Ready to admit your were wrong?

[Bubblehead1980]

I just don't know how much evidence those who voted for obama needs.Are you ready to admit your mistake\ in supporting this fool? With all the mounting evidence(From the scandals to the radical associations, to his failed keynesian economics, failure to contain Iran, extreme naivete' in dealing with Putin, constantly violating the constitution with the NDAA, summary execution of US citizens via drone strikes, taking the side of the muslim brotherhood in Egypt, Libya ,) this presidency has been a disaster.Now, he is, as even Ed Schultz put it, Bush light when it comes to war.Obama is beating the war drums hard, he wants his war with Syria, to hell with the lives it will cost, to hell with the money he will spend, to hell with possibily igniting a war.Obama will as always, ignore the constitution and do what he wants, he will ignore congress.All this is dress rehearsal of course for his attempt to seek a third term.

Again, my question is are those of you who support this monster ready to admit you are wrong? This is not about left or right here, this is about coming to terms that you were duped.Hey, I almost was in 2008, I liked him until I did some research and found out about the real Barack Hussein Obama.

[vienna]

No, but I will admit you are an impressively persistent troll... :D


<O>

[TarJak]

In before Obama.

[Takeda Shingen]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=sfwyt0tjqEY#t=57

[Catfish]

I ... Are you ready to admit your mistake\ in supporting this fool? With all the mounting evidence(From the scandals to the radical associations, to his failed keynesian economics, failure to contain Iran, extreme naivete' in dealing with Putin, constantly violating the constitution with the NDAA, summary execution of US citizens via drone strikes, taking the side of the muslim brotherhood in Egypt, Libya ,) this presidency has been a disaster.


Do you really think a politician like Bush or Obama really governs the USA ?

1. The US is not a democracy in original sense, common people cannot elect directly. As they say it is a 'constitutional republic'. This means rich powerful people influence elections and build up the candidates themselves. No politician is rich and/or powerful himself to pay those fees for entering as a candidate.
Unless Mr. Ford or Rockefeller would have campaigned themselves.
(Which is why i would propose to elect our economical bosses directly, without using politicians as puppets. Spares a lot of money.)

2. The second a politician has been elected, the real powers (economical and those who really know, like e.g. secret services) tell him what's really up, and that is when he can say goodbye to his ideals and campaign pledges (if there was any idealism left). With this new nasty knowledge of what's really going on there is not much leeway to navigate, for the 'president'.

Greetings,
Catfish

edit: P.S. Sorry for taking you seriously :D

[AngusJS]

Obama will as always, ignore the constitution and do what he wants, he will ignore congress.Is that why he went to Congress for approval on Syria, instead of just unilaterally taking action like past presidents have done?

All this is dress rehearsal of course for his attempt to seek a third term.:rotfl2: Will you admit you're completely wrong when he doesn't seek a 3rd term (which, btw, would require an amendment to the Constitution)? Somehow I doubt it.

[AVGWarhawk]

Community organizer. Quite the resume. But no better than Bush's resume.

[Takeda Shingen]

Community organizer. Quite the resume. But no better than Bush's resume.

Or B movie actor, for that matter.

[mapuc]

It's not only in the USA it's every were. however is your president, prime minister etc there will always be people that hate them.

We shall not forget though we have free speech and it's their opinion. I however do not agree on these

Markus

[Ducimus]

.....

Dude!

Why stir the pot? There's enough angst to go around already.

[Dowly]

Guys! We were wrong!

Next Topic!

[Tribesman]

All this is dress rehearsal of course for his attempt to seek a third term.

What a way to invalidate your claim:haha:

[Tchocky]

This thread promises not to disappoint.

If anyone needs me I'll be in the garage with the engine running.

[Subnuts]

New thread idea: Admit to the previous poster something you were wrong about.

[Takeda Shingen]

New thread idea: Admit to the previous poster something you were wrong about.

Subnuts,

I had previously stated that it was not necessary to use the extra tomato pens to wall off the begonias. Clearly I was wrong, as the deer had taken them this morning. I can only offer my most sincere apology, as the beautiful red and white color of the flowers are mostly gone. Had I the foresight to assess the problem for myself, or the good sense to listen to your words, such a disheartening calamity would not have occurred. Rest assured that I will take such proactive steps in the planting phase next spring.

In profound sadness,
Tak

[Tchocky]

Tak.

I used to think you exaggerated about GT.

Regretfully yours,

Tchock

[Stealhead]

Tchocky,

When I was six years old I insisted that Santa Claus was real.I was most regrettably incorrect in making this claim.

With great compunction I apologize,
Stealhead

[Armistead]

Tchocky,

When I was six years old I insisted that Santa Claus was real.I was most regrettably incorrect in making this claim.

With great compunction I apologize,
Stealhead


Cmon, Santa was needed to keep kids under 6 from being evil.

[Bubblehead1980]

What a way to invalidate your claim:haha:

No, a war setting off a powder keg that will lead to a larger war and dangerous situation will be his excuse to postpone elections, to violate the constitution(has shown has a propensity to do this) and seek a third term, if not elected since by law, he can't be.Again, you need to do some research and understand how he thinks.

[Bubblehead1980]

Or B movie actor, for that matter.

Reagan has a much stronger resume than obama or Bush.Reagan had been the successful governor of California and involved in political affairs a while.Bush was a successful governor of texas at least.What had obama done? Exploit poor, uneducated, fellow black (mostly) people in Chicago for political gain.so impressive! Constitutional Law Professor? What a joke. I would drop his class if wound up with him as a con law professor because he has not clue.I mean on the rare occasion I've seen footage or things he wrote regarding the constitution, he was absolutely incorrect as is anyone who pushes the "living constitution" THEORY.Which is nothing more than left wing way to confuse the meaning among those who do not know any better so can have some appearance of legitimacy in their ridiculous policies.

[August]

Or B movie actor, for that matter.

Of the three only the community organizer was without executive experience and it shows.

[Bubblehead1980]

Is that why he went to Congress for approval on Syria, instead of just unilaterally taking action like past presidents have done?

:rotfl2: Will you admit you're completely wrong when he doesn't seek a 3rd term (which, btw, would require an amendment to the Constitution)? Somehow I doubt it.


That is for show, but I promise he will strike even if does not get permission or something will happen where enough changes their mind.Believe me, there is chicago thuggery afoot right now in DC.

Yes I am aware the LEGALLY, the constitution would have be amended but do you think obama or his goons care? Obama could care less about the constitution.I can almost hear his disgusting voice now trying to mince words and explain why elections are postponed, why he must stay in office just a little while longer. Used to this was unthinkable , but under hi=m? No. That is part of his advantage, a large number of people underestimate the danger he poses but he feels not restrained by law, plus no doubt he has a back up plan.Rocky seas ahead my friends..

[Onkel Neal]

No, a war setting off a powder keg that will lead to a larger war and dangerous situation will be his excuse to postpone elections, to violate the constitution(has shown has a propensity to do this) and seek a third term, if not elected since by law, he can't be.Again, you need to do some research and understand how he thinks.

You know, I had a customer come into the shop last week, looking to buy a motorcycle. We found one he liked, I had him fill out the credit app. While we were waiting for the bank to get back to us, we were discussing stuff, and somehow without my noticing, the conversation turned political. He began asserting that Obama was using the Syrian conflict in order to remain for a third term, take control of this and that, suspend liberties...

Man, it's one thing to read posts about this online, it's really scary to have a guy siting across the desk from saying it in the light of day. :timeout:

He didn't get approved for the loan, bad credit, to many credit card charge offs and collections.

[Bubblehead1980]

Do you really think a politician like Bush or Obama really governs the USA ?

1. The US is not a democracy in original sense, common people cannot elect directly. As they say it is a 'constitutional republic'. This means rich powerful people influence elections and build up the candidates themselves. No politician is rich and/or powerful himself to pay those fees for entering as a candidate.
Unless Mr. Ford or Rockefeller would have campaigned themselves.
(Which is why i would propose to elect our economical bosses directly, without using politicians as puppets. Spares a lot of money.)

2. The second a politician has been elected, the real powers (economical and those who really know, like e.g. secret services) tell him what's really up, and that is when he can say goodbye to his ideals and campaign pledges (if there was any idealism left). With this new nasty knowledge of what's really going on there is not much leeway to navigate, for the 'president'.

Greetings,
Catfish

edit: P.S. Sorry for taking you seriously :D

That is a litte too conspiracy theorist for me.

Yes money has corrupted and once someone is in office they owe a lot of favors but they are still powerful.There is a power structure to consider but there is no dark force pulling the strings. A movement and political ideology are elected more than a man, at least lately.

Bush was well meaning but not extremely bright son of a powerful family who managed to get elected.Overwhelmed and not ready for the job, he relied heavily on those he trusted, namely Cheney and Rumsfeld.Unfortunately, the neocons, which are not much better than far left types, maybe a little more inclined toward domestic liberty, less taxes etc but still just about as bad, won his trust.

Obama is a hardcore marxist indoctrinated since he was a child who managed to get some backers knowing a black man who didnt talk like Sharpton or Jackson would have a chance, esp with correct timing, that year was 2008, they knew the ignorant masses would buy him.Yes, the power structure on that side of the aisle joined on his bandwagon, some knowing he was not a good thing but look for their own interest, others were just not aware.Regardless, we have someone more dangerous than ANY individual to ever hold that office.The man's behavior since he took office has shown this.The most disturbing is his utter disregard for the law he shows, esp as it pertains to rights of citizens.The thing EVERYONE should be up in arms over is his use of drones on AMERICAN citizens who the government labels a terrorist. Unfortunately, people let their emotions and bias interfere and say (well he was an arab and a terrorists so to hell with him) but they dont realize the precedent that it has set.

[AVGWarhawk]

Now just hold it. THERE IS NO SANTA! :o

[Bubblehead1980]

You know, I had a customer come into the shop last week, looking to buy a motorcycle. We found one he liked, I had him fill out the credit app. While we were waiting for the bank to get back to us, we were discussing stuff, and somehow without my noticing, the conversation turned political. He began asserting that Obama was using the Syrian conflict in order to remain for a third term, take control of this and that, suspend liberties...

Man, it's one thing to read posts about this online, it's really scary to have a guy siting across the desk from saying it in the light of day. :timeout:

He didn't get approved for the loan, bad credit, to many credit card charge offs and collections.

Yes, it is a scary thought but it's one people should be aware of is a possibility.That is a huge problem with many people in this country, they think oh it wont happen here, this is the USA.Well guess what, we are in uncharted territory.We have had dangerous leaders before, Lincoln and FDR come to mind but they meant well, did some bad, stupid things but meant well and didnt thing this nation was rotten to the core. The man who currently holds that office HATES this country as it was founded, he thinks the constitution is irrelevant. Obama believes this country needs to be "fundamentally transformed" . I base this on research into who he is, how he thinks, he actions as president.I look beyond the facade and understand his true intent, as many do. Something he takes advantage of us is the stupidity of many and the willingness of some, who have their doubts, to give him the benefit of the doubt because American people as a whole, are fair, too fair sometimes.Tolerance is a good thing but it can go too far. Obama and his people know how to play enough of the population.

Neal, what does his credit have to do with anything? Bad credit does not mean a bad person etc. Credit is a tool used to for control and to keep people down, nothing more.

[Bubblehead1980]

Dude!

Why stir the pot? There's enough angst to go around already.


Not trying to stir the pot, but managed to get a couple people to admit finally, they regret their vote and support for him, just wondering if anyone had the cajones to admit it on here.

[Takeda Shingen]

Of the three only the community organizer was without executive experience and it shows.

And yet we aren't shooting yet. Hmmmmmm..........:hmmm:

[Stealhead]

Not trying to stir the pot, but managed to get a couple people to admit finally, they regret their vote and support for him, just wondering if anyone had the cajones to admit it on here.


Are you reading the same thread? Because I see know one who has done what you claim.:hmmm:

Dowly did in jest but he is from Finland which is a nation situated between Russia and....oh never mind.

[August]

And yet we aren't shooting yet. Hmmmmmm..........:hmmm:

Tell that to the families of those people we lost in Benghazi.

[Admiral Halsey]

Don't blame me I voted Libertarian. Also if Obama gets this country involved with Syria I bet within a month Russia gets involved as well and WW3 starts by the end of that week.

[Bubblehead1980]

Are you reading the same thread? Because I see know one who has done what you claim.:hmmm:

Dowly did in jest but he is from Finland which is a nation situated between Russia and....oh never mind.


I dont mean on here, had two people I know in life adm it it, just wondering if could get anyone on here to admit it.

[August]

Don't blame me I voted Libertarian. Also if Obama gets this country involved with Syria I bet within a month Russia gets involved as well and WW3 starts by the end of that week.

I'll take that bet.

[Admiral Halsey]

I'll take that bet.

Accepted. Though you'll have to wait awhile since if the US gets involved with Syria i'm bugging out to a Pacific Atoll I have ready.

[Tribesman]

Tell that to the families of those people we lost in Benghazi.
Does that include the families of anyone who went on TV to boast about the undercover work they were doing in a "secret" building in Benghazi?
I suppose that while you try and figure that out ,you could explain to all the families of those who went to Iraq to die exactly why you still insist that the WMD lies are really true.

I dont mean on here, had two people I know in life adm it it, just wondering if could get anyone on here to admit it.
So by on here you don't mean on here you mean on here.
That probably explains why it is on here, but you need to admit why you put this CT nonsense on here.:hmm2:

[Tchocky]

Yup. Definitely.

War with Russia is inevitable if the US strikes Syria.

There's nothing more important to Russia than Syria. They'll fight to the death to keep.....hey whatever WORLD WAR THREE GUYS THE RUSSIANS ARE COMING

[Tchocky]

No, a war setting off a powder keg that will lead to a larger war and dangerous situation will be his excuse to postpone elections, to violate the constitution(has shown has a propensity to do this) and seek a third term, if not elected since by law, he can't be.Again, you need to do some research and understand how he thinks.

I don't know what we'd do without you, Bubbles.

[Betonov]

Don't blame me I voted Libertarian. Also if Obama gets this country involved with Syria I bet within a month Russia gets involved as well and WW3 starts by the end of that week.

I'll take that bet.

Count me in. €20 against Russia starting ww3

[Oberon]

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ayWbXiHaaJ8/T8uUqdKTbwI/AAAAAAAAA3Y/xZ4aZfOg2KM/s320/Sky.jpg

[u crank]

I admit nothing. How about buying me a drink? :O:

[Jimbuna]

You know, I had a customer come into the shop last week, looking to buy a motorcycle. We found one he liked, I had him fill out the credit app. While we were waiting for the bank to get back to us, we were discussing stuff, and somehow without my noticing, the conversation turned political. He began asserting that Obama was using the Syrian conflict in order to remain for a third term, take control of this and that, suspend liberties...

Man, it's one thing to read posts about this online, it's really scary to have a guy siting across the desk from saying it in the light of day. :timeout:

He didn't get approved for the loan, bad credit, to many credit card charge offs and collections.

Probably a politician in a previous life :)

[Onkel Neal]

Neal, what does his credit have to do with anything? Bad credit does not mean a bad person etc. Credit is a tool used to for control and to keep people down, nothing more.

Hah, m'ok.

Credit is a service. You may elect to borrow money, it will cost you something. If you ignore to pay the money back as agreed when you borrow it, the lender will impact your credit score. Pretty simple, huh?

I never said this guy was "bad". Bad credit means this guy was undisciplined and sloppy. And it also means he has other, more important things to attend to than buying a toy.

