« Harry Reid Admits ObamaCare Will Cost at Least $2 Trillion | Main | Obama's Diplomatic Powers with Burning Bushes »

SKREET,SKREET SQUAWK SQUAWK SQUAWK LISTEN TO ME YOU BUNCH OF BLABBERHEADS IM GETTING MY FEATHERS RUFFLED YOUR NOT LISTENING TO ME SQUAWK SQUAWK SQUAWK SKREET,SKREET

V Being "Softened" to Blunt... Overt Rightwing Subtext

There has been speculation about this.

The teasers running on ABC offer a hint of this. "They gave us hope. We gave them our trust." Who does that bring to mind? Of course, the Visitors (hence the title), after promising things like universal health care and peace in a one world government, turn out to be totally evil. They attempt to seize control of the media, favoring those who don't challenge them or ask probing questions about their real agenda, which turns out to be the annihilation of humanity. The heroes are everyday people, who form a grass roots resistance movement. Supposedly, the show is being slightly reconceptualized to soften or remove events some might interpret as negative parallels to today.

Which means they'll have obnoxiously saintly liberal characters show up to show they're not so bad, and other stuff that will make the show incoherent and sucky.

Protesting?
How very Liberal....

You can bitch all you want, but at least Obama was elected (unlike Bush in 2000....).

Wait - that's not right. I meant to say that GORE almost succeeded in using his legal team to steal the 2000 election. Thankfully, true democracy prevailed.

As for Obama...who can say? There has been so much talk lately over ACORN-related irregularities, and that unpleasant business in MN with Al Franken actually managing to overtake his opponent in a recount. Apparently the first time in recorded history that has happened.

I can't seem to make up my mind what side of the fence I am on.

You can bitch all you want, but at least Obama was elected (unlike Bush in 2000....).

Oh really, still mad because The media elite like "Rather Bias" could not swing the election? Do some home work from that election, explain, how did precincts in Philadelphia, and all major cities report hundreds of thousands of votes for algore, when it was in some cases 7 times the regestered voters in that district?

Same with your "Tin god" Obango.

Let's face it Democrats are elitist scum.

You can bitch all you want, but at least Obama was elected (unlike Bush in 2000....).

Oh for God's sake, not this crap again. Aquatarkus, how is the president elected in this country? Is it through the popular vote or the electoral college?

At no point was Gore ahead in the EC. At no point was Gore ahead in Florida. Numerous newspapers did their own recounts there and determined that Bush won the state, not Gore. And thus, Gore lost the election.

This is a perfect example of how liberals, err... "think." Their side never loses for real. When they do lose, it's because the other side cheated, not because their candidate sucked and couldn't even win his home state. You idiots just can't accept that not everyone agrees with you.

"Protesting? How very liberal...."

I don't even know what the hell that's supposed to mean. Does the First Amendment apply only to the left, and not all Americans? Maybe in your mind, but not in the real world.

You idiots just can't accept that not everyone agrees with you.
Posted by: Evil Otto

Don't make me fucking laugh.
That's all this site is about!

The whole point of the protest is to whinge about not everyone is agreeing with you.

You have this unfounded belief that conservatives and white people have become oppressed classes in America.
Do you have evidence? Of course you don't, you just think it's true, therefore it must be.
If you don't have evidence, then who cares?
Just make shit up and claim it as fact.

I thought of a way to explain what I understand to be the Conservative thought process:

1.I know a gay guy.

2.He likes Britney Spears.

3.I think Britney Spears makes terrible music.

4.Therefore, all gay guys like terrible music.

Basically, the Conservative brain observes one thing, attaches it to a group and ends up with a banal oversimplification:

1.I saw a Muslim being unpatriotic.

2.Patriotism is something I value.

3.Therefore, all Muslims are evil.

See? It works for for anything:

1.I read the words of a whiney Liberal.

2.Reading is too hard.

3.Fuck the lot of 'em.

Of course, you need to factor in their inherent persecution complex and their singlemindedness and their inexhaustible greed, but in a nutshell, that is how Conservatives think.

Thank you.

Aquatarkus, We get evidence that we need every year on April 15th. Washington, Jefferson, Hancock and other went to war over far less.

