Wait a second, was your post about a blindfold supposed to be a quip about being “blind to the truth”? If it was, please work on your anologies. That one sucked ass.
Prof X, Dude just a simple little symbolization. It wasn’t really that Awsome. You know “looks like you’re blindfolded” AKA you just called someone else blind… Oh nevermind.
P.S. I have just repeatedly shut my hand in my desk drawer.
Vegita ~ Prince of all Sayajins
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Wait a second, was your post about a blindfold supposed to be a quip about being “blind to the truth”? If it was, please work on your anologies. That one sucked ass.[/quote]
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Don’t worry Professor, it will all come to an end tomorrow evening when the votes are in and Kerry is President (keeping fingers crossed).
It’s too bad that many have been blinded by the war and are giving Bush their vote based on that and not his other beliefs that don’t sit well with me (and others).
Zeb,
There are those that do believe the administration lied about various things. Stating that you hold this belief does not mean you are filled with hatred.
As for thinking he is a criminal, maybe that is simply a hatred issue, I wouldn’t know. I guess if there were laws that were broken he could easily be a criminal that belongs in jail.
To use language you are sure to understand, when Clinton was getting blowjobs in the oval office, many conservatives were outraged and voiced these opinions. Would you say they were filled with hatred?
In any case, again, you can’t claim someone is full of hatred simply because they have a belief or opinion that you consider unfounded. Well, I am mistaken, it is clear that you can, but that doesn’t make it correct.
I think you are busy looking for the negative in people all the time. Having a different viewpoint somehow equates to something negative.
Maybe if you accept that differing people of good conscience can have different beliefs and different judgements without either having to be negative, you’ll be able to be more upbeat in your interpretation of things?
Vroom pay attention!
[quote]vroom wrote:
Zeb,
There are those that do believe the administration lied about various things. Stating that you hold this belief does not mean you are filled with hatred.
Since no lies were ever proven then why cry “liar”? If the rules have changed then I suppose I can call anyone a liar at anytime about any issue…make sense? No.
As for thinking he is a criminal, maybe that is simply a hatred issue, I wouldn’t know. I guess if there were laws that were broken he could easily be a criminal that belongs in jail.
Yea, I suppose. However since no one was even charged with breaking laws then I suppose once again hate trumps reality in your world.
To use language you are sure to understand, when Clinton was getting blowjobs in the oval office, many conservatives were outraged and voiced these opinions. Would you say they were filled with hatred?
To use language that you will understand: Clinton lied under oath and that is a crime. Were you then claiming we had a liar in office, or didn’t it matter because it was Clinton? When one is a proven liar calling that person a liar is simply telling the truth!
In any case, again, you can’t claim someone is full of hatred simply because they have a belief or opinion that you consider unfounded. Well, I am mistaken, it is clear that you can, but that doesn’t make it correct.
Yes, you are mistaken, as usual. When someone calls another a criminal with no proof or justification then they sure appear full of hate to me. A “belief or opinion” better be based upon fact prior to calling someone a criminal…at least that’s the way it works in American vroom.
I think you are busy looking for the negative in people all the time. Having a different viewpoint somehow equates to something negative.
Wrong again! I have never mentioned anyone being hateful who has attacked the issues only. Only certain posters who are determined to attack others personally have drawn my wrath. Turbo was obviously full of hate when he wrote that mess. You can state that the Iraq policy is wrong and then give your reasons. Stating the President is a criminal is asinine, even you should recognize that.
Maybe if you accept that differing people of good conscience can have different beliefs and different judgements without either having to be negative, you’ll be able to be more upbeat in your interpretation of things?[/quote]
I am upbeat vroom. It is you who attempts to twist the facts to suit whatever the latest supposition you are attempting to foist on the forum.
(Hey that was fun let’s do it again sometime…
[quote]ZEB wrote:
If the rules have changed then I suppose I can call anyone a liar at anytime about any issue…make sense? No.
[/quote]
Gee, isn’t that what the Patriot Act allows with no boundaries intact?
lothario,
[quote]lothario1132 wrote:
makkun wrote:
I also have to add that I think there shouldn’t be one most powerful country, but a group of evenly strong, bound by international agreements (and the willingness to uphold them), making sure no one country can influence the fate of the world too much.
How ironic that this is coming from someone from the what remains of the British Empire! No offense meant makkun, but I just thought that was funny, that’s all. :)[/quote]
You know what’s even more funny is that I am German… 
Makkun
Berner,
[quote]Berner wrote:
makkun wrote:
In this instance, Kerry. In my view it can’t get any worse than Bush for the rest of the world.
I also have to add that I think there shouldn’t be one most powerful country, but a group of evenly strong, bound by international agreements (and the willingness to uphold them), making sure no one country can influence the fate of the world too much.
I know that’s a bit blue-eyed - must be blinded by all my liberal hate…
Makkun
England & Germany
2 non-angry libs in the same thread–a record
“bound by international agreements (and the willingness to uphold them)”
Problem is that the UN:
- Is grossly currupt (food for oil)[/quote]
Like any other big organisation, it is not perfect. It should be the job of its most powerful nations to make sure it is. And - if you had quoted something like 25 incidents over the last 10 years, I would call it “grossly corrupt”. This one is pretty new and until now, I can live with this level of corruption.
You see that is the thing about democracy and pluralism - you have to tackle with these people and still give them the same rights as you have. It is our job as the “civilised nations” to promote our ideas by living them. Unfortunately the US under the Bush administration has in my view not been championing this.[quote]
In general, I’m sorry makkun, but based on the inappropriateness of what Europe is doing with vitamins (something I know something about) and the obvious predictable outcomes in other areas, I have no wish to let anyone in Eurpose determine our fate.[/quote]
Likewise - I am not sure about the vitamin-part (in the light of more important issues I tend give a toss about vitamins…) - I rather not have the US determine my fate. Unfortunately by circumventing the flawed but tried and tested UN procedures the Bush gouvernment does just that. Hence my original post.
Me neither - and so were many others. The problem with the Iraq war for most of its critics that they wanted to ignore what a bastard Saddam was - it was doubts concerning the displayed evidence as a base for the necessity of the war at that time. And in hindsight it seems that the sceptics were right.
Makkun
[quote]Professor X wrote:
ZEB wrote:
If the rules have changed then I suppose I can call anyone a liar at anytime about any issue…make sense? No.
Gee, isn’t that what the Patriot Act allows with no boundaries intact?[/quote]
Professor:
Please tell us all about the Patriot act. Teach us what is wrong with it and what is right about it, if anything. Go ahead…
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Professor X wrote:
ZEB wrote:
If the rules have changed then I suppose I can call anyone a liar at anytime about any issue…make sense? No.
Gee, isn’t that what the Patriot Act allows with no boundaries intact?
Professor:
Please tell us all about the Patriot act. Teach us what is wrong with it and what is right about it, if anything. Go ahead…
[/quote]
Teach you? Well, class, let’s begin with the power to obtain information that required warrants before while allowing the ability for the institution doing the research to withhold the fact that the individual in question is being investigated. In the pure aspect of terrorists, this sounds great. If someone is about to blow up a building, I would love to know ahead of time. However, for people who can see further than the immediate future and know from history that human nature eventually corrupts any absolute power, it seems clear that this can also be used against those who are not planning on blowing anything up…all it takes is for someone to say that they are. That means that for this to avoid that potential conflict, there need to be limitations in place. President Bush is against limiting the scope of the Patriot Act while Kerry is FOR the Patriot Act but with limitations. That’s all for now, class. For refreshments, I made little cookies in the shape of Kerry’s head and also in the shape of little Heinz ketchup bottles.
Zeb,
Clinton played word games. I’m not in any way suggesting this is a good thing, but in probability it would mean he didn’t actually lie.
Will that stop people from calling him a liar? Of course not.
Again, there is a difference between having very strong feelings and being pissed off and being in a state of hatred.
We are often in a position of having to believe things about politicians based on incomplete information. Making a judgement call based on the information available is part of how it works.
This is obviously done by conservatives when judging Kerry. It’s not like Kerry has a track record as president to condemn him for. However, he is condemned very strongly indeed.
You are just off in Zebland looking for ways to call others negative when they have a different interpretation than yours.
I’d venture to say that it is pretty clear to many folk around here. You may not feel it is so, but I certainly am not filled with hatred for thinking that way. I have no proof other than the posts I see you make.
The general public doesn’t require absolute proof to make judgements. Sure, the legal system requires something approaching real proof, but that is another matter entirely. President Bush is a fair target for speculation and criticism because he chose to run for public office.
The same is true for Kerry. The same is true for you and I, for becoming involved in this forum. If you can seperate the passion in the message from the feelings of the poster, what I’m saying will simply drop into place.
[quote]Vegita wrote:
Turbo - the planet naturally goes through differing global climatic periods, There have been numerous Ice ages and numerous “global Warmings” all of these have occured quite nicely for millions of years on thier own. To even half heartedly connect a dot between global warming and bush is down right insane. First off we know so little about the entire global weateher system and how it is influenced by the nearly million variables that it is “impossible” (more like impossible right now) to know why it is changing let alone claim that george bush is changing it.
Please don’t make me kick myself in the nuts, I am currently being driven insane by the sheer unbelievability of some statements that I might do it.
Vegita ~ Prince of all Sayajins[/quote]
Dear Vegetable,
I don’t pretend to be an expert. I’m just going by what the guys who study this stuff say; you know, like the Nobel Prize winners that say it’s happening right now.
Bush should get his head out of the hole in the ground and at least acknowledge that global warming is indeed a possibility.
You can’t just pick and choose the truth that’s convenient.
To dismiss it without study is like kicking yourself in the nuts; a bad idea, unless you’re into that sort of thing.
[quote]vroom wrote:
Zeb,
Clinton played word games. I’m not in any way suggesting this is a good thing, but in probability it would mean he didn’t actually lie. [/quote]
???
Is it just me, or does this bother anyone…(not Clinton, Vroom’s take on it)?
Turbot,
Thanks for being exhibit A or should I say exhibit H for hate. Professor X takes no prisoners and writes his mind, but he has more class then to write:
[quote]turbot33 wrote:
Dear Vegetable,
[/quote]
and
[quote]turbot33 wrote:
You can’t just pick and choose the truth that’s convenient.
[/quote]
Actually alas you can. It turns out that to say anything other then the PC party line about global warming is frowned upon. This issue is not as simple as you think. I can get you the info later if you are interested.
[quote]Berner wrote:
Turbot,
Thanks for being exhibit A or should I say exhibit H for hate. Professor X takes no prisoners and writes his mind, but would not write:
turbot33 wrote:
Dear Vegetable,
and
turbot33 wrote:
You can’t just pick and choose the truth that’s convenient.
Actually alas you can. It turns out that to say anything other then the PC party line about global warming is frowned upon. This issue is not as simple as you think. I can get you the info later if you are interested.[/quote]
[quote]Berner wrote:
Turbot,
Thanks for being exhibit A or should I say exhibit H for hate. Professor X takes no prisoners and writes his mind, but he has more class then to write:
turbot33 wrote:
Dear Vegetable,
and
turbot33 wrote:
You can’t just pick and choose the truth that’s convenient.
Actually alas you can. It turns out that to say anything other then the PC party line about global warming is frowned upon. This issue is not as simple as you think. I can get you the info later if you are interested.[/quote]
Oh gee, I made a little play on his name. Man, we Dems are so mean!
Speaking of being politically correct, you righties have inherited the mantle. Since when did you all turn into such pansies?
It’s “wrong” to criticize the President. It’s “wrong” to call Vegita “Vegetable, king of all salads.”
“It’s so hurtful, I need to go shoot an animal so I can get rid of the sting.”
He deserves to be criticized. Live with it. And I think I like calling Vegita “Vegetable.”
Reallly, you guys have turned into whiny women.
Please have the integrity never to call Dems the PC party again.
Clinton most certainly lied.
One of my favorite bumper stickers this electoral season from the Democrats is:
“When Clinton Lied, No One Died”
What Vroom is suggesting is wrong, but not surprising.
Thunder, the big quote I remember is “I did not have sexual relations with that woman”.
Feel free to educate me, in particular, where he was more explicitly lying than that?
I’m not the lawyer on here claiming that anything short of a conviction is acceptable behavior…
[quote]vroom wrote:
Mage,
I was making sure to be balanced in my last post. Surely you can see that having a negative opinion and hatred are not the same thing. [/quote]
Sorry, but you are very biased on this issue. Having a negative opinion is not a problem, but the thing was total crap. It was an attack on a person without any substance. Again when did Bush ever say he had God’s ear? Why refer to him as a product of a failed education system? Or saying he didn?t believe in science, but without explaining why.
Not to mention his saying, “The rest of your shortcomings and crimes are too many to cite.” What a great way to make up some crap without having to support the position.
[quote]Of course, hatred can also be expressed via negative opinion. To try to claim that I was saying otherwise is clearly silly.
My goodness, maybe nobody should ever say anything critical of anything ever again, for it might be considered hatred. Nice try. [/quote]
Yes, nice try at making what I said out to be more then what it was. I never complained about being critical. This was not criticism, but an attack, plain and simple. Are you saying it is wrong to be critical of his “criticism”? Isn’t that hypocritical?
Reasons? What reason was there to say, “…you and your administration are to Republicans what the Taliban is to Islam.” What kind of statement is that? This is not criticism, but a blatant attack showing hate, pure and simple. You cannot see that?
Are you going to defend putting Bush at the level of the Taliban?
It’s called criticism Mage, you and I don’t have to agree with it, but that doesn’t make it hatred.
Turbo wasn’t trying to convince us with logic, it’s an opinion piece.
I’m guessing his opinion is that Bush sucks. His reasons for this opinion are pretty clear when you read the statements made.
As for the Taliban statement, I’m guessing this implies that Bush is a bit of an extremist. Can you not hold the ideas you believe in your head at the same time as the ideas that someone else believes?
I’m not trying to convince you that Turbo is right.
It’s not a disease y’know. You won’t be harmed by thinking in another man’s shoes from time to time.