The guy in this video is a lawyer? Astounding that someone with such flawed logic, and an inability to do research, can remain a member of the bar. You want to talk about "why didn't he?" scenarios, how about, "Why didn't Philip simply call the State of Hawaii to ask them whether or not BHO was born therer?"
Bullshit in a different color. Intelligent design is the attempt of creationists to look scientific. Actually there is nothing intelligent about it or the people who believe in this, it takes outrageously dumb people to belive this stuff.
That'll be an attempt to build a scientific sounding facade for creationism to hide behind. Methodology appears to favour the judicious application of scientific sounding terminolgy, dumb believers and bullshit.
Stweem'O being the most apposite example of an adherent. Banned are you seriously suggesting the it's something different to creationism?
Actually Mako, Intelligent Design is the theory of God, of some supreme being, taking an active role in the design of all life on Earth, but its not strictly creationism. Creationists believe god made the world in 6 days, roughly 6000 years ago.
ID advocates might believe the world is 6 billion years old, but God has guided / controlled evolution throughout the eons. Its an attempt to "fill in the gaps" of evolution. But its not necessarily taking the bible literally.
The opposing views being, there is no God and everything happens on its own, there is a God who just created everything and sat back to let everything run on autopilot by the rules God created, or God created everything and is still actively controlling everything, including our daily lives.
Science can only take us back as far as the big-bang, but what created the universe and all that hydrogen gas for the big-bang? Religion only goes so far. If there is a God, where did he come from? Neither religion or science can explain everything, so you can't really say anybody is wrong with their beliefs. I think its impossible to prove God exists or doesn't exist.
I do believe the evidence that dinosaurs existed, and their apparant age of at least 65 million years old. No creationist explanation I've heard to explain dinosaurs have I found satisfactory. "God planted fossils" just to confuse and annoy us, or "dinosaurs existed at the same time as man", I just don't buy. So I'm not a creationist. But with the dreamy scientific origins for life, and gaps in evolution, I certainly can't prove there wasn't a God / aliens / flying spagetti monster shaping life on Earth either.
Half the time, we can't even agree on our history in the last 50 years. How accurately can we speculate on history 10,000 years ago, much less 6 billion years ago? No matter how much we learn, how many fossils we gather, there will always be gaps, always new unproven theories. And I doubt they will ever be scientifically able to prove or disprove God.
Since we're doing book reports now, I'm almost finished reading "The Aquariums of Pyongyang". Its a story about a North Korean kid who is sent to Yodak, an infamous NK prison, at the age of 9, for a political crime his grandfather supposedly committed. He spent 10 years of hardship, beatings, frostbite, starvation, hard labor, before being released. He then lived as a NK citizen for years, bribing his way to a comfortable life, by NK standards, before learning from his bribed security agents that he was under investigation again for listening to SK radio, and would be arrested once his friends were found out. So he then escaped to China, and eventually SK. Hell of a life's story. His family still lives in NK, probably being punished for his defection.
Mako, I just spent some time reading the summary of "Of Pandas and People" about ID. That led me off reading about the FSM, and the pastafarian faith. I learned a few important things:
- Global warming is caused by a lack of pirates.
- Heaven contains beer volcanoes and a stripper factory. Hell is similar, except that the beer is stale, and the strippers have VD.
I'm really more agnostic than anything, but I'm not really sure. ;-)
Creationists is the larger group, they divide into the young earth creationists and the ID creationists. And no doubt there are going to be a couple more sub groups who can not agree on some details.
Streamy is a reverend of the church of flat earth.
HD, some correction: There was no hydrogen before or shortly after the big bang. As far as it is understood so far the sub atomic particles were generated by the big bang and some time later larger particles formed which ultimately formed hydrogen.
There is no evidence for a god. But there is a lot of evidence on how religions did form...
Bug, I disagree with any bashing of Streamy for his religious beliefs period. Here in America, we have freedom of religion, and Streamy has not preached or pushed his religion on me at all. I don't even know his religious beliefs, but I do know its wrong to attack him for them. I don't see how religion can be proved or disproved, mush less how you prove one faith is better than another.
As for the big bang, really, how can you correct me on a wild-assed theory anyway? Its so far from being proven, and new information is coming all the time. But I was speculating about the hydrogen shortly after the big bang. ;-)
"There is no evidence for a god. But there is a lot of evidence on how religions did form..."
I agree, there is no way to prove there is no God. But I also believe if there was no God, mankind would still invent religion. Every group of people on Earth, developing in isolation, has a story of creation and belief in a higher power. We are a creative species, that wants to belief in a higher purpose, life after death, divine justice, etc. How can you watch your child die, and not cry out wishing for something beyond death? Its only human to want to believe, but I'm not convinced that makes it real.
I hope God is real, I really do, I think most people do. Which is why its so easy to imagine it being made up, ancient fake religious priests taking advantage of peoples hopes and fears to gain power, etc.
Then you have stories in the bible, like the great flood, obviously existing in older religions predating Christianity and Judaism. Well either they've all recorded the same history, which is one possibility, or the bible borrowed really good stories from other religions. But Christianity has also turned once pagan holidays into Christian holidays.
If you believe in God, and you're wrong, you just become worm-food and you've wasted a bunch of Sunday mornings. I don't see the moral teachings of most religions, or the church donations which mostly go to charities as a waste.
If you don't believe in God, and you're wrong, then eternity really sucks for you. So the cautious approach is to believe in God. And if believing in God brings you peace and happiness, in a dangerous and uncertain world, then good for you.
So I would rather I believed in God. I envy those who believe in God. But I'm an engineer. I'm plagued with being entirely too rational and analytical!
HD, the big bang is far from being a wild assed theory, it is a best theory we currently have to explain how the universe started and there are a lot of observations to support it. When the LHC finally starts to operate it will provide more information that will allow to confirm, refine, or modify the big bang theory, maybe even to replace it, but that seems unlikely (though not impossible).
I can do better things with my Sundays than waste them in church.
Also who tells you that you are preaching to the real god? The christians are unable to agree on the right rituals, there are three major branches and dozens of smaller ones, the muslims preach to the same god as do the jews, but their beliefs vary a lot. Then there are about a dozen other major religions, some with a whole pantheon, or even without a god.
My bottom line is that it is all invented by humans to explain things they do not understand and in many cases modified by the priests to have control over the masses.
As for streamy: Yes, he has the right to belive what he wants, but he does not have the right to be respected by me for believing obviously stupid things and spewing them out in this forum. Check out the "universemodel" thread to get some idea of his beliefs and why he lost all respect with most of the long timers here on Glumbert. He is a genuine flat-earther.
"Intelligent Design is the theory of God, of some supreme being, taking an active role in the design of all life on Earth, but its not strictly creationism."
No no no, that is "DESIGN" Theory which is a facet of Intelligent Design Theory.
In principle, Intelligent Design theory seeks to explain the observable traits in INTELLIGENT CAUSATION: Engineering Principles, Anthropology, Archeology Etc.
"Design Theory" Attempts to find a "divine" (depending on what you consider divine), teleological causation for the Universe and a teleological cause for the development of complex organisms by natural selection.
Canuck, Do you ever have anything useful to add to a conversation? Seriously? Here I'm actually supporting your atheist beliefs, and still you bash me. I'd tell you to go to hell, but it might not be a real place. The sentiment applies.
Just because the big band is our best theory, doesn't mean its not a wild assed theory. If its so in danger of being replaced with further scientific study, then maybe its not completely solid yet eh? I'm not disagreeing with the big band theory being our best theory currently, but I'm not getting all opinionated defending its details either. If someone else wants to believe in Creationism, I disagree with them, but I see no harm in they're believing that. The ID folks would probably fall somewhere in the middle, saying God created the matter for the big bang, and set it all in motion.
I go to church, about twice a year. Great places for weddings and funerals. But I'll probably make my kids suffer through Sunday school, like I had to, so they can decide for themselves what to believe.
Seriously Bug, how can you get your undies in a bunch arguing with anyone, over something you can't possibly confirm as absolute fact? You're even arguing with me over something I already said. I said specifically, how can anyone know which religion is true, assuming God even exists? I mean, are you simply not happy with yourself, unless your opinion is agreed with? Is that why you like Canuck so, cause he re-affirms your personal belief system daily? I don't care if you agree with my beliefs or opinion.
"As for streamy: Yes, he has the right to belive what he wants, but he does not have the right to be respected by me for believing obviously stupid things and spewing them out in this forum."
You believe obviously stupid things when it comes to politics and history, do you not have the right to be respected? Is it ok to disrespect others simply because you don't agree with what they believe? That's kinda how Hitler got started with his bigotted Jew-bashing. Now I'm not saying you're like Hitler, don't get your undies in a bunch again, but you are pretty intolerant of others opinions (one definition of bigot). Do you really want to be like that?
"No no no, that is "DESIGN" Theory which is a facet of Intelligent Design Theory." Um... so is "Design" theory somehow less intelligent?
"In principle, Intelligent Design theory seeks to explain the observable traits in INTELLIGENT CAUSATION: Engineering Principles, Anthropology, Etc. "
Like how global warming is caused by a lack of pirates! One example of how observable correlation does not prove causation.
Of Pandas and People is regarded as a fairly definitive text on ID. It was in draft stage in 1987 when the Edwards v Aguillard decision made the teach creation 'science' unconstitutional. Early drafts of the book show that it was a creationism book, using the word 'creation' and cognates throughout.