Folks pay no attention to aquaboy, I think his diaper rash is getting to him.

You have this unfounded belief that conservatives and white people have become oppressed classes in America.
----
Just make shit up and claim it as fact.

Posted by: Aquatarkus at October 16, 2009 5:28 AM

Are you denying that it's unacceptable to denigrate a black person's race in public but OK to denigrate a white person's race?

Would have thought it's fairly easy to comprehend why that's a problem.

Oh, and isn't the White House paying people to troll conservative blogs these days?

"You have this unfounded belief that conservatives and white people have become oppressed classes in America. Do you have evidence?"

I do. If I present it, will you STFU and go away?

The NEW YORK SLIMES gave positive coverage to a bunch of illegal alien supporters then they did the 9/12 demonstrators as all liberal rags always do

Jesus, Aquatarkus, even for you that was incoherent.

Don't make me fucking laugh. That's all this site is about!

No, this site is about making fun of leftist drones like you... you're a "moonbat." We have no problem with people disagreeing with us... we just make fun of the nutcases on your side. Like you.

The whole point of the protest is to whinge about not everyone is agreeing with you.

No. You really don't understand, do you? Again, this is proof of what I said before: you just can't accept that not everyone agrees with you.

You have this unfounded belief that conservatives and white people have become oppressed classes in America.

Funny, I was talking about your idiotic comment that Bush lost the 2000 election. And suddenly we're arguing about race?!?

Do you have evidence?

About what? Gore vs Bush? Can you TRY to stay on subject, you pathetic brain donor?

Of course you don't, you just think it's true, therefore it must be.

At this point, Aqua, you aren't even arguing with me. You're arguing with some cartoon version of a conservative you have in your head.

If you don't have evidence, then who cares?
Just make shit up and claim it as fact.

You mean like "You can bitch all you want, but at least Obama was elected (unlike Bush in 2000....)." That sort of shit that you made up?

Pathetic. You didn't even TRY to refute what I wrote. You just went off on one of your tired rants. You made the claim that Bush lost the 2000 election. Back it up, or admit you can't.

Honestly, Aqua, why do you come here? Time and again you embarrass yourself, and yet you always return.

"Protesting?
How very Liberal...."
Um, not really.
News flash: Both sides have just as much right to legally demonstrate.
The difference, though, is conservative protests tend to be cleaner, more orderly, more coherent, and generally more pleasant to be around than liberal protests.

No. You really don't understand, do you? Again, this is proof of what I said before: you just can't accept that not everyone agrees with you.
Posted by: Evil Otto

Of course I understand that not everyone agrees with me.
The fact that you keep bringing it up suggests to me that you're the one who can't accept that not everyone agrees with you.

By the way, I enjoy criticising the other side as much as you do.
Why do you think I keep coming back here?

"Aquatarkus at October 16, 2009 12:44 AM"

Even the LIBERAL media has proved repetedly that you're a lier!

Oh well.

Of course I understand that not everyone agrees with me.

Do you now? You clearly don't understand the reason for the protest. You clearly don't understand why this blog exists, what we believe, or why.

The fact that you keep bringing it up suggests to me that you're the one who can't accept that not everyone agrees with you.

????? Honestly, this is like arguing with a third-grader. Everything anyone posts is met with a response from you of "I know you are, but what am I?"

By the way, I enjoy criticising the other side as much as you do.

No you don't. It clearly offends you that we take you leftist drones to task. It offends you that we call you liberals on your lies, your errors, and your constant attempts to reshape society into something that fits your worldview, despite the cost.

Why do you think I keep coming back here?

I think it's because you hate. You clearly have nothing but contempt for us, and commenting here allows you to revel in it. The problem is that you've shown that you don't even know what we here believe. You don't even know why you believe what you believe. You argue from positions of ignorance, and then don't understand why you lose.

Now, let's try this AGAIN. Aquatarkus, you claimed that Bush lost the 2000 election. Either back that statement up with facts, or acknowledge that you can't. I'm not going to let you slide on that one... I'll continue to bring it up.

