Rabble Rousing, is it ok? (in Debates)


AdminQBVerifex [Serenity In Chaos] March 25 2010 2:48 PM EDT

There have been some stories about lawmakers being directly targeted by disillusioned and unbalanced individuals. Do you think it's okay to incite people with violent imagery? Where exactly is the problem here anyways, is there anyone or any group that is to blame here? Or is this just another case of: It's okay because the other side does it, so just let it blow over?

BadFish March 25 2010 2:53 PM EDT

Do you think it's okay to incite people with violent imagery?

No. This tactic encourages bad reasoning. Encourages people to pay attention to the "ick" factor (our kneejerk reaction to the more negative aspects of things like abortion, capital punishment, drug legalization, etc.) rather than starting from a valid premise and making an argument based on fact.

That said, I don't think that inciting people with imagery, violent/disgusting/idyllic as it may be, will ever go away. It works far too well.

VsCountStrum [Black Watch] March 25 2010 3:05 PM EDT

There always has and always will be some degree of it. However, it seems that recently both sides have taken to a new level (at least for recent times). In today's society, everyone should be able to express their thoughts, however, that does not include violence or threats of violence.


I have not been able to put any political stickers on my car or in my yard since 2002. Though I was luckily not personally hit, many cars with political stickers were keyed, egged, or otherwise vandalized as were the many yards that had signs. Did it change my vote or my discussing it with people - no, but it did change how much I advertise my stance.

AdminQBVerifex [Serenity In Chaos] March 25 2010 3:11 PM EDT

I put a John Kerry sticker on my car years ago; I wasn't a big Kerry supporter honestly, but I also wasn't a big Bush fan either, so, yes apathy wins. When I parked my car at a grocery store over in this rich part of town, someone took the time to rip the sticker off of my car. I wasn't entirely sure what to make of this. I didn't replace the sticker.

All I know is that I'm a little uncomfortable putting anything political on my car now because apparently there are people out there who don't want me to have a voice. You win wackos!

Cube March 25 2010 3:38 PM EDT

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/03/25/congress.threats/?hpt=T1

This is not acceptable.

Free speech is all well and good, but when there are people exaggerating things to the point that violence is incited that's unacceptable.

While inciting violence, is not the same as committing it, I think our public figures hold some sort of responsibility. Not complete responsibility, as it takes a relatively unbalanced individual to do something like these acts. They should recognize that some people can take their words to the extreme and limit their rhetoric.

Public figures have been calling this an Armageddon. When you have a significant number of people believing Obama is a Nazi, socialist, AntiChrist, you're bound to have some people fly off the wire. It's clear that some of the rhetoric around the healthcare debate has caused this.

Some may say that you can't determine where the line should be drawn and thus can't draw it, but one thing is clear and line has been crossed.

QBBast [Hidden Agenda] March 25 2010 3:38 PM EDT


Because they easily overcome your (apathy + 1)?

Demigod March 25 2010 3:39 PM EDT

I've seen cars that have been keyed over political bumper stickers. It doesn't take much to incite the fringe. As for "violent imagery," anyone who has walked past an abortion protest knows the topic. It's not okay in the sense that it's a cheap shot instead of a valid argument, but it's free speech until it crosses the line into inciting violence.

AdminQBVerifex [Serenity In Chaos] March 25 2010 3:53 PM EDT

I suppose this article is on-topic here: When Right-Wing Extremism Moves Mainstream.

A new poll from Harris interactive finds that 40 percent of American adults think that Obama is a socialist; 25 percent believe that Obama was not born in the United States and is therefore not eligible to be president; 20 percent say Obama is doing many of the things that Hitler did; 14 percent say Obama "may be the Antichrist."

"I hear a very scary situation developing," says Potok. "The idea that people really have swallowed these stories in such enormous numbers is something remarkable. I covered, as a reporter, the militia movement in the 1990s, which really produced an extraordinary amount of criminal violence. And even back then, you did not hear this kind of talk so broadly spread through this society."

QBRanger March 25 2010 4:11 PM EDT

A new poll from Harris interactive finds that 40 percent of American adults think that Obama is a socialist; 25 percent believe that Obama was not born in the United States and is therefore not eligible to be president; 20 percent say Obama is doing many of the things that Hitler did; 14 percent say Obama "may be the Antichrist."


I personally am amazed at the 60 percent who do not think he is a socialist. He was raised with socialists. His associated with known socialists throughout his career. To me, it is obvious he is a socialist and wants the US to be in that direction.

Was he born in the US? Likely he was, but why has he yet to release his official birth certificate. However, this is not an important point. He was raised in the US and won an election for president. This has gotten too much press. And every so often, when the "main-stream" media needs to attack the right, they bring it up. When only a few radicals ( and there are on both sides) think this is an issue.

Is he the anti-Christ? No. But his is doing things to destroy the US. To bring it from a capitalist society to a socialistic one. The antithesis of what made America so great to begin with. Their love of their country and their wanting to stop it from being destroyed from within brings out raw emotions that sometimes manifest themselves in misguided phrases.

As to the violence in the OP-It is uncalled for. There is free speech and there is inciting violence. I am for the former and certainly against the latter. There is a line between the 2 that should not be crossed. As I stated, there are radicals on BOTH sides. But with the Demoncrats in power, the right sided radicals are the most frustrated and the most vocal. The opposite happened in the Bush years. But the "main-stream" media downplayed or ignored most of the leftist radicals.

AdminQBVerifex [Serenity In Chaos] March 25 2010 5:54 PM EDT

I personally am amazed at the 60 percent who do not think he is a socialist. He was raised with socialists. His associated with known socialists throughout his career. To me, it is obvious he is a socialist and wants the US to be in that direction.

You have been watching too much Fox News. He is closer to using Corporatism in what he does then anything else, but please, don't look up that term or anything.

Was he born in the US? Likely he was, but why has he yet to release his official birth certificate.

He did, OMG, again.. stop watching Fox News!
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/06/obama-birth.html

Is he the anti-Christ? No. But his is doing things to destroy the US. To bring it from a capitalist society to a socialistic one.

Fox News, no. It doesn't matter what I say, when you start BELIEVING hyperbole then all hope is lost. Banana unicorns are evil because they want to take away your water pops! Marxist!

As to the violence in the OP-It is uncalled for. There is free speech and there is inciting violence. I am for the former and certainly against the latter. There is a line between the 2 that should not be crossed. As I stated, there are radicals on BOTH sides. But with the Demoncrats in power, the right sided radicals are the most frustrated and the most vocal. The opposite happened in the Bush years. But the "main-stream" media downplayed or ignored most of the leftist radicals.

You're right, all those protests against Bush by leftists and the worst he got was a shoe thrown at him by someone from another country; that there is a great comparison. I'm sure the demonization of Obama and "demoncrats" (your word) is just par for the course. Especially when the racist and hate rhetoric is hardly even discouraged by the republican lawmakers, they wouldn't want to anger the angry mob they've made.

Lord Bob March 25 2010 6:31 PM EDT

I personally am amazed at the 60 percent who do not think he is a socialist.

It's because that's the 60% that understands the definition of socialism.

But his is doing things to destroy the US. To bring it from a capitalist society to a socialistic one.

Correction: to a mixed economy. And that's improving America, not destroying it.

QBRanger March 25 2010 6:53 PM EDT

Veri,

I can say you have been watching too much MSNBC and have too much a liberal slant to what you watch. But, hard for you to likely believe, I watch and read both MSNBC and Fox News. And like most Republicans can draw my own conclusions on this fiasco of a President.

