Page 17 of 23 FirstFirst ... 71213141516171819202122 ... LastLast
Results 321 to 340 of 450
  1. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #321  
    Quote Originally Posted by tcrunner View Post
    Investments,without which today's record-setting Recession would have been an historic Depression beyond which the US had never seen. Those critical of Obama would have railed against Obama had the Depression land on his watch. How dignified of them.
    Of course, you are relying on pure speculation. What is fact is that the costs of these "investments" WILL occur, regardless of the effect (beneficial or not), and hence, provide a very significant financial burden (on top of many others). The benefits, despite the best efforts of an ongoing propaganda campaign, have not been realized as promised (fact), and may not exist at all (speculation).

    Quote Originally Posted by tcrunner View Post
    Healthcare economics discussion by those who have no intimate knowledge of healthcare delivery is pure folly. The same are those harping about "socialism", yet have no idea what it means either.
    Yet, apparently the folly of letting people who openly reject even the most basic premises of economics (or a variety of historical facts) are given broad credibility (unwarranted) in regards to the issue. Of course, the "folly" of this "reform" is becoming clearer by the day as the fraud that it is revealed. Of course, your statement becomes incredibly laughable when you consider that the nearly all the people who brought us "healthcare reform" are experts at neither healthcare nor economics--but apparently that isn't "folly."

    KAM
  2. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #322  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    I guess you're refering to John Voight. You may be right. I think he supported taking out Saddam. I'm not so sure what his feelings were about what followed.

    But what's the connection? Other than both concern spending money.
    Why bother with making a connection that has relevance and applies, when a disconnected one will suffice. There IS a connection of course--in that both are massive wastes of taxpayer dollars (in many and varying ways), but It doesn't seem the poster was attempting to protest government spending in any sort of general manner.

    KAM
  3. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #323  
    Quote Originally Posted by tcrunner View Post
    According to Treasury, you are out on a limb all by yourself and not following the actual record of prior administration bailouts. That >$1.1 allocated does not include direct-paid goody handouts to the public. That is a matter of easily obtainable public record and is beyond dispute.
    So...you want to apologize for your lack of specificity then?

    Quote Originally Posted by tcrunner View Post
    Where hypocrisy is concerned, there was no outrage expressed by those sympathetic to the previous administration, in the Congress or among the public. The same group which is now funded - I mean motivated - by Freedomworks, Inc.
    Sounds like the self-delusions of a "partisan" to me. Of course there was outrage over bailouts, and over-spending. The fact that you are unaware of it, or in denial of it doesn't make your claim true.

    Perhaps you'd benefit from noting the opposition to TARP for example--171 House Members,a and I think 25 Senators voting AGAINST it.

    http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2008/roll681.xml

    Hmmm, sounds like opposition to me, and I'm quite sure those voting in Congress were not "silent" nor were their constituents who opposed it.

    Freedomworks, inc? Are they an organization like the Center for American Progress, who seem to be very effective in "motivating" the current administration?

    Quote Originally Posted by tcrunner View Post
    People of principle are consistent. Hence the issue with their hypocrisy. No false notion is being forwarded.
    Actually, there is--that notion is that there aren't people who opposed the out of control spending in the Bush Administration as well as in the Obama administration. Again--your ignorance of their existence might absolve you of guilt of willful distortion, but it doesn't mean you are correct.


    Quote Originally Posted by tcrunner View Post
    If you believe that liberals are currently dead silent and not holding Obama's feet to the fire these days via rallies and protests according to their set of principles, you're not listening to the right people.
    I'm sorry--you've apparently mistaken our statements. I've not made absolutist statements like "perfect silence"--you have. I noted the existence of hypocrites, not stated dissenters do not exist. That's what you've attempted to do. You've stated that there was no outrage expressed by those sympathetic to the prior administration, and there most certainly was. You just refuse to acknowledge it, or are ignorant of it.

