Please read the follow up comments as well. Cheersunnamednewbie13 wrote:
Kinf of precludes debate and serious talk. If this is the case, it should've gone in 'Not BF2S, Not BF2'.The_Shipbuilder wrote:
...don't waste your breath.
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- A moment of silence for Rove's and Cheney's underwear.
Oh please. I'm sure your life here is horrible because of what our country has done for you.Marinejuana wrote:
Colfax get over it. The administration has fed our country so much propaganda, lies, smokescreens, and other bullshit that the majority of us do not believe any of this fabricated garbage belongs in a "serious" debate forum. Insisting that the president's defenses be taken seriously, or even coming to the defense of the president yourself, I think is something like playing devil's advocate for Hitler. Both of them killed people to expand their power and influence. End of story. It really angers me to think of how many otherwise friendly Americans will suspend their judgements on a man like the president while he is guilty of dropping bombs on people for money(the oil economy). He is a criminal. Sort of like Saddam Hussein but on a giant global scale.
http://everything2.com/index.pl?node=Godwin's%20Law
The Law is generally used on Usenet as an indicator of whether a thread has gone on too long, who's playing fair and who's just slinging mud, and who finally gets to "win" the discussion. It has, over time, become the closest thing to an impartial moderator that Usenet can get.
So, what this means in practical terms:
If someone brings up Nazis in general conversation when it wasn't necessary or germane without it necessarily being an insult, it's probably about time for the thread to end.
If someone brings up Nazis in general conversation when it was vaguely related but is basically being used as an insult, the speaker can be considered to be flaming and not debating.
If someone brings up Nazis in any conversation that has been going on too long for one of the parties, it can be used as a fair excuse to end the thread and declare victory for the other side.
So thank you, Bush and the Conservatives win. The truth is, people like this will frame anything a person says to fit their agenda. Did you completely forget the part where he says "Nobody's ever said that Iraq ordered 9/11." ? Do you think that at some point he said they DID this? If you think so please find the quote from a reliable source (For example, not drudgereport or MadTV) and prove it. Otherwise you're just twisting what he's saying to look deceitful and dishonest. He never made a claim that Saddam planned 9/11. If you'd like to argue that Iraq had nothing to do with terrorism, please be my guest but you've got a long road ahead of you. The question wasn't "Did Iraq support Terrorism?" The question was "Did Iraq have anything to do with the 9/11 attack?". Please, for the sake of intelligent discussion, pay attention.
How fortunate that the last of the three does not apply, as the discussion had, arguably, not even started. Some would say it's because of my magic comment which disabled any possible reply.Not wrote:
Oh please. I'm sure your life here is horrible because of what our country has done for you.Marinejuana wrote:
Colfax get over it. The administration has fed our country so much propaganda, lies, smokescreens, and other bullshit that the majority of us do not believe any of this fabricated garbage belongs in a "serious" debate forum. Insisting that the president's defenses be taken seriously, or even coming to the defense of the president yourself, I think is something like playing devil's advocate for Hitler. Both of them killed people to expand their power and influence. End of story. It really angers me to think of how many otherwise friendly Americans will suspend their judgements on a man like the president while he is guilty of dropping bombs on people for money(the oil economy). He is a criminal. Sort of like Saddam Hussein but on a giant global scale.
http://everything2.com/index.pl?node=Godwin's%20Law
The Law is generally used on Usenet as an indicator of whether a thread has gone on too long, who's playing fair and who's just slinging mud, and who finally gets to "win" the discussion. It has, over time, become the closest thing to an impartial moderator that Usenet can get.
So, what this means in practical terms:
If someone brings up Nazis in general conversation when it wasn't necessary or germane without it necessarily being an insult, it's probably about time for the thread to end.
If someone brings up Nazis in general conversation when it was vaguely related but is basically being used as an insult, the speaker can be considered to be flaming and not debating.
If someone brings up Nazis in any conversation that has been going on too long for one of the parties, it can be used as a fair excuse to end the thread and declare victory for the other side.
Excellent! Then congratulations to them, and ice cream for everyone!Not wrote:
So thank you, Bush and the Conservatives win.
The man himself is a joke. I think he looks less moron when he is impersonated in SNL. I can't believe there's still people defending this guy. He's one of the greatest frauds of America's history. All of you who defend him, should feel shame for yourselves for having such a president. Cmon dude, wake up. This isn't a conspiracy theory like you always say. This is natural him. I'm surprised this guy sold so much bullshit and so many people bougth his propaganda. Pray for an impeachment or just wait til 08. This guy belongs to jail.
