Will a Romney/Ryan win save us?

[Phi for All]

No more than I can substantiate this claim, other than the Reverend's own words.

You know, if this was a USA Boxing event, you wouldn't be allowed to throw dirt in your opponent's eyes just because he's kicking your ass in the ring. We have rules too.

[Moontanman]

Turn it around and around and around however you want to spin it. But I despise a liar regardless of his faith or lack of faith.

 

Since you didn't answer swansonT I'll ask, this means you despise Romney and Ryan doesn't it?

 

A Muslim running for office is no different than a Protestant, Catholic Methodist etc. But if you believe Americans will eventually bow to Sharia Law, you're full of it. That my friend is pure ignorance.

 

 

I agree that America would not bow to Sharia law, why do you think Obama has the power to bring us under Sharia law?

 

Rigney, you are not making sense here, your video was nothing but quote mining of the worst type. Anyone can be made to say anything with quote mining.

 

I know you are better than this Rigney, it's not honorable to use lies, or even assume something is true just because it is what you want to believe and bring it to a discussion about something so serious without some back up. I know you are an honorable man Rigney and I know you do not worship at the alter of lies. Why are you doing this? To rattle the lions cage because you are powerless to do anything else? That would be very sad Rigney, I think you are a better human being than that.

[rigney]

You know, if this was a USA Boxing event, you wouldn't be allowed to throw dirt in your opponent's eyes just because he's kicking your ass in the ring. We have rules too.

What is this we thing? Are you afraid to speak without backup? What kind of rules do you have, only those you acknowledge? I suppose you are calling this preacher a liar as you do anyone else who opposes Obaba and your left wing leanings? If so, you have it wrong pal. Edited September 14, 2012 by rigney

[uncool]

Rigney is clearly either a troll or too unable to remember history to be able to competently comment on it. No other way anyone could say the following:

As we were beginning to clear that shit up in Iraq, we find that ben Ladin is hiding in Afghanistan. Well! Let's go kick some ass. So we more or less invade Afghanistan, with most of the people's blessing.

=Uncool-

[rigney]

Since you didn't answer swansonT I'll ask, this means you despise Romney and Ryan doesn't it?

 

 

 

 

I agree that America would not bow to Sharia law, why do you think Obama has the power to bring us under Sharia law?

 

Rigney, you are not making sense here, your video was nothing but quote mining of the worst type. Anyone can be made to say anything with quote mining.

 

I know you are better than this Rigney, it's not honorable to use lies, or even assume something is true just because it is what you want to believe and bring it to a discussion about something so serious without some back up. I know you are an honorable man Rigney and I know you do not worship at the alter of lies. Why are you doing this? To rattle the lions cage because you are powerless to do anything else? That would be very sad Rigney, I think you are a better human being than that.

What lies Moon? When I watch that left wing nut case on the Young Turks, Lions or what ever, to including that blathering, blithering idiot (Mr. Ed) Shultz, I actually want to puke. Talk about lying, neither of those guys know the truth. The shame of it is that you guys have chased every conservative or religious person from this forum except me. I will shortly be gone too because I can't stand the total bias shown for that waffling liar we now have in office. But if the cobwebs of ignorance can be shaken out of just a few of the voting public's head, he willl also be gone, come Nov. 6. No mixed ticket this time Moon, It will be "Straight Republican". Edited September 14, 2012 by rigney

[Phi for All]

What is this we thing? Are you afraid to speak without backup? What kind of rules do you have, only those you acknowledge? I suppose you are calling this preacher a liar as you do anyone else who opposes Obaba and your left wing leanings? If so, you have it wrong pal.

I'm talking we, the members of this forum, since that's the position I have in this particular thread. We have rules that guide discussions to keep them intellectually honest. We have rules to keep them meaningful and productive. We have rules to keep them from devolving into the kind of deceitful exchanges that attempt to avoid the truth and dance around the issues.

 

We're asking very specific questions here and you keep throwing dirt in our eyes to distract us from the statements you've made. I'm not falling for your cheap red herring about this extremist religious zealot and his unfounded allegations. I don't care about his "status" as a preacher, but his desire to keep Harlem from progressive renovations to maintain it as a "drought zone" because of Elijah's warning to Ahab in the Bible seems to paint a fairly good picture of where this man is coming from. Instead, I'd like to remind you that we're asking, pleading with you to tell us why you think Romney/Ryan, as representatives of a failed and fractured Republican party whose policies have crippled this country, could possibly use those same policies to make things better?

[swansont]

The shame of it is that you guys have chased every conservative or religious person from this forum except me.

People who can't stand having to back up their claims get chased. People who break rules get chased (well, banned). You're blaming others for not being able to spread fabrications and innuendo with impunity. Cry me a river. That's like the crook who blames the cop for arresting him rather than taking personal responsibility for his actions. Which is ironic, because I thought personal responsibility was one of the GOP's favorite talking points. (When it's convenient, at least)

[iNow]

Rigney is clearly either a troll or too unable to remember history to be able to competently comment on it. No other way anyone could say the following:

The unfortunate thing is that rigney serves as a really good representation of MOST conversations with the American right these days... Except, rigney tends to be a bit more coherent and rational than they are. Scary stuff.

[John Cuthber]

The shame of it is that you guys have chased every conservative or religious person from this forum except me.

Another, some would say more reasonable way to look at that is that all the Conservatives couldn't cope with rules that obliged them not to lie, to back up teir assertions with evidence and to answer points put to them.

 

What's shameful is that they either couldn't do that, or they chose not to.

If they chose not to then their cowardice should debar them from office.

If they couldn't do it then their dishonesty should do so.

 

 

In any event, as you have said, since you, quite rightly, despise liars here's a hint

Don't ever vote for Romney and Ryan.

 

They lie- a lot.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/slacktivist/2012/08/29/mitt-romney-tells-533-lies-in-30-weeks-steve-benen-documents-them/

 

Feel free not to vote for Obama if you don't like him or his views, or his policies-

 

but don't give power to people who you should loathe.

[uncool]

The unfortunate thing is that rigney serves as a really good representation of MOST conversations with the American right these days... Except, rigney tends to be a bit more coherent and rational than they are. Scary stuff.

Honestly?

 

Posts like yours are what I find the most scary. Posts saying that "the other" cannot be reached, cannot be argued with, cannot be reasoned with. No. That is wrong. That is exactly what is wrong with American politics these days. People are fundamentally reasonable. They may have truly ridiculous beliefs, but they have reasons for holding most of those beliefs, and often are willing to discuss them. While there may be a whole lot of shows and people that claim otherwise, people will respond to reason.

 

Posts like yours are what make posts like rigney's so dangerous. Even though I'm sure he is a troll, he still has managed to convince you, among other people, that even attempting to discuss with "the other" is not worth your time. And once you accept that view, you become just like what rigney is parodying - and that is not acceptable.

=Uncool-

[iNow]

But he's not a troll. He's an elderly man who is acting exactly like >80% of everyone else acts on the US right at present.

Sure, many people can be reasoned with and are open to mature dialog. My quip above didn't suggest that nuance, I stipulate that.

 

However, I disagree with your attempt to equivocate me with the right wing ideologues on this. I fear you don't have exposure to the same information that I do, and you don't see what I see that causes me to make such comments. That's fine, but don't completely disregard my point or suggest that I'm "the same thing on the other side" if you're lacking that insight and information.

 

I am very much open to mature dialog. My comment above is merely a disheartened lament about how difficult it has become to engage in exactly that. It's become roughly equivalent to discussing evolution with a creationist or climate change with a denier. There is a point where what I say is no longer "dangerous" or "wrong," but an objective statement of fact.

 

There are clearly exceptions, and they should be noted... but there are quite a large number who simply cannot be reasoned with... who cannot even be made to agree on basic facts.

Edited September 14, 2012 by iNow

[Phi for All]

Honestly?

 

Posts like yours are what I find the most scary. Posts saying that "the other" cannot be reached, cannot be argued with, cannot be reasoned with. No. That is wrong. That is exactly what is wrong with American politics these days. People are fundamentally reasonable. They may have truly ridiculous beliefs, but they have reasons for holding most of those beliefs, and often are willing to discuss them. While there may be a whole lot of shows and people that claim otherwise, people will respond to reason.

 

Posts like yours are what make posts like rigney's so dangerous. Even though I'm sure he is a troll, he still has managed to convince you, among other people, that even attempting to discuss with "the other" is not worth your time. And once you accept that view, you become just like what rigney is parodying - and that is not acceptable.

=Uncool-

But he's not a troll. He's an elderly man who is acting exactly like >80% of everyone else acts on the US right at present.

Sure, many people can be reasoned with and are open to mature dialog. My quip above didn't suggest that nuance, I stipulate that.