    Quote Originally Posted by tcrunner View Post
    Unfortunately, there is no evidence of conservatives rallying against the previous administration. The claim of there being "many" must be a total of lone individuals who were quite ineffective in getting the word out.
    Ah, I see--now you change the claim--now, there must have been a RALLYING of opposition. Just move that bar, whenever its convenient eh?

    KAM
    Last edited by KAM1138; 06/23/2010 at 12:03 AM. Reason: Link added
  4. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #324  
    Quote Originally Posted by tcrunner View Post
    And to refer to these investments as "disasters" is purely speculative folly.
    No--merely your opinion of it. Whether it is a "disaster" or not remains to be seen.

    Quote Originally Posted by tcrunner View Post
    In fairness, after 8 years, let's see if Obama even comes close to Reagan's 186% rate of expansion of Debt. So far, Obama is responsible for 23%. Fact vs hyperbolic speculation.
    Are you addressing something I've said or just throwing out some random "facts." Or is this just your contribution in a long line of "but they did it" justifications. What's funny is that people in this administration (and their legions of apologists) haven't realized is that sort of avoidance that worked so well for a campaign isn't working in a supposed leader. Now-dated campaign propaganda (as successful as it was) isn't leadership.

    Quote Originally Posted by tcrunner View Post
    Though split along specialty lines, the very long list of professional healthcare associations who advocated for healthcare reform speaks for itself. Though personal politics always gets involved, at least these are the people whose opinion is qualified and matters.
    Qualified to provide health care services perhaps, not to manage a major portion of the national economy. Of course, when you say they "advocated for healthcare reform" is in itself misleading, given that what was promised, is already turning out to be significantly different.

    There's this thing politicians often do...its called lying--might want to look into that as well--examples available daily--across the board.

    KAM
    Last edited by KAM1138; 06/23/2010 at 12:11 AM.
  5. #325  
    OT:

    Welcome Back KAM.
  6. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #326  
    Quote Originally Posted by berdinkerdickle View Post
    OT:

    Welcome Back KAM.
    Hello Berd,

    Thank you. I'm quite busy these days, but I still love my pre/WebOS which brings me around.

    KAM
    Last edited by KAM1138; 06/23/2010 at 12:12 AM.
  7. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #327  
    Quote Originally Posted by tcrunner View Post
    You keep repeating this claim of my personal ignorance but continue to avoid the historical record of silence on "conservative's" part while the prior administration was in power.
    I only keep repeating it, because you keep claiming the same lie. Now, you've made it clear (because you've been told and continue to deny it) that you are simply lying, and not innocently ignorant. Thanks for confirming that.

    Quote Originally Posted by tcrunner View Post
    Yes, I have. And accurately so.
    No, you really haven't. Here's a bit of a lesson...when you make an absolute statement it takes but a single contrary fact to disprove it. Since there was opposition amongst Bush supporters (despite your denial of reality), your absolutist statement is false. So, no, it wasn't accurate--it was just typical shill propaganda-speak.

    Quote Originally Posted by tcrunner View Post
    How many times within the same response is it necessary to repeat the same falsehood? Taking a page out of the tragically failed Karl Rove Theory of Revisionism?
    Given that your entire "argument" (if one can consider naked propaganda an "argument") is based on denial of historical facts (opposition amongst Bush supporters to bailouts that occurred during his administration), it is quite clear that you are very literally attempting "Revisionism." That of course makes your accusation directly hypocritical. Nice touch with the boogie-man mention of Karl Rove.

    Quote Originally Posted by tcrunner View Post
    The record speaks clearly and loudly enough for even the most partisan to hear and understand.
    If that were true, you'd have stopped repeating the same false claims by this time and admitted that you've let your mouth (keyboard) overrun reality, but it is clear that partisanship won't allow such sincerity or honesty to exist.

