DC Tom Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 Did Tom just say he's speechless? Even more shocking, I said I have no justification for my opinion.
Bigfatbillsfan Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 (edited) Your God or my God? My God is a God of vengeance. My God is an indian that turns into a wolf when he's mad, and he's paid less taxes than Willie Nelson. I'd appreciate it if you and Obama keep your God out of my wallet. What the hell are you talking about? This is so stupid it's hard to really reply to it. I just said that we should keep chruch and state separate. And by the way, my God is named Ulthar, he lives in the lake behind my house and pisses all over Indian wolves when he's mad. Edited February 3, 2012 by Bigfatbillsfan
Jauronimo Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 What the hell are you talking about? This is so stupid it's hard to really reply to it. I just said that we should keep chruch and state separate. And by the way, my God is named Ulthar, he lives in the lake behind my house and pisses all over Indian wolves when he's mad. There's no lake behind your house you f#$%ing liar! Keep your flying lake monster out of my wallet!
/dev/null Posted February 3, 2012 Posted February 3, 2012 Even more shocking, I said I have no justification for my opinion. That never stopped you before
Bigfatbillsfan Posted February 4, 2012 Posted February 4, 2012 There's no lake behind your house you f#$%ing liar! Keep your flying lake monster out of my wallet! Ulthar doesn't fly dipshit!
B-Man Posted February 4, 2012 Posted February 4, 2012 Not you, nor anyone else in the world has a mandate from God to tell us how God feels about taxes. LOL................I'm not the one doing just that, on a national stage to defend myself....................talk to Barry. I think to myself, if I’m willing to give something up as somebody who’s been extraordinarily blessed, and give up some of the tax breaks that I enjoy, I actually think that’s going to make economic sense. But for me as a Christian, it also coincides with Jesus’s teaching that “for unto whom much is given, much shall be required.” It mirrors the Islamic belief that those who’ve been blessed have an obligation to use those blessings to help others, or the Jewish doctrine of moderation and consideration for others. .
Koko78 Posted February 4, 2012 Posted February 4, 2012 Ulthar doesn't fly dipshit! Clearly he's not much of a god then. I'll wager the urine he excretes on Indian gods isn't even Dom Perignon. A god who can't fly and pees crap imitation champagne... that's just pathetic.
B-Man Posted February 4, 2012 Posted February 4, 2012 More viewpoints on Mr. Obama's new found use for religion. The rich should pay more not only because “I actually think that is going to make economic sense, but for me as a Christian, it also coincides with Jesus’s teaching that ‘for unto whom much is given, much shall be required,’” Obama said at the Washington Hilton, delivering remarks at an annual event that every president has attended since Dwight D. Eisenhower. “We can all benefit from turning to our Creator, listening to him,” Obama said. “Avoiding phony religiosity. … This is especially important right now when we’re facing some big challenges as a nation.” A bold statement, one I suppose he thinks bolsters his position. However, there’s a word in there that changes everything. “Given.” See, Obama isn’t talking about looting from those who have been “given” anything. He’s talking about shaking down the producers, the “creators” of profit, those who have, through their own industry, created wealth. If Obama really, truly believes Jesus’s teaching that ‘for unto whom much is given, much shall be required,’” let’s apply that to the recipient of government assistance. If you are given much from the benevolent government, shouldn’t much be required from you? Without a doubt. But it is considered an outrage that we would even consider doing a urinalysis on those who collect government assistance, despite the fact that those who were forced to pay for the assistance were often willing to provide a sample. How about those who live in government housing? Should we expect them to keep the property clean and in good repair? They are getting much, should we not expect much? And “the projects” have become synonymous with filth and squalor. Why do we not have a squad of government employees who force the people who take advantage of the coerced charity provided by the taxpayer to keep “the projects” in good repair? Why isn’t much required from them? And why aren’t they required to show an increase in the skills necessary to stop being a good for nothing and start being a producer? Remember the story I put on the blog this winter about an Atlanta woman who was upset about not getting federal heating assistance? In the photo of her, you can clearly see a huge flat screen television and an XBox 360. Why are those who enjoy the largesse of widespread government seizure of personal property allowed to spend money on such luxuries? Shouldn’t much be required, including the sacrifice of high definition television until you can pay for your own heat? All American Blogger In the midst of espousing Biblical principles at the National Prayer Breakfast yesterday, Barack Obama made a point to say, “We are our brother’s keeper.” Interesting that he used the collective “we” — and made no mention of his actual brother or of his responsibilities to him. “For a start, when he says, ‘I am my brother’s keeper,’ his brother is back in Kenya living on $12 a year. That’s what he was living on at the time of the 2008 election. So all the president has to do in terms of shared responsibility is put a $10 bill in an envelope and mail it to Nairobi or Mombasa or wherever and he will double his brother’s salary.” - Mark Steyn Hot Air .
