You do realize that constantly using rhetorical devices like "we" and "us" has absolutely nothing to do with morality or philosophy?
That's why nobody else does it, because they're not insecure losers like you.
Obama Intentionally Caused Ambassador's Death By Shutting Down Military Response
- Thread starter hellblazer
- Start date
You do realize that constantly using rhetorical devices like "we" and "us" has absolutely nothing to do with morality or philosophy?
That's why nobody else does it, because they're not insecure losers like you.
My previous statement made it clear that I am not saying it is "more outrageous" at all. The elevation of one story over another does not "take away" from the other stories. They are all horrific.
If there are 20 murders and we catch one, with overwhelming evidence, should we not prosecute that one?
The media picks the story. The same as would occur under AnCap.
I would be interested in what you would prosecute Bush for re: 9/11 . Obama may not be legally responsible and the trail may never lead all the way to him, there's always a Col North to take the hit, but that does not mean that we should not seek out the truth about what happened.
LOL... The phrase your ignorant mind was searching for when you wrote that was: "Argumentum ad populum," which is a logical fallacy that the speaker (me in this case) makes an appeal to a group of people or the majority to prove his point that his viewpoint is correct.
Then you committed the Abusive fallacy, like you always do when you don't agree with others, and this totally makes others not want to debate with you anymore because you behave irrationally all of the time, which is no fun.
And then you finished it off with total avoidance of all the other points I made refuting your previous points...
Which is again so typical of you. This is exactly what you always do in arguments here, pretend things that go over your head don't even exist.
Don't take my word for it, go look at your past arguments on WF, especially with people like Guerilla, Moxie, and Shady, and count how many responses they make and how many you refute... It's kinda embarrassing, really. (But of course you won't respond to this accusation too, for the reasons stated herein. Why do I waste my time??)
Anyway, back on the topic of your accusation against me of employing argumentum ad populum, the fact is that I did not appeal to the other voluntaryists to say I was right about any personal point in any of the cases you linked to... I was DEFENDING the group, defending Voluntaryism itself each time... Not appealing to it or them to make my own points look right.
In all cases you linked to (yes I just checked) I was defending against your attacks against voluntaryism itself, whether you understood it was voluntaryism you were attacking or not.
In short; you're too ignorant to understand the accusations you make. Just stop it, it's getting embarrassing.
SHOULD we? Of course.
COULD we? Hell no, noob!
They wouldn't like for their puppet to be removed from his role, they have ample tools to deflect any such threats, and they simply won't let us. Period.
References: All previous presidential war crimes. (Here is a tiny list of those to get you started. It's only the tip of the iceburg though.)
Not impressed. Sounds like everyone is reaching a bit in this wimpy feminized world that wants to prosecute for everything. These terrorists want to wear civilian clothes and hide behind civilians etc they waive their Geneva rights. Can't have it all.
Yeah, let's prosecute for Hiroshima..... whatever.
Anyhow, I never mentioned prosecuting Obama.
The fact is this is a big story. We'll see if it gains legs or dies off. For now its not getting much coverage outside of certain social bubbles.
Who is reaching a bit? The families of the dead? Foreign governments? The Hague? I don't get what you're trying to say here... Do you really not believe that the US has committed the most war crimes of any country in recorded history?
My argument isn't about prosecution. I'm trying to make you see that the white house habitually kills ppl all over the world by the truckload, daily, for 50+ years now, even our own citizens, and no presidents ever get the slightest slap on the wrist for it. (In fact this one just passed a law making it perfectly legal to do so against the constitution's most core principles.)
Don't get me wrong, I'd absolutely LOVE to see it happen, for obomba to be taken away in handcuffs and tried in military court or something... But any actions against him at all, even a trial or hearing, have the exact same chances of occurring as does the sun moving in to live in your spare bedroom.
I'm just thankful that one good thing will come out of this: Hellblazer just backed himself into a corner when he said "whatever happens in the fall, will not be able to be swept under the table so lightly."
When this blows away like all the other crimes, and we all make fun of him for this, hopefully he'll do the honorable thing and go express his feelings to obomba personally. :thumbsup:
I wouldn't.
I suspect the relatives of the 100s of thousands of people in Iraq and Afghanistan he has had killed probably would like to prosecute him.
I have noticed the subtle change in you. Perhaps not so subtle.
The truth is a dangerous thing. It creates more questions than answers.
I'm sure they would like to do more than that.
Can't say that I agree with either war nor the way in which they have been executed. The whole situation could have been handled much differently.
Sadly, its not likely to last. Frankly, I'm burnt.
I'm old enough to agree.
I'm not a Romney fan, but between him and Obama the choice to me is clear. Elections do matter, in spite of what the prevailing opinions here.
Pretty weak video. Anyone with half a mind can see the consistency.
Tarp should be ended. Is that different than TARP was a good idea?
The auto industry should die is different than allowing a BK.
Ending Roe is not the same as anti-choice.
Saying one coal plant "kills" is different than being pro clean coal.
on and on and on.
There are good anti-Romney points to be made, but this video did not make them.
You seem like a smart guy.
How, in your opinion, do elections matter?
What will Romney do that Obama hasn't? Genuinely curious.
In a nutshell the following come to mind. Not to say that he will do it all (or even try), but we already know Obama's proven actions on the following:
1. Extend tax cuts.
2. Change the energy policies.
3. Dump Bernake.
4. Repeal Dodd Frank and the tyrannical unaccountable CFPB.
5. Repeal portions of Obamacare
6. Real in the EPA's expansion.
7. Find the Mormon tablets... OK I kid.
8. Appoint less progressive judges.
9. Advocate businesses going to Vegas.
10. Not support the Muslim Brotherhood expansion.
11. Repair relationship with Israel.
12. Let the market sort out the housing crisis.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6G3nwhPuR4]Lena Dunham: Your First Time - YouTube[/ame]
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wAkdHzpXXo0]Lena Dunham: Your First Time PARODY - YouTube[/ame]
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wAkdHzpXXo0]Lena Dunham: Your First Time PARODY - YouTube[/ame]
No Difference Between Romney and Obama? Really? - Forbes
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsa4uLmTw0M&feature=player_embedded]CONSERVATISM IS CALLING - YouTube[/ame]
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsa4uLmTw0M&feature=player_embedded]CONSERVATISM IS CALLING - YouTube[/ame]
Yes, there are differences, but the two parties are also not polar opposites, like the misleading video you posted seems to suggest.
Rises in the national debt are not solely the fault of Obama or democrats.
Debt Up $1.59T Under GOP House
History of the United States public debt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The U.S. budget situation has deteriorated significantly since 2001, when the CBO forecast average annual surpluses of approximately $850 billion from 2009–2012. The average deficit forecast in each of those years as of June 2009 was approximately $1,215 billion. The New York Times analyzed this roughly $2 trillion "swing", separating the causes into four major categories along with their share:
Recessions or the business cycle (37%);
Policies enacted by President Bush (33%);
Policies enacted by President Bush and supported or extended by President Obama (20%); and
New policies from President Obama (10%).
Thanks for posting this. . . Not that I support either candidate wildly or blindly, but saying "we can't have another 4 years of this" as your campaign motto is just stupid.
Anyone can see that the economic hand dealt this administration was pure and total shit and was going to be for more than 1 or two years. If you can't, then you just don't really know how long it takes for policies to have an impact. Things take a long time. Not that I think Obama's policies are awesome, but to just flat out say "Things have sucked under his watch" is to have a short memory of what got the country there in the first place.
The previous admin seriously screwed up the economy when they came in with things in "decent" shape. Dot com happened, which sucked, but the wars and the old boy deals, oil deals, bullshit rights violations, new laws, etc . . .was like, "here american people, take it in the ass. It hurts, but you'll be safer with me giving it to you rather than the other guy".
blaze away .. not gonna change my vote this time . . .no compelling reason to change it, there is no leadership in evidence on the other side.
Do your best to convince me there is leadership over there on the right, but you can't. They've only ever said, "we can't have more of the same".
Kill PBS, Planned parenthood, unions, etc. . . WHAT THE FUCK EVER - 12 Million jobs is a pipe dream .. 250,000 jobs created per month for the next four years straight . . good luck with that .. especially after the correction that is coming.