Quote:
Originally Posted by pan6467
I'm going to make this real simple... because I'm beyond pissed.
|
You're spending your Sunday morning being angry on the internet? Why? I'm not here to be angry, I'm here to discuss.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pan6467
Did you or did you not direct the highlighted part at me? Yes or no, don't give any fucking but... you are misreading.... fuck the excuses Will... did you or did you not direct the highlighted part at me for defending the Tea Party and as a response to my first post?
|
Dunedan was specifically defending the bigots in the Tea Party. I was specifically addressing that. Are you intentionally trying to change my argument or are you just reading what you want to read? Honestly, what's your problem?
Quote:
Originally Posted by pan6467
Who's playing the race card?
|
Who keeps bringing up "Farrakhans, Wrights, and NBPP"? You.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pan6467
But did YOU or did YOU not make a point of saying this earlier, I even highlighted it for you?
|
I did because part of the Tea Party is racist. Why are you not getting my simple point? The people of the Tea Party have one thing in common: hate. Some of them are racially bigoted, some of them are gender bigoted, some of them hate the poor, some of them hate the president, some of them hate immigrants, etc. etc. Do you understand? The Tea Party itself isn't racist, but part of it is and the rest of it is there because of a shared hatred of something. That's the point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pan6467
And no one here called W worse? He was fucking compared to Hitler, remember Will? You, Host, a group of us here, myself even all compared and made Hitler references to W.
|
I've posted tu quoque a few times already, but you don't seem to understand.
A tu quoque argument attempts to discredit the opponent's position by asserting his failure to act consistently in accordance with that position; it attempts to show that a criticism or objection applies equally to the person making it. It is considered an ad hominem argument, since it focuses on the party itself, rather than its positions. If you can't actually address my points, don't bother responding.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pan6467
Let's see unemployment rates are how high? And Barack is saying that the economy is in a deeper hole than expected and we have to work harder?
|
President Obama is not responsible for the problems in the economy. He's not made every effort I would have to fix things, but even a conservative can see that we're in a hole because of Wall Street and deregulation, not President Obama. How can he be responsible for a recession that started months before he took office? Answer: he can't. You know that as well as anyone, but as Jon Stewart would say, it doesn't fit in your narrative.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pan6467
Our government is losing it's tax base and going further and further into debt? True or not?
|
True.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pan6467
People are losing their homes, their cars, the banks who have been bailed out are raising credit card rates and fees causing more people financial pain? True or not?
|
True.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pan6467
We have reports that say we are losing the middle class and small businesses are barely surviving? true or not?
|
True.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pan6467
Now a very basic look at 1790's France, the government was bankrupt, the middle class took the brunt and were taxed to to the brink of bankruptcy, reforms to "help" the people were corrupt and failed miserably. BUT, the King and the court, while the peasants and middle class were losing everything, basically made sure they had the best of everything at the cost of the worker. True or not?
|
And that's when you went off the rails. Aside from the respectable $400k annual salary, President Obama and his family are nothing like the aristocracy in France before the revolution. Ask roachboy. The Obamas don't have the "best of everything", the richest 1% of Americans do. The corporate elite are the aristocracy in the United States, not the guy that's president for 4-8 years. The Obamas don't get the best of everything at the cost of anyone. Never once did I complain that the Bush family was living in the White House or that Bush made $400,000 a year, ever, because that comes with the job. Being president is one of the most difficult jobs in the world, so of course it pays respectably. If the president only made $30,000 a year, it would be unfair.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pan6467
SO as our citizenry is losing everything we have built for 200+ years, and Michelle Obama takes a trip to one of the most exclusive and expensive resorts in Europe, it's not like Marie Antoinette telling us "let them eat cake... I'll do as I wish on their money." ....
|
You're acting like everything suddenly went to shit in January of 2009. Which is dishonest. Hyperbolic "losing everything we have built for 200+ years" crap aside, we started heading downhill in 1980, not 2008.
As for Michelle Obama, she actually has money of her own. Vice President for Community and External Affairs for University of Chicago Hospitals pays about $275k a year, iirc. She's also worked for TreeHouse Foods on the board, which is a salaried position. I don't know where you get this idea that somehow she's spending the state's money on vacations. And if she is spending some of the $400k from the president's salary, what business is it of yours? He's earned that money. He's not spending money from Social Security or pensions, he's spending his salary.
You have a job, right? When you spend money you've earned, do people hassle you for spending company money on things for your personal use? Of course not. That would be absurd.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pan6467
To make excuses for that is fucking ignorant. There is no excuse. If and when Obama gets this country back to where people can breathe financially, then maybe a trip like that could be understandable... but when they are talking double dip recession and Obama is telling us to tighten our belts while he and his family do the opposite on OUR tax dollars??? Come on, now Will not even you can be so fucking loyal to the King that you can't make the comparisons.
|
Okay, you're obviously just trolling now. Calling the democratically elected president a king is stupid. Stop wasting forum space with this shit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pan6467
And yes, when you rant about how full of hate the Tea Partiers (which like I have said I strongly believe in what they stand for, I just dislike the talking heads trying to control it) are and insinuate or even tell me, (I'll assume it was insinuation) that I defend bigots, I need to defend myself. You are by telling me that because I believe in the movement and that I have gone to a few am full of hatred, that because I defend them, I am a defender of bigots... sooooo what should I do? Allow you to keep making insinuations and when I make a rebuttal, keep getting that pounded down my throat and not be able to say, "Fuck, you I"m not and I get tired of the bullshit where you say I do?"
One thing about the TFP politics and why so many have left is it is ok to insinuate or flat out call people bigots, defender of bigots, believer in a hateful movement, and so on... but when they defend themselves... it's turned and "YOU are not being attacked." BULLSHIT.
|
If you're defending the Tea Party as a whole, you are defending bigots because there are bigots doing racist things in the Tea Party. That's not complicated. You're also defending xenophobes, people that hate the poor, people that hate 'abortionists', people that hate the president, people that hate taxes, people that hate Pelosi and Reid, people that hate the federal government, people that hate women, people that hate regulations on the market, and people that hate people like me. It's a collection of different people that hate different things, brought together by Fox News through fear to pool their hatred into an astroturf movement.