Drafts made after the Edwards decision show that the authors simply substituted the term 'intelligent design' for 'creation'
The ID movement rejects naturalistic explanations for origins and seeks to replace them with one or a few sudden creations by a supernatural agent whom almost everyone in the movement identifies as the Christian God.
Thanks Mako. I think one difference of creationism vs. ID though may be that creationist buy into the world was created in 6 days, and the world is ~6000 years old, wheras ID folks may not agree with this? I think creationists are willing to completely through out any scrap of science that disputes their dogma, whereas ID folks try to weave God into science, so God fills in the gaps of science.
Try arguing dinosaur fossils with a true creationist. One of my best friends defends creationism, and he's a very smart rational guy. He believes dinosaur fossils were created with the rest of the Earth at the time of creation. For fossils that are say 10,000 years old, where carbon dating applies, he'll straight-faced tell me either carbon 14 radioactive decay was accelerated by God, or we have the science wrong. But that just goes against any notion of a God I have. I can't believe a God worthy of worship would intentionally deceive us, but rather gave us the intelligence (except Canuck) to learn and understand, to more fully appreciate the world God created. And why would a God demand worship from his lowly creations anyway? I don't get that. Is God lonely?
There is a film %u201CWhat we still don%u2019t know%u201D in which groups of scientist discuss the %u201Ccosmological constant%u201D. Basically if this constant was off by 10 to the 120th of a decimal place the universe would not exist. These scientists say that this pointed to a universe that was created for life because it couldn%u2019t have happened by chance. However being scientists they could not accept that so they came up with the theory of a multi-verce. The theory states that our universe is one of infinite universes and it stands to reason that if there are endless universes that one of then would eventually evolve some type of life.
You could use the same argument that if there were infinite universes eventually one of them would have a God like creator, or one of them could be run by pink unicorns in purple tutu%u2019s. It%u2019s your life believe what you want.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7044753105944203252
"And why would a God demand worship from his lowly creations anyway? I don't get that. Is God lonely?"
As I understand it God created people for fellowship and to share his love much like the same reason people have children.
Then why Hell? Hell was not originally intended for humans it was made for Satan and those who followed him. Satan tried to overthrow God and force humans to worship him.
My point is that YOU have some seriously wrong ideas about politics and history. Now which one of us is right?
There is no need for a "big band" theory, if you like the music, dance.
Sorry, could not let that one pass :)
My point is that there are certain things that are just plain stupid, like the fossils being planted by some god who wants to test his creation. Why should I respect such a belief?
But I can assure you I am not discriminating any religion, I don't respect a single one of them, I just tolerate them as long as nobody tries to stick them in my face. That does not mean they have no human rights as you seem to suggest that I would imply, it just means I reserve the right to tell them get either get educated or fuck off.
"As I understand it God created people for fellowship and to share his love much like the same reason people have children. "
So if your children don't love you back, its ok to damn them to hell? Or is hell like being kicked out of the house, and having you eat Raman noodles forever?
"Bug: My point is that YOU have some seriously wrong ideas about politics and history. Now which one of us is right?"
Let me set you straight Bug. Whenever we disagree, and one of us is clearly wrong, its you that is wrong!
"There is no need for a "big band" theory, if you like the music, dance."
I'm sooooo embarassed!
"Why should I respect such a belief?"
Maybe its not the belief, ideology, party, or any institution so much you should respect, but you should respect the person and their opinion.
"But I can assure you I am not discriminating any religion, I don't respect a single one of them, I just tolerate them as long as nobody tries to stick them in my face. " An equal opportunity bigot! I'm ok with that.
"That does not mean they have no human rights as you seem to suggest that I would imply, it just means I reserve the right to tell them get either get educated or fuck off."
I didn't suggest you would deny them their human rights, just that intolerance in almost any form is an ugly thing. Getting educated alone doesn't somehow "cure" them of their religious beliefs. You imply religious people are somehow less intelligent, less educated than yourself, that is wrong. The educated religious people are the ones coming up with ID theory! Einstein was educated, genius, and religious. Does education cure people of deep left-wing or right-wing thinking? Does education turn homosexuals into heterosexuals? Education is usually absorbed only so far as it confirms your existing beliefs. Anything that completely disagrees with your beliefs, is usually ignored as garbage. So to imply religious people are less intelligent, less educated, is bigotted.
Say I meet a native deep in the Amazon rain forest, and he believes in a sun God, or maybe a Goddess of monkey droppings, whatever... Should I assume he less intelligent? Less educated? well maybe by western standards.
Could education alone eliminate Islamic extremism? I think it might reduce it, but more because of the improved economic conditions that might result from that education, the greater personal happiness that might result from improved economic conditions, and maybe that tendency to learn all about Islam on their own from multiple sources, rather than one crazy Imam. So I think education can reduce extremism, but I don't think it eliminates all religious beliefs. I don't think college educations for Arabs will make them give up Islam, because I know college education for westerners doesn't make them give up their religious beliefs.
So if your children don't love you back, its ok to damn them to hell? Or is hell like being kicked out of the house, and having you eat Raman noodles forever?
Yeh it's kind of like the Ramon noodle thing except "you" choose to leave the house with the understanding that you can return at any time you wish, (parable of the lost son Luke 15:11) until that is when you die then you have made your final choice.
HD, not the Einstein thing again. I am always hearing this argument in discussions and it turns out that those who say that Eistein was religious do usually repeat something they have heard somewhere and accepted at face value.
If you take a closer look at Einsteins life and read documents like the letters he exchanged with Max Born you will see a person who was brought up with a religious background but emancipated himself from religion. He sometimes had to say he was religious, like when he got a job at a university. But in his later life he stated that religion is childish. Look up the history of that great man, it is really enlightening in a totally non religious way.
And again one of us was wrong and it has been you as always.
"Yeh it's kind of like the Ramon noodle thing except "you" choose to leave the house with the understanding that you can return at any time you wish, (parable of the lost son Luke 15:11) until that is when you die then you have made your final choice."
Then its Ramon noodles for eternity my friend! Sounds pretty horrible. So how do we know if God is real, and what is the one true religion? Bug, be nice!
So Bug, now you're calling Einstein an atheist? Mr. admirer of the universe? Say it ain't so? Ok, you're not buying my even genious' can be religious? I believe Einstein's religiosity may not be fully known by either of us, but I don't really care about Einstein.
How about we go the other way, and look at incredible dumbasses in history who have been atheists? Joseph Stalin, Kim Jong Il, Jesse Ventura?
Your claim is that religion can and should be educated away. That's where you're wrong. In fact, I'm pretty sure the first two atheists in my list actually tried to educate the religion out of people.
"So how do we know if God is real, and what is the one true religion?"
I had a personal experience in 1985 which proved God is real for me. I cannot convince you it happened and I won%u2019t even try. If you had an experience that I never had I can either believe you or not.
I%u2019ve asked the second question many times and it has gotten me in many arguments and branded as a non believer in a few churches and religious groups, consequently I don%u2019t believe in religion. However because of my personal experience I do believe in Jesus of the Bible, I believe he was a historical person.
I do not believe that God would condemn someone who truly wants to believe or is truly trying to follow Him but is reading the wrong book. But then again that is my own beliefs.
HD you seem to be the type of person that I would consider sitting down and having a beer with. Cheers.
"thebug: HD, you just told me that you have no idea about Einstein, yet you know that he was religious? Another one of the very stupid non-points you make."
Now Bug, that's not quite what I said. I said we disagree over Einstein's religiousness, neither of us can really prove what he believed, and its not worth my time to argue with you over it. Especially since you rarely listen, but I know I can't create a strong arguement to defend what I think someone else believed. Whether Einstein was religious or not, is not relevant to my point, that religion is not only for the uneducated.
But you are soooo dead set in your opinion that all people who believe in any religion are somehow less educated and less intelligent than you. Well you're wrong. Religious people can be very intelligent (as Streamo is) and they can be very highly educated. I mean how many religion based colleges are there in this world anyway? I'm pretty sure they give out college degrees at the end, and I doubt those classes are any less demanding.
Now that doesn't mean a college graduate with a PHD has any rigorous knowledge of science. They may have spent all their time studying economics, philosophy, underwater basket weaving, etc. In fact, these people are probably worse, because they're so smart, they assume they understand science without having actually studied it. And when you're smart, and a religious authority, its easy to start spouting wrong science to support your beliefs. They may be wrong with their science. But you may be wrong with your religious beliefs, and you may be eating Ramon noodles for eternity.
How many things in science do you believe, without actually observing, or having perfect evidence about? Like the big bang, our evidence isn't perfect, the theory is evolving, you didn't observe it. Yet you believe it completely. Well religious people believe they not only have evidence of God, but that this very world is proof of God's existance, and fully observable. Muslims believe the Koran is so perfect, that it had to be written by God, not by man. They don't see science as discrediting the existance of God, but actually confirming it. They take the same facts you use to deny God, and interpret them to prove God. Scientific fact is still subject to interpretation, just like historical fact is subject to interpretation. You can't possibly know you're right, and everyone religious is wrong, unless you're just a self-rightous bum.
But regardless of whether God is real, I would never deny someone their right to worship or force someone to worship. I would never punish someone for their belief in God, or atheism. I would never disregard or look down upon someone because they were religious or atheist. Every human has good and bad ideas. Going through life convinced you're all wise always right may help you sleep well at night, but true wisdom is knowing that there's a lot you don't know. That some mysteries of life you will never figure out, no matter how long you study them. That you could be wrong, and you just might figure that out sooner if you keep an open mind.
Going through life stubborn and close-minded really denies you the ability to fully enjoy this life, especially as you belief that you only have one life to live.
Worship all you like, but don't fucking bother me with it, that is my point. And don't expect to be taken serious if you spew bullshit like creationism. There is a right to free speech, but not a right to have an audience.
Interesting...if it's true. About the infanticide claim, I've found that he actually doesn't support it. He's just voted against legislature that would prevent it, supposedly to protect abortion rights.
PHILADELPHIA (AP) %u2014 A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit challenging Barack Obama's qualifications to be president.
U.S. District Judge R. Barclay Surrick on Friday night rejected the suit by attorney Philip J. Berg, who alleged that Obama was not a U.S. citizen and therefore ineligible for the presidency. Berg claimed that Obama is either a citizen of his father's native Kenya or became a citizen of Indonesia after he moved there as a boy.
Obama was born in Hawaii to an American mother and a Kenyan father. His parents divorced and his mother married an Indonesian man.
Internet-fueled conspiracy theories question whether Obama is a "natural-born citizen" as required by the Constitution for a presidential candidate and whether he lost his citizenship while living abroad.
Surrick ruled that Berg lacked standing to bring the case, saying any harm from an allegedly ineligible candidate was "too vague and its effects too attenuated to confer standing on any and all voters."
So we might as well have Hugo Chavez run for the Democrats in 2012 for president. Or ACKmendenijad from Iran. Any anti-American, anti-capitalist thug would get endorsed by the Democrat party.
Our future Supreme Ruler Hussein's birth citizenship is a legitimate topic. It's all about the rules we run by, but the Democrats don't care about rules, only power.
I wonder what candidate that judge endorses? ...hmmm... You automatically assume that because a judge says something that it means that Berg or anyone else would be wrong? That's why we have appeals. If you assume that logic to be true -Canadamama & Canuk- ... Then you must also support all court rulings even the ones that put the Bush you hate so much into office.
....and so......the judge did not rule on the merits of the allegation, merely on Berg's standing as being eligible to bring action on it. Hence, no enlightenment on the question.
Damn. Why doesn't OB simply lay the issue to rest by producing his birth certificate, or something reasonably convincing?
I do not believe in the Manchurian Candidate, nor in a conspiracy regarding Kennedy, nor a whitewash of an alien visit to our southwest emptyness years ago........BUT
I do believe that an uncontested assertion stays alive until killed by fact. So, Obama can be seen as dodging......just can't explain why to my friends.
Simple smear/fear-mongering is keeping it alive, nothing more.
The final nail in the coffin for this issue, SHOULD be the fact that McCain or his camp haven't even whispered it as an issue in the current election cycle.
As I said.....fear and suspicion go hand-in-hand....and once folks latch onto those crutches.....NOTHING will shake them of it.
Not even facts.
Just ask the company of Streamlined Racist Helldivers, Inc.
The lawsuit is being appealed to the supreme court. Obama would rather have 100 million people log onto berg's site and take account of this rumor, instead of hand over a piece of paper dismissing the claim.
Considering he's attacked every rumor but this, it's quite strange..
Same reason why GWB or his staff don't ever waste time on or defend against "9/11 Conspiracy Theorists".....because suddenly these people would get an air of legitimacy. (sorry guys...I can't buy into that whole "inside job" stuff).
One of the MINISCULE times I actually agree with the current U.S. Administrations rationales.
Besides.....you don't have to look any further than McCain:
He's tossed just about every smear he can think of at Obama....but not THIS.
You'll agree with the current administration, or any other administration so long as it fuels your need to be an boisterous idiot on glumbert. Dude, go be Canadian and leave discussion of United States politics to Americans.
Once the day comes when whatever person sits in that Oval Office can make decisions that do NOT affect the rest us (i.e. the world).....I'll keep muh mouth shut.
IF that ever happens, or comes to pass.....then if I NEVER have to hear from nutty, flag-waving, insular-minded, ignorant xenophobes like YOU, will STILL be too damn soon.
I wish more stuff like this would make it to the mainstream media viewers. Unfortunately, contrary to what liberals would have you think, they dominate that arena. Fox news and CNN are the only two that in my opinion make an effort to show the other side of things. Other than that you have to find things like this to get your fill of news that isn't cultured in a liberal petri dish.
There is probably no answer that will be sufficient for you canuck... because as much as you think you know about the United States and/or its politics - you don't know shit. You believe what you want to believe. Your general stance is anti-United States of America, not anti-Republican.
I'll try to explain it to you though. The United States has an electoral voting system set in place to determine who will be our President. This means that while a president can win a popular vote (wins the majority number of votes cast), it is ultimately who wins the electoral vote, or the largest amount of senate voting seats that determines who in fact will be the next President of the United States. The same goes for cases in which a Presidential candidate loses the popular vote. All the -would be- President really needs is the Electoral Vote...
In 2000 Bush lost the Popular Vote, but won the Electoral Vote. That is why he was made President of the United States. After his first term was up in '04 I think most Americans voted for him over Kerry for 2 reasons. First, we we're still at war and while not all Americans agreed, most believed that it would be best to let Bush finish what he had started. Second, he was running against Kerry. That was a poor Democratic nominee on all levels.
Hopefully that gives you some insight. When you look at both election years, take a look at what was said by the majority of the media conglomerates. Even though mainstream media is liberal infested, it doesn't mean its going to sway all the people, or the courts. In general it sways the people that talk a lot, but are too lazy to go vote anyway. For all the lazy sheep out there that are willing to believe anything and everything the news tells them... There are still others that are willing to be skeptical, do their own research, and make an educated choice.
"Your general stance is anti-United States of America, not anti-Republican"
Great.
Another flag-waving nutjob.
Just how deep IS the hole that you and your band of zealots crawl out of? Or....are Americans who share similar or identical views to myself "Anti-American" as well? Gonna call them 'traitors'? Shaddap, ya fascist, McCarthy-loving hawg.
Maybe YOU'RE the one who don't know jack-shit....ever thought of that?
And while that was a very nice dissertation of the electoral college system....you STILL didn't answer the question, you clueless dope.
Questions like THAT ALWAYS trip-up closet-no-minds like yourself, anyways.
"In 2000 Bush lost the Popular Vote, but won the Electoral Vote. That is why he was made President of the United States. After his first term was up in '04 I think most Americans voted for him over Kerry for 2 reasons. First, we we're still at war and while not all Americans agreed, most believed that it would be best to let Bush finish what he had started. Second, he was running against Kerry. That was a poor Democratic nominee on all levels."
... That didn't answer your question? Seems like a pretty straight forward answer to me. I like how you result to childish insults. You're such a silly willy pants canuck. lol.
"Well, if the media are so "liberal biased", then how did Georgie-Boy become Prezdint for the last 8 years?"
... That was your question. I felt I gave you an answer as to why George Bush was elected and has been our president for the last 8 years. I also predicted and was right, that NO answer would be good enough for you.
So I guess, unless you're more specific, then I can't give you the answer YOU want.
Mickle...it is even easier than that.
The question is a non sequitur. IT DOES NOT FOLLOW.
See, in C-'s world, the media define reality. Ergo, if the media are so liberal how on earth is it possible that the rest of America is not also?
See how it works?
It does not follow that a liberal media creates and/or maintains a populace with like views. In fact, the American public is overwhelmingly conservative despite the well-established fact of a liberal/dem-sympathetic media.
Soooo....if Obama becomes President (which he will), it will be because dorks like yourselves say "It was The Liberal Media"; when an idiot like Georgie-Boy gets to be Prezdint for the last 8 catastrophic years....THEN it's because most of the U.S. is "overwhelmingly conservative".
You DO know how fuckin' stupid both you idiots sound.....right?
No, they are real wise men, representing those who brought us the great GWB teice, despite the best attemtps of the liberal media of destroying the man by supporting him and ruining his name by doing so.
So this Chinaman gets a new job. His boss tells him he is in charge of office supplies. The Chinaman disappears. After a while people start wondering where he went. The boss tells his secretary he is going to look for him. As he walks around a corner, the Chinaman jumps out and yells "SUPPLIES!".
How's it feel to be in support of dems these days?
Tim Mahoney
Barney Frank (just a matter of time)
Chris Dodd (just a matter of time)
Diane Wilkerson
William Jefferson
Derrick Shepherd
Jamie Gorelick
I am leaving out Bill Clinton on purpose as he is the past and criminals pushinf BHO to the presidency will minimize the Clinton's. This does not diminish his role as a liar. (Not an accused liar, C-. A real live one.)
See, both party's have their share of crooks. (One party, it would seem, has the lion's share. Or, is that the ass's?) But, when it comes to conservatives, we tend to run out our riff-raff. The liberals? not-so-much.
Your latest "surge success" update:
Updated at 7:17 p.m. EDT, Oct. 27, 2008
At least 20 Iraqis were killed and another 29 were wounded in the latest violence. One American soldier died Friday of wounds received on Oct. 16 during a small arms attack in Baquba. Meanwhile, U.S. authorities confirmed a border attack on Syria.
In Baghdad, a bomb planted on a car in the Sinak neighborhood killed two people and wounded seven others. Three people were killed and six others were wounded during a bombing in New Baghdad; earlier, U.S. troops killed five gunmen during an attack on a military base. In Nahda, a roadside bomb blast wounded four people. Two people were wounded during a bombing near the Kindi Hospital in northeast Baghdad. Also, a body was found in Mashtal.
