On July 07 2009 17:15 Arbiter[frolix] wrote: Personally, I think as soon as someone starts using the name Barry Soetoro and calling President Obama a "Socialist and Marxist" then normal right-thinking people should just back away carefully in the required state of nervous bewilderment.
Barry Soetoro was his name. Why can't I call him by his name?
Personally, I tend to call people by the name they lawfully choose for themselves rather than one I might prefer to call them to make some kind of bizarre "point".
Further, googling "Barry Soetoro" brings up a long list of whacko conspiracy sites and blogposts, which is another good reason for backing slowly away from someone who chooses to use it in the face of the obvious fact that the President's name is Barack Obama.
I will not respond to the rest of your post other than to say that I see absolutely no sign in the United States of any measure that would invest control of the means of production with working people nor do I expect such policies to be proposed any time in the near future by President Obama.
I will add that those policies you outline look pretty good to me, although I doubt many of them will be implemented except in the most watered down fashion.
Ding Ding. Most are enacted!
Way to deflect however. The point stands, Barry is a socialist/marxist. I call a spade a spade. His policies are destructive of everything America was founded as, and what has brought us to become a superpower, despite the socialist programs enacted in the 30s and 60s, though we are about to enter the period that shows how destructive socialism is since we are in ~50 Trillion debt for Medicare/Medicaid/SS.
Read John Locke, Edmund Burke, Articles of Confederation, US Constitution, Declaration of Independence, Letters from the Founders, etc. If there was ever a 180 shift from what we were founded as a nation to where we are today with his policies it is this.
In any event, down with the Statists and Collectivists. Mrs. Palin is far more aligned with the founders than most in the GOP, and I can't find one democrat that isn't aligned to the exact opposite of the Founder's views and what the Union was borne as.
PS: DeMint/Paul 2012.
Unfortunately the world of today is a far different place than when America was founded. To argue that a state should be static is to ignore reality.
edit: and if you use the word spade to describe Obama again you are gone.
I assumed since a spade is black and so is Obama you must mean that that is a racist term so I googled it, and obviously it is not.
This is absurd. "Calling a spade a spade" is an expression, not a slur. This is a very common expression to mean: "To be outspoken, blunt, even to the point of rudeness; to call things by their proper names without any “beating about the bush."
I am obviously aware of the saying "calling a spade a spade". However, when you use it repeatedly, capitalize it, while all along using a name that Mr. Obama himself does not recognize in a sad repetition of the "Barack Hussein Obama" matra the Republicans chanted throughout the election, I think there is something beyond just the expression.
On July 07 2009 17:15 Arbiter[frolix] wrote: Personally, I think as soon as someone starts using the name Barry Soetoro and calling President Obama a "Socialist and Marxist" then normal right-thinking people should just back away carefully in the required state of nervous bewilderment.
Barry Soetoro was his name. Why can't I call him by his name?
Personally, I tend to call people by the name they lawfully choose for themselves rather than one I might prefer to call them to make some kind of bizarre "point".
Further, googling "Barry Soetoro" brings up a long list of whacko conspiracy sites and blogposts, which is another good reason for backing slowly away from someone who chooses to use it in the face of the obvious fact that the President's name is Barack Obama.
I will not respond to the rest of your post other than to say that I see absolutely no sign in the United States of any measure that would invest control of the means of production with working people nor do I expect such policies to be proposed any time in the near future by President Obama.
I will add that those policies you outline look pretty good to me, although I doubt many of them will be implemented except in the most watered down fashion.
Ding Ding. Most are enacted!
Way to deflect however. The point stands, Barry is a socialist/marxist. I call a spade a spade. His policies are destructive of everything America was founded as, and what has brought us to become a superpower, despite the socialist programs enacted in the 30s and 60s, though we are about to enter the period that shows how destructive socialism is since we are in ~50 Trillion debt for Medicare/Medicaid/SS.
Read John Locke, Edmund Burke, Articles of Confederation, US Constitution, Declaration of Independence, Letters from the Founders, etc. If there was ever a 180 shift from what we were founded as a nation to where we are today with his policies it is this.
In any event, down with the Statists and Collectivists. Mrs. Palin is far more aligned with the founders than most in the GOP, and I can't find one democrat that isn't aligned to the exact opposite of the Founder's views and what the Union was borne as.
PS: DeMint/Paul 2012.
Unfortunately the world of today is a far different place than when America was founded. To argue that a state should be static is to ignore reality.
edit: and if you use the word spade to describe Obama again you are gone.
I assumed since a spade is black and so is Obama you must mean that that is a racist term so I googled it, and obviously it is not.
This is absurd. "Calling a spade a spade" is an expression, not a slur. This is a very common expression to mean: "To be outspoken, blunt, even to the point of rudeness; to call things by their proper names without any “beating about the bush."
Quite simple, if he wants to ban me for something as stupid as this, let him. Besides Barry isn't even black. In case anyone forgot his mother was white, and I could care less what a person's skin color is. I rather like JC Watts and Star Power.
Anyways, I bid you farewell from this thread, I had to clear this up however.
I am beginning to think that you do not read or process information very well. Naively or otherwise I did not question your use of the phrase, although Manifesto was more suspicious.
What I did question was evandi's ridiculous post, given that the word "spade" can indeed be a racial slur, something that anyone with a reasonable breadth of knowledge would already know, and anyone with the basic ability to operate an internet search engine could discover in a seconds.
I meant to say phrase instead of term.
And why must I know that spade is a racist term? What about Sambo? Who uses those words these days offensively? No, I don't hang around with very many racist centenarians.
Earlier in this thread I defended you against charges that you were trolling. In the post that you are responding to I pointed out that anyone with the basic capability to operate an internet search engine could discover the possible use of that term and yet here you are, jumping up and down on that thin ice.
Barry Soetoro was his name. Why can't I call him by his name?
Personally, I tend to call people by the name they lawfully choose for themselves rather than one I might prefer to call them to make some kind of bizarre "point".
Further, googling "Barry Soetoro" brings up a long list of whacko conspiracy sites and blogposts, which is another good reason for backing slowly away from someone who chooses to use it in the face of the obvious fact that the President's name is Barack Obama.
I will not respond to the rest of your post other than to say that I see absolutely no sign in the United States of any measure that would invest control of the means of production with working people nor do I expect such policies to be proposed any time in the near future by President Obama.
I will add that those policies you outline look pretty good to me, although I doubt many of them will be implemented except in the most watered down fashion.
Ding Ding. Most are enacted!
Way to deflect however. The point stands, Barry is a socialist/marxist. I call a spade a spade. His policies are destructive of everything America was founded as, and what has brought us to become a superpower, despite the socialist programs enacted in the 30s and 60s, though we are about to enter the period that shows how destructive socialism is since we are in ~50 Trillion debt for Medicare/Medicaid/SS.
Read John Locke, Edmund Burke, Articles of Confederation, US Constitution, Declaration of Independence, Letters from the Founders, etc. If there was ever a 180 shift from what we were founded as a nation to where we are today with his policies it is this.
In any event, down with the Statists and Collectivists. Mrs. Palin is far more aligned with the founders than most in the GOP, and I can't find one democrat that isn't aligned to the exact opposite of the Founder's views and what the Union was borne as.
PS: DeMint/Paul 2012.
Unfortunately the world of today is a far different place than when America was founded. To argue that a state should be static is to ignore reality.
edit: and if you use the word spade to describe Obama again you are gone.
I assumed since a spade is black and so is Obama you must mean that that is a racist term so I googled it, and obviously it is not.
This is absurd. "Calling a spade a spade" is an expression, not a slur. This is a very common expression to mean: "To be outspoken, blunt, even to the point of rudeness; to call things by their proper names without any “beating about the bush."
Quite simple, if he wants to ban me for something as stupid as this, let him. Besides Barry isn't even black. In case anyone forgot his mother was white, and I could care less what a person's skin color is. I rather like JC Watts and Star Power.
Anyways, I bid you farewell from this thread, I had to clear this up however.
I am beginning to think that you do not read or process information very well. Naively or otherwise I did not question your use of the phrase, although Manifesto was more suspicious.
What I did question was evandi's ridiculous post, given that the word "spade" can indeed be a racial slur, something that anyone with a reasonable breadth of knowledge would already know, and anyone with the basic ability to operate an internet search engine could discover in a seconds.
I meant to say phrase instead of term.
And why must I know that spade is a racist term? What about Sambo? Who uses those words these days offensively? No, I don't hang around with very many racist centenarians.
Earlier in this thread I defended you against charges that you were trolling. In the post that you are responding to I pointed out that anyone with the basic capability to operate an internet search engine could discover the possible use of that term and yet here you are, jumping up and down on that thin ice.
Term also means expression. But it wasn't completely clear what I was referring to when I said what I said, but I really don't care what you think exactly. You can think what you like, I don't need your blessing. What you should have been more concerned with was that a mod is threatening to ban someone for using a phrase that has nothing to do with racism.
On July 07 2009 19:17 evandi wrote: Term also means expression. But it wasn't completely clear what I was referring to when I said what I said, but I really don't care what you think exactly. You can think what you like, I don't need your blessing. What you should have been more concerned with was that a mod is threatening to ban someone for using a phrase that has nothing to do with racism.
I have already stated that due to that poster's attitude and language, I felt it was a double entendre.
On July 07 2009 19:17 evandi wrote: Term also means expression. But it wasn't completely clear what I was referring to when I said what I said, but I really don't care what you think exactly. You can think what you like, I don't need your blessing. What you should have been more concerned with was that a mod is threatening to ban someone for using a phrase that has nothing to do with racism.
I have already stated that due to that poster's attitude and language, I felt it was a double entendre.
Well, since I'm already banned...
You were evidently perusing this thread with interest and it contained an argument with someone who seemed to me to be doing rather well. I was surprised that someone like that showed up after I left.
However, he uses a common phrase twice to mean exactly what it is supposed to mean (and it is the most commonly used phrase to say exactly that as far as I know) and you threaten to ban him if he does it again. Well, no wonder the threads here tend to go far left. I have a suspicion that the people insulting me tend to receive fewer warnings... And of course you implied to that one guy that if only he had more posts he would be free to insult me as much as he wants.
I don't think it is unfair for me to suspect that someone who is showing disrespect in one way may be showing it in another as well. Maybe I am reading too much into it, but it does not take away from his argument if he would use the proper name of a man and avoid using a term that may have other implications.
You seem to fit into that mold idealized by what your picture represents (communist opposition to free speech).
How fucking stupid does one have to be to idealize something that failed as hard as that did?
Where have I ever said I idealize a communist system? You don't really know anything about why I have my nickname.
Posting here evidently requires one to bow down to any mods in every argument. That would really imply that mods shouldn't get involved in arguments if they are going to be able to ban anyone they disagree with.
You will get your wish and people like me will be rarer here. You can call me a troll and him a racist, but we represent lots of people, perhaps not as much in the age group that peruses this forum.
Your rant against his words being racist is totally conspiratorial nonsense. Filled with fallacies and was really just blatant argument rigging. Who would want to continue arguing here in this environment?
No, all you will get here is the popular side and perhaps another token side where the token side gives in on as many points as they feel they need to to avoid being ridiculed.
You are being a good communist. Arbiter is being a weak immature power-tripping fool. I don't care about his opinion, nor should he weigh in on any issues whatsoever if he feels the need to ban those who don't give a shit about his opinion. In an argument he deserves no higher plane from which to look down on anyone.
