• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF Thread of PRESIDENT OBAMA Checkin' Off His List

Status
Not open for further replies.
mAcOdIn said:
Oh shut the hell up.

You know, if you want to pretend you even give a fuck about anyone in uniform how about not equating them all to poor uneducated morons, how about that? Just give it a try.

Fuck, I mean, who would want that support anyways? It's better to not be supported but not having your intelligence and motives being called into question than being supported by someone who obviously thinks you're too stupid to make you own decisions.

Edit: Truthfully, I'd rather be spit on and called a baby killer than have your support.

John Kerry said it... cause its a fact. Kids in the military are widely non-white poor and uneducated. Its pretty sad that the white rich folks in this country set all the policies, yet the poor non-white folks have to do all of the work/fighting.
 
PistolGrip said:
The President is suppost to best represent our views in the world stage... The is the ruler of all not just of some. I dont want an anti-gay president to ban same sex marriage or ban gays from public displays of affection just because his personal beliefs or values... His job is not to do with this country whatever he wants... it is to unite us by finding common ground and make this is a better country. This is what defines a leader... making others follow him.

The President's job is to abide by the Constitution and keep America Safe.
 

JayDubya

Banned
I don't think anyone could get the wrong impression and think I would prefer Hillary, or they shouldn't, anyway. I'm saying that Bush performed so poorly as a supposed conservative that the election was going to be loaded heavily in favor of the guy or gal from the Democratic party, be they a Saul Alinksky fangirl or one of his "community organizers."

I would blame Bush for Hillary, too, and frankly, I guess I do - Secretary of State is kind of a big deal.
 
Steve Youngblood said:
First of all, that's a stretch and you know it. It's a stab at taking some moral highground that is purely theoretical. "I'm a compassionate liberal, and that's what makes me awesome. YOU may not care, but I bet you wouldn't have cared back in WWII about what was happening to the Jews if you were living in Nazi Germany. That's what makes you and I different."

Second of all, I'd like to point out that you're not really taking a stand here. You care so much about the little man that you did the same exact thing I did -- you voted Obama! The only difference is that I did so with more realistic expectations.

First point: huh? I don't follow what you are saying.

Second point: I elected the best option, doesn't mean I ain't going to dissent him and voice my opinion. If there was an option on the ballot "none of the above" I would have voted for it.
 

APF

Member
empty vessel said:
Because that would utterly misrepresent the relationship between the Republican and Democratic parties? The Democratic and Republican parties are factions of the same governing capitalist class. They are not "direct ideological opponents" any more than Lenin and Trotsky were.
lol, quoting for the lols.

quadriplegicjon: uh, you do remember that Cheney was--up until recently--the VP of the US, right? I'm not sure your argument has much going for it.
 

mAcOdIn

Member
Karma Kramer said:
John Kerry said it... cause its a fact. Kids in the military are widely non-white poor and uneducated. Its pretty sad that the white rich folks in this country set all the policies, yet the poor non-white folks have to do all of the work/fighting.
You and John Kerry are both idiots.

Around 70% of the military is white. The "uneducated" part I might give you assuming that we're going to say college is the new educated and everything else is uneducated, whether people go in first because they want to join the military and think it easier to do so while they're young and haven't started their career or they joined first because they needed college assistance is something you do not know, so you really shouldn't go around making everyone out to be some kind of welfare draft or insinuating that they joined because they were duped or are stupid.

I know supporting the troops is new to the left and all but seriously, just go back to protesting because it's much easier when people who hold you in contempt just make it obvious that way. Trust me. It's not like your current approach is working any better.
 
Whenever there is an actual lack of links, this thread goes to shit. Stop pontificating and post actual news links that foster actual discussion rather than the current circle jerk please. Thank You.
 
mAcOdIn said:
You and John Kerry are both idiots.

Around 70% of the military is white. The "uneducated" part I might give you assuming that we're going to say college is the new educated and everything else is uneducated, whether people go in first because they want to join the military and think it easier to do so while they're young and haven't started their career or they joined first because they needed college assistance is something you do not know, so you really shouldn't go around making everyone out to be some kind of welfare draft or insinuating that they joined because they were duped or are stupid.

I know supporting the troops is new to the left and all but seriously, just go back to protesting because it's much easier when people who hold you in contempt just make it obvious that way. Trust me. It's not like your current approach is working any better.

I am more talking about the Army... the branch where most soldiers are dying. And the uneducated part is true... you don't see many kids from Harvard enrolling.

I wasn't trying to make everyone in the Army out to be some dumb shit.. just saying its typically poor people who can't afford college, who go to fight in Iraq.

You need to calm down.
 