In Mosul, a dumped body was found. Two people were wounded during a suicide attack on a checkpoint. Gunmen killed a civilian. Two Iraqi soldiers were injured during a combined small arms and indirect fire attack. Also, a bomb blew up a policeman's car, but no casualties were reported in the blast.
A roadside bomb killed a government employee and wounded six others in Dour.
An Iraqi soldier was killed when a bomb planted on his car blew up in Tuz Khormato.
Two wanted suspects were captured in separate locations within Dhi Qar province.
Security forces in Kirkuk detained 14 suspects.
A "key militia leader" was arrested in Kut.
Twelve suspects were arrested across Ninewa province.
Four suspects were arrested across Basra province, while an Iranian was picked up in the Shatt al-Arab area.
U.S. forces killed four suspects and detained seven more across northern and central Iraq.
A long-delayed sewage treatment system for Fallujah is beset with problems and likely will not be operational until at least next April. Also, a roadside bomb was defused safely.
Turkish forces targeted locations in northern Iraq last night and this morning.
U.S. officials confirmed conducting a deadly raid that left at least seven people dead just across the border in Syria. They said they killed the head of a smuggling network. An Associated Press journalist on scene reported that seven adult men were killed, while the Syrian government claimed that children were among the dead. Witnesses said two people were taken into custody.
The As Sukkariyah farming area borders a centuries-old trade route along the Euphrates River that is well-used by smugglers operating in both directions between the countries. The Iraqi town of Qaim and a U.S. base are located just a few miles away on the other side of the border. Only five days ago, a mass grave containing 34 police recruits was found nearby.
All I know about Iraq is this..... The official 'reason' for going to war with them.was NOT oil! It was WMDs. I suspect they will use them ANY DAY NOW, unless they are saving them for when a truely MASSIVE army attacks.
As for Bush..... just another in a long line of rich white guys pretending to run America.
I'm fairly certain that if this lawyer and Illuminati Films were full of any more shit, it would be flying from their ears in a fabulous shower of explosive diarrhea. McCain is getting beaten in all levels of state/national polling, and these jackasses want people to believe that all his staffers who have the sole task of digging up dirt on Obama have somehow missed something that could disqualify Obama from the presidency and essentially give them victory by default. If you believe anything these people say, please report to your nearest neurosurgeon to have a full frontal lobotomy, since your brain is already no more than a useless chunk of meat.
You might want to take note that the guy up there in the video ... Berg... IS A DEMOCRAT. Why would a Democrat put out his own parties nominee if it meant a Republican won by default? It wouldn't give them the victory. So that's not the intention. Try again.
Haven't read Logan's Run (I assume thats where that is from)...so your superior intellectual pot shot was wasted. Stick to the other stuff you said earlier... you know where you called me a "fascist, McCarthy-loving hawg."
The same reason why hundreds if not thousands of white democrats are not voting for Obama. Because he's black, because his policies are too liberal, the list goes on on on. Just because he's a democrat doesn't mean he's not a fucking idiot.
pathetic: 1. he was born in Honolulu, it even says that on his "Indonesian" papers Anyone born in the states is automatically a natural born citizen also... the USA allows dual citizenship. Who cares if Indonesia doesn't?
2. When he gets into office, they can always double check. If this guy is correct, then they can throw him out.
This guy Berg is an idiot though. Even his stupid little graphics that show a stamp in one and not the other are just two of the same image at different resolutions.
Why would Barack run for president if he knew he was not qualified? That's ridiculous!
yes, but when he moved to Indonesia, he had to register as an Indonesian citizen to go to the madrasa. At the time, Indonesia did not have a dual citizenship program. As a result he had to remove his US citizenship when he moved to Indonesia. Thus even if he was born as a citizen on soil and by 1 american parent, it doesn't matter when you change citizenship to another country that does not have a dual citizenship program.
Why should we wait until after the election to verify Obama's US citizenship? Wouldn't it be better to know beforehand? Maybe so the Democrats could find a replace... um... Hillary. Its not like John McCain is getting any younger ya know!
Seriously, if Obama gets disqualified after he's elected, that means Bush remains in power until a new president can be elected, or maybe Biden gets appointed, I'm not sure how that would work. Wouldn't you like to know beforehand that your vote is actually for Obama, and not for Biden?
He had to drop his citizenship because Indonesia was in a civil war that did not allow dual citizenship with United States. Had to drop his citizenship to attend a school there.
Do you assume this, or do you have hard fact? That is what I am asking.
The second point is even if he did, what exactly says the law about the citizenship status, is it even possible to lose the status of natural born citizen?
I actually could care less if Obama's father told the Indonesian government that Barack renounced his US citizenship. Barack was a kid, and I don't see renouncement as some legal revocation of US citizenship. If Barack Obama was actually born in Hawaii, regardless of what came after, then he's a US citizen. The constitution only says the president must be a natural born US citizen. It says nothing about renouncement and re-instatement of US citizenship. And judging from illegal immigrants, it doesn't matter what the nationality of your parents are.
All Obama has to do, is provide a legal copy of his birth certificate, showing he was born in Hawaii. Some picture of it on the internet is hardly proof. I can probably find a picture on the internet showing Obama training with al Qaeda.
HD, do you expect Obama to show the birth certificate to each and every citizen who asks for it, or would it be sufficient to show it to the authorities responsible for verifying his candidacy?
As I understand the whole situation he did provide the document to the authorities, just not to all the crackpots who attack him.
I want Obama to show his birth certificate to the authorities only, that being some federal court, possibly the supreme court. Although, I don't think it would be too much to ask if Obama made notarized copies, and sent them to the state courts where his citizenship lawsuits are pending. There can't be more than say 54 of these needed. ;-)
This challenge about Obama's citizenship will still be ongoing, after Obama wins the election. Then it will be up to the supreme court yet again, to decide our president. Not what I prefer. I'd rather Obama just settled this now, put any conspiracy to rest. Or is it too hard to show a birth certificate?
Soooooo......we have one presidential candidate who WAS born in the U.S. which IS a fact......and another who was NOT born in the U.S. which is also a fact, which leaves his own status as murky, when it comes being a "natural born citizen".
And some of these right-wing cretins are all over Obama for THIS?????
Some people are just too effing stupid for their own good.
However, I do want to make a note of which stories Canuck's completely objective media chooses to report on. I couldn't find anything about Obama's citizenship issue on any of the mainstream news agencies. But I'm sure it's purely coincidental.
Was that a surprise to you Canuck, that McCain was born in Panama? If McCain is declared to not be a natural born US citizen, then he shouldn't qualify for president either, and maybe that is why McCain isn't pushing this. However, he was born on a US military base, to a family actively serving in the US military, stationed by orders overseas. I'm pretty sure there's a law that supplied little Johnny with a US birth certificate. There must be hundreds, if not thousands of Americans, born to parents serving in Germany, South Korea, England, etc. I'm sure this issue was resolved in the courts a long time ago.
One of the many things about the USA I don't understand: Why they do insist on the natural citizenship for the president, but on state level you can be governor if you are not a born citizen.
Without that rather stupid law the GOP would have a perfect presidential candiate sitting in California.
"Because the state's decide the criteria of those it wishes to select as its leaders."
Yes, yes, kind of like the Mob decides that only people in the "family" can lead it... But that wasn't my question. My question was why does it matter? Who cares? If someone is going to mug you, why should their place of birth be so important to you?
"Nothing inconsistent or difficult to understand...for most."
They may not be inconsistent, but they're arbitrary at best.
Being a natural born citizen to be president, is written in our constitution. That is our law, and we are a nation ruled by law. Law over mob mentality, law over religion, law above political parties, etc. Now we could change that law, with a constitutional ammendment, but we haven't done that yet.
The intent of the law being so that our president is more likely to share American culture, American values, American morality, and truly have the best intentions and aspirations for the US. Although, I have noticed that many foreigners who have emigrated to the US, often exemplify American values better than many natural born citizens. So I'm not entirely opposed to lifting this restriction. But that law as it stands now, says the president must be a natural born citizen. No one is above the law in this nation, not even the president. The president's very job is to preserve and defend the constitution, pretty hard to do if you have to violate the constitution to get the job.
Two wrong's don't make a right. The next president should re-double his efforts to restore our nation to the guiding principles of the constitution. It is the legislative branch's responibility to create laws within the framework of the constitution. The executive branch's responsibility to enforce it. And the judicial branch's responsibility to strike down laws, or remove officials, that violate the constitution.
It is not just a piece of paper. It is the guiding principles of this nation. Although you can argue we've deviated from it for the past 100 years.
Mako, I fully took your comment as something you believed Bush felt, not something you felt. Good thing I know you're political leanings. We could argue all day about how Bush did or did not violate the constitution, I doubt we'd agree. In my mind, that only re-affirms that the next president do everything in his power to follow the spirit and laws of the constitution.
But I fail to see how McCain is anyone's puppet. He got behind Bush in 2000, for the good of the party, just as Hillary got behind Obama now. Does that make Hillary Barack's puppet?
McCain wasn't Bush's puppet supporting the Iraq war, McCain simply agreed with Bush on the reasons for the Iraq war. (along with dozens of Democrats at the time) Yet it was McCain who was one of the first to call for Rummy's resignation, and it was McCain who was the first calling for a surge. And it was McCain calling to close Gitmo, and ban all torture. Hardly Bush's puppet.
But McCain is a republican, so it stands to reason they might agree on things like taxes, the economy, abortion, gay marriage, etc.
McCain is many things, but Bush puppet? I don't see how you can justify that.
McCain voted with Bush 90% of the time, because McCain is a republican, and they believe a lot of the same things. That doesn't mean he's anyone's puppet.
Hillary voted with Obama some very high percentage of the time, is Hillary a puppet of Obama?
You agree with Bug an aweful lot. Are you Bug's puppet?
Did you figure out the stupidity of your arguement yet? Agreeing with someone, doesn't make you their puppet. Ask yourself, what influence will Bush have over McCain, after Bush leaves office? Not a damn bit! And judging from how McCain challenged Bush on so many very important topics during Bush's presidency, I don't see how you can say McCain was much influenced by Bush then.
Don't think there wasn't some bad blood between Bush and McCain after the 2000 primaries. You spout on and on about McCain's temper, do you think he forgave Bush any farther than the camera captured? Hillary supports Obama, for the good of the party. Is she Obama's puppet now? If Hillary agrees with Obama 90% of the time, when they start building the new socialist America, will that officially confirm her status as Obama's puppet?
Puppet is just one of those favorite words used by communist propaganda ministers throughout time, and pretty much radical extremists everywhere.
Yup. Yet ANOTHER republican crook bites the dust (and this one a senior honcho from ALASKA, no less!!). My-my-my.....they is droppin' like flies....ain't they?
So, with all of the "guilt-by-assocation" rationale that the McCain/Palin Lynch Mob have been touting, what would one make of THIS, then?:
Hmmmm....I think a full investigation of this 'assocation' is warranted, plus I really think Ms. Palin needs to EXPLAIN the nature of her relationship with this man. I mean, is "palling around with terrorists" any less unsavory than palling around with a multiple-convicted felon?
Gosh-darnit, ya got to just LOVE those double-standards.
Ol Ted Stevens...run him out on a rail.
Notice how "party faithfuls" treat the bad elements in the Republican party: Get rid of him.
Which is quite different from those on the left, who apologize and rationalize the criminal element that exists there. Just look at ACORN and their current (gubment funded, btw) support for Obama, et al.
Actually, there's a couple of points your failing to grasp here, Mr. Pap Shmeer:
1. You see the attached videos? Your glorious Wonder Girl has been "palling" around this scumbag for a long, long time; you saying she didn't know even THEN, that something was up? Yeah, okay. Right. But I sure don't see YOU screaming for an investigation into that LONG-TIME relationship....now do I?
2. This idiot is symbolic yet again, of the inherent rot and corruption within the GOP. If I tried to rhyme off each and every single Republi-goon that went down in flames over the last 8 years (through criminal acts ALONE), my keyboard would explode from the typing that'd be involved.
3. Who said I was "upset"? For me to be that way, it would be because I genuinely believed in the FIRST PLACE that a majority within in the GOP are up-standing kinda folks. In this case? Simple: NOT surprised, is more like it. Are there some on the Dems side? Probably. But THEY ain't making the news as much as the GOP-malefactors......now are they? No siree, Bob-The-Builder.....not by a longshot.
4. If this is the way "Party Faithfuls" treat their own who go astray (somehow the phrase "eating their young", comes to mind).....then how come Georgie-Boy and Dickie-Head lasted for 8 years? And why ain't Rove and Gonzales standing tall, before The Man? Or Rumsfeld, for that matter?
Of course, to streamy a massive carpet bombing is also equal to liberating people and bringing them democracy. I did point this out only as a benefit to those who can think, this specifically excludes streamy.
Plenty of Democrats and Republicans...
Including Hillary and Obama...
So despite Canuck's rants, both sides are crooked as hell. Yet we don't have to elect these people once they're exposed.
5. Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) %u2013 News reports surfaced in 2006 that Illinois Senator Barak Obama entered into an unusual land deal with a now-indicted political fundraiser, Tony Rezko. The complicated real estate transaction occurred when it was widely known that Rezko was under federal investigation in a political corruption scandal.
C-, Buggery
I love you two.
Buggery, when you quoted what I wrote...you quoted something, I DID NOT WRITE.
When I say you guys are illiterate and willing to lie, it is proven here.
I said he "lied" on those forms and C- made the moral equivocation to a terrorist. And, because you two enjoy each other's opinions so much, the kiss fest begins.
C-
Please see a post of mine above, listing (abridged) the current crooks/indicted or otherwise in the Democrat party.
HALLIBURTON!
Your question 4 answers itself, Mr. Big Brains.
Dem majority and not a whisper of punishing the lying-killing machine of the satanic trio bent on world domination: Rove-Bush-Cheney
Buggery
having never EVER been involved in a liberating of a people, you would have no idea how it is done nor the rationales that lead a man to do it. The last time you were involved in a war, we had to carpet bomb YOU in order to liberate those YOU were oppressing.
Streamy, which of the B-17s did you fly into Germany?
With your good aim and clear understanding you would not even have found Germany, more likely you would have ended up bombing Cape Town.
And I did not quote you, I have summarised some of your opinions. Though the complete summary of your person would be "pathetic waste of organic material".
John Cleese was always a huge hit with me ("Fawlty Towers" reigns supreme), and he does put the "Sarah Palin" notion into a pretty funny (if not accurate) pespective:
"A couple of staffers from North Carolina congressional candidate Judy Feder's campaign tried to approach her opponent, Republican Rep. Frank Wolf, the other day to ask him to make clear his position on health care (something Wolf has refused to do so far) and, rather than talk them, stood by as members of his own staff assaulted one staffer with a cane, while a couple of others backed the second staffer against a wall."
"Temperatures always rise towards the end of the campaign season, but this year, the prospect of massive GOP losses looms large in the minds of Republicans, and they're obviously lashing out in a lot of ways. Ugly rhetoric is one. This is another."
My-my-my.....these folks sure are becoming sore losers....and they ain't even lost yet!!!
Let the Supreme court decide our next president, like they did last time.
Seriously though, I fail to understand why Obama can't take the time to lay this "conspiracy" to rest, if that be the case. By failing to respond, he will only convince some independent voters that he has something to hide. And if this election is close, Obama could lose because of this failure to act. So either he is a US citizen, and could easily prove it, to lay this accusation to rest, or he's not a US citizen, and has no business running for president.
There are several states now questioning Obama's US citizenship. I'm not hazarding a guess to whether they are justified or not, but why does Barack need to call in the DNC to provide cover? Why can't he just provide proof and be done with this? Surely if Bush tried this evasiveness, he would not get a free pass from you liberal folks. Why the double-standards?
Neither of you provided any real answer why Obama would let the question of his US citizenship remain unanswered. And with only one week to go, almost makes you think he's stalling for time.
Earth is 6000 years old and was made in 6 days. Iraq surge is going well. I'll vote McCain even though I don't like him and I think the republicans are spineless and ball-less.
Back to swearing...because he looks good, feels good and seems to be the only thing that gets peoples' attention:
HD:
"Neither of you provided any real answer why Obama would let the question of his US citizenship remain unanswered. And with only one week to go, almost makes you think he's stalling for time."
You posted that 19 hours ago; I posted the links that answer these questions 17 hours ago. This tells me (yet again) that you don't fuckin' READ ANYTHING in front of your fuckin' face. Okay..I get it now....you deliberatelt PRETEND to be fucking stupid and not read things, so you'll get a rise out of people....right? Or....ARE you pretending?
Either way....get a new fucking argument. You're starting to bore me. AGAIN.
Now C, I would have thought you were talking about yourself there:
"you deliberatelt PRETEND to be fucking stupid and not read things, so you'll get a rise out of people....right? "
As for your response, if its not in this link, I may not find it. Am I seriously expected to read every one of your long rambling pointless posts every 24 hours? None of us have as much time to dedicate to Glumbert as you.
Wow, you'll just happily drop to the lowest level of any conversation won't you? Its not really worth arguing anything with you, you rarely make a good point, your extremism is tiring, your name-calling is childish. I can discuss things with Bug and Mako. You're just a left-wing radical, completely devoid of any reason.
I can't believe that this story is still around. It surfaced during the primaries, what eight-nine months ago?
Do you really think, serisouly think, that Obama would be so stupid as to try to run for President if he wasn't a US citizen? Give me a fucking break guys, c'mon.
GET EDUCATED! And stop watching Faux News ffs.
You do know that this election is Barack Obama vs. Ignorance right? Not McCain, but Ignorance. Ignorance will be the only thing that keeps Barack out of the White House.
In your opinion, as you see it. Your opinion is not shared by all. I happen to think this election is between Obama and McCain. Ignorance is no where on the ballot. Maybe if Bush were running again, I'd give you the benefit of the doubt, but McCain is not Bush. I see nothing ignorant with wanting to clarify the history, political views, and qualifications of a candidate running for the most powerful office in the world. In fact, I see it as the duty of every American citizen.
Once again, the left-wing automatically assumes that anyone who opposes Obama has to be an ignorant racist. That we McCain supporters are too stupid and racist to truly appreciate Obama's incredible lack of military and foreign policy experience. That we are too ignorant to recognize Obama's "share the wealth" as the socialism it truly is. That we must be racist to insist on verifying Obama's citizenship qualification, as specified in the constitution. Couldn't you get a dig in on religious zealots?
Your Obama vs. ignorance logic may work among leftists, but it won't sway anyone with a brain and a desire to think for themselves. Or is that only something you Obama supporters do? You sound as bigotted as Canuck.
Just a Hillary-supporter, who's still crying the blues. Wahh-Wahh-Wahhh.
And THIS is why the entire judical system is backlogged: because of stupid morons like this, who have nothing better to do with taxpayers money (as well as get a little infamy out of it). That's it. That's all.
And the people that actually buy into this shit, let alone give it an OUNCE of credibility?
Well......it's not hard to see why the GOP (as anyone now knows it) has only a week to live.
Sooo...you cite these articles as fact? Unbiased fact?
And, Fox News is biased.
And, you are not a bigot because you side with a dimwit who suggests that the only reason BHO would not be elected is ignorance.
At least bigotry is not as lonely as it once was.
so this is the worst they could dig up on Obama? I don't understand how this affects his credibility at all. Even if this obscure shit is true, some one please give me a good reason why this would hinder his ability to run the country.
If he's not truly a US citizen, he is unable to be US president. Its just a formality really, written right there in the constitution... well... nobody reads that old rag anymore...
While this is correct it is another of the outdated laws you should get rid of, along with the indirect voting system that was fine for a large country with no long distance infrastructure but is inadequate for a modern nation.
If some law is passed, or some official elected, in clear violation of the US costitution, the supreme court can strike it down as unconstitutional. That is the law, and the US only functions based on rule of law.
As for any violation of the constitution supposedly committed by Bush, that is the job of the legislative and judicial branches of government, to be a check on Bush's power. The supreme court can rule a law uncontitutional, such as the patriot act, if it was. (which I disagree). Congress and the senate could impeach Bush if they had a valid reason, which they haven't done yet, and I can only attribute that to Nancy Pelosi's secret love for Bush.
So if you really believe Bush did anything unconstitutional, you should hold Bush accountable, but you should also hold your democrat controlled congress and senate accountable. However, I disagree with you, that Bush did anything unconstitutional, and possibly the congress and senate disagree with you to.
GWB was 35 and a natural born US citizen, that's what technically qualified him to run for president of the US. The rest you can blame on both political parties, for not providing us better choices to vote for.
Streamy, Bug, Do you guys enjoy taunting each other? I mean if both sides enjoy it, by all means, be my guests! Myself, I find it rather tiresome. I see two reasonably intelligent people, of different political beliefs (one right and one wro... left ;-) taking potshots at each other all day long. Bug, I'm not sure you endear yourself to others (other than Canuck) by constantly mocking Streamos religious believes, whatever they are.
For what it's worth I have no time for Stweem'O'Bullshit because he's a smug, self congratulatory twat who thinks the world was built in 6 days, fails to understand that america has illegally invaded iraq under international law, cannot give a woman the right to chose to give birth, feels that the US administration is in no way imperialist, pretends that he's not a supporter of Bush yet loves and supports all he's done, admits that the republicans have been spineless and ball-less yet will STILL vote for them... the list goes on
His CONSTANT defense of the invasion of Iraq and the current 'surge' goes along similar lines to words Kruschev (leader of the Union of Soviet SOCIALIST Republics, otherwise known as the USSR) who once said, "to make an omelette one has to crack eggs"
...and Syweem'O'Bullshit's rallying cry of late has been that Obama is a socialist???
"For what it's worth I have no time for Stweem'O'Bullshit"
Well for what its worth, I've never heard Streamo talk about creation, not that his opinion would affect my view of him. I happen to agree that Iraq was legally invaded, based on several UN resolutions that Saddam had violated. I've never heard him say anything about abortion, and while I might disagree, I certainly can't hold it against somebody for having strong opinions on abortion. I don't think their is a clear right answer on abortion.
No Bush supporter truly loves everything Bush has done. Most of us (I'm halfway in there) are really pissed at him for not securing the borders properly, for not handling the post-war execution in Iraq properly, for not letting US troops capture bin Laden at Tora Bora, for creating a 10 trillion dollar debt, etc. You don't have to agree with everything your leaders do, to still chose them over the other side. I'm pissed at Republicans, they had majority in senate and congress, with a republican president, and got nothing done. I can only hope the democrats will be so effective when they get power. Now I wouldn't vote for Cheney. But McCain is not Bush.
Kruschev wasn't nearly so bad a guy as Stalin. I would say Obama has more in common with Kruschev than Bush does. Just because you don't agree with Streamo, doesn't mean you should disrespect him or his opinion.
HD, you are relatively new here, streamy has done his part to lose all respect of the long timers, including myself. When I said I am not discussing with him but rather make him look even more stupid I meant that.
Look up the old threads if you are so inclined. He is a young earth creationist who tries to argue with maybe fifth grade science to explain his world view, to his chagrin he has to face a couple people here who finished the higher classes.
Bug, I'll take you at your word on that. But just because a man's opinion on one topic is wrong, doesn't mean his opinion on every topic is wrong. I'm sure you guys weren't too gentle on him for his beliefs, and probably made yourself strong enemies right from the get go. Now you're opinion on history and politics is wrong, but I don't think that makes you a bad person!
Lets say Streamo wasn't a science major, he might be a friggin professor of history and political science for all you know. History being only recorded history after all. Scientific education may not sway his beliefs, that doesn't make him stupid, that makes him devoted. But he doesn't sound like a crusading zealot to me, and I support taking out fanatical extremists of all kinds.
Maybe so, but do Canuck and yourself not excel at name calling? I'm sure you guys worked yourself into a frenzy. I figured out that was not my preferred path. People won't listen to your reasoning, if you're busy insulting them.
So if Streamo was a biology major, he's probably studied enough creations of God or evolution to have a reasonable opinion on them. Bailing out of school isn't always washing out, sometimes life gives you an opportunity you need to take. Personal trainers might get to train some pretty hot women... ;-)
So Bug, what is your personal history and education for comparison? I better hear PHD in astro-physics and natural sciences, or I just might be dissappointed.
Subject: Interesting Political Slant from the UKSubject: Brits have a way with the language
"You have to pinch yourself - a Marxist radical who all his life has been mentored by, sat at the feet of, worshiped with, befriended, endorsed the philosophy of, funded and been in turn funded, politically promoted and supported by a nexus comprising black power anti-white racists, Jew-haters, revolutionary Marxists, unrepentant former terrorists and Chicago mobsters, is on the verge of becoming President of the United States. And apparently it's considered impolite to say so."
Be aware of the political leanings of the title before assuming this is a ground swell of opinion in the Sceptred Isle. Spectator's a respected but incredibly right wing title so it's bound to take a swipe at Obama.
You're right though, it's a nicely written little dig
It's not a widely held view though. Most recent poll suggests 66% in favour of Obama
The general populace understand he represents much more that is good than McInsane does
Honestly, both of them suck in my opinion just like the last two elections. Bush/Gore, Bush/Kerry, and now McCain/Obama ... We haven't had anybody to really pick from. When that happens, I side with the lesser of two evils (my opinion of course) ... Which tends to be Republican, mainly because they don't want to invade every facet of my life, and they don't want to take more money from me to fix other peoples problems including other nations that take the money and then continue to diss us afterwards. And mako, polls are only as good as the people who produce them. Just like news articles. It was just a copy and paste of something that made a very good point.
You might be interested in a facebook group some of my friends and I are in, "Coastal Elites for Sarah Palin."
Description: Do you find yourself telling your squash partner to call you 'Barracuda' during a match? Have you set aside a weekend for 'snow machining' when you winter in Vail? When someone asks you to make his martini extra dry, do you respond 'you betcha'? During your last pheasant walk-up, did you stop to consider that moose hunting might be a good change of pace? Upon seeing Sen. McCain introduce Gov. Palin, did you announce, 'Well, Dorothy Parker sure got that one wrong!' If so, this group is for you.
PS - (the Dorothy Parker gag only understandable to those with an edcuation from a superior college - we are the elite after all...)
Tin Foil Hats? That's a giveaway. If you don't wear tin foil hats, then you must be trustworthy. THats a high bar. Barack Obama is from Mars. I read it some where. I wrote it down , then I read it. Must be true..
Must say.....Helldiver is a well-spoken and welcome addition to the always interesting exchanges between intelligent people of different views.
One must admire his willingness to confront the inestimable Canuck and the redoubtable Bugster.
I have much enjoyed the exchanges, and if I were to judge, I'd have to lean toward the HD side....tho Bug maintains his usual competent style. Canuck slips somewhat due to his rather peripatetic dashes from one citation to another, which tend to wear out the reader of these posts.
Good to see Streamy back online, and not so much evangelizing, yet still firm in his convictions.
Mako has interspersed interesting comments, but probably should know he loses some traction when trivializing the US constitution.
And welcome Mickle, who seems ready to exchange barbs with his Canadian counterparts...and not resorting to crudity in the process (unless I missed something - don't feel like reviewing this whole thread to confirm that, but my impression is that the Mick person fights cleanly).
Chaz, my thoughts are in-line with yours. I've read through this whole string (as I rub my eyes) and what a ride it's been LOL! Some good reading for sure and not one childish moron in sight...wonderful! You all made my evening, thank you!
-Thanks. Don't know how much I'll bother writing though. Canuk isn't much of a challenge. He's just a child. He's a Canadian Bacon aficionado with the intellect of a high school history teacher that just never quite made it. Doesn't listen to reason, because he has none. In one of my postings I answered his question multiple times... yet he acted as if I hadn't I've gathered from reading other posts here that's something he likes to do. Also he loves linking news articles etc ... showing his lack of real devotion to much... let others do the talking because he's lazy. That's where the democrat in him shines like a bright star.
I noticed he responds to nearly every post about him and very quickly too... He probably doesn't have a job... we should feel sorry for him I guess. I mean maybe Glumbert is all he has. Poor wittle guy. :/ I wish there was something I could do... Well when Obama is in power, taxes will go up and I guess I'll have plenty of opportunity to support his kind. I just wish he'd do something more valuable with his time.
Randal....sorry, didn't mean to overlook your often-entertaining observations, but you were a bit late to this party and this thread was the focus of my note.
Libations...? Hey, I'm all for a bit of the grape, corn squeezin's, JD, the essence of potato or juniper......but not quite as early in the day as my post yesterday (but not long after).
Given we have been working together for the last ten years I will let this pass, only and unless you drop some of that moonshine off at my desk in ten...
Mickle....you're an interesting new voice, but don't for a moment underestimate the C-man. When in good "voice", he can be exceptionally well spoken, supporting firm opinions with fact. Don't be deceived by his free-swinging blue-collar ("Joe six-pack"?) style...he likes being one of the boys and do his rough-house trick all the time....but this belies a pretty sharp intellect. He can be very precise and compelling when he chooses. You can fault him for being a bit over-the-top dramatic sometimes, a bit too earthy for some, and posting links to other sites too often...you'll have a lot of company on these points. But simple he is not. If you engage him in a contest of criticism or crudity, you just might find yourself outgunned.
But please continue any way you'd like....it makes for entertaining reading in any event.
Cman - it occurs to me that I often speak of you and not so often to you. I enjoy it when you are active here....whether or not I agree with what you say or how you say it, you are a unique spark on these threads, adding a prodigious amount of color to what can sometimes be a bland site. I know I don't have to encourage your continued contributions, as you seem to be more than just a little dedicated to maintaining a personna here...just wanted to say thanks for the energy you bring to every post.
And now, excuse me while I libate a bit...it's Randal's idea.
Bug was critisizing my understanding of Hitler and refuting the Socialist "qualities" of Obama.
I responded, (on the Extreme hate mail" thread.
The history of your country (Germany) is history, clear. It is your history, the USA is trying to avoid.
You (Bug) said, " Like most US Americans of your kind you lack any understanding of what the Third Reich really was and what was going on here. "
Well, holy mackeral, enlighten me. BUT, don't skip the part where Germany is devastated by a war they started, WW1, and that after that war, the economy was in the crapper. The Mark was almost worthless and people were in desperate straits. Then along comes an angry wouldbe artist, that worms his way into the arms of unhappy Germans. He tells them what they need to hear, but his motives are twisted. They accept him as a way to get out of their terrible situation. Anything to "change" things.
Many atrocities Hitler commits, like assassinating the Army Generals that supported him, because he was inspiring the people. The killings were kept secret from the people until it no longer mattered. Hitler was appointed by the Kaiser ( correction Hindenberg) to a lower office (Chancelor) , because the Hindenberg saw the influence Hitler had and he felt he could control Adolf better. Hitler continued to rise, the details of which are not critical.
After Hitler had developed his Black shirts or brown shirts, groups used to intimidate anyone who spoke against him, there was little anyone could do. HE WAS RIGHT, period. Mass rallies, like Nurenberg, simply promoted the angry little maniac to places he was never supposed to go, as the world later saw. and many died because of it.
Hitler changed everyone's focus by going after the Jews and blaiming them for Germany's situation. He used religious reasoning to add credibility to his ruse. The Jews were then the scapegoat for Germans, even though their own wrong choices (WW1) brought disaster to their country. WW2 was another result of their looking for answers to their situation in the wrong place, as we have discussed in the "Museum" thread.
Yes, there were desperate times. Yes, the Germans were suffering. Yes, desperate people do desperate things. Of course, they were just stupid??? (Bug said previously) I said, ONLY hindsight allows you the priviledge of that shallow observation.
Maybe you do not think our situation compares to back then.
1. Our economy (in a realative sense) is in dire straits. Many have lost big bucks, money they live on, from investment accounts.
2. Bank credit is at a standstill, because of rules at the Fed and bad credit extentions.
3. Realestate values have dropped greatly, causing banks to be forced to re-evaluate loans vs colateral, forcing people to come up with cash they do not have.
4. New housing has stopped, new car sales have slowed dramatically, fuel prices drove up the cost of food, besides the cost of an individual getting to work. The dollars required to meet additional food and fuel cost, blew the top off of budgets throught the USA. All of this adds up to lost jobs, lost income which exaserbates the situation.
5. Along comes an articulate black man, who hangs out with angry men. They see something in him that inspires them to promote his attempts to join the political system. He is a socialist in fundamental beliefs but hides it from the public for now.
6. Supporters threaten to sue anyone that says anything wrong about him.
7. He is associated with an organization that attempts to register people to vote for him, all the time declaring non-partisan statis. Their efforts are found to be fraudulent, across many states. Nothing is done about it.
8. As his confidence rises because of the propaganda of a media that is totally bias toward him, he and his running mate become more bold in what they say.
9. There is a real sense of something being wrong. It demands a question. "Who is this guy and why,..are so many people going nuts over him? He lacks experience, he hangs with known Socialists, even his religious connections are strongly prejudice and anti-American.
10. Observation of his champaign rallies indicates massive followings for a relative unknown. His retoric is exactly what they want to hear. They swoon, as in Germany.
11. As the voting day approaches, he and his VP running mate, growing confident, make statements each that expose what they really want to do and who they really are. Just like in WW2, their oponents grasp these mistakes and launch an agressive effort to save the war (election).
Obama is not like Hitler yet. That is the point. Hitler did not become Hitler, until after he was enabled by the power of his political position. Then the system served to meet his demands. Sure he shared his thoughts in Mine Kamph, but political power was the ingredient that was missing.
Bug called me a Fascist Christian.
Fascists operate under dictators. Just incase you have not looked it up lately.
That is what we are fighting against, dictators. We give a lot of power to our President. Once in place, it is too late if we are wrong in our choice.
You might be mistaking Jesus for a dictator. To bad you have totally misunderstood Him. What dictator do you know that died for his constituents, so he could be dictator?????
Dear mimmow, you better watch out. That fish you see on peoples cars is going to swallow you up one day. That sounds bad. It actually is good.
Of course, "shut the fuck up ", that is what you want. That is your only hope.
Salt in an open wound hurts.
MC
The Lawyer may be a nut. Or he is acting for others as most Lawyers do. The fact that he has worked for the Dem's may say something. Maybe he will appeal.
No matter what, DO NOT VOTE FOR OBAMA. Then we can still have these little discussions.
MC, you do have a good grasp of history. I disagree that Obama has such maniac tendencies. However, I'd like to believe our balance of power and checks and balances, would prevent a Hitler from ever rising to power here. Although many will claim Bush is as bad, Bush has faced a constant threat of impeachment for some time, and has remained only because no one can clearly prove he did anything illegal. I'd like to believe Americans first ammendment rights to free speech will always be honored, or fought for. And that we would take to the streets to kick the asses of any brown shirters here, a good reason to keep the second ammendment.
So while all democracies should be ever vigilant against the slide to facism, I don't see it happening on Obama's watch. That doesn't mean I'm voting for Obama, but he's not the antichrist. I do realize that if you expressed an reasoning based on your religious beliefs, Bug may not have been kind.
You're STILL a religious zealot retard...k? You have NO clue to your OWN histiry, much less any other nations. And you're literally a joke with every post you make.
HD:
You're just as bad as the retard above, if not worse, because of your own borderline-asinine-torture-loving stupidity, and have not been "right" about ANYTHING.
The only "history" you two limp-dicks know, is whatever happens within whatever backwash town you live in.
So stop embarrassing your fellow countrymen who ARE familiar with the concept of 'history', and take it down the road.
canuck, ease a bit on HD, he has some really wiered opinions, some of them totally nuts, but he is not insane and it is possible to discuss with him.
HD, our dear mountain scrambler, or as I lately started to call him "christian fascist" has no grasp of history. If you agree with him on the twisted German history he presents you have probably seen the same documentaries as he did and also remembered only half of that at best.
He thinks I don't know......but his style and penchant for twisting what I say while backpeddling on everything HE says.....gave him away long, long ago.
Well I don't agree with mountain scrambler's conclusion that Obama is the next Hitler, but we should always be wary of fascism and extremism, whether is be Islamic, German, Evangelical, or Canadian.
His history of Hitler's rise may have left a few holes, but the basic jist is right. Germans didn't wake up one day thinking lets trade our democracy for a crazy dictator, so we can burn jews and conquer the world! Hitler got into power by hiding the crazy until he firmly consolidated power, crushing all opposition. MCs point (or maybe my interpretation) is to be vigilant about slow baby steps towards fanaticism, because it doesn't always start as obvious. Never surrender your freedoms to the government for any reason, because you won't get them back. That includes your financial and health care freedoms.
Canuck, you're just as extremist fanatical as you accuse the other side of being. I clarify my position, because you put words in my mouth. I explain the truth to you, and its twisting your words. You're like a great communist propaganda minister or Herman Goerring. I am against extremists of all kinds, that makes me a threat to you. You do have me all figured out.
