Anyone Still Support Obama After Ndaa?

[KittenAB]

Come on, the German people listened to him and that is what I was talking about. You still do not make any sense especially when you were talking earlier about how the extremes in our current government have too much of a voice.

I have to say, Leilin got it. One must also realize, the German people as a whole didn't listen or even accept Hitler, it was actually a large portion of the population that did however, and it was the worst of the worst in that scenario. If we had listened to the people, to Hitler, and to the neighboring nations we would have known this before he became a threat and if we had acted on what we heard ... we could have stopped it before it got too bad. Instead we ignored him.

See, listening to luncay will always help in some way, it will either advance thinking or allow prevention of something negative. For instance, I listen to what a certain hacktivist group does, though I do not agree with, nor accept, their logic. They have a nuclear bomb (digitally of course) and they toss it around like it's an angry letter or petition instead of using it as a last resort. So I listen and know their movements, to the point I can even spot fakes, but I do not accept their ideals at all. ... and they are certifiable according to some people.

[Diapered Jason]

You are right, but he would have never risen to power with out having his Nazi party become the dominating party in the Reichstag, which required the German people to vote.

Of course I am not saying you should not listen to what everyone has to say, but I am saying some people do not deserve time on the 6 o'clock news.

[Leilin]

Of course, we come to a completely different conundrum when listening to a person is a precursor to silencing their voice. I believe in freedom of speech.

I also believe, as I have mentioned, in the freedom to ridicule those whose speech is made up of half-thought falsehoods and idiocies.

For instance, I listen to what a certain hacktivist group does, though I do not agree with, nor accept, their logic. They have a nuclear bomb (digitally of course) and they toss it around like it's an angry letter or petition instead of using it as a last resort. So I listen and know their movements, to the point I can even spot fakes, but I do not accept their ideals at all. ... and they are certifiable according to some people.

Stop that, or you're going to make me agreeing with you a trend.

[Horndog]

That is almost a logical fallacy though, ignoring the opposition just because they won't change their minds is actually worse than not changing your mind but still listening to (or reading) the opposition. The main reason being that minds are not changed by a whole argument or debate, but often by one key fact. Not to mention, there is truth in even the most insane of opinions. One must consider even the most remote possibility of being true before one can elinimate it as false, not considering that opinion is telling them (by not telling them anything) that they are correct and should not change their opinion on the matter at all. You also may miss out on how they formulated their opinion, and yours may be completely wrong, even if it sounds sane.

Uh...

There is no logical fallacy here, and what you said actually makes no sense. Nothing is "almost" a logical fallacy. It's either a logical fallacy or it isn't. There's not much gray area.

Just for you, I viewed some of BoToX and Redneck's posts, and what I see is not an argument so much as an appeal to fear and prejudice. They've shown no impulse to listen to what others have to say while they make claims that are mostly inaccurate. The inaccurate claims are not "inaccurate" because I say so, but because many reputable, non-partisan sources have fact-checked and dismissed them. I have a belief system that may be unorthodox to you, but this is how it goes: those who are satisfied with partisan demagoguery and being factually wrong will not change the world. The people, who have an open mind, will change the world -- and for the better. The ignorant contribute little to no intellectual wealth to our society and western civilization. This is not to say that they can only be acknowledged if they agree with everything or anything I say; it's whether they will be able to listen. Keyword is listen.

As far as the guns issue goes, I believe that owning certain guns (fully automatics, semi-automatics) can designate bad intent if those arms are not purchased for military use. I believe an outright ban on guns is ridiculous, and we should handle bans with a scalpel instead of an ax. Also, we should focus more on illegal gun sales than banning guns. It's still easy to purchase weaponry at gun shows without going through state-mandated background and license checks. It's really about preventing guns from getting in the wrong hands, and preventing the sale of guns that are military-grade.

[Leilin]

Also true. Nobody is dismissing BotoX and RDB "just" because they aren't changing their minds. They are being dismissed because they are presenting opinions which are without basis in reputable fact and completely ignoring not just some but ALL of the evidence which is provided to the contrary.

[redneck diaper boy]

So... buying adjacent land to your home from a corrupt person is corrupt? Living next door to a corrupt person is corrupt? You don't really have a leg to stand on with this one.

