Clinton endorses Obama, calls for party unity

[Parkbandit]

Absolutely. Now that we've gotten the unsubstantiated personal attacks out of the way, care to answer the original question? Or is this where you bow out of the conversation and wait for another opportunity to make yourself look like an idiot?

It wasn't an attack, I was agreeing with you. YOU are the one that looks like an idiot. One lucky ass idiot to be sure.

And the answer is: McCain

[Daniel]

that wasnt the question.

[Khariz]

As you said, you were afraid of what it meant to have a black man in the White House who wanted to fix these problems. You can definitely do everything in your power to stop that from ever happening, but the reality is that at some point it will happen. Whites are no longer the majority in America.



No, Sir. I've never said anything of the sort. I don't know if you are intentionally misconstruing me over and over again, or if you geniunly misunderstood my initital post, but in my last post, I explained in great detail what I meant.

Other people have also posted in this thread, that I never said that. You are the only person who has ever injected "scared whitey" into this thread.

As I've stated, going on ad naseum now, it's not the blackness I have a problem with, its the marxistness. It's not the BLACK part of Black Liberation Theology I'm worried about, its the philosophical part behind it. Please recognize this from here on out. This is not about blacks or other races. This is about socio-economic worldviews that don't match mine.

And again...please re-read what I said about being a racist. I specifically stated that I was NOT a racist. I said that I common racially stereotype people, and that if you think that makes me a racist-in-fact, then so be it in your judgement, but I'm not actually prejudiced against any particular race.

[BigWorm]

No, Sir. I've never said anything of the sort. I don't know if you are intentionally misconstruing me over and over again, or if you geniunly misunderstood my initital post, but in my last post, I explained in great detail what I meant.

Other people have also posted in this thread, that I never said that. You are the only person who has ever injected "scared whitey" into this thread.

As I've stated, going on ad naseum now, it's not the blackness I have a problem with, its the marxistness. It's not the BLACK part of Black Liberation Theology I'm worried about, its the philosophical part behind it. Please recognize this from here on out. This is not about blacks or other races. This is about socio-economic worldviews that don't match mine.

And again...please re-read what I said about being a racist. I specifically stated that I was NOT a racist. I said that I common racially stereotype people, and that if you think that makes me a racist-in-fact, then so be it in your judgement, but I'm not actually prejudiced against any particular race.

Whatever you have to tell yourself.

[Parkbandit]

No, Sir. I've never said anything of the sort. I don't know if you are intentionally misconstruing me over and over again, or if you geniunly misunderstood my initital post, but in my last post, I explained in great detail what I meant.


I'm pretty sure this is a reoccuring method Daniel employs here. I'm lik 100% positive he does it constantly.

[Daniel]

No, Sir. I've never said anything of the sort. I don't know if you are intentionally misconstruing me over and over again, or if you geniunly misunderstood my initital post, but in my last post, I explained in great detail what I meant.

O rly?


He's talking the good talk right now, but once it's up to him, he'll be trying his hardest to right all those things that he sees as "wrongs". That scares the fuck out of me.

This is in regards to BLT which advocates black empowerment in the face of white racism.

As I enumerated in my previous post, you would have a point if there was not a history of racism in America and if the success of people was not dependent upon the environment they were born into.

It's impossible to delink the "Black" and the liberation theology, as the impetus for liberation stems from very fact of being black.

[Daniel]

I'm pretty sure this is a reoccuring method Daniel employs here. I'm lik 100% positive he does it constantly.

I'm like 100% positive that you've never actually contributed to a thread in a construction manner. In fact, you can't even answer a simple question. Pathetic.

[TheEschaton]

You ain't seen nothin yet... we still have 5 months to go! You shoulda been here for the '04 election debates.

I left the '04 debates in June to go abroad, and it was still too much. I'm sure PB and some Mabus-type touted the Swiftboat incident with all abandon. I swore I would give up my interest in politics, which of course, did not work.

-TheE-

[Mabus]

I'm sure PB and some Mabus-type touted the Swiftboat incident with all abandon.
Of course, you would be wrong about me.

I felt John Kerry was unfairly treated, both by the people that ran the ads and the media. I also felt he did not respond soon enough, nor forcefully enough.

I was also against the "swift boating" of Bill Clinton in SC in the current election cycle. I do not remember you speaking out about the injustice of calling his comments "racist".

