Chuck Norris Will Bring '1,000 Years Of Darkness'


Off-Topic Discussions

151 to 200 of 245 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

Andrew R wrote:
Irontruth wrote:
Aretas wrote:

At Iron truth: Don't say it another way, show me how you support Chuck Norris is a subconscious racist? Focus, CHUCK NORRIS.

You're missing my point. This has nothing to do with Chuck Norris. This has to do with you saying the same thing too many times, that that concept no longer has meaning to me.

You know how when you say a word out loud a whole bunch of times in a row and suddenly it starts to sound strange? Its that. Your catchphrase of "this isn't racism" has become meaningless when you say it. Or maybe you're just unsure of what racism is.

I'm not saying Chuck Norris is racist. I'm saying your overall defense of republican's not being racist sounds like meaningless babble to me now. You don't actually provide anything in your defense except a counter attack. That might work in a firefight, but it doesn't work in logic.

By that same standard isn't the slinging of the term racist meaningless now anyway?

Are you going to tell me the KKK don't exist? Or that they aren't racist?


Freehold DM wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
A Man In Black wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
Against affirmative action are you?

Affirmative action isn't institutional bigotry. It's a (crude) tool to reverse the effects of institutional bigotry.

Here is a simple illustration of the concept.

Except that is EXACTLY what it is. We will "help" the right groups because of the past. F**k the white poor son of an immigrant that needs a job too. he must have white privilege to pay his way.
I've never been in favor of affirmative action. It ended up being a quota system in faaaaaar too many ways to be palatable to me. I was in favor of identifying potential employees by Social Security Number, but even that's no good considering employers wanting to know your financial background and such. Very rarely do I list my race on identification forms.

And most of the time they want to talk to you too. It's hard to hide your race in person.

*Race here being a construct at least partly in the mind of the beholder. Self identification is important, but if someone is prejudiced against what you appear to be, it doesn't really matter what you identify as.

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Irontruth wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
Irontruth wrote:
Aretas wrote:

At Iron truth: Don't say it another way, show me how you support Chuck Norris is a subconscious racist? Focus, CHUCK NORRIS.

You're missing my point. This has nothing to do with Chuck Norris. This has to do with you saying the same thing too many times, that that concept no longer has meaning to me.

You know how when you say a word out loud a whole bunch of times in a row and suddenly it starts to sound strange? Its that. Your catchphrase of "this isn't racism" has become meaningless when you say it. Or maybe you're just unsure of what racism is.

I'm not saying Chuck Norris is racist. I'm saying your overall defense of republican's not being racist sounds like meaningless babble to me now. You don't actually provide anything in your defense except a counter attack. That might work in a firefight, but it doesn't work in logic.

By that same standard isn't the slinging of the term racist meaningless now anyway?
Are you going to tell me the KKK don't exist? Or that they aren't racist?

yes kkk, black panthers, la raza and dozens of similar groups exist. real racism does exist. too often anything a white person says that pisses off anyone not white gets called racism even when race is not part of it though, and blatant racism from non whites is given a pass.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Okay, imagine this scenario.
Racism is considered a bad thing, and appearing to be racist hurts your election prospects as a politician as well as profits if you're a corporation or small business.
But, hey, racists are gonna be racist. So they mask their language and their intent. They can't say "hey, this law is going to keep black people down, cuz eff them" they instead say, for example "look, the Civil Rights Act was a federal government overreach into rights reserved to the individual states by the 10th ammendment, and is therefore unconstitutional".

Now this argument (or others like it) may sway perfectly innocent non racist people into backing it, into voting a party into power that has it on their agenda, etc. But it doesn't change the fact that the motive behind the argument, as well as the consequences of it coming to fruition, are absolutely racist.

So, there aren't two categories of people, racists and non racists, and not all racism is open. In fact the vast vast majority of it isn't. It's subtle. So much so that people that are genuinely racist (I've met them) have convinced themselves they're really not.

If legislation comes down the pipe, regardless of its apparent intentions, that favors one race/gender/class/ethnicity or disparages one or more. Legislations which have discriminatory implications in general. I reserve the right to look at it dubiously and call foul.

RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32

Andrew R wrote:
yes kkk, black panthers, la raza and dozens of similar groups exist. real racism does exist. too often anything a white person says that pisses off anyone not white gets called racism even when race is not part of it though, and blatant racism from non whites is given a pass.

Which La Raza are you talking about? Because the only La Razas that still exist in a real way in the US are National Council on La Raza, a Hispanic/Chicano advocacy group in the model of the NAACP, and La Raza Nation, a Chicago street gang. Neither is a racist hate group (although La Raza Nation is hardly to be complimented!)

