ExiledInIllinois Posted November 5, 2008 Posted November 5, 2008 I wont be wrong, trust me. If I think he's done a good job he wont get reelected. A good job in my mind is all/most of the things he's against. But we'll see I suppose, I'm of the ilk that says never say never. You are also a baby-boomer... One of many of that spoiled "Me Generation." Now... Do no get me wrong, Obama is a later boomer, but he gets the problem where the "Greatest Generation" went wrong.
erynthered Posted November 5, 2008 Author Posted November 5, 2008 You are also a baby-boomer... One of many of that spoiled "Me Generation." Now... Do no get me wrong, Obama is a later boomer, but he gets the problem where the "Greatest Generation" went wrong. I am a part of the Baby Boomers generation. I'm just wondering how I was part of the generation that spoiled the " Me Generation"? WHAT? How the !@#$ did I do that? My kids are 6 and 5. Acid kick in already?
ExiledInIllinois Posted November 5, 2008 Posted November 5, 2008 I am a part of the Baby Boomers generation. I'm just wondering how I was part of the generation that spoiled the " Me Generation"? WHAT? How the !@#$ did I do that? My kids are 6 and 5. Acid kick in already? Read please. I said: "One of many of that spoiled "Me Generation."" I think you are the one on acid.
erynthered Posted November 5, 2008 Author Posted November 5, 2008 Read please. I said: "One of many of that spoiled "Me Generation."" I think you are the one on acid. I guess you forgot this part: You are also a baby-boomer One of many of that spoiled "Me Generation." Sorry I dont speak Klingon, next time I'll check with Tom before responding to you.
murra Posted November 5, 2008 Posted November 5, 2008 Most of America does not "deserve" Obama. They just really liked the word "change".
VOR Posted November 5, 2008 Posted November 5, 2008 Most of America does not "deserve" Obama. They just really liked the word "change". Apparently a lot more than "maverick."
murra Posted November 5, 2008 Posted November 5, 2008 Apparently a lot more than "maverick." McCain's campaign sucked. That doesn't mean I can't be bitter about how many mindless Americans voted for Obama without having a clue what his policies are.
OCinBuffalo Posted November 5, 2008 Posted November 5, 2008 Wow, a series of out of context statements which are made to appear to negate each other. On Youtube. Now, there's a source we can trust. Jesus H Christ! More evidence of a thought I have had for a while now: the concept of something being "out of context" no longer has any meaning whatsoever. In fact, I highly doubt that you could get 2 in 10 Americans that even know how that concept was originally defined, or what it actually means. Hint: out of context does not mean, "way to get out of saying stupid schit yesterday", or "I didn't say what you just saw me say on video tape, that was some other guy", or "you didn't play the entire interview = the part where I said "America is an evil country" was explained in the part you didn't show"(as if we really want to hear their explanation of that nonsense). Every time some idiot says something stupid now, out comes the "out of context" excuse. The PR/PC people in this country have successfully killed off the meaning of another construct in our language. However all is not lost as long as there are some of us who still know what it actually means. So here's a real example: P1: Bob told me the other day that, although he was unhappy with his job, he was happy about his hot-ass boss. If I say: Bob said that he has a hot-ass boss, and he's happy about it, that IS NOT taking Bob's statement out of context. If I say: Bob is happy about his job because of his hot ass boss, that IS taking it out of context. The point: the first statement doesn't reflect Bob's whole sentence, but it does accurately reflect his meaning. The second does not. Now, watch the video tape again. How many times was Barack's MEANING changed? Exactly 0. The only MEANING changes here are done by Barack himself.
The Big Cat Posted November 5, 2008 Posted November 5, 2008 Jesus H Christ! More evidence of a thought I have had for a while now: the concept of something being "out of context" no longer has any meaning whatsoever. In fact, I highly doubt that you could get 2 in 10 Americans that even know how that concept was originally defined, or what it actually means. Hint: out of context does not mean, "way to get out of saying stupid schit yesterday", or "I didn't say what you just saw me say on video tape, that was some other guy", or "you didn't play the entire interview = the part where I said "America is an evil country" was explained in the part you didn't show"(as if we really want to hear their explanation of that nonsense). Every time some idiot says something stupid now, out comes the "out of context" excuse. The PR/PC people in this country have successfully killed off the meaning of another construct in our language. However all is not lost as long as there are some of us who still know what it actually means. So here's a real example: P1: Bob told me the other day that, although he was unhappy with his job, he was happy about his hot-ass boss. If I say: Bob said that he has a hot-ass boss, and he's happy about it, that IS NOT taking Bob's statement out of context. If I say: Bob is happy about his job because of his hot ass boss, that IS taking it out of context. The point: the first statement doesn't reflect Bob's whole sentence, but it does accurately reflect his meaning. The second does not. Now, watch the video tape again. How many times was Barack's MEANING changed? Exactly 0. The only MEANING changes here are done by Barack himself. No, his comments are taken out of context. Yours is an example of inference.