[TheEschaton]

I said "some Mabus-type", since you weren't around then.

And I did speak out against what people said about Bill Clinton's comments in SC.

[Khariz]

O rly?



This is in regards to BLT which advocates black empowerment in the face of white racism.

As I enumerated in my previous post, you would have a point if there was not a history of racism in America and if the success of people was not dependent upon the environment they were born into.

It's impossible to delink the "Black" and the liberation theology, as the impetus for liberation stems from very fact of being black.

You still don't understand what I'm saying. It's not the Liberation part either.

But honestly this isn't worth talking about if you aren't listening to me. I don't care about a bunch of black people wanting to be more powerful. I care about the MEANS they use to get there. I care that they want to use Marxist socialism to acheive it. I care that instead of competing with me, which they are now more than capable of doing on the merits of their own hard work and minds, that they intend to Steal, Loot, and Mooch me shit from my with the aid of the Government.

DISCLAIMER: I'm not talking about all black people. I'm talking about Barack Obama, and how he's likely to accomplish his goals.

[Mabus]

I said "some Mabus-type", since you weren't around then.

And I did speak out against what people said about Bill Clinton's comments in SC.
Then please, even when used as a negative commentary, at least use my forum name only on things I have actually said, or did. Gods know most here can find enough to bitch about me without having to make things up.

And if you did speak out against what the other campaign did to Bill, "good on ya". The media keeps talking about "Bill's role". I really believe he was sincerely hurt by that attack on him. I do not believe he will actively, and sincerely, campaign for the race-baiting presumptive nominee.

[TheEschaton]

Oh, it was an apropos use of your name; I was using it to refer to people who brought up stupid, often false issues about a candidate without actually caring for the truth and relevance of the statement.

-TheE-

[Parkbandit]

I'm like 100% positive that you've never actually contributed to a thread in a construction manner. In fact, you can't even answer a simple question. Pathetic.

The only thing you've ever proven after making the "100% positive" comment, is that you are indeed a 100% dipshit.

Pathetic doesn't even begin to cover what you are. Lucky boy.

Feel free to insert your contributions below.

1) Woosh
2) Riiight
3) Teh internet r serious business.

[Parkbandit]

I swore I would give up my interest in politics, which of course, did not work.

-TheE-


You should have stuck with your first intention. Have you picked out a place in France yet?

[TheEschaton]

I'm thinking somewhere near Montmarte, in Paris. I probably butchered the spellingon that, but the artistic community should fit in well with my generally unkempt appearance.

[Mabus]

Oh, it was an apropos use of your name; I was using it to refer to people who brought up stupid, often false issues about a candidate without actually caring for the truth and relevance of the statement.

-TheE-
Why not call them some "TheE-type", as that would fit your description much better.

[TheEschaton]

See? Baseless accusations against a person with no regard for the truth.

[Latrinsorm]

For me (as I cannot speak to others) I do not put up with any of my acquaintances being racist. I speak up, point out the ignorance that lead to their viewpoint and do my best not to associate with the person.You and Obama have so much in common! It's weird you're endorsing McCain.

[Parkbandit]

You and Obama have so much in common! It's weird you're endorsing McCain.


Well, except it takes Obama 20 years longer to do so.

[Mabus]

Well, except it takes Obama 20 years longer to do so.
Exactly.

[Daniel]

You still don't understand what I'm saying. It's not the Liberation part either.

But honestly this isn't worth talking about if you aren't listening to me. I don't care about a bunch of black people wanting to be more powerful. I care about the MEANS they use to get there. I care that they want to use Marxist socialism to acheive it. I care that instead of competing with me, which they are now more than capable of doing on the merits of their own hard work and minds, that they intend to Steal, Loot, and Mooch me shit from my with the aid of the Government.

DISCLAIMER: I'm not talking about all black people. I'm talking about Barack Obama, and how he's likely to accomplish his goals.

Let's pretend that you didn't emphasis the "wrongs" part of the equation and instead meant to focus on the "methods" of correcting those "wrongs" (despite you calling them into question in the same breath..).

What exactly leads you to believe that Barack Obama means to take money away from you to provide a hand out to other people? Maybe that's where our wires are getting crossed, because I've never heard him say anything like that and nothing about his history leads me to believe that. You can't point to TUCC either, because they are pretty proactive in addressing problems in their community.