I want to see the original birth certificate. Not some copy that could or could not have been manipulated. Is that too much to ask for our Commander-in-chief? It seems to be as he refuses to show it. Again, to me it is not a point to keep making but I would like to see the original as that would quiet any controversy.

As to socialism, one of the key Obama quotes is "spread the wealth". That is socialistic at its core. You seem to be too blinded by MSNBC to see the true reality of his goals.

Especially when the racist and hate rhetoric is hardly even discouraged by the republican lawmakers, they wouldn't want to anger the angry mob they've made.

The Republican denounced these radicals quite resoundingly. As we have no videotape of the actual events the Democrats claim, we do now know who are to blame. But please, just come to the conclusion like MSNBC that it is the main stream normal Republicans perpetrating it.

However, you fail to see the radicals on both sides. Bush had a shoe thrown at him. What is the worst Obama had? Nasty words? OMG, stop watching MSNBC and view a real station.

What about those SEIU goons who beat up the black man who was against Obamacare. The diabetic man they put in the hospital. Or the Democrat that broke the windows at the DNCC building in Denver, that was first assumed to be done by Republicans. There are idiots on both ends of the spectrum.

Bush was far worse demonized by the press than Obama ever was.

I have tried to say there are idiots on both sides, but you still are clinging to your "Republicans hate Obama because he is black" rhetoric. You have to get over your race baiting as it is simply not true and an age old Democrat ploy. Rangel has used this for years to keep his chairmanship and finally even the blacks got fed up with him.

We hate Obama for the socialist he is, for the inexperienced leader he is, and for his naivete about well basically everything in the real world that is not from the ivory tower of academics he was in his whole life.

I very much despise his attitude and actions towards Israel and believe he treats our enemies far better than any of our friends. But I guess you will blame that on Fox somehow.

Get over Fox News and accept people have honest opinions on Obama as seen in his actions and his speech.

Banana unicorns are evil because they want to take away your water pops!

Now who is resorting to hyperbole? I have not commented on Banana unicorns as I have not yet seen one. I have seen our President put this country on the path of financial ruin. I have seen him enact policies that are detrimental to capitalism and have seen him wreck long standing alliances.

I will comment on Obama being a socialist because it is obvious to all those without rose colored glasses he is one.

Which would have been fine if he ran on those principles instead of the crap he spewed about being centrist during the campaign. All that garbage about wanting to work across the aisle. Yea, only if the other side agreed with whatever crap he wanted and had no free will of their own. Yea, that's the ticket.

Lord Bob March 25 2010 6:57 PM EDT

We hate Obama for the socialist he is,

I love it when I'm right.

QBRanger March 25 2010 7:02 PM EDT

Correction: to a mixed economy. And that's improving America, not destroying it.

Why is a mixed economy better? America is the greatest nation due to capitalism. Innovation and creativity are rewarded in America. Why do you want to radically change this? If you want a mixed economy, there are plenty of places you can live to fulfill your dream. You can get healthcare, if that is your number 1 issue, by living in many other countries. But why do you feel the need to change the US? And think others should fall down accept it without complaining?

It's because that's the 60% that understands the definition of socialism.

To keep denying the truth does not make it go away. That is the Democratic playbook now? Deny, Deny, Deny?

Did Obama not say he wanted social reform and wealth redistribution via taxation? That is one of the keystones of Socialism.

I am shocked you cannot admit it. Can you please call it as it is?

AdminQBVerifex [Serenity In Chaos] March 25 2010 7:10 PM EDT

Ranger, I've never watched MSNBC in my life. I don't watch Fox News or CNN either. I read my news online in many forms, I've told you this before also. Why do you keep talking about MSNBC?

AdminQBVerifex [Serenity In Chaos] March 25 2010 7:15 PM EDT

Ranger, would you like to go on record here, right now, as an official, what is known colloquially as a "birther", then? As it is clear from the large amount of text you have devoted to this birth certificate issue in the last couple replies that you don't believe that he was born here.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] March 25 2010 7:25 PM EDT

i think that john lewis said it best during the last presidential campaign:

http://www.johnlewisforcongress.com/node/219

AdminQBVerifex [Serenity In Chaos] March 25 2010 7:27 PM EDT

More material relevant to this thread:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/25/AR2010032501722.html?hpid=topnews

QBJohnnywas March 25 2010 7:29 PM EDT

Obama doesn't need to have been born on American soil to be an American citizen anyway.

http://travel.state.gov/law/info/info_609.html

QBRanger March 25 2010 7:29 PM EDT

Did you not read my post? I am not a birther so I will not go no the record as being one. I just hate Obama's policies. I have yet to experience a more anti-America or anti-Israel president. And I used to believe the US could not be more stupid than when it elected Carter. Again, I was disappointed.

I was responding to your quote about how 25% of people think Obama was not born in the US. Some is just stupidity. Others are I guess birthers. But Obama himself can end all this with his original birth certificate. Since he refuses to show it, it just fuels the fire.

Ranger, I've never watched MSNBC in my life. I don't watch Fox News or CNN either. I read my news online in many forms, I've told you this before also. Why do you keep talking about MSNBC?

Because you keep on bring up Fox News. I watch and read both Fox and MSNBC for different views.

You keep trying to disagree with my points but just saying "stop watching Fox News" instead of actually debating those points.

Lord Bob March 25 2010 7:32 PM EDT

Why is a mixed economy better?

A purely capitalist economy is no better than a purely socialist one. Taken to their extremes, capitalism and socialism are equally bad. An economy where people have the freedom to profit and fail, but where the underclass is protected from being trampled by the mighty weight of the nation's powerful owners and corporations is far preferable to either extreme. In America, we have capitalism tempered by socialist programs like minimum wage, a progressive tax rate, Medicare, and Social Security to ensure that the least fortunate among us aren't stomped on. That's a mixed economy.

If I have to explain to you why that's better, I think I'd just be wasting my time.

Why do you want to radically change this?

Stop pretending this. Really. Stop it. I'm really tired of the socialist accusations from you, and I've told you a million times before to knock it off. I will tell you my position on economics. I will not have you hand it to me.

Now of course, I DO want to change the health care system in this country, and I feel the best way to do that is to take a page out of the Medicare playbook and have socialized insurance. THAT DOES NOT TRANSLATE TO TURNING OUR ENTIRE ECONOMY PURELY SOCIALIST. And that is not what Obama is trying to do either.

If you want a mixed economy, there are plenty of places you can live to fulfill your dream.

Yes, like the United States. We've had socialist elements in our mixed economy, and our government, since far before the Reagan era.
http://i.imgur.com/590Ev.png

If YOU don't like America, then YOU can leave. I'll stay here with the mixed economy we already have and vote to improve it, in opposition to the radical far right who wants to change it to a purely capitalist (read: terrible) system.

To keep denying the truth does not make it go away.

To fail to grasp the definition of a word does not change the definition of the word.

Did Obama not say he wanted social reform and wealth redistribution via taxation?

No.

QBRanger March 25 2010 7:34 PM EDT

Veri,

As opposed to the Weather Underground:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weather_Underground_%28organization%29

Of which Bill Ayers was a part. Who was a friend and associate of Obama.

Again for the third time, there are radical on BOTH sides. And I abhor violence, either implied or performed, on BOTH sides.