[mookiemookie]

Neal,

I thought there would be enough room to put all of the Christmas stuff in the front bedroom closet.

I was wrong.

Regards,
Mook

[vienna]

This just in:


"I'm sorry I created the whole thing, sincerely, sincerely, sorry...

...and you guys on on your own now...

Again, sorry...

GOD"


<O>

[Sailor Steve]

I seem to recall some Liberals saying the same thing about Reagan. And Bush. And some Conservatives said it about Clinton. Deny it all you want, it is indeed partisan politics, and there seems to be very little that is honest about it.

I have to side with AngusJS. Will you admit you were wrong if it doesn't happen the way you say it will? And if you do, will it be a sincere apology or the kind that I always got from my ex-wife: "I'm sorry...but..."

[razark]

I just want to go on record now to say that I am opposed to Obama's attempts to gain a fourth term.

[vienna]

I just want to go on record now to say that I am opposed to Obama's attempts to gain a fourth term.


He'll be sorry to hear that...


<O>

[Platapus]

About the only thing I can say about Obama is that he was better than the alternatives.

But then I never voted "for" Obama, I always had to vote against his opponents.

One of these days I might actually be able to vote for a president. But the odds are unlikely. :nope:

[vienna]

http://assets.amuniversal.com/70df8140f0a901300e73001dd8b71c47?width=900




<O>

[desertstriker]

About the only thing I can say about Obama is that he was better than the alternatives.

But then I never voted "for" Obama, I always had to vote against his opponents.

One of these days I might actually be able to vote for a president. But the odds are unlikely. :nope:
i have to agree. Maybe if there was a universal 3rd party (as in real competition for both the left and the right) instead of the 2 party system we might get better canadits right now it is a "most liked" competition.

[Oberon]

i have to agree. Maybe if there was a universal 3rd party (as in real competition for both the left and the right) instead of the 2 party system we might get better canadits right now it is a "most liked" competition.

We tried that, didn't work. :/\\!!

[Bubblehead1980]

About the only thing I can say about Obama is that he was better than the alternatives.

But then I never voted "for" Obama, I always had to vote against his opponents.

One of these days I might actually be able to vote for a president. But the odds are unlikely. :nope:


I just don't get the thinking that can reason someone like Barack Hussein Obama is a lesser evil than Mitt Romney? That right there shows the lack of knowledge among the masses who Barack Obama is. Simple research into this person would have likely convinced more.I can possibly see the first time, McCain was a terrible candidate but the second time, Romney? Nothing wrong with Romney other than well he is not an actual conservative.

Does not matter, obama has been a disaster, economy is still crap, unemployment is still high, debt keeps growing and growing, liberties are eroded each day, corruption is rampant, Obama did not create all problems but he has made them worse and purposely done nothing to solve them.Add int he race baiting and other divisive tactics.I mean jesus tap dancing christ people, the US is on the wrong side of everything under him, we continue to side with the muslim brotherhood. We have lost moral high ground to Russia! When you lose that to Putin, that says something.

[Bubblehead1980]

I seem to recall some Liberals saying the same thing about Reagan. And Bush. And some Conservatives said it about Clinton. Deny it all you want, it is indeed partisan politics, and there seems to be very little that is honest about it.

I have to side with AngusJS. Will you admit you were wrong if it doesn't happen the way you say it will? And if you do, will it be a sincere apology or the kind that I always got from my ex-wife: "I'm sorry...but..."

That is one way this piece of trash gets away with so much, people are cynical and apathetic towards politics, people like you figure the anti obama movement is just politics and hyperbole.This is different, must see this president is different, he is a clear and present danger to this country.What has to happen for more people to see that? Does the DHS have go full gestapo on everyone before people wake up? Really, it will be too late then.

Someone saying these things about Reagan was indeed crazy talk.Reagan did everything he possibly could to protect this country, he confronted a legitimate threat in soviet russia which we had screwed around with for 40 years and his policies lead to their defeat shortly after he left office, communism was and still is a real threat.Unfortunately, it's not the big external threat now, it is internal and difficult to take out, much like a cancer.

Reagan did not kill US citizens without trial, Reagan did not detain citizens indefinitely.Bush nor Clinton did either but who has done things to warrant the opposition? Barack Hussein Obama. Wake up, really.

P.S> I will gladly admit I was wrong if he does not seek a third term or obtain one.I hope I am on this one, really.

[Bubblehead1980]

Hah, m'ok.

Credit is a service. You may elect to borrow money, it will cost you something. If you ignore to pay the money back as agreed when you borrow it, the lender will impact your credit score. Pretty simple, huh?

I never said this guy was "bad". Bad credit means this guy was undisciplined and sloppy. And it also means he has other, more important things to attend to than buying a toy.


No, it is entirely unfair. Credit score does not take into account things that happen out of control then it affects people's ability to get things(certain jobs included) they NEED. Personally, it's never affected me since I have good credit but I have seen it hurt people who had things happen out of their control. Honestly, it is "the man's" way to keep a lot of people down because they wont or cant at a moment in time, play by his rules.Also, without know this guy you suggested he is sloppy and undisciplined because of his credit? See allows for a lot of prejudgements, it's an unfair process.

I mean how ridiculous is it you credit score takes a hit if someone runs a credit check when you apply for things? That is the most ridiculous crap ever, it punishes someone for trying to get things.The system is outdated, unfair and needs to be abolished and at the least, a major consumer oriented overhaul.

[Bubblehead1980]

i have to agree. Maybe if there was a universal 3rd party (as in real competition for both the left and the right) instead of the 2 party system we might get better canadits right now it is a "most liked" competition.

Unfortunately that is unlikely to happen in our lifetime. That is why real conservatives libertarians are trying to weed out the RINO's and closet liberals as well as necons out of the GOP, they are the problem.Reform from within, reinvent .Of course, there are growing pains with this.

[Sailor Steve]

Barack Hussein Obama
And there you show your bias while denying it. From the start people predisposed to hate him used his middle name just to show a possible Muslim tie. No one ever said "Ronald WILSON Reagan" "George WALKER Bush!" The Democrats sometimes use Clinton's middle name, Jefferson, to try to make a good comparison. The only reason anyone uses Obama's middle name is in an attempt to tar him with the Muslim brush. It makes you look extremely biased.

this piece of trash gets
I've asked you repeatedly not to throw slurs at people, even the ones you hate. It makes you look stupid, and it makes me look stupid as well for even trying to talk to you in a civilized manner. If you can't discuss things like the educated person you keep claiming to be, please stop trying.

people like you figure the anti obama movement is just politics and hyperbole.
Not so. I happen to be against Obama myself. I just don't make myself look foolish ranting about it. It's anti-Obama extremists like you who are all politics and hyperbole.

This is different, must see this president is different, he is a clear and present danger to this country.What has to happen for more people to see that? Does the DHS have go full gestapo on everyone before people wake up? Really, it will be too late then.
Back to the FEMA death camps? I thought you learned your lesson with that one. If you really believe all this, why aren't you standing large in public making sure the world hears this instead of posting it in a backwater website no one but us cares about?

Reagan did not kill US citizens without trial
He did however start wars "just 'cause", and people accused him of trying to set himself up for a third term. Just like Obama.

Reagan did not detain citizens indefinitely.
But he planned to.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/24621067/Reagan-Aides-and-the-Secret-Government-The-Miami-Herald-July-5-1987
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rex_84


Bush nor Clinton did either
Bush? Patriot Act?

You seem to not know what you're talking about.

Barack Hussein Obama.
There it is again. HUSSEIN!

I don't like Obama. I think he's a mediocre president at best, a bad one at worst. I said the same thing about Clinton. I said the same thing about Bush. Bush the Elder was okay, but weak. Reagan was a double-dealer. Carter was weak. Ford never got a chance to prove himself one way or the other. Nixon was a snake of the worst sort. The country survived. It will survive this.