So, I'm exceedingly curious as to where you get this notion.

[Daniel]

The only thing you've ever proven after making the "100% positive" comment, is that you are indeed a 100% dipshit.

Pathetic doesn't even begin to cover what you are. Lucky boy.

Feel free to insert your contributions below.

1) Woosh
2) Riiight
3) Teh internet r serious business.

Sure.

[Parkbandit]

Sure.


I'm like 100% positive that you've never actually contributed to a thread in a construction manner.

:shrug:

[Khariz]

Let's pretend that you didn't emphasis the "wrongs" part of the equation and instead meant to focus on the "methods" of correcting those "wrongs" (despite you calling them into question in the same breath..).

What exactly leads you to believe that Barack Obama means to take money away from you to provide a hand out to other people? Maybe that's where our wires are getting crossed, because I've never heard him say anything like that and nothing about his history leads me to believe that. You can't point to TUCC either, because they are pretty proactive in addressing problems in their community.

So, I'm exceedingly curious as to where you get this notion.


I'm sorry but I can't even take your curiosity seriously.

I could spend a few hours farming Obama speeches right now for concrete statements of socialist intent, and paste probably hundreds snippets where he is indicating collectivness and leveling of the playing field, and nationalization of various things, and taxing rich to benefit middle class and poor.

He doesn't understand how the rich having money trickles down to the middle and lower class via more jobs, better pay, etc. He thinks it requires government stiff arming with minimum wage laws, and unions laws, and other mechanisms of artificially replacing genuine competition. Well, actually, I DO think he understands it, but I think he is purposely choosing to make the choices he does and hold the positions, ideals, and purposes that he does. I can't prove it, but I think he's smart enough, and went to a good enough school to understand how things work well, and how they don't.

The reason I'm not going to do such hours of speech farming isn't because I can't, and it isn't even because I don't want to, but it's merely because the opportunity cost of me doing so isn't worth it at this point. I gain nothing by continuing to attempt to convince you of something that we don't share the same conclusion on. Notice I didn't say opinion. I don't think this is an opinion issue. I think this is an examine the evidence, and come to a conclusion based on what evidence you see, type of issue.

Have a great day, Daniel. (Note, I'm not being condescending or sarcastic here).

[CrystalTears]

He doesn't understand how the rich having money trickles down to the middle and lower class via more jobs, better pay, etc. He thinks it requires government stiff arming with minimum wage laws, and unions laws, and other mechanisms of artificially replacing genuine competition.
I feel that's mostly a Democrat party belief, not strictly Obama.

[Khariz]

I feel that's mostly a Democrat party belief, not strictly Obama.

I love agreeing with you, CT.

[TheEschaton]

That's because it doesn't.

[BigWorm]

I'm sorry but I can't even take your curiosity seriously.

I could spend a few hours farming Obama speeches right now for concrete statements of socialist intent, and paste probably hundreds snippets where he is indicating collectivness and leveling of the playing field, and nationalization of various things, and taxing rich to benefit middle class and poor.

He doesn't understand how the rich having money trickles down to the middle and lower class via more jobs, better pay, etc. He thinks it requires government stiff arming with minimum wage laws, and unions laws, and other mechanisms of artificially replacing genuine competition. Well, actually, I DO think he understands it, but I think he is purposely choosing to make the choices he does and hold the positions, ideals, and purposes that he does. I can't prove it, but I think he's smart enough, and went to a good enough school to understand how things work well, and how they don't.

The reason I'm not going to do such hours of speech farming isn't because I can't, and it isn't even because I don't want to, but it's merely because the opportunity cost of me doing so isn't worth it at this point. I gain nothing by continuing to attempt to convince you of something that we don't share the same conclusion on. Notice I didn't say opinion. I don't think this is an opinion issue. I think this is an examine the evidence, and come to a conclusion based on what evidence you see, type of issue.

Have a great day, Daniel. (Note, I'm not being condescending or sarcastic here).

Why don't you skip the speeches and go straight for the position papers (http://www.barackobama.com/issues/economy/)? The Obama campaign has done an excellent job of articulating his goals.

[Clove]

I'm sorry but I can't even take your curiosity seriously... The reason I'm not going to do such hours of speech farming isn't because I can't, and it isn't even because I don't want to, but it's merely because the opportunity cost of me doing so isn't worth it at this point...
Opportunity cost of finding and posting sources of Obama's economic stances; too high.

Opportunity cost of writing a page explaining why you can't look up and post support for your opinion; just right.

Reading posts this ripe with irony; priceless.

[Daniel]

He doesn't understand how the rich having money trickles down to the middle and lower class via more jobs, better pay, etc. He thinks it requires government stiff arming with minimum wage laws, and unions laws, and other mechanisms of artificially replacing genuine competition.



Well, I'm sure he does understand why that *doesn't* work, but that's an entirely different discussion. Perhaps you would do better if you said this in the beginning as a opposed to fear mongering and misrepresenting the man's church. To each their own.


Have a great day, Daniel. (Note, I'm not being condescending or sarcastic here).

You as well.

[Khariz]

Perhaps you would do better if you said this in the beginning as a opposed to fear mongering and misrepresenting the man's church. To each their own.





Good point. I let my emotion cause illogical attempts at poor persuasion. I'll attempt to refrain from that in the future.

[Khariz]

Opportunity cost of finding and posting sources of Obama's economic stances; too high.

Opportunity cost of writing a page explaining why you can't look up and post support for your opinion; just right.

Reading posts this ripe with irony; priceless.

You do realize that 90 seconds has less of an opportunity cost than 4 hours, right?

[Latrinsorm]

Well, except it takes Obama 20 years longer to do so.
Exactly.Whooooooooooooosh.
taxing rich to benefit middle class and poor.Taxing the rich [more than the middle class and poor] benefits everyone, including the rich. It's been a long time since Shays' Rebellion (and rebellions of that ilk) for a reason.

[Parkbandit]

Whooooooooooooosh.Taxing the rich [more than the middle class and poor] benefits everyone, including the rich. It's been a long time since Shays' Rebellion (and rebellions of that ilk) for a reason.

HAHAHAHAHAAHAAAAAa.aa.a.a.a..nfjencc

Holy shit, that's a good one Latrine. Taxing the rich benefits everyone, including the rich.

Grats man, you earned this:

http://www.trophymuskegon.com/images/Pin_095.jpg

[Daniel]

Kinda like giving money to the rich benefits everyone, including the non rich. Amirite??

[Clove]

You do realize that 90 seconds has less of an opportunity cost than 4 hours, right?90 seconds? 4 hours? I've told you a million times not to exaggerate.

1) If it takes you four hours you suck at the internet. If it takes you longer than 10 or 15 minutes to find that kind of evidence, it ain't there. You're not looking for Obama's opinion on orange striped kittens for God's sake.

2) Your little essay had 269 words in it. I type up to 100 wpm but a leisurely pace for me is 80ish. That's 3.5 minutes typing alone, not including composition time. It's not beyond the realm of reason to suppose you took 5-10 minutes to create that gem (about as long as it would have taken to pull up a few speeches).

Learn 2 take a joke.

[Warriorbird]

So, Khariz... which is worse? Giving money to foreign countries and removing taxes from multinationals or giving money away to Americans?

Would you rather have some Iraqi (or some Iraqi plutocrat profiteer or some Halliburtion exec who won't get taxed on it) get your money or somebody else in America?

You're setting up things incorrectly.

Both parties blow through epic amounts of money. You just have to choose what you want it spent on.

[Clove]

Both parties blow through epic amounts of money. You just have to choose what you want it spent on.Sadly true (and out of the mouths of babes).

[Parkbandit]

90 seconds? 4 hours? I've told you a million times not to exaggerate.


Hehe.. nicely played.

[Khariz]

So, Khariz... which is worse? Giving money to foreign countries and removing taxes from multinationals or giving money away to Americans?

Would you rather have some Iraqi (or some Iraqi plutocrat profiteer or some Halliburtion exec who won't get taxed on it) get your money or somebody else in America?

You're setting up things incorrectly.

Both parties blow through epic amounts of money. You just have to choose what you want it spent on.

Wrong. My answer is neither.

Stop the entitlements and bullshit and you won't need to tax me so much. Stop taxing me so much and you won't have so much of my money to spend on stupid shit that it doesn't need to be spent on.

Understand that I'm only talking about the Federal Government spending unearned money in places that they feel is better than the market dictates it be spend. I'm not talking about private economy at all.