VOR Posted November 5, 2008 Posted November 5, 2008 McCain's campaign sucked. That doesn't mean I can't be bitter about how many mindless Americans voted for Obama without having a clue what his policies are. So you believe that most people who voted for McCain knew fully well what his policies were? That they knew they were going to be implemented, and would work? If you voted for Dubya (and now it seems like no one wants to admit they ever did), did you feel you knew his policies? Did he come close to succeeding? McCain was sunk before he ever began, given the albatross that was the last 8 years with a Republican president. His campaign just made it worse.
Adam Posted November 5, 2008 Posted November 5, 2008 I wonder when the Ether is going to were off on oBama sheeple? I'll tell you when- it will happen when the Republicans take their party back- when they get back to their ideals and away from their messages of fear and hate. Thank God that Ronald Reagan wasn't alive to see what his party has degenerated into
OCinBuffalo Posted November 5, 2008 Posted November 5, 2008 No, his comments are taken out of context. Yours is an example of inference. Add another person to the list. While my example might be used to demonstrate inference, it certainly demonstrates the difference between what is "in context" and what is not. Moreover, if you say that his comments were taken out of context: explain his context. How is "no pre-conditions" not the exact opposite of "pre-conditions"? This should be good. I gotta go to a meeting, but I will be highly anticipating your entertaining response. Look the guy is a politician, so I expect him to say whatever he needs to get elected, they all do. Moreover, I hope they can change their damn minds when necessary. As in: "I'd rather be right than consistent"- Churchill. But, this endless, "out of context" nonsense has to go. He said what he said, stop making excuses.
In-A-Gadda-Levitre Posted November 5, 2008 Posted November 5, 2008 Moreover, if you say that his comments were taken out of context: explain his context. How is "no pre-conditions" not the exact opposite of "pre-conditions"? preconditions (as in "you must destroy your nuclear enrichment facilities") is not the same as preparation (as in holding low level diplomatic talks prior to meeting).
Fan in Chicago Posted November 5, 2008 Posted November 5, 2008 Concentrated power has always been the enemy of liberty. If that liberty means the liberty to abuse people... Then bring on concentrated power. As compared to the experiences of the last few years with dispersed/balanced power ?
Adam Posted November 5, 2008 Posted November 5, 2008 McCain's campaign sucked. That doesn't mean I can't be bitter about how many mindless Americans voted for Obama without having a clue what his policies are. Yes, you are more intelligent than ALL of the democrats, republicans and independents that votes for Obama. His policies are flat out better than McCains- not to mention that each year the republicans betrayed their own message more and more by not standing up to George W. Bush. Maybe the landslide loss can get the republican party to fix itself and get back to what made them successful in the first place. I for one, hope so
ExiledInIllinois Posted November 6, 2008 Posted November 6, 2008 I guess you forgot this part: You are also a baby-boomer One of many of that spoiled "Me Generation."Sorry I dont speak Klingon, next time I'll check with Tom before responding to you. Dude. No need to learn Klingon... Just reading comprehension... I never said that you spoiled anyone. Maybe I should learn Klingon because where the eff did you came up with this?: "I'm just wondering how I was part of the generation that spoiled the " Me Generation"?" One more time... Nice and sloooooooow: You are part of that spoiled "Me generation." You haven't spoiled anyone... You are the spoiled. The word "that" is a pretty big word... Please be careful when you read it and use it... Baby-Boomers=Spoiled.
erynthered Posted November 6, 2008 Author Posted November 6, 2008 Dude. No need to learn Klingon... Just reading comprehension... I never said that you spoiled anyone. Maybe I should learn Klingon because where the eff did you came up with this?: "I'm just wondering how I was part of the generation that spoiled the " Me Generation"?" One more time... Nice and sloooooooow: You are part of that spoiled "Me generation." You haven't spoiled anyone... You are the spoiled. The word "that" is a pretty big word... Please be careful when you read it and use it... Baby-Boomers=Spoiled. I found your home page so I'm sure you'll understand the words below. naDevvo' yIghoS bIjatlh 'e' yImev
ExiledInIllinois Posted November 6, 2008 Posted November 6, 2008 I found your home page so I'm sure you'll understand the words below. naDevvo' yIghoS bIjatlh 'e' yImev Nice. Just admit you can't read English. Just admit when you are wrong.
erynthered Posted November 6, 2008 Author Posted November 6, 2008 Nice. Just admit you can't read English. Just admit when you are wrong. OK, I'll admit I was wrong about you, you're not a moron. You're an idiot!!
ExiledInIllinois Posted November 6, 2008 Posted November 6, 2008 OK, I'll admit I was wrong about you, you're not a moron. You're an idiot!!
Recommended Posts