I don't like Obama and I'll say so. But is he trying to make himself Dictator For Life? Not even a little bit, and if he does try something like that I will be one of the millions standing against him, armed if necessary. I'll also eat my hat, swallow my words, and apologize.

P.S> I will gladly admit I was wrong if he does not seek a third term or obtain one.I hope I am on this one, really.
Will you really? I'm betting you'll figure a way to weasel out of it. There will be a "but..." in there somewhere.

[Bubblehead1980]

And there you show your bias while denying it. From the start people predisposed to hate him used his middle name just to show a possible Muslim tie. No one ever said "Ronald WILSON Reagan" "George WALKER Bush!" The Democrats sometimes use Clinton's middle name, Jefferson, to try to make a good comparison. The only reason anyone uses Obama's middle name is in an attempt to tar him with the Muslim brush. It makes you look extremely biased.


I've asked you repeatedly not to throw slurs at people, even the ones you hate. It makes you look stupid, and it makes me look stupid as well for even trying to talk to you in a civilized manner. If you can't discuss things like the educated person you keep claiming to be, please stop trying.


Not so. I happen to be against Obama myself. I just don't make myself look foolish ranting about it. It's anti-Obama extremists like you who are all politics and hyperbole.


Back to the FEMA death camps? I thought you learned your lesson with that one. If you really believe all this, why aren't you standing large in public making sure the world hears this instead of posting it in a backwater website no one but us cares about?


He did however start wars "just 'cause", and people accused him of trying to set himself up for a third term. Just like Obama.


But he planned to.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/24621067/Reagan-Aides-and-the-Secret-Government-The-Miami-Herald-July-5-1987
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rex_84



Bush? Patriot Act?

You seem to not know what you're talking about.


There it is again. HUSSEIN!

I don't like Obama. I think he's a mediocre president at best, a bad one at worst. I said the same thing about Clinton. I said the same thing about Bush. Bush the Elder was okay, but weak. Reagan was a double-dealer. Carter was weak. Ford never got a chance to prove himself one way or the other. Nixon was a snake of the worst sort. The country survived. It will survive this.

I don't like Obama and I'll say so. But is he trying to make himself Dictator For Life? Not even a little bit, and if he does try something like that I will be one of the millions standing against him, armed if necessary. I'll also eat my hat, swallow my words, and apologize.


Will you really? I'm betting you'll figure a way to weasel out of it. There will be a "but..." in there somewhere.



I use his middle name because it puts an emphasis on who he is why he acts the way he does. Want to know why he tends to take the side of the brotherhood etc? Well his background explains it.Nothing wrong with being a non radical muslim(just as stupid as being a christian honestly) but it does run contrary to the national interests of the united states.Of course this is not PC etc but it's a real factor to worry about and now is supported by evidence, his behavior.Why is he so pro muslim brotherhood? why he has been hostile towards Israel? explains a lot.

Ronald Wilson Reagan had no questionable ties or allegiance for enemy.Now, he his middle name been Vissarionovich and he had ties from his early life such as being raised in Russia, sure it would have been valid.

Yes, the Democrats wish Clinton was even remotely close to Jefferson.I remember seeing Reagan's 92 RNC convention speech, he had a great line about that load of crap the Dems were trying to push.

I call the president what he is, period.


Well you may be anti obama but you are naive and blind to what a danger the man is and take for granted we will survive, it's a shame.The evidence is all there, just stop worrying about trying to be "fair" and see what is there.

I hope I am wrong, I hope he is out of office and is remembered as carter if not worse, at least Carter was just a naive, incompetent fool but had a good heart.Only thing better than him serving res to fterm and fading away would be for an impeachment where he is actually forced out like Nixon and goes down in history for what he is.However.I hope I am wrong about the third term or him staying in office one more day than legally allowed, if I am, I will gladly admit I am wrong.

[Tchocky]

Well it's certainly clear that he's trying for a third term.

I'm surprised you're having trouble convincing people. Benghazi, IRS, NDAA - it's all there.

[Sailor Steve]

I use his middle name because it puts an emphasis on who he is why he acts the way he does.
You use it to be insulting. That's not how you convince people you're right.

(just as stupid as being a christian honestly)
Do you always feel the need to insult people for no apparent reason? Sure, we can talk about radicals of all kinds, but calling the average believer stupid just for what they believe? If someone called you stupid for what you believe you'd be complaining to anyone who'd listen about how you were being abused. Can you possibly discuss anything without resorting to insults?

Ronald Wilson Reagan had no questionable ties or allegiance for enemy.Now, he his middle name been Vissarionovich and he had ties from his early life such as being raised in Russia, sure it would have been valid.
No, it wouldn't have. Using someone's name in an insulting manner shows how low you are, not how bad he is. It's a game the Right has been playing since day one. As with the Liberals hating Bush long before he gave them a reason to, the Conservatives have been hating Obama since long before this began. You need to learn how to think, rather than spout rhetoric. You've repeatedly accused the Liberals of not using logic or reason, yet you have yet to use either. Please try to form a serious argument before shouting about all the evil you see around you.

I call the president what he is, period.
No, you call him what you think he is. Then you get all upset when people call you what they think you are. You want it both ways.

Well you may be anti obama but you are naive and blind to what a danger the man is and take for granted we will survive, it's a shame.The evidence is all there, just stop worrying about trying to be "fair" and see what is there.
"Fair" in my case equates to "reasonable", "thoughtful" and "logical". You should try it sometime. Right now you sound like an old-time prophet/preacher. You might possibly be right, but you don't know that for certain. Still you carry on as though you know the truth about his evil plans. I'm already convinced he is bad for the country, but until he actually does something provably impeachment-worthy, or even revolution-worthy, then there's nothing that can be done, or that should be done.

As I asked before, why aren't you making a huge public outcry rather than just preaching here?

I also notice that you've blithely ignored the fact that Reagan was indeed working on a contingency plan that would allow him to detain citizens indefinitely, just as you've ignored the Patriot Act. Obama is not the first to look at something like this.

I hope I am wrong
Do you really? You don't sound like it. You sound like you want to be proven right. You've already said "I told you so" several times on these boards, including the title of this thread. It sounds to me more and more like all you really want is to make a lot of noise. You don't seem interested in actually working for the good, or else you would learn how to form an argument and discuss this rationally. You have yet to do anything like that.

[Bubblehead1980]

You use it to be insulting. That's not how you convince people you're right.


Do you always feel the need to insult people for no apparent reason? Sure, we can talk about radicals of all kinds, but calling the average believer stupid just for what they believe? If someone called you stupid for what you believe you'd be complaining to anyone who'd listen about how you were being abused. Can you possibly discuss anything without resorting to insults?


No, it wouldn't have. Using someone's name in an insulting manner shows how low you are, not how bad he is. It's a game the Right has been playing since day one. As with the Liberals hating Bush long before he gave them a reason to, the Conservatives have been hating Obama since long before this began. You need to learn how to think, rather than spout rhetoric. You've repeatedly accused the Liberals of not using logic or reason, yet you have yet to use either. Please try to form a serious argument before shouting about all the evil you see around you.


No, you call him what you think he is. Then you get all upset when people call you what they think you are. You want it both ways.


"Fair" in my case equates to "reasonable", "thoughtful" and "logical". You should try it sometime. Right now you sound like an old-time prophet/preacher. You might possibly be right, but you don't know that for certain. Still you carry on as though you know the truth about his evil plans. I'm already convinced he is bad for the country, but until he actually does something provably impeachment-worthy, or even revolution-worthy, then there's nothing that can be done, or that should be done.

As I asked before, why aren't you making a huge public outcry rather than just preaching here?

I also notice that you've blithely ignored the fact that Reagan was indeed working on a contingency plan that would allow him to detain citizens indefinitely, just as you've ignored the Patriot Act. Obama is not the first to look at something like this.


