What Do You Say to This?
Monday, August 6, 2012
IF YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND THE FOLLOWING, YOU DON'T BELONG HERE, SO KINDLY GET OUT AND STAY OUT.
We welcome Conversation
But without Vituperation.
If your aim is Vilification ––
Other forms of Denigration ––
Unfounded Accusation --
Determined Obfuscation ––
Alienation with Self-Justification ––
We WILL use COMMENT ERADICATION.
Gratuitous Displays of Extraneous Knowledge Offered Not To Shed Light Or Enhance the Discussion, But For The Primary Purpose Of Giving An Impression Of Superiority are obnoxiously SELF-AGGRANDIZING, and therefore, Subject to Removal at the Discretion of the Censor-in-Residence.
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
The person is obviously naive, mentioning "free" stuff. Nothing is free, somebody always pays.ReplyDelete
We have yet to see the effects of #1, but it's already not looking good. And what government program didn't eat up billions more than advertised?
He did end the Iraq war, give him that, but he played with people's lives for political purposes in Afghanistan. Allowing a surge while simultaneously announcing to everyone that we were leaving.
His investments in clean energy have wasted tens of billions of dollars.
Who says making college more available is a good thing? We already have too many people graduating with worthless degrees that have no real education and who can't even employ logical arguments or write complete paragraphs.
Define "fair share."
We are still over 1,000,000 jobs down. President Obama will be the first president in our nation's history to be a net job loser.
What do I say to it?ReplyDelete
Don't Bogart that joint, my friend, pass it over to me!"
That graphic sums up what those who still support Obama are thinking and citing.ReplyDelete
I personally know two such individuals. And any rebuttal that I offer is turned down.
I've decided this: most people are unwilling to or incapable of seeing the big picture. That goes for both Left and Right.
Thinking over this list, it is designed to keep liberals on the reservation. It will not persuade undecided conservative-leaning moderates. These arguments only work on liberals.ReplyDelete
That's very helpful, Kurt. Thank you.ReplyDelete
I have to admit I am flummoxed when faced with this sort of "logic," because none of it is exactly a lie, but the liberal assumption that all this stuff is
A. Good for the country
B. Well-and truly motivated
C. Proof of Obama's efficacy as president
D. Proof that Obama is well-qualified to be president
E. The only presidential actions worth considering
is largely untrue. That it satisfies -- probably more than 50% of -- the voters frankly horrifies me.
Communists have an uncanny ability to make their blandishments appear just, fair, pure and noble. Conservatives unfortunately are less gifted with the power of persuasion, because the deeper realities that concern them are not easily "sold" in shallow, simplistic, seductive terms.
Unfortunately, most people are not the least bit moved or intrigued by subtlety, nor are they capable of looking at things with the faintest semblance of depth.
These arguments only work on liberals"ReplyDelete
Yes, and that underscores a point I've tried to make any number of times in relation to a diversity of topics. That is that very few people want to entertain opinions or give credence to any information that does not affirm their cherished beliefs and smash away at their pet peeves.
That intransigence - that utter intractability -- that eager willingness to rely on Tradition and Superstition -- is probably the single most significant factor in the deterrence of human progress.
I'm voting Socialist.ReplyDelete
... although the list is a demonstration that you can be right/center without being completely Tea Bagger, bat shite, Ayn Rand insane.ReplyDelete
So who is this Marxist candidate you're planning to vote for, Ducky?ReplyDelete
I'm glad you've finally come out of the closet and admitted you support Marxism -- not that it hasn't been patently obvious for years.
Oh and Ducky, I have said many times that I never liked Ayn Rand, because I saw her interviewed numerous times when she first burst upon the scene as a brand new force to reckoned with, and found her personality odious -- dour, arrogant, unfeeling, hyper-judgmental, humorless and harsh, but INSANE? --- certainly NOT!ReplyDelete
Now what are YOUR reasons for making such an outrageous claim?
There's a world of difference between being unattractive and being insane, I should think.
1. The AFA will end up screwing the consumer in the end, because insurers will make up for the massive losses they're about to incur. The problem with the AFA is that it doesn't fix the problem: the problem being the inefficient practice of medicine in this country. Until we change the way medicine is practiced, we'll be stuck with an extra $1.3 trillion tacked on to our deficit.ReplyDelete
2. Unbeknownst to many, George W. Bush actually signed a deal with the Iraqi government in 2008 to widthrawl all US troops from Iraq by 2011.
So Obama basically just followed through with what the Bush Administration already had laid out.
3. Nothing in this world is free. "More accessible," is the better term to use here.
4. The repeal of DADT was actually a really good thing. So I can't really disagree with this one.
5. European and other nations have had a stranglehold on clean energy for a long time. Investing in this would be like opening a hamburger join with the hopes of competing with McDonald's.
6. He should ahve supported education by REPEALING NCLB. Also, more college money is a good thing. He can't really help the fact that colleges are making themselves easier to get into. That is completely out of his and the government's control.
7. They already pay their fair share, but I agree that they are very able to pay more without hurting investment and what not. Trust me, Bill Gates will not feel a thing, nor will he slow down his investment, if he has to pay 5% more in taxes. But the "fair share" verbage is simply used as a gag to get people fired up.
8. I think that we've nearly lost just as many jobs as we've gained so far. Maybe we've slightly edged out job losses? Also, if you look carefully, a large portion of the jobs added are really, really crappy jobs. Sure, we added 40,000 jobs in a month, but when 30,000 of those jobs are at fast food joints and menial labor, that's not really something to be bragging about. Quality over quantity IMO.
Thanks for that excellent, thorough, well-thought-out response, Jack.ReplyDelete
As for paying more in taxes, perhaps the SUPER-rich like Gates, Buffett, Soros, Trump -- and many many more we don't know anything about -- COULD easily afford to do it, but why should they? There is so much WASTE, STUPIDITY and DISHONESTY in the way Washington handles the vastly ample funds they DO get it seems down right immoral to let them have any more than they now get which is already far too much.
I KNOW people who makes upwards of 100K per annum, and they ADMIT their jobs are nothing but a WASTE of MONEY (yours and mine) and TIME.
One of my good friends has been an attorney in the U.S. Patent Office for over 40 years. He told me he spends a great deal of office time making paper airplanes and seeing if he can get them to land in the wastebasket at the opposite end of the room.
He has also admitted that he has to put up with functionally illiterate, lazy, insolent, black "assistants" who produce nothing but can't be fired.
And on and on it goes.
What we REALLY need is to REDUCE the size of government by a good fifty-percent.
It may take ARMED COMBAT to accomplish that.
Thanks for coming by. Hope to see more of you.
Okay, got it Bull Connor.
I have said many times that I never liked Ayn Rand, because I saw her interviewed numerous times when she first burst upon the scene as a brand new force to reckoned with, and found her personality odious -- dour, arrogant, unfeeling, hyper-judgmental, humorless and harsh...ReplyDelete
So Ayn Rand was just like Ducky?
Unfortunately, Canardo, like all Marxists, you live in an illusory world of theoretical "equality" where all people must be regarded as THE SAME regardless of what aberrations, anomalies, disabilities, dysfunction, deviltry or dimwittedness they exhibit in actual fact.ReplyDelete
Living a LIE will never make he LIE turn into TRUTH, Canardo.
Millions have gone to their deaths in a vain attempt to prove otherwise.
Your Ethos is in truth Pathos and in the end will produce nothing but Chaos followed by Thanatos.
Like Ayn Rand or not the parallels to the minds of the marxist/socialist/communists that have invaded the White House and beyond is dead on. The roadmap to wealth redistribution has never worked, outright failed and like true mental illness they keep doing the same things yet they eagerly anticipate a different result.ReplyDelete
As Professor Leonard Peikoff (Ayn Rand's protege if you will and heir to her estate) so correctly pointed out in his book, The Ominous Parallels (a book endorsed by Ayn Ran before her death) there United States political trajectory is in the direction of fascism rather than Marxism.ReplyDelete
The parallels between the United States and the German fascist economic system and the are striking, true, and frightening. The Patriot Act is one example of the points he makes.
The book is well worth the read, and it is still in print. The totalitarian Leninist/Stalinist state is not what we need fear the most. As the book demonstrates in striking ways it is the fascistic economic system and government control of businesses through regulatory fiat that me most need to fear.