Jump to content



Adverts help to support the work of this non-profit organisation. To go ad-free join as a Member.


Photo
* * - - - 3 votes

" My Mummy Ate Rats "

obama poverty

  • Please log in to reply
17 replies to this topic

#1 tham

  • Registered User
  • 1,406 posts
  • 490
  • Location:Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Posted 13 February 2012 - 05:57 PM




The Obama Administration and poverty.

http://news.bbc.co.u...000/9695217.stm

http://news.bbc.co.u...000/9694094.stm






  • 0

#2 niner

  • Member, Moderator
  • 14,525 posts
  • 3,449
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 13 February 2012 - 08:26 PM

This has nothing to do with Obama. Do you seriously think he "caused" poverty in America? Do you seriously think he can do anything to change it, given the situation in Congress?
  • 0

#3 Ben

  • Registered User
  • 1,936 posts
  • -8
  • Location:South East

Posted 18 February 2012 - 04:00 PM

The obama apologist fires back, frothing at the mouth, red eyed, his idol of sentimentalism insulted.
  • -1

sponsored ad

  • Advert

#4 niner

  • Member, Moderator
  • 14,525 posts
  • 3,449
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 18 February 2012 - 09:50 PM

The obama apologist fires back, frothing at the mouth, red eyed, his idol of sentimentalism insulted.

Yeah, "frothing". Do you think that Obama is responsible for poverty in America? Do you think he could do anything to eliminate it?
  • 0

#5 david ellis

  • Registered User
  • 949 posts
  • 73
  • Location:SanDiego

Posted 19 February 2012 - 03:27 AM

The obama apologist fires back, frothing at the mouth, red eyed, his idol of sentimentalism insulted.


You are a bully, Ben. Why do you think it is acceptable to treat niner disrespectfully? Your crudeness is execrable.
  • 1

#6 Ben

  • Registered User
  • 1,936 posts
  • -8
  • Location:South East

Posted 19 February 2012 - 04:34 AM


The obama apologist fires back, frothing at the mouth, red eyed, his idol of sentimentalism insulted.

Yeah, "frothing". Do you think that Obama is responsible for poverty in America? Do you think he could do anything to eliminate it?


I expect more from you than a straw man. You should examine, too, what that says about the intellectual foundation for your views.

Edited by Ben, 19 February 2012 - 04:35 AM.

  • -1

#7 niner

  • Member, Moderator
  • 14,525 posts
  • 3,449
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 19 February 2012 - 05:19 AM



The obama apologist fires back, frothing at the mouth, red eyed, his idol of sentimentalism insulted.

Yeah, "frothing". Do you think that Obama is responsible for poverty in America? Do you think he could do anything to eliminate it?


I expect more from you than a straw man. You should examine, too, what that says about the intellectual foundation for your views.


"Straw man"? Where's the straw man? The post was labeled "The Obama Administration and poverty". Am I responding to that inappropriately? The "intellectual foundation" of my views? WTF? What's your deal? How about you put up or GTFO. So far you've been insulting, disrespectful, and inaccurate in your characterization of me with respect to Obama. I don't worship him. I have a problem with political bullshit, on the other hand. This post and associated video seem to be attempting to causally link the Obama Administration to poverty in America, which is ludicrous. What's YOUR take on it? Do you even have a take on it? Boy, you talk about the intellectual foundation of my views. Good Lord, your posting history here tells me all I need to know about where you stand on ignorance, racism, misogyny, and class.
  • 0

#8 Ben

  • Registered User
  • 1,936 posts
  • -8
  • Location:South East

Posted 19 February 2012 - 05:30 AM




The obama apologist fires back, frothing at the mouth, red eyed, his idol of sentimentalism insulted.

Yeah, "frothing". Do you think that Obama is responsible for poverty in America? Do you think he could do anything to eliminate it?


I expect more from you than a straw man. You should examine, too, what that says about the intellectual foundation for your views.

"Straw man"? Where's the straw man? The post was labeled "The Obama Administration and poverty". Am I responding to that inappropriately? The "intellectual foundation" of my views? WTF? What's your deal? How about you put up or GTFO. So far you've been insulting, disrespectful, and inaccurate in your characterization of me with respect to Obama. I don't worship him. I have a problem with political bullshit, on the other hand. This post and associated video seem to be attempting to causally link the Obama Administration to poverty in America, which is ludicrous. What's YOUR take on it? Do you even have a take on it? Boy, you talk about the intellectual foundation of my views. Good Lord, your posting history here tells me all I need to know about where you stand on ignorance, racism, misogyny, and class.


That foundation is emotion.
  • 0

#9 Connor MacLeod

  • Registered User
  • 615 posts
  • 46

Posted 20 February 2012 - 01:07 AM

Your crudeness is execrable.


Execrable? Rational Madman... I believe David is calling you out. ;)
  • 0

#10 maxwatt

  • Member, Moderator
  • 4,557 posts
  • 1,414
  • Location:New York

Posted 20 February 2012 - 01:10 PM

Speaking obliquely to the topic, I saw Jackie Chan's movie "1911" on the flight to China last week. Sun Yat Sen and the Chinese nationalists are fomenting revolution against the Chin dynasty in 1911. Sun is discussing alleviating poverty, modernizing China and installing a democratic elective government. (Bear with me, the relevant point will come.) A chin assasin bursts in and almost kills Sun, but is stopped by Sun's military commander and his guards. "Why do you want to kill Dr. Sun?" the commander asks the peasant assasin. "How dare he insult the Chin dynasty, who rule by the mandate of heaven!"

The commander turns away in disgust: "Don't bother interogating him. Just take him out and shoot him. He lives in a different Universe."

You guys do not live in the same universe.

And cut the ad hominem rhetoric and just rationally discuss the matter at hand. (What is it with people who confuse petty insult with wit?)
  • 0

#11 david ellis

  • Registered User
  • 949 posts
  • 73
  • Location:SanDiego

Posted 20 February 2012 - 05:57 PM


Your crudeness is execrable.


Execrable? Rational Madman... I believe David is calling you out. ;)


No, I called it as I saw it. I did not make an ad hominen attack. I commented on the crudeness of Ben's remarks, not Ben. I think Ben made completely ad hominen remarks, which I detested. (and maybe a dictionary will erase any remaining doubts about my comment)
  • 0

#12 Connor MacLeod

  • Registered User
  • 615 posts
  • 46

Posted 20 February 2012 - 10:47 PM



Your crudeness is execrable.


Execrable? Rational Madman... I believe David is calling you out. ;)


No, I called it as I saw it. I did not make an ad hominen attack. I commented on the crudeness of Ben's remarks, not Ben. I think Ben made completely ad hominen remarks, which I detested. (and maybe a dictionary will erase any remaining doubts about my comment)


I didn't accuse you of an making an ad hominen attack. I guess you didn't get the joke. Oh well, maybe Rational Madman (the poster formerly known as Rol82) will.
  • 0

#13 niner

  • Member, Moderator
  • 14,525 posts
  • 3,449
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 21 February 2012 - 05:10 AM

I didn't accuse you of an making an ad hominen attack. I guess you didn't get the joke. Oh well, maybe Rational Madman (the poster formerly known as Rol82) will.


Oh, now I get it... I was wondering how Rational Madman/Rol82 slipped in there. I don't think one big word is enough; maybe throw in the term 'non-normative'...
  • 0

#14 Ben

  • Registered User
  • 1,936 posts
  • -8
  • Location:South East

Posted 21 February 2012 - 06:59 AM

And cut the ad hominem rhetoric and just rationally discuss the matter at hand. (What is it with people who confuse petty insult with wit?)


No one's ad homming here.

E.g. of an ad hom.:

Multicult-uralist: "Wow, I love all these different culchas here. Wow. The Chalupas are sooo cheap!! Multicultualism is great!"

Conservative: "No it's not. There are many negative externalities that are not taken into account in the 'salad bowl of cultures' worldview"

Multicult-uralist: "You're a racist*, that's why you're against it."

I'm just personally criticising niner here by calling him an Obama apologist. Not saying his tendency to rush to Obama's defense affects the truthfulness of his arguments in support of Obama (his straw man does that).

Edited by Ben, 21 February 2012 - 07:08 AM.

  • 0

#15 maxwatt

  • Member, Moderator
  • 4,557 posts
  • 1,414
  • Location:New York

Posted 22 February 2012 - 11:25 PM

Ben, it could be that you know not that you know not, and do indeed confuse petty insult with wit. You said "...apologist fires back, frothing at the mouth, red eyed, his idol of sentimentalism insulted." Ridicuuling the other poster thus borders on insult, if not ad hominem attack.

(FWIW: Perhaps I am from Mars. or China. While I myself may believe Obam and his party to be full of shite up to here, the alternative politicians seem to be buried 20 feet deep judging from what they say.)
  • 0

#16 niner

  • Member, Moderator
  • 14,525 posts
  • 3,449
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 23 February 2012 - 03:16 AM

I'm just personally criticising niner here by calling him an Obama apologist. Not saying his tendency to rush to Obama's defense affects the truthfulness of his arguments in support of Obama (his straw man does that).


The thing that's really annoying is that you assume I'm an Obama fanboy because I take issue with a claim that's ignorantly wrong. If someone were criticizing Obama over something that he actually did, you wouldn't see me "leaping to his defense" (though I reserve the right to defend policies that I think are good). I still don't see how my question "Do you think that Obama is responsible for poverty in America? Do you think he could do anything to eliminate it?" is a "Straw Man" with respect to the OP. Would you be so kind as to explain that?
  • 0

#17 Ben

  • Registered User
  • 1,936 posts
  • -8
  • Location:South East

Posted 23 February 2012 - 10:49 AM

Ben, it could be that you know not that you know not, and do indeed confuse petty insult with wit. You said "...apologist fires back, frothing at the mouth, red eyed, his idol of sentimentalism insulted." Ridicuuling the other poster thus borders on insult, if not ad hominem attack.

(FWIW: Perhaps I am from Mars. or China. While I myself may believe Obam and his party to be full of shite up to here, the alternative politicians seem to be buried 20 feet deep judging from what they say.)


I can see how it would be insulting; not ad hominem though, let's clear that up. Crucially, it was not intended to only offend (obviously) but also criticise.

Don't know if the other politicians are that bad. I'm liking Santorum a lot. Particularly because of this:

2012-presidential-candidates.findthedata.org/q/11/4202/What-is-Rick-Santorum-s-stance-on-immigrant-amnesty

Ron Paul, though, is looking pretty darn good too. Anyone who wants to reduce the size of ideological (based on a self indulgent sentimentality) spending in the US in on the right track. Sentimentality and government spending create more poverty than they could ever, absolutely, avert.
  • 0

sponsored ad

  • Advert

#18 maxwatt

  • Member, Moderator
  • 4,557 posts
  • 1,414
  • Location:New York

Posted 23 February 2012 - 04:48 PM

Santorum is sanctimonious. Reminds me of the dickish kid in sixth grade who tattled to the teacher .... In favor of individual rights except where they conflict with the superstitious doctrines of the papist church.

Ron Paul says more things I agree with than any of the others. But though he sees and says clearly what's wrong with a lot of things, I don't believe he has a program for fixing it or a philosophy that would come close to working. But he's the only one of the bunch who has principles and sticks to them.

Gingrich is what a stupid person thinks a smart person sounds like.

Obama is a center right politician who would have fit right in with the Republican Party of Nelson Rockefeller, except they didn't let blacks in back then. (Rockefeller liberalism was lip service to perceived common ideals of the electorate, to buy votes.) Obama talks like a "progressive" but his policies reinforce the power of the corporate state and of the corporations who I consider a greater threat to individual freedom than the government per se (it has become a tool for those with money to screw everyone, including your average mere multi-millionaire.) It's sadly a shell game, and what you see is not what you'll get.
  • 0





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: obama, poverty

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users