• Paul Ryan under fire after fact-checkers tear apart his convention speech
    132 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Strider*;37484296]Haha, you guys are ridiculous. This hive mind is so vacant of any originality and is full of hypocrisy. You all decry Fox news for being biased and preying on emotion while you continually spout the same old shit. And the worst part is that you all hold the smug opinion that you're so wise and [b]right[/b]. How the hell can you think that your opinion of Republicans is so adamant? You throw all Republicans into this pot of hate that you've conjured up. You ignore Republicans who do a lot of good like Darrell Issa. And then you let Democrats like Patty Murray who thrive on corruption and stupidity, slide by. Do you realize that the extent of your ignorance rivals and perhaps even dwarfs that of your anathema (Fox News)? The opinions on this sub forum are just trash, and they would be laughed off by any legitimate sector of academia or intelligentsia.[/QUOTE] Hey. I said stop crying.
[QUOTE=Lambeth;37484649]I really don't get where you got this impression that facepunch likes to worship democrats and the holy ground they touch.[/QUOTE] the forum is definitely left-leaning I also visit BF2s forums (though it's nearly dead) and that's a right-leaning forum the difference is palpable If you went to AR15.com's politics section you'd get the impression that they like to worship republicans. [url]http://www.ar15.com/forums/f_1/137_Politics_andamp__Activism.html[/url] have fun.
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;37484769]"Ohh god! He said a Republican president could be a [I]Democrat[/I]! Someone call the police!"[/QUOTE] Is this how I was acting at all? Explain to me how Eisenhower could even slightly be considered a democrat by today's standards beyond the high tax rate.
[QUOTE=Strider*;37484717]Why do people insist on always connecting former Republicans with the current democratic party? I could understand you calling Lincoln a democrat, although in truth he could be associated with both modern parties. But Eisenhower? Hell, Kennedy came right after does that mean he would be more of a Republican if he were around today?[/QUOTE] Because in the last 20 years or so the republican party has shoved itself violently to the right.
[QUOTE=Strider*;37484829]Is this how I was acting at all? Explain to me how Eisenhower could even slightly be considered a democrat by today's standards beyond the high tax rate.[/QUOTE] he invested in infrastructure, something that has acquired a significantly democratic flavor during the Obama administration he took a pro-civil rights stance. Since civil rights is most easily compared to the gay rights movement, it's easy to see the parallel.
I mean if he were still alive today his political positions would be more inline with the democrats than the republicans.
[QUOTE=Lambeth;37484836]Because in the last 20 years or so the republican party has shoved itself violently to the right.[/QUOTE] pretty much dammit lambeth I broke your automerge and you broke mine. HAPPY NOW
[QUOTE=Lambeth;37484836]Because in the last 20 years or so the republican party has shoved itself violently to the right.[/QUOTE] Not really, there was the migration of religious values from the Democratic party to the Republican party around Reagan's time. But as far as economic values go, the GOP has always been pro business. Of course the consensus on how best to facilitate business has changed somewhat dramatically from the time of Lincoln or the Sherman Anti Trust act. But I wouldn't say the Republican party is an entirely new beast. Unless you're referring to authoritarian and social values, if so I definitely see your point. Especially in those changes that have taken place in the past 20 years.
[QUOTE=Strider*;37484717] I could understand you calling Lincoln a democrat, although in truth he could be associated with both modern parties.[/QUOTE] No first republican president will always be a republican in my eyes.
[QUOTE=Strider*;37484919]Not really, there was the migration of religious values from the Democratic party to the Republican party around Reagan's time. But as far as economic values go, the GOP has always been pro business. Of course the consensus on how best to facilitate business has changed somewhat dramatically from the time of Lincoln or the Sherman Anti Trust act. But I wouldn't say the Republican party is an entirely new beast. [B]Unless you're referring to authoritarian and social values, if so I definitely see your point. Especially in those changes that have taken place in the past 20 years.[/B][/QUOTE] I'd say that's the primary focus of this forum... we're not very economic types here :P
[QUOTE=Strider*;37484919]Not really, there was the migration of religious values from the Democratic party to the Republican party around Reagan's time. But as far as economic values go, the GOP has always been pro business. Of course the consensus on how best to facilitate business has changed somewhat dramatically from the time of Lincoln or the Sherman Anti Trust act. But I wouldn't say the Republican party is an entirely new beast. Unless you're referring to authoritarian and social values, if so I definitely see your point. Especially in those changes that have taken place in the past 20 years.[/QUOTE] there is also the staunch never raise taxes ever ever ever position that many republicans have taken
[QUOTE=trotskygrad;37484961]I'd say that's the primary focus of this forum... we're not very economic types here :P[/QUOTE] I think that's why I get so worked up. Some of you were in the right to blast me. I think everyone recognizes the left leaning bias on this forum. Hell I agree with you all on social issues most of the time. So sorry for being so dickish. [editline]31st August 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Lambeth;37484986]there is also the staunch never raise taxes ever ever ever position that many republicans have taken[/QUOTE] One of the faults of Reagan's legacy.