And exactly who are you to be telling Americans how we should feel about our own president? I'm sure Argentina gets the full picture in the news there.
And no, the debate hadn't begun. Not because of your "Magic Powers" that I'm sure half of San Francisco knows all about, but because you state the case in a way that doesn't open a debate. Posting propaganda has nothing to do with beginning a level discussion.
And no, the debate hadn't begun. Not because of your "Magic Powers" that I'm sure half of San Francisco knows all about, but because you state the case in a way that doesn't open a debate. Posting propaganda has nothing to do with beginning a level discussion.
Last edited by Not (2006-08-21 17:43:40)
Oh shush, Godwins law is a joke (literally, its meant to be humerous) and applies strictly to Usenet.Not wrote:
http://everything2.com/index.pl?node=Godwin's%20Law
Besides, we have our own guidelines in this forum, they're in a sticky.
You know dude, the world with cable tv, sat tv, internet now is too small. I don't need to be there to know some shit. Besides, I have american relatives, I get some info. I don't have super powers, I have brains, an item not many people is using very frequently. And I'm free to give my opinion. If you don't like it disagree like an adult, stop whinning.Not wrote:
And exactly who are you to be telling Americans how we should feel about our own president? I'm sure Argentina gets the full picture in the news there.
And no, the debate hadn't begun. Not because of your "Magic Powers" that I'm sure half of San Francisco knows all about, but because you state the case in a way that doesn't open a debate. Posting propaganda has nothing to do with beginning a level discussion.
This is an interview former Treasure Secretary of Bush gov. gave to CNN. Read what he said about why US was planning to attack Iraq.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/01/10/oneill.bush/
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/01/10/oneill.bush/
*rim shot*Not wrote:
And no, the debate hadn't begun. Not because of your "Magic Powers" that I'm sure half of San Francisco knows all about
*cymbal crash*
After your eloquent recitation of Godwin's Law, I'd thought you might have been the sort to avoid ad homenim attacks.
Let's see how you did.
I give you 5 points for using my location against me - it shows RELEVANCE. But I subtract 2 for using San Francisco instead of Los Angeles. Same... state I guess, I'll give you that, but you might try to take the extra few seconds to conjure up something that might actually annoy me. Some sort of riff on "hollywood liberals" or something equally hilarious.
You are also docked 1 point for the implied gay joke. Not because I'm uptight, but because it's old. I want EDGY, I want CREATIVE. Perhaps next time.
So 3 points! Keep going, because at 50 points you get ice cream!
Has it come this far, that public display of the president's own unedited words is an act considered propaganda against him?Not wrote:
Posting propaganda has nothing to do with beginning a level discussion.
Ladies and gentlemen, I believe we have hit Rock Bottom.
His own unedited words against him are fine. But when you choose to emphasize only the part of that interview that makes him look bad, and ignore the facts, you fail. If you'd spend half as much time thinking about what you're saying as you do coming up with sarcastic remarks to sell your point, reasonable people might believe you.The_Shipbuilder wrote:
*rim shot*Not wrote:
And no, the debate hadn't begun. Not because of your "Magic Powers" that I'm sure half of San Francisco knows all about
*cymbal crash*
After your eloquent recitation of Godwin's Law, I'd thought you might have been the sort to avoid ad homenim attacks.
Let's see how you did.
I give you 5 points for using my location against me - it shows RELEVANCE. But I subtract 2 for using San Francisco instead of Los Angeles. Same... state I guess, I'll give you that, but you might try to take the extra few seconds to conjure up something that might actually annoy me. Some sort of riff on "hollywood liberals" or something equally hilarious.
You are also docked 1 point for the implied gay joke. Not because I'm uptight, but because it's old. I want EDGY, I want CREATIVE. Perhaps next time.
So 3 points! Keep going, because at 50 points you get ice cream!Has it come this far, that public display of the president's own unedited words is an act considered propaganda against him?Not wrote:
Posting propaganda has nothing to do with beginning a level discussion.
Ladies and gentlemen, I believe we have hit Rock Bottom.
Also if I got 5 points for using your location, was docked 2 for using San Fran, and another one for an implied gay joke...how do I end up with 3 points? Is that the new math the liberals are teaching people? The logic your calculations provide rivals the logic you use in your political views.