I think about 90% of what the federal government does is not necessary for them to do. I think that states and private entities could do it much better and much cheaper. Just about everything the federal government gets involved in is an overinflated mess.

Oh, and I'd rather the Haliburton exec get the money than the crack dealer on the corner, assuming he worked his way up to his position, and his company is doing something to progress our world/economy. His reward for his role in the grand scheme is money. Our is their product, which we PAY for. I don't want to TAKE anything from Haliburton that I do not earn.

[Warriorbird]

If that's your feelings on the matter... why support McCain either?

Republicans outspend Democrats these days. Gone are the days of it being a conservative party.

Sure... they do some intelligent measures for the economy... but if you cut taxes AND raise spending even more you're not actually helping anybody.

Conservative estimates put the Iraq War costs at 3 trillion. McCain would stay and likely invade Iran too. Think about that wasteful Federal spending.

The Halliburton exec isn't doing much for America either. He may be employing some people but he's largely avoiding taxes for his company and himself. What Republicans seem to forget is that in the epic Reagan military buildup not only were the defense industry types employing folks... their employees were largely spending money in America and all of the above were paying taxes in America (not avoiding taxes in Dubai).

I think we're in the midst of something of an economic and resource war with India and China. I feel like that should be our priority as a country.

[Khariz]

If that's your feelings on the matter... why support McCain either?

Republicans outspend Democrats these days. Gone are the days of it being a conservative party.

Sure... they do some intelligent measures for the economy... but if you cut taxes AND raise spending even more you're not actually helping anybody.

Conservative estimates put the Iraq War costs at 3 trillion. McCain would stay and likely invade Iran too. Think about that wasteful Federal spending.

Okay, I have a couple things here:

1. Unfortunately, I live in the real world, and cannot cause it to become my theoretical ideal world. Voting for Bob Barr, for example, would be pointless, and thus a waste of my time. In this case, I'm going to have to chose who will at least allow the country to remain MORE of a capitalist nation than the other.

2. You know how I said that 90% of what the Fed does is unnecessary? Protecting our country from attack, and doing what's necessary to make sure we aren't attacked in the future is part of the other 10%.

This engagement and future military engagements, I'm willing to bankroll myself, therefore, I don't care if the government is bankrolling it for me. It's in my best interest to keep myself safe from attack so that I can remain profitable.

While it's debatable whether any type of pre-emptive strike is "defense" of our country, I feel that this type of thing is one of the few things the federal government SHOULD actually be doing.

[Warriorbird]

Even if said spending dwarfs any of the other "wasteful" spending that you'd complain about and economically impacts our country and its ability to contend with other foes... economic/resource or military?

All righty.

Stick with McCain then. Just don't claim he's a conservative. You're also selling your political identity for some flag waving. Me I'm giving mine up for the idea that it'd be better to pay too much to send folks to college rather than pay too much to send them to a war (or wars) of questionable merit.

I do wish that Barr (or Paul) had more of a chance and less questionable ideas on social issues.

[Parkbandit]

Even if said spending dwarfs any of the other "wasteful" spending that you'd complain about and economically impacts our country and its ability to contend with other foes... economic/resource or military?

All righty.

Stick with McCain then. Just don't claim he's a conservative. You're also selling your political identity for some flag waving. Me I'm giving mine up for the idea that it'd be better to pay too much to send folks to college rather than pay too much to send them to a war (or wars) of questionable merit.

I do wish that Barr (or Paul) had more of a chance and less questionable ideas on social issues.

Where did Khariz claim that McCain is a conservative and not just the lesser of two evils?

And I would definately vote for Barr over McCain if I thought he had a chance of getting more than 2% of the entire vote. Economically, I agree with so much more of his platform than McCain's.

McCain is nothing more than a semi-conservative Democrat.

[Clove]

McCain is nothing more than a FORMER semi-conservative Democrat.Sheesh. Do I have to fix EVERYTHING for you PB?

[Parkbandit]

Sheesh. Do I have to fix EVERYTHING for you PB?

You are confused with the term 'former' I am guessing?

[Khariz]

And I would definately vote for Barr over McCain if I thought he had a chance of getting more than 2% of the entire vote. Economically, I agree with so much more of his platform than McCain's.



Quoted for 100% agreement.