AdminQBVerifex [Serenity In Chaos] March 25 2010 7:34 PM EDT

I was responding to your quote about how 25% of people think Obama was not born in the US. Some is just stupidity. Others are I guess birthers. But Obama himself can end all this with his original birth certificate. Since he refuses to show it, it just fuels the fire.

Ok, so you believe he is a US Citizen then, you disagree with the "birthers" then.

This thread is about Rabble Rousing, and whether or not it is okay. It is more about the Fox News and MSNBC and all of that then anything else. Do you agree with the use of all the hate and vitriol on TV? And do you think any of the images and words used on TV and by some prominent politicians has anything to do with the rise in violence we are seeing right now, or do you think they are completely unrelated?

QBRanger March 25 2010 7:39 PM EDT

LB,

You can deny Obama is a socialist all you want.

Yes, the US has some socialistic policies. But do we need more, draining the economy?

Social Security is bankrupt. Medicare, especially with its 10% cut, is to follow soon.

But does it stop at Socialized Medicine? What about the banks, who made the current financial crisis? Should we socialize them?

Or what about the "Fairness Doctrine"? Should we socialize the media to give everyone the exact same air time?

Where does it end?

The sooner you admit you are a socialist, the sooner we can have a more jovial discussion.

It is hard to argue with a tomato that thinks its a plum.

Lord Bob March 25 2010 7:42 PM EDT

Of which Bill Ayers was a part. Who was a friend and associate of Obama.

Really?

Obama came out against Ayers long before the presidential campaign.

He also, by Ayers' own admission, had no contact with the man during the campaign, took no money from him during the presidential campaign.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/02/obamas_weatherman_connection.html
The only hard facts that have come out so far are the $200 contribution by Ayers to the Obama re-election fund, and their joint membership of the eight-person Woods Fund Board.
Senator Obama strongly condemns the violent actions of the Weathermen group, as he does all acts of violence. But he was an eight-year-old child when Ayers and the Weathermen were active, and any attempt to connect Obama with events of almost forty years ago is ridiculous.

AdminQBVerifex [Serenity In Chaos] March 25 2010 7:44 PM EDT

Come on guys, grind your axes somewhere else, I had some legitimate questions in regards to this thread.

Lord Bob March 25 2010 7:51 PM EDT

You can deny Obama is a socialist all you want.

You can pretend he is a socialist all you want.

Yes, the US has some socialistic policies. But do we need more, draining the economy?

No, we don't need any more that will drain the economy, we need more that will work for the people.

But does it stop at Socialized Medicine? What about the banks, who made the current financial crisis? Should we socialize them?

I don't believe so, but they should certainly be punished by the government when their sleight-of-hand, economic parlor tricks crash and send us into recession.

Or what about the "Fairness Doctrine"?

What about it? Who has said anything about it other than the Republicans? While were on the topic, what about the 5 - 4 court decision allowing corporations to pump unlimited amounts of money to Republican campaigns? Corporations don't vote! They shouldn't have more power than the people during our elections.

The sooner you admit you are a socialist,

Troll. Grow up. Learn something.

QBRanger March 25 2010 8:07 PM EDT

I do not see why you fail to admit it.

I admit I am a capitalist and want free markets and minimal government intervention.

Work hard and reap the rewards.

Opposed to the nanny state direction we are heading.

Obama's own words stated he wanted a radical change for America and a redistribution of wealth. Socialism at the core.

The sky will not turn ashen when you admit your true feelings.

Either way, violence is not to be tolerated.

Wraithlin March 25 2010 8:18 PM EDT

Pure capitalism works.

Pure socialism works.

Socialist laws in a basically capital economy fail hard.

QBRanger March 25 2010 8:21 PM EDT

Ok, so you believe he is a US Citizen then, you disagree with the "birthers" then.

I would like to see the original certificate. Until then, I will have some sliver of doubt. Not enough, however, to rise to the level of a birther and call for his removal from office.
This thread is about Rabble Rousing, and whether or not it is okay. It is more about the Fox News and MSNBC and all of that then anything else. Do you agree with the use of all the hate and vitriol on TV? And do you think any of the images and words used on TV and by some prominent politicians has anything to do with the rise in violence we are seeing right now, or do you think they are completely unrelated?

I do not like the vitriol but understand it.

The public elected Obama based upon some lies he made during the campaign. Lies like he would work with Republicans.

They are equally upset at this monstrosity of a health care law that very few of their legislators have actually read and understand.

Legislators that ignored their will and imposed this beast. When most of the public wanted a bipartisan law. Not something ramrodded through Congress of which we are now finding out hidden things about.

There is a fine line between free speech and breaking the law. All those breaking the law should be prosecuted to the fullest extent. But there is a right to free speech. And I support those using it.

Demigod March 25 2010 8:26 PM EDT

Socialist laws in a basically capital economy fail hard.


For starters, I haven't read this whole article (I try to avoid the ones that are bound for arguments), but that comment stood out. I completely disagree with it. Capitalism needs some measure of "social" structure to keep balance. As is, America is probably 80/20 in capitalism/socialism, with social security, unemployment benefits, STAMP, etc forming the latter group.

Without that balance, the income disparity would be on par with India's class structure. Put simply, your grandmother would be homeless because she's too old to work and failed to put enough away enough for retirement.

Demigod March 25 2010 8:27 PM EDT

I should really proofread what I type.

Wraithlin March 25 2010 8:35 PM EDT

I didn't say pure capitalism makes everyone happy and cheerful, I said pure capitalism works.

An old grandma that didn't plan ahead and is now homeless better hope that she has some friends otherwise yes, she's not going to do too hot.

But a pure capitalist economy assumes everyone is a pure capitalist, so there would be NO women that don't plan ahead, and therefore this situation can't occur.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] March 25 2010 9:39 PM EDT

in what society during human history has pure capitalism worked?

Lord Bob March 25 2010 10:16 PM EDT

I do not see why you fail to admit it.

Ranger, you are a troll. You have proven that you are a troll, time and again. Today, you have cemented the fact that you are either unwilling or incapable carrying of a rational discussion, or responding to a disagreement with anything other than inflammatory remarks and insults. I suspect both.

You claim to embrace bipartisanship, but in reality you are a perfect image of your party: an obstructionist, a teabagger, and straight from the thread title, a rabble rouser. And apparently considering your earlier posts, a birther. You have thrown in your lot with other obstructionists, extremists, teabaggers, birthers and other crack pots such as John Boehner, Eric Cantor, Michelle Bachmann, Mitch McConnell, and Sarah Palin. Or the crack pots, liers, propaganda slingers, and extremists in the media like Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, and Glenn Beck, the vile fiend that he is. I'd rather be called a socialist. The difference is, I'm not a socialist. You are all the things I've mentioned: the very essence of all that is wrong with your party.

I'd call you a capitalist, but you would take that as a compliment when it isn't. You call me a socialist, and you're either doing it for the sole purpose of being disrespectful, or you're too dense to realize how ignorant you really are. In reality I'm more the guy standing square in the middle, looking at both extremes and saying "eww, I'll pass." But you see, in Ranger-fantasy-land, anything that isn't to the right of Mussolini is socialist. You are incapable of even comprehending the middle ground of anything. Or you're trolling. To you, there is either capitalism or socialism, and nothing in between. Or you're trolling. Your bi-polar mentality doesn't grasp the concept of a mixed economy, because it only works in a binary, all or nothing state. I and others have made several attempts to explain this to you, but you refuse to set aside your arrogance long enough to even acknowledge it, let along try to incorporate it into your psyche. You are an intellectually dishonest person. Or you're a troll. But there's no other explanation. Again, I suspect both.