Do you really? You don't sound like it. You sound like you want to be proven right. You've already said "I told you so" several times on these boards, including the title of this thread. It sounds to me more and more like all you really want is to make a lot of noise. You don't seem interested in actually working for the good, or else you would learn how to form an argument and discuss this rationally. You have yet to do anything like that.

I will have to do some research on Reagan's planned indefinite detention, I know one thing, no evidence he ever did nor did he sign any law like the NDAA permitting him too, I will discuss this further once have had a chance to look into it.

The PATRIOT Act is an awful thing and I have railed against this many times, for most it was knee jerk reaction, for other more sinister types in the government it was an important step towards the police state they desire, they exploited 9/11 to get it passed.Bush was more an unwitting accomplice in this than anything and not intelligent enough to see his neocon advisers pushing him in the wrong direction.Bush, like many, overreacted and now we have to live in a police state for it.

Obama is a different creature, he is not stupid.Obama as he has said from day one wants a "fundmental transformation" of the US.Most people just do not fully understand what he meant by that but if you do some research, look into who the man it, read his books, look at his associations, his actions since taking power, his words , fully understand who he is and what he wants. I don't just say this online, say it in person and put it out there as much as possible.Some people do their own research and wake up, some don't. apparently before you see the danger he has to start killing more people or get us in a war we can't really win when the signs are already there.

Steve, you and I just have different styles.I am confrontational and yes I have no problem telling someone they lack a certain amount of intellect if they honestly follow and believe a religion or a set political/economic beliefs that have never, ever worked.Someone believes in a political figure that is such an overt threat to the liberties of the people, then yes they are an idiot, esp when they ignore the proof.Seems you are very old school and that is fine, it's a natural clash.

I do know I am right, this is not a religious argument, the evidence of the clear and present danger that obama poses is there and has been for a long time, many are waking up or already have but some like you are still stuck on being "fair" and "tolerant" while disguising it in alleged "logic" , it's nothing more than refusing to admit we have someone who is an actual threat to this country holding power.Obama is more of threat than any terrorist or other nation right now.

I honestly do hope I am wrong about his plans for a third term.Yes, I have no problem letting someone know when I am right and they were wrong.There is nothing more satisfying than trying to tell someone about things, but they are too ignorant to listen then only to be proven correct but in this case I would love to be wrong.

[Tribesman]

Ronald Wilson Reagan had no questionable ties or allegiance for enemy.
Bloody hell, are you for real?:har:
Throughout his political career Reagan held some of the most questionable ties humanly possible which created decades of damage on the US, and as President actively aided your enemies.
Successive presidents have spent countless billions and many thousands of lives dealing with the terrible legacy of Reagans allegiances.:down:

[Jimbuna]

Bubblehead1980

Your repeated name calling and slurs toward the POTUS are not necessary. You have made your opinions known time and time again, so often in fact that they could possibly be interpreted as hate speech and racial name calling.

I know this sort of behaviour and content is not what Neal, myself or other moderators care to see and judging by the number of post reports more than a fair few members of the community.

I'm hopeful you can debate and argue your points without repeatedly resorting to the above mentioned in the future.

I'm also hopeful you will take my advice in the friendly manner it is intended.

[mookiemookie]

Just ban him already. How many warnings and futile requests to change their behavior does someone get?

[Oberon]

This just in:


"I'm sorry I created the whole thing, sincerely, sincerely, sorry...

...and you guys on on your own now...

Again, sorry...

GOD"


<O>

https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/1028382976/h01ECC955/

[Oberon]

Just ban him already. How many warnings and futile requests to change their behavior does someone get?

More than I'd give, which is why I'm not a moderator. :haha::03:

[Sailor Steve]

I will have to do some research on Reagan's planned indefinite detention, I know one thing, no evidence he ever did nor did he sign any law like the NDAA permitting him too, I will discuss this further once have had a chance to look into it.
No, he didn't sign anything, because it wasn't passed. I'm not sure that it was even proposed, but the evidence is there that it was discussed and that he agreed with it.

The PATRIOT Act is an awful thing and I have railed against this many times
Where? On these boards? The only time I can remember you addressing it is when somebody else shoved it in your face.

Bush was more an unwitting accomplice in this than anything and not intelligent enough to see his neocon advisers pushing him in the wrong direction.Bush, like many, overreacted and now we have to live in a police state for it.
That I will agree with.

apparently before you see the danger he has to start killing more people or get us in a war we can't really win when the signs are already there.
The problem isn't seeing the danger, it's what you can actually do about it. You accuse him of violating the Constitution, yet you don't say what can be done without violating the Constitution. Exactly what do you think should be done at this point?

Steve, you and I just have different styles.
It's not about style, it's about presenting an actual argument rather than shout to everybody that you're right and they're wrong.

I am confrontational and yes I have no problem telling someone they lack a certain amount of intellect
I guess you don't actually read anything on this forum except as it relates to what you post. If you had would would have noticed long ago that I can be extremely confrontational. That said, I do try to stay within the bounds of actual discussion and debate. That is what a "certain amount of intellect" entails. It's funny that you should say that, because when others say you lack the same you accuse them of personal attacks. Is it okay for you to point that out and others not? I'm sorry, but your "style" lacks just about everything required for any kind of reasonable discussion, and shows no real reason at all, just vitriol against someone you don't like.

if they honestly follow and believe a religion or a set political/economic beliefs that have never, ever worked.
No. You can argue against said beliefs, but simply calling them stupid is the lazy man's way out. It could be argued that the economic beliefs have never worked because the opposition to them prevented that from happening. As for religion, you don't know that any particular belief is wrong, and just saying it's so doesn't make it so.

Someone believes in a political figure that is such an overt threat to the liberties of the people, then yes they are an idiot, esp when they ignore the proof.
You've read his books. You've formed conclusions. That's okay as far as it goes, but it does not constitute proof. You're just like the Truthers in that. You insist that there is evidence, but it's only evidence to you because you already believe it.

Seems you are very old school and that is fine, it's a natural clash.
If "old school" means believing in reason and logic, then it's a major clash, because those are two things all your "arguments" are sorely lacking.

I do know I am right
No, you don't. You believe it with all your heart and soul, and never question your own rightness. This makes you exactly like a religious fanatic preaching your version of the absolute truth. But you don't know for certain, and claiming you do only exposes the same lack of intellect you accuse others of showing.

this is not a religious argument
Sure it is. You just can't see it, because you're a believer.

the evidence of the clear and present danger that obama poses is there and has been for a long time
Assume that's true. What do you think we should do about it?


many are waking up or already have but some like you are still stuck on being "fair" and "tolerant" while disguising it in alleged "logic"
Better than being a fanatic and disguising it as "intellect". If that sounds like an insult, remember that you started it.


it's nothing more than refusing to admit we have someone who is an actual threat to this country holding power.Obama is more of threat than any terrorist or other nation right now.
And that has been said by the opposition to just about every president we've had. Of course this time it's different. This time it's true. That's what they said as well.

Again, assuming for the moment it is true, what do you think should be done?

I honestly do hope I am wrong
You keep saying that, but of course you're right so you don't really hope you're wrong. You enjoy being right, and wouldn't change that for the world.

I have no problem letting someone know when I am right and they were wrong.
As I've said before, if you know everything then you have no room to learn anything. And you haven't yet.

There is nothing more satisfying than trying to tell someone about things, but they are too ignorant to listen then only to be proven correct but in this case I would love to be wrong.
So did you ever admit you were wrong about your copypasta 'Lay Off Obama' thread? Pretty much everything you claimed there was wrong. Of course it wasn't your fault since you were just quoting someone else. Did you ever admit you were wrong about the whole FEMA thing?

I don't hold out much hope for this one either. Or that you'll ever figure out that you are your own worst enemy.

[Subnuts]

But, true courage is knowing you're wrong but refusing to admit it. (http://www.theonion.com/articles/true-courage-is-knowing-youre-wrong-but-refusing-t,33742/)

[Oberon]

The oppressive Obama regime spreads its shadowy tentacles to Australia:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0549kdr1Xww

[u crank]

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ4MAE2A6IF0gt5nJX2MHNmkNNZ_YUVx EpNMOQLn7l0LNNBN_cxSQ

[Armistead]

Just ban him already. How many warnings and futile requests to change their behavior does someone get?

Off with their heads.......

Anyway, don't ban Bubble until I get my PC fixed and we get our mod finished.

If Bubble gets banned, you'll lose me as a member as well..

wait, hmmm, maybe not, too many of you would view that as a win win.

[Onkel Neal]

Just ban him already. How many warnings and futile requests to change their behavior does someone get?
Three in months with 30 days, 4 in months with 31 days.

No, it is entirely unfair. Credit score does not take into account things that happen out of control then it affects people's ability to get things(certain jobs included) they NEED...... Honestly, it is "the man's" way to keep a lot of people down because they wont or cant at a moment in time, play by his rules.Also, without know this guy you suggested he is sloppy and undisciplined because of his credit? See allows for a lot of prejudgements, it's an unfair process.

I mean how ridiculous is it you credit score takes a hit if someone runs a credit check when you apply for things? That is the most ridiculous crap ever, it punishes someone for trying to get things.The system is outdated, unfair and needs to be abolished and at the least, a major consumer oriented overhaul.

Careful, you are sure beginning to sound like an entitlement class liberal.

[desertstriker]

I honestly do hope I am wrong about his plans for a third term.Yes, I have no problem letting someone know when I am right and they were wrong.There is nothing more satisfying than trying to tell someone about things, but they are too ignorant to listen then only to be proven correct but in this case I would love to be wrong.
Your ignorance of the constitution really shows. Obama can not get a third term because of the 22nd amendment passed after FDR. that would have to be readmended to allow a 3rd term or more which would be extremely difficult.

[Tchocky]

Didn't you see what happened in the IRS and Benghazi?

The clues for a third term are all there, you just don't want to see them because people will call you a racist.

[razark]

Your ignorance of the constitution really shows. Obama can not get a third term because of the 22nd amendment passed after FDR. that would have to be readmended to allow a 3rd term or more which would be extremely difficult.
But he's going to use his secret army (from the health care law) to take over the US, supported by the DHS (using all the ammunition they bought) to take out the American people, who won't have any guns (because Obama is going to forcibly confiscate all of them), and those who do have guns won't have any ammo (because, again, DHS).

[desertstriker]

my responce to those who really think a 3rd term is possiblle
the 22ND amendment
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

and how an amendment would have to be done
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_Five_of_the_United_States_Constitution

so as you can see it is ny impossible for a third term or more.

now i might have to add a reminder on a calendar to start a tread LIKE this one in when in 2016 :P
Razark I really hope you are being sarcastic.

[Platapus]

Why would anyone think that someone would ever want to be the POTUS for more than 8 years? It has got to be a crappy job with life threatening pressure. Just look at the pictures of Presidents before and after two terms.

I truly believe that at the end of the second term, the president breathes a sigh of relief that his party can't pressure him to run again. :yep:

Since this is a forum on the Internets Tubes, the argument can't be considered legitimate unless there is a quote from some old dead guy.

As to the Presidency, the two happiest days of my life were those of my entrance upon the office and my surrender of it. - Marty Van Buren

[Sailor Steve]

Made me look! I was going to make a crack about a guy with a starched collar being called "Marty", but now I just gotta get a haircut like that! :rock:

[Armistead]

Three in months with 30 days, 4 in months with 31 days.


.

That's a liberal monthly plan and some handy info I didn't know:hmm2:

[razark]

Razark I really hope you are being sarcastic.
Sarcastic? Me? Never!

I learned everything I need about this from the "Yubs and Bubs Scary Liberal Hour/Endless Threads".

[Admiral Halsey]

Why would anyone think that someone would ever want to be the POTUS for more than 8 years?

FDR Says hello.

[Tchocky]

...... .does it even need to be said?

[Bubblehead1980]

Your ignorance of the constitution really shows. Obama can not get a third term because of the 22nd amendment passed after FDR. that would have to be readmended to allow a 3rd term or more which would be extremely difficult.


Ignorant of the constitution? Oh, whoever you are, you just have no earthly idea, ill let that one slide. I am well aware of the constitutional term limits, you are are obviously ignorant not understanding the situation.This is someone who ignores the constitution so it's not a stretch to think he would push for another term.Would it be legal? no but since when does obama care abotu legal means? never. Assuming we are safe because the constitution says so is blissful ignorance when it comes to anything to do with BHO.

[mookiemookie]

Three in months with 30 days, 4 in months with 31 days.



Lesson learned: spread out your trolling. Make yourself a troll calendar, as it were. :rotfl2:

[Bubblehead1980]

Just ban him already. How many warnings and futile requests to change their behavior does someone get?

Spoken like a true liberal

[desertstriker]

you know bubble your hatred for obama and any lefty is really becoming ridiculous i would hate to heare what you would say to anyone who does not align themselves with any political party.

[Tribesman]

Don't ban him, I want to see the next episode of "Obamas personal secret army of Nazi dentists are coming to get us" .

[Admiral Halsey]

Spoken like a true liberal

You know in my life I have found out more often then not the most intolerant people on this earth are the ones who call themselves "Liberal". I still don't understand why they can be so close-minded when someone disagrees with them.

[vienna]

Everyone, please try to remember Bubbles is ostensibly in law school and therefore is much more knowledgdeable than we mere mortals on matters of government and law, particularly constitutional law. After all, he is going to take a bar exam after his studies and, when he passes it, he will be a full fledged member of a noble profession...

Wait, he still has to pass a bar exam?...

Never mind;...we're safe...

<O>

[Sailor Steve]

That's a liberal monthly plan and some handy info I didn't know:hmm2:
And you still don't. :shifty:

...... .does it even need to be said?
No, but it will be, by somebody. Possibly me. :O:

Lesson learned: spread out your trolling. Make yourself a troll calendar, as it were. :rotfl2:
Neal, we've suckered another one.

Don't ban him, I want to see the next episode of "Obamas personal secret army of Nazi dentists are coming to get us" .
Is it safe?

[desertstriker]

Everyone, please try to remember Bubbles is ostensibly in law school and therefore is much more knowledgdeable than we mere mortals on matters of government and law, particularly constitutional law. After all, he is going to take a bar exam after his studies and, when he passes it, he will be a full fledged member of a noble profession...

Wait, he still has to pass a bar exam?...

Never mind;...we're safe...

<O>
good god he and one of my tea party relatives would probably hit it off... please don't be going to hillsdale college.... please don't be going to hillsdale college *praying*

[Sailor Steve]

Spoken like a true liberal
What exactly does political belief have to do with someone thinking you're a troll? Whether he's right or wrong in his political beliefs or in his belief that you're a troll is irrelevant - the one has nothing to do with the other, and your assumption is invalid.

[Oberon]

This kind of thread goes on for too long, and since it's clear that people will not let it sink out of sight, and indeed neither will Bubbles it's really probably best that it be locked.

[Tchocky]

Pfft. Locking is admitting defeat. Persistence hunting is what we're talking about.

[Oberon]

On what grounds? That you personally don't like it? There are many threads that one person or another thinks goes on too long, and many that one person or another thinks serves no purpose. Were they all to be locked there wouldn't be many threads left.

It's a pointless circle-bait of a thread, Bubbles is never going to give up his bloodlust for Obama and the current US administration, and people trying to point out the flaws in his arguement, whilst amusing, are essentially fighting a battle they cannot win, and this will just result in name calling and heated arguments. But, there's a lot of that about so I suppose it doesn't really matter.