Now I eagerly await the responses I will not be able to reply to. I know that that is how those who fit into whatever happens to be the popular position get to do there arguing. The fact that that is ridiculously cowardly is a secret. Don't worry I will tell no one! HE IS A TROLL DON'T TALK TO HIM! HE IS RACIST HE CAN'T USE THAT PHRASE AGAIN HAHAHA.... OR HE WON"T BOW DOWN TO ME, I HAVE MY REASONS FOR BANNING HIM...
And it all comes down to which side of the argument both Arbitter and Womanifesto just happen to share.
Really sad. Really, if you ban me for that I don't want to be here anyway, who would. But I do need to just post this one last thing so that, as you threatened, you will ban me permanently and show exactly how cowardly you are.
I didn't ban you or the other guy. In fact I don't think your ban was justified, and have unbanned you (although now that you have posted this your true colours have come shining through, only eloquent on Palin I guess). I just asked him to show a little respect in his posting. Especially when one takes a less popular opinion than others, it is important to carefully word your statements otherwise your message gets lots in the clutter.
But have it your way, go google "stimy" and you can join the crusade (or talk to a mirror). Fine by me.
I'm pretty sure that arguing about Barack Obama's name / secret communist alignment / secret family or race history is just like arguing that Bush organized 9/11 in order to secretly steal the gold that was being stored in the buildings' basements. The ideas have been vetted and shown to be baseless and empty. Continued belief in them is conspiratorial and wrongheaded. John McCain, to take one mainstream Republican example, doesn't believe any of it. I don't think any mainstream Republican does (although I'm not sure I know what that means anymore). Maybe Michael Savage or El Rushbo do, I don't really know what they think. Or maybe Glenn Beck and Bill O'Reily do, I dunno. But those guys don't represent the Republican party. Do they? What does a mainstream Republican look like these days?
Most agree she doesn't have a chance in 2012. She would be very young for a presidential candidate anyways. She has plenty of years to create a name for her self, she could run any time after 2012.
To defend her I would like to add that she spent 2 million dollars of Alaskan tax payer dollars just to defend herself against the Democratic National Committees ethic charges against her. There were 15 charges and of course, they were all shot down. She probably spent as much time defending herself and her family as she did governing. I might also add she spent 500,000 dollars of her own money to defend her self.
Basically the democrats were having her out of office anyway they saw fit, even if it meant spending tax payer dollars.
Between the stress and the fact that even being a prominent conservative figure that threatens the Democratic parties existence requires you to spend your states tax payer dollars like crazy, she quit. Maybe a not so prominent conservative person will be elected and not have to pay absurd amounts of money to defend themselves, and be able to spend the money on something worth while.
Posting here evidently requires one to bow down to any mods in every argument. That would really imply that mods shouldn't get involved in arguments if they are going to be able to ban anyone they disagree with.
If you had been here a little longer, or even paid a little more attention while you were here, you would know what utter nonsense that was.
You can call me a troll and him a racist, but we represent lots of people, perhaps not as much in the age group that peruses this forum.
You are being a good communist. Arbiter is being a weak immature power-tripping fool. I don't care about his opinion...
And it all comes down to which side of the argument both Arbiter and Womanifesto just happen to share...
You still don't get it, do you? I have had hundreds of serious disagreements in threads over many years, long before you ever arrived here, I must have crossed swords with Excalibur alone 30 or 40 times, without a ban ever crossing my mind. You got a temp ban because, correctly or incorrectly, I started to feel you were simply trolling despite earlier going out of my way to defend you. Getting up on your high horse about it is not impressing me.
Having discussed it with Manifesto and out of respect for his concerns I am happy to defer to his judgement, and that's the end of the matter.
On July 08 2009 01:26 generic88 wrote: If Palin becomes President I'm giving up on America and emigrating, Sweden maybe.
I am sure Sweden is a delightful place to live but don't start booking a plane ticket. There is absolutely no prospect of Sarah Palin ever becoming President.
I think on a national level, your department of law there in the White House would look at some of the things that we’ve been charged with and automatically throw them out.
EPT