Aaaaargh! I am short of resorting to name calling again. HD, the fascinating thing about you is that you speak with the air of absolute truth even if you don't have the foggiest idea about what the topic is. It would actually not hurt too much to just shut up and listen if you don't know shit about something. This is like my 8 year old boy trying to explain the world to me.
Hitler was known for what he was when he came into power. He had written "Mein Kampf" while imprisoned for his attempted coup de etat in 1923, it was published in the 1920s in two parts. The whole country was leaning that way back then and willingly accepted this mad man. Hindenburg was pressed by lobbyists to put Hitler in power in 1933 and he thought that the parliament would be able to control Hitler, he did see Hitler as a means to put a check on the socialist and communist "threat".
Anyone who sees parallels between Germany in the 1930s and the USA today definitely has some serious optical (or mental) problem.
HD, now it is up to you to rewrite history or just tell me that this is the same as MC claimed.
So you're suggesting Germans did wake up one day thinking lets trade our democracy for a crazy dictator, so we can burn jews and conquer the world? That the majority of Germans were leaning toward eugenics, racial superiority, and wanting to eliminate all Jews? You telling me the majority of German citizens in 1939 were that radical and extremist? What does that say about the German people? :-(
While Mein Kampf was out there, I doubt the majority of Germans supported Hitler's agression, barbarism, and the final solution. If they did, I think I might lose my faith in my fellow man. Makes all that bombing seem more worthwhile. I didn't say I fully agreed with MC's history. But I don't see the majority of reasonable, rational people like the Germans deliberately choosing barbarism, murder, and genocide. I have to think there was a fair share of people too afraid to speak against Hitler, by the time they realized what a monster he was. If you're saying all Germans understood what a monster Hitler was, and they all willingly supported him, then I can't agree with you. In fact, I'd say you were probably under-estimating your German ancestors.
Its not like all the jews, homos, political prisoners, and gypsys supported Hitler. You have a situation where Hitler first went after people of "obvious eugenic inferiorty", retarded, cripples, criminals. And the good people of Germany failed to stand up to defend them, failed to fight for the rights of those who couldn't defend themselves. Maybe out of fear, maybe agreement with Hitler and lack of compassion, maybe both. But it only snowballed from there.
The rest of Europe also failed to stand up to Hitler, until it was too late. Diplomacy was the preferred means of containing Hitler, which obviously didn't work, just as it won't work in Iran.
While I might think groups like the ACLU in America are sometimes crazy, other times I'm glad they exist. Somebody has to fight for prisoners right not to be executed, while at the same time supporting abortion and assisted suicide.
Nice to see that you are again mixing topics, this time Hitler and Iran.
No, of course not all of Germany decided to want to establish barbarism on some lazy Sunday morning. That was not the point of this discussion, it started with MC comparing Obama to Hitler based on his very flawed knowledge of German history. I am not going to waste my time explaining how it came to Nazi Germany, that would be way too long and complex, if you are interested in that topic look up some books.
My main point was that neither person nor situation have anything in common at all with the dark age of German history. A person stating such as the very truth of the political situation in the USA is either deranged or does not know what he is talking about (I think both apply in case of our dear christian fascist).
HD: Appreciate the comments. O is a socialist. THAT is what I am afraid of.
Bush will end up being the guy who saved our country from the enemy. Already the military is agreeing that if we were not in Iraq. Whatever we did before would have been negated by the bad guys running there. Now we have at least one backstop to push them up against hopefully.
Don't get me wrong. Most conservatives had far greater hopes in Bush. Looking at all he has had to deal with, stage presense or not, we have not been attached. Also the market was at 15,000 up until four or five weeks ago. Why did the economic turn happen then, instead of a few days from now?
Remember, the Fed loves being paid taxes. They hate the idea of a Fair tax. They would be out. Eventually we would be out from under them. This turmoil keeps us distracted, so a socialist can be elected to change our money to Euro's. Move away from Israel. MAny other unpleasant things.
No he's not the anti-christ, he's was just born on Krypton, (gag) as he put it. Of course Superman was a type of Christ. Supernatural powers, from a far off place, heard everything, even from afar. Hum?
Ya lost me there MC, can you clarify this:
"Already the military is agreeing that if we were not in Iraq. Whatever we did before would have been negated by the bad guys running there. Now we have at least one backstop to push them up against hopefully. "
You're kinda losing me on this to:
"Remember, the Fed loves being paid taxes. They hate the idea of a Fair tax. They would be out. Eventually we would be out from under them. This turmoil keeps us distracted, so a socialist can be elected to change our money to Euro's. "
I'd support a fair tax, but I'm not feeling too abused by the Feds. Are you saying this turmoil is created by the Feds?
It is a good thing I am not a plane, cause you crack me up!!!
See, you're wrong. I am right about that!
History is a concept huh? Yah sure, any ting you say. Ve foreigners from Ohio don know not ting, ve know not ting, mine hair :-0... :-) oops a bout dat, mine herr. ( ya dat vas very funny ya, don you tink so zie Hell diver?)
Ah my dear cawack, you are too funny to be stupid.
Cawack is a far more marketable moniker. More descriptive of your product.
PS to HD: Clinton did it and was let off. Impeachment for Bush?
Ever see the Clinton Chronicles?
Later, MC
Please, everybody, DO NOT VOTE FOR A SOCIALIST. WHAT DID AYRES SEE IN OBAMA?
"I'd have all deluded religious fruitcakes like you locked up in mental asylum, in a heartbeat. The we'd see if J.C. would airlift your sorry ass out of THAT one, you dumb peasant."
Wow Canuck, a new low even for you! You've managed to so suscinctly express your views of religious bigottry, stalinistic tendencies towards the repression of basic human rights, and your elitist class mentality all in two short sentences.
MC, I'm getting a bit lost in your argument and reasoning, and I'm definately the only sympathetic ear in this thread. What are you trying to say? Clinton did what? I did not see the Clinton Chronicles, catchy title though. If you're truly crazy, we'll figure it out soon enough. ;-)
"No brains....no entry", I like that rule, we should impose this here on Glumbert :)
Though could be a slogan for a zombie party too :))
Afraid I won't make it to your party though, but you can be sure I am going to have a really good single malt on the new president if the outcome is what it looks like now.
Well you're wife's proxy vote may cancel out my vote, but my wife's vote for McCain tilts the balance. I still think your wife secretly voted for McCain, and just didn't have the heart to tell you! Please pass along my respects to your wife, and kindly ask her to increase your meds.
Sorry about the confusion. " Bush will end up being the guy who saved our country from the enemy. .."
In all this crap that is going on I was reflecting back to the person being blaimed for everything it seems. I believe he did the right thing in Iraq.
There has been a news report commenting on Military Leadership saying that going into Iraq after Afganistan, not only got rid of Sadam but since the "Surge", going there has created a backstop for the future efforts now required in Afganistan. The bad guys will be penned in, until they meet Ala.
About the Feds. The Feds are a source of money. We borrow from them. Our taxes until recently were paid to the Federal Reserve. Control of our economy has been in their hands. As the Fed goes, so goes the economy.
When Bush senior was running the second time, He and Clinton had attended a meeting in Europe. Do not recall at this time if it was Bildergerg, CFA, or World Monetary Fund. As Bush exited the meeting, he expressed he was confident that his success in first term would assure his second victory.
Little did he know that those same people had someone else in mind. Along comes Ross Perot who was not going to run but did anyway at the prompting of the Rockefellers, who were responsible for the massive fortune he had made since meeting them. Perot steals enough votes to throw the election to Clinton.
Yes it sounds conspiratorial. My point is the Fed is made up of guys who protect themselves first. The Europeans have already expressed a need for everyone to get on the same monitary page. One currency.
Also, the fair tax would simplify things beyond belief. As you know, the vast majority of the IRS would be rendered useless, ..gone. The Fed is effected. Should we no longer need their money, they would not be collecting the interest on billions, as they have been. The other monitary powers in the world would be stronger than them.
HD: Don't mind my wacky response to Cawack. He and I are old friends from the Museum thread. ( ya dat vas very funny ya, don you tink so zie Hell diver?)
I am so glad to find someone who even hints at a sympathetic position, I just had to include you in my (Sargent Schultz) gag. It is the only way to deal with his crap and remain civil.
Clinton Chronicles: Clintons before becoming Pres. Drugs, Murder, Sex, associations, dead security guys, whistle blowers. Film was created under covering of Baptist preacher that recently died, Jerry Falwell.
Well thanks for the clarification. I haven't been overly concerned about some FED conspiracy; However, I sure don't like the idea of placing billions of dollars under the control of the treasurer, with very little control. I am against this bailout.
I'm no longer overly concerned about Obama's citizenship. He was born in Hawaii. What came after, I don't care about.
Bush may turn out to have done a great thing, through the lens of history, we'll see. I supported the invasion of Iraq, I do not think Bush made great decisions in the post war phase. Bush's mistakes in post war planning, cost the lives of our soldiers. That is an unforgiveable blunder, I won't soon forget.
I think you are right about decisions made. Rummy messed up. It is too bad Bush trusted him as much as he did. Also, I think at times our troops have had their hands tied. THAT to me should never happen, except after a war is basically over and enemy surender is iminent.
I wonder if Osama bin Laden will catch it from his Saudi brothers for ordering attacks on oil installations. Maybe now they will do their own laundry.
Comments (276)
To post a comment, you need to login or signup.