Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Eldon on November 29, 2007, 11:05:46 AM
-
I heard this one time. I don't rememberer exactly how the story goes, buy for the most part :
Their were some people living in a town,
and one day a group of Thugs came to round up all the Christians, to get rid of them.
the Atheist did not raise his voice in anger to stop it, and defend the Christians ,,,, as he is not a Christian, so no problem ;D
Then a few weeks later, the Thugs came back and rounded up all the Hindus. to get rid of them.
the Atheist did not raise his voice in anger to stop it, and defend the Hindus ,,,, as he is not a Hindu, so no problem ;D
Then a few weeks later, the Thugs came back and rounded up all the Buddhist. to get rid of them.
the Atheist did not raise his voice in anger to stop it, and defend the Buddhist ,,,, as he is not a Buddhist, so no problem ;D
Then a few weeks later, the Thugs came back to round up all the Atheist. to get rid of them.
and their was nobody left to defend the Atheist man, as everyone else was already gone. :(
The point being that with what happended last night, In the Republican Debate, with the Democrats Planting people to ask question to try and make the republicans look bad, I ask many of you Liberals on here to think about this before you say it was no big deal.
Is this really something you think you think is OK ?, Or are you like the atheist in the above story, telling yourself, that since you are a democrat, and it was done to a Republican, no big deal, " so no problem " ;D
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=trxZAN1W-ms)
-
The only problem with your post is that it's wrong. The Buddhist and Hindu and other religions would support your right to not be rounded up. The Christians on the other hand, I don't know, it's kind of written into their word that all these other people are wrong... Look, maybe it's wrong what happened last night. Maybe it's even wrong on the same level of sending your campaign staff to be staged protesters in Florida during the 2000 election, like the Bush campaign did. One thing is for sure, the dems will get busted for it on a much bigger level than republicans ever do for pulling similar stunts so I don't know what your worry is about. From what I see this will sit well for you guys despite there being zero evidence that Hillary put her man up to this, could easily be his own idea. Even the staged question she got nailed on, the truth be told, that chick went and asked Hillary what would be a good question to ask. Didn't hear anybody in the media mention that fact. They just nailed her to the wall on it.
-
I'm sorry Eldon, but it looks to me like Republicans have gotten such a free ride in the so-called liberal media, getting tossed so many softballs, that you come to expect it from a national debate. That's not how it works. Anyone running for office should expect to have hard questions directed towards them. There are questions that need to be answered, and when you're asking for people's votes, you should expect to prove yourself worthy of it prior to the ballots being cast. Politicians are there to represent their entire constituency, ...not just those who voted for them, ...and they must be accountable to the entire constituency, ...not just those who voted for them, ...but also those who didn't.
As for your analogy, ...fat chance of that ever happening.
With the stronghold religious radicals have on public policy makers, ...they'd take the Atheists first.
-
The only problem with your post is that it's wrong. The Buddhist and Hindu and other religions would support your right to not be rounded up. The Christians on the other hand, I don't know, it's kind of written into their word that all these other people are wrong... Look, maybe it's wrong what happened last night. Maybe it's even wrong on the same level of sending your campaign staff to be staged protesters in Florida during the 2000 election, like the Bush campaign did. One thing is for sure, the dems will get busted for it on a much bigger level than republicans ever do for pulling similar stunts so I don't know what your worry is about. From what I see this will sit well for you guys despite there being zero evidence that Hillary put her man up to this, could easily be his own idea. Even the staged question she got nailed on, the truth be told, that chick went and asked Hillary what would be a good question to ask. Didn't hear anybody in the media mention that fact. They just nailed her to the wall on it.
This is the most bullshit I have read on here all week.
Berserker, as usuall so full of shit.
For the record,
I don't like any of the republicans, I wish Low Dobbs would run as an independent
Question for the loony Liberal Berserker ?