Last edited by Not (2006-08-21 18:20:36)
At what point was I whining? I support your right to an opinion, but to tell me what to believe in my own country when you have nothing to do with it is just not acceptable. I don't proclaim to know anything about Argentinian politics, and even if I 'researched' them, it would be far from first-hand experience. Calling people who support their own country idiots is a pretty harsh thing to do when you don't live there.sergeriver wrote:
You know dude, the world with cable tv, sat tv, internet now is too small. I don't need to be there to know some shit. Besides, I have american relatives, I get some info. I don't have super powers, I have brains, an item not many people is using very frequently. And I'm free to give my opinion. If you don't like it disagree like an adult, stop whinning.Not wrote:
And exactly who are you to be telling Americans how we should feel about our own president? I'm sure Argentina gets the full picture in the news there.
And no, the debate hadn't begun. Not because of your "Magic Powers" that I'm sure half of San Francisco knows all about, but because you state the case in a way that doesn't open a debate. Posting propaganda has nothing to do with beginning a level discussion.
I do believe him. And I think I'm reasonable people or may be not, or perhaps, or who knows, or wtf are we discussing here?Not wrote:
His own unedited words against him are fine. But when you choose to emphasize only the part of that interview that makes him look bad, and ignore the facts, you fail. If you'd spend half as much time thinking about what you're saying as you do coming up with sarcastic remarks to sell your point, reasonable people might believe you.The_Shipbuilder wrote:
*rim shot*Not wrote:
And no, the debate hadn't begun. Not because of your "Magic Powers" that I'm sure half of San Francisco knows all about
*cymbal crash*
After your eloquent recitation of Godwin's Law, I'd thought you might have been the sort to avoid ad homenim attacks.
Let's see how you did.
I give you 5 points for using my location against me - it shows RELEVANCE. But I subtract 2 for using San Francisco instead of Los Angeles. Same... state I guess, I'll give you that, but you might try to take the extra few seconds to conjure up something that might actually annoy me. Some sort of riff on "hollywood liberals" or something equally hilarious.
You are also docked 1 point for the implied gay joke. Not because I'm uptight, but because it's old. I want EDGY, I want CREATIVE. Perhaps next time.
So 3 points! Keep going, because at 50 points you get ice cream!Has it come this far, that public display of the president's own unedited words is an act considered propaganda against him?Not wrote:
Posting propaganda has nothing to do with beginning a level discussion.
Ladies and gentlemen, I believe we have hit Rock Bottom.
what a fucking idiot, i cant believe he is the president of our country
Wait, don't express so freely, according to some people the debate is about to begin in any moment.CommieChipmunk wrote:
what a fucking idiot, i cant believe he is the president of our country
IGATOR591957 wrote:
I miss having a President.PRiMACORD wrote:
I miss having a president who knows how to speak properly.
Lets play pyramid!
thinkmessfeeder wrote:
IGATOR591957 wrote:
I miss having a President.PRiMACORD wrote:
I miss having a president who knows how to speak properly.
Lets play pyramid!
Serge, I believe that you're somewhat reasonable as well. Please let me say, I don't think this administration is perfect. You can look up several of my recent posts to confirm that. I'm overall terribly disappointed in the way this country is being run. I'm not really even a Bush supporter myself. This administration hasn't really made anybody happy.sergeriver wrote:
I do believe him. And I think I'm reasonable people or may be not, or perhaps, or who knows, or wtf are we discussing here?Not wrote:
His own unedited words against him are fine. But when you choose to emphasize only the part of that interview that makes him look bad, and ignore the facts, you fail. If you'd spend half as much time thinking about what you're saying as you do coming up with sarcastic remarks to sell your point, reasonable people might believe you.The_Shipbuilder wrote:
*rim shot*
*cymbal crash*
After your eloquent recitation of Godwin's Law, I'd thought you might have been the sort to avoid ad homenim attacks.
Let's see how you did.
I give you 5 points for using my location against me - it shows RELEVANCE. But I subtract 2 for using San Francisco instead of Los Angeles. Same... state I guess, I'll give you that, but you might try to take the extra few seconds to conjure up something that might actually annoy me. Some sort of riff on "hollywood liberals" or something equally hilarious.
You are also docked 1 point for the implied gay joke. Not because I'm uptight, but because it's old. I want EDGY, I want CREATIVE. Perhaps next time.
So 3 points! Keep going, because at 50 points you get ice cream!
Has it come this far, that public display of the president's own unedited words is an act considered propaganda against him?
Ladies and gentlemen, I believe we have hit Rock Bottom.
However, this thread and its goals are so cliche. The person who started this thread talks about cliche and ad homenum attacks, not bringing up the usual talking points, yet has a "Is Bush an 'Idiot'" signature. Talk about wearing out the talking points!
All I'm saying is that whenever something like this is posted, the words are framed in a way to make the man look ridiculous. If you really, truly understood the details surrounding this interview, and understood HOW he was answering the question, this wouldn't really even be controversial. It's simply because people who hate Bush will look for any opening available to attack him, even if that means twisting recent history.
Last edited by Not (2006-08-21 18:27:35)
lol +1cpt.fass1 wrote:
Man I really think we need to change our laws and have him for 4 more years. I get such a good laugh every day..
You have to forgive me, but I never saw the man giving a true intelligent answer. He's not controversial, he's just a dumbass, and I think America deserves much better than him. I tell you this because I like your country, and I see the shit this guy does everyday. So, I'll always be against anything that has to do with this guy, coz he is fucking America people and when he farts you smell it from any place in the fuckin world.Not wrote:
Serge, I believe that you're somewhat reasonable as well. Please let me say, I don't think this administration is perfect. You can look up several of my recent posts to confirm that. I'm overall terribly disappointed in the way this country is being run. I'm not really even a Bush supporter myself. This administration hasn't really made anybody happy.sergeriver wrote:
I do believe him. And I think I'm reasonable people or may be not, or perhaps, or who knows, or wtf are we discussing here?Not wrote:
His own unedited words against him are fine. But when you choose to emphasize only the part of that interview that makes him look bad, and ignore the facts, you fail. If you'd spend half as much time thinking about what you're saying as you do coming up with sarcastic remarks to sell your point, reasonable people might believe you.
However, this thread and its goals are so cliche. The person who started this thread talks about cliche and ad homenum attacks, not bringing up the usual talking points, yet has a "Is Bush an 'Idiot'" signature. Talk about wearing out the talking points!
All I'm saying is that whenever something like this is posted, the words are framed in a way to make the man look ridiculous. If you really, truly understood the details surrounding this interview, and understood HOW he was answering the question, this wouldn't really even be controversial. It's simply because people who hate Bush will look for any opening available to attack him, even if that means twisting recent history.
Ouch! Nice catch. As my penance, it shall remain unedited.Not wrote:
Also if I got 5 points for using your location, was docked 2 for using San Fran, and another one for an implied gay joke...how do I end up with 3 points? Is that the new math the liberals are teaching people? The logic your calculations provide rivals the logic you use in your political views.
Exactly what does this have to do with the original post?sergeriver wrote:
This is an interview former Treasure Secretary of Bush gov. gave to CNN. Read what he said about why US was planning to attack Iraq.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/01/10/oneill.bush/
Look. The original poster thinks Bush is an idiot. He also seems to think they Bush lied to us about going into Iraq because they planned 9/11.
Please watch this video another time and LISTEN to the question he's asked. He's asked what Iraq had to do with 9/11 specifically. To which he replied "Nothing." This is the truth and it always has been. I don't know what you all thought was going on, but we invaded AFGHANISTAN as a response to 9/11. Not Iraq. Iraq was an agenda completely seperate from 9/11. Yes, it involved terrorism as we were told, but not a direct link to 9/11. So why anyone thinks this makes him look stupid is beyond me. If anything, it makes the people who think this video is big news look stupid. Had you thought this entire time that we were going after bin Laden in Iraq? Judging by some of your responses, I'm sorry to say that yeah, I think that's maybe what was going on in your head for the last few years.
People, get real. Is the war a mistake? Yeah probably, at least I think it is. But this video is just absolutely nothing to get wound up about. It says nothing new that the adminsistation hasn't been saying since the start.
i remember when he farted last time, the fall out was devastating,So, I'll always be against anything that has to do with this guy, coz he is fucking America people and when he farts you smell it from any place in the fuckin world.
i was lucky to have survived.
Those poor mutated men at ground zero. I'll never forget the greusome disfigurement.mafia996630 wrote:
i remember when he farted last time, the fall out was devastating,So, I'll always be against anything that has to do with this guy, coz he is fucking America people and when he farts you smell it from any place in the fuckin world.
i was lucky to have survived.
+10 points!Not wrote:
Look. The original poster thinks Bush is an idiot.
-5 points. I have written nothing to give that impression.Not wrote:
He also seems to think they Bush lied to us about going into Iraq because they planned 9/11.
7 points! 43 more til ICE CREAM
How the fuck is this propaganda.Not wrote:
Posting propaganda has nothing to do with beginning a level discussion.
Thats BUSH speaking and making himself look like a jackass, as usual.
As i once said, effective anti-Bush propaganda occurs whenever he opens his mouth.
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- A moment of silence for Rove's and Cheney's underwear.