I support Bush because ....
POSTED BY: rue
UPDATED: Monday, September 18, 2023 03:50
VIEWED: 13337
PAGE 12 of 14
Quote:Are you saying we all have an equal say in what happens?
I do believe things have changed a bit since the 18th century. I realize that China, North Korea, and some of the countries in Africa, the Middle East, and other places may still be under dictitorial control. However, most of Europe and the Americas, plus big bits of the former British empire, have discovered this thing called democracy. You'll probably see it at work in a couple of weeks when the US Congress moves from majority Republican to majority Democratic. Claiming that 0.1% of the world population currently controls the other 99.9% to the point that they have no choice seems at least a bit paranoid to me.
Quote:Sure! If you think it'll help, feel free!
Cool! Can I quote you in my next political operative evaluation input? It might mean a bonus.
Quote:So by the way Geezer- in all of that other stuff to do- including answering other posts in this thread- have you ever gotten around to deciding if Hitler was merely "misguided", or truly "evil"? Or to defining what "evil" is? Or do you just figure it's not a useful paradigm when posting about Bush?
Thinking about it, I believe I have more trouble with the incessant use of the word "evil" than anything else. Just because someone disagrees wiht you over policy does not make them evil.-Geezer
Was Hitler "evil"? Where does "disagreement" and "different values" end and "evil" being? Or does "evil" even exist in your world view?- Signy
I
I don't see this as a useful paradigm in realworld politics, when used by either side.-Geezer
Notice how Geezer avoided the whole embarassing "what is evil?" question?-Signy
Nope. Just had other stuff to do.Would I be evil if I pointed out how embarrassing it must be to mis-spell "embarassing"?-Geezer
So c'mon Geezer, say the words that are so obvious to everyone but you. Say it loud and say it proud! I SUPPORT BUSH BECAUSE... ---------------------------------
Reality sucks. Especially when it contradicts our cherished ideas.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Are you saying we all have an equal say in what happens?
Rue said that 99.9% of the people have no choice. I disagree. I figure a lot of people in the world have varying degrees of say in what happens to them. In some places the people have enough say to change the government. I'd prefer it if more people had more say, but Rue's 99.9% figure seems awful high to me.
Quote:
Notice how Geezer avoided the whole embarassing "what is evil?" question?-Signy
Well, I did answer Righteous9, who posed the question. And I answered your comment above in the same spirit in which it was posted.
Oh. Hitler evil? Yep. Stalin too, even if he did beat Hitler.
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
So I went back to this exchange:
“WHY DO YOU SUPPORT BUSH?”
“JUST TO PISS YOU OFF!!!!”
You see, I have a timeline below. Slick joined (under his current name) early Jan 2004.
August 2004, almost exactly 8 months after joining, Slick posted his very first archived post. In it he taunted Knibblet for indirectly criticizing Bush.
My new slogan. "Geezer - Pissing off the Looney Left since 2004" Thanks, Rue.
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:So "evil" is a useful paradigm for talking about Stalin and Hitler, but not for talking about any USA Administration? Why not? You would prefer to talk about "different values" instead? Why?
Misguided maybe, wrong, foolish, supporting different values.
Well, I did answer Righteous9, who posed the question. And I answered your comment above in the same spirit in which it was posted. Oh. Hitler evil? Yep. Stalin too, even if he did beat Hitler.
---------------------------------
Reality sucks. Especially when it contradicts our cherished ideas.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
So "evil" is a useful paradigm for talking about Stalin and Hitler, but not for talking about any USA Administration? Why not? You would prefer to talk about "different values" instead? Why?
Well, for one thing, there's a pretty broad consensus, maybe Rue's 99.9%, that Hitler and Stalin were bad guys, easily over the evil cutoff, whatever that is. There's a good bit less consensus on the the current US Administration, which managed to make the last two elections close run thihgs, regardless of whether you believe in election fraud or not. You can consider the Administration evil, and I can disagree, believing they don't rise to that mysterious "evil" cutoff. Maybe I just consider them not too bright, or not up to the challenges they had to face.
I suspect that everyone has their own understanding of what evil is. It's probably like the judge said about pornography, "I know it when I see it", and everyone has different criteria.
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
If Hitler had won, do you think history would have categorized him as "evil"?
Or, to take another example, if Bush is convicted of war crimes, do you think he will avoid being labelled "evil"?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Slick,
Just one more question - You said: "My new slogan. "Geezer - Pissing off the Looney Left since 2004" Do you consider EVERYONE who disagrees with Bush to be the "looney left"? Including, say, ConnorFlynn? Just curious how rabidly partisan you are. 
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Kaneman:
Do we really need the yellow-horned swamp frog? Are they worth more than our present quality of living? Is there not a way to manage forests so we always have them? Are rain forests overrated? Old growth forests? How much do we gain from having millions of acres of rain forest if no one except a handful of people go into them anyway?
Oh dear.
I'm forced by my own beliefs to conclude that Kaneman is evil. or, at least, evil-intentioned. His arguement above show a total void of compassion, empathy or even respect for life, or the earth. In fact, it spits on existence with hate and contempt. His level of disconnect goes so far as to be psychopathic.
Forget the counter-arguments, such as "who are we to decide, or maybe we shoudn't exist?" etc., or the fallacy of his "we can synthesize this" argument, as in "duh, we can't, you can't synthesize something you haven't catalogued" or the "fairytale science idea" which neglects that 90% of all medicines actually come from rare plants, and 50% come from untouched rainforests, and over 1/2 of all plant and animal species live in the rainforest, and 99% of undiscovered plants from which new medicines will come.
Nevermind the logic. The raw consciousness gap is stunning. From an internet perspective it's an interesting case study. If he were in my community I think I might have to suggest something radical. Mental health clinic for starters. But, honestly, if you have someone in your community who has no respect for life, what do you do with him? You could exile him, I suppose, but ultimtely, that's not going to help. You could put him on a watchlist, but maintaining a watchlist harms everyone's freedom. I'm open to suggestions from the non-Kaneman among us.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Geezer, the only reason why you're getting into trouble in this thread is not because of your views. It's because of your attack-dog, political-operative, Rovian approach to debate. You've used EVERY trick in the book!
This hardly seems fair. I think Geezer is pretty straghtforward and neither a raptor not a rove
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Just, for anyone who hasn't noticed it, I wanted to alert everyone to the objective fact that liberals are losing this debate because of their antagonistic attitude. So, liberals, sound more reasonable, and show that there are differences of opinion that separate you from your opponents, and not conspiracies and tricks, and btw, ditch the nicknames, it's a self-deprecating technique.
Conservatives, if you want to win, keep the steady hand, and don't descend to your opponents level, in fact, turn on your own when they're wrong, but do so in the same stayed manner (or ban kaneman to troll country :) ) and you'll do just fine.
Oh, yeah, wait, that's every debate, isn't it?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME