|
U-Know! Forum » barack's nuts |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
handofdave 3515 posts |
Jul 15, 2008, 19:29
|
||
|
shanshee_allures wrote: To be fair, you were not the only one resorting to insults. I did notice however that the posts that did not resort to using them went generally unanswered, so maybe someone was beign indulged along the way. I haven't been called so many names since the yahoo boards were running. I should know better than to engage these types... they never fail to reveal themselves early, so there's no real excuse why I didn't just hang up on him then. I burns me to hear another American reinforce the most heinous negative stereotypes about us, too. It's unfair to those who don't subscribe to his unilaterally murderous ideas to be painted by that brush in the eyes of the world, as it usually is the biggest offenders that hijack world perception. And unfortunately, they still occupy the White House as we speak.
|
|||
|
Lawrence 9547 posts |
Jul 15, 2008, 19:30
|
||
Well I'm not sorry for anything I said. At least this time I wasn't taken advantage of like the flame war I was involved in years ago. Really I'm not stupid or naive, but my patience has been tried in the past...
|
|||
PMM 3155 posts |
Jul 15, 2008, 19:42
|
||
|
Aye. But... Me, mythical outsider looking in at mythical thread.... Fred: "You fucking dickhead! Of course oil is a finite commodity and every barrel we use is one less to be used. What are you? Some kind of moron?" Jack: "Actually, Sir, while your reasoning does have some merit, atmospheric processes such as condensation (the same process that turns water vapour into rain) will turn the resultant pollutants back into oil which we will then be able to extract and use again in 6 months time. Here's a link to eminent climatologist, Bjorn Lomberg's excellent article on the subject, as reported by Fox News..." Probably, I'm going to have my own opinions and the two posters are not going to make one jot of difference to my point of view. But if it was all new to me, I'd believe Jack, not Fred. So allowing yourself to become engaged in flamage is always a negative. People deliberately provoke such a reaction in order to weaken their opponents case. But I don't believe that's altogether true here. Both sides have sparked off the worst in each other. This isn't the first thread in which Tinky and Dave have locked horns. And Barack Obama has caused friction on this thread between people on a number of occasions. Looking further back, I recall HH old timer, Ron announcing that he was voting Bush in 2004. He got a rough ride for this, as you might expect. His rationale was that the Bush administration was so utterly inept, that putting them back into popwer would probably make them so unpopular that they'd completely collapse. Not your usual political logic, and not something that has really been proved correct, given that the polls don't stand 75% - 25% to the Democrats, but he did have what he felt were real and valid reasons for doing something that made little sense to many here.
|
|||
|
Lawrence 9547 posts |
Jul 15, 2008, 19:48
|
||
I dunno if Ron's theory has worked -- sadly I don't think Bush has caused enough damage for an outright collapse but I've been hearing that the next election will be a loss for Republicans across the board in EVERY race let alone the presidential one. Perhaps it'll be a very long time before the Repugs ever regain power again, and if we're even luckier there won't even be a Republican party in the US anymore...
|
|||
|
PMM 3155 posts |
Jul 15, 2008, 19:56
|
||
|
A 2008 History News Network poll among professional historians (with self-selected responders) found that 98 percent believed that the George W. Bush presidency was a failure, and that 61 percent believed it to be the worst in history. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_rankings_of_United_States_Presidents A CNN/Opinion Research Corp. survey released Thursday indicates that 71 percent of the American public disapprove of how Bush is handling his job as president. "No president has ever had a higher disapproval rating in any CNN or Gallup Poll; in fact, this is the first time that any president's disapproval rating has cracked the 70 percent mark," said Keating Holland, CNN's polling director. http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/01/bush.poll/ I don't think Bush's unpopularity will translate directly to long term failure of the Republican party and more than New Labour's 1997 landslide victory has meant the end of the Conservative party in the UK. The point I keep on making is that a vote for the mainstream parties is a vote for the status quo, however loudly they proclaim how different they will be.
|
|||
|
handofdave 3515 posts |
Jul 15, 2008, 19:57
|
||
|
PMM wrote: His rationale was that the Bush administration was so utterly inept, that putting them back into popwer would probably make them so unpopular that they'd completely collapse. Not your usual political logic, and not something that has really been proved correct, given that the polls don't stand 75% - 25% to the Democrats, but he did have what he felt were real and valid reasons for doing something that made little sense to many here. Well, that casts some light on why he and I don't jive. Personally, I find that rationale to be borderline schizophrenic. Here, maybe if I keep smashing my thumb with a hammer, it'll stop hurting.
|
|||
|
Lawrence 9547 posts |
Jul 15, 2008, 20:01
|
||
Yeah you could be right. An Obama presidency could spark a backlash like there was during Clinton in '94 with Newt Gingrich and all that. I can't say it won't happen, but what could also happen could be civil war as well...
|
|||
|
PMM 3155 posts |
Edited Jul 15, 2008, 20:03
Jul 15, 2008, 20:02
|
||
|
Fine, but he believed he was doing the right thing and was prepared to explain his beliefs. And he kept his cool, despite considerable provocation from some quarters.
|
|||
Sir John Dunn 530 posts |
Jul 15, 2008, 20:03
|
||
|
handofdave wrote: My apologies to the board in general if anyone was made uncomfortable by the tone of any of my posts. Not very enlightened of me to go off like that. I would never shout down someone that observes, and therefore deserves, civility. No apologies needed, Dave. Keep on keeping on. If the rest of this wretched board wants to act like deluded 15th century dudes, then, wow, feck 'em, that's their problem.
|
|||
|
handofdave 3515 posts |
Jul 15, 2008, 20:12
|
||
|
PMM wrote: The point I keep on making is that a vote for the mainstream parties is a vote for the status quo, however loudly they proclaim how different they will be. Yeah, but reality has to be addressed.. the Naders and Kucinich's don't get even close to enough support in a national election to effect any change to the system. There are varying degrees of 'status quo'... I have no illusions that the world is going to dramatically improve under Obama, but a presidency is just as much about how they inspire and challenge the people as it is about the guy in the oval office. And Obama has really fired up a lot of people who have never felt like a candidate was one of their own before. This is really monumental stuff that's going on! A black man has a serious shot at being president. Within the larger context of trouble that the black community still endures, it might seem symbolic and not really that impressive. But in my lifetime this country has come to this from a time when the cops would set the dogs and hoses on people of color just for sitting at the wrong lunch counter. So, it is significant. Of course the bulk of any argument about the desirability of having an Obama presidency has to be regarding how effective he'll be dealing with the country and the world as a whole. It's no secret that he's young, he sometimes says some regrettably rash things, his voting record ain't perfect, and he bends the party's comfort level regarding religion and so on. But as someone else pointed out, a president is not a king- he's a hub of a big wheel of people who, if Obama is as good a delegator as they say- will be a wise and effective team that'll actually get to work on correcting the jaw-dropping blunders and crimes of the Bush administration.
|
| Pages: 16 – [ Previous | 1 … 9 10 11 12 13 14 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| U-Know! Forum Index | |