Stoney Mason said:
Whenever there is an actual lack of links, this thread goes to shit. Stop pontificating and post actual news links that foster actual discussion rather than the current circle jerk please. Thank You.

You can post links if you want. No one is stopping you.
 

JayDubya

Banned
Stoney must have killed a mod and stolen his power. That name will be turning red any minute now, Karma. Best not to anger him.
 

PistolGrip

sex vacation in Guam
Karma Kramer said:
Where does it say something about finding common ground?
Leaders have to be effective negotiators.
Effective Negotiations means listening to the opposition
It means the leader must compromise at times when there is no way to progress.
Leaders must represent the people they lead and govern. They cant think in just black or white.
 

Justin Bailey

------ ------
Karma Kramer said:
So don't protest what I believe in? Don't dissent? I voted for him, doesn't mean I accept every single policy he has.

It seems everyone here agrees with legalizing pot, gay marriage etc... but aren't speaking up about it because Obama said otherwise... just accept what we have and be happy?

Great democracy.
Yeah, no one here has ever spoken out for legalizing pot or gay marriage. Yep.
 

mAcOdIn

Member
Karma Kramer said:
I am more talking about the Army... the branch where most soldiers are dying. And the uneducated part is true... you don't see many kids from Harvard enrolling.

I wasn't trying to make everyone in the Army out to be some dumb shit.. just saying its typically poor people who can't afford college, who go to fight in Iraq.

You need to calm down.
Lol, you don't get it do you?

Again, you're wrong, it's not mainly minorities because the Army is roughly 60 percent white. You just don't know what you're talking about and you so wish for what you believe to be true you just don't care about reality.

Further while many might not be able to afford college, yeah there were some of those, a shit ton don't even want to go to school, so you extrapolate from your limited knowledge of the military being from lower income brackets, which is generally true, to assume that they'd all be in a classroom right now if it just weren't for society, poor parents or the lack of a welfare state.

Lastly, you were meaning to insult because if you weren't surely saying that men and women in uniform are dying for nothing would have been just as powerful as "poor uneducated kids" are dying for nothing but you decided to qualify that statement for a reason. It's either because you do think the military are a bunch of idiots or you belittle their position to give your argument more sympathy weight both of which in my opinion are disgusting.

And I am calm, I'm playing Devil Summoner 2 at the same time but I'm not going to let your comments stand. You don't know what you're talking about, you belittle the people you pretend to look out for, it's really pathetic. Truly, if you think everyone in the military, or just the (60% white)minority Army that white people send to die for them, were suckered into their position just go back to spitting on 'em when they come home.

Save your contempt for people like yourself.
 

Particle Physicist

between a quark and a baryon
APF said:
lol, quoting for the lols.

quadriplegicjon: uh, you do remember that Cheney was--up until recently--the VP of the US, right? I'm not sure your argument has much going for it.

people vote for VPs? hasnt it been statistically proven that VPs dont really do much in an election..

people didnt really vote for Cheney's ideologies.. you cant compare ex-VPs to presidents.

anyway.. lets go back to some of the things youve said... if 'Obama ran and was elected as a consensus-builder, not an ideological firebrand' how can Cheney be a 'direct ideological opponent' of a 'consensus-builder' ?
 

APF

Member
quadriplegicjon said:
people vote for VPs? hasnt it been statistically proven that VPs dont really do much in an election..

people didnt really vote for Cheney's ideologies.. you cant compare ex-VPs to presidents.

anyway.. lets go back to some of the things youve said... if 'Obama ran and was elected as a consensus-builder, not an ideological firebrand' how can Cheney be a 'direct ideological opponent' of a 'consensus-builder' ?
Your above post makes no sense.
 

Macam

Banned
mAcOdIn said:
Sensational BS title aside, it's not like there's been a lack of students shooting each other in schools that didn't allow it now is it?

The headline was borrowed from Wonkette, but I opted to link to the more substantive coverage on the issue. And, no there hasn't been a lack of students shooting each other of late; so I hardly see how encouraging the possibility of more incidents to happens is acceptable.
 

mAcOdIn

Member
Macam said:
The headline was borrowed from Wonkette, but I opted to link to the more substantive coverage on the issue. And, no there hasn't been a lack of students shooting each other of late; so I hardly see how encouraging the possibility of more incidents to happens is acceptable.
So you feel that people who own guns are encouraged to shoot people with them? Who or what is doing this encouraging?
 

Macam

Banned
mAcOdIn said:
So you feel that people who own guns are encouraged to shoot people with them? Who or what is doing this encouraging?