 

However, I disagree with your attempt to equivocate me with the right wing ideologues on this. I fear you don't have exposure to the same information that I do, and you don't see what I see that causes me to make such comments. That's fine, but don't completely disregard my point or suggest that I'm "the same thing on the other side" if you're lacking that insight and information.

 

I am very much open to mature dialog. My comment above is merely a disheartened lament about how difficult it has become to engage in exactly that. It's become roughly equivalent to discussing evolution with a creationist or climate change with a denier. There is a point where what I say is no longer "dangerous" or "wrong," but an objective statement of fact.

 

There are clearly exceptions, and they should be noted... but there are quite a large number who simply cannot be reasoned with... who cannot even be made to agree on basic facts.

I think you're both right, but you're both wrong, and that's exactly what's happening with the US right now. People are being repelled by what they don't want and are gravitating to whatever seems opposite that. I don't think the Democrats are the opposite of the Republicans right now, but they seem so much more attractive because they're NOT the Republicans.

 

uncool is right, we can't dismiss the opposition, because there's more common ground than we're willing to dig for. We start town hall meetings with all the gripes instead of starting with where we agree and moving on from there. It's not productive.

 

iNow is right, rigney isn't a troll, he just comes off that way because we think he's intentionally screwing with us to get a negative reaction. He's probably genuinely scared about what's going on and has simply been fanning an ember of dislike for Obama, based on what he chooses to listen to. I can't believe anyone who is a Dennis Kucinich fan could EVER truly back a Romney/Ryan ticket, but someone who is repelled by Obama is naturally going to gravitate the other way.

[ElasticCollision]

Obama - Change you can't believe in.

 

Romney - Failure you can bet on.

[uncool]

But he's not a troll. He's an elderly man who is acting exactly like >80% of everyone else acts on the US right at present.

Sure, many people can be reasoned with and are open to mature dialog. My quip above didn't suggest that nuance, I stipulate that.

 

I disagree with your attempt to equivocate me with the right wing zombies on this. I am very much open to mature dialog. My comment above is merely a disheartened lament about how difficult it has become to do exactly that. It's become roughly equivalent to discussing evolution with a creationist or climate change with a denier. There is a point where what I say is no longer "dangerous" or "wrong," but an objective statement of fact.

Even when it's an objective statement of fact, it's still dangerous that that fact needs to be expressed. I'm not trying to equivocate - I'm trying to point out the end result of that line of reasoning. You're quite understandably getting tired of a lot of people not talking reasonably; the problem is that when people get tired, they stop doing whatever is making them tired. The problem isn't that what you're doing is unreasonable; the problem is that what you're doing is entirely reasonable. That's why rigney's posts are dangerous - they're making an entirely unreasonable position reasonable.

=Uncool-

 

iNow is right, rigney isn't a troll, he just comes off that way because we think he's intentionally screwing with us to get a negative reaction.

 

It's more than that. The blatant revision of history necessary to make that long post is so over the top that I cannot believe that he is anything but a troll.

=Uncool-

[Phi for All]

It's more than that. The blatant revision of history necessary to make that long post is so over the top that I cannot believe that he is anything but a troll.

=Uncool-

Because he didn't remember that we invaded Afghanistan before we invaded Iraq? I think that's mostly because Bush failed to find bin Laden and so had to make a huge justification to invade Iraq, and the press at the time reflected that. Much more was reported about Iraq and the second invasion of Afghanistan. rigney may have genuinely forgotten about the October 2001 attempt to find bin Laden, and we know he doesn't check facts before he posts.

 

I define trolling as a premeditated act, and I just don't see that in his posts. I could be a huge fool for not seeing what you see, but I don't think rigney's intent is malicious as much as ill-formed.

[uncool]

Because he didn't remember that we invaded Afghanistan before we invaded Iraq? I think that's mostly because Bush failed to find bin Laden and so had to make a huge justification to invade Iraq, and the press at the time reflected that. Much more was reported about Iraq and the second invasion of Afghanistan. rigney may have genuinely forgotten about the October 2001 attempt to find bin Laden, and we know he doesn't check facts before he posts.

 

I define trolling as a premeditated act, and I just don't see that in his posts. I could be a huge fool for not seeing what you see, but I don't think rigney's intent is malicious as much as ill-formed.

Because not only did he not remember, but he's constructed an entire narrative based off of the opposite of the truth. Because the amount of sheer amnesia required to construct that entire narrative - you'd have to forget two years of information on Afghanistan to think that Iraq even started to come first, let alone another half a year of information on Iraq to think that we invaded Afghanistan after we had finished with Saddam Hussein. Because so much was made out of the October 2001 invasion - perhaps less than Iraq, although I honestly don't think so - repeatedly over the years. Basically, I don't see it as possible to forget that much and still be able to function in the way rigney does.

=Uncool-

[iNow]

Which brings us back to my post #208.

[uncool]

Which brings us back to my post #208.

And that's what makes my point - I don't think that most right-wing people are like that, but posts like rigney's make people think that right-wing people are like that.

=Uncool-

[Moontanman]

Rigney's arguments are disturbing but the idea that "elderly" has something to do with it is also disturbing, in fact the mere mention of elderly being significant is scary. I see so many people in Rigney's age range that have the same stance, right wing nuts is a accurate description. I know of no elderly left wing nuts but what scares me the most is that i am at the ragged edge of elderly and I don't want to be a wing nut right or left.

 

I have always prided myself on ignoring the "wings" in favor of real world evidence, if it's right wing and correct then it's correct, the same for left wing. Real world evidence is what everyone should base their decisions on not whether or not you like the candidate.

 

Lies, spin and fear mongering should not be a factor in deciding the course of our country and it's policies but they seem to be the prime consideration these days. It may have always been that way but i don't remember it ever being as fierce as it is these days. Is this culture of lies, spin and fear mongering the result of lack of real world data or is it an intentional strategy designed to appeal to the part of the brain that has little or no intellectual capacity? or even more darkly could it be an appeal that is demonstrated to work on older people due to factors that are present in "elderly" people?

 

Could all this really be one party simply taking advantage of our natural fear of the other... that which is different? The republicans consistently claim it's not a black white thing but "me thinks they do protest too much" could it be that simple?

 

One thing I feel for sure is that using the word "elderly" to somehow denigrate Rigney's opinion is not right but in the real world I do see a pattern of older people flocking to the right wing nut position, of course we humans tend to see patterns even where none exist and it might be that this is a case of the squeaky wheel getting the grease.

 

None the less i can't see where Rigney is coming from at all and the fact that I know Rigney is an intelligent person makes this doubly disturbing.... but i think we should be careful in using the adjective "elderly" in this context...

 

The bold is a mistake, after reading the post i realized that elderly was not being used to denigrate Rigneys opinion, Inow, I apologize...

Edited September 14, 2012 by Moontanman

[iNow]

And that's what makes my point - I don't think that most right-wing people are like that, but posts like rigney's make people think that right-wing people are like that.

That's probably fair. We over-represent the crazies. We have a population bias, and a flawed sample. The right-wing people who are more moderate but don't speak out are underrepresented and often uncounted. I also acknowledge your previous point about the dangers of more reasonable people simply tuning out and giving up because they get tired of it. It's reasonable not to want to continue beating our heads against the wall or pounding on the sand, but that's sort of what needs to keep happening if anything is ever going to improve.

 

...but the idea that "elderly" has something to do with it is also disturbing

Just to be clear, I never intended to imply that being elderly was any sort of problem. I was simply stating that rigney was an elderly guy who genuinely believes these things, and that he's not trolling. This is truly how he thinks and remembers stuff, and it's not at all uncommon these days.

 

The bold is a mistake, after reading the post i realized that elderly was not being used to denigrate Rigneys opinion, Inow, I apologize...

No worries. I'm glad we were able to reach common ground and accurately understand one another.

[Moontanman]

Rigney's position on this disturbs me not because he is ignorant or stupid but because I know he is intelligent, when someone who is intelligent disagrees so profoundly on a subject that appears to be so obvious it makes me wonder if i am missing something.

 

My father in law is the same way, he hates Obama with a passion, so much passion he would believe almost anything as long as it is critical of Obama. We cannot hold a conversation on the subject due to his intense hatred of the man, it is weird as snake suspenders...

 

This is not a reasonable stance, i do not hate Romney or Ryan but I do see the error of what they want to do, if for no other reason than it has been done for the last 30 years and it has failed miserably. Someone said the the definition of insanity was doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.... What the republicans are suggesting we do is the very definition of insanity and to suggest they are the party of fiscal conservatism is just simply not true...

 

I want to understand... I really do... But i cannot help but think that much of the Republican hatred of Obama is based on race, pure and simple...

 

I would also like to add that there appears to be a measure of not liking the messenger means the message is bogus as well...

[Phi for All]

I want to understand... I really do... But i cannot help but think that much of the Republican hatred of Obama is based on race, pure and simple...

I don't believe this is true. I think the GOP knows it's trying to serve too many masters with conflicting positions. Neocons and religious conservatives don't belong in the same party with Reagan Republicans. Especially after the Bush fiasco, if Obama comes in and makes the changes necessary and pulls the country out of the nose-dive it was in, the Democrats would have had a dynasty in the making.

 

So the GOP has fought Obama on everything, even legislation they wanted themselves (which they will of course reintroduce and claim as their own should they win in November), and they were very clear about doing anything they could to make sure Obama didn't get a second term. They can't allow "change" to be successful because they've put all their efforts into radical conservatism, doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

[rigney]

Rigney's position on this disturbs me not because he is ignorant or stupid but because I know he is intelligent, when someone who is intelligent disagrees so profoundly on a subject that appears to be so obvious it makes me wonder if i am missing something.

 

My father in law is the same way, he hates Obama with a passion, so much passion he would believe almost anything as long as it is critical of Obama. We cannot hold a conversation on the subject due to his intense hatred of the man, it is weird as snake suspenders...

 

This is not a reasonable stance, i do not hate Romney or Ryan but I do see the error of what they want to do, if for no other reason than it has been done for the last 30 years and it has failed miserably. Someone said the the definition of insanity was doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.... What the republicans are suggesting we do is the very definition of insanity and to suggest they are the party of fiscal conservatism is just simply not true...

 

I want to understand... I really do... But i cannot help but think that much of the Republican hatred of Obama is based on race, pure and simple...

 

I would also like to add that there appears to be a measure of not liking the messenger means the message is bogus as well...

Moon, I don't hate Obama because of his ethnic heritage whether it be, green, white, black, yellow, or an alien from Mars. But I despise everything he has tried to do politically to save us from the: "Stupid Republicans". Of course I didn't mean that! Don't ask me why I disagree as I do with this administration, because I can't keep things in mind as some of you can do. Even explaining the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, I knew the time frames were not correct, but thinking of the manpower used instead. My gut feeling is that if Obama gets another four years in office, we may never know this country again as it has been for the past 200 years. I'll just say that the Reps. suit me this time.

 

Rigney is clearly either a troll or too unable to remember history to be able to competently comment on it. No other way anyone could say the following:

 

=Uncool-

You're right, I screwed up the time frames. Here they are in all of their "GORY"

 

Afghanistan

http://www.factmonster.com/ipka/A0107264.html

 

Iraq and Afghanistan

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/R40682.pdf

Page 8

Edited September 14, 2012 by rigney

[Phi for All]

My gut feeling is that if Obama gets another four years in office, we may never know this country again as it has been for the past 200 years.

This country has NOT been what you think it has for the past 200 years. I think you have this image in your mind of how it once was for you and you think conservatism will somehow bring it back so it can be preserved like some kind of sacred pot roast dinner with corn on the cob and apple pie. But what you've got is baloney on white bread.

 

We can hold on to our ideals, stay true to what makes us great, and still progress as a society. In fact, with new knowledge and technology it's very important that we hold our values as we move forward. But we MUST move forward. We can't wish for things to be like they were because they never will be. That time is gone and it's up to us to make a better time. We need to stop letting liars make us fearful of progress so they can profit from keeping things static and stagnant. As the people before us created great things for the general welfare, we need to not only carry that torch but make sure the torch is a better one than the one that was handed to us.

 

Sometimes I think that's the only thing that really matters, making the world better for the children who come after us. Unfortunately, I think too many people just want a better world for their children. And that's when the system starts breaking down.

[Moontanman]

Moon, I don't hate Obama because of his ethnic heritage whether it be, green, white, black, yellow, or an alien from Mars. But I despise everything he has tried to do politically to save us from the: "Stupid Republicans". Of course I didn't mean that! Don't ask me why I disagree as I do with this administration, because I can't keep things in mind as some of you can do. Even explaining the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, I knew the time frames were not correct, but thinking of the manpower used instead. My gut feeling is that if Obama gets another four years in office, we may never know this country again as it has been for the past 200 years. I'll just say that the Reps. suit me this time.

 

You're right, I screwed up the time frames. Here they are in all of their "GORY"

 

Afghanistan

http://www.factmonster.com/ipka/A0107264.html

 

Iraq and Afghanistan

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/R40682.pdf

Page 8

 

 

So you blame Obama for Iraq and Afghanistan?