Kathaksung caught on camera

I used Bing and I believe it was government waste. The "non-conservative" media is extremely biased to the point of being far left wing radical and I'm talking about the mainstream media. The MSM looks the other way so you cannot find information from them that disparages in any way the Socialist agenda.

I do challenge you however to point out an untruth in the conservative links.

It is unfortunate that the supposedly middle road media is in the tank with "Big Government".

 

That having been said Abalaster you are one of the most reasonable "progressives" I can think of in a long time to have a discussion with. So I will give you this regarding "models". In a perfect world if you remove the unfortunate human factor Communism is quite appealing in its' model form.

Wouldn't you say?

Oh and here is a link from a Libertarian site to get away from Conservative links and draw the same conclusion.

http://boortz.com/govtoutrage/index.html

 

Thank you for the compliment. At what point does the political bullsh*t end and common sense begins? If I were Obama I would've been more in favor of reform than a complete overhaul (something that republicans were willing to do after the bill passed in the congress). Even a moron could see that an economic crisis isn't the right time to spend billions of dollars. The conservatism principle is the better one to follow in difficult times. But heh, I'm all for change man. Insurance companies aren't helping out by raising premiums and contributing to the inflation. Something has got to be done about the people on medicare, they cost billions every year. I think that if we do something about the insurance firms' bureaucracy, that would let more people back on insurance and therefore saving money. Food for thoughts anyway. I've always preferred Hilary "Angry Vagina" Clinton.

 

[size=+2]Awful funny thing to say for someone whom has disgraced his position more often than any other president in history...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fd425zfw5Ew

And not ashamed to repeat his self-belittling actions with yet another country...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kyD_e0Y7FQ

...to the point where even his very mannerisms are brought under the microscope... with our supposed closest ally???

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYLuLEfVNow

Amerika voted for CHANGE - well, it got it. [/size]

Welcome to the world of questionable ethics and principles, people! Heralded by William Jefferson Clinton, and his equally-greedy cunt of a spouse, witness SLAVERY 2.0!!!

Yes, folks!

Be a part of the NEW WAVE of political reform!

Fool yourself into thinking that you actually have a voice!!!

You'd be better served by voting for the following beverage-fueled evening (which, oddly enough, completely personifies our country's political situation):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X4XBepEirPo

Again...

[size=+4]Don't blame me.[/size]

 

Regular fonts would have done it just fine. Besides, I wrote "bowing" in a figurative sense not literal. Bowing used to be popular back in the 1800s, nobody shook hands. Isn't that what you hard conservatives like? A return to the old days? :biggrin:

 

Yeah but you have to remember Obama was raised by hate filled left wing radical parents. His mentors were the likes of Saul Alinsky , Bill Ayers , Jeremiah Wright, real people who are open about their seething hatred for their own country. Once you get into his head you can see these are not accidental, he did not forget his manners with the Queen of England. He hates England and loves third world communist dictators and such. Look who admires Obama it's people like Sean Penn for crying out loud.

 

http://news.ehealthinsurance.com/pr/ehi/document/Cost_and_Benefit_Report_2009.pdf


http://article.nationalreview.com/427740/explaining-obamacare-by-bashing-insurers/paul-howard?page=1

 

Once again the links are to extremly biased websites. I'm starting to think that you're a "sheeple" for the right my friend.

 

abc.com?

OK I get the attack the messenger part, and what about the message now?

 

I love how the response I spent an hour on was somehow lost after I posted it.

Way to promote free speech.

Fuck you.

 

I attack your message, not you. When I see an article with a heading like: "The Truth behind Obamacare". I know that it's pointless to even look at it, the source is biased and it's likely that some of the information is distorted. I like the idea that you call democrats "sheeple", when yourself are a fanboy of the right. You don't question the government, you only question whatever you hate. It's hypocrisy to its purest essence. You don't care about anything else other than anti-democratic rethorics. Even a guy like Barry Goldwater (considered of the greatest conservatives ever) knew that there are good ideas coming from the left, Adam Smith (the father of capitalism) wrote in The Wealth Of Nations that some aspects of "the public benefit" are essential to the prosperity of a country. But guys like Glen Beck or Rush Limbaugh are too caught up in the bullsh*t partisan wars and too busy spreading hatred to realize that it's not all bad. They are in fact, the sheeples that they love to mock on their shows. Sheeples for the left, sheeples for the right. Obama's Idiocracy feeds the ever-hungry mouths of the left and the right's Bullsh*t Machine feeds the ever-hungry mouths of the Tea Baggers. Left or right, sides on the same coin. A big fat sh*t coin.

 

I think Joe better check his ass for bruises, it just got slapped pretty hard.

:biggrin:

 

Once again you avoid attacking the substance of the message and go for the source of the message. "the information is distorted." Now in a different post you speak of ad hominem then are guilty of it yourself. I do not want to hear about the motives of the person making the statement but rather specifically what you disagree with in the statement.

Here is an article from Bloomberg surely your would call Bloomberg "Mainstream" but I will illustrate what I am talking about. If the article is incorrect then I do not have to say "Well this is from Bloomberg obviously it means nothing they have an agenda" I simply need to point out the problem I have with their message.

Obama Aides See ‘Extended Period’ of Unemployment

 

But you're still staring at only one side of the coin. You think that it's all the liberals' fault? No conservative in power ever made a mistake? Ah yes they do, but then you call it "liberal policies". That article you posted basically said that these are tough times and that the white house isn't doing enough about it. Do you think that there is a magic button that Obama obstinately won't push? When an economy is f*cked, it can take years before it's viable again. Giving Obama just over a year to fix it is unrealistic. Even in prime conditions, the short-run of a country is at least a few years. Short-run means that some factors are "frozen" and impervious to change. Such as a rising inflation or the outsourcing of manufacturing jobs.

Listen Joe, I know you're not a bad guy and I usually agree with you when it comes to spending money. But I don't buy the whole "Obama is a communist in disguise" bullsh*t. Disagreeing with Obama doesn't make him a monster.

You really have to come visit me in Canada and take a look at our news media. There is no spin. Can you imagine how refreshing that is? After watching Fox News and being bombarded by images of death and chaos (or Glen Beck's embarrassing on-air crying [WTF?]). I crave having news read to me by a stone-faced anchorman that doesn't give me a piece of his mind. They leave the decision making to us. Really, I mean it. Come on down to Manitoba and see for yourself how different our cultures are.

That's why you and I can't get along. You have that crazed American gung-ho attitude. No offense intended. We are more passive and cool-headed. Some call us pussies but it's more about living and let live. When the government piss us off we don't create militias or Tea Parties. We simply vote them out. How hard is that?

 

The first sentence

WTF the sheeple will thing the unemployeement did not reach 9.7 until February!

Well no fuckin shit Sherlock Holmes. How did you come across that clue did you have to use your magnifying glass? Did Sir Watson help you out?

Was it not Obama himself who states that if he got his budget the first year and TARP 2 unemployment would not go above 8 percent.

Point number two this is the same media who shot down anyone who during Clinton's term pointed to the failing economy at the end of his term. They were accused of trying to "Talk down the economy" The same media who was calling Bush II's 4.6 unemployment abysmal and not reflecting the ones who just gave up. Well if they gave up during Bush's 4.6 then how the hell are they doing since it doubled under Obama? And what responsibility can be placed right at the feet of the Democrats who took over in 2006 and flat out refused to fix CRA *the cause of the housing and mortgage crash* although the Republicans were pleading for reform?

These fuckin morons are blowing through money we do not even have, revenue under Obama are only a fraction of what they were under Bush but spending has FUCKIN QUADRUPLED. What kind of foundation is that? The last quarters growth they tout was 100% in the public sector. 0% private sector on the contrary growth was contracting still in the private sector. With LESS revenue to grow ourselves out of debt and QUADRUPLE spending .......

And I ask you.

SPENDING ON WHAT? Look around WHAT? WHAT to show for all this spending?

LAYING A FOUNDATION

WTF?

This is one of Alabasters FAVORED Main Streem Media! And who is the sheeple getting fed the crock of lies?

Reporting "Administration officials said..." and forgetting your journalistic duty to question out right BULL$HIT is tantamount to LYING.

Classic bullshit. His jobs creation strategy has NEVER worked it just builds a bigger government and puts our dept money into more bureaucrats pockets. But the FAIR minded Main Stream Media forgot to report this. Instead the Fair MSM lays the ground work for blaming future failures on an inability to pass more failed legislation that will put us trillions more in debt.

Oh and here is the real golden nugget of the whole Main stream Media fuel for sheeple thought media.

Well no freakin sh!t

It's George Walker Bush's fault.

 

You see the difference?

The so called "Main Stream Media" is totally in the tank for the Democrats.

I'll have to take your work on the Canadian media but I have my doubts. The media has the ability to appear non-biased but in reality be extremely biased. The media can make you feel like the world is ending or we are on the brink of a grand and marvelous new beginning. And all along not appear biased in the least. Me I argue the fallacy or merits of the points being made regardless of the ideological opinions of the person making the statement.

Of a pathological liar runs into a theater and yells "Fire" it may be true or it may not. But to say "The building is absolutely not on fire that man is a pathological liar!" Is an ad hominem one would be wise to ignore if the temperature is rising above 100 and the room is filling with smoke.

 

"The truth is that the come-and-go politicians are not running Britain, as they are not running the United States and elsewhere. The real power is with the military-..intelligence agency nexus that is the constant force no matter who is in theoretical 'power' in Downing Street or the White House."

 

I agree with you that the spending has to stop. It is not sound to introduce deficit-causing bills during an economical downturn. But I would hardly call CSN or MSN my "favored mainstream media". I much prefer CTV or CBS when it comes to information.

I think you have to give me a little more credit than that. I know when I'm being fed bullsh*t. That's the whole reason why I dislike Obama in the first place. I only listen for the actual facts and I don't pay much attention to the talking points. I also double check whatever they say with other news stations to wash the fecal matter off the information.

Ad Hominem is Latin for: "Against the person" or "At the person". It's used to categorize personal attacks. It's fancy talk for pompous writers and I'm guilty of using it. In the context of your post the 'Ad Hominem' is misplaced.
I like your analogy of the burning theater and here is my spin on it; the democrats smell the smoke and feel the temperature rising but tell everyone that it's fine and that they should pay more for their tickets next time. The republicans see a guy playing with his lighter and decide to organize a grass root movement to stop him, but by the time they have organized themselves and are ready to take the guy down, the fire has already started.

In my opinion both sides are abysmally incompetent. The democrats spend money like it's free and the republicans lack the leadership and the balls to put a stop to it. Maybe after another great depression and a famine the people will realize what it means to incur debt as a country. Until then, good luck convincing the masses that the theater is burning.

 

Pretty much.

This is why the republican party has broken into the pissed off independent and Libertarian parties. casting their vote in protest of the Republican party becoming the Liberal Republican party and straying its conservative roots. This is out of disgust with the current. These independent groups also have a really small percentage of Democrat moderates that are alarmed at our politicians disregard for the Constitution.

These "Constitutionalists Democrats" (Somewhat of an oxymoron) are the hardest to debate because much of what they say in defense of the constitution is true.

Similar to the Federalist and Anti-Federalist arguing each with logical and valid valid points.

My solution it to return the Right back to Conservatism not defect from the party.

George Bush I have said before and will say again was a liberal on many or possibly the majority of his positions. This is most certainly the case with Fiscal spending.

 

Intelligence Agency? Yeah sure theoretically. Look at Clinton with his 2000 FBI files everyone of them on Conservative figures and politicians.

The Military? Not hardly.