A New Low........i Have Heard It All Now....................

[Joe]

Warning: Hijacked Thread by usual boring US Liberals vs Conservative crap-trap. This is like when a Fascist argues with a Marxist Leninist - really no difference between the two except semantic intricacies.

BOOOOOOOOOORIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINNNNNNNNNNGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG

 

[ajoknoblauch]

Warning: Hijacked Thread by usual boring US Liberals vs Conservative crap-trap. This is like when a Fascist argues with a Marxist Leninist - really no difference between the two except semantic intricacies.

BOOOOOOOOOORIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINNNNNNNNNNGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG

There are no conservatives on this list, so far as I know. Conservatives are not utterly irrational.

 

[steveinbsas]

\

Warning: Hijacked Thread by usual boring US Liberals vs Conservative crap-trap. This is like when a Fascist argues with a Marxist Leninist - really no difference between the two except semantic intricacies.

BOOOOOOOOOORIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINNNNNNNNNNGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG

How has this thread been hijacked? Kate mentioned Obama in the opening post and it has "developed" from there. You didn't object yesterday when you mocked Tangerine for asking "How does one more cheap shot at Obama add to the information about shake downs at the airport help expats?"

Why does what followed bother you now? You jumped on the bus and help steer it in the direction it has taken. Thanks.

PS: The difference between an argument based on demonstrable facts and an argument ad hominem is much greater than one of semantic intricacies.

 

[Rich One]

\





How has this thread been hijacked? Kate mentioned Obama in the opening post and it has "developed" from there. You didn't object yesterday when you mocked Tangerine for asking "How does one more cheap shot at Obama add to the information about shake downs at the airport help expats?"

Why does what followed bother you now? You jumped on the bus and help steer it in the direction it has taken. Thanks.

PS: The difference between an argument based on demonstrable facts and an argument ad hominem is much greater than one of semantic intricacies.

Thanks Steve for mentioning the argumentum ad hominem..... this resource is used very often by some board members and also polititians.

argumentum ad hominem, is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument.

 

[Joe]

I'm not interested in assessing blame, the fact is the thread has been hijacked onto a topic that is one of these least favorite of forum members: US politics.

Just as game threads should be titled with "Nerd Alert" - this topic should be re-titled "US Political" so those of us with a life don't waste our time on it.

 

[internationalguy]

If I hear (or read) one more Obamabot say that Benghazi is a non story I'm going to explode. How is it that when a foreign ambassador requests help repeatedly because his safety and that of his post is in extreme danger, gets no help and is eventually tortured and killed, not a real issue? What about Hilary's famous "When you get a call at 3 am, I will be the one who knows what to do"? What about abandoning Americans to their own fate? How is any of that a non story? After that they proceeded to lie about it and make up a stupid youtube video that they knew wasn't the real reason. When a congressional comitee was investigating... that famous Hilary phrase again. "Americans are dead, what difference in the end does it make?" Utter bs. The Obama administration has no idea of accountability, not with Holder, and not with Hilary. They never admitted the facts of Benghazi because it would be the end of Hilary's run. (and just saying... I don't have that much against her)

 

[ajoknoblauch]

\





How has this thread been hijacked? Kate mentioned Obama in the opening post and it has "developed" from there. You didn't object yesterday when you mocked Tangerine for asking "How does one more cheap shot at Obama add to the information about shake downs at the airport help expats?"

Why does what followed bother you now? You jumped on the bus and help steer it in the direction it has taken. Thanks.

PS: The difference between an argument based on demonstrable facts and an argument ad hominem is much greater than one of semantic intricacies.

The wingnuts who can't even spell "Berkeley" (still, by acclamation, of the world's greatest universities, even in the eyes of the notoriously reactionary US News & World Report) always start if off with an attack on Obama.

 

[Redpossum]

There are no conservatives on this list, so far as I know. Conservatives are not utterly irrational.

As I've said before, Pat Buchanan is the last Classic Conservative in US politics, and he's 10 years younger than Moses - a racist, sexist dinosaur.

There is no Leftist party in US politics, nothing even slightly Left of center.

What we have today are neo-Conservatives and neo-Liberals, who are both exactly the same in functional terms, and both answer to the same masters. There is no difference, and the so-called debate is just a distraction from the real struggle - the ultra-rich against the rest of us.

 

[homeinbuenosaires]

The wingnuts who can't even spell "Berkeley" always start if off with an attack on Obama.

Hahaha, thanks for bringing this chef-d'œuvre to my attention:

"Some babies (aka fetuses) get their brains sucked out at birth. Others (aka Fulbights) get their brains sucked out at Berkely." (anonymous)

I would be wracking my brains to try to deduce who the anonymous author of this stellar quote is (also: to understand what a "Fulbight" is) but sadly they were all sucked out while I was earning my degree at "Berkely".

 

[steveinbsas]

Hahaha, thanks for bringing this chef-d'œuvre to my attention:

"Some babies (aka fetuses) get their brains sucked out at birth. Others (aka Fulbights) get their brains sucked out at Berkely." (anonymous)

I would be wracking my brains to try to deduce who the anonymous author of this stellar quote is (also: to understand what a "Fulbight" is) but sadly they were all sucked out while I was earning my degree at "Berkely".

One of the words in question should have been " Berzerkely" and I apologize to the original author and have made the appropriate correction.

The other spelling error was the result of a mal-functioning "r" key which will be replaced soon.

PS: Fulbright scholars also misspell words, and occasionally do so in threads in which they are highly critical of others who have also made spelling errors.

If the best they can do is criticize someone for a misspelled word or two, their arguments are extremely weak and likely to include fallacious logic.