why folks aren't eager to hop on board that train. Let's try not to mix science with politics, they're ugly bedfellows.
The video is still bullshit. Anyone with a shred of economic, politic and scientific understanding can see that.
I laughed the most at the european part, although for a moment it made sense to me; I mean europe is in a huge shitpile isn't it? Well yes. It is. But not really worse than the US, people in europe just understand better. The (northern) european economic model was actually pretty damn good, germany did excellent even though they had to lug eastern germany through the past 2 decades. It all went to shit because (southern) countries spent billions more than they could afford... copying the US system, not the european one. If you look at the independent european countries (parts of scandinavia, switzerland) that don't have to bail greece etc. out, you get a majorly different picture.
Also, how the fuck can you believe that oil is the future? Yes, it's necessary now, I won't deny that. But sooner or later it will run out. And you damn well better have infrastructure up, when that happens or you'll be in a world of hurt.
And to the post above me: did it? I never really noticed, but does it really matter what it's called? Global warming is the consensus of the vast, vast, vast majority of scientists. So unless you believe in some weird conspiracy to god knows what ends by scientists from all over the world, different cultures, ethnicities and religions, well, then you better accept it. As tercotta said, one cold winter doesn't mean anything. The trend is clear.
EPT