I've tried to extend an olive branch to you on your previous thread Ranger. I pointed out where there was common ground between us and our views, reminded you that a civil tone would serve you and the discussion better. I even pointed out areas where I side with Republican or conservative philosophy. But you're either too dense to get it, or you're trolling. Time and again, you just resort to the tired old name calling and slander that you're accustomed to, and you don't seem intent on changing your tired old stripes anytime in the foreseeable future. Hopefully this thread is a wake up call to you, but I doubt it will be, as you're either not mentally equipped to change, or again, you're a troll. I still suspect both. So I'm going to end this rant with a quote from the great Jon Stewart that I hope you and your obstructionist, extremist, teabagging, rabble rousing allies will take to heart: "stop it. You're hurting America."

Do you think it's okay to incite people with violent imagery?

No. Nor do I think it's ok to incite people with the kind of dishonest slander that individuals like Ranger or Glenn Beck engage in. We on the left have given the Republicans ample opportunity to speak their minds and contribute to the legislative process, and time and again they have shown themselves more interested in divisive, rude, and harmful partisan hackery. The recent articles I've posted about the 290 bills being filibustered, or the Republicans shutting down the Senate after 2pm prove it, as does anything you watch on Fox Poos.

Where exactly is the problem here anyways, is there anyone or any group that is to blame here?

To an extent both sides are guilty of the bickering and nonsense. As pointed out several times, including by me, MSNBC is the left wing Fox. But the Republicans take this to a whole new level with, as you can see from Ranger, the accusations of socialism, the slander, the outright lies (Bill Ayers? Birthers? Obama trying to destroy the country? These people are idiots). Nowhere on the mainstream left do I see this level of disrespect and outright hatred, and yes, that includes against Bush.
Or is this just another case of: It's okay because the other side does it, so just let it blow over?

I hope not, but if it is that's very sad indeed, and shows you exactly the mentality of these despicable individuals.

QBRanger March 25 2010 11:15 PM EDT

A very typical response by someone from the Socialist Agenda.

Attack those who want freedom while making it so they are dense.

Sorry to break some of those myths.

I have seen both sides of things. I was lower middle class my whole life till I graduated from school. Never asked for a handout like free healthcare. I got a job throughout college and paid for it myself. Same with everything else as my family could not help.

These socialist policies that Obama is enacting with your approval is destroying America. You are too blind to see that. You see roses everywhere with money growing on trees. Typical of someone who believes in an entitlement society. But there are ways to balance things as I have stated many times. However you refuse to read anything I write other than what you want..

Keep putting rules and regulations on companies with additional taxes. Keep taxing those who are successful and made something of themselves. Keep taking incentive for people to succeed and then see what is left.

This stupid law, just insanely stupid, especially at this time in the economic crisis may just be the beginning of a very long sustained recession. Maybe not. But I do not want to take the chance just to say "Wow we did something, anything but wow, we did it!!" I work in the medical field and have knowledge of the business of medicine.

There were so many other ways to do this healthcare bill but NOT ONCE did the Democrats ever reach over the aisle except to say "Do it our way or be left out". They had the votes to do it. Than Brown came.

But you are so myopic in your hatred of those successful that you fail to see what is happening. You want more and more all the time doing less and less.

Successful people paying your way. Which is what Obama is doing and what you are promoting.

I am not an extremest. Obama has so polarized this nation. And you back that? Even when Bush was enacting policies, they were bipartisan by Congress vote.

You are a socialist. You cannot deny who you are.

Lord Bob March 25 2010 11:29 PM EDT

Yep, you're trolling. Thanks for proving me right. I'll rest easy knowing that everything I just posted about you was entirely, 100% correct and justified.

Troll.

Demigod March 25 2010 11:31 PM EDT

Wow... Ranger, I think you're letting the name calling get to you.

And don't mind me, I'm just leaving this history of US marginal taxes here and walking away:

But first, temper your anger. Remember that the highest tax bracket in the 1950s was 92%. It's currently 35% -- one of the lowest ever. Increasing the burden on the super-wealthy doesn't equal socialism.

And this is coming from an Independent, not a Democrat.

Lord Bob March 25 2010 11:36 PM EDT

And don't mind me, I'm just leaving this history of US marginal taxes here and walking away:

Thank you Demigod! That's a very helpful chart.

Increasing the burden on the super-wealthy doesn't equal socialism.

He doesn't understand that, and even if he did he likes to troll. We just have to accept that.

And this is coming from an Independent, not a Democrat.

Likewise, I am also not a Democrat. I'm a liberal/progressive independent. I vote for the Dems because, well, they're obviously better than the opposition. But I don't count myself among them.

QBRanger March 26 2010 12:54 AM EDT

As any economist knows, the income tax levels do not properly show the total tax burden on a population.

There are other taxes such as Medicare, Social Security, property tax, state income tax.

So while income tax marginal rates have dropped, they were compensated more and more by other rising tax rates such as in Social Security over the years.

As more "super-wealthy" people, defined by Obama as those over 250k income, pay more of the burden, we are headed right to the socialistic entitlement society.

In 1979 the top 20% of earners payed about 56% of all taxes, now it is 69% and will grow more due to this new health care law. The problems of Obamacare are already starting. Two large farm equipment companies are planning on losing 250M dollars this year due to Obamacare. Great way to encourage job creation and investment.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/36032946/

However, 250k is far from "super-wealthy". 250k for a business may be losing money. In NYC 250k cannot get you a 2 bedroom condo.

You may want to consider me a troll, fine. Nothing I can write will change that myopic vision. I have tried to discuss what I believe and all you can do is lump me in with the right wing radicals. Sine you believe every Republican is a "obstructionist, a teabagger, and straight from the thread title, a rabble rouser." Get over your prejudice and look past your anger.

At least admit your a socialist. Then we can start debating real points once you accept who you are. Then I will not dislike you, but feel your just a misguided soul.

Lord Bob March 26 2010 1:11 AM EDT

You may want to consider me a troll, fine.

It's true. Look, I'll prove it.

At least admit your a socialist.

There you go.

Sine you believe every Republican is a "obstructionist, a teabagger, and straight from the thread title, a rabble rouser."

Nope, just the ones like you, including the ones I mentioned. At least admit this is what you are.

There are sane, rational conservatives out there that can discuss issues without trolling, or acting like Glenn Beck or you. I know many of them. I respect many of them. I even agree with many of them on several points.

You are not one of them. You are everything I told you you are. Admit it. Own up to what you really are.

AdminNemesia [Demonic Serenity] March 26 2010 2:15 AM EDT

In 1979 the top 20% of earners payed about 56% of all taxes, now it is 69% and will grow more due to this new health care law.


This is a misleading statement. You failed to take into account that % of total income that the top 20% of earners make up. I couldn't find a record of 1979 in the time I spent looking but in 1982 the top 20% of earners made up 51.9% of total income and from the looks of the trends, it looks like they probably made up around 50.5% in 1979. In 2006 the top 20% of earners made up 61.4% of total income.

So if you look with more information in 1979 ~50.5% of the total income paid 56% of the total taxes. And now 61.4% of the total income pays for 69% of the total taxes.

If you take the ratios you get 1.11 for 1979 and 1.12 in terms of relative tax paying. It has hardly increased for the wealthy. They just have a bigger part of America now.

sebidach [The Forgehood] March 26 2010 7:02 AM EDT

>I didn't say pure capitalism makes everyone happy and cheerful, I said pure capitalism works.

You really should read something about game theory, or maybe have a look at "Manchester Capitalism" and what it did to England.

"True" capitalism did not work and will never work, even with the (game theory backed, see Nash Equilibrium) intervention of the state it hardly works, as can be seen by the large monopolies in oil industry or even TV/media.

And Ranger, you ceremoniously left CB just to come back a few days later because of health care reform? Don't you have other people you could discuss with? Or maybe did they just tell you they won't talk to a man with no intention of a good discussion?

QBRanger March 26 2010 9:05 AM EDT

Back to the OP:

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=OTc3NDA5YjE2NzUyZmQ3OWRiOGUyNDVmNjJmNDJhMjg=

O the hypocrisy.

QBsutekh137 March 26 2010 9:41 AM EDT

And Ranger, you ceremoniously left CB just to come back a few days later because of health care reform? Don't you have other people you could discuss with? Or maybe did they just tell you they won't talk to a man with no intention of a good discussion?


No, sebidach, Ranger doesn't have anyone else to discuss with. As he stated in a different thread, all of the people he "chats" with agree with him and think Obama is running the United States into the ground.

It's hard to be a troll when people are agreeing with you. And as for name-calling, it's not name-calling if it's simply true. "Troll" isn't an ad hominem attack -- it is an attribute. An attribute that Ranger is portraying to a tee. Lord Bob has adequately shown that, and Ranger has done nothing except solidify those points in subsequent posts.

QBsutekh137 March 26 2010 9:43 AM EDT

O the hypocrisy.


Wait, you found a hypocrite writing some silly blog somewhere on the Internet?

How did you manage that? Well, however you did, you've convinced me! If there is hypocrisy in play, then it is true Obama is ruining our country. Why didn't you just say that in the first place?

Demigod March 26 2010 10:24 AM EDT

As more "super-wealthy" people, defined by Obama as those over 250k income...


Just to clarify for those not in the U.S. (as Ranger is well aware of this), no one has ever claimed that $250k/annum is super-wealthy. That term is generally reserved for the top 1% of income earners who make far, far more than that. Since our tax system is progressive, the more you make generally means the more you pay out in taxes.

Again, for those not in the U.S.:
Currently, our highest tax bracket is 35%, which is very low by historical terms. That bracket goes into effect after someone earns more than $372,950 in a given year. It also doesn't mean that the person pays 35% of that figure in taxes -- it means that the person will pay 35% for every dollar MORE than that figure. For a single individual, income earned between $8350 and $33,950 is taxed at 15%.

On a personal note, I do believe that there should be another bracket for the $1 mil+ group (in the ballpark of 1.5% higher), which many Republicans would fight.

And to add a comment about Ranger leaving, I enjoy him being a part of this community. This debate (though turning ugly and lacking truth-seeking) has been the entertainment of my morning. Plus, we need more frequent thread posters in this game.

Cube March 26 2010 11:09 AM EDT

In 1979 the top 20% of earners payed about 56% of all taxes


Are you proposing a lump sum tax? Do you actually have a problem with the current progressive tax system? Or not?

Also, when you take the question "Is Obama the Antichrist?" seriously, I find it hard to take you seriously. I was not posing a question, just stating a lunacy. And while you may take the SLIGHTLY more logical side of the birther movement. I also can't take you seriously for that.

"Why hasn't he shown the full birth certificate?" may make sense to you, but to me it sounds like "Why hasn't NASA simply gone back to the moon?" Maybe not that extreme, but it's the logical equivalent IMO.

QBRanger March 26 2010 12:54 PM EDT

No,

The reason I am in this thread is to see the views of the people have.

While all the Bush bashing was perfectly ok and in fact egged on my the main stream media, when someone states Obama is bad, they are railed on as being an "an obstructionist, a teabagger, and straight from the thread title, a rabble rouser."

Very interesting take by the socialists in the community, even those that do not admit it.

Lochnivar March 26 2010 1:17 PM EDT

Interesting (quasi-related) read:

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/100325/national/us_cda_frum_fired

AdminQBVerifex [Serenity In Chaos] March 26 2010 1:31 PM EDT

If those guys in charge of our laws were required to work together whether they liked each other or not, we wouldn't have this problem. What we need is a grown-up in charge over in Congress that can punish lawmakers for hurting the process of law-making.

Being against something is not the same as being a baby or being dishonest and lying. It would be nice if there was a little more R.E.S.P.E.C.T. for everyone in Washington, both democrats and republicans.

Adminedyit March 26 2010 3:12 PM EDT

what we need is a complete overhaul of our federal government, vote out everyone of the officials in office now and replace them with noncorrupt (if thats even possible) politicians.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] March 26 2010 3:28 PM EDT

methinks the lobbyist would have them before they were able to enter the capitol.

Adminedyit March 26 2010 3:46 PM EDT

of course they would, especially since corporations can now donate to campaign funds, can't see any kind of conflict of interest there can you....

QBRanger March 26 2010 4:39 PM EDT

Interesting (quasi-related) read:
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/100325/national/us_cda_frum_fired


Perhaps we should wait to hear from all sides before coming to unwarranted conclusions?

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MDk4NjA3NmU5NTI3ZDNhOGM4ODUzOWI2OTViNTg1NDM=

Lochnivar March 26 2010 4:57 PM EDT

Perhaps we should wait to hear from all sides before coming to unwarranted conclusions?


Jeez Ranger....

The link I provided made absolutely no detailed reference as to why Mr Frum was no longer with the organization.

Nor did I make any conclusions based on that article.
However, he is sufficiently like minded to have been taken on by the organization in the first place so I think his criticism of the Republican strategy is interesting.... not authoritative, not absolute, and not completely irrelevant either.

Why do you feel it necessary to be confrontational about anything that does not entirely back the 'Republican' view point?

One thing I will note regarding the strategy it mentions:
It amazes me that since Pyrrhus we have so few people who have failed to differentiate between 'victory' and success.

QBsutekh137 March 26 2010 5:18 PM EDT

Why do you feel it necessary to be confrontational about anything that does not entirely back the 'Republican' view point?


Because he is trolling. Trolls will eat anything, and always regurgitate the same thing.

QBRanger March 26 2010 5:49 PM EDT

And socialists do the exact same thing. However I call myself a Republican.

The socialists in our community still will not admit it.

AdminQBVerifex [Serenity In Chaos] March 26 2010 5:56 PM EDT

Ranger, you take McCarthyism to a whole... 'nother... level.

Lord Bob March 26 2010 6:02 PM EDT

*laughs*

Soxjr March 26 2010 6:19 PM EDT

Oh and Ranger, Please don't say you have been at both ends. Lower middle class does not qualify as the other end. Lower class. Less than 20k a year. Minimum wage and trying to figure how you will buy food and keep lights on is the other end. Either way. I have read every post of this forum and it has been interesting to say the least. Ranger you are so vocal about how our new president is destroying our nation, but yet a lot of our problems started during the last presidents time in office. How do you explain that? Is it another thing the democrats did to curse the Republicans? I used to think I was a Republican until I read more and more and couldn't agree with most of what they agreed with. I also am not a Democrat and would call myself an Independent. I like to take each topic and think about that one and make a decision based on that thought. Not the whole oh my... I am a Republican so I have to agree with everything they say rhetoric.

On to other peoples comments about socialist and capitalist and whateverelsealists. Every country out there has a combination of ideals. There is no way to make our society work with just one. I think this new bill will work just fine. There is the idea that you have to give it a chance. I would hate to have thought of you being around when Social Security, Medicaid, Food Stamps, WIC, and other federal programs came into being. You might have had a coronary or something thinking how Socialist this country was going and we were all going to die or something. You just prove the Rabble Rousing topic to a tee. Every comment you make is to the extreme. Not that this will change things, but that it will destroy things as we know it. I doubt you will end up any worse off in the end and will still be a rich man. Drug companies will still be rich, just not as rich and maybe we might get some good medicine out to people that need it and maybe can't afford it. That to me isn't a bad thing.

We are a very good combination of capitalism and socialism. Different areas of our country need both to continue to live in harmony. If you can't see that and all you want is capitalism, then you really are hoping for something that will never happen. This country has been about government help and government partial control about plenty of things for a long long time and that will never change.

I hope this wall of text can compete with the others out there and I'm hoping my thoughts aren't answered with the same drab... "You are a socialist, just admit it." comments and some good comments from you about some of the thoughts in here come out. I doubt it, but I will cross my fingers and hope. :)

QBRanger March 26 2010 6:26 PM EDT

In fact I hated Bush from going away from the financial conservatism of the Republican party.

But when does this government intrusion end?

Now healthcare, tomorrow the banks? Or media?
All in the name of redistribution of wealth.

Yes we have some socialst policies but certainly do not need more.
Esp on healthcare. Via a bill nobody fully understands.

But it seems plenty of people in CB want me to pay for their healthcare so they can contribute nothing to society.

One wonders why our debt keeps going up exponentially.

Enjoy while you can because one day there will be no incentive for innovation and we become just like Europe. A nanny society.

sebidach [The Forgehood] March 26 2010 6:35 PM EDT

>>no incentive for innovation and we become just like Europe

HAHAHA. Yeah. You are a really good troll. HAHAHA.

QBJohnnywas March 26 2010 6:53 PM EDT

Never mind, the Republicans are saved: McCain and Palin are back together...

QBRanger March 26 2010 7:23 PM EDT

State your opinion and you're a troll.

Gee you drank the Obama Kool-Aid.

If someone disagrees they must be a troll?

I would much rather have McCain/Palin over Obama/Biden.

At least you know where they stand and they do not treat enemies much better than allies.

Again. I do not advocate violence but I will do all I can to get this President out of office as well as his cronies. Violence on both sides is wrong.

But someone has to try to convince the stupid masses who elected this idiot how bad he is for America.

While I do not think of him as 'the anti-christ', his policies reflect a true disregard for the safety of America and it's future prosperity. And judging by the reactions to him I am not alone. Even Bush did not seem this polorizing. And Obama is starting his 2nd year.

AdminQBVerifex [Serenity In Chaos] March 26 2010 8:22 PM EDT

I think it's best if we just agree to disagree on some of these issues Ranger.

I've learned a few things from this so far:
-There are crazy people everywhere.
-I guess leftist and rightist extremists are basically the same, so this whole episode of violence will eventually blow over.
-I've learned that MSNBC fans the flame of leftist anger in the exact same way Fox News fans the flame of rightist anger. Good, they can have their polemic violence networks.
-I have also learned that right-wing and left-wing hate is identical.
-I have also learned that politics isn't quite as interesting and deep and thoughtful as I thought it once was.

Lochnivar March 26 2010 8:27 PM EDT

But someone has to try to convince the stupid masses who elected this idiot how bad he is for America.


I seem to remember a similar sentiment towards Bush 8yrs ago...

I guess the notion that the masses in America are stupid is, at least, a bi-partisan one.


fyi... I'm in Canada, JW is in the UK, and Seb is in Germany... I don't know that we are asking you to pay for squat.

Vaynard [Fees Dirt Cheap] March 26 2010 9:43 PM EDT

Is this really a new phenomenon though? I was of the belief that there always was, and always will be, extremists and and those that are mentally unstable. I will admit I am not the most unbiased person on certain issues. However, it seems to me that this is only news now because people are trying to draw connections from these random happenings that are nothing new to the republican party. Yes, several leaders in the republican party are quite outspoken and even abrasive, yet it is a far stretch to say that it is their fault crazy person A decided to be, well, crazy.

I find it hard to blame the aggressively speaking party pundit for unbalanced individual's actions. It is the same as I find it hard to blame violence on violent video games. Sure, it is easy to make a link if you want to, but it really just seems like someone making up connections between things they don't like.

QBRanger March 26 2010 10:06 PM EDT

Veri,

I think this article basically sums it up:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/mar/25/will-america-break-up/

I do disagree with his views on abortion breaking America up. The rest of the article is fairly spot on.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] March 26 2010 10:24 PM EDT

the truly scary thing is that what we would usually consider normal people are so polarized by the political rhetoric and so easily manipulated by the fear-mongering and hate-politics. the forced two-party system in america may very well be its downfall.

sadly there are many different stands and viewpoints, yet the media, politicians and lobbyists are very successful in their marketing campaigns with convincing everyone it is an "us" vs. "them" conflict.

this sleight of hand is most likely diverting us from the real issues, and doing so quite well using the tried and true debates of "capitalism vs. socialism" or "pro-choice vs. pro-life" or even "god vs. a vacuum".

sadly though i am not sure we as americans are worthy of being saved until we can realize for ourselves that it is all subterfuge worthy of the matrix distracting us from the real issues of loss of liberty through attrition.

if the above makes me a socialist then it probably makes us both sheep, bleating at each other through the fence about whose grass is greener!

QBsutekh137 March 26 2010 10:41 PM EDT

The socialists in our community still will not admit it.


OK, I'm a socialist. Admitted. Embraced. _Loved_. Now what?

_You're_ still a hypocritical troll (not sure if you have checked that other thread where your hypocrite, inconsistent nature is entirely substantiated).

What should we do now?

QBRanger March 26 2010 11:04 PM EDT

Nothing.

Just accept who you are. A socialist who wants others to pay for your way in life. Someone who resorts to insulting those who contribute to society so you can skim off it.

Soon, there will not be enough people who actually contribute to society to pay for all the social entitlements you think you deserve to have.

Perhaps then you can actually do something productive and contribute yourself.

Lord Bob March 27 2010 12:16 AM EDT

More ad hominem attacks from a troll. "Wah! Everybody who disagrees with me is a socialist!" It's really quite laughable.

Ranger's political dictionary:
Democrat: Socialist!
Republican: The only real Americans!
Free Speech: What Republicans have to silence the Democrats!
Socialist: Anyone who disagrees with me!
Capitalism: The government subsidies I get so I can make more money!
Troll: How I'll pee off the "socialists" that disagree with me!
Reform: OMG!!11 A COMMUN1S7 P10T TO D3STROY AM3RICA!!1!!1 GLENN BECK 4EVER!!!1

QBsutekh137 March 27 2010 12:18 AM EDT

Just accept who you are. A socialist who wants others to pay for your way in life. Someone who resorts to insulting those who contribute to society so you can skim off it.


Drat. I trusted you and then you spawned a strawman false dichotomy ad hominem attack upon me.

I do accept who I am. Strike that -- I just DID accept who I am, so it's already on the books. Why are you still talking about it like this is some sort of intervention?

I never said I wanted anyone to pay for me. I said I'm a socialist. You can't understand the difference? Then how am I supposed to reason with you? You don't appear to know even the most basic facts of history, economics, psychology, philosphy, or humanity.

Lord Bob March 27 2010 12:20 AM EDT

You don't appear to know even the most basic facts of history, economics, psychology, philosphy, or humanity.

Or simple vocabulary. Or reading skills.

AdminTitan [The Sky Forge] March 27 2010 12:25 AM EDT

I'm glad to see we've resorted to child like name calling. I'm disappointed in admins for letting this happen, but most of all I'm disappointed in you Sut.

Lord Bob March 27 2010 12:31 AM EDT

I'm disappointed in admins for letting this happen, but most of all I'm disappointed in you Sut.

Are you likewise disappointed in your fellow conservative for simply accusing everyone he disagrees with of being socialists rather than making any attempt to engage in constructive debate?

QBRanger March 27 2010 12:32 AM EDT

That is right, when losing an argument resort to name calling.

Typical, very typical.

Lord Bob March 27 2010 12:32 AM EDT

That is right, when losing an argument resort to name calling.

Your hypocrisy is astounding.

Troll.

Demigod March 27 2010 12:33 AM EDT

Considering that this is in the Debates forum, and considering that any truth-seeking and structured, respectful, debate is long-since dead, why is this thread still open?

AdminTitan [The Sky Forge] March 27 2010 12:34 AM EDT

No I didn't say I wasn't disappointing in anyone else, I just expect more out of Sut.

Soxjr March 27 2010 12:34 AM EDT

Titan, if you have read this entire post, which I am sure you have, you will see that it has been said from both sides. This is the problem with politics today. People don't really want to listen or compromise. They just want people to do it their way. Every person here can find some kind of online post, or page that agrees with what they say, so linking links is just a waste of time, because for every link ranger gives to prove his side of the story I can find a couple that say the exact same thing. I also love how people like ranger have gone to saying what america wants. You have no clue.. You know what you want. You know what your friends want, but as the whole United States. I don't think so. I am also glad I don't let these things get me upset because Ranger your comments about how people that even have any thought that some of the socialist things happening in our country mean we want a free handout is just wrong, but there have been times in my life that I needed help for one reason or another and was glad it was there. I also worked my butt off to get to where I didn't need that help anymore. I also am now better off and doing pretty good in life. If it weren't for the help I got I have no idea where I would be. Maybe homeless and really bad off. So I have to say unless you really know what you are talking about please just be quiet. Thanks

Lord Bob March 27 2010 12:35 AM EDT

Considering that this is in the Debates forum, and considering that any truth-seeking and structured, respectful, debate is long-since dead, why is this thread still open?

I don't know, but I'm having a blast.

No I didn't say I wasn't disappointing in anyone else, I just expect more out of Sut.

That's fair.

QBRanger March 27 2010 12:48 AM EDT

Certainly Sox there are times when honest people need help. And there are plenty of mechanisms for that through the government, church (synagogue), and private foundations.

But to insist that hard working successful people HAVE to give more and more in the interest of "social justice" (whatever the hell that is) is just stupid. And against the principles of which this country was founded. Ever hear of the American Dream? It certainly is not to become successful so you can give it all to those sucking off the system. It is to be able to enjoy the fruits of your labor.

I just love reading LB calling me a troll on and on, since he is doing the exact same thing but cannot even come to terms with his socialist ideology. He is stuck in some fantasy world where those who make something of themselves have to give it all back to those that leech off the system.

But to say I have no humanity or basic knowledge of history is just an incredibly stupid thing to say. Since I want those who can succeed to be able to, I guess I have no humanity. I can live with that easily.

The more I read LB and Sut's posts, the more reasonable Palin is sounding.

I guess Obama is the great one. The great divider.

AdminTitan [The Sky Forge] March 27 2010 12:50 AM EDT

I will definitely agree with you there Ranger, the current situation has done anything but unify the nation.

Lord Bob March 27 2010 1:05 AM EDT

Certainly Sox there are times when honest people need help. And there are plenty of mechanisms for that through the government,

And this is exactly what I'm advocating for, but you call me a socialist for it.

So when you say it's ok, you're capitalist. When I say it, I'm a socialist. The truth is, neither of us are at either extreme. You don't get that. So you troll.

I just love reading LB calling me a troll on and on, since he is doing the exact same thing

No Ranger, again you are too blind to see. I'm actually trying desperately to open your eyes, to try something that will show you your hypocrisy. But you're unable to see it. You're also unwilling to see it, hence your trolling.

I'm not trolling. I'm really, honestly trying to teach you something here. But you just don't care, because that means you can't continue to inflame and insult, and at the end of the day, that's you're only goal here. It would be far easier if you could just admit that.

but cannot even come to terms with his socialist ideology.

See? Troll.

I will definitely agree with you there Ranger, the current situation has done anything but unify the nation.

Titan, did you see the nation so much more unified under Bush? Obama certainly didn't do this.

AdminTitan [The Sky Forge] March 27 2010 1:12 AM EDT

Titan, did you see the nation so much more unified under Bush? Obama certainly didn't do this.


Yes, while there were a plethora of issues under bushes presidency, I would say there was a larger sense of brotherhood and patriotism in the nation. This I'm sure in part was due to 9-11, but even 5 and 6 years later I still had this feeling. Now I feel much like we're a nation divided. Maybe this is just me, but I can't imagine that even my liberal friends wouldn't agree with me.

Lochnivar March 27 2010 1:22 AM EDT

I guess Obama is the great one. The great divider.


You seem to be trying really hard to reach common ground with his supporters... it must hurt that they are rebuffing you like this.

Funny that a thread about rabble rousing has essentially turned into, wait for it, rabble rousing.

Lord Bob March 27 2010 1:25 AM EDT

Yes, while there were a plethora of issues under bushes presidency,

That's an understatement.

I would say there was a larger sense of brotherhood and patriotism in the nation. This I'm sure in part was due to 9-11, but even 5 and 6 years later I still had this feeling.

I certainly did not feel this way.

Now I feel much like we're a nation divided. Maybe this is just me, but I can't imagine that even my liberal friends wouldn't agree with me.

I'd be shocked if they did, because everyone I know - and going by both sides of the media I watched, we weren't alone - felt we were way too divided during Bush's last term. Progressives were seething over the poor policies of the previous administration, and were frustrated by being shut out of the entire political process by partisan dividers like Bush, Tom DeLay, Bill Frist, and former speaker Dennis Hastert. Yes, things were more unified during 9/11, and things calmed down a bit after we took Congress back in the 2006 midterms, but in the years of unrestricted Republican rule, things were as divided as we are now.

It's just that now, the Republicans are more vocal about it, seeing as how they lost and they're not used to not getting whatever they want.

QBOddBird March 27 2010 3:27 AM EDT

Ranger, because you don't seem to understand, let me clarify this for you:

You ARE a troll. I've actually even gone so far as to have requested to have my QB removed in the past because I wanted THAT BADLY to be dissociated with you.

Try to understand this definition: a troll is someone who makes statements with the intent of provoking a response, generally a hostile one, from another person for their own amusement.

Calling LB a socialist despite his evidence to the contrary, despite him asking you not to, doing so simply to raise his ire? That _defines_ trolling.

Calling sutekh a socialist, then when he decides to play your little game and go along with it, continuing to poke the label at him in the hopes that it will somehow strike a nerve? STILL trolling.

It is IMPOSSIBLE. Literally IMPOSSIBLE for your statements to be mere ignorance. I firmly believe that nobody who can type as many complete sentences as you do in a post is that outright stupid.

YOU are probably one of the biggest reasons I come to this game as infrequently as I do. One QB has been traded for another. Rest assured, until this community is rid of you, it is still rid of me.

I'd also like to point out that certain other new players - even my very own GF! - have remarked that the constant bickering in the forums was off-putting and contributed to why they would leave. You are contributing to the reason this game is declining, Ranger, plain and simple.

I still cannot figure out for the life of me why you have not been banned. I would beg that the admins fine me every damn CBD I have on this account for this inflammatory post if they'll enforce a rule or two on your account for trolling, flaming, I don't care what anything, it's not like it is difficult to find something! And it is only because I _CANNOT_ remove my own bias from the situation that I do not remove your posts from this thread right now! You and several others have violated the debate forum rules #1, 2, 9, in just this thread alone! AND IT WAS SUCH A GOOD THREAD!

This is NOT what the debate forum was created for. Not as a trolling grounds, not as a flaming grounds, but a place for reasonable debate and discussion.

THIS is why I can't seem to stay on CB for any length of time. Every time I see you posting in a thread, I leave to prevent an outburst like this one. I guess I just had to look one too many times.

QBJohnnywas March 27 2010 5:01 AM EDT

Ranger, if you really don't want anything socialist near you then I suggest you do the following:

Work for your bosses for nothing. Never take any paid leave. Never expect good working conditions. Never expect bosses to care when you are sick or need help.

Things most people take for granted in their working lives were introduced because of people with socialist leanings, perhaps even communist leanings. Because capitalist bosses were never in favour of any of the above.

QBsutekh137 March 27 2010 10:55 AM EDT

That's OK, Titan, the disappointment (if I did have higher expectations in the first place) is mutual.

"Potential" has always been kind of a bugbear for me, but I stopped blaming myself quite a while ago. If you expected better of me (and can't see that I am actually living UP to that expectation) I'm afraid you'll have to deal with that internally. I'm as consistent as I ever have been, with similar tone (all in the face of someone who has gone further off the deep end than I have ever seen before -- so a very INconsistent situation for him), so why you would consider this scenario as any sort of disappointment is a true mystery to me.

QBRanger March 27 2010 11:29 AM EDT

So if I disagree with people and try to state my opinions I am a troll. But when LB goes ballistic on me he is not?

Exact the division Obama has brought the country.

OB. Do what you want. You can turn this forum off, not read it, or post your personal bias.

It is a free forum for discussion. Except for when people disagree with you.

When LB states he is trying to teach me, that is just fine. But when I do it, I am the troll?

This is one time I give it up to Jon and NS for not being reactionary and being realistic.

Lord Bob March 27 2010 12:00 PM EDT

But when LB goes ballistic on me he is not?

My refusal to tolerate your intolerance is not, in fact, intolerance.

My refusal to tolerate your trolling and your name calling does not, in fact, make me a troll.

By your logic I am to simply allow you to get away with the inflammatory remarks you have posted without retaliation. This is very typical of you. You have previously shown on prior threads a belief that only you or the people who agree with you have the right to post whatever inflammatory, divisive, dishonest comments you want. Worse, any attempt to get you to behave has been mischaracterized as an attempt to censor conservative opinion from the forums entirely.

As Odd Bird said, you cannot be that dumb to believe this to be true. You may believe we are dumb enough to fall for it, but you would be wrong. You are a troll Ranger. This is not me trolling you. I say it not to inflame or enrage. I say it because this is a proven, verifiable fact, as seen on this very thread.

QBOddBird March 27 2010 12:04 PM EDT

So if I disagree with people and try to state my opinions I am a troll. But when LB goes ballistic on me he is not?


OK, disagreeing with someone is saying "I believe this and you believe that." That's not the same as "YOU ARE A SOCIALIST AND YOU SHOULD ADMIT YOU ARE A SOCIALIST BECAUSE YOU ARE A SOCIALIST AND IT IS SOCIALIST AND SOCIALISM." *Particularly* if someone actually goes to the extra lengths to try to explain to you what socialism means, what THEY are actually stating, and their position.
Exact the division Obama has brought the country.


If your inability to distinguish between ignorant labeling, trolling, and informing is a result of the division that Obama has brought this country, then I entirely agree that the nation is headed for its downfall.
OB. Do what you want. You can turn this forum off, not read it, or post your personal bias.


That's just the thing - I shouldn't have to turn an entire forum off just because one poster is either too stubborn to follow the rules, incapable of following the rules, or just plain trolling the other members.
It is a free forum for discussion. Except for when people disagree with you.


This is only in your case, Ranger. I see many of the other members agreeing and disagreeing with one another, and presenting information to back up their case. Then I see you saying "SOCIALISM SOCIALISM SOCIALISM YOU SOCIALIST SOCIALISMS *mouthfoam* OBAMAAAAAAA" as a response to any logical debate presented! That's not dis/agreement.
When LB states he is trying to teach me, that is just fine. But when I do it, I am the troll?


Look at it like this: LB is explaining that your actions are a form of trolling. This is a well-defined internet behavior. He's really not just calling you a name.

Similarly, you're trying to explain to him that he's a socialist. He's not, but you're trying to tell him that anyway, based on faulty logic and zero evidence. That's just labeling. And when he has asked you not to do so, because the label is incorrect, and you persist in doing so, that is TROLLING.

Think of it this way, Ranger. What if I was just "trying to teach you" that you're a total jerk? You say "no stop don't call me names" and I persist in doing so anyway. Am I trolling? Yes.

But if I randomly post images throughout the thread, you identify this as the internet behavior known as "spamming" and tell me not to be a spammer, are you trolling? NO. That's identifying a behavior and explaining to the other person what they are doing. Just what LB was doing.
This is one time I give it up to Jon and NS for not being reactionary and being realistic.


And if nobody else wants to play because they're willing to cater to the most stubborn, inflammatory, self-important member of the entire community, good for them, they weren't reactionary. It's totally realistic to bend the forum rules so that you'll be willing to stick around, right? I mean, you're so important to this game!

Lord Bob March 27 2010 12:14 PM EDT

*laughs*

Maybe he'll get it this time.

QBRanger March 27 2010 12:34 PM EDT

So who is trolling now?

Do not read or reply if you do not like what I post.

It is a free country.

Lord Bob March 27 2010 12:36 PM EDT

Do not read or reply if you do not like what I post.

Yep, more of your "Only I get to post what I want."

Take your own advice. Do not reply here again if you do not like what you see. Troll.

Wraithlin March 27 2010 12:41 PM EDT

LB,

Long thought out replies like OB had 4 posts up might work towards getting ranger to stop.

Your short jabs just incite the behavior more, and is basically on the same level as Ranger's posts.

If both sides can just keep the short jabs to themselves, the more blantant posts that we don't like will lessen as well.

Lochnivar March 27 2010 12:41 PM EDT

And we're done... this no longer vaguely resembles a debate.. feel free to CM me if you don't like my decision...

It is kind of a pity because Fex's original post did have potential to lead to a stimulating debate.

AdminNightStrike March 27 2010 1:59 PM EDT

It is a free forum for discussion.


Just so that everyone is clear, this statement of Ranger's is actually quite incorrect. This particular forum is far from free. There are strict rules regarding the debates, and this thread is an epic failure on debate moderation (let alone debate participants).

Thank you for the lock, Loch. In the future, know that you as well as the other forum mods are entitled to be proactive in keeping the Debates forum sane.
This thread is closed to new posts.