Great Message About Patriosm - Page 5

Lamil · 07-02-2008, 08:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lamil

carry on.

qft

Faabio · 07-02-2008, 08:35 PM

Lamil, stfu and stop messing up their debate about politics

Otis · 07-02-2008, 08:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deson

What he said and since I don't oppose NAFTA or free trade at all I can't answer you Otis. John has also clearly advocated along with his free trade stance that the Government should do more to aid the workers it has fucked, where is Obama on that one or more to the point, how many different policies has Obama claimed on that one?

Sorry, not interested in this protracted game of whack-a-mole.

That being said, we can all agree that for those who place an anti-NAFTA agenda at the top of their important issue list, Barack Obama is their man.

Check

Hoss · 07-02-2008, 08:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Otis

Sorry, not interested in this protracted game of whack-a-mole.

That being said, we can all agree that for those who place an anti-NAFTA agenda at the top of their important issue list, Barack Obama is their man.

Check

No, we can't. Because Bob Fucking Barr would be at the top of that list.

-h

Deson · 07-02-2008, 08:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Otis

Sorry, not interested in this protracted game of whack-a-mole.

That being said, we can all agree that for those who place an anti-NAFTA agenda at the top of their important issue list, Barack Obama is their man.

Check

No he isn't since he's backed away from renegotiation and McCain while offering more free trade also offers opportunity for recovery from the same( elements of so called fair trade). Obama with his current reversal at best intends to maintain the status quo...or he's lying again.

Whack-a- mole is trying to pin down an Obama position from his "just words".

Hoss · 07-02-2008, 08:58 PM

One more thing. Is it too late for you to change the title of this thread kronnik? Now that I've noticed its mispelled, it bugging the hell out of me. Sounds french, and it sounds like it means surrender.

-h

Otis · 07-02-2008, 09:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deson

Whack-a- mole is trying to pin down an Obama position from his "just words".

I'm starting to see a recurring theme here. Just to clarify, you seem to be saying that you have a serious problem with Obama's "position changes", and as such McCain is your man?

Deson · 07-02-2008, 09:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Otis

I'm starting to see a recurring theme here. Just to clarify, you seem to be saying that you have a serious problem with Obama's "position changes", and as such McCain is your man?

No, here it is restated for you from another thread:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deson

I can look at John McCain's history and tell when he's full of shit. When confronted with two liars, that's my best bet.

Pandering has always been acceptable, if it weren't politicians wouldn't do it. It works, it's obvious it works and if the people really didn't like it, we wouldn't have over 200 years of experience watching it. Ask Obama how it feels to pander to the Jewish lobby right after excoriating Hillary for promising to annihilate Iran if they step too far. Or how much he's going to backpedal on his Cuba and Iran being "tiny" statements because they offended the wrong constituents. Or how much he's going to pander to blue collar workers that hate NAFTA. Or how much saying he would have left his church if Wright didn't retire--after "defending" the man and trying to duck the issue--wasn't really a pander. If Obama had a record I'd be examining that for his true stances but between the changes he's been making over his ~10 years in politics (4 in the national Senate) his vote ducking and his very radical shifts in action/rhetoric over the past 2 years, I don't know him at all.

Obama is full of shit, my biggest issue with him is supporters who treat his every action as sanctified and ignore his obvious and massive flaws. How do his Democratic supports and "netroots" devotees feel about his faith based initiatives announcements? He hid that pretty well when he was in the primary.

McCain is the devil I know and he's not intolerable when faced with Obama the, "I'll tell you what you want to hear then pretend it's a hard truth," devil I don't. Actually McCain's not so bad period and of the field of politicians who stood a chance in hell, he was the best choice. Sad but true.

Otis · 07-02-2008, 09:49 PM

Great, so because you're comfortable giving McCain a pass because of your gut feeling that you know what he really means despite the words that come out of his mouth, you want everyone to drink that Kool-Aid.

But if we don't, we're drinking Kool-Aid of our own, because we can't possibly have anything on which to base our knowledge of our candidate, so it must be our gut feeling? And since it's not your gut feeling, it must be wrong.

How does that work again?

Deson · 07-02-2008, 09:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Otis

Great, so because you're comfortable giving McCain a pass because of your gut feeling that you know what he really means despite the words that come out of his mouth, you want everyone to drink that Kool-Aid.

But if we don't, we're drinking Kool-Aid of our own, because we can't possibly have anything on which to base our knowledge of our candidate, so it must be our gut feeling? And since it's not your gut feeling, it must be wrong.

How does that work again?

It's called life. When faced with two shit choices you pick the more palatable. If you've never been in such a situation, you are blessed by powerful forces. It's not drinking Kool-Aid when you acknowledge the flaws and still choose to accept them. I accept my candidate warts and all, what becomes of your messiah when he proves he isn't?