Nobody is oppressing you because you're white, dude. People are oppressing you because you're poor, but shitting on other people who are being oppressed for other reasons—often people who are also poor—isn't going to improve your station.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
A Man In Black wrote:


Nobody is oppressing you because you're white, dude. People are oppressing you because you're poor, but s+@~ting on other people who are being oppressed for other reasons—often people who are also poor—isn't going to improve your station.

I've found that one of the better ways to identify covert racism among white Americans is to look for those griping about American whites being oppressed. The oppression to which they are inevitably referring is the partial, incremental removal of some of the four centuries of unearned privilege that they consider their birthright. They're white supremacists who just don't want to own up.

Of course there's a whole constellation of policy positions that are also very good markers. Meatrace pointed out one of the biggest ones.


Andrew R wrote:
Irontruth wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
Irontruth wrote:
Aretas wrote:

At Iron truth: Don't say it another way, show me how you support Chuck Norris is a subconscious racist? Focus, CHUCK NORRIS.

You're missing my point. This has nothing to do with Chuck Norris. This has to do with you saying the same thing too many times, that that concept no longer has meaning to me.

You know how when you say a word out loud a whole bunch of times in a row and suddenly it starts to sound strange? Its that. Your catchphrase of "this isn't racism" has become meaningless when you say it. Or maybe you're just unsure of what racism is.

I'm not saying Chuck Norris is racist. I'm saying your overall defense of republican's not being racist sounds like meaningless babble to me now. You don't actually provide anything in your defense except a counter attack. That might work in a firefight, but it doesn't work in logic.

By that same standard isn't the slinging of the term racist meaningless now anyway?
Are you going to tell me the KKK don't exist? Or that they aren't racist?
yes kkk, black panthers, la raza and dozens of similar groups exist. real racism does exist. too often anything a white person says that pisses off anyone not white gets called racism even when race is not part of it though, and blatant racism from non whites is given a pass.

Cool, your reactionary defensiveness about racism means that no useful outcome can happen in a conversation.

I care less about racism that takes the form of angry words. Institutionalized racism, like criminal sentences is much worse.


.

Whoah Oh!

Has Mittens just lost completely??

.

The Exchange

Irontruth wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
Irontruth wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
Irontruth wrote:
Aretas wrote:

At Iron truth: Don't say it another way, show me how you support Chuck Norris is a subconscious racist? Focus, CHUCK NORRIS.

You're missing my point. This has nothing to do with Chuck Norris. This has to do with you saying the same thing too many times, that that concept no longer has meaning to me.

You know how when you say a word out loud a whole bunch of times in a row and suddenly it starts to sound strange? Its that. Your catchphrase of "this isn't racism" has become meaningless when you say it. Or maybe you're just unsure of what racism is.

I'm not saying Chuck Norris is racist. I'm saying your overall defense of republican's not being racist sounds like meaningless babble to me now. You don't actually provide anything in your defense except a counter attack. That might work in a firefight, but it doesn't work in logic.

By that same standard isn't the slinging of the term racist meaningless now anyway?
Are you going to tell me the KKK don't exist? Or that they aren't racist?
yes kkk, black panthers, la raza and dozens of similar groups exist. real racism does exist. too often anything a white person says that pisses off anyone not white gets called racism even when race is not part of it though, and blatant racism from non whites is given a pass.

Cool, your reactionary defensiveness about racism means that no useful outcome can happen in a conversation.

I care less about racism that takes the form of angry words. Institutionalized racism, like criminal sentences is much worse.

i disagree with all racism too, i just don't pretend some kinds are OK


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber
Freehold DM wrote:
Very rarely do I list my race on identification forms.

I either refuse to answer those, or -- if the option permits -- I check the Other box and write in "human."


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Grand Magus wrote:

.

Whoah Oh!

Has Mittens just lost completely??

.

Gaff: noun. A rare moment in which a politician is honest.

Sovereign Court

Freehold DM wrote:
I was in favor of identifying potential employees by Social Security Number, but even that's no good considering employers wanting to know your financial background and such. Very rarely do I list my race on identification forms.

Yeah, I run into this as a woman with a computer engineering degree. I'm damned good at what I do, and it pisses me off when people assume I am where I am because "companies just wanted a woman in IT to try to be diverse". The problem is, I can't be sure that's not the case. There's one place I worked for where I suspect it was a consideration, honestly...the owner made a lot of dumb decision based on what he thought would be "cool" - I left after a year because I was scared he would run the place into the ground.

sometimes I can laugh about, shrug off or deflect comments. Sometimes they hit harder than I'd like to admit.