    Quote Originally Posted by tcrunner View Post
    Definition has not changed one inch. As stated, if there was an "effort" by conservatives while the prior administration was in power, it never saw the light of day. Just as the historical record shows. Unless you'd like to demonstrate newly manufactured history, that is.
    Hmmm, actually it has. Let's see, "perfect silence" becomes a requirement that there is a "rallying" of opposition, and that's not a change? Clearly that is exactly what you attempted. See above again for how absolutist statements fall apart, since you don't seem to understand that. I know you're trying to scurry about and figure out how to make your absolute hyperbole seem like it isn't, but it's too late.

    An easily identified event in "the historical record" shows that there was significant Republican (and to a lesser extent Democrat) opposition to one of the biggest examples of "bailouts" (TARP) yet you persist in claiming that it simply did not exist. It was quite unpopular, and many who voted for it did so "holding their nose." Enjoy your self-delusion.

    Look--I understand the tactics. Make an absolute statement, hoping that it is accepted blindly, and when someone calls you out on it, go right for the backup, which is to engage in a constant string of reversals, denials and accusing others of engaging in the sort of lies and deception that you rely on. You're wasting your time. I know you depend on repeating the same drivel again and again, until rational people get tired of wasting their time, and people who aren't engaged wander away. Always more time to target them with another propaganda attempt later. That sort of tripe might work amongst the group-thinkers you might be accustomed to associating with, but it doesn't even approach the level of "argument" with someone who has even the most basic memory.

    I know you're forwarding falsehoods. You may or may not be aware of it (I think you are), and I tried to give you an out for being simply ignorant, but you insisted on doubling down. I get it--I know that's the tactic, but now that you know I know...don't waste any more time with it.

    But hey--thanks for giving me an immediate example of why I found this forum to be largely a waste of time. What amazes me is that anyone can take someone with such empty, hole-riddled propaganda seriously. You're really not good at this.

    KAM
    Last edited by KAM1138; 06/23/2010 at 09:13 AM.
  8. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #328  
    Quote Originally Posted by tcrunner View Post
    Thanks for clarifying the intellectual dishonesty of those here referring to disasters The only Titanic-level disasters are threads like this one.
    You work hard to insure that.

    I'm not going to bother debating "intellectual dishonesty" with someone who has demonstrated it so eagerly.

    Enjoy wasting someone else's time.

    KAM
  9. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
       #329  
    Is U.S. Now On Slippery Slope To Tyranny?
    By THOMAS SOWELL
    Posted 06:13 PM ET

    When Adolf Hi4ler was building up the N4zi movement in the 1920s, leading up to his taking power in the 1930s, he deliberately sought to activate people who did not normally pay much attention to politics.

    Such people were a valuable addition to his political base, since they were particularly susceptible to Hi4ler's rhetoric and had far less basis for questioning his assumptions or his conclusions.

    "Useful idiots" was the term supposedly coined by V.I. Lenin to describe similarly unthinking supporters of his dictatorship in the Soviet Union.

    Put differently, a democracy needs informed citizens if it is to thrive, or ultimately even survive.

    In our times, American democracy is being dismantled, piece by piece, before our very eyes by the current administration in Washington, and few people seem to be concerned about it.

    The president's poll numbers are going down because increasing numbers of people disagree with particular policies of his, but the damage being done to the fundamental structure of this nation goes far beyond particular counterproductive policies.

    Just where in the Constitution of the United States does it say that a president has the authority to extract vast sums of money from a private enterprise and distribute it as he sees fit to whomever he deems worthy of compensation? Nowhere.

    And yet that is precisely what is happening with a $20 billion fund to be provided by BP to compensate people harmed by their oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

    Many among the public and in the media may think that the issue is simply whether BP's oil spill has damaged many people, who ought to be compensated.

    But our government is supposed to be "a government of laws and not of men."

    If our laws and our institutions determine that BP ought to pay $20 billion - or $50 billion or $100 billion - then so be it.

    But the Constitution says that private property is not to be confiscated by the government without "due process of law."

    Technically, it has not been confiscated by Barack Obama, but that is a distinction without a difference.

    With vastly expanded powers of government available at the discretion of politicians and bureaucrats, private individuals and organizations can be forced into accepting the imposition of powers that were never granted to the government by the Constitution.

    If you believe that the end justifies the means, then you don't believe in constitutional government.

    And, without constitutional government, freedom cannot endure. There will always be a "crisis" which, as the president's chief of staff has said, cannot be allowed to "go to waste" as an opportunity to expand the government's power.

    That power will of course not be confined to BP or to the particular period of crisis that gave rise to the use of that power, much less to the particular issues.

    When Franklin D. Roosevelt arbitrarily took the United States off the gold standard, he cited a law passed during the First World War to prevent trading with the country's wartime enemies. But there was no war when FDR ended the gold standard's restrictions on the printing of money.

    At about the same time, during the worldwide Great Depression, the German Reichstag passed a law "for the relief of the German people."

    That law gave Hi4ler dictatorial powers that were used for things going far beyond the relief of the German people - indeed, powers that ultimately brought a rain of destruction down on the German people and on others.

    If the agreement with BP was an isolated event, perhaps we might hope that it would not be a precedent. But there is nothing isolated about it.

    The man appointed by President Obama to dispense BP's money as the administration sees fit, to whomever it sees fit, is only the latest in a long line of presidentially appointed "czars" controlling different parts of the economy, without even having to be confirmed by the Senate, as Cabinet members are.

    Those who cannot see beyond the immediate events to the issues of arbitrary power - vs. the rule of law and the preservation of freedom - are the "useful idiots" of our time. But useful to whom?

    (edits to certain words so they'd be displayed; emphasis added)
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  10. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #330  
    Quote Originally Posted by tcrunner View Post
    With the historical record being what it is, I might want to try and make this about a poster I didn't like too. If I was really desperate to dumb down the discussion to make it purely partisan, that is.
    It isn't about you--its about the fact that you are lying, or utterly ignorant of the fact that conservatives opposed bailouts (like the vote and voter reaction to TARP proves) while Bush was in Office.

    I'm sorry that you apparently do not have the capacity to comprehend the fact that this opposition did exist, or that you are lying about it, because your propaganda relies on these lies.

    Look--I'm telling you--I'm not the audience for your propaganda--I understand reality, and recall events from about 2 years ago. No matter how many lies you throw around, that isn't going to change.

    If you want to be effective with your propaganda, you've got to target the right audience--that is the non-thinking, non-reasoning or ignorant. That's who is most likely to support your guy. Of course, I know that task is quite a lot harder now, because even many of those who were fooled by such propaganda and nonsense once have the capacity to understand "fool me once, fool me twice."

    I guess, I should try to drain as much as your time as possible, so you cannot reach the audience that can be affected by this propaganda effort, but I'm not that interested in those sorts of futile efforts.

    Quote Originally Posted by tcrunner View Post
    That little issue of >$1.1T in bailouts authorized under the previous administration stands unfettered.
    I'm not sure what you intended to say, but the fact remains, conservatives opposed various bailouts, even while President Bush was in office, as the TARP vote (and voter reaction) demonstrates. Claims that there was "perfect silence" are blatantly false.

    KAM
    Last edited by KAM1138; 06/23/2010 at 09:54 AM.
  11. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #331  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    Those who cannot see beyond the immediate events to the issues of arbitrary power - vs. the rule of law and the preservation of freedom - are the "useful idiots" of our time. But useful to whom?
    Oh, it seems pretty clear who benefited from the "idiots" in 2008.

    This relates to what I was saying. The informed citizen is the biggest fear in the propagandist's heart. They often have a hard time understanding when the nonsense and lies they spew don't work. It makes them have to create more elaborate and extreme lies, which of course are self defeating.

    Take absolutist statements for example (such as we've seen here). They might sound good, because they have such an aggressive initial thrust, but they are toothless tigers as it were. They cannot stand up to actual facts. Now, as we've seen, facts won't deter the propagandist--they will just pivot, twist and turn, but that too is self defeating...except with an ignorant populace.

    It takes decades to produce a populace that is receptive to propaganda, and while there has been good success in stifling the thinking capacity of our schoolchildren, and populace in general. It was sufficient to elect someone like Obama, but apparently (hopefully) not sufficient to keep them nodding their heads to empty slogans like "hope and change" and blaming the other guy, when that person is the "leader."

    KAM
  12. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #332  
    Hello Everyone,

    This article I read yesterday was a nice example of how skewed the media (or other propagandist) treatment was/is of two different Gulf Disasters.

    Paul H. Rubin: A Tale of Two Disasters - WSJ.com

    It speaks to the success of Propagandists, but also of the NEED for such propaganda in the current administration.

    KAM
  13. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #333  
    Quote Originally Posted by tcrunner View Post
    I've told no lies, though I'll gladly let you know if I ever do.

    What conservative "voter reaction"? The one that didn't show up until Feb 2009 with Freedomworks, Inc funding?
    I'm not sure why you believe that your ignorance is a defense. Of course, you cannot claim ignorance when you've been told of the existence of something, and simply refuse to acknowledge it. That is what makes it a lie.

    Quote Originally Posted by tcrunner View Post
    Repeating the same circular lie? Why?
    That's what I'm asking you. Why do you keep lying by denying there was Conservative opposition to bailouts while Bush was in office. It existed--I remember it. I remember BEING it. I remember members of Congress (including conservatives) voting AGAINST it. Yet you laughably continue to claim that it simply didn't happen. Like I said--you aren't good at this, because you apparently think that your posts can literally erase my memory and experience in living through that event.

    Quote Originally Posted by tcrunner View Post
    Again. No lies told by me. Though lies are being torn down brick by brick without breaking a sweat.
    I am becoming convinced that repeating lies is effortless for you.


    Quote Originally Posted by tcrunner View Post
    The record is just the record.
    Yes, and that record (in regards to TARP at least) shows Republican opposition.

    Quote Originally Posted by tcrunner View Post
    It's not propaganda. Don't like it? Discuss it on its merits rather than this thin-skinned claim of propaganda.
    When you lie about an actual event, attempting to deny reality, that really does fall into the category of propaganda.

    Quote Originally Posted by tcrunner View Post
    I'm far too much a realist to even consider lowering myself to the level of those who would use such cliches. Join me, won't you?
    Ah yes--the self, congratulatory, back patting. I'm afraid, self-propaganda isn't effective either. You're not even a good shill, and that doesn't take much skill at all.

    Quote Originally Posted by tcrunner View Post
    Thanks for revealing your agenda. Much appreciated.
    Actually, I've been responding to what you've said. I've not forwarded an agenda other than to call lies what they are. For anyone watching--this is another wonderful demonstration of the amateur propagandist--the reversal.

    But hey TCrunner...I don't want to be negative. Keep at it, and someday you can learn to state lies that aren't so easily refuted, and grow into an effective propagandist. I might suggest a movie or TV show forum, or even better--a video game forum where the average age is perhaps 11-14. That might be more your speed.

    KAM
  14. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #334  
    Quote Originally Posted by tcrunner View Post
    The only orchestration was the completion ($350B) of the $700B bailout that had already been authorized by the previous administration. That is a far cry from the >$1.1T total authorized by the previous administration.
    I should also be noted that Senator Obama voted for the TARP bailout (which is $700 of 1100--a majority).

    It was indeed (wrongly) forwarded by the Bush Administration, but readily accepted (approved in fact) by Senator Obama (and others).

    It is of course a desire of the Propagandist to muddy those waters as well, pretending that the President (the one you oppose) has ultimate power, when of course TARP could not have passed without the Democrat Controlled Congress.

    Of course, despite the lies being repeated here, there was opposition to the Biggest Bailout (again 700 of 1100) that occurred during the Bush administration, primarily Free Market Conservatives and Anti-business liberals.

    KAM
  15. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
       #335  
    Quote Originally Posted by cjgemm View Post
    Correct me if I"m wrong, but I remember the upcoming Admin green lighting and largely orchestrating with the out going Admin on the bailouts you speak of. They don't call it Lame Duck for nothing.
    They didn't just green light it - they increased it, rinsed, and repeated it.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  16. #336  
    Just passing through to check the grammar.... don't mind me.
  17. #337  
    Obama is a socialist.
    PalmPilot, PalmIIIc, Treo 650, Pre, Pre 3, Nokia 1020, Lumia 950

    "It's good to be the King" - Mel Brooks, History of the World, Part 1

    "I would rather have a German division in front of me than a French one behind me." General George S. Patton
  18. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
       #338  
    Quote Originally Posted by dbd View Post
    Just passing through to check the grammar. Don't mind me.
    That's better.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  19. #339  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    That's better.
    Doh!
  20. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #340  
    Quote Originally Posted by tcrunner View Post
    Belittling me is a laughable tactic, even for the low, low standard of the internet. It tells every reader much more about you than you care to recognize.
    Oh there is no need to belittle you, when you're providing such a wonderful example all by yourself. But don't be shy about playing victim.

    Quote Originally Posted by tcrunner View Post
    Still no demonstrated evidence of conservative outrage at bailouts under the previous administration? Why am I not surprised?
    I refer you again to the opposition of many Congressional Republicans in Congress, who were in many cases responding to their constituents angry phone calls. I really can't help your willful denial of reality.

    One thing to note--in the past, Conservatives weren't very likely to run around in the streets protesting, nor are they prone to throwing hissy fits and breaking windows such is common amongst left wing protesters at G7/8/20 gatherings--for example.

    Again--for those bothering to watch--notice the moving bar. At first the claim was "perfect silence" and when that lie is exposed, it becomes a demand that "rallying" too place, and now "outrage."

    Quote Originally Posted by tcrunner View Post
    That would require that a first lie had been told. It has not (by me, at least).
    Your premise is based on a lie, and you continue to repeat/maintain it.

    Quote Originally Posted by tcrunner View Post
    No. A vote count does not equate to opposition.
    That is an incredibly moronic statement, devoid of reality. A vote OPPOSING something isn't opposition. Staggeringly stupid statement.
    See--I think you're confusing yourself, and tripping over your amorphous "reasoning." Now, actual hard votes against something doesn't qualify as "opposition. That's not even propaganda...its just nonsense.

    Quote Originally Posted by tcrunner View Post
    Just stop while you're behind.
    That's typically where one is at whilst kicking someone's ***--OH YEAH, BURNED, you got SKOOLD!
    To be clear--that is mockery of the self-congratulatory nonsense seen on the internet. I didn't actually intend to claim any such silliness.

    Quote Originally Posted by tcrunner View Post
    Is this disease of yours been officially diagnosed yet?
    Propaganda Lesson kids: Note this--first whine about being "belittled" playing the victim and then get right to it. Hypocrisy--not a problem for the liar. The problem again is that the amateur propagandist is easily thrown off their game--contradicting themselves too directly. They haven't learned that hypocrisy and contradiction ARE valuable tools for the propagandist, but they have to be used with some care.

    Quote Originally Posted by tcrunner View Post
    A claim of deceit without foundation is a lie itself. Where subjectivity is concerned, you only add hyperbole. All of which amounts to a microscopic hill of manure.
    Again--you passed on the easy route by admitting ignorance and taking a more reasonable line of attack, but you weren't smart enough to take it. I'm doing my best to help you grow as a propagandist, but you're apparently too self-indulgent.

    Quote Originally Posted by tcrunner View Post
    That pretty much summarizes your most cerebral post yet. Congrats!
    So, you'll give it a try? I think you've got the drive to be a better propagandist, but not the skills. The funny thing is you haven't even realized what's happened.

    One thing you might learn is that you'll be treated seriously if you deserve it.

    KAM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions