THESHADOWBOX.NET

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

"Like" Amanda? Be sure to Zuckerberg-that-shit, and show her on Facebook... (The Dolls' Facebook is HERE)

Pages: 1 2 [3]  All   Go Down

Author Topic: "Yes We Can"  (Read 6718 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

caddy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3463
  • The Anti-Semantic
Re: "Yes We Can"
« Reply #30 on: November 13, 2008, 09:02:37 PM »

Hey, maybe if I get angry I really do turn into The Incredible hulk....  :o



oh fuck!

somebody make this man angry.  i wanna do terrible things with THAT.
Logged

caddy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3463
  • The Anti-Semantic
Re: "Yes We Can"
« Reply #31 on: November 13, 2008, 10:12:28 PM »

I carefully consider where you are coming from, compare it to people I have encountered previously, and recognize with great clarity and certainty that nothing I can say will make any difference in your deeply flawed world-view.

1.  Not necessarily true by any means.  A year ago I didn't believe most of what I now know and believe to be true about governance/politics.  And I'm still learning.

2.  Ultimate Truth is always "deeply flawed," to varying degrees, in the eyes of man.

3.  You may be more intellectually stubborn than myself.


I could go back and point out the difference
between bias and pre-judgement as illustrated by your cited sources, a difference that renders most of them utterly worthless, but it would be wasted effort.  You could try it on your own time though, but I suppose you'd rather parrot the ranting from the fringes than look for what's actually happening and why.

Cut the lawyer talk and step off your high-horse.  You're not gonna enlighten me with lawyer statements.  State something substantive.  Just because a source is flawed/biased (again, as virtually all are) doesn't render it "utterly worthless."  If you want to be intellectually honest, you'll have to refute specific points, not make general statements and deny something completely because there are "dents in the armor." 

I always try to base my perception on a limited amount of knowledge, and when I discover new and/or conflicting information, and can prove it to be true (or highly likely true) using empiricism/intuition, then I make the appropriate adjustments.  And it's a never-ending process.


It looks as though somebody recently took Philos 1.

The only reason your argument seems refutable and full of holes, is because it doesn't allow for any freedom of motion, and is wrought with absolutes.  You are allowed to believe whatever you want about a system and it's flaws (and every system is flawed, so no argument there), but at this point you've degenerated into a blathering pile of Anarchy and Tinfoil Hat statistics.  Then when somebody does actually attempt to refute your points (and Cee started out by doing), you pulled up yet another argument that has been used a countless amount of times (mostly by Ron Paul and LaRouche enthusiasts).  The most amazing thing is that you quote your sources as if nobody (especially on the Doll's board) has heard of these things before.

Conspiracies in the government?  Media bias and all the evil they possess?  Orly?  Would have never known about it before you, surely.  Not to mention half the shit you posted about Obama could easily be refuted by just reading the man's damn website.  Unless you just -heard- about it from other unrelated sources.  I mean, let's see;

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/iraq/index.php

Yes, he wants to refocus on Afghanistan, but let's not forget why America was angry with him for Iraq.  One - bin Laden remained uncaught.  Two - we were lied to about the reasons for entering Iraq.  Three - We've been there pretty much for the oil, while killing innocent people, and making the situation more violent while stationed there.  Since we landed, car bombings and other nonsuch violence has increased.  Not only that, but it would be idiotic for us to just pull out completely.  Pulling out while the land is still in a wreck would bring us the same circumstances that happened when we pulled out of Afghanistan immediately.  You have to phase shit out.  Not to mention that it's brownie points to tell America that you're going to refocus on Afghanistan.

Yes, it also DOES take time to undo all the damage Bush did with Guantanamo Bay and the Patriot Act.  Why?  Because it's not just Obama there, but the system of checks and balances that have to be answered to.  And aside from that, whose to say that those checks won't say fuck it, and ask him to retreat a little earlier, and work on Guantanamo?  Literally, considering how terrible that place is, so you really think nobody will hold him accountable for that?  I mean, just look at the gays!

Not only that, but the man isn't even in there yet.  You can't say what he will do, until he gets there.  Unless, of course, you're psycho...I mean psychic.
Logged

pedobear

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 60
Re: "Yes We Can"
« Reply #32 on: November 14, 2008, 12:08:47 AM »

"Yes We Can"

I'd like to know what that means to you.

"Yes We Can"...   get fucked again.

Seriously people, Barack Obama is just another shitty neocon, like Bush, McCain, and the rest of 'em.  He's pro-war, pro-patriot act, pro-FISA, pro-Banker bailout, et cetera.  He's not going to get troops out of Iraq, and on the whole he wants MORE troops in the middle-east - something like 2-3 more brigades in Afghanistan alone.  He's probably not even going to close Guantanamo Bay from the looks of it.  And even if he did, it wouldn't matter.  Check this sh*t out.  Plus he wants forced servitude for Americans.  This guy is gonna be a nightmare.  Mind you, it's only perpetuating the status quo.

Hey Ghoul,

I invite you away from this rubbish thread, and into the arms of a real American, who is totally against any sort of government enforced policy or laws.  Especially the Statutory ones.  That is, so long as you're truly 13 years of age, and look nothing like your picture suggests.  I've got free candy.

Logged
I swear I didn't know she was 3.
Pages: 1 2 [3]  All   Go Up