12
   

2016 moving to #1 spot

 
 
georgeob1
 
  0  
Mon 27 Aug, 2012 09:14 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:

It sure as hell isn't, as I said earlier, an analysis of his policies that lead most on the right-wing to be against him. Most posters here who are against Obama don't have the foggiest idea what's in the plans he proposes or the bills the GOP passes. You're one of the more informed of that bunch here and I really don't think you pay any attention to the details either.


Clearly you claim to have developed the uncanny ability to read the inner thoughts and motivations of othere without even seeing them. You prejudge others as you accuse them of prejudice. Are you remotely aware of how stupidly hypocritical that makes you look to a reasoning person?

Do you expect any rational person to accept your statement as anything but stupid boasting and bluster. I'm disappointed in you.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Mon 27 Aug, 2012 09:27 pm
@georgeob1,
Quote:
Clearly you claim to have developed the uncanny ability to read the inner thoughts and motivations of othere without even seeing them.


As I said to Phoenix earlier - all we can know of others is what they choose to display. If the right-wing posters here on A2K do research on the bills that are passed in Congress, or the details of the various plans Obama proposes, why don't I ever see evidence of that analysis?

All I see from them - and you - is character analysis. It's emotionally driven, not factually based. It's all 'Obama wants to make more people dependent on the state,' but when questioned, no explanation of exactly how is ever forthcoming. Why is it that I never see this detailed analysis, if it's truly being done?

Hey, tell ya what - if I'm way off base here, prove me wrong. Next time a topic comes up, show that you put an iota of research and effort into understanding the actual plans and proposals of both parties, instead of just repeating the same boilerplate about failing Europe socialism over and over.

Cycloptichorn
georgeob1
 
  -1  
Mon 27 Aug, 2012 09:51 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
What others choose to tell you or not to tell you - or indeed the subset of it that you actually understand - does not necessasarily mesan they have no other thoughts, knowledge or understanding. The quality of the "factual" arguments you have presented here so far does not particularly impress, except to emphasize your somewhat naive solipsism. Reducing the understanding and insight one gains through study and highly varied experience and travel to the level of the political blogs that provide you your opinions is neither an enjoyable nor efdifying experience. You can make of that whatever you want.

I have heard rationalizations for narrow-minded prejudice far more effective and credible than yours from some very close-minded bigots.
0 Replies
 
Phoenix32890
 
  -2  
Tue 28 Aug, 2012 04:08 am
http://www.contactmusic.com/news/movie-reviews-2016-barack-obamas-america_1403670

Quote:
"The corrupt media will likely tell you 2016 is a success because of racism and hate, but the real reason people are flocking is to try and grasp a better understanding of this awful, divisive, inept, and anti-American failure currently sitting in the Oval Office"
(Emphasis mine)

Well, I am sure that I will be thoroughly trashed for writing the above, but I did not write it. But I could not have written it better myself.
parados
 
  2  
Tue 28 Aug, 2012 06:20 am
@Phoenix32890,
Quote:
a slick infomercial ... a textbook example of preaching to the choir


That looks like a more discerning review.
Phoenix32890
 
  0  
Tue 28 Aug, 2012 06:47 am
@parados,
Maybe so, but IMO it would be wise for people of all political persuasions see this film, and make up their own minds as to the veracity of it. In this election especially, the more information that one has, the better. It is important for each person to sort the information out for himself.
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Tue 28 Aug, 2012 06:47 am
@Phoenix32890,
Phoenix32890 wrote:

Well, I am sure that I will be thoroughly trashed for writing the above, but I did not write it. But I could not have written it better myself.
No, it was "John Nolte, editor at the conservative Breitbart.com". What your quoted website clearly notices.

To give another quote from your link:
Quote:
The film is not after new insight.Rather, it's intent on laying out the arguments of a man who has given the same lecture countless times. That makes for a sluggish film. Even its outrage falls flat.
parados
 
  2  
Tue 28 Aug, 2012 07:04 am
@Phoenix32890,
Quote:
awful, divisive, inept, and anti-American failure

That is why it is preaching to the choir. People that already have that opinion are the ones that want to believe it.
Phoenix32890
 
  0  
Tue 28 Aug, 2012 07:12 am
@parados,
There is a lot of bullshit masking as reporting in the media nowadays. No part of the political spectrum is exempt. As thinking individuals, I think that it is important for people to become conversant with ALL sides of an issue, and to separate the "wheat from the chaff".
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  2  
Tue 28 Aug, 2012 07:14 am
@Phoenix32890,
Quote:
It is important for each person to sort the information out for himself.

Of course it is. They shouldn't believe it just because it's in a film.

This for example....

Somehow you think this is an example of how Obama is going to brainwash kids. That is hardly sorting out the information. That is falling for a scare tactic. It was filmed before Obama took office. You will notice there are ZERO films of kids singing Obama's praises since he took office. Yet, you stated it scared you to watch this. That is nothing but failure on your part to look at it rationally. There is nothing else to say about it. I realize it won't change your mind but you have to realize that anyone that doesn't have your preconceived notions will see this for what it is, a scare tactic that is much worse that what the kids are doing.
Phoenix32890
 
  -1  
Tue 28 Aug, 2012 07:52 am
@parados,
Quote:
Somehow you think this is an example of how Obama is going to brainwash kids.


Brainwashing kids? That thought never struck my mind. It looks like you draw conclusions based on nothing but YOUR interpretation.

When I saw that clip, it reminded me of something that I had seen in the past, during the years of Chairman Mao, and that upset me.

I think that it would be better if you listened to what I write, rather than coming to your own conclusions, which may or may not be accurate. BTW, what you are doing with regards to my perceived thoughts, is certainly a form of prejudice.
revelette
 
  3  
Tue 28 Aug, 2012 08:11 am
@Phoenix32890,
Quote:
When I saw that clip, it reminded me of something that I had seen in the past, during the years of Chairman Mao, and that upset me.



What in the video reminded you of Chairman Mao and in what way were they similar?
sozobe
 
  3  
Tue 28 Aug, 2012 08:19 am
A fairly good fact-check here.

http://news.yahoo.com/fact-check-anti-obama-film-muddy-facts-072153385--politics.html

The conclusion:

Quote:
D'Souza then goes through a list of actions Obama has taken as president to support his thesis. Many of them don't hold water:

— D'Souza rightly argues that the national debt has risen to $16 trillion under Obama. But he never mentions the explosion of debt that occurred under Obama's predecessor, Republican George W. Bush, nor the 2008 global financial crisis that provoked a shock to the U.S. economy.

— D'Souza says Obama is "weirdly sympathetic to Muslim jihadists" in Afghanistan and Pakistan. He does not mention that Obama ordered the raid that killed Osama bin Laden and the drone strikes that have killed dozens of terrorists in the region.

—D'Souza wrongly claims that Obama wants to return control of the Falkland Islands from Britain to Argentina. The U.S. refused in April to endorse a final declaration on Argentina's claim to the islands at the Summit of the Americas, provoking criticism from other Latin American nations.

—D'Souza says Obama has "done nothing" to impede Iran's nuclear ambitions, despite the severe trade and economic sanctions his administration has imposed on Iran to halt its suspected nuclear program. Obama opposes a near-term military strike on Iran, either by the U.S. or Israel, although he says the U.S. will never tolerate a nuclear-armed Iran.

— D'Souza says Obama removed a bust of British Prime Minister Winston Churchill from the Oval Office because Churchill represented British colonialism. White House curator William Allman said the bust, which had been on loan, was already scheduled to be returned before Obama took office. Another bust of Churchill is on display in the president's private residence, the White House says.


Only "fairly" good because of sentences like this:

Quote:
It's true that Obama's father lived most of his life in Kenya, an African nation once colonized by the British, and that Obama's reverence for his absent father frames his best-selling memoir.


I've read the book and "reverence" is not the right word. He wants to find out more about him, and is regretful that he didn't have a father in his life (although his [white, midwestern] grandfather filled much of the paternal role for him), but "reverence" is definitely too much.
tsarstepan
 
  2  
Tue 28 Aug, 2012 08:22 am
@Phoenix32890,
Phoenix32890 wrote:

Quote:
Somehow you think this is an example of how Obama is going to brainwash kids.


Brainwashing kids? That thought never struck my mind. It looks like you draw conclusions based on nothing but YOUR interpretation.


Quote:
When I saw that clip, it reminded me of something that I had seen in the past, during the years of Chairman Mao, and that upset me.


How convenient! You're deliberately speaking out of both sides of your mouth in this one single post. And so why did this association with Chairman Mao upset you again, if not for the obvious implications of brainwashing by a tyrant??? Just because you can't recognize your own irrational hyperbolic nonsense doesn't mean everyone else is blind to your political illogicalities.
0 Replies
 
Phoenix32890
 
  -1  
Tue 28 Aug, 2012 08:22 am
@revelette,
It is a vague memory. In it, a large group of Chinese communists, dressed in red, are singing the praises of Chairman Mao, and the communist party.

What happened was as I was watching D'Sousa's film, I had a strong emotional reaction which harkened back to what I had seen years ago.
sozobe
 
  4  
Tue 28 Aug, 2012 08:23 am
@Phoenix32890,
Phoenix32890 wrote:

What happened was as I was watching D'Sousa's film, I had a strong emotional reaction which harkened back to what I had seen years ago.


And that strong emotional reaction needs to be examined in the cold light of day. It really isn't based on facts.
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  6  
Tue 28 Aug, 2012 08:32 am
@sozobe,
Ha! All lies!

Quote:
— D'Souza rightly argues that the national debt has risen to $16 trillion under Obama. But he never mentions the explosion of debt that occurred under Obama's predecessor, Republican George W. Bush, nor the 2008 global financial crisis that provoked a shock to the U.S. economy.

Republican presidents don't create deficits, they provide opportunities for job creators. As Dick Cheney correctly remarked, "deficits don't matter." He forgot to add: "except if you're a Democrat."

Quote:
— D'Souza says Obama is "weirdly sympathetic to Muslim jihadists" in Afghanistan and Pakistan. He does not mention that Obama ordered the raid that killed Osama bin Laden and the drone strikes that have killed dozens of terrorists in the region.

Yeah, that's the "weird" part.

Quote:
—D'Souza wrongly claims that Obama wants to return control of the Falkland Islands from Britain to Argentina. The U.S. refused in April to endorse a final declaration on Argentina's claim to the islands at the Summit of the Americas, provoking criticism from other Latin American nations.

And that's why these neo-anti-colonialists are so sneaky -- they support one policy in public while actively working toward its opposite behind the scenes. In fact, as a result of Obama's clandestine machinations, Argentina now owns the Falkland Islands. Ha! Made you look!

Quote:
—D'Souza says Obama has "done nothing" to impede Iran's nuclear ambitions, despite the severe trade and economic sanctions his administration has imposed on Iran to halt its suspected nuclear program. Obama opposes a near-term military strike on Iran, either by the U.S. or Israel, although he says the U.S. will never tolerate a nuclear-armed Iran.

Yes, Obama has done nothing to thwart Iran's nuclear ambitions, just as Bill Clinton did nothing to thwart Iraq's WMD ambitions. And given the hundreds of thousands of US casualties caused by Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction, I think we know just successful that was!

Quote:
— D'Souza says Obama removed a bust of British Prime Minister Winston Churchill from the Oval Office because Churchill represented British colonialism. White House curator William Allman said the bust, which had been on loan, was already scheduled to be returned before Obama took office. Another bust of Churchill is on display in the president's private residence, the White House says.

And he's going to remove that one too!
0 Replies
 
revelette
 
  3  
Tue 28 Aug, 2012 08:41 am
As Chairman Mao was the leader of communist party, that large group of communist were probably forced to sing praises as a matter of course.

Those kids were not compelled by Obama to sing anything. Back in 2006 kids sang praises for Bush and the government too. Again, they were not compelled to sing by Bush.

Flashback: Students Sang Bush's Praises Too (And For Katrina Response!)
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  -3  
Tue 28 Aug, 2012 09:17 am
@revelette,

Try watching both of these and let us know how much difference you see...



Cycloptichorn
 
  3  
Tue 28 Aug, 2012 09:27 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:

Phoenix32890 wrote:

Well, I am sure that I will be thoroughly trashed for writing the above, but I did not write it. But I could not have written it better myself.
No, it was "John Nolte, editor at the conservative Breitbart.com". What your quoted website clearly notices.


Oh, the editor of Breitbart.com thinks the movie is a slam-dunk against Obama?

shocking!

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 11/23/2024 at 03:11:07