And I'll just leave this here. I expect you fully to respond to it without actually reading it. http://www.snopes.co...obama/ayers.asp

Corrupt is failure to prosecute the New Black Panthers for voter intimidation at a Philadelphia voting precinct. Corrupt is allowing thugs to walk free because they are black and the evidence against them was videotape! Corrupt is loaning a company almost 1/2 of 1 billion dollars for solar pannels because said company was a large political contributor! Solyndra was found to have a bad business plan by the Bush Administration. Shortly after the Obama loan Solyndra went bankrupt! Corruption is "these shove ready projects aren't so shovel ready after all"! Corrupt is 800 billion or should I say 0.8 trillion dollars being channeled to personal campaign contributors and union thug friends! Corrupt is forcing Catholics to provide contraception for Catholic hospital employees. Corrupt is forcing up the price of gasoline to promote their stupid "green energy" plan. Corrupt is not allowing more domestic oil production and handing money to Brazil for oil production. Corrupt is forcing and un-Constitutional healthcare system on all Americans.

As for guns, I believe everyone that wants an AK-47 or AR-15 or 50 cal. machine gun should have one! The best reason for the public to be armmed is to prevent tryanny in government! (that was a paraphrased comment form Thomas Jefferson.

[Leilin]

*facepalm* You realize that the president isn't a district attorney right?

Never mind, of course you don't.

[redneck diaper boy]

*facepalm* You realize that the president isn't a district attorney right?

Never mind, of course you don't.

You are making up excuses for the corrupt POS. Eric Holder admitted that the lack of prosecution was because the criminals were black! Obama and his Attorney General are racists!

[Leilin]

You are making up excuses for the corrupt POS. Eric Holder admitted that the lack of prosecution was because the criminals were black! Obama and his Attorney General are racists!

... because it's not like they started a case and then dropped it for lack of evidence.

Oh, wait. Yes it is, and I'm sure you were equally critical of Bush's administration for not pursing that case as it was happening.

[redneck diaper boy]

Seven lies in less than 2 minutes!

[redneck diaper boy]

... because it's not like they started a case and then dropped it for lack of evidence.

Oh, wait. Yes it is, and I'm sure you were equally critical of Bush's administration for not pursing that case as it was happening.

Oh I know about the lack of evidence. They only had a videotape of the crime as it happened!

[Leilin]

Oh I know about the lack of evidence. They only had a videotape of the crime as it happened!

So. Not only do you think that Obama is a DA, but you also don't know how Voter Intimidation works. Wow, we know facts aren't your strong suit, but this is a new low. What other interesting factlessoids did you suck from Rush's teat?

[redneck diaper boy]

So. Not only do you think that Obama is a DA, but you also don't know how Voter Intimidation works. Wow, we know facts aren't your strong suit, but this is a new low. What other interesting factlessoids did you suck from Rush's teat?

When you have black thugs, outside of a voting precinct with clubs it is intimidation. People at the justice Department resigned over this issue. It was Eric Holder that dropped the charges.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/06/30/justice-dept-lawyer-accuses-holder-dropping-new-black-panther-case-political/

[BoTox]

Dismissing me with a wave of your hand does not make my comments any less relevant. Failure to quote things others see as supporting my points makes my statements no less true or false. If I say the sky is blue and the grass is green, it is not false just because you can disagree with me. Obama is a gun grabber, demonstrated by his time in the IL senate and should he win a second term, he will have no fear of the NRA and will begin to push through antigun legislation like Clinton did. As bad as I hate lobbying, the NRA is the necessary evil to keep the second amendment between me and the tyranny of man.

Try to own a handgun in Canada, the UK or Australia. They all started with registration and then had to turn in their guns because the government knew everyone that had a legal handgun.

Removing guns does not stop murder and other violent crimes. Ask our Canadian neighbors. Guns were only used in 1/3 or less of all murders. If you removed every deadly weapon on the planet, people would still kill people. It happened as soon as the first human discovered he could take something from another with less effort than earning it himself. Do you want the rule of the jungle or the rule of law?

No gun is evil no more than any car or bottle of whisky is evil. The person that murders another with a gun or a bottle of booze and a 2 ton car is equally evil and the tool he used is irrelevant. Cars are much easier to get than guns and kill more people annually yet we do not ban cars. You need to show no proof of sanity or financial responsibility to buy a car and proceed to run down innocent people. Other than being of a certain age, buying alcohol has no other restrictions.

Extend it even further, when alcohol was banned, an entire crime economy rose up to fill the desire to have alcohol along with all the unsavory types that go with it.

Again, those that refuse to learn from history are doomed to repeat the same mistakes.

[KittenAB]

You are right, but he would have never risen to power with out having his Nazi party become the dominating party in the Reichstag, which required the German people to vote.

Of course I am not saying you should not listen to what everyone has to say, but I am saying some people do not deserve time on the 6 o'clock news.

I'm sorry, but you need to review your history a bit. For one thing you have it backward, it was the Nazi party that put him in power, he was just an avangelist before that, a political loud mouth (much like Rush Limbaugh really). The Nazi party was already a strong political party at the time. Germans did not simply say "oh, we like these people better than our current party, let's support them instead." See, even now you haven't listened and still don't know the facts or see the signs, if someone dangerous would be given a chance in the US, you'd probably vote for them without realizing the similarities between them an Adolf just because of that ... Santorum anyone?

[sarah_ab]

back to the original question.. Yep I still support obama... but then again I have a higher IQ

oh yheah and dont forget... Mitt Romney as governor of massachusettes forced health care on all people working in that state... everyone seems to forget that little fact... he did the same thing obama did... but somehow no one mentions that....

[Alexandra]

Ok I've gone back and read most of the postes here that I had blocked and I've only got to shake my head at the trash I read here what are we a bunch of backwater mouth breathing hicks, I know I'm not and I'd hope the people on this forum aren't either and yet we all are either posting nonsese or responing to nonsense. I will say a few things though to everyone against thing like healthcare lets forget the political side of things and instead ask are you really so apathitic that you wouldn't want to give up just a bit of your money to help thoose less fortunate and if your about to say well I already give to charity, 1 charity can only reach so many people in the community but the government to take that reach farther and 2 what about the people who don't want to give to charity its only fair they give to the worse off too though right so though taxes the govt. can make charity far for everyone. as I've said I'm torn on the gun issue but the fact of the matters is yes people will always find a way too kill each other but is it not worth it to at least make it harder to kill someone instead we seem to be making it easier; A handgun in your home for safety is onething but really why need any stronger form of defense I mean ideally even an intruder you just want to incapasitate not kill so why need a rifle or automatic weapon a handgun works just fine, also the argument of leaving a means to rebel against the "tryanical" government is best answered by this quote from Thomas Jefferson

"

In defense of our persons and properties under actual violation, we took up arms. When that violence shall be removed, when hostilities shall cease on the part of the aggressors, hostilities shall cease on our part also."

I could go on all day and refute allot of statements but instead I'll simpy say this I hope others on here will simply ignore the ignorant, arrogent, racist, post made by people like Redneck BoTox and Kitten I know I intend to because as its been said before while another opinion is not only ok in a debate it is vital another opinion that has neither facts nor even an open mind to other's opinion is vile and the end of any sort of meaningful debate

[Diapered Jason]

I'm sorry, but you need to review your history a bit. For one thing you have it backward, it was the Nazi party that put him in power, he was just an avangelist before that, a political loud mouth (much like Rush Limbaugh really). The Nazi party was already a strong political party at the time. Germans did not simply say "oh, we like these people better than our current party, let's support them instead." See, even now you haven't listened and still don't know the facts or see the signs, if someone dangerous would be given a chance in the US, you'd probably vote for them without realizing the similarities between them an Adolf just because of that ... Santorum anyone?

I have been listening to Rick Santorum, lol, just not taking him seriously yet, but he still already scares me. I will be watching the Michigan primary with interest. I do not want him to win as he dumbing down Republican politics, but so are the rest of them now that I think about it. To finish, Hitler was not just some Rush Limbaugh equivalent, he was the leader of his party before he rose to power (the chairman), requiring people not only listen to him, but support him. You need to review history. People voted his party into the Reichstag and he was made chancellor by Hindenburg. Had people never taken stock in what he said, he would have never risen to power, which is what I have been saying. Speaking further about this, you will notice the German people were quite supportive of him during his reign and I doubt one could argue ignorance as war is good for business or so they thought. I hate talking about American politics in the same post as Hitler, but the fact Rick Santorum, lol, has gotten this far is because people are listening to him and believing him. The truth people always disregard is he was voted out of office in Pennsylvania (They don't like him, I wonder why). What is even more disheartening is, aside from Ron Paul, similar things can be said about the rest of the candidates. Newt Gingrich is a repudiated speaker of the house and the same can be said about Mitt Romney and his governorship. It is like we are scraping the bottom of the barrel when it comes to candidates.

