1 in 5 Say Obama is Muslim

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
61

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]Dustin wrote:

My own enjoyment, really. The more interesting point is the reactions from some of you.

And the fact that I can post (obviously) silly pictures which legitimately piss people off (Chushin, really?) calls into question who the immature people actually are. Anyone who gets pissed at anonymous people of internets has some anger issues.

Some of you take this forum and yourselves too seriously. [/quote]

Wow.

That’s “fun” for you? Really?

Tell me more about “maturity.”

I have to admit, I can’t understand why anyone would spend time here if they’re just going to post shit that they don’t really believe. To watch other folks get worked up?

See no reason to communicate with anyone like that.

Whatever, I guess.

I’ll stay clear of your “fun” from now on, ok?

[/quote]

I was merely playing up the “1” in the 1-5 who believe Obama is Muslim. The same ignorant fools who think Obama is the antiChrist. The same people who are losing their mind over a Muslim community center blocks away from ground zero. The same people who still to this day think Saddam was involved in 9-11.

I figured the more enlightened individuals who posted here would “get it”. I guess I was wrong.

63

[quote]Dustin wrote:

I was merely playing up the “1” in the 1-5 who believe Obama is Muslim. The same ignorant fools who think Obama is the antiChrist. The same people who are losing their mind over a Muslim community center blocks away from ground zero. The same people who still to this day think Saddam was involved in 9-11.[/quote]

Wait, wait, wait, let’s make sure and get this right - someone who believes that “anarchy!” is a viable political system for human beings - without even an 8th grade argument on behalf of it - is “making fun” of people who believe in something that is foolish to believe in based on a lack of evidence?

And the irony is somehow lost on you?

Someone might be able to “make fun” of someone for believing in something so ludicrous - you are not that someone.

Of course.

64

No matter what religion he does or does not practice, he is still weak.

65

[quote]Dustin wrote:

I was merely playing up the “1” in the 1-5 who believe Obama is Muslim. The same ignorant fools who think Obama is the antiChrist. The same people who are losing their mind over a Muslim community center blocks away from ground zero. The same people who still to this day think Saddam was involved in 9-11.

I figured the more enlightened individuals who posted here would “get it”. I guess I was wrong.

[/quote]

Yes, you were wrong. The majority here are far from enlightened. Remember how they backed Bush so heartily? Now that Obama has been handed Bush’s HUGE pile of shit, they somehow blame Obama for our nation’s ills.

Enlightened indeed.

66

[quote]Chushin wrote:

And BTW, your story of “fun” is kind of hard to swallow, since you have a long and consistent history here of denigrating your fellow Americans.
[/quote]

I only denigrate my fellow Americans who deserve it.

67

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

Wait, wait, wait, let’s make sure and get this right - someone who believes that “anarchy!” is a viable political system for human beings - without even an 8th grade argument on behalf of it - is “making fun” of people who believe in something that is foolish to believe in based on a lack of evidence?
[/quote]

Yes, I argue for property rights and all that should follow that. Call it a political stance (anarchy/voluntaryism), I see it almost as a philosophy of life. In the mean time, as the government continues to grow (and all that comes with it) I’ll continue to point out the dangers of the state. You and the proverbial “1” of the 1 and 5 can worry about Muslim community centers and gay marriage disrupting the space time continuum. There are bigger fish to fry, i.e., lets work to decrease the size of government.

Your “system”, which you call “limited government” (a lie) that you come on here and defend tooth and nail is crumbling before our eyes, but yet, I’m stupid for advocating smaller government one step at a time, on the way to a bigger goal?

As John S once said to you (paraphrasing) “I don’t give a fuck what a Christian Conservative (you) thinks of me.”

68

[quote]Dustin wrote:

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

Wait, wait, wait, let’s make sure and get this right - someone who believes that “anarchy!” is a viable political system for human beings - without even an 8th grade argument on behalf of it - is “making fun” of people who believe in something that is foolish to believe in based on a lack of evidence?
[/quote]

Yes, I argue for property rights and all that should follow that. Call it a political stance (anarchy/voluntaryism), I see it almost as a philosophy of life. In the mean time, as the government continues to grow (and all that comes with it) I’ll continue to point out the dangers of the state. You and the proverbial “1” of the 1 and 5 can worry about Muslim community centers and gay marriage disrupting the space time continuum. There are bigger fish to fry, i.e., lets work to decrease the size of government.

Your “system”, which you call “limited government” (a lie) that you come on here and defend tooth and nail is crumbling before our eyes, but yet, I’m stupid for advocating smaller government one step at a time, on the way to a bigger goal?

As John S once said to you (paraphrasing) “I don’t give a fuck what a Christian Conservative (you) thinks of me.”

[/quote]

I wish more people thought this way instead of “The government will save me and make everything ok.” As congress gives themselves raises I can’t help but wonder why they have jobs. Anyone else who fails as bad as they do gets fired.

69

[quote]Dustin wrote:

Yes, I argue for property rights and all that should follow that. Call it a political stance (anarchy/voluntaryism), I see it almost as a philosophy of life. [/quote]

No, you don’t - you argue for a painfully ridiculous “philosophy” that defies common sense and no humans anywhere are stupid enough to try, but then have the chutzpah to “make fun” of someone for being “not smart”.

Again, it’s ironic, see - you believe in really stupid stuff, yet to want to mock people for believing in really stupid stuff.

Sure thing, sport. If I am a “liar” supporting a “crumbling system”, then I fall in good company - such “liars” as Washington, Hamilton, Jefferson, Jay, Adams, and Madison.

And you don’t “advocate for smaller government” - you advocate a ripping up the blueprints of society and starting over because society only serves as a primordial prison.

Aw, that’s too bad. But, if you get your kicks “making fun” of “stupid people” on PWI, surely you must not mind that I do the same?

70

[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:

The majority here are far from enlightened. [/quote]

How would you possibly know?

72

Count me in, The proof is there.

73

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
The grounds for scapegoatting Muslims grows by the day. The Muslims will be the Jews of 1930’s Germany.[/quote]

Lets hope so

74

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

No, you don’t - you argue for a painfully ridiculous “philosophy” that defies common sense and no humans anywhere are stupid enough to try, but then have the chutzpah to “make fun” of someone for being “not smart”.
[/quote]

I have been consistently supporting smaller government since I’ve been posting here. Yes, voluntaryism is the goal.

During the 2004 election I supported (in this forum) a Constitutionalist candidate Michael Peroutka. I’m constantly supporting a withdrawal of troops from the ME, gay rights (marriage/civil unions), property rights, decentralization of government, etc, etc.

You, on the other hand, have not. Always riding on your white horse of statism supporting the government or its ludicrous laws anytime someone questions them.

Indeed it is. You claim to be all for “limited government”, but in reality argue otherwise.

No, see above. You lie (maybe unintionally, who knows) because you make the general statement, “I support limited government”, but then support blatant statist policies.

Your politics are nothing near what the Founders believed. Nice try though.

Wrong again. See above. I don’t want to rip up the blueprints.

And this just shows you read and comprehend only what you want. Voluntaryism is an “evolutionary” process. This has been stated before. No one wants to wipe the slate clean and start over.

[quote]
Aw, that’s too bad. But, if you get your kicks “making fun” of “stupid people” on PWI, surely you must not mind that I do the same?[/quote]

In that case you should start with you and your kind (“conservatives”) who complain about a “socialist” like Obama, but will gladly vote for a President Bush.

75

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:

The majority here are far from enlightened. [/quote]

How would you possibly know?[/quote]

He can read.

76

[quote]Dustin wrote:

I have been consistently supporting smaller government since I’ve been posting here. Yes, voluntaryism is the goal.[/quote]

You’ve been consistently supporting an infantile philosophy of politics.

This is, of course, one of the stupidest things you’ve posted (and that says something, there are lots to choose from).

Statism - the principle or policy of concentrating extensive economic, political, and related controls in the state at the cost of individual liberty.

Not my thing, never been my thing. I have no interest in “concentrating” power in the state.

But, you knew that - but because of your political limitations, you desperately need to divide the world into two clumsy camps. They don’t exist, and your need to pretend they do is an indictment of your worldview, and no one elses.

Nope - “limited” means, well, limited. Not “none”. The government does have and should have some power. If a naive anarchist can’t figure that out, it’s still not my problem to fix.

[quote]No, see above. You lie (maybe unintionally, who knows) because you make the general statement, “I support limited government”, but then support blatant statist policies.

Your politics are nothing near what the Founders believed. Nice try though.[/quote]

What a joke. Short answer is you wouldn’t have any idea if my views were consistent with the Founders’, so why would I waste my time asking for you to show me how my politics are “nothing near what the Founders believed”?

We’ve been down this road before. You’ve come up wanting time and again, so don’t make such silly statements.

Definitionally, every anarchist does.Aw, that’s too bad.

No, in my case, I choose to make fun of fools who believe in Anarchism, who are much more foolish than people who vote for Bush or Obama.

77

[quote]Dustin wrote:

He can read.[/quote]

Based on his posts, the jury is still out on that.

78

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

You’ve been consistently supporting an infantile philosophy of politics.
[/quote]

You ignored a whole paragraph were I provided examples of me supporting smaller government.

So either respond to what I’m typing, or don’t bother responding at all.

Orly!?! Do I need to find the recent thread where you argued the government should step in and dictate to business owners what the do with their money? Remember that thread? Even Push called you on your bullshit. I think the word you used was “good government”.

Or how about all the gay marriage threads were you defend the government preventing consenting adults from forming civil unions/marriages? How it will “hurt” society.

How about your constant circle jerk sessions here defending Abe Lincoln wiping his ass with the Constitution?

And perhaps the best of all, you supporting blatant war mongering and imperialism with the Iraq and A-Stan wars?

Do I need to continue?

It seems more like you aren’t even sure what statism involves.

Of course not. President Bush? Patriot Act? Any of the examples I mentioned above?

I may have political limitations, but at least I know what camp I’m in. You flounder all over the place and then hilariously put yourself in the same group as the Founders.

I understand the difference and I also understand you don’t fall into the “limited camp”. John S falls into the limited government category, not you.

[quote]
so why would I waste my time asking for you to show me how my politics are “nothing near what the Founders believed”? [/quote]

I have already demonstrated your politics are different than theirs. As has Push (in the thread I mentioned), John S, and several others.

Um, no. You don’t know what you are talking about. Period. Libertarians/anarchists/voluntaryists don’t want that. You are just making up stuff as you go along.

79

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Obama isn’t a Muslim, and there is no reason to think so, but then again, I don’t think he’s much of anything with regards to matters of faith. It’s clear that his last affiliation with any church was using it as a political vehicle rather than attending it as a place of bona fide worship. >>>[/quote]I must’ve said 100 times during the campaign that he is not a Muslim nor is he a Christian by any historic definition. He is a Marxist plain and simple. A dime a dozen, academic elite, western Marxist bookworm. Universities are full of em. Trinity United Church of Christ is a Marxist rallying center. Anytime you hear the term “liberation theology” you are by definition dealing with Marxism. Of course I was quite jovially snickered at by many on this forum for my paranoid extremism, but here we are.

80

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Obama isn’t a Muslim, and there is no reason to think so, but then again, I don’t think he’s much of anything with regards to matters of faith. It’s clear that his last affiliation with any church was using it as a political vehicle rather than attending it as a place of bona fide worship. >>>[/quote]I must’ve said 100 times during the campaign that he is not a Muslim nor is he a Christian by any historic definition. He is a Marxist plain and simple. A dime a dozen, academic elite, western Marxist bookworm. Universities are full of em. Trinity United Church of Christ is a Marxist rallying center. Anytime you hear the term “liberation theology” you are by definition dealing with Marxism. Of course I was quite jovially snickered at by many on this forum for my paranoid extremism, but here we are.
[/quote]

Hey, don’t interrupt our irrelevant pissing contest.