Obama 2012?

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

Perhaps you think that because you so often offer "extraneous bits of nonsense" to deal with.

That you never deal with, Frank. You never address the facts in any discussion. You seize on some tiny inanity, just as you are doing here, to avoid having to face, let alone discuss the actual issue/issues.

Quote:

You could have said that in your opinion, Ronald Reagan was a vicious war criminal. Instead, you chose to use the wording: "Reagan was one of the most vicious of war criminals/terrorists to ever walk the planet.”

That is hyperbole, JTT. I called it to your attention.

That's exactly what I mean. There has been ample fact provided to you which shows that that was not overstatement.

What part of this isn't vicious?

"I don't mean to abuse you with verbal violence, but you have to understand what your government and its agents are doing. They go into villages, they haul out families. With the children forced to watch they castrate the father, they peel the skin off his face, they put a grenade in his mouth and pull the pin. With the children forced to watch they gang-rape the mother, and slash her breasts off. And sometimes for variety, they make the parents watch while they do these things to the children."

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

If the tale of Mr Reagan's deeds is true Frank I don't think any of the victims would think what JTT said to be hyperbole. I think some of them might think it understatement.

3 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

...apparently you do not understand hyperbole.

Apparently you do not understand just how little you understand about the English language.

Quote:

You wrote something...I commented on it. Now, instead of dealing with my comment, you are going ape.

No, I refuted your silly contention, Frank. Deal with the facts that have been presented and show us what you are trying dismally to show us. All the while doing what you are really trying to do - avoid talking about the relentless vicious nature of various US governments.

1 Reply

@spendius,

Quote:

If the tale of Mr Reagan's deeds is true Frank I don't think any of the victims would think what JTT said to be hyperbole. I think some of them might think it understatement.

Spendius....even if everything JTT has offered is true...it would still be hyperbole. There have been monsters at work on this planet since recorded history. Reagan, even if all of that is true, is small potatoes in the vicious department.

2 Replies

@spendius,

In fact Frank, war criminals are ten a penny these days. We hear the phrase so often now that we have war criminal fatigue.

2 Replies

@JTT,

Quote:

That you never deal with, Frank. You never address the facts in any discussion. You seize on some tiny inanity, just as you are doing here, to avoid having to face, let alone discuss the actual issue/issues.

I discuss issues...and I enjoy discussing issues. You seem to be bothered by the fact that I called on of the issues you raised "hyperbole."

Try to get over that.

Quote:

That you never deal with, Frank.

That comment also is hyperbole, JTT. You ought to try to get over that also.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Some people like to hang onto threads that are already unraveled.

0 Replies

@JTT,

Quote:

What part of this isn't vicious?

Take this slow now, JTT.

That can BE VICIOUS...and still Reagan does not have to be one of the most vicious people ever to have walked the planet.

Can you get that through whatever is blocking your thinking?

1 Reply

@spendius,

And we have hyperbole fatigue as well.

0 Replies

@JTT,

Quote:

Apparently you do not understand just how little you understand about the English language.

I understand quite a bit about the English language, JTT. I also understand that you have to charge people with not understanding the English language. Not sure what that is all about with you, but you've got to deal with it.

0 Replies

@spendius,

The world thought it understatement, Spendi.

Quote:

Nicaragua v. United States

...

After five vetoes in the Security Council between 1982 and 1985 of resolutions concerning the situation in Nicaragua [6], the United States made one final veto on 28 October 1986[23] (France, Thailand, and United Kingdom abstaining) of a resolution calling for full and immediate compliance with the Judgment.[24]
Nicaragua brought the matter to the U.N. Security Council, where the United States vetoed a resolution (11 to 1, 3 abstentions) calling on all states to observe international law. Nicaragua also turned to the General Assembly, which passed a resolution 94 to 3 calling for compliance with the World Court ruling. Two states, Israel and El Salvador, joined the United States in opposition. At that time, El Salvador was receiving substantial funding and military advisement from the U.S., which was aiming to crush a Sandinista-like revolutionary movement by the FMLN. At the same session, Nicaragua called upon the U.N. to send an independent fact-finding mission to the border to secure international monitoring of the borders after a conflict there; the proposal was rejected by Honduras with U.S. backing. A year later, on November 12, 1987, the General Assembly again called for "full and immediate compliance" with the World Court decision. This time only Israel joined the United States in opposing adherence to the ruling.[25][26]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States

0 Replies

@spendius,

Quote:

In fact Frank, war criminals are ten a penny these days. We hear the phrase so often now that we have war criminal fatigue.

Exactly...which is the reason why I called JTT's overcharged statement "hyperbole."

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

That can BE VICIOUS...and still Reagan does not have to be one of the most vicious people ever to have walked the planet.

That's hardly something that an intellectually [and I use that advisedly] dishonest person like yourself would ever be able to discern, Frank.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

I think what JTT is bothered about is that the monsters of recorded history made no bones about being monsters. The Emperor Augustus is said to have put somebody's eyes out with his fingers.

It is Mr Reagan's persona as a good ol' regular guy that is the problem. And you all falling for it.

0 Replies

@Thomas,

Thomas wrote:

Lash wrote:
Would those same people now ascribe an Obama victory to a positive change in racism?

While I'd have to see more evidence to commit to such a conclusion, this may well have been part of the story, yes. At the very least, American society is less racist than expected by the truthers, the Obama-is-a-Muslim people, and Newt "Obama is an anti-colonial Kenyan Socialist" Gingrich. Those right-wingnuts, and their enablers in professional politics, bet their political futures on American racism and lost. (And as an aside, isn't that wonderful?)

Odd that your expressed willingness to ascribe an Obama defeat to white racism doesn't suggest to you the contrary in the case of the Obama victory. Does an even greater statistical proclivity of Black voters to prefer Obama suggest the existence of racism on the part of Blacks in this country?

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

Exactly...which is the reason why I called JTT's overcharged statement "hyperbole."

But your logic is faulty Frank. If the term "war criminal" is hardly a term of abuse, as you correctly imply, then how can it be hyperbole? It is just a descriptive phrase like "business man". In the asymptote of operations the terms are synonyms. More or less.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Frank,
don't engage jtt or ask him/her any questions.
He will not answer any questions about himself.
I have asked him where he is from, so I can try and figure out his bias and hatred, but he will not answer.
He says it is not important.

So, since he won't reveal any information about himself, other than the fact that he is not an American, and since he has only one song to sing, don't waste your time, unless you are prepared to agree with everything he says.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

How so, JTT? Can you name any "massive powers" that have not used its power in deplorable ways? Name three! If you cannot, name two! And if you cannot do that...NAME ONE!

Is this sort of diversion intentional, Frank, or is it that simple stupidity again?

"deplorable ways" is the euphemism, Frank. Those were war crimes/crimes against humanity/unspeakable acts of terrorism.

Those are all things that the US has regularly, yes, Frank, REGULARLY engaged in with way too many countries of the world. And cowardly as the US is, it has largely been small defenseless countries and peoples; those that can't mount any real defense.

And the aim - to steal their wealth, impoverishing people, causing starvation and disease.

How vicious is that, Frank? Is that the "American way"?

0 Replies

@georgeob1,

Quote:

Does an even greater statistical proclivity of Black voters to prefer Obama suggest the existence of racism on the part of Blacks in this country?

Not necessarily, Gob, but you sure aren't doing the white race any great favors here.

0 Replies

@georgeob1,

Quote:

Odd that your expressed willingness to ascribe an Obama defeat to white racism doesn't suggest to you the contrary in the case of the Obama victory. Does an even greater statistical proclivity of Black voters to prefer Obama suggest the existence of racism on the part of Blacks in this country?

There is a problem with that George. It is that most of the black people are in a low economic demographic along with a fair number of white people and the coalition voted for Mr Obama for economic reasons and not necessarily for race reasons.

If over 90% of black people are in the bottom 50% economically and Mr Obama, roughly, represents that section of the population and the votes divide along that demarcation, give or take a bit of diffusion, then it is obvious the black people in the coalition will vote for Mr Obama. As it presumably did for Mr Clinton.

1 Reply

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know