House Passes Student Loan Takeover

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
61

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Petedacook wrote:

I see Olberman, Stewart, NBC, CNN, Maddow, all attack Obama when it is deserved. The same cannot be said for the right side of reporting. Again, I see the above noted media outlet and individuals as the face of conservatives.

Dumbest thing I have read here in months. I have no use for these talking heads right or left, but to say the right-wing pundits refused to criticize Bush or GOP is preposterous. O’Reilly, as an example, trashed Bush over his approach to illegal immigration. Coulter criticized the GOP over spending.

Do something - anything - rather than pass off this nonsense.[/quote]

I wish I could say I am shocked to see you defend the right wing from my attack. The fact you is, you are captain right wing. They can do no wrong.

It is fruitless for me to point out the numerous, staggering out right lies and fabrication promulgated by Fox News, and the entire Fox network, including your boy Bill O’. It is fruitless because you are in denial. You are correct, Bill did attack Bush…here is one of his quotes…“While Mr. Bush has made major mistakes, the overall press hostility towards him is grossly unfair.”

That is a PRIME example of Bill attacking Bush and using to attack another group instead.

If you think Fox is News, if you think they report accurately, if you think they genuinely report on each side equally, if you think any other network comes even slightly close to the mis-information they peddle on a daily basis…then YOU and people like YOU are what is wrong with this country today.

62

[quote]So you watch all of these guys regularly huh?

My guess: You watch the lib ones more and hence see them go against there own more often. Conservatives do the same for their talking heads.

O’Reilly criticised Bush about as often as Olbermann has been criticising Obama, that is to say not very often at all, but when he did it was with fervour.[/quote]

Actually, I rarely watch TV. In fact, I think I watch an hour of TV every two weeks. I obtain my news from the internet. In regards to the talking heads, I watch or catch the summaries. I am also active on other political forums.

I watch the right wing whack jobs more often because I like to know what they are telling people. it is ironic that what I find being spewed on Fox is touted as fact and the gospel by many people. I have encountered the same thing here within the past few days…“Obama is responsible for the national debt, not just 10%.”

63

[quote]Petedacook wrote:
<<< I wish I could say I am shocked to see you defend the right wing from my attack. The fact you is, you are captain right wing. They can do no wrong. >>>[/quote]

I’ve been really busy today and am so far behind on this thread I don’t where to start.

I promise you Thunderbolt is another one of the folks here you are falsely accusing in this manner.

64

[quote]Petedacook wrote:

I wish I could say I am shocked to see you defend the right wing from my attack. The fact you is, you are captain right wing. They can do no wrong. [/quote]

Provide a single quote supporting your notion that I think “they can do no wrong”. I’ll wait patiently.

Where to begin? None of this is relevant to the point you raised - that these pundits can “find no wrong” with the GOP. FOX “lies”? Different topic. As a bonus, you’ll note I said I don’t care for these pundits left or right, so “Bill O.” ain’t muh boy.

I am wondering - can you get anything right?

[quote]It is fruitless because you are in denial. You are correct, Bill did attack Bush…here is one of his quotes…“While Mr. Bush has made major mistakes, the overall press hostility towards him is grossly unfair.”

That is a PRIME example of Bill attacking Bush and using to attack another group instead. [/quote]

Read your own quote - it refutes your own bullshit claim. O’Reilly notes he has criticism of Bush, but that other critics go too far. And? Perfect example that O’Reilly does exactly what you said he didn’t.

Who cares that he used it to attack another group instead? Different topic, Einstein.

When did I defend FOX? What does it have to do with the fact that you (erroneously) said conservative pundits never, ever criticize the GOP?

You seem to be willing to talk about anything but your stupid, stupid assertion that was refuted in nanoseconds by anyone who is literate - but, then, I would want to change the subject too.

[/quote]

65

I’m beginning to believe we’d have to accuse Bush of planning 9-11 before Pete is satisfied. That’s not meant to be a joke.

66

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

When did I defend FOX? What does it have to do with the fact that you (erroneously) said conservative pundits never, ever criticize the GOP?
[/quote]

Here:

[quote]
but to say the right-wing pundits refused to criticize Bush or GOP is preposterous[/quote]

It appears to me as though you are defending my attack on Fox, and right wing pundits in general. Let me guess…I am stupid, right?

And that pretty mush summarizes your tact, wit, and decorum. Typical.

One more thing…a quick search…took me a minute reveals this:

In this thread:

[quote]
Finally, No More Bush![/quote]

So no need to wait any longer my friend. If O’Reilly as I quoted above is “trashing Bush,” then I am sure you can see how insinuating everyone is stupid in a thread titled “Finally no more Bush” is defending Bush. If not, you will have to search for yourself. I draw the line at 60 seconds.

67

[quote]Sloth wrote:
I’m beginning to believe we’d have to accuse Bush of planning 9-11 before Pete is satisfied. That’s not meant to be a joke.[/quote]

Sloth,

I am not sure that would satisfy me.

68

I don’t see how this is a bad thing. Even in fukking Russia, a student who passes entrance exams gets free tuitions and a federal stiped provided by the government. I mean, we’re talking about RUSSIA.

