Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Bindare_Dundat on January 16, 2012, 08:08:20 PM
-
What the fuck is wrong with the people of SC? They are like animals. I prefer that no boos or clapping be allowed at these debates. Its just ridiculous. They booed the fact that Romneys dad was from Mexico. wtf? They booed the golden rule? Seriously fucked up.
Paul really fucked up the foreign policy question. His answer was atrocious. Probably one of the worst answers Ive ever heard from the poor guy. The rest was your standard pandering bullshit from the others. I cant believe people cant see through some of predictable answers. Gingrich got the crowd going but for what I think are many of the wrong reasons.
I'd like to see the the opinion expressed before of asking all the candidates the same question and allowing them time to answer and get to answer one rebuttal from another candidate, go into effect.
-
off topic a bit. Watching this debate, I just noticed how much Newt looks like a fucking lego character.
-
I like how Romney in the debate just basically said, fuck you, I'll take all the time I want to answer lol
-
hahaha at the lego character.
-
I like how Romney in the debate just basically said, fuck you, I'll take all the time I want to answer lol
What did you think of the crowd? I thought they acted primitive
-
What did you think of the crowd? I thought they acted primitive
I'm still watching it. I just got to the part where they boo'd Mitt's father being born in Mexico. Unfuckingbelievable. While republicans are busting their ass to court the hispanic vote, these brainiacs feel like it's great to boo Mitt's father? Like that even matters? I don't like Mitt but holding that shit against him has got to be the dumbest most bigoted shit in this race yet. I would have never thought an audience could effect an election but I'll bet these guys turned off some voters with that shit. There's a lot of conservative families who have family from Mexico. When a republican crowd boos that, it can't sit well. Stupid stupid stupid...
-
Ron Paul destroyed everyone on the poll though. Romney did the worst. lol
-
I'm still watching it. I just got to the part where they boo'd Mitt's father being born in Mexico. Unfuckingbelievable. While republicans are busting their ass to court the hispanic vote, these brainiacs feel like it's great to boo Mitt's father? Like that even matters? I don't like Mitt but holding that shit against him has got to be the dumbest most bigoted shit in this race yet. I would have never thought an audience could effect an election but I'll bet these guys turned off some voters with that shit. There's a lot of conservative families who have family from Mexico. When a republican crowd boos that, it can't sit well. Stupid stupid stupid...
Totally, certain media will have a field day with the crowds behavior.
-
I also noticed that they tried once again to push the lie that Paul is running to the left of Obama on foreign policy. What an absurd notion.
Obama is practically in the neocon camp on foreign policy. The main bitches about him from the right is that he didn't do this or that quick enough or he said the wrong thing... but the neocons have overall been happy with Obama's foreign policy, especially around the wars where he has pretty much followed Bush's path. So to be left of Obama on Foreign Policy isn't exactly saying much since overall Obama has been rightwing and sometimes downright neocon in this area. This is just a designed hit against Paul that Fox keeps trying to nail in and it's false. Most libertarians think like this but would you go up to them and tell them they are left of Obama? No...
-
Mitt totally wrong on the National Defense Authorization Act. LOL, Mitt's position is that you should just trust us with this kind of power, we won't misuse it... OMG ::) Santorum got it right, but I think he just says what people want to hear. Ron Paul nailed the answer to that question.
-
WHAT? Mitt called Bigfoot a hoax :o
-
Ok, finished watching. I didn't think Paul did that bad. there was one moment that went wrong and the rest was good. I know the media is looking for any spot to exploit with Paul so they'll make a big deal out of it while skipping everything he said that was spot on.
When you have a moment in a debate that doesn't go well, it makes it worse when you didn't get very much time in the debate. And once again, Paul didn't get much time despite polling well and performing well in the primary results thus far. Again, Santorum got twice the time Paul had even though Paul has had more time polling higher and been right there in caucus results. The time Paul had to talk was about the same as Perry got, not much....
-
I'm still watching it. I just got to the part where they boo'd Mitt's father being born in Mexico. Unfuckingbelievable. While republicans are busting their ass to court the hispanic vote, these brainiacs feel like it's great to boo Mitt's father? Like that even matters? I don't like Mitt but holding that shit against him has got to be the dumbest most bigoted shit in this race yet. I would have never thought an audience could effect an election but I'll bet these guys turned off some voters with that shit. There's a lot of conservative families who have family from Mexico. When a republican crowd boos that, it can't sit well. Stupid stupid stupid...
They were booing the question.
-
They were booing the question.
You think so? There wasn't a question asked at the time. I'll have to watch again.
-
You think so? There wasn't a question asked at the time. I'll have to watch again.
They were booing Juan Williams attempt to make mittens look like a rasis
-
I'm still watching it. I just got to the part where they boo'd Mitt's father being born in Mexico.
I didn't understand that either?
???
???
-
They were booing Juan Williams attempt to make mittens look like a rasis
Ohhh, that makes sense...
I thought they were booing Mitts father for being born in Mexico. lol
-
off topic a bit. Watching this debate, I just noticed how much Newt looks like a fucking lego character.
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=410162.0;attach=453072;image)
LOL
-
8)
-
What in the hell is wrong with these people who boo when Paul talks about us getting out of the middle east. My prediction is we will have a libertarian government by 2020 if the GOP keeps condoning these wars, restricting our rights and spending all of our money. LOL..what am I thinking...we do not have any fucking money. Hey lets start another couple conflicts. ::)
-
8)
That was my favorite part of the night.
-
That was my favorite part of the night.
Then you have fools in the audience cheering for 25% tax. This is how messed up people are. That's like me going to my neighbors house and screwing his wife daily then I decide I will only screw her 3 times a week so he cheers and thinks it's a good thing. Only he hasn't realized yet that I am screwing his 18 y/o daughter now to make up for the other 4 days.
-
the people in NH were educated. The people in SC? LOL... not so much ;)
You kknow what you're getting when you campaign here. A bunch of d*ck hard, broke pissed off people. They packed the hall with as many far-right primary voters, and they were rabid for blood. The first candidate could have come onstage and punched out an old and frail afghan woman, and the crowd would have given him a standing ovation.
-
the people in NH were educated. The people in SC? LOL... not so much ;)
You kknow what you're getting when you campaign here. A bunch of d*ck hard, broke pissed off people. They packed the hall with as many far-right primary voters, and they were rabid for blood. The first candidate could have come onstage and punched out an old and frail afghan woman, and the crowd would have given him a standing ovation.
::) ::)
-
SC Dem Chair: GOP Holding Debate On MLK Day Is Racist
http://weaselzippers.us/2012/01/16/sc-dem-chair-gop-holding-debate-on-mlk-day-is-racist-oreilly-you-do-know-dems-held-a-debate-on-mlk-day-in-2008/ ^
South Carolina Democratic Party Chair Dick Harpootlian objected earlier in the week on MSNBC to today’s Republican primary debate. Unlike the rest of America, he was not just objecting to the concept of having the watch the same candidates of the past year or so talk about the same things for another two hours — he considered it objectionable to have a debate on Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Day and “ignore” the holiday. On tonight’s Bill O’Reilly, Harpootlian began to make the case, but was promptly silenced, jaw agape, as O’Reilly reminded him that the Democrats in his state did the exact same thing in 2008.
(Excerpt) Read more at weaselzippers.us ...
-
::) ::)
I agree with Rob on this. The crowd was bloodthirsty and fucked in the head. Not the best combo.
-
What in the hell is wrong with these people who boo when Paul talks about us getting out of the middle east. My prediction is we will have a libertarian government by 2020 if the GOP keeps condoning these wars, restricting our rights and spending all of our money. LOL..what am I thinking...we do not have any fucking money. Hey lets start another couple conflicts. ::)
Lol no shit! 25% from Romney and the people are ready to strip off his pants and suck him off. Goes to show how stupid the people in the audience were.
-
Lol no shit! 25% from Romney and the people are ready to strip off his pants and suck him off. Goes to show how stupid the people in the audience were.
They are older people who watch Fox news and are looking for "security" for social security, etc.
Like I keep saying, and this is the reality.
Romney looks like the guy women wish they had married.
Newt looks like the guy women regret they had married.
Perry looks like the guy women want to have an affair with.
Ron Paul looks like the guy women think they will have to take care of or visit in the nursing home.
I know its shallow as fuck, but women have a large part of who wins.
-
The people don't like what your candidate has to say? Well they must be stupid. ::)
Regarding the "golden rule," what he said was just appalling. Comparing us to our enemies? Seriously? It was as bad as Obama running around the world kissing people's rear ends during his apology tour.
Although he is never going to be the nominee, to the extent he ever became a serious contender, all his opponent would have to do is play this clip.
-
The people don't like what your candidate has to say? Well they must be stupid. ::)
Regarding the "golden rule," what he said was just appalling. Comparing us to our enemies? Seriously? It was as bad as Obama running around the world kissing people's rear ends during his apology tour.
Although he is never going to be the nominee, to the extent he ever became a serious contender, all his opponent would have to do is play this clip.
The way he formulated the answer was totally shit as i already mentioned. Romney got booed too with his totally stupoid NDAA answer by the people that had a brain. But you are just like the the other idiots in the crowd. They are right up your alley. The candidate you people pick will end up just like McCain. Watch and see.
-
The way he formulated the answer was totally shit as i already mentioned. Romney got booed too with his totally stupoid NDAA answer by the people that had a brain. But you are just like the the other idiots in the crowd. They are right up your alley. The candidate you people pick will end up just like McCain. Watch and see.
I'm not impressed with people like you who try and act like they're intellectually superior. You're the same dope who posted a clip where some punk walked around trying to show how dumb people were because they didn't know the federal reserve was a private bank. ::)
It's pretty juvenile to call an entire class of people stupid because they don't like your Messiah.
-
I'm not impressed with people like you who try and act like they're intellectually superior. You're the same dope who posted a clip where some punk walked around trying to show how dumb people were because they didn't know the federal reserve was a private bank. ::)
It's pretty juvenile to call an entire class of people stupid because they don't like your Messiah.
And Im not impressed with people who play dumb just so they dont have to admit they are wrong.
-
And Im not impressed with people who play dumb just so they dont have to admit they are wrong.
Who's playing. :D News flash for you: you're not as smart as you think you are.
-
Who's playing. :D News flash for you: you're not as smart as you think you are.
I see. Only BB had the authority and wisdom to call other ideas or people stupid and ridiculous and all the while you're bring humble as well. Well, I won't overstep my bounds again.
-
Actually - I understand that clip and agree with him. Fast and Furious comes to mind. How would we react if Canada or Mexico pulled a F&F on us?
-
The people don't like what your candidate has to say? Well they must be stupid. ::)
Regarding the "golden rule," what he said was just appalling. Comparing us to our enemies? Seriously? It was as bad as Obama running around the world kissing people's rear ends during his apology tour.
Although he is never going to be the nominee, to the extent he ever became a serious contender, all his opponent would have to do is play this clip.
It's interesting you mention this, because I was absolutely blown away by the fact that anyone could disagree with Ron Paul in this regard.
-
It's interesting you mention this, because I was absolutely blown away by the fact that anyone could disagree with Ron Paul in this regard.
So BB is ok with Romney being the largest benefiter of lobbyist campaign funds. Has no problem that his largest contributor is Goldman Sachs, (same as Obama). Has no problem with a candidate supporting the indefinite detention of American citizens because that candidate said he would only imprison the bad guys. He has no problem with candidates talking about fiscal conservatism while they supported bailouts and has no problem with candidates who have been charged with ethics violations. BUT, if you mention the golden rule, holy shit, you should be shot in the back of the head.
-
Lol @ beach bums's inability to look through other peoples eyes. Lol.
Epic awareness of how our actions are viewed by the other countries of the world.
He probably thinks of he broke into his neighbors house because be thought they had drugs, that the neigbors would be happy he was trying to save the neigborhood from their immoral actions. I mean, its obvious they would be grateful and would not be afraid that he would break into their house next. Lol. Anything else just doesn't make sense! :D
-
Lol @ beach bums's inability to look through other peoples eyes. Lol.
Epic awareness of how our actions are viewed by the other countries of the world.
He probably thinks of he broke into his neighbors house because be thought they had drugs, that the neigbors would be happy he was trying to save the neigborhood from their immoral actions. I mean, its obvious they would be grateful and would not be afraid that he would break into their house next. Lol. Anything else just doesn't make sense! :D
As long as the action is always backed with the best intentions everything will be ok. Look how well things turned out in Iraq. I bet of we stayed another 10 years then things would really improve for sure.
-
As long as the action is always backed with the best intentions everything will be ok.
Yup!
Beach bum seems to view our actions as right and wrong, when in reality right and wrong OS relative to everyone participating. What is right to us, is criminal is someone else. But unless you can put yourself in others shoes, look at your actions through others eyes,,, you will never understand who you really are.
Isn't there some famous quote that is along the lines of the best intentions have caused some of the most heinous acts throughout history?
Here's a.good one;
The road to hell is paved with good intentions,
And
Hell isn't merely paved with good intentions; it's walled and roofed with them. Yes, and furnished too. Aldous Huxley
-
They were booing Juan Williams attempt to make mittens look like a rasis
You're just guessing that could be the reason. I guess it could be taken either way.
-
You're just guessing that could be the reason. I guess it could be taken either way.
I think they booed Williams when he tried the same thing w newt
-
I see. Only BB had the authority and wisdom to call other ideas or people stupid and ridiculous and all the while you're bring humble as well. Well, I won't overstep my bounds again.
Some people are stupid. Like many who embrace that 911 conspiracy crap. But my point was/is people aren't stupid solely because they have a different viewpoint, or because, en mass, they disagree with what a particular candidate has to say.
33 is absolutely right about Obamabot and Paulbots. Cut from the same cloth. Say something negative about the messiah, brace yourself for personal attacks. It's pretty lame. And humorous.
-
Lol @ beach bums's inability to look through other peoples eyes. Lol.
Epic awareness of how our actions are viewed by the other countries of the world.
He probably thinks of he broke into his neighbors house because be thought they had drugs, that the neigbors would be happy he was trying to save the neigborhood from their immoral actions. I mean, its obvious they would be grateful and would not be afraid that he would break into their house next. Lol. Anything else just doesn't make sense! :D
O Rly? Let's look at what Ron Paul really said:
The reason we were attacked on 911 was because we violated the Golden Rule. The reason they attack us, is because we have bombed them. Why is that preposterous?
1. Al Qaeda isn't a friggin country.
2. We were not bombing Al Qaeda, or anyone, when we were attacked on 911.
3. You cannot justify the evil murder of innocent noncombatants by pointing to some "Golden Rule."
4. To the extent he really limited his comments to terrorist attacks since the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan started, he's still off his rocker. Radical Islamists don't have a country (see no. 1).
It's just mind-boggling that this man could say what he did when he's trying be elected Commander in Chief.
-
The GOP fears Paul because he doesn't buy into the military-industrial complex. The GOP is hellbent on "saving" America from enemies it creates. He wishes to stop this, thus he is despised.
-
O Rly? Let's look at what Ron Paul really said:
The reason we were attacked on 911 was because we violated the Golden Rule. The reason they attack us, is because we have bombed them. Why is that preposterous?
1. Al Qaeda isn't a friggin country.
2. We were not bombing Al Qaeda, or anyone, when we were attacked on 911.
3. You cannot justify the evil murder of innocent noncombatants by pointing to some "Golden Rule."
4. To the extent he really limited his comments to terrorist attacks since the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan started, he's still off his rocker. Radical Islamists don't have a country (see no. 1).
It's just mind-boggling that this man could say what he did when he's trying be elected Commander in Chief.
1.Al Quaeda is an organization, composed of people, who live in countries largely in the middle east that are sick of our actions in their region, which is spawning sympathy with muslims across the globe. There are literally dozens of our actions in the last 50 years that we have done that pissed the people in that region off.
2. Of course we werent actively "bombing" when it attacked, but those attacks were due to our involvement in the middle east, to think otherwise is just naive (They bomb us because they hate us is NOT a valid reason, there are many many other countries that are as liberal or MORE liberal than the US. Yes, they hate our way of life, but they attacked us because they hate our way of life AND our involvement in their region of the world)
3.Of course you cannot, and there is no way Paul was trying to "justify" their attacks. Just because he understands the reasons they attacked us in no way means he thinks it was OK. That is a huge stretch of logic.
4.This whole statement is retarded. Of course they arent from 1 single country, they are from multiple countries in a REGION in which they are pissed at our activities. Youre really stretching with these statements like "Hes wrong cause they arent a country, theyre an organization, or "Radical Islamists dont have a country".. Cmon, youre just fishing for a way to refute his statements because there is no other way.
Radical Islamists hate us for 2 reasons. 1. Our actions in their region of the world. 2. Our way of life. Since many, many other countries share our way of life, there can be only 1 logical conclusion... they must be pissed because of our involvement in their way of life. Weird huh?
-
O Rly? Let's look at what Ron Paul really said:
The reason we were attacked on 911 was because we violated the Golden Rule. The reason they attack us, is because we have bombed them. Why is that preposterous?
1. Al Qaeda isn't a friggin country.
2. We were not bombing Al Qaeda, or anyone, when we were attacked on 911.
3. You cannot justify the evil murder of innocent noncombatants by pointing to some "Golden Rule."
4. To the extent he really limited his comments to terrorist attacks since the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan started, he's still off his rocker. Radical Islamists don't have a country (see no. 1).
It's just mind-boggling that this man could say what he did when he's trying be elected Commander in Chief.
Actually, this is what he says.
The reason for attacks was because we had troops in Saudi Arabia. United States has been occupying the Middle East for years and turning its bases in the Peninsula into a spearhead through which to fight the neighboring Muslim people. He states this clearly here in the first 20 seconds:
And we have been bombing Iraq off and on for years, (91-03).One example. wikipedia:
The December 1998 bombing of Iraq (code-named Operation Desert Fox) was a major four-day bombing campaign on Iraqi targets from December 16–19, 1998 by the United States and United Kingdom. The contemporaneous justification for the strikes was Iraq's failure to comply with United Nations Security Council resolutions as well as their interference with United Nations Special Commission inspectors.
This was all bullshit. Just like Santorum who keeps talking about putting inspectors in Iran or bomb the shit of them. But there are inpectors in Iran all the time.
We interfere in their elections. We support dictators when convienviant. All this plays a role in their motives.
-
1.Al Quaeda is an organization, composed of people, who live in countries largely in the middle east that are sick of our actions in their region, which is spawning sympathy with muslims across the globe. There are literally dozens of our actions in the last 50 years that we have done that pissed the people in that region off.
2. Of course we werent actively "bombing" when it attacked, but those attacks were due to our involvement in the middle east, to think otherwise is just naive (They bomb us because they hate us is NOT a valid reason, there are many many other countries that are as liberal or MORE liberal than the US. Yes, they hate our way of life, but they attacked us because they hate our way of life AND our involvement in their region of the world)
3.Of course you cannot, and there is no way Paul was trying to "justify" their attacks. Just because he understands the reasons they attacked us in no way means he thinks it was OK. That is a huge stretch of logic.
4.This whole statement is retarded. Of course they arent from 1 single country, they are from multiple countries in a REGION in which they are pissed at our activities. Youre really stretching with these statements like "Hes wrong cause they arent a country, theyre an organization, or "Radical Islamists dont have a country".. Cmon, youre just fishing for a way to refute his statements because there is no other way.
Radical Islamists hate us for 2 reasons. 1. Our actions in their region of the world. 2. Our way of life. Since many, many other countries share our way of life, there can be only 1 logical conclusion... they must be pissed because of our involvement in their way of life. Weird huh?
1. Al Qaeda is a collection of terrorists who are evil. They attack and murder innocent civilans. There is zero justification for the murder of innocents. And because they are not a country, saying we "bombed them" is ridiculous.
2. What exactly were we doing on 911 that justified a terrorist attack? Sort of a rhetorical question, because nothing justifies terrorism. But one thing were not doing was bombing or attacking anyone. If that's the case, then to the extent the attacks were not solely because they hate Western culture (which they do), then it had to be because of our foreign policy? Just another absurd way to try and justify terrorism.
3. The Golden Rule says do unto others as you would have them do unto you. What the heck were we doing on 911?? Of course he was drawing a parallel between our conduct and the 911 attacks.
4. I'm actually struggling to try and make sense of his comments, because they were so bizarre. I'm trying to give him the benefit of the doubt that his comments were limited to 911. If they were not limited to 911, they're still absurd.
Suffice to say, yesterday was not his finest hour.
-
Actually, this is what he says.
The reason for attacks was because we had troops in Saudi Arabia. United States has been occupying the Middle East for years and turning its bases in the Peninsula into a spearhead through which to fight the neighboring Muslim people. He states this clearly here in the first 20 seconds:
And we have been bombing Iraq off and on for years, (91-03).One example. wikipedia:
The December 1998 bombing of Iraq (code-named Operation Desert Fox) was a major four-day bombing campaign on Iraqi targets from December 16–19, 1998 by the United States and United Kingdom. The contemporaneous justification for the strikes was Iraq's failure to comply with United Nations Security Council resolutions as well as their interference with United Nations Special Commission inspectors.
This was all bullshit. Just like Santorum who keeps talking about putting inspectors in Iran or bomb the shit of them. But there are inpectors in Iran all the time.
We interfere in their elections. We support dictators when convienviant. All this plays a role in their motives.
And this invokes the Golden Rule?
-
So BB is ok with Romney being the largest benefiter of lobbyist campaign funds. Has no problem that his largest contributor is Goldman Sachs, (same as Obama). Has no problem with a candidate supporting the indefinite detention of American citizens because that candidate said he would only imprison the bad guys. He has no problem with candidates talking about fiscal conservatism while they supported bailouts and has no problem with candidates who have been charged with ethics violations. BUT, if you mention the golden rule, holy shit, you should be shot in the back of the head.
One thing I've learned here, is don't try to understand why people like BeachBum have the bizarre political opinions they do, we'll never understand it.
-
The GOP fears Paul because he doesn't buy into the military-industrial complex. The GOP is hellbent on "saving" America from enemies it creates. He wishes to stop this, thus he is despised.
You're making a lot of sense today!
-
Some people are stupid. Like many who embrace that 911 conspiracy crap. But my point was/is people aren't stupid solely because they have a different viewpoint, or because, en mass, they disagree with what a particular candidate has to say.
33 is absolutely right about Obamabot and Paulbots. Cut from the same cloth. Say something negative about the messiah, brace yourself for personal attacks. It's pretty lame. And humorous.
the only one who called Obama a messiah is 333 and he also initiates the personal attacks which is why it's completely fair game to attack him back
It cracks me up that he say completely unnecesary and vile things about Michelle Obama and then thinks the exact same type of attack on him is offensive and unwarranted.
If he could just stick to the topic and stop with the constant name calling and unprompted FU"s this board would be a lot better
for fucks sake, the guy starts threads with FU in the title
who else but him does that on this board?
-
the only one who called Obama a messiah is 333 and he also initiates the personal attacks which is why it's completely fair game to attack him back
It cracks me up that he say completely unnecesary and vile things about Michelle Obama and then thinks the exact same type of attack on him is offensive and unwarranted.
If he could just stick to the topic and stop with the constant name calling and unprompted FU"s this board would be a lot better
for fucks sake, the guy starts threads with FU in the title
who else but him does that on this board?
Obama and his staff called him the messiah.
-
Obama and his staff called him the messiah.
yeah, we've been over this before and you've not only taken it out of context but then projected on everyone else who didn't say it
I dont' expect someone as profoundly stupid as yourself to even understand that
shit, when I posted about Barbours pardons last week you immediately jumped to the absurd conclusion that his family was threatened and you called this the only possible explanation
face it man.....you're just not that bright
-
yeah, we've been over this before and you've not only taken it out of context but then projected on everyone else who didn't say it
I dont' expect someone as profoundly stupid as yourself to even understand that
shit, when I posted about Barbours pardons last week you immediately jumped to the absurd conclusion that his family was threatened and you called this the only possible explanation
face it man.....you're just not that bright
LOL at the idiot who voted for "Black Jesus . . . . the one we have been waiting for"
-
LOL at the idiot who voted for "Black Jesus . . . . the one we have been waiting for"
great comeback
-
1. Al Qaeda is a collection of terrorists who are evil. They attack and murder innocent civilans. There is zero justification for the murder of innocents. And because they are not a country, saying we "bombed them" is ridiculous.
2. What exactly were we doing on 911 that justified a terrorist attack? Sort of a rhetorical question, because nothing justifies terrorism. But one thing were not doing was bombing or attacking anyone. If that's the case, then to the extent the attacks were not solely because they hate Western culture (which they do), then it had to be because of our foreign policy? Just another absurd way to try and justify terrorism.
3. The Golden Rule says do unto others as you would have them do unto you. What the heck were we doing on 911?? Of course he was drawing a parallel between our conduct and the 911 attacks.
4. I'm actually struggling to try and make sense of his comments, because they were so bizarre. I'm trying to give him the benefit of the doubt that his comments were limited to 911. If they were not limited to 911, they're still absurd.
Suffice to say, yesterday was not his finest hour.
Good lord dude... so because Al Qaeda is a group of people somehow means they arent from the regions we have constantly stuck our nose into and bombed? Jesus your logic is so convoluted. No one is saying what they did is ok, just that we provoked them by our constant operations in their region. Your bullshit about "we werent doing anything on 911 to justify it" Well no shit, its never justified, but your whole point is stupid, they attacked us because they dont like our actions in their region of the world. How in the fuck are you trying to argue this?
And your attitude of their reasons for attacking us = justifying it is equally absurd and idiotic.
Justification = meaning something is just, which no one thinks it was.
Explaining why they attacked us doesnt make it OK, its simply their reason for doing so.
Goddamn man, youre like arguing with an infant.
-
Good lord dude... so because Al Qaeda is a group of people somehow means they arent from the regions we have constantly stuck our nose into and bombed? Jesus your logic is so convoluted. No one is saying what they did is ok, just that we provoked them by our constant operations in their region. Your bullshit about "we werent doing anything on 911 to justify it" Well no shit, its never justified, but your whole point is stupid, they attacked us because they dont like our actions in their region of the world. How in the fuck are you trying to argue this?
And your attitude of their reasons for attacking us = justifying it is equally absurd and idiotic.
Justification = meaning something is just, which no one thinks it was.
Explaining why they attacked us doesnt make it OK, its simply their reason for doing so.
Goddamn man, youre like arguing with an infant.
Welcome to the frustration zone.
-
Welcome to the frustration zone.
Yeah I dont think Ill argue anymore...
The whole Al Qaeda isnt a country so we cant have bombed them therefore they arent attacking us because of our actions in their region of the world logic is beyond me.
Not to mention the whole "explaining/understanding why they attacked us = justification = we think it was ok" leap of logic is just beyond hope. :-\
-
Yeah I dont think Ill argue anymore...
The whole Al Qaeda isnt a country so we cant have bombed them therefore they arent attacking us because of our actions in their region of the world logic is beyond me.
Not to mention the whole "explaining/understanding why they attacked us = justification = we think it was ok" leap of logic is just beyond hope. :-\
This is the most frustrating part. No one ever said it was ok but they beat us over the head with it.
Lighten things up a bit.
#!
-
Good lord dude... so because Al Qaeda is a group of people somehow means they arent from the regions we have constantly stuck our nose into and bombed? Jesus your logic is so convoluted. No one is saying what they did is ok, just that we provoked them by our constant operations in their region. Your bullshit about "we werent doing anything on 911 to justify it" Well no shit, its never justified, but your whole point is stupid, they attacked us because they dont like our actions in their region of the world. How in the fuck are you trying to argue this?
And your attitude of their reasons for attacking us = justifying it is equally absurd and idiotic.
Justification = meaning something is just, which no one thinks it was.
Explaining why they attacked us doesnt make it OK, its simply their reason for doing so.
Goddamn man, youre like arguing with an infant.
Hey here's an idea, if you think you're arguing with an infant then don't engage me. Pretty simple. :)
Here is what's stupid: saying "they" attack us because we bomb "them," when "they" and "them" not only haven't been bombed, but "they" don't even cohesively exist.
You know what else is stupid? Using the "Golden Rule" at all in this context. It doesn't make any dang sense. It was a terrible moment for Ron Paul.
-
Hey here's an idea, if you think you're arguing with an infant then don't engage me. Pretty simple. :)
Here is what's stupid: saying "they" attack us because we bomb "them," when "they" and "them" not only haven't been bombed, but "they" don't even cohesively exist.
You know what else is stupid? Using the "Golden Rule" at all in this context. It doesn't make any dang sense. It was a terrible moment for Ron Paul.
"They" = People who comprise Al Qaeda, citizens of countries (Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Iran, etc, the list goes on) we bomb/intrude in affairs (Iraq bombinb, Iran/Contra, toppling regimes, installing leaders, the list goes on), so they join a group who's primary purpose it to get the US out of the middle east, so they organize a terror attack.
Therefore "they" attacked "us" because we bombed "them". No matter how much you argue semantics, you just makes you look like you refuse to accept reality.
In this case, youre the one being stupid. Not Paul, or any of the Paul fans defending him in this case.
The golden rule - treat others as you wish to be treated - I.E.,You want them to leave us alone, you dont want them to retaliate against us, you stop interferring in their countries affairs and pushing our interests on them. How hard is that to understand?
Oh, wait, I forgot, you dont think were doing anything over there to piss them off prior to 9/11, or am I wrong?
-
"They" = People who comprise Al Qaeda, citizens of countries (Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Iran, etc, the list goes on) we bomb/intrude in affairs (Iraq bombinb, Iran/Contra, toppling regimes, installing leaders, the list goes on), so they join a group who's primary purpose it to get the US out of the middle east, so they organize a terror attack.
Therefore "they" attacked "us" because we bombed "them". No matter how much you argue semantics, you just makes you look like you refuse to accept reality.
In this case, youre the one being stupid. Not Paul, or any of the Paul fans defending him in this case.
The golden rule - treat others as you wish to be treated - I.E.,You want them to leave us alone, you dont want them to retaliate against us, you stop interferring in their countries affairs and pushing our interests on them. How hard is that to understand?
Oh, wait, I forgot, you dont think were doing anything over there to piss them off prior to 9/11, or am I wrong?
I see. So when Ron Paul mentioned the Golden Rule, and said they attacked us because we bombed them, "them" referred to Iraq, Iran/Contra, toppling regimes, installing leaders, etc.? So now they attacked us, not only because we bombed "them," but because we have been meddling in "their" affairs? Can it possibly get any more convoluted?
The fact we exist "pisses off" radical Islamists. The fact we have a military presence outside of the world upsets them. The fact we support Israel angers them. But we're not talking about them being upset. It's about the Golden Rule.
The only way to logically use the Golden Rule in this context is as some sort of justification or explanation for terrorist attacks. That's why the whole friggin building booed him when he made his comments. It's completely nonsensical.
-
I see. So when Ron Paul mentioned the Golden Rule, and said they attacked us because we bombed them, "them" referred to Iraq, Iran/Contra, toppling regimes, installing leaders, etc.? So now they attacked us, not only because we bombed "them," but because we have been meddling in "their" affairs? Can it possibly get any more convoluted?
The fact we exist "pisses off" radical Islamists. The fact we have a military presence outside of the world upsets them. The fact we support Israel angers them. But we're not talking about them being upset. It's about the Golden Rule.
The only way to logically use the Golden Rule in this context is as some sort of justification or explanation for terrorist attacks. That's why the whole friggin building booed him when he made his comments. It's completely nonsensical.
You honestly, honestly believe their reasoning for attacking us was because we exist? And not because we push our interests and Israels interests on their countries? Ron Paul has said over and over that it has to do with the blowback from all those things. Youll hear no argument from me he worded things poorly, but anyone that is aware of anything he has said is capable of figuring out when he says "bombing" (including bombing Iraq in 98) in that case he is referring to all the shit we've done in the middle east in the last 40+ years, as he has reffered to this over and over.
Yes, the fact we have military bases in their backyards upsets them. Id be upset if Iran had a base on our border in Mexico.
If you believe they attacked us because we exist, then youre beyond rationality.
-
You honestly, honestly believe their reasoning for attacking us was because we exist? And not because we push our interests and Israels interests on their countries? Ron Paul has said over and over that it has to do with the blowback from all those things. Youll hear no argument from me he worded things poorly, but anyone that is aware of anything he has said is capable of figuring out when he says "bombing" (including bombing Iraq in 98) in that case he is referring to all the shit we've done in the middle east in the last 40+ years, as he has reffered to this over and over.
Yes, the fact we have military bases in their backyards upsets them. Id be upset if Iran had a base on our border in Mexico.
If you believe they attacked us because we exist, then youre beyond rationality.
They hate our culture. They believe we are corrupt. They believe we are evil. The goal of radical Islam is for us to either convert or die. So yes, they hate us because we exist.
Are there other factors? Sure. The stuff I already mentioned (support for Israel, Middle East presence, etc.). But to deny the hatred they have for our way of life is to deny reality.
Also, there is nothing wrong with our support for Israel, having a military presence in the Middle East, kicking Saddam out of Kuwait and preventing him from invading Saudi Arabia, etc. so the Golden Rule doesn't apply.
One of the overring problems with trying to use the Golden Rule is it equates us with our enemies. Couldn't be more wrongheaded.
What 1998 Iraq bombing are you talking about?
-
They hate our culture. They believe we are corrupt. They believe we are evil. The goal of radical Islam is for us to either convert or die. So yes, they hate us because we exist.
Are there other factors? Sure. The stuff I already mentioned (support for Israel, Middle East presence, etc.). But to deny the hatred they have for our way of life is to deny reality.
Also, there is nothing wrong with our support for Israel, having a military presence in the Middle East, kicking Saddam out of Kuwait and preventing him from invading Saudi Arabia, etc. so the Golden Rule doesn't apply.
One of the overring problems with trying to use the Golden Rule is it equates us with our enemies. Couldn't be more wrongheaded.
What 1998 Iraq bombing are you talking about?
I never denied they hate us because of what we represent, but there are literally dozens of other countries that are far more "westernized" and liberal than us (see Germany) they dont attack.
The fact that you think equating us with our enemies is wrongheaded is telling, they react to our actions the same way we react to theirs. Were both comprised of people, both react based on how they percieve things. We look at them like they are backwards and retarded, they look at us the same way.
To try and flat out say they are evil and they attacked us because they dont like us is ignorant as hell. There is no excuse for how they act but to understand WHY they do is a huge step forwards, unless we just decide to say fuck it and declare war on Islam.
-
Yeah, they're not trying to hit Germany, lolololol.
Aw lawdy...
-
Yeah, they're not trying to hit Germany, lolololol.
Aw lawdy...
It was 1 example of many. Germany being the most liberal one I could think of.
You wont find me arguing that they dislike our lifestyle choice. But to think their actions on 9/11 is primarily due to the way we live our lives is ludicous (especially since "US out of middle east" is a common theme amongst them)
-
I never denied they hate us because of what we represent, but there are literally dozens of other countries that are far more "westernized" and liberal than us (see Germany) they dont attack.
The fact that you think equating us with our enemies is wrongheaded is telling, they react to our actions the same way we react to theirs. Were both comprised of people, both react based on how they percieve things. We look at them like they are backwards and retarded, they look at us the same way.
To try and flat out say they are evil and they attacked us because they dont like us is ignorant as hell. There is no excuse for how they act but to understand WHY they do is a huge step forwards, unless we just decide to say fuck it and declare war on Islam.
There is no other country like The Great Satan. We're the ultimate destination. People around the globe move to the U.S. Even radical Islamists come here to be educated. We're a much bigger target. That said, I completely disagree about other Westernized countries not being attacked.
Radical Islamists are evil. There is no other way to say it. What they believe is twisted. Their methods are barbaric. We're nothing like them.
I haven't said anything about Islam. There are plenty of good Muslims. We can't declare war on Islam. But we can find and kill radical Islamists who are trying kill Americans.
-
It was 1 example of many. Germany being the most liberal one I could think of.
You wont find me arguing that they dislike our lifestyle choice. But to think their actions on 9/11 is primarily due to the way we live our lives is ludicous (especially since "US out of middle east" is a common theme amongst them)
Example of what? In case it went over your head...I was mocking your nonsense. Hell, you don't even have to research any further than Google to know that these shitbags are constantly trying to hit Germany.
Even if we accept the nonsense of your statement, Germany supported OEF. So here we have a country "intervening" and you're trying to use them as an example of what happens when you don't intervene. ::)
And if you're trying to argue the 9/11 issue, then how is it that we weren't even the first target? Surely the great intervener must have been the first target! ::)
The reality is intervention is one issue. Cultural, social, political, economic, and religious factors are as well.
I doubt you can offer any evidence to quantify which was greater. If anything, the fact that we were not the initial target suggests intervention was not high on their list...but that can't be quantified either.
-
Jon Stewert is making fun of the audience tonight and the golden rule booing. Saw this coming. The actions of the SC crowd was a real turn off for many people.
-
Hey here's an idea, if you think you're arguing with an infant then don't engage me. Pretty simple. :)
Here is what's stupid: saying "they" attack us because we bomb "them," when "they" and "them" not only haven't been bombed, but "they" don't even cohesively exist.
You know what else is stupid? Using the "Golden Rule" at all in this context. It doesn't make any dang sense. It was a terrible moment for Ron Paul.
It's pretty cut and dry, they (Al Qaeda, Islamic Extremists) view the Middle East as their home land (as it is). They certainly aren't justified in killing innocent civilians ever, but we've definitely incited the terrorist threat we're now at war with.
Do you really believe they hate us because we're free? They hate our Freedom?
If it is because they hate our freedom, haven't we let them win by giving up our freedom through the Patriot Act, and National Defense Authorization Act?
-
In regards to the golden rule, I have no sympathy for terrorists but look at it from the hypothetical:
If China or some other country that had military power engineered a coup in say, Alabama, and installed a dictator as its new governor, then slapped sanctions on Alabama for decades causing it to go into poverty, then bombed it year after year killing innocent civilians in the process. Would that not cause Alabama natives to get angry at China and conduct terror attacks against them as an only means of trying to defend their state and stop China from meddling in their affairs?
Americans need to get their head out of the sand and look at it from a different perspective. We pay more than enough in taxes to defend our nation's borders from terror attacks without having to nation build overseas.
-
Fast n Furious anyone?
-
the people in NH were educated. The people in SC? LOL... not so much ;)
You kknow what you're getting when you campaign here. A bunch of d*ck hard, broke pissed off people. They packed the hall with as many far-right primary voters, and they were rabid for blood. The first candidate could have come onstage and punched out an old and frail afghan woman, and the crowd would have given him a standing ovation.
I have found that this song accurately describes many white Southeasterners...
-
In regards to the golden rule, I have no sympathy for terrorists but look at it from the hypothetical:
If China or some other country that had military power engineered a coup in say, Alabama, and installed a dictator as its new governor, then slapped sanctions on Alabama for decades causing it to go into poverty, then bombed it year after year killing innocent civilians in the process. Would that not cause Alabama natives to get angry at China and conduct terror attacks against them as an only means of trying to defend their state and stop China from meddling in their affairs?
Americans need to get their head out of the sand and look at it from a different perspective. We pay more than enough in taxes to defend our nation's borders from terror attacks without having to nation build overseas.
Dont bother dude.