Bigfatbillsfan Posted February 5, 2012 Posted February 5, 2012 LOL................I'm not the one doing just that, on a national stage to defend myself....................talk to Barry. . Obama doesn't have a mandate from god to tell me what God thinks about taxes either. It's nothing but pandering.
OCinBuffalo Posted February 6, 2012 Posted February 6, 2012 (edited) Perhaps the biggest loss for liberals over the last 10 years is their ability to effectively turn ALL people on the right into caricatures. The simple fact is that the average joe knows what the current conservative message is, and it ain't about guns or bibles. It is about the failure of big government to do the big things it promises. Again, motives aside, the method of taxing and spending simply doesn't work, and that's an effective message, because it has the advantage of being easily demonstrable. "Guns and Bibles, yeehaw!" simply doesn't stick anymore. Look at this thread. Nobody here thinks this guy's "test" is even relevant, never mind worthy of serious consideration.....except maybe birddog. Birddog's problem: he found 1 idiot, but that doesn't mitigate the routine beatings by 20+ posters he takes here due to his silly arguments. I bet it's comforting to birddog that he found his 1(one) guy to hold up...as meaning something...to somebody... But, his story doesn't mean schit to any of us, regardless of where we line up politically. Conversely, it has become increasingly easier to broad brush liberals over the last 10 years. Why? Because most of them stopped thinking for themselves a long time ago and/or have stopped thinking in general in favor of emoting/wishful thinking. When they all say the same thing, because they are all getting what they say from the same place, and it is proven wrong(left's batting avg since the Surge in Iraq? .050?), then it's easy for us to say they are ALL idiots, even if that isn't the case. We need look no further than the OWS turds repeating whatever the "leader" says on Youtube. Nobody remembers what they said, all we remember is their totalitarian tactics.That's a message that is undeniable. That's a picture that is unforgettable. And as I told you all in the OWS thread(um early on), thanks to inexplicable stupidity on the part of elected Democrats, that image is now 50x more powerful that some tired old caricature about guns and bibles, because it is both accurate and relevant, and is now hanging around their necks. This summer is going to be a barrel of laughs....for me, not birddog....as I watch the political ad content that the idiot Democrats have provided us all....for free....being re-cycled. Edited February 6, 2012 by OCinBuffalo
birdog1960 Posted February 7, 2012 Author Posted February 7, 2012 Perhaps the biggest loss for liberals over the last 10 years is their ability to effectively turn ALL people on the right into caricatures. The simple fact is that the average joe knows what the current conservative message is, and it ain't about guns or bibles. It is about the failure of big government to do the big things it promises. Again, motives aside, the method of taxing and spending simply doesn't work, and that's an effective message, because it has the advantage of being easily demonstrable. "Guns and Bibles, yeehaw!" simply doesn't stick anymore. Look at this thread. Nobody here thinks this guy's "test" is even relevant, never mind worthy of serious consideration.....except maybe birddog. Birddog's problem: he found 1 idiot, but that doesn't mitigate the routine beatings by 20+ posters he takes here due to his silly arguments. I bet it's comforting to birddog that he found his 1(one) guy to hold up...as meaning something...to somebody... But, his story doesn't mean schit to any of us, regardless of where we line up politically. Conversely, it has become increasingly easier to broad brush liberals over the last 10 years. Why? Because most of them stopped thinking for themselves a long time ago and/or have stopped thinking in general in favor of emoting/wishful thinking. When they all say the same thing, because they are all getting what they say from the same place, and it is proven wrong(left's batting avg since the Surge in Iraq? .050?), then it's easy for us to say they are ALL idiots, even if that isn't the case. We need look no further than the OWS turds repeating whatever the "leader" says on Youtube. Nobody remembers what they said, all we remember is their totalitarian tactics.That's a message that is undeniable. That's a picture that is unforgettable. And as I told you all in the OWS thread(um early on), thanks to inexplicable stupidity on the part of elected Democrats, that image is now 50x more powerful that some tired old caricature about guns and bibles, because it is both accurate and relevant, and is now hanging around their necks. This summer is going to be a barrel of laughs....for me, not birddog....as I watch the political ad content that the idiot Democrats have provided us all....for free....being re-cycled. whateverdude doesn't seem on board with your analysis. he inferred from my gun and ammo ownership and use, a great deal about me, even if it totally missed the target. and i rarely get a chuckle from any political ads. i find them depressing and their effectiveness disconcerting. so, you may be correct on this. if you're laughing at them, i likely won't be. i don't find the stereotypes of liberals and conservatives very accurate except at the extremes. unfortunately, however, i hear and read frequent regurgitation of talking points made by right wing "poltical analysts"/propagandists, even here and that does lead to some generalizations about those who partake in this. the folks i've met who do this have some commonalities, not the least of which is a poor educational history and a tendency towards xenophobia.
OCinBuffalo Posted February 7, 2012 Posted February 7, 2012 whateverdude doesn't seem on board with your analysis. he inferred from my gun and ammo ownership and use, a great deal about me, even if it totally missed the target. and i rarely get a chuckle from any political ads. i find them depressing and their effectiveness disconcerting. so, you may be correct on this. if you're laughing at them, i likely won't be. i don't find the stereotypes of liberals and conservatives very accurate except at the extremes. unfortunately, however, i hear and read frequent regurgitation of talking points made by right wing "poltical analysts"/propagandists, even here and that does lead to some generalizations about those who partake in this. the folks i've met who do this have some commonalities, not the least of which is a poor educational history and a tendency towards xenophobia. Again, you are behind the times. Again, you've tried and failed to make something stick which simply doesn't anymore. It should be evident to you by now that many on this board are just as intelligent as you, if not more so, and have just as good an educational history, if not more so, yet they simply don't agree with you. More often than not, especially in the last 6 years, what you have supported/said has turned out to be wrong. Now, should we start inferring negative things about your educational history? Or, is it more appropriate that we simply be accurate: the methods you choose to support regarding attenuation of serious problems are terrible, because they don't f'ing work as designed. We ask for results, and you give us platitudes, abject failures to solve the intended problems, and more often than not: additional unintended problems that your non-solutions create. When we call you on this, you try to transform the fact that your methods suck, into a non-fact: we don't care about the problems. You question our motives, which is not only dishonorable, but also ineffective. In contrast, we simply question your methods, which is not only fair, but also highly effective. Let's put the focus back where it should be: your solutions to our problems suck. Period. What are you going to do about it? Also, they are easily critiqued, because they are very often less about solving the problem at hand, and more about phony moralizing in a cheap effort at gaining power, and punishing people you don't like. Xenophobia? Because I want our borders secured for national security reasons? Laughable. Why would a conservative, who according to your characterization, doesn't care about anybody but themselves, suddenly start caring about illegals being here or not? Their plight or not? You've argued yourself in a circle. Either your characterization is false, or, you don't understand what conservatives want and why. Take your pick. But, I am sure you will try to avoid a serious discussion by calling us all racists. See, it's like I said: you've cried Wolf/Racist too many times. Now, it's over.
3rdnlng Posted February 8, 2012 Posted February 8, 2012 whateverdude doesn't seem on board with your analysis. he inferred from my gun and ammo ownership and use, a great deal about me, even if it totally missed the target. and i rarely get a chuckle from any political ads. i find them depressing and their effectiveness disconcerting. so, you may be correct on this. if you're laughing at them, i likely won't be. i don't find the stereotypes of liberals and conservatives very accurate except at the extremes. unfortunately, however, i hear and read frequent regurgitation of talking points made by right wing "poltical analysts"/propagandists, even here and that does lead to some generalizations about those who partake in this. the folks i've met who do this have some commonalities, not the least of which is a poor educational history and a tendency towards xenophobia. We all occasionally have typos when we post, but try this on for size; read conservative's posts looking for poor grammar, misspelled words and the misuse of words. Then do the same thing for the libs. See if you still think conservatives are dumber than liberals.
birdog1960 Posted February 8, 2012 Author Posted February 8, 2012 Again, you are behind the times. Again, you've tried and failed to make something stick which simply doesn't anymore. It should be evident to you by now that many on this board are just as intelligent as you, if not more so, and have just as good an educational history, if not more so, yet they simply don't agree with you. More often than not, especially in the last 6 years, what you have supported/said has turned out to be wrong. Now, should we start inferring negative things about your educational history? Or, is it more appropriate that we simply be accurate: the methods you choose to support regarding attenuation of serious problems are terrible, because they don't f'ing work as designed. We ask for results, and you give us platitudes, abject failures to solve the intended problems, and more often than not: additional unintended problems that your non-solutions create. When we call you on this, you try to transform the fact that your methods suck, into a non-fact: we don't care about the problems. You question our motives, which is not only dishonorable, but also ineffective. In contrast, we simply question your methods, which is not only fair, but also highly effective. Let's put the focus back where it should be: your solutions to our problems suck. Period. What are you going to do about it? Also, they are easily critiqued, because they are very often less about solving the problem at hand, and more about phony moralizing in a cheap effort at gaining power, and punishing people you don't like. Xenophobia? Because I want our borders secured for national security reasons? Laughable. Why would a conservative, who according to your characterization, doesn't care about anybody but themselves, suddenly start caring about illegals being here or not? Their plight or not? You've argued yourself in a circle. Either your characterization is false, or, you don't understand what conservatives want and why. Take your pick. But, I am sure you will try to avoid a serious discussion by calling us all racists. See, it's like I said: you've cried Wolf/Racist too many times. Now, it's over. demographics, not platitudes. data, not opinions. from my perspective, the fact that old white men comprise a shrinking percentage of the electorate is a good thing.
3rdnlng Posted February 8, 2012 Posted February 8, 2012 demographics, not platitudes. data, not opinions. from my perspective, the fact that old white men comprise a shrinking percentage of the electorate is a good thing. Why so racist?
Nanker Posted February 8, 2012 Posted February 8, 2012 Why so racist? And ageist too. Class warfare is a tool of the tools.
OCinBuffalo Posted February 8, 2012 Posted February 8, 2012 demographics, not platitudes. data, not opinions. from my perspective, the fact that old white men comprise a shrinking percentage of the electorate is a good thing. Amazing. Literally amazing. I tell you that your ethos is largely predicated not on morality, but instead on gaining power through whipping up hatred and envy....and this is your response? Perhaps your educational history deserves further scrutiny after all? Could be intentional...but I doubt it. But, aside from that, again, you cannot defend your methods, because they are indefensible. If we take what you wrote above seriously, then you also cannot stand on your values, because they are corrupt. There is nothing "moral" or "honorable" about you, is there? The only thing you can do is expose your hatred for other people.....and call that "having a perspective". No. That's being a douche bag. Apparently the liberal ethos is predicated solely on douchebaggery, because it sure as hell isn't about what's best for the country as a whole, or about getting things done properly.
Bigfatbillsfan Posted February 8, 2012 Posted February 8, 2012 And ageist too. Class warfare is a tool of the tools. . Class warfare is a load of ****.
OCinBuffalo Posted February 8, 2012 Posted February 8, 2012 . Class warfare is a load of ****. Not if you use it to win elections....or in more extreme cases, punish some classes in favor of others.
birdog1960 Posted February 8, 2012 Author Posted February 8, 2012 (edited) And ageist too. Class warfare is a tool of the tools. young, black men are disproportionately represented in the us prison system. is that racist? ageist? no, its a statement of fact just as old, white men disproportionately make up the talk radio audience. Amazing. Literally amazing. I tell you that your ethos is largely predicated not on morality, but instead on gaining power through whipping up hatred and envy....and this is your response? Perhaps your educational history deserves further scrutiny after all? Could be intentional...but I doubt it. But, aside from that, again, you cannot defend your methods, because they are indefensible. If we take what you wrote above seriously, then you also cannot stand on your values, because they are corrupt. There is nothing "moral" or "honorable" about you, is there? The only thing you can do is expose your hatred for other people.....and call that "having a perspective". No. That's being a douche bag. Apparently the liberal ethos is predicated solely on douchebaggery, because it sure as hell isn't about what's best for the country as a whole, or about getting things done properly. do you have an argument or just the usual ad hominem attack? Edited February 8, 2012 by birdog1960
Recommended Posts