That's an inane, and inaccurate, interpretation of what I said. Try again.
 

mAcOdIn

Member
Macam said:
That's an inane, and inaccurate, interpretation of what I said. Try again.
This coming from the man who linked the article as "Texas Senate Votes To Let College Kids Shoot Each Other All The Time?"

Lol!
 

ronito

Member
republicans just need to pass a law saying "You can have a gun anywhere, churches, mental wards, hospitals, airports, courthouses, police stations, anywhere." And just get it over with.
 
mAcOdIn said:
Lol, you don't get it do you?

Again, you're wrong, it's not mainly minorities because the Army is roughly 60 percent white. You just don't know what you're talking about and you so wish for what you believe to be true you just don't care about reality.

Further while many might not be able to afford college, yeah there were some of those, a shit ton don't even want to go to school, so you extrapolate from your limited knowledge of the military being from lower income brackets, which is generally true, to assume that they'd all be in a classroom right now if it just weren't for society, poor parents or the lack of a welfare state.

Lastly, you were meaning to insult because if you weren't surely saying that men and women in uniform are dying for nothing would have been just as powerful as "poor uneducated kids" are dying for nothing but you decided to qualify that statement for a reason. It's either because you do think the military are a bunch of idiots or you belittle their position to give your argument more sympathy weight both of which in my opinion are disgusting.

Karma Kramer's comment was empirically accurate.

(1) People who volunteer for armed services are disproportionately poor and uneducated. Indeed, the desire for economic stability and educational opportunity is what drives many to enlist. There is nothing pejorative about this.

(2) If whites make up 60% of the army, then racial minorities are overrepresented and whites underrepresented in the army. Whites make up a greater percentage of the American population than 60%.

(3) They are dying for nothing. At least, nothing that helps either themselves or average Americans. Regardless of what they believe they are fighting for, they are in fact fighting for things a very narrow and elite segment of the American and international population wants: imperial control.

I didn't understand anything he said to be insulting.
 

JayDubya

Banned
ronito said:
republicans just need to pass a law saying "You can have a gun anywhere, churches, mental wards, hospitals, airports, courthouses, police stations, anywhere." And just get it over with.

A Democratic Republican named Madison did write a law kind of like that.

It doesn't apply to private property, though, in the same way that other law he wrote doesn't allow me to freely disparage EvilLore's heritage. And that knocks out most of what the places on your list.
 
JayDubya said:
FUCK. YES.

Awesome, or so awesome? I'm going with so awesome.

Momentarily putting aside the somewhat circular "well it's in the Constitution" argument (and attendant questions of which words in the 2nd Amendment specifically describe the right to carry concealed weapons), what precisely is "so awesome" about letting people carry deadly weapons into college buildings?

Like, really: I don't get it.
 
charlequin said:
Momentarily putting aside the somewhat circular "well it's in the Constitution" argument (and attendant questions of which words in the 2nd Amendment specifically describe the right to carry concealed weapons), what precisely is "so awesome" about letting people carry deadly weapons into college buildings?

Like, really: I don't get it.

Oh, you mean you aren't irrationally fearful of crime such that you think you need to be carrying a deadly weapon at all times? No wonder you don't get it.
 

JayDubya

Banned
charlequin said:
what precisely is "so awesome" about letting people carry deadly weapons into college buildings?

Ending the practice of allowing a public institution to deny the Constitutional rights of American citizens long since past the age of majority, is in fact, awesome.

An individual not having to live in fear of the delay between when something bad happens and when campus police and / or the local police actually manage to arrive and do something about it is awesome.
 

gkryhewy

Member
JayDubya said:
An individual not having to live in fear of the delay between when something bad happens and when campus police and / or the local police actually manage to arrive and do something about it is awesome.

What about the college students in Texas who are not gun toting rednecks? Surely there must be at least a few. They're likely to live in greater fear.
 
gkrykewy said:
What about the college students in Texas who are not gun toting rednecks? Surely there must be at least a few. They're likely to live in greater fear.

Rational fears don't count. It is Texas, after all. Reason finds no purchase here.
 

Suikoguy

I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
JayDubya said:
Ending the practice of allowing a public institution to deny the Constitutional rights of American citizens long since past the age of majority, is in fact, awesome.

An individual not having to live in fear of the delay between when something bad happens and when campus police and / or the local police actually manage to arrive and do something about it is awesome.

How many cases of college shootings have occurred so far?

Now how many, with the new rules, do you think will happen, which before would have been just minor skirmishes, which now could far more easily escalate into gun violence?
 

JayDubya

Banned
gkrykewy said:
They're likely to live in greater fear.

Which doesn't rationally (or statistically, even, if you're into that sort of thing) pan out as being a logical position, so my advice would be to get over it.

A lot of people have CCW. They have it for self-defense. Unless they need it, you'll never know. And if they do need it, I'm glad they have it. And yet, with all those people having all these gun rights protected by their government it's crazy how it isn't the Wild West outside every day, huh?
 

gkryhewy

Member
JayDubya said:
Which doesn't statistically pan out as being a logical position, so my advice would be to get over it.

lol -- statistically more likely than the random "oh lo if we only had guns!" situations you just described.

jesus christ, how many times are you going to edit that post? :lol
 

Macam

Banned
JayDubya said:
Which doesn't statistically pan out as being a logical position, so my advice would be to get over it.

Statistically speaking, the whole "more guns = more safety" argument doesn't pan out even remotely to being a logical position either. Your position is one of ideological rigidity, not statistics or, arguably, logic (i.e., this isn't about safety, it's about guns).
 
I think people under estimate how powerful it is just "knowing" that if you attempt to shoot up a school, someone else there might also have a gun and end your life just as quickly, if need be.

This alone will probably decrease the amount of gun violence.
 

gkryhewy

Member
Karma Kramer said:
I think people under estimate how powerful it is just "knowing" that if you attempt to shoot up a school, someone else there might also have a gun and end your life just as quickly, if need be.

This alone will probably decrease the amount of gun violence.

But... most school shooting maniacs end up shooting themselves. They aren't exactly afraid of being shot.
 
JayDubya said:
A lot of people have CCW. They have it for self-defense. Unless they need it, you'll never know. And if they do need it, I'm glad they have it. And yet, with all those people having all these gun rights protected by their government it's crazy how it isn't the Wild West outside every day, huh?

I'd rather have adequate social services so violent crime is reduced in accord with most other industrialized nations. That sounds like a more rational and civilized response than simply arming everybody to "deal with it." Seriously, who willingly chooses to live this way?
 

JayDubya

Banned
gkrykewy said:
But... most school shooting maniacs end up shooting themselves. They aren't exactly afraid of being shot.

But they sure do like taking out as many defenseless people as possible before they go. Which makes schools and hospitals and the like excellent targets.

empty vessel said:
I'd rather have adequate social services so violent crime is reduced in accord with most other industrialized nations.

Nah. A bullet is cheaper than paying tribute.
 

Suikoguy

I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
gkrykewy said:
But... most school shooting maniacs end up shooting themselves. They aren't exactly afraid of being shot.

I would like to add that, in a situation where someone is faced with a gun to their face, they are far more likely, with a gun or not, to freeze and not retaliate.
 

Baraka in the White House

2-Terms of Kombat
Hell, even taking CHL training doesn't suddenly turn you into a stone cold ace that can draw and drop someone in an instant, which is kind of what you need to be in a pinch situation or else you're likely to get yourself or someone else hurt.

It sounds crazy, but if a shooter had stormed my college campus I'd much rather hide and wait for police to bring him down than count on any of my classmates to do it (and not hurt themselves or anyone else in the process.)

It takes a good bit of psychological conditioning to keep cool and override the adrenaline rush of a tense, life-or-death situation - not to mention the ability to resist hesitation when it comes time to actually pull the trigger and kill someone. Cops spend months undergoing this kind of training; concealed carriers, not so much.
 
DOO13ER said:
Hell, even taking CHL training doesn't suddenly turn you into a stone cold ace that can draw and drop someone in an instant, which is kind of what you need to be in a pinch situation or else you're likely to get yourself or someone else hurt.

It sounds crazy, but if a shooter had stormed my college campus I'd much rather hide and wait for police to bring him down than count on any of my classmates to do it (and not hurt themselves or anyone else in the process.)

It takes a good bit of psychological conditioning to keep cool and override the adrenaline rush of a tense, life-or-death situation - not to mention the ability to resist hesitation when it comes time to actually pull the trigger and kill someone. Cops spend months undergoing this kind of training; concealed carriers, not so much.

I agree with you, but in many ways it's just silly to even spend time thinking about this stuff. The chances that anybody will ever be in this situation at any time in his or her life is approximately zero.
 
The problem with the logic here is that if someone wants to bring a concealed weapon on school grounds, they can!

The only people who don't are non-law abiding citizens who may have other intents (killing a bunch of people)
 

Macam

Banned
Karma Kramer said:
The problem with the logic here is that if someone wants to bring a concealed weapon on school grounds, they can!

The only people who don't are non-law abiding citizens who may have other intents (killing a bunch of people)

As the problem has spread, a number of schools have stepped up response systems, prevention systems (e.g., counseling), and, in some cases, security. There are other, more sane, solutions to the problem posed by a very small statistical minority.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom