|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: Expectations For The New Obama Democrat Government | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Blue Jay Member (Idle past 2697 days) Posts: 2843 From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts Joined: |
Hi, Straggler.
Straggler writes: In the unlikeley event that I lose I would become a social outcast. Just post a sign beneath it that says, "I lost a bet," and you're sure to gain a lot of pity friends. -Bluejay Darwin loves you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member (Idle past 164 days) Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: |
So, you are jumping to conclusions in order to find support for your belief that Barack Obama is the anti-Christ. You are more than welcome to this belief. Just don't tell me I'm ignorant or stupid or immature for disagreeing with you. Well said that man. Buzz is allowing the negative bias in his thinking prescribe the conclusion he reaches. As these conclusion cause him distress he selectively attends to the information he percieves as confirming said conclusions (and therfore causing him to worry and ruminate). This kind of distorted thinking can be very entrenched but (just like smoking) is a habit you can quit if you have the courage.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rrhain Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
Bluejay writes:
quote: Considering that their only association was both being on the board of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, a charitable group working on education, chances are they were talking about schools and where they could spend the Annenberg's money (the Annenbergs being big Reaganites). But even then, there wouldn't have been much discussion because Obama was the chair and Ayers was in a separate committee for dealing with disbursal. Since some of the groups receiving funds were projects created by Ayers, there was a separation in order to prevent conflicts of interest. They attended half a dozen board meetings. They were also on the board of the Woods Fund of Chicago, an anti-poverty charity, so they probably discussed the poor and where they could spend the money. And point of order: Ayers was never convicted of anything, though admittedly on a technicality: The evidence the feds had gathered was through the results of illegal wiretaps (which is why it is important to maintain such standards...you don't want your suspects getting away because you screwed up the case.) The two bombs he set off neither killed nor injured anybody as he warned the people in the buildings (the Capitol building and the Pentagon) to evacuate. I also point out that Ayers turned himself in. Compare this to McCain's association to G. Gordon Liddy, convicted traitor. Among the plans Liddy developed as part of the Committee to Re-elect the President were the firebombing of the Brookings Institution, the kidnapping of antiwar protesters to Mexico, and the entrapment of Democratic officials by inviting them to a party and having secret pictures taken of them with prostitutes who would be there. While none of these were carried out, Liddy was the one who masterminded the break-in at the Watergate hotel, for which he did not turn himself in nor did he apologize for. During the Branch Davidian raid in Waco, Liddy told people to shoot the members of the BATF, saying, "Go for a head shot; they're going to be wearing bulletproof vests. ... Kill the sons of bitches." Liddy has been a direct financial supporter of McCain, hosting a fundraiser in his own home where people could get their picture taken with Liddy and McCain. McCain's statement regarding his relationship with Liddy? "I know Gordon Liddy. He paid his debt. He went to prison and paid his debt, as people do. I'm not in any way embarrassed to know Gordon Liddy." So McCain likes to pal around with convicted traitors who to this day still advocate violence. How does Obama's association with Ayers compare? (Note: I am not stating anything about your opinions. Just pointing out that Buzsaw's reaction with regard to Obama and Ayers is hypocritical given his non-reaction to McCain and Liddy.) Rrhain Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
fallacycop Member (Idle past 5520 days) Posts: 692 From: Fortaleza-CE Brazil Joined: |
I just want to get this one thing straight. You are worried about 1) Obama being a Muslim and 2) the association he has with his Christian pastor?? and 3) His intentions to Israel because he chose a Jewish Chief of Staff??
Exactly! It's f***ing hilarious! That`s why I said it's hard for me to resist pulling his leg.
Can anybody see the contradictions in Buzz's concerns?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fosdick  Suspended Member (Idle past 5500 days) Posts: 1793 From: Upper Slobovia Joined: |
NosyNed writes:
You may think you're "prepared," but I ask again: How are YOU qualified to make those moral judgments? I have made enough observations of your posts to conclude that you are as least as ignorant, fearful, and hateful as Buz is. I am prepared to make moral judgments. ”FTF I can see Lower Slobovia from my house.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kuresu Member (Idle past 2513 days) Posts: 2544 From: boulder, colorado Joined: |
Not to be a dick, but when you say that Nosyned is
as least as ignorant, fearful, and hateful as Buz is. , isn't that a moral judgement you are making about him? If so, what qualifies you to make that judgement? Hypocrisy, much?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rahvin Member Posts: 4032 Joined: Member Rating: 9.2 |
You may think you're "prepared," but I ask again: How are YOU qualified to make those moral judgments? I have made enough observations of your posts to conclude that you are as least as ignorant, fearful, and hateful as Buz is. What qualifications are necessary to make moral judgments? I'm perfectly able to determine that racism, religious intolerance, homophobia and other flavors of bigotry are immoral, in the same way I can determine that murder, theft, rape, and other actions are immoral. In the case of Nosy's judgment of Buz, Nosy is taking the clear image of Jesus as a preacher of love for all of mankind and comparing it to Buz's outright hatred (even if he won't admit as much) of brown people, gays, and non-Christians. Jesus specifically instructed everyone to love their neighbor, not hate them. It's a pretty cut-and-dry comparison, if you ask me. You seem to take the opinion that only those who are morally perfect should be "qualified" to judge others in terms of morality. Unfortunately, we're all human beings, which means none of us are perfect. We all feel fear, we all feel anger, and we are all ignorant. The difference is how you react to those feelings. When you practice willful ignorance even when corrected, and when you apply your fear and hatred not to individuals who deserve it but to entire races and religions, you've crossed the line into bigotry. Buz is fearful and hateful of all Muslims, and he lumps anyone with an Arabic-sounding name and brown skin into the Muslim category regardless of any facts of worship or statements of the individual in question. Buz is on record stating that interracial relationships are immoral (which is rather personally offensive to me, having a half-black ex-stepdaughter and an interracial girlfriend), for which he can provide no actual reason other than his own bigotry. Buz has made some very disgusting and factually incorrect statements regarding homosexuality, and things homosexuality is immoral, despite having nothing more than the Bible to support such an assertion. Buz is a bigot. Plain and simple. Feel free to say I'm unqualified. After all, I mock people who make irrational statements, and have an extreme distaste for all religion in general and Christianity in particular. But I don't judge people by their faith - most of the Christians I know (with the exception of those I tend to meet on evolution debate forums, like Buz) are very nice people who support equal treatment under the law for everyone and respect the rights of others to have faiths different from their own. I like those people. I just don't like bigots. Or irrational idiots. Like Buz (irrationality and bigotry do seem to go well together).
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fosdick  Suspended Member (Idle past 5500 days) Posts: 1793 From: Upper Slobovia Joined: |
kuresu writes:
Let me ask you this: Do you really think it was fair for NosyNed to say in Message 129:
If so, what qualifies you to make that judgement? Hypocrisy, much? quote:If you do then we are standing on different planets. How would you like it if someone said: "You, kuresu, are not in any way qualified to comment on what Jesus was like." That would be like saying: You, kuresu, are not in any way qualified to comment on what Bugs Bunny was like." ”FTF I can see Lower Slobovia from my house.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kuresu Member (Idle past 2513 days) Posts: 2544 From: boulder, colorado Joined: |
I see you decided to evade my question.
You say Ned is not qualified to make moral judgements. You proceed to make a moral judgement about Ned. What makes you qualified to make moral judgements about Ned (or anyone)? Since you claim Ned is unqualified, you should have an acceptable answer for why you are qualified as you can apparently discern the required conditions for making justifiable moral judgements. This also means you should have ready an objective measure of qualification for moral judging. So, what makes you qualified to make moral judgements about Ned (or anyone)?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fosdick  Suspended Member (Idle past 5500 days) Posts: 1793 From: Upper Slobovia Joined: |
Rahvin writes:
I think you have massively misunderstood me. I don't think you understand the function of dialectics and the antithesis. You dabble only the surface of a deep philosophical lake. Well, snorkel on down here and learn something about how to examine all sides of an issue. There's much more to it than a bunch of stupid hysteria about bigotry.
What qualifications are necessary to make moral judgments? I'm perfectly able to determine that racism, religious intolerance, [removed for survival purposes] and other flavors of bigotry are immoral, in the same way I can determine that murder, theft, rape, and other actions are immoral...Buz is a bigot. Plain and simple. After all, I mock people who make irrational statements, and have an extreme distaste for all religion in general and Christianity in particular.
I don't suppose you would understand that I do the very same thing. ”FTF I can see Lower Slobovia from my house.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fosdick  Suspended Member (Idle past 5500 days) Posts: 1793 From: Upper Slobovia Joined: |
kuresu writes:
Because I am amoral? Can you to imagine a judgment being made without invoking morality? I can. So, what makes you qualified to make moral judgements about Ned (or anyone)? ”FTF I can see Lower Slobovia from my house.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kuresu Member (Idle past 2513 days) Posts: 2544 From: boulder, colorado Joined: |
Because I am amoral?
That's an interesting position to take. This suggests that any moral judgement, then, is incapable of being rendered. How can you judge morality without morals? If amorality is the requirement to pass judgement, then your judgement about Ned (that he is as least as ignorant, fearful, and hateful as Buz) is unjustifiable, as it is a moral judgement.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
onifre Member (Idle past 2950 days) Posts: 4854 From: Dark Side of the Moon Joined:
|
Hi Rahvin,
I agree with most of your post, however, on this specific statement...
Buz is a bigot. Plain and simple ...I think you may be making a bit of a character judgment having not looked at the whole of the situation. Buz, all though he does express feelings of bigotry, is not a bigot IMO. Buz is a faithful follower of a system designed to instill fear and intolerance. Buz has fallen for the propaganda that the media, and the, in this case, republican party, have put forth. To signal out Buz as a bigot does not in anyway deal with the issue as a whole, which is, Why does Buz feel this way? Why would the majority of republicans feel this way about Obama? They don't make this stuff up in their heads, for the most part. They are told this by reliable, or what they consider to be, reliable sources. We must question the system, and see Buz as a by product of a corrupt system of disinformation. Buzs' thoughts are manipulated by media sources. Unfortunatly he has been indoctrinated so deeply into the system that he fails to recognize the deceptive persuation measures that are used to guild his opinion about Obama, homo-sexuals, religious intolerance, etc, etc. This is why an educated conversation on these issues is sometimes impossible, because the issues are divided my party lines and party support supersedes a balanced discussion. The system of propaganda instills these feelings through fear and lies. Same thing that is done in religion. So, I agree that Buz expresses feelings of bigotry but I don't feel that label describes him accurately. To me he is a by product of a system that indoctrinates people and pushes them towards bigoted opinions for the sake of party division and to maintain loyalty amongst its supporters. So, again IMO, instead of dismissing Buz as a crazy bigot, we should look at what means were used to turn Buz into such a person. Was it out of his hands? Are we all guilded to our opinions by outside influences without properly investigating issues? Is this a method of indoctrination that we should ALL be above? Why is every moral issue divided by party lines? Are people even looking at the facts, or are they just siding with their party of choice an any issue? I think we all do this from time to time. IMO Buz is a casualty of bad guildance by people he was told were honest. See Buz, I do kinda feel for you. Edited by onifre, : No reason given. "All great truths begin as blasphemies" "I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks "I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fosdick  Suspended Member (Idle past 5500 days) Posts: 1793 From: Upper Slobovia Joined: |
kuresu writes:
All moral judgments are fueled by an rational belief in mutual exclusion. A philosopher avoids this mistake, per Will Durant: "The first lesson of philosophy is that we may all be mistaken." That's an interesting position to take. This suggests that any moral judgement, then, is incapable of being rendered. How can you judge morality without morals? ”FTF I can see Lower Slobovia from my house.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
onifre writes: So, again IMO, instead of dismissing Buz as a crazy bigot, we should look at what means were used to turn Buz into such a person. Was it out of his hands? Are we all gilded to our opinions by outside influences without properly investigating issues? Is this a method of indoctrination that we should ALL be above? Why is every moral issue divided by party lines? Are people even looking at the facts, or are they just siding with their party of choice an any issue? I think we all do this from time to time. IMO Buz is a casualty of bad guidance by people he was told were honest. See Buz, I do kinda feel for you. Thanks, Onifre. Your points are well taken and do make sense in that the media which one ascribes to can have a bearing on one's ideology. It doesn't make sense though regarding bigotry. That my ideology happens to be the minority POV at this site does not make my ideology a bigot ideology or me a bigot. By that token, I could claim you people all as bigots simply because you don't see it as I do and you don't ascribe to much of the information which I get. I don't stoop that low, but honor your POV as above the level of bigotry. However, the vast majority of mainstream media is leftist, democratic and liberal. Likely it is about all most of the members here ever watch, hear or access on line. I get much of what you people get but you people get precious little of what I get. I'm the one who gets both sides of the stories. What folks here ascribe to bigotry in me comes not from unreliable sources for the most part. Often when counterparts demean and engage in name calling, labeling and posting substanceless meanspirited messages their response is to a message substantiated by a link to source or UTUBE clip. Rather than addressing points made in the link, too often it's just personal attack and yada about my alleged bigotry, racism or other nonsense. No matter how many times I cite valid reasons why I am not a practicing racist, for example, the lie is soon repeated that I'm racist just because the one I happen to be opposed to is half black. BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024