[QUOTE=Strider*;37484992]Some of you were in the right to blast me. I think everyone recognizes the left leaning bias on this forum.[/QUOTE] Let's not go crazy, just because someone can admit that something like the Daily Kos is biased towards Democrats (they are), it doesn't mean you've somehow caught us out on being some sort of Socialist cabal designed to ridicule Conservatives.
[QUOTE=Megafan;37485075] Socialist cabal designed to ridicule Conservatives.[/QUOTE] Naw that's not what I'm saying.
[QUOTE=Megafan;37485075]Let's not go crazy, just because someone can admit that something like the Daily Kos is biased towards Democrats (they are), it doesn't mean you've somehow caught us out on being some sort of Socialist cabal designed to ridicule Conservatives.[/QUOTE] hey, if you look at the other thread you can see ALL our political compasses are in the green even mine is we might not all want to ridicule conservatives but we are left-leaning
[QUOTE=trotskygrad;37485103]hey, if you look at the other thread you can see ALL our political compasses are in the green even mine is[/QUOTE] That doesn't mean we're biased to the point that Strider seems to be describing.
[QUOTE=Megafan;37485115]That doesn't mean we're biased to the point that Strider seems to be describing.[/QUOTE] well I think he's been a bit reconciled now, his earlier posts should be thought of as "angry posts"
[QUOTE=Super Muffin;37478085]You have my admiration and my pity for writing one of the dumbest things I've ever read. But you're kidding, right? Please, god, tell me you're kidding. If you look on a timeline that heavily focuses on American involvement, there is nothing particularly notable that shows up besides Germany starting things off by invading Poland in '39 and Japan signing the Pact of Steel treaty in '40. Then the good old stars 'n stripes gear up to save the world the day after Pearl Harbor in '41. There's quite a bit of missing content here on this timeline that I assume you never learned in highschool. April, 1940, Germany invades Denmark and Norway. May 10th, Germany takes Belgium, France, and some other places. Later Italy invades France and France surrenders in about a week (I think, somebody check me on that)France gets split occupation zones. Then the Battle of Britain happens. Germany realizes that bombing the brits doesn't do as much for you as invading would, especially when the RAF is wrecking your shit. Bombing stops early '41. People fight in boats for a bit, then the Tripartite pact creates what is known as the Axis. Around Midway and Guadalcanal, we Americans got a bit more important. With the fighting in Europe, somebody had to go fight in the Pacific. (Not to say that the Aussies didn't help. Guys were damn useful and protected their own.) Now at this point you may be thinking, "But Muffin, D-Day wasn't until '44! I thought that the U.S was fighting in Europe and saving the day right after Pearl Harbor!" Well thing is, from '42 to '43, there was a particular focus on Sicily, the Pacific, Attu/Kiska, and North Africa. The big things that Americans place as feats of the US of A and only the US of A, tend to be liberating France and invading Normandy. That's pretty dumb. Come D-Day there was quite a crew of soldiers. Americans, Brits, Frenchies, Canadians, etc. Americans tend to forget to credit the other forces fighting at the Battle of the Bulge and whatnot. Generally the timeline for an American that doesn't know much about history is this: Pearl Harbor, D-Day, dumb assumption that America bails out western Europe all by its lonesome, Russians did something, U.S 3rd army crossing the Rhine, nukes get dropped on Japan, game over. [B]TL;DR[/B] : I wrote a lot because your words annoy me. U.S was important, but we didn't save Europe and the whole war. That's horseshit. More importantly, your mention of the Germans taking over Russia is hilarious. The Germans tried to fight during the winter with borked supply lines. They were already retreating around the time the western front got all fighty. Apologies for the page stretch everyone. I come from a family of history majors, so when something does set me off I tend to rant.[/QUOTE] Hi. Just wanted to point out that all your history is correct but your forgetting the huge role America played in providing Britain and the rest of the Allies with war material via the Lend-Lease agreement. We gave the Brits around $372 billion (in today's cash) of supplies or $31.4 billlion (in 1940's currency). This was a critical factor in Britain's survival, as Churchill said [QUOTE]Here is the answer which I will give to President Roosevelt: Put your confidence in us. ... We shall not fail or falter; we shall not weaken or tire. Neither the sudden shock of battle, nor the long-drawn trials of vigilance and exertion will wear us down. Give us the tools and we will finish the job.[/QUOTE] The [URL="http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/wwtwo/how_the_allies_won_01.shtml"]BBC writes[/URL], [QUOTE]The reliance on American aid indicates just how much the Allied war effort owed to the exceptional material and logistical strength of the United States. [/QUOTE] And not only Britain but other allies. The logistic force for the USSR was made up of hundreds of thousands of US produced trucks. Not to mention the 18,000 aircraft we gave them and the 2,000 trains (when they only had 92 to begin with). Josef Stalin himself even said that the war would have been lost without the help of American production, [QUOTE] "Without American production the United Nations could never have won the war." [/QUOTE]. But you're right Americans tend to overemphasize our military's role, and I think its because its so much cooler to say we liberated people and saved Europe than to say we gave them guns/trucks/food and saved Europe. So yes you are correct with your history, but American involvement was critical for victory as we were the "Arsenal of Democracy", according to President Roosevelt. [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lend-Lease"] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lend-Lease[/URL]
[QUOTE=Disotrtion;37485644]Hi. Just wanted to point out that all your history is correct but your forgetting the huge role America played in providing Britain and the rest of the Allies with war material via the Lend-Lease agreement. [/QUOTE] You're right about the LLA but I was purposefully leaving it out as I was focusing on what many people I've met believe, the misguided thoughts on direct American military intervention and such. The majority of the people I know have no knowledge of the LLA, the Battle of Britain, or anything involving North Africa and Sicily.
Yeah, most Americans learn about Lend-Lease in middle school/high school, but it isn't really focused upon. It really should be considering what the US did for Great Britian/USSR and the other 36 nations we aided.
[QUOTE=Strider*;37484992]I think that's why I get so worked up. Some of you were in the right to blast me. I think everyone recognizes the left leaning bias on this forum. Hell I agree with you all on social issues most of the time. So sorry for being so dickish.[/QUOTE] Do that again and it's off to the re-education center with you.
[QUOTE=Megafan;37485115]That doesn't mean we're biased to the point that Strider seems to be describing.[/QUOTE] Stider has this whole persecution complex going on.
this is so bullshit. paul ryan would never make a mistake. those dirt communistic liberals are all a bunch of shitheads who are trying to kill our Sunshine and run this country into the ground. they'll chew their heart out once Mitt Romney wins this fate-race
[QUOTE=TheStateTrooper;37492069]this is so bullshit. paul ryan would never make a mistake. those dirt communistic liberals are all a bunch of shitheads who are trying to kill our Sunshine and run this country into the ground. they'll chew their heart out once Mitt Romney wins this fate-race[/QUOTE] This is getting so boring and droll now.
[QUOTE=Governor Goblin;37492556]This is getting so boring and droll now.[/QUOTE] mlyp [editline]1st September 2012[/editline] swish
[QUOTE=Strider*;37485081]Naw that's not what I'm saying.[/QUOTE] But it's what you're meaning to say.
[QUOTE=Strider*;37484296]Haha, you guys are ridiculous. This hive mind is so vacant of any originality and is full of hypocrisy. You all decry Fox news for being biased and preying on emotion while you continually spout the same old shit. And the worst part is that you all hold the smug opinion that you're so wise and [b]right[/b]. How the hell can you think that your opinion of Republicans is so adamant? You throw all Republicans into this pot of hate that you've conjured up. You ignore Republicans who do a lot of good like Darrell Issa. And then you let Democrats like Patty Murray who thrive on corruption and stupidity, slide by. Do you realize that the extent of your ignorance rivals and perhaps even dwarfs that of your anathema (Fox News)? The opinions on this sub forum are just trash, and they would be laughed off by any legitimate sector of academia or intelligentsia.[/QUOTE] hey guy, I know you're trying to sound smart by using lots of advanced words but, as a Guy Who Likes Big Words and Fancy Brainthought lemme just say that you're using a lot of them very poorly and are actually coming off as, like, really dumb bro (instead of smart). hthtia
[QUOTE=Glaber;37475450]Actually, it's their sources and sub sources, that aren't themselves, that provide the smoking guns. for example: [URL="http://www.forbes.com/sites/aroy/2012/08/16/fact-checking-the-obama-campaigns-defense-of-its-716-billion-cut-to-medicare/"]Forbes on the medicare cuts[/URL], [URL="http://gazettextra.com/news/2009/feb/19/gm-plant-last-day-finalized/"]GazetteXtra.com on the GM plant closure[/URL], Plus here's an interview with Obama where he admits to cutting Medicare to fund his program: [video=youtube;t5Ha7RNpn24]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5Ha7RNpn24[/video] Plus we have a cbs video that shows the plant closed in 2009:[video=youtube;56h1gobtkIo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=56h1gobtkIo[/video] Oh, and last I knew, trolls don't provide sources or proof.[/QUOTE] "Oh they dont agree with my viewpoint! Obviously trolls."
[QUOTE=trotskygrad;37484814]the forum is definitely left-leaning I also visit BF2s forums (though it's nearly dead) and that's a right-leaning forum the difference is palpable If you went to AR15.com's politics section you'd get the impression that they like to worship republicans. [url]http://www.ar15.com/forums/f_1/137_Politics_andamp__Activism.html[/url] have fun.[/QUOTE] That's fucking comedy gold.
[QUOTE=Super Muffin;37478085]You have my admiration and my pity for writing one of the dumbest things I've ever read. But you're kidding, right? Please, god, tell me you're kidding. [/QUOTE] Look you are pretty right but if America did not do anything than Europe would be speaking Russian or German depending on which alternate history you like more.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.