I was interviewing some guys (every applicant that got through HR was male) for an intern position, and every single one, during the interview, wanted to know what my position was. One just flat out stated he thought I was with HR. This was the second interview, I'd already introduced myself, and I'd just spent 30 minutes asking them programming questions. And they were all shocked I would be their supervisor, and worked in IT. At first it was amusing...after the third it got darned annoying!

thunderspirit wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
Very rarely do I list my race on identification forms.
I either refuse to answer those, or -- if the option permits -- I check the Other box and write in "human."

If I'm feeling particularly cantakerous, I sometimes write "American" in the "other" slot.


Andrew R wrote:
i disagree with all racism too, i just don't pretend some kinds are OK

That's fine. But when I hear people complain about the black panthers just as much as the sentencing inconsistencies for drug offenses, that tells me they don't share a useful view of the problem from my perspective.

The Exchange

Irontruth wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
i disagree with all racism too, i just don't pretend some kinds are OK
That's fine. But when I hear people complain about the black panthers just as much as the sentencing inconsistencies for drug offenses, that tells me they don't share a useful view of the problem from my perspective.

So too much punishment for some offenses (no punishment for NOT offending, just sayin) is a "real" race issue but a violent, racially motivated, group that got a pass at voter intimidation is a non-issue that how dare we bring that up?


Like I said, I really don't have anything to discuss with you if you want to pretend those two issues are equal. You can rail about it if you like, but your perception of racism isn't even close to what I see.

RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32

Andrew R wrote:
So too much punishment for some offenses (no punishment for NOT offending, just sayin) is a "real" race issue but a violent, racially motivated, group that got a pass at voter intimidation is a non-issue that how dare we bring that up?

Any single state voter ID law will disenfranchise more people in one national election than have ever been members of the Black Panthers. This is why people don't take the Black Panthers very seriously: they haven't been influential or widespread in 20 years, have not had any role in government other than "outside critic" ever, and at this point have radicalized themselves into a militant racist rump with a three-digit mailing list. Other black hate groups are basically Christian Identity with a different race (and sometimes a different religion) plugged in.

It's myopic to focus on hate groups as the main manifestation of racism, though. Overtly racial hate groups aren't tolerated any more. Today, what affects people's lives are institutions and programs which serve to needlessly perpetuate racist attitudes and racial inequality.


A Man In Black wrote:
Any single state voter ID law will disenfranchise more people in one national election than have ever been members of the Black Panthers. This is why people don't take the Black Panthers very seriously: they haven't been influential or widespread in 20 years,

You probably already know this, but it bears stating that the New Black Panthers was a split-off from the Nation of Islam and has nothing to do with the original Black Panther Party for (Armed) Self Defense.

Free Huey!

All power to the people!

Vive le Galt!


Jess Door wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
I was in favor of identifying potential employees by Social Security Number, but even that's no good considering employers wanting to know your financial background and such. Very rarely do I list my race on identification forms.

Yeah, I run into this as a woman with a computer engineering degree. I'm damned good at what I do, and it pisses me off when people assume I am where I am because "companies just wanted a woman in IT to try to be diverse". The problem is, I can't be sure that's not the case. There's one place I worked for where I suspect it was a consideration, honestly...the owner made a lot of dumb decision based on what he thought would be "cool" - I left after a year because I was scared he would run the place into the ground.

sometimes I can laugh about, shrug off or deflect comments. Sometimes they hit harder than I'd like to admit.

I was interviewing some guys (every applicant that got through HR was male) for an intern position, and every single one, during the interview, wanted to know what my position was. One just flat out stated he thought I was with HR. This was the second interview, I'd already introduced myself, and I'd just spent 30 minutes asking them programming questions. And they were all shocked I would be their supervisor, and worked in IT. At first it was amusing...after the third it got darned annoying!

thunderspirit wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
Very rarely do I list my race on identification forms.
I either refuse to answer those, or -- if the option permits -- I check the Other box and write in "human."
If I'm feeling particularly cantakerous, I sometimes write "American" in the "other" slot.

I know I don't work in the field, but I have no idea why someone's gender would mean they aren't good at their job.


Andrew R wrote:
Irontruth wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
i disagree with all racism too, i just don't pretend some kinds are OK
That's fine. But when I hear people complain about the black panthers just as much as the sentencing inconsistencies for drug offenses, that tells me they don't share a useful view of the problem from my perspective.
So too much punishment for some offenses (no punishment for NOT offending, just sayin) is a "real" race issue but a violent, racially motivated, group that got a pass at voter intimidation is a non-issue that how dare we bring that up?

Voter intimidation? Unless they're getting into the booth with you, I find such accusations to be ridiculous.


Also, this. Noone takes the Black Panthers seriously anymore. They've become the punchline to a particularly tasteless joke.

A Man In Black wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
So too much punishment for some offenses (no punishment for NOT offending, just sayin) is a "real" race issue but a violent, racially motivated, group that got a pass at voter intimidation is a non-issue that how dare we bring that up?

Any single state voter ID law will disenfranchise more people in one national election than have ever been members of the Black Panthers. This is why people don't take the Black Panthers very seriously: they haven't been influential or widespread in 20 years, have not had any role in government other than "outside critic" ever, and at this point have radicalized themselves into a militant racist rump with a three-digit mailing list. Other black hate groups are basically Christian Identity with a different race (and sometimes a different religion) plugged in.

It's myopic to focus on hate groups as the main manifestation of racism, though. Overtly racial hate groups aren't tolerated any more. Today, what affects people's lives are institutions and programs which serve to needlessly perpetuate racist attitudes and racial inequality.


Freehold DM wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
Irontruth wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
i disagree with all racism too, i just don't pretend some kinds are OK
That's fine. But when I hear people complain about the black panthers just as much as the sentencing inconsistencies for drug offenses, that tells me they don't share a useful view of the problem from my perspective.
So too much punishment for some offenses (no punishment for NOT offending, just sayin) is a "real" race issue but a violent, racially motivated, group that got a pass at voter intimidation is a non-issue that how dare we bring that up?
Voter intimidation? Unless they're getting into the booth with you, I find such accusations to be ridiculous.

Generally the point is to keep people (or the wrong people) from voting in the first place.

Were the death threats blacks in the south faced for trying to register or vote in the 50s and 60s ridiculous too?

This particular case does seem ridiculous. 2 guys in a mostly black neighborhood not being taken too seriously, since the investigation couldn't find evidence that anyone had been intimidated. It's still a serious crime.

The Exchange

thejeff wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
Irontruth wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
i disagree with all racism too, i just don't pretend some kinds are OK
That's fine. But when I hear people complain about the black panthers just as much as the sentencing inconsistencies for drug offenses, that tells me they don't share a useful view of the problem from my perspective.
So too much punishment for some offenses (no punishment for NOT offending, just sayin) is a "real" race issue but a violent, racially motivated, group that got a pass at voter intimidation is a non-issue that how dare we bring that up?
Voter intimidation? Unless they're getting into the booth with you, I find such accusations to be ridiculous.

Generally the point is to keep people (or the wrong people) from voting in the first place.

Were the death threats blacks in the south faced for trying to register or vote in the 50s and 60s ridiculous too?

This particular case does seem ridiculous. 2 guys in a mostly black neighborhood not being taken too seriously, since the investigation couldn't find evidence that anyone had been intimidated. It's still a serious crime.

If they were white they would be in jail, that what the problem is.

RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32

Andrew R wrote:
If they were white they would be in jail, that what the problem is.

It's fairly common for groups to do this, if only to keep an eye on "the other guys'" poll watchers. Plus, despite being racists, they don't have the history of intimidating people at the polls that, say, the KKK has.

It's a non-issue raised by far-right media to play into the exact same false equivalence argument that you're making now. "At one polling station in the entire US, two black guys from a hate group with a membership in the dozens were acquitted of voter intimidation. Obviously both sides are disenfranchising voters!"


thejeff wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
Irontruth wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
i disagree with all racism too, i just don't pretend some kinds are OK
That's fine. But when I hear people complain about the black panthers just as much as the sentencing inconsistencies for drug offenses, that tells me they don't share a useful view of the problem from my perspective.
So too much punishment for some offenses (no punishment for NOT offending, just sayin) is a "real" race issue but a violent, racially motivated, group that got a pass at voter intimidation is a non-issue that how dare we bring that up?
Voter intimidation? Unless they're getting into the booth with you, I find such accusations to be ridiculous.

Generally the point is to keep people (or the wrong people) from voting in the first place.

Were the death threats blacks in the south faced for trying to register or vote in the 50s and 60s ridiculous too?

This particular case does seem ridiculous. 2 guys in a mostly black neighborhood not being taken too seriously, since the investigation couldn't find evidence that anyone had been intimidated. It's still