You know what, Aqua? There is a thing called an "identifying mark" You find it on coins, software, etc. And you have the same one as Wellstone, Andy, Maxwell....
It's the whimpering statement that you are even-handed and unbiassed.
Only you and yours trot it out. It's like a headmaster using teen-slang at a party to get accepted. It's embarassing.

I never said I was even-handed, you assumed that.

I just want you to realise your opinions aren't to be confused with fact, either.

It clearly offendsyou that we take you leftist drones to task
Posted by: Evil Otto

No, Otto, it amuses me in the same way it amuses you.
I couldn't give two shits what you think about me, my beliefs or even my country.
I'm just having enormous fun getting into inconsequential arguments with ignorant right-wing bullies such as yourself.

You keep talking about me, so in my opinion I must be doing something right.
And if you can't resist picking apart this comment, I suggest that you see a special needs assistant to help you with your reading comprehension. Burn.

Aquatarkus

Funny you and Wellstone are Kicking off the same I.P.Address how odd....Can anyone draw any conclusions from this?

No, Otto, it amuses me in the same way it amuses you.

Clearly not. Clearly it pisses you off. I remember when you showed up here, Aqua. You were filled with rage and anger, tossing insults casually around from the start. You hate.

Y'see, I don't go to lefty boards and spout off my beliefs. They don't want to hear my opinions, and I don't want to argue with them. Everybody wins. You, on the other hand, feel compelled to show up here and spout your ill-conceived ideas, despite the fact that no one here asked your opinion on anything. Something makes you come here, and that is your hatred of us.

I couldn't give two shits what you think about me, my beliefs or even my country.

Not true. Someone who doesn't care wouldn't be showing up here hour after hour. You DO care what we think, Aqua. And you've argued with me about the state of your country in the past, which shows me that you're lying.

I'm just having enormous fun getting into inconsequential arguments with ignorant right-wing bullies such as yourself.

"Ignorant." That's rich, coming from you. You still haven't admitted you were wrong about the 2000 election. And you won't, either. You've been consistently wrong about virtually everything you've commented on, and yet you accuse others of being "ignorant."

And if you can't resist picking apart this comment, I suggest that you see a special needs assistant to help you with your reading comprehension. Burn.

"Burn?" Seriously? "Burn?"

(rolling eyes) Traditionally, "burn" is said by someone else as a way of saying "Good one, man." You saying "burn" in your own post is like me saying "Good job, Evil Otto!" at the end of this one.

Do you have a reading disability?
Posted by: Evil Otto

Yes.
Yes I do.
Now whose the asshole?

Posted by: aquatarkus at September 15, 2009 3:00 PM

Now, how about backing up your claims about the 2000 election? I'm going to remind you of that in EVERY comment until you do. You made a claim, time for you to show your amazing insight to us "ignorant" right-wingers and prove what you say is true.

John Galt:

What the fuck are you on about?

Do you believe everything you read?

I remember when you showed up here, Aqua. You were filled with rage and anger
Posted by: Evil Otto

No Otto, I was filled with boredom.
I found this site because I bored and thought it might be fun to annoy some Conservatives by telling them how stupid I think they are.
I'm not actually annoyed, you're probably projecting again.

No Otto, I was filled with boredom.

No. I read your comments. Bored people don't write what you did. Angry people do. Hate-filled people do. Heh, you really are trying to project an image of sneering disinterest, but your own comments betray that, as do your actions right now.

"Evil Otto has made a common mistake for opinionated bigots - he assumes that because I have become slightly annoyed and started swearing, it means that he's won."

You weren't bored. You were PISSED. It was a beautiful thing to see. And we here played you like a cheap violin. Just as I'm playing you now.

I found this site because I bored and thought it might be fun to annoy some Conservatives by telling them how stupid I think they are.

And you failed. You were humiliated in that thread, finally agreeing to play nice in exchange for a cease-fire.

I'm not actually annoyed, you're probably projecting again.

Nope. You're annoyed. Well, desperate would probably be a better word.

Oh, and wouldn't it be nice for you to back up your claims about the 2000 election. It's amusing that you won't. Clearly, you believe that by refusing to do so you're making me angry. Instead, you're making me smile, because I know you can't defend what you write. I'm going to continue to bring it up in every comment. You've provided me with great ammunition to throw every time you comment here.

Bored people don't write what you did.
Posted by: Evil Otto

I think you'll find that I have been.

Oh, and wouldn't it be nice for you to back up your claims about the 2000 election. It's amusing that you won't.
Posted by: Evil Otto

Why? You haven't adequately explained why you think Obama is the tyrant you claim he is.
You just quote things you've heard from FOX and other fascist idiots.
If you explain in your own honest opinions, then I won't extend you the same kindness.

And I can't believe you would be so vindictive that you would archive comments from 3 fucking weeks ago to use as ammunition in our petty squabbling, and have the balls to call me desperate.

Why? You haven't adequately explained why you think Obama is the tyrant you claim he is.

Hmm. (looking around) Exactly where did I claim that Obama was a tyrant? Please post my words, Aqua. Y'see, you keep making unsubstantiated claims. When pused to actually prove them, you attempt to change the subject. EVERY. TIME.

You're really not good at this, Aquatarkus. One of the basic rules of argument is that it is up to the person making the statement to prove it. You've now made two in this thread. The first was about the 2000 election. Now you've made a claim that I called Obama a tyrant. PROVE IT, or admit you can't.

You just quote things you've heard from FOX and other fascist idiots.

Ah, and now FOX is "fascist." Prove that too.

If you explain in your own honest opinions, then I won't extend you the same kindness.

No, that's not it. First, you're not asking me to prove my "honest opinions," because I never said Obama was a tyrant. Second, it's not that you won't prove it, it's that you can't.

Stop pretending. You said something you can't back up, and now you're trying every trick you can think of to change the subject.

And I can't believe you would be so vindictive that you would archive comments from 3 fucking weeks ago to use as ammunition in our petty squabbling, and have the balls to call me desperate.

(laughs) Aww, you poor baby. You really do want those inconvenient words to disappear, don't you? Your behavior here has shown that the sneering, bored leftist you pretend to be just isn't the truth. You HATE US. You enjoy it, revel in it. Admit it, Aqua.

Oh, and you still haven't posted proof of your claims that Bush lost the 2000 election. I'm going to keep reminding you of that fact, however long it takes. You WILL post proof, or you will admit you can't. Because I'm going to keep reminding you and everyone else of that fact.

Maybe your right, in a way.
Maybe I do just come here to criticise the right.

I sure as hell don't come here for reasoned debate.

If I wanted that I would go to my intelligent, Liberal friends and family, rather than get into shit-flinging contests with some miserable old fucker in some grotty corner of the internet.

You know how you said you were Liberal, but you grew out of it?
Well I discussed this with a friend of mine who is an academic, and we decided by “grew out of it”, you actually meant “became a bitter, twisted old bastard, who gave up on the world and everything he believed in because of several self-perceived inadequacies and apathy”.

How did Bush lose the 2000 elections?

Simple: He bribed officials to discard votes for Gore, lied about his popularity and his dad had the influence to make sure he won.

How is FOX fascist?

Any retard can see they have a violently far-right bias, which is fascism as far as I'm concerned.

As for the whole asking you to explain about Obama, I think I confused you with some other git, you're all the same to me.

Maybe your right, in a way.
Maybe I do just come here to criticise the right.

Not what I said. You come here because you HATE the right. You despise us. And you enjoy that feeling. It shows you to be a liar.

Just admit it. You comment here because you hate us.

I sure as hell don't come here for reasoned debate.

Look, Aqua, you don't even know how to do reasoned debate. The first rule of reasoned debate is that you have to prove your claims. You won't do that, so any attempt to claim that's really what you'd like is meaningless.

If I wanted that I would go to my intelligent, Liberal friends and family,

Oh, I know you'd be more comfortable with your echo chamber. I'm sure your liberals friends and family never demand you actually prove what you say.

rather than get into shit-flinging contests with some miserable old fucker in some grotty corner of the internet.

So leave. Nobody is forcing you to be here.

You know how you said you were Liberal, but you grew out of it?

Yep. I was a liberal, but I got better. Not that I was ever as pathetically bad at defending my opinions as you are...

Well I discussed this with a friend of mine who is an academic,

No you didn't. Seriously, you discussed me with an "academic" friend? Cut the crap, Aquatarkus... you did no such thing.

and we decided by “grew out of it”, you actually meant “became a bitter, twisted old bastard, who gave up on the world and everything he believed in because of several self-perceived inadequacies and apathy”.

You really are precious. First, you and your imaginary friend's opinions of me are irrelevant. This is a mosh pit... either defend your statements or don't, but spare me your bargain-basement psychoanalysis and act like a grown-up. You've said a great many things here and proven NONE of them. That is failure on your part. And you know it.

Second, you are just some random guy sitting behind a keyboard. I don't really give a crap what you think. I don't want to be liked by you, don't want to impress you. I enjoy taking your feeble comments apart because it's entertaining to do so. I enjoy watching you squirm, watching you dodge and duck questions, watching you constantly change the subject.

Oh, and by the way, you haven't proven that Bush lost the 2000 election. Do so.

How did Bush lose the 2000 elections?

Simple: He bribed officials to discard votes for Gore, lied about his popularity and his dad had the influence to make sure he won.

WHAT?!?

THAT IS YOUR "PROOF?"

Holy crap, I thought you were an idiot, but I overestimated you. I mean, seriously, that is one of the most intensely stupid things I have EVER read. When I demanded proof, I mean that you actually had to back up your claims with, y'know, proof. Not further claims that are even more bizarre than the earlier claims.

So Bush bribed officials? Where did you find that? What news source broke that story? Was it the Associated Press? Reuters?

And then he... "lied lied about his popularity." Which somehow won the election. How? Well, you don't know, Aqua, because you're making this up.

And then his dad had the "influence" to make sure he won? How, Aquatarkus?

I can see why you didn't want to prove your statements. Because you can't. You don't know that Gore won, you just assume it because it's what you want to believe. So you just handed me the biggest load of paranoid horseshit I've read in a long time.

How is FOX fascist?

Any retard can see

You know we're in for a fun time when someone uses a line like "any retard can see" in his proof.

they have a violently far-right bias, which is fascism as far as I'm concerned.

"As far as I'm concerned" isn't proof. It's opinion. And you don't know the difference. And the word "fascist" has a specific meaning. Has FOX called for a tyranny? Has FOX called for the extermination of any races? Have they demanded a state take-over of the economy?

To a simpleton like you, fascist means "anything I don't like." You don't like FOX, so it's fascist.

As for the whole asking you to explain about Obama, I think I confused you with some other git, you're all the same to me.

Are you that stupid that you don't even know who you're responding to or what they said?

Aquatarkus, why are you here? You're so far out of your league that I feel a little guilty for hammering you. You're so pathetically bad at this I almost feel like I'm pounding on someone who can't fight back.

You don't think, Aqua, you feel. You don't know the actual details of why Bush won, but you feel he shouldn't have, so you just make things up. You probably believe everything you wrote about the election, but YOU HAVE NO PROOF. You simply feel that it is correct, but you haven't done even the most basic research into the subject.

For your own sake, just stop. You've got nothing left. You can't even pretend to be a thinking person anymore, after you posted that.

No you didn't. Seriously, you discussed me with an "academic" friend?
Posted by: Evil Otto

Fuck off, yes I did.
She's an actual academic, she is a professor, she works for a univesity, she has a PhD, she's conducted many studies and has had published research.

Is the concept of friendship alien to you?

"Aquatarkus at October 16, 2009 4:18 PM"

For a Liberal/socialist, an accusation is an acceptable substitute for PROOF; but for INTELEGENT people, it's crap.

You can't change the fact that several LIBERAL news outlets have proven several times that BUSH won in 2000.

I wrote this basic analysis of leftists months ago. I'm going to post it again, because once more the leftists like Aquatarkus have proven everything I wrote is correct.

----------------------------------
1) The leftist troll always believes himself to be smarter than his opponent. Always. No matter how idiotic his arguments, no matter how easily they are torn apart, he never wavers in this belief.

2) Similarly, the troll knows that he is better educated. Even if he is a high school freshman arguing against someone with multiple degrees, his opponent is an ignorant, illiterate boob with a third-grade education.

3) His opponents are racists. ALL of them. This is not even guilty-until-proven-innocent, since there is no way for the opponent to prove to the leftist that he isn't racist.

4) His opponents are fascists. The leftist troll doesn't even truly understand the meaning of the word, but nonetheless labels everyone who disagrees with him as fascists or Nazis.

5) The troll believes himself to be tolerant, yet shows no respect whatsoever for anyone's opinion that doesn't agree with his. He is perfectly willing to indulge in the vilest accusations and basest insults, all the while believing in his heart that he is a tolerant and open-minded person. Leftists HATE. They hate with a pure, single-minded passion that would impress a member of the KKK.

6) There is NO DIFFERENCE WHATSOEVER in their political views. Quiz them on a subject, and you can always predict the answer they will give you. The trolls are interchangeable.

In the end, nothing we say matters to them. They don't care what we think, don't have any intention of listening to anything that casts doubts on their view that government (at least, when they are in charge of it) is the solution to all of life's problems. They're here to dazzle themselves with their own brilliance. Coming here and stirring up shit is just a form of masturbation to them, and we're the props in their sick fantasies.

YOU HAVE NO PROOF.
Posted by: Evil Otto

What's your point?
That hasn't stopped people from believing a number of fictitious things.

No-one has managed to prove whether ghosts exist, but that doesn't stop people from saying they've seen them.

You don't think, ..., you feel.
Posted by: Evil Otto

Yes, and I imagine you're feeling pretty pissed off right now.

Fuck off, yes I did.

Whatever you say. After all, nobody ever lies on the internet.

But hey, if you're not lying (and I think you are, don't get me wrong), it's nice to know that I got under your skin so much that you had conversations about me with friends. Can't really claim to be bored and disinterested, can you? I must have REALLY pissed you off. Just as I'm doing now.

Sweet.

She's an actual academic, she is a professor, she works for a univesity, she has a PhD, she's conducted many studies and has had published research.

Hmm. Wondering why I should care.

Is the concept of friendship alien to you?

No. The concept of discussing an internet argument with a friend off the internet, then doing a pointless psychoanalysis of the opponent (without said opponent being present for your brilliant friend to actually judge), that is alien. I mean, it's just plain weird.

Feel free to tell your friend all about his thread too. Make sure to leave out the parts where you embarrassed yourself.

What's your point?

What's my... point?

So... you know what you posted wasn't true? That you believe in something without proof? Why not just claim that the Illuminati rigged the election for Bush? It would make about as much sense.

That hasn't stopped people from believing a number of fictitious things.

So you believe something that is fictitious. Got it. And you know it is fictitious, but you believe it anyway.

Wow, Orwell was right. You've mastered the art of doublethink. You're a fine citizen of Airstrip One.

No-one has managed to prove whether ghosts exist, but that doesn't stop people from saying they've seen them.

Ghosts? So what you've just done is compare your own beliefs about the 2000 election to people believing in ghosts.

I really don't know how to respond to this. You are freely admitting you're arguing from a position of fiction. And worse, you're OK with that. Hell, I don't have to argue against you. At this point, you're arguing against yourself.

Whether or not somebody believes something is irrelevant to whether it is actually true. Reality exists separate from people's beliefs, Aqua. If I were to believe that Obama is a space alien, it wouldn't make him a space alien.

Yes, and I imagine you're feeling pretty pissed off right now.

No, actually, I'm delighted. You've shown yourself to be absolutely pathetic. You just believe random things, no proof required. And when someone demands proof, you have none and are fine with that.

I won, Aquatarkus. I didn't even have to destroy your arguments... you destroyed your OWN arguments. At this point, you're just here out of sheer stubbornness and hate. You're trying to get in the last word. I'm going to give it to you, since my work here is done.

I'm going to bookmark this thread, though. You've provided such WONDERFUL ammunition for future arguments. Your comments here were a masterpiece of hate-filled, incoherent crazy.

Have a nice day, kook.

1) I don't ever recall saying I was smarter than you, only that I'm probably younger than you.

2) Point 2 is exactly the same as point 1, only worded differently.

3) How come someone posted a article claiming that two completely different-looking black guys looked exactly the same and everyone had a good laugh about it?
And how come I'm not allowed to say that I don't hate Muslims without several people calling me a pussy? (I know you said Muslims aren't a race, but for the sake of argument, I assume the hatred was actually aimed at Arabic people, who generally follow Islam)

4) I'm refusing to distinguish between fascists, Nazis and conservatives on the grounds that this site refuses to distinguish between liberals, socialists and communists, even though they are 3 separate ideologies.

5) In my mind, I am merely showing hate and intolerance towards people who I believe to be even more hateful and intolerant, as the society in which I live would understand such concepts.
In real life, people tell me that I'm kind, patient, intelligent and quiet, what I say on this site is merely a persona that shouldn't be confused with how I really am.

6) What's your point? You need to give examples, it isn't fair to generalise.
You haven't spoken to every liberal ever, therefore you can't prove that to be true.

In the end, the love you take,
is equal to the love you make.

Let's agree to disagree.

Let's agree to disagree.

No. You're an idiot. An incoherent, none-too-bright fool who believes random things for no reason and couldn't argue his way out of a paper bag. In the first thread you showed up on this blog, you played this same game... you were a total tool, then called for a cease fire. I gave it to you. A couple weeks later, this is the result.

I try to give everyone a second chance. I don't give third chances. Aquatarkus, there will be no "agree to disagree" with you. I'm going to quote-mine this thread and use them every time you try this same crap. You've made comments here that will make you a laughingstock on this blog, and I'm going to make sure everyone reads them. And I'm going to demand proof for every claim you make. And I'm going to enjoy it.

So save your Beatles-quotes. You've not demonstrated love, and you'll get none in return.

You're an idiot.
Posted by: Evil Otto

Yeah.... you do know you're arguing with a guy who has a learning disability, right?

“Bah! Typical liberal victim mentality!”

We're both so predictable...

I'm going to quote-mine this thread and use them every time you try this same crap.
Posted by: Evil Otto

You really are a conceited turd aren't you?

Hang on, you only made one nitpicking comment just then.

Oh yeah, that's right, I defeated your shitey, over-simplified checklist.

Wow - y'all are really passionate, which is something I admire whether or not I agree with you. I must say, though, it's obvious that LIBS are either blinded, do NOT understand policy & FACTS or just plain stupid (sorry I'm reduced to saying that, but hey - it's the TRUTH which is something the LIBS have a problem with) We need to pray for them, but more importantly for our country. What part of OBAMA, PELOSI, REID, & THE REST OF THE CORRUPT GOVERNMENT is ruining our country don't you understand? Don't bother sending a lecture and acting like you're superior. You obviously are brain-washed. I am an INDEPENDENT who is sick & tired of MOST politicians - Democrat AND Republicans - so don't EVEN go there! Look in the mirror before you blast off against TRUE PATRIOTS who are trying to save our beloved U.S.A.

I don't much care for the concept of political parties, especially in Britain.
What happened over and over again in the last century was that in one election, people voted Labour.
One or two elections later, people were sick of Labour and vote Conservative.
One or two elections later, people were sick of the Conservatives and voted Labour.
One or two elections later, people were sick of Labour and voted Conservative.
And so on and so on.

It's just a see-saw, with one party becoming the favourite and the other falling out of favour.

So my thought was (It still requires further consideration) that maybe we should do away with having one ruling party and just elect individuals to a single, unified government.
Yeah, I know, it's not a proper workable concept...... yet.

What the fuck are you on about?

Do you believe everything you read?

Aquatarkus..hummmm or Wellstone doesn't really matter both are total losers.

But What does matter is that I.P. addresses tell lots, like your name, where you live, We might just call your Mommy. NOW Listen Punk "Aquatarkfool" and listen real well, I will say this just once, mind your manners, Be respectful, cool it with the liberal gutter talk. Or.....

I'm just a weak little limey faggot who thinks he knows everything even though I am a poorly informed teenage punk.

Just ignore me. I am a worthless piece of shit who would be speaking German (along with the rest of my countrymen) right now were it not for the USA.