Though Rich Santorum, lol, frightens me, I am not saying he or any of the Republican candidates are in any way like Hitler.

[Horndog]

I don't think any politician should be compared to Hitler, and I don't think anyone should be compared to Gabrielle Giffords' shooter. When Bush was in office and progressives compared Bush to Hitler, I condemned it and sat on the sidelines while they made fools of themselves.

[KittenAB]

I don't think any politician should be compared to Hitler, and I don't think anyone should be compared to Gabrielle Giffords' shooter. When Bush was in office and progressives compared Bush to Hitler, I condemned it and sat on the sidelines while they made fools of themselves.

I make the exception with Santorum because his ads are much like Hitler's platform, similar enough to actually be frightening. He is literally the only truly scary Republican candidate, honestly. Bush was just a moron but did not single out any groups nor attack positive changes at all, he was just stupid. Same holds for Obama, except instead of stupid Obama is two faced. The mentality of singling out a specific group and implying they are "evil" is what Hitler did with the Jews before he got into power.

[Diapered Jason]

I make the exception with Santorum because his ads are much like Hitler's platform, similar enough to actually be frightening. He is literally the only truly scary Republican candidate, honestly. Bush was just a moron but did not single out any groups nor attack positive changes at all, he was just stupid. Same holds for Obama, except instead of stupid Obama is two faced. The mentality of singling out a specific group and implying they are "evil" is what Hitler did with the Jews before he got into power.

Perhaps, but the only certainty here is when you pull the H-word out and compare to a candidate or someone's policy, you make yourself look foolish and also lose any credibility at least in my book.

[redneck diaper boy]

I don't think any politician should be compared to Hitler, and I don't think anyone should be compared to Gabrielle Giffords' shooter. When Bush was in office and progressives compared Bush to Hitler, I condemned it and sat on the sidelines while they made fools of themselves.

So how do you feel about Anita Dunn's favorite philosopher being Mao Tes Tung?

Hitler was a bad guy. The only two rulers worse than Hitler were Mao Tse Tung and Joseph Stalin. My worst is based on the number of people killed diring their respective reigns.

[KittenAB]

Perhaps, but the only certainty here is when you pull the H-word out and compare to a candidate or someone's policy, you make yourself look foolish and also lose any credibility at least in my book.

I am starting to see why so many people wish to resist learning historical facts. Hitler is an example, and one of the most well known ones, that can be applied to spot those with a high chance of being like him. Another is Kim Jong Il, we can even add Sadam Hussein to that list. But most people know more about Hitler since he's part of school cirriculums. Though anyone compared to him is not guilty until they do something, we must avoid allowing that risk in our country, which we need a basis for detecting such people ... and thus must compare their actions and words to others. Have you even seen Santorum's ads? They're scary, even if someone is not gay, the hairs on the back of your neck should stand on end hearing his words. They are virtually a direct quote from one of Hitler's speaches on Jewish people.

What I believe you are doing is confusing accusation with comparison, they are two very different concepts. Comparison allows us to make predictions and analyze things, accusations are saying they did something already. We cannot compare people to just the "good" people in history, or we will miss the signs we learned about from the "bad" people.

[Horndog]

So how do you feel about Anita Dunn's favorite philosopher being Mao Tes Tung?

You mean Mao Zedong, right?

Personally, I wouldn't say Zedong was my "favorite philosopher" because one cannot ignore the atrocities that he committed. You have to be careful, though, because she didn't endorse Zedong's ideologies. Yes, it's a Media Matters link, but it has the transcript of the Glenn Beck Show, and you can read it for yourself.

[redneck diaper boy]

You mean Mao Zedong, right?

Personally, I wouldn't say Zedong was my "favorite philosopher" because one cannot ignore the atrocities that he committed. You have to be careful, though, because she didn't endorse Zedong's ideologies. Yes, it's a Media Matters link, but it has the transcript of the Glenn Beck Show, and you can read it for yourself.

No Zedong is wrong. It was printed that way because some pundit did not know how to spell it. It is pronounced mao sey tung. I remember it all to well from my studies in high school as well as Union Theological Seminary in Richmond Va. My mother wanted me to be a minister but it never happened I wound up at OSU but that is another story.

I just remembered another jewel about Chairman Mao. How about this philosophy?

"Politics comes out of the barrel of a gun" Chairman Mao