I see now you are for Ron Paul,
Him being Pro life and a Christian how does this sit with your liberal views ::)
http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=402
http://fellowprisoner.wordpress.com/2007/05/21/why-it-doesnt-matter-whether-ron-paul-or-any-president-is-christian/
-
I refuse to reply to anything the American hating jaguarenterprises, says on here,
go back to the business board and push some more of your scam gas pills :o
-
This is the most bullshit I have read on here all week.
Berserker, as usuall so full of shit.
For the record,
I don't like any of the republicans, I wish Low Dobbs would run as an independent
Question for the loony Liberal Berserker ?
I see now you are for Ron Paul,
Him being Pro life and a Christian how does this sit with your liberal views ::)
Looks like if I'm full of shit, so are you :D I was there first nanner na nanner 8)
Lou Dobbs for President by Berserker: http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=88465.0
Where did I say I was Pro Choice or Pro Life? I've been undecided on the issue for years and years and for good reasons.
Why would I care about him being a Christian? As I've noted a non Christian is more willing to accept a Christian that the other way around. The angry atheists are in a small minority, just about every sampling has shown that. Most people believe we all have rights to worship as we please. If I have a problem with Ron Paul being a Christian, I'm in serious trouble with my family who are all Christian not counting myself and my sister. I have criticisms of Christianity, so what? I also am happy to be friends with them and even accept their beliefs on several levels, it's only right.
-
The point being that with what happended last night, In the Republican Debate, with the Democrats Planting people to ask question to try and make the republicans look bad, I ask many of you Liberals on here to think about this before you say it was no big deal.
Is this really something you think you think is OK ?, Or are you like the atheist in the above story, telling yourself, that since you are a democrat, and it was done to a Republican, no big deal, " so no problem " ;D
I don't think it's alright.
But to make it fair, they should have questions from both parties at debates.
-
If the republicans don't want to look bad in answering questions, they should not give stupid answers to those questions.
For god's sake, do you think the president of the US should only answer softball questions? Don't answer that if you are Bush supporter....ipso facto.
I see nothing wrong with what happened..if it indeed happened that way. I do see something wrong when the whitehouse uses tax dollars to plant false stories in the national media though.
-
If the republicans don't want to look bad in answering questions, they should not give stupid answers to those questions.
For god's sake, do you think the president of the US should only answer softball questions? Don't answer that if you are Bush supporter....ipso facto.
I see nothing wrong with what happened..if it indeed happened that way. I do see something wrong when the whitehouse uses tax dollars to plant false stories in the national media though.
That's true, it might all be BS in the first place.
However, if it did happen that way it doesn't make the playing field fair if the debate is supposed to have certain parameters.
-
I want to see the DEM candidates get TOUGH questions too.
I think ALL Republicans should want their candidates to face TOUGH questions, so that they can see who is honest, tough, and has good ideas, and who is just a pretty face with a
Shit, do any of you run a business? Do you spend the interview saying "tell me your 3 greatest strengths", or do you ask about their work record, their past perforamce, why they left the last job, etc?
You should WANT to know who the frauds are. From BOTH parties. This way, you don't elect a DUD. Again.
-
That's true, it might all be BS in the first place.
However, if it did happen that way it doesn't make the playing field fair if the debate is supposed to have certain parameters.
Frankly I don't care about the rules of debate. Etiquette is fine. But this is the big chair we are talking about--the presidency.
Let's see what these men are made of lest we get stuck with another incompetent like Bush.
I want to see a leader that can think and act on his feet. One that preferably does not sit in a children's classroom for 17 minutes reading a goat story looking like a goddam dope after he was told the country was under attack by his chief of staff.
-
Frankly I don't care about the rules of debate. Etiquette is fine. But this is the big chair we are talking about--the presidency.
Let's see what these men are made of lest we get stuck with another incompetent like Bush.
I want to see a leader that can think and act on his feet. One that preferably does not sit in a children's classroom for 17 minutes reading a goat story looking like a goddam dope after he was told the country was under attack by his chief of staff.
Which is all good and i agree with.
But if the administrators of the democratic debates don't allow it and the administrators of the republican debates don't allow it, but somehow the republican debate is compromised it's creates an unfair playing field which isn't right.
-
Which is all good and i agree with.
But if the administrators of the democratic debates don't allow it and the administrators of the republican debates don't allow it, but somehow the republican debate is compromised it's creates an unfair playing field which isn't right.
I agree. It's really not about tough questions, which are fine, it's about the integrity of the process.
-
I see what you both mean.
However there really is very little integrity to this format of debate. You get your 60 or 30 seconds to make a point or get off a zinger and then you move on.
That's not debate.
That's plain BS.
I love to see things get shaken up where the polish from the rehearsal is gone and all you're left with is the talent of the men answering the question.
-
who is this eldon character?
-
I love to see things get shaken up where the polish from the rehearsal is gone and all you're left with is the talent of the men answering the question.
You and me both sir, even if being a good debater doesn't necessarily make you a good president. It would be revealing to see them answer real tough questions and be made to directly answer them.
-
who is this eldon character?
Bruce.
-
I see what you both mean.
However there really is very little integrity to this format of debate. You get your 60 or 30 seconds to make a point or get off a zinger and then you move on.
That's not debate.
That's plain BS.
I love to see things get shaken up where the polish from the rehearsal is gone and all you're left with is the talent of the men answering the question.
Good points.
-
who is this eldon character?
Well, I agree with much of what he has posted so far about the debate, so he must be another one of my alter egos. :)
-
Bruce.
are you sure ???
-
are you sure ???
No. But the behavior pattern has emerged almost identically to where he left off, among other clues.
Eldon, are you Bruce?
-
who is this eldon character?
I have been on here since 2002, don't post much anymore, many of the older members I knew are gone, such a Jdog, Avenging Eagle, Beyond Genetics, and etc......
every now and then I have a day off from work, and come on here to read and laugh.... :o
Dam. Berserker being for Lou Dobbs, makes me want to rethink it all
Just kidding
Later.
once again folks , it had nothing to do wit hard questions, the more the better, it had to do with Democratic Plants trying to make the other side look bad,
Do you think the following question would ever be asked to the democrats from a youtube undecided voter ?
Being a liberal, you are all for defending a cold blooded murderer's right to life, but all for killing Innocent babies during the 3rd-trimester, when at that stage of the pregnancy, the baby could be birthed, and be living ?
Never in your wildest dreams, especially not on CNN.
and if so, if it was found out that this person was planted by a Republican front runner, along with 7 others republican plants ?
again, hard questions are great, that is not the problem with what happended last night.
This is not Venezuela or Russia.
Who is Bruce ?
-
I have been on here since 2002, don't post much anymore, many of the older members I knew are gone, such a Jdog, Avenging Eagle, Beyond Genetics, and etc......
every now and then I have a day off from work, and come on here to read and laugh.... :o
Dam. Berserker being for Lou Dobbs, makes me want to rethink it all
Just kidding
Later.
once again folks , it had nothing to do wit hard questions, the more the better, it had to do with Democratic Plants trying to make the other side look bad,
Do you think the following question would ever be asked to the democrats from a youtube undecided voter ?
Being a liberal, you are all for defending a cold blooded murderer's right to life, but all for killing Innocent babies during the 3rd-trimester, when at that stage of the pregnancy, the baby could be birthed, and be living ?
Never in your wildest dreams, especially not on CNN.
and if so, if it was found out that this person was planted by a Republican front runner, along with 7 others republican plants ?
again, hard questions are great, that is not the problem with what happended last night.
This is not Venezuela or Russia.
Now who's full of shit ::)
-
Now who's full of shit
want to make a bet ?
-
I don't remember any of these people.
were you on here 5 years ago ?
since you dont remember them, I guess they never existed, and I just made up their names ::)
-
want to make a bet ?
why would I bet you on something, you can't even address my answers to your pissed off questioning of me. Instead you make some halfass illogical statement of guilt by association which is why you're full of shit... Save the "You're either with us or you're against us..." for your neocon group meetings, that shit doesn't fly here.
-
In Europe, Liberalism retains its original meaning:
[A]t the heart of classical liberalism", wrote Nancy L. Rosenblum and Robert C. Post, is a prescription: "Nurture voluntary associations. Limit the size, and more importantly, the scope of government. So long as the state provides a basic rule of law that steers people away from destructive or parasitic ways of life and in the direction of productive ways of life, society runs itself. If you want people to flourish, let them run their own lives."[20]
But Yanks have to change everything and probably hear about a liberal in Europe and immediately assume that it is the same thing as in Yankland...
-
In Europe, Liberalism retains its original meaning:
But Yanks have to change everything and probably hear about a liberal in Europe and immediately assume that it is the same thing as in Yankland...
yes, we constantly get scolded by Hedge for not following strict interpretation. But the fact remains, there are multiple contexts in which the term is used. As long as it's not being used out of the context it's being applied, I don't see a problem. The spectrum of political movements over time all but make this impossible to avoid. Granted, it can be a lot to soak in and for a person who insists on a term being only used in it's strictest sense, it's no doubt frustrating.
-
yes, we constantly get scolded by Hedge for not following strict interpretation. But the fact remains, there are multiple contexts in which the term is used. As long as it's not being used out of the context it's being applied, I don't see a problem. The spectrum of political movements over time all but make this impossible to avoid. Granted, it can be a lot to soak in and for a person who insists on a term being only used in it's strictest sense, it's no doubt frustrating.
Yanks are weird, living in their own bubble, insular, without a passport, generally to wholly ignorant of the world their country runs and uncaring about that circumstance to boot. It has very nice landscapes but most of everything else with the exception of NYC bagles is...well I am glad I don't live there anymore....
-
Yanks are weird, living in their own bubble, insular, without a passport, generally to wholly ignorant of the world their country runs and uncaring about that circumstance to boot. It has very nice landscapes but most of everything else with the exception of NYC bagles is...well I am glad I don't live there anymore....
no doubt this describes a lot of people here but I hope there are some exceptions :D actually I know of quite a few that don't fit this mold. As disgruntled as I get, I still have high hopes this country can overcome the evils affecting us. Plus remember, this is not an isolated evil anymore. It is now an evil without borders. These global corporations and power interests that have worked diligently to make people mindless consumer automatons are extending their influences everywhere, and the media which has become a tool for these influences are also extending their reach. Nobody is immune from the things that have taken us to our current state. I think the largest danger is for a country to think, it can't happen here, that's just an American problem because they're dumb or to self involved to give a shit--a concept often asserted by some arrogant Canadians. One of the biggest problems that occurred in America was the move from classical education to occupation focused education. IMO, this system turns out robots with limited ability to think analytically and have a functional understanding of events. Bad thing=Listen and memorise, listen and memorise, listen and memorise... blaaaa...
-
I refuse to reply to anything the American hating jaguarenterprises, says on here,
I suppose if you keep repeating that long enough, ...many of the brain dead will start to believe it.
...kind of like with the Iraqi WMD's. ::)
-
no doubt this describes a lot of people here but I hope there are some exceptions :D actually I know of quite a few that don't fit this mold. As disgruntled as I get, I still have high hopes this country can overcome the evils affecting us. Plus remember, this is not an isolated evil anymore. It is now an evil without borders. These global corporations and power interests that have worked diligently to make people mindless consumer automatons are extending their influences everywhere, and the media which has become a tool for these influences are also extending their reach. Nobody is immune from the things that have taken us to our current state. I think the largest danger is for a country to think, it can't happen here, that's just an American problem because they're dumb or to self involved to give a shit--a concept often asserted by some arrogant Canadians. One of the biggest problems that occurred in America was the move from classical education to occupation focused education. IMO, this system turns out robots with limited ability to think analytically and have a functional understanding of events. Bad thing=Listen and memorise, listen and memorise, listen and memorise... blaaaa...
I gotta agree with this. When people don't know how to think, ...they'll believe any absurdity.