In short, yeah, I don't really like this thread, nor what it does to people, but I don't really matter, so carry on, and I'll keep watching.

[Tribesman]

Is it safe?
A classic:up:


Everyone, please try to remember Bubbles is ostensibly in law school and therefore is much more knowledgdeable than we mere mortals on matters of government and law, particularly constitutional law.
Good point. Though as he said that all the staff at school were dumb and knew nothing about law, plus all the students in the school were dumb too. So wouldn't that mean that his education in law is somewhat lacking?

[Sailor Steve]

I posted that by accident. I was composing a much longer post, then decided to back out of it altogether. When I saw I had accidentally posted it anyway I deleted it, but apparently too late. Since you quoted it before I could delete it, I'll continue.

If we know where every thread of this nature is going to go, then should we not lock every one of them after the first post? That might seem to make sense, but then where do you draw the line? Should he really be brigged, or even banned? Why. I advocate infractions for abusive language and name-calling, even if it's against a non-member, such as a public figure. For topic spamming? Bubble head starts a huge number of threads. Most of them are on the SH4 forums and about the game. In that context he is consistently helpful. He doesn't post political threads in GT as often as it seems. His last one was three weeks ago. The previous one was about three weeks before that. Of course it could be argued that one such thread should have been where the line was drawn, but unless someone breaks an actual rule it's hard to justify that line.

His political beliefs are his own. He needs to learn how to express them in a manner that convinces people to listen to him rather than his current manner, which only convinces people that he's a nutcase. I argue with him a lot because I always have hope that he will finally figure that out some day. More flies with honey than with vinegar and all that.

Threads like this might annoy some, but while they may not serve any real purpose the don't do any real harm either. I've recently heard it proposed that threads like the Joke thread, Four Word Story Game thread and especially the Tories thread are useless and should be closed. Should they? For the most part I feel that way, but for the most part I don't read them, so they don't really affect me.

I don't know what the answers are, and if I believed I did I'd probably be wrong.

[vienna]

Good point. Though as he said that all the staff at school were dumb and knew nothing about law, plus all the students in the school were dumb too. So wouldn't that mean that his education in law is somewhat lacking?



And, as I recall, according to Bubbles both faculty and students are a lot of liberals, to boot. So, I would suppose, if he fails to pass his bar, it really wouldn't be his fault, would it? It would just be part of that vast liberal conspiracy headed by Obama and those who control him. It must be good for Bubbles to have an out that relieves him of all culpability for his shortcomings...

No, wait, blaming the world, I believe, is classed as a liberal fallback...


<O>

[Takeda Shingen]

You know in my life I have found out more often then not the most intolerant people on this earth are the ones who call themselves "Liberal". I still don't understand why they can be so close-minded when someone disagrees with them.

That's interesting given that my experience has been the opposite. It is was changed me from being a 700 Club Reagan conservative into what I am today. Perhaps the truth is in the middle ground.

[desertstriker]

Good point. Though as he said that all the staff at school were dumb and knew nothing about law, plus all the students in the school were dumb too. So wouldn't that mean that his education in law is somewhat lacking?
no just means he thinks he knows more than his professors who are a hell of a lot older and more experienced than him. i have seen people with that attitude and of the 5 i know 4 get their law licensees suspended regulary and 2 of those 4 can no longer practice law . It is pretty funny that the 1 has never had a suspension got out in the real world and changed his ways fast and no longer thinks they know it all. perhaps we can hope once bubbles gets into the real world his attitude changes a bit just as my friends has.

a fun fact for you guys though studies are showing the less you know the more you think you know :haha: of course i got that from a psychology professor.

[Takeda Shingen]

Threads like this might annoy some, but while they may not serve any real purpose the don't do any real harm either. I've recently heard it proposed that threads like the Joke thread, Four Word Story Game thread and especially the Tories thread are useless and should be closed. Should they? For the most part I feel that way, but for the most part I don't read them, so they don't really affect me

The thing is that threads like this and dozens of others that you see here today weren't permitted in the good old days when this website was actually about video games. Nowadays, I see the commonplace acceptance of the argument and wonder how long it is before Mr. Stevens sells the domain off to Infowars. The progression has been gradual, but I don't think one can deny that things have changed drastically since I joined 13 years ago.

[Sailor Steve]

a fun fact for you guys though studies are showing the less you know the more you think you know :haha: of course i got that from a psychology professor.
Read my current sig. I also have another Solzhenitsyn quote in my collection of similar character: “It's a universal law – intolerance is the first sign of an inadequate education. An ill-educated person behaves with arrogant impatience, whereas truly profound education breeds humility.”

And a third, but this one's by one of my favorite quote-makers - me. :O: It's also the perfect match for your professor's quote.

"It's said that the more we learn, the less we know. I've reached a point in my life where I've learned so much I'm now convinced I don't know anything."

[Oberon]

I posted that by accident. I was composing a much longer post, then decided to back out of it altogether. When I saw I had accidentally posted it anyway I deleted it, but apparently too late. Since you quoted it before I could delete it, I'll continue.

If we know where every thread of this nature is going to go, then should we not lock every one of them after the first post? That might seem to make sense, but then where do you draw the line? Should he really be brigged, or even banned? Why. I advocate infractions for abusive language and name-calling, even if it's against a non-member, such as a public figure. For topic spamming? Bubble head starts a huge number of threads. Most of them are on the SH4 forums and about the game. In that context he is consistently helpful. He doesn't post political threads in GT as often as it seems. His last one was three weeks ago. The previous one was about three weeks before that. Of course it could be argued that one such thread should have been where the line was drawn, but unless someone breaks an actual rule it's hard to justify that line.

His political beliefs are his own. He needs to learn how to express them in a manner that convinces people to listen to him rather than his current manner, which only convinces people that he's a nutcase. I argue with him a lot because I always have hope that he will finally figure that out some day. More flies with honey than with vinegar and all that.

Threads like this might annoy some, but while they may not serve any real purpose the don't do any real harm either. I've recently heard it proposed that threads like the Joke thread, Four Word Story Game thread and especially the Tories thread are useless and should be closed. Should they? For the most part I feel that way, but for the most part I don't read them, so they don't really affect me.

I don't know what the answers are, and if I believed I did I'd probably be wrong.

I will admit, his thread generation rate has come down remarkably since Yubbas brig time, a shot across the bows perhaps, but personally I wouldn't brig or ban Bubblehead, whilst his arguments are poorly constructed they are not generally offensive nor any more inflamatory than some other people around here.
I'd consider merging some threads though, such as this one with the Conspiracy theory thread, since they are both about the same level of discussion, and then perhaps pull the conspiracy theories out of the Syrian thread and put that in there too. It might make the Conspiracy thread a bit messy, but it's already pretty messy anyway. :haha:
But, like I've said before, I'm not a moderator and I wouldn't make a very good one anyway, I'm too hardline, and the axe would come out a bit too often I suspect. So I defer to those that are, and just pipe up from time to time when frustration overcomes inertia.

[Takeda Shingen]

But, like I've said before, I'm not a moderator and I wouldn't make a very good one anyway, I'm too hardline, and the axe would come out a bit too often I suspect. So I defer to those that are, and just pipe up from time to time when frustration overcomes inertia.

You'd make a better moderator than you think. I think I have demonstrated that an axe-heavy approach is not at all bad for the community. Frankly, if I ran WhatTakedaThinks.com, you'd be a mod.

[Sailor Steve]

I'd consider merging some threads though, such as this one with the Conspiracy theory thread, since they are both about the same level of discussion, and then perhaps pull the conspiracy theories out of the Syrian thread and put that in there too. It might make the Conspiracy thread a bit messy, but it's already pretty messy anyway. :haha:
Excellent observation.

But, like I've said before, I'm not a moderator and I wouldn't make a very good one anyway
You might be surprised. There are guidelines and some rules, so it's not that easy to do what you want.

I'm too hardline, and the axe would come out a bit too often I suspect.
So am I, and sometimes I go to far. That's one of Neal's jobs, keeping his staff in line. I've made more than a few mistakes, and I sometimes call myself a Nazi where the rules are concerned. But we learn, and a part of that learning is finding out how the boss wants things run. We even get to disagree sometimes. I sometimes also disagree more than I should, but Neal is always willing to listen and to talk things over rationally. It's not that hard, mainly because he makes it so. You'd probably do better than you think. :sunny:

[HunterICX]

You'd make a better moderator than you think. I think I have demonstrated that an axe-heavy approach is not at all bad for the community. Frankly, if I ran WhatTakedaThinks.com, you'd be a mod.

This better be the homepage banner!
http://www.underagethinkers.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/guy_on_bed_with_guns.jpg

HunterICX

[vienna]

Bubbles, just found a new avatar for you:


http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/RbQE3SDxs4s/hqdefault.jpg


<O>

[Onkel Neal]

Excellent observation.


You might be surprised. There are guidelines and some rules, so it's not that easy to do what you want.


So am I, and sometimes I go to far. That's one of Neal's jobs, keeping his staff in line. I've made more than a few mistakes, and I sometimes call myself a Nazi where the rules are concerned. But we learn, and a part of that learning is finding out how the boss wants things run. We even get to disagree sometimes. I sometimes also disagree more than I should, but Neal is always willing to listen and to talk things over rationally. It's not that hard, mainly because he makes it so. You'd probably do better than you think. :sunny:

It's not really keeping anyone in line. I would hope it's more of a cooperative effort.

As for banning people who post what many consider nutty opinions, is that really the best way to approach it? I prefer to reserve banning for straight out violations of the rules. So what if one or two guys think Obama is gearing up to take over the country. That kind of thinking does not threaten my concept of reality.

Now, if someone topic spams 10 threads to the same tune, I can see pulling out the ban hammer for that.

[vienna]

...I can see pulling out the ban hammer for that.



It's finally out: Neal is actually Thor!...


<O>

[Stealhead]

It's finally out: Neal is actually Thor!...


<O>


Well guess that means that the topic spammers had better stay Loki.

[Wolferz]

I'm sorry I convinced you to have an open mind.
How was I to know that your brain would fall out?
Maybe a hair net would solve the problem?
I freely admit that I was wrong.

[Bubblehead1980]

Bubbles, just found a new avatar for you:


http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/RbQE3SDxs4s/hqdefault.jpg


<O>

it's authori-tye

[Bubblehead1980]

Amazes me the number of members who implore the mods to ban those they dislike. Really, should stop and see how wrong that is and ask yourself where you went wrong as a person. I may find left wingers ridiculous and will call them out, antagonize, argue etc but you'll never hear me say "shut them up, ban them" because that is a key element of liberty, freedom of speech. I despise MSNBC but I will be honest, I watch it, mainly as a know they enemy thing and for a good laugh. Occasionally, I agree with what is said.I dislike what many classmates say, but would never try to ban them etc, just fight the battles with the facts and try to expose those who are unaware.I know I have made a difference, after years of fighting this battle, I have seen several wake up, I have seen a large number of our citizens wake up, it's a process for sure.

Liberals are usually the ones who call for manipulation of free speech, via the "fairness doctrine" or just outright suppression because they can't win on ideas and they know it.Honestly, has any liberal presidential candidate in recent years floating any ideas that really make sense? No, they play identity politics.Race, class, gender, sexual orientation etc They use emotion based rhetoric to try and fool the populace into voting for an empty chair.Sometimes it works, sometimes it does not, it did the last two cycles.

Conservatives(not Republicans) but real conservatives float ideas, like follow the constitution, stop the economic rape via taxes and debt, stop trying to play beat cop for the world, demand respect for individual rights.Crazy things like that, i know.Republican neocon and RINO's caused a lot of damage because they were lumped in the collective psyche of many uninformed voters as conservatives.

All of that aside, the point of the thread was to see if anyone of my online friends in the forum were willing to admit they regret their vote and support for Barack Hussein Obama.I was curious since I've had a couple of friends in day to day life admit they were wrong. Despite what certain members will say, I will admit when I am wrong.

I was wrong to not check out a story a while back(the photo thing, the young kids in tactical gear, turned out to not be DHS but some police explorers or something) but does that mean I am wrong about other things? no. We all make mistakes.

[desertstriker]

Barack Hussein Obama.
I really wish you would stop using his middle name. you use it as blatant disrespect for the commander in chief. I have no love for Obama either, but i make sure i refer to him with the respect due to the office of president.

[Bubblehead1980]

I really wish you would stop using his middle name. you use it as blatant disrespect for the commander in chief. I have no love for Obama either, but i make sure i refer to him with the respect due to the office of president.

Deserves not one ounce of respect.Respect is earned, not automatic, he has done nothing to earn respect.

[eddie]

Deserves not one ounce of respect.Respect is earned, not automatic, he has done nothing to earn respect.

Exactly how I always felt about Cheney, not worth an ounce of respect.

[Bubblehead1980]

Exactly how I always felt about Cheney, not worth an ounce of respect.


I once liked him, admired him telling Leahy to go f himself on the Senate floor lol but once learned about him, no a fan.Does not compare to BHO by any means but definitely not a great guy.

[Stealhead]

Deserves not one ounce of respect.Respect is earned, not automatic, he has done nothing to earn respect.


The same could be said of you.What have you done to deserve any respect from your peers?

In the military the idea is respect the rank not the person.Of course with your attitude you would not last 10 seconds in the military and my saying that has nothing to do with your political opinions but simply the attitude that you display.even if you did make it you would have very few friends.

[Wolferz]

All of that aside, the point of the thread was to see if anyone of my online friends in the forum were willing to admit they regret their vote and support for Barack Hussein Obama.


Assuming that they committed the accused action.:D
I know I'm innocent. Getting the rest to fess up is another matter entirely.:03:

But, why worry about it? I'm sure they rue it and will suffer the consequences in silence.
You know what they say...
"There's a sucker born every minute":nope:
Probably thought they were voting for Lionel Ritchie.

[soopaman2]

I enjoy your posts Bubbles.

Most of them enrage me, but hey, that is why I read GT.:D

Something about you irks people, and with most people I would call it pure trollery, but with you, it is sincerity.

Keep up the good work, ruffling feathers evokes legit discussion.

I am not remorseful for voting for Obama.

2 word reason.

Sarah Palin.

Blame her, not liberals for the current crap we live in. Alot of on the fence people felt the same as me.

[Sailor Steve]

Amazes me the number of members who implore the mods to ban those they dislike.
No one here as ever asked for a ban on someone because they disliked them. Some people find your posts and attitude to constitute trolling. I'm not one of them, but I understand why they feel that way, and I've tried to explain it until I've pretty much run out of ways of trying to get through.

People react to us because of the way we say things. Saying you don't care what people think of you just exacerbates the problem. If you really want to convince people to listen and learn you need to adopt a more conciliatory tone. As the old saying goes, "You'll catch more flies with honey than with vinegar". Bragging about the people you've been confrontational with doesn't help either. How many more might you have convinced if you had talked to them properly, as if you were trying to help rather than just win?

[soopaman2]

Not to seem like I am piling on, but bubbles, you tend to have an accusatory tone to some of your posts, trust me, I am guilty of it too. I get myself in trouble alot here with that myself.

The info you do present is valid, but you tend to attack people at the same time, "how do you liberals feel now?" tagged at the end of a good post kills it.

I am a fan Bubbles, but you got so much more potential.

No one wants you banned, (I said worse than you, I am still here;)) and we are complete opposites on ideology, I like that kinda conflict here, just less malice behind it.

I mean that as constructive critisism, and not trying to belittle or preach to you.

:up: