Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Irongrip400 on July 30, 2014, 06:20:15 PM
-
Or do people actually care about the outcome of situations when it comestarts to politics? It seems most are just concerned about their party winning, or proving the other guy wrong than doing the right thing. This board seems to be a microcosm of that situation. What say you GetBig's critical thinkers?
-
Unfortunately, I think politicians by and large care about money, staying in power, and pushing an agenda (regardless of merit), and care very little about what is really best for the country.
And yes, the board is in a sense a microcosm of the national political scene in that regard. Many of the people posting on the board play this us versus them game and are blindly partisan. Not true of everyone.
-
Or do people actually care about the outcome of situations when it comestarts to politics? It seems most are just concerned about their party winning, or proving the other guy wrong than doing the right thing. This board seems to be a microcosm of that situation. What say you GetBig's critical thinkers?
One such example is amnesty. Most getbiggers on the right were all "close the border, kick em out!" Then, after two minutes of listening to FOX radio, suddenly they say "as long as they work..." or "it's inevitable". They completely shift a really polarizing position like this, in 2 minutes.
or dems on the war. Iraq war evil, etc. Then, obama takes office and their anti-war rallies have really shrunk in numbers.
And on impeachment - We hear about obama's crimes for 5 years. Once they have a chance to hold him accountable for them, it's "oh, well, I have a feeling we'll do better in elections if americans don't know about obama's crimes, so let's just forget about all that".
A lack of core beliefs. They have strong party allegience, but they really don't know how they feel about certain issues. They are 100% willing to shift their position 100%, if it means they're 100% in line with "their" party.
Sure, go ahead with a personal attack on 240 now, but you know I'm right here. If anyone feels jilted by this post, it might be due to your own lack of core beliefs. Anyone that truly stays consistent on the issues will agree.
-
^^^
can we start deleting this fucking hacks posts?
yes 240 accuse me of all people of not having core beliefs now you dip shit
remind me you were a liberal before you were an independent, right? or was it independent then conservative?
-
^^^
can we start deleting this fucking hacks posts?
yes 240 accuse me of all people of not having core beliefs now you dip shit
remind me you were a liberal before you were an independent, right? or was it independent then conservative?
I didn't accuse you of shit. I pointed out that anytime a person can switch so radically on amnesty or impeachment - in a matter of minutes - then they never really had any core belief to begin with, when it comes to that issue.
I mean, most of us woke up today and we were against the crime of murder. We go to sleep against the crime of murder. If MSNBC or FOX tells us we'd better change position to win an election, none of us are suddenly going to support murder.
But amnesty? We all heard certain politicians (and getbiggers) and pundits change, 2 weeks after the 2012 election, when reince and hannity announced it was time to "adapt". And impeachment? Well, Rush, newt and krauthammer declared repubs were now against it, and voila, many shifted radically on that.
If a person believed last week that the leader of the USA deserved to be fired and/or jailed - how in the world can they suddenly not feel that way, today? When 333386 said it was only liberals that were calling for impeachment, i was in complete shock. I mean, he started that talk in 2010 lol, and here we are, he was denying it completely.
-
One such example is amnesty. Most getbiggers on the right were all "close the border, kick em out!" Then, after two minutes of listening to FOX radio, suddenly they say "as long as they work..." or "it's inevitable". They completely shift a really polarizing position like this, in 2 minutes.
or dems on the war. Iraq war evil, etc. Then, obama takes office and their anti-war rallies have really shrunk in numbers.
And on impeachment - We hear about obama's crimes for 5 years. Once they have a chance to hold him accountable for them, it's "oh, well, I have a feeling we'll do better in elections if americans don't know about obama's crimes, so let's just forget about all that".
A lack of core beliefs. They have strong party allegience, but they really don't know how they feel about certain issues. They are 100% willing to shift their position 100%, if it means they're 100% in line with "their" party.
Sure, go ahead with a personal attack on 240 now, but you know I'm right here. If anyone feels jilted by this post, it might be due to your own lack of core beliefs. Anyone that truly stays consistent on the issues will agree.
Who...name names...me, soul, Kazan, Beach....coach?
-
Or do people actually care about the outcome of situations when it comestarts to politics? It seems most are just concerned about their party winning, or proving the other guy wrong than doing the right thing. This board seems to be a microcosm of that situation. What say you GetBig's critical thinkers?
I havent paid attention to politics for too long in the grand scheme of things only since the last few years of W bush's 2nd term. It seemed like the media definitely took a staunch view against him and anything they viewed as "conservative". I think that in turn caused alot of republicans to dig in their heels and do the same making the issue worse and now we are in a tail spin of just stupidity racing to the lowest common demoninator.
-
Who...name names...me, soul, Kazan, Beach....coach?
soulcrusher blamed libs for talk of impeachment.
coach accepted amnesty "as long as they work".
There are others. Not you, not tony.
-
Or do people actually care about the outcome of situations when it comestarts to politics? It seems most are just concerned about their party winning, or proving the other guy wrong than doing the right thing. This board seems to be a microcosm of that situation. What say you GetBig's critical thinkers?
Maybe its midterms or maybe its people actually starting to come around to the reality of our political parties but it seems at least on the surface that more people are coming around to what you have said.
I think however that obama is in danger of setting up what bush did on his way out. Meaning that he will set up for a far right candidate to win and we will just start the cycle over again.
-
I didn't accuse you of shit. I pointed out that anytime a person can switch so radically on amnesty or impeachment - in a matter of minutes - then they never really had any core belief to begin with, when it comes to that issue.
I mean, most of us woke up today and we were against the crime of murder. We go to sleep against the crime of murder. If MSNBC or FOX tells us we'd better change position to win an election, none of us are suddenly going to support murder.
But amnesty? We all heard certain politicians (and getbiggers) and pundits change, 2 weeks after the 2012 election, when reince and hannity announced it was time to "adapt". And impeachment? Well, Rush, newt and krauthammer declared repubs were now against it, and voila, many shifted radically on that.
If a person believed last week that the leader of the USA deserved to be fired and/or jailed - how in the world can they suddenly not feel that way, today? When 333386 said it was only liberals that were calling for impeachment, i was in complete shock. I mean, he started that talk in 2010 lol, and here we are, he was denying it completely.
being against amnesty and understanding that logistically it isnt very realistic does not mean you dont have any core beliefs.
-
being against amnesty and understanding that logistically it isnt very realistic does not mean you dont have any core beliefs.
I'm talking about those who SHIFT because FOX news tells them to.
I mean, we're talking 333386 telling getbig that amnesty is a liberal creation that he never supported, and that its only Dems that want impeachment proceedings. 33 has used the word HUNDREDS of time lol. We talk about it daily.
And because Rush did a 5 minute piece on it (along with other coordinated talk on FOX, etc), 33 has completely shifted his position overnight.
Literally, hundreds of times:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/may/21/obama-transition-team-told-about-3-audits-showing-
Time for impeachment
And yesterday?
The only ones pushing impeachment were failed liberals
Seriously, such a shift lol. Coincidentally, the same day Rush says so...
-
I'm talking about those who SHIFT because FOX news tells them to.
I mean, we're talking 333386 telling getbig that amnesty is a liberal creation that he never supported, and that its only Dems that want impeachment proceedings. 33 has used the word HUNDREDS of time lol. We talk about it daily.
And because Rush did a 5 minute piece on it (along with other coordinated talk on FOX, etc), 33 has completely shifted his position overnight.
Literally, hundreds of times:
And yesterday?
Seriously, such a shift lol. Coincidentally, the same day Rush says so...
thats nothing compared to your flip flops my politically hermaphroditic friend
-
Liberals ARE talking about impeachment dipshit..they're fundraising off of it.
-
Liberals ARE talking about impeachment dipshit..they're fundraising off of it.
About $1 million in about 24 hours.
-
thats nothing compared to your flip flops my politically hermaphroditic friend
Like I said, feel free to insult. But 240 ain't changing things one bit. Repubs, on the other hand, are about to squander a chance to seriously save the USA and kick obama out of office before 2 years of lame duck destructive executive orders.
Eric cantor could have been veep, very easily. And he's out of congress because he obeyed the amnesty directive, AGAINST THE WILL OF REPUB VOTERS.
Now, all these dudes that obey the party directive once again - well, some will be ousted by clueless newbie plumbers who will squander their term. Cantor was a rock star, and now he's out. I bet he sure regrets obeying reince priebus.
Anyway, lol, we're arguing GOP party strategy now. too funny. I can't wait for NFL. The GOP is a confused mess right now, nobody can deny that.
-
Ridiculous
One such example is amnesty. Most getbiggers on the right were all "close the border, kick em out!" Then, after two minutes of listening to FOX radio, suddenly they say "as long as they work..." or "it's inevitable". They completely shift a really polarizing position like this, in 2 minutes.
or dems on the war. Iraq war evil, etc. Then, obama takes office and their anti-war rallies have really shrunk in numbers.
And on impeachment - We hear about obama's crimes for 5 years. Once they have a chance to hold him accountable for them, it's "oh, well, I have a feeling we'll do better in elections if americans don't know about obama's crimes, so let's just forget about all that".
A lack of core beliefs. They have strong party allegience, but they really don't know how they feel about certain issues. They are 100% willing to shift their position 100%, if it means they're 100% in line with "their" party.
Sure, go ahead with a personal attack on 240 now, but you know I'm right here. If anyone feels jilted by this post, it might be due to your own lack of core beliefs. Anyone that truly stays consistent on the issues will agree.
-
One such example is amnesty. Most getbiggers on the right were all "close the border, kick em out!" Then, after two minutes of listening to FOX radio, suddenly they say "as long as they work..." or "it's inevitable". They completely shift a really polarizing position like this, in 2 minutes.
or dems on the war. Iraq war evil, etc. Then, obama takes office and their anti-war rallies have really shrunk in numbers.
And on impeachment - We hear about obama's crimes for 5 years. Once they have a chance to hold him accountable for them, it's "oh, well, I have a feeling we'll do better in elections if americans don't know about obama's crimes, so let's just forget about all that".
A lack of core beliefs. They have strong party allegience, but they really don't know how they feel about certain issues. They are 100% willing to shift their position 100%, if it means they're 100% in line with "their" party.
Sure, go ahead with a personal attack on 240 now, but you know I'm right here. If anyone feels jilted by this post, it might be due to your own lack of core beliefs. Anyone that truly stays consistent on the issues will agree.
absolutely agree with this. it stems from the dependence of everyone on mainstream media. they're creating drones who are told what to think by the political party that they have sworn allegiance to by the television set.
-
absolutely agree with this. it stems from the dependence of everyone on mainstream media. they're creating drones who are told what to think by the political party that they have sworn allegiance to by the television set.
Two weeks after the 2012 eleciton, where Romney only got 27% of hispanic vote (Bush2 got 44% in 2008)...
Reince priebus, GOP chair, decided it was time to change positions on amnesty to win that hispanic vote.
Hannity got right on board. Rush and others followed suit.
Cantor, Rand, Rubio, Boehnner, and most others in congress publicly supported it too.
Cruz was vilified because he would NOT succumb.
THEN, we saw public backlash. Rand dropping on the forums, now that people see he's not his father. Cantor lost to a broke unknown on a single issue - amnesty. All these cats got on board with professor Priebus, without actually talking to the PEOPLE they represent.
That is happening here, on amnesty, once again.
Rush, Boehnner,Krauthammerr, Newt, they're all selling the same narrative at the same time - no impeachment.
And sure enough, many on getbig are just swallowing it, even though most were very much saying obama needed impeached, last week. Coach and 33 and I were the BIGGEST supporters of impeachment last week. This week? Hmmmm
-
my personal opinion about this is that the power of politics in our society stems from the innate need for humans to believe in something bigger then themselves. for thousands of years it has been religion that has provided this for the people. but religion is losing ground.....and fast. more and more are giving up on religion.
subconsciously though these people need to believe in something. so they latch on to politicians and political parties to fill that void.
it seems that their need for "blind faith" in something needs to be satisfied. I would really like to see a psychologist delve deeper into this.
-
I lol at the people who take this shit seriously. Spend a year or two working in DC or your state capitol. Then you'll know the truth. Politics is a business no different than any other. Thinking any of these politicians have any ideology beyond their own self-interest is like thinking the guys in the IFBB are natural.
I actually agree with you. :o
-
I actually agree with you. :o
Shocker.
Liars think everyone lies. Thieves think everyone steals. BB thinks everyone is intellectually dishonest.
-
Shocker.
Liars think everyone lies. Thieves think everyone steals. BB thinks everyone is intellectually dishonest.
Nah. I just think you are an unfunny simpleton.
-
Nah. I just think you are an unfunny simpleton.
Whateva, liar.
Besides "classic" Bugs Bunny (lol) what do you consider funny?
And please, try to restrain yourself from making references to anything that happened before the 1950's.
-
(http://img4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20140423034814/roblox-apocalypse-rising/images/2/2a/Anchorman-well-that-escalated-quickly.jpg)
-
Whateva, liar.
Besides "classic" Bugs Bunny (lol) what do you consider funny?
And please, try to restrain yourself from making references to anything that happened before the 1950's.
What do I consider funny? You. Not your incredibly lame attempted humor. Your pseudo-intellectual commentary, which is often mindless, drone, simplistic left-wing gibberish.
-
(http://img4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20140423034814/roblox-apocalypse-rising/images/2/2a/Anchorman-well-that-escalated-quickly.jpg)
;D
-
Beach making some enemies lately - im impressed. ;D
-
Beach making some enemies lately - im impressed. ;D
lol :D Man I don't take any of this stuff seriously.
-
What do I consider funny? You. Not your incredibly lame attempted humor. Your pseudo-intellectual commentary, which is often mindless, drone, simplistic left-wing gibberish.
LOL. Of course you don't think anything I say is funny, BB. I criticize you way too much for you to let your guard down long enough for real laughter. You're actually kind of a wuss, BB. Look how defensively you avoid saying what you think is funny because you fear being attacked for your taste in humor.
Seems to me that when folks criticize you unfairly, you don't care. But when they call you out for your more obvious forays into intellectual dishonesty, hypocrisy, or flat-out illogical and inconsistent reasoning, that's when you get a little pissy and start name-calling.
And me, pseudo-intellectual? Seriously? LOL I'm no sort of academic at all. That you would think that indicates your own lack of academic achievement, I think. (Either that or you've grown so used to talking with meatheads that you think there's something odd about someone who has a bigger vocabulary or better grasp of grammar than you.)
FWIW, I'm just a persnickety old logical bodybuilder who's served 4 years in the US army before going back to school, had a lot of foreign language training (in the army and in college) who now works as a "blackbox-style" QA tester for a 3rd party testing house where I mainly do performance testing and write up bugs (problems) I encounter with pre-released mobile wireless devices.
The reason I mention all of that is that I think that the way I write is reasonably appropriate for a guy with my background. In other words, I don't write for a living and think it's obvious. If you consider my writing to be even pseudo-intellectual, it means you're kinda dumb.
Now go get you shine-box, LOL.
-
LOL. Of course you don't think anything I say is funny, BB. I criticize you way too much for you to let your guard down long enough for real laughter. You're actually kind of a wuss, BB. Look how defensively you avoid saying what you think is funny because you fear being attacked for your taste in humor.
Seems to me that when folks criticize you unfairly, you don't care. But when they call you out for your more obvious forays into intellectual dishonesty, hypocrisy, or flat-out illogical and inconsistent reasoning, that's when you get a little pissy and start name-calling.
And me, pseudo-intellectual? Seriously? LOL I'm no sort of academic at all. That you would think that indicates your own lack of academic achievement, I think. (Either that or you've grown so used to talking with meatheads that you think there's something odd about someone who has a bigger vocabulary or better grasp of grammar than you.)
FWIW, I'm just a persnickety old logical bodybuilder who's served 4 years in the US army before going back to school, had a lot of foreign language training (in the army and in college) who now works as a "blackbox-style" QA tester for a 3rd party testing house where I mainly do performance testing and write up bugs (problems) I encounter with pre-released mobile wireless devices.
The reason I mention all of that is that I think that the way I write is reasonably appropriate for a guy with my background. In other words, I don't write for a living and think it's obvious. If you consider my writing to be even pseudo-intellectual, it means you're kinda dumb.
Now go get you shine-box, LOL.
Actually I find lots of things funny. I am easily amused. But I don't find you funny (except I do find your futile attempts to sound smart pretty amusing). Sometimes you say something that is a little humorous. But by and large, you're a dud. I don't find you particularly bright. You're a hack. Your ability to understand and discuss complex matters is horrendous. You try way too hard to sound intelligent. You're not.
But that's ok. We need you. Have to maintain the board bell curve. :)
-
Actually I find lots of things funny. I am easily amused. But I don't find you funny (except I do find your futile attempts to sound smart pretty amusing). Sometimes you say something that is a little humorous. But by and large, you're a dud. I don't find you particularly bright. You're a hack. Your ability to understand and discuss complex matters is horrendous. You try way too hard to sound intelligent. You're not.
But that's ok. We need you. Have to maintain the board bell curve. :)
Sometimes I'm a "little humorous" and you don't find me "particularly bright"? I'm gonna take those as grudging and deliberately understated compliments since my own voiced opinions of you have been so harsh that you can't exactly be my biggest fan. So thanks, lol.
BTW, on serious note, you are about the last person who ought to complain about anyone's lack of ability to discuss complex matters. Everything with you boils down to your gut reaction which you then try to rationalize. That's not really so much different than what most people do but you go farther by often remaining intentionally ignorant because of your refusal to learn more facts about a subject especially when those facts would seem to threaten the validity of your viewpoints. If that's not hacky, I don't know what is.
To me, you seem like an old guy with old-fashioned views about most things who, because he wants so much to achieve some sort of validation, will argue that his beliefs are rationale even if that argument is knowingly dishonest and requires him to be willfully ignorant of relevant facts.
So, actually, I change my mind: Being a hack would be a step up for you.
True conservatism is ill-served by your kind.
-
Sometimes I'm a "little humorous" and you don't find me "particularly bright"? I'm gonna take those as grudging and deliberately understated compliments since my own voiced opinions of you have been so harsh that you can't exactly be my biggest fan. So thanks, lol.
BTW, on serious note, you are about the last person who ought to complain about anyone's lack of ability to discuss complex matters. Everything with you boils down to your gut reaction which you then try to rationalize. That's not really so much different than what most people do but you go farther by often remaining intentionally ignorant because of your refusal to learn more facts about a subject especially when those facts would seem to threaten the validity of your viewpoints. If that's not hacky, I don't know what is.
To me, you seem like an old guy with old-fashioned views about most things who, because he wants so much to achieve some sort of validation, will argue that his beliefs are rationale even if that argument is knowingly dishonest and requires him to be willfully ignorant of relevant facts.
So, actually, I change my mind: Being a hack would be a step up for you.
True conservatism is ill-served by your kind.
You're starting to bore me. Can you try and say something smart so I can get my Friday morning laugh in? Thanks. :)
-
You're starting to bore me. Can you try and say something smart so I can get my Friday morning laugh in? Thanks. :)
Yeah, when ya keep hearing the same sort of criticism from people over and over, I'm sure it does get old.
-
Yeah, when ya keep hearing the same sort of criticism from people over and over, I'm sure it does get old.
Simpleton Simon, a very wise man once told me that your critics define you. So, you have to consider the source. When really intelligent people are all saying the same thing, you have to step back and reassess. When a handful of weirdos say the same thing, that's probably a good thing. (You would be the weirdo in this scenario.)
-
Simpleton Simon, a very wise man once told me that your critics define you. So, you have to consider the source. When really intelligent people are all saying the same thing, you have to step back and reassess. When a handful of weirdos say the same thing, that's probably a good thing. (You would be the weirdo in this scenario.)
Yeah, your definition of weirdo seems to be anyone who has different beliefs than you. Function of your solipsistic nature, I expect. (Sorry for the big word, chief.)
And I'm "The" weirdo? According to what you wrote I'm one of a "handful of weirdos", aren't I?
Also, did this very wise man only say "your critics define you" or did he add all that other stuff about intelligent people and weirdos? Because, "your critics define you" is ludicrously weakened (almost dodged, really) by saying, "Oh, but that only applies to the critics I approve of". If you don't immediately see what I mean then you are just dumb.
-
Yeah, your definition of weirdo seems to be anyone who has different beliefs than you. Function of your solipsistic nature, I expect. (Sorry for the big word, chief.)
And I'm "The" weirdo? According to what you wrote I'm one of a "handful of weirdos", aren't I?
Also, did this very wise man only say "your critics define you" or did he add all that other stuff about intelligent people and weirdos? Because, "your critics define you" is ludicrously weakened (almost dodged, really) by saying, "Oh, but that only applies to the critics I approve of". If you don't immediately see what I mean then you are just dumb.
Bwahahaha! Thank you. Now that's what I'm talking about. I love it when you try and sound smart. ;D lol . . . .
-
Bwahahaha! Thank you. Now that's what I'm talking about. I love it when you try and sound smart. ;D lol . . . .
D-d-d-d-dodge.
C'mon Bum, did the "very wise man" say that you need to make distinctions among your group of critics or not?
-
D-d-d-d-dodge.
C'mon Bum, did the "very wise man" say that you need to make distinctions among your group of critics or not?
Oh so now you want to have an exchange like an adult? Clown. ::)
-
Oh so now you want to have an exchange like an adult? Clown. ::)
Double-dodge.
Why are you not answering here? A simple "yes" or "no" will do.
Did the very wise man who told you "Your critics define you" add that you need to make distinctions among your group of critics?
(If you do answer, which I judge to be unlikely, I'm guessing you'll lie and say "yes".)
-
Double-dodge.
Why are you not answering here? A simple "yes" or "no" will do.
Did the very wise man who told you "Your critics define you" add that you need to make distinctions among your group of critics?
(If you do answer, which I judge to be unlikely, I'm guessing you'll lie and say "yes".)
Here is my simple answer, Simpleton Simon: kiss where the sun doesn't shine. How is that? :)
-
Here is my simple answer, Simpleton Simon: kiss where the sun doesn't shine. How is that? :)
Oh, it's like BB calling out "uncle", I guess. ;D