Why do you keep going back to the “we saved your ass in WW2” thing?

I wouldn't go up to a Spanish person and say “Suck it bitch, our navy totally owned your Armada!”

It's as though you're claiming personal responsibility for something you never actually did.

"As I am," one party rule is essentially Communism. No natural expression of the multitude of ideologies within a population could possibly be served by it. That's why, as messy as the party system is, it at least serves the purpose of keeping politicians honest for fear of being ousted.

One-party rule is indeed one of the facets of communism, but that's not to say that this hypothetical party would rule with an iron fist.

One of the premises our country our country was founded upon was that too much power in the hands of too few is a formula for tyranny. Granted, there have been a few absolute monarchs throughout history who have ruled benevolently, but that can turnaround in one generation with the installation of a bad ruler. I think this chasing after Utopia is unhealthy and unrealistic. It denies the failings that are inherent in human nature rather than seeking to mitigate those weaknesses by setting up checks and balances. Our system of government may not be perfect, but I contend that no system made up of fallible human beings ever will be.

Judith M. :

The really annoying thing about politics and business is that power isn't awarded to the meek or the intelligent, but to the greedy and the rich.

The British government is trying to encourage a sense of ambition and competitiveness in the young people, by promoting enterprise in schools and by forcing schools to compete with each other for resources.

However, the only real outcomes of this will be that years from now, strees and anxiety related illnesses will increase, people will be overly ambitious but won't have the talents to achieve anything, the rich/poor divide will grow and families will find find it harder to remain together.

Power will still only be given to the greediest, but their ambition will far exceed their abilities, and it will only get worse.

And in case you were wondering, this isn't necessarily politics, this is sociology.
New Right perspective - competition must be encouraged.
Marxist perspective - competition leads to inequalities.

If you can't understand what I wrote Evil Otto, it's because I have difficulty communicating, and you're a bastard for picking on me.

I guess Aquatarkus needs to keep his sorry mouth shut until he matures and can learn to communicate like an adult.

Until then, he can just trash talk anything he doesn't like with his omni-sexual freak friend.

It is fascinating the way you call me immature, then proceed to leave childish comments about a person you have never met, just so you can have the last word.

Also Uncle Rick sounds like the nickname of some local sex offender.

“I looked out the window this morning to see Uncle Rick flashing his knob at traffic again.....”

"The really annoying thing about politics and business is that power isn't awarded to the meek or the intelligent, but to the greedy and the rich."

I'm afraid that's true of every system, Aqua, including communism (although communism usually makes a certain elite class rich after they've wrested power by force from those who know how to create wealth, thereby creating an even more impoverished working class).

"The British government is trying to encourage a sense of ambition and competitiveness in the young people, by promoting enterprise in schools and by forcing schools to compete with each other for resources.

However, the only real outcomes of this will be that years from now, strees and anxiety related illnesses will increase, people will be overly ambitious but won't have the talents to achieve anything, the rich/poor divide will grow and families will find find it harder to remain together."

The reason students are so poorly educated has nothing to do with demanding that schools educate them. Schools that do not deliver should be starved out. But you seem to have mixed two issues together here. One regarding school competition, and one regarding competition between students. Competition can be a powerful motivator for some students, but I personally believe the most healthy intellectual curiosity is one that is driven by one's own intellectual curiosity. This sort of curiosity is not motivated by wanting to know more than someone else, but by wanting to know as much as one can about a given subject.

"Power will still only be given to the greediest, but their ambition will far exceed their abilities, and it will only get worse."

Sure, but you see this occurring in socialist and communist countries all the time, too. It seems to be more connected to a lack of scruples in the lust for power than a by-product of any particular, political ideology.

"And in case you were wondering, this isn't necessarily politics, this is sociology.

New Right perspective - competition must be encouraged.

Marxist perspective - competition leads to inequalities."

Let me ask you, would you rather be treated by a doctor who was tested and tested and tested again and found to be the best among his peers, or a doctor who came from a pool that didn't have very stringent requirements for membership? Competition is generally the best way to create a system based on merit rather than connections, and it tends to benefit not just the people who really are the best at what they do, but the people who need their services, as well.