69

I don’t see how you figure this. Business wise, the economy is unpredictable, so forecasting on whether or not a student will get a job when he graduates is risky, also those who get loans are those who need them, which means their family can’t mortgage their life’s investments to pay for their school…which means they don’t really have any collateral to take from the student.

70

[quote]3IdSpetsnaz wrote:
I don’t see how this is a bad thing. Even in fukking Russia, a student who passes entrance exams gets free tuitions and a federal stiped provided by the government. I mean, we’re talking about RUSSIA.

[/quote]

You actually have academic standards in russia. We don’t here. We re-calibrate ours every few years or so when we don’t like the outcomes.

71

[quote]Petedacook wrote:

but to say the right-wing pundits refused to criticize Bush or GOP is preposterous

It appears to me as though you are defending my attack on Fox, and right wing pundits in general. Let me guess…I am stupid, right? [/quote]

Well, yes - you said various conservative talkig heads refused to ever criticize the GOP/Bush. You are wrong - they did so, and you know they did so. The first step is instead of throwing an anti-FOX tantrum, admit you’ve been refuted.

And, what does the press’ “overall hostility to Bush” - true or false - have to do with my point, that conservative talking heads like Coulter and O’Reilly, do, in fact, criticize the GOP and Bush?

Who cares? Take a Ritalin. Your irrelevant histrionics regarding FOX News has nothing to do with the subject.

[quote]Your ad hominem argument is getting old fast. Lets see:

thunderbolt23 wrote:

can you get anything right?
Dumbest
bullshit claim
Einstein
your stupid
stupid
anyone who is literate

And that pretty mush summarizes your tact, wit, and decorum. Typical. [/quote]

These are not ad hominems - these are naked insults. Learn the difference.

Secondly, I am a fan of respect and decorum, but at the same time, I won’t suffer rank stupidity like yours without a comment. If that bothers you, not my problem.

No, I am happy to defend Bush and have done so in the past. I have also criticized him. I wanted to know where I had raised this issue in refuting your point?

You see, Pete, that is an ad hominem - when I provide a fact rebutting your claim, and you immediately launch into a tirade that I must be wrong because I have defended Bush in the past, that is a classic example of the fallacy.

Looks like the “intellectual Left” continues to be an oxymoron - well, certainly at least the latter part of the word, for sure.

72

[quote]Petedacook wrote:
CLICK TO ENLARGE

Where was this outrage when Bush increased the size of the National Government by 1/3? This partisan bickering is exasperating.

The fact that the right is upset about the same things the left was upset about, but did not speak out about because a republican was in charge says a lot about the people on the right wing of politics. I am staying on the left, both in belief and my vote until I see constituents, politicians, and the media on the right hold themselves to the same standard they hold the left. Czars are nothing new. Rewind time and protest Bush…then you can be taken seriously.

Democrats won, get over it.

[/quote]

This post bitching about bickering about partisan politics spurned up a lot of bickering about partisan politics … I’m just saying Pete, you fail at posts

73

[quote]Petedacook wrote:
Mufasa wrote:

The problem is that “right” and “left” are just as corrupt as one another…and trying to make stark differences between the GOP and the DEMS is a joke.

Mufasa

This is the same thing I “try” to say. The problem with my message is that it gets lost in trying to present the right with genuine bias.

You see, even if everyone agrees that Obama sucks and is doing the exact same thing Washington has done, it does no good unless the people on the right realize their side is also WRONG.

It is high time everyone realized that both sides are lying to our faces. They do not hate one another, conservatives and liberals are buddies and pals behind the scenes.

If Obama leaves office, and another Republican takes office, then Fox will stop the attacks and inevitably the right wing outrage will cease. It simply was not there when Bush was in office.

If anyone disagrees with the notion the right wing outrage did not exist when Bush was in office…then provide and example of a right wing rally protesting Bush.
[/quote]

Umm? Ron Paul? Am I credible since I knew and acted on the fact that both sides are utterly corrupt and incompetent? Yet both sides laughed at anyone who mentioned Ron Paul, and now everyone is coming to the realization that nearly everything he said would happen has happened and will continue to happen unless people reject both the democrats and republicans outright. (of course he still called himslef a republican, but he was and old school Barry Goldwater Republican, not a neo-con.)

V

74

[quote]Petedacook wrote:

“Putting the government in charge of all federal loans would save taxpayers an estimated $87 billion.”

…

“end the subsidized loan program under which private lenders made $56 billion in government-backed loans to more than 6 million students last year”

[/quote]

Any of you college types care to explain the math here?

75

[quote]Petedacook wrote:
Sloth wrote:

Rewind time and protest Bush…then you can be taken seriously. [/quote]

You paint all non-liberals with the same brush. That is folly. You tell me to find facts to argue after making a statement that is rife with folly and virtually untestable. So 30% of people approved Bush and now protest Obama. Fine. The hardline party voters behavior shouldn’t surprise you, but what about the 70% of people that did NOT approve of Bush? You’re telling me there were no conservatives there? No republicans in there? That’s bullshit and you know it.

You CAN’T paint everyone with the same brush. It’s retarded. The political spectrum on the right side is not one monolithic giant, any more than the spectrum on the left side is. Further, just because some of those 30% hardliners are now in the crowd protesting Obama does NOT in any way mean that there are no protesters who were a) conservative Bush critics b) previous Obama supporters who changed their minds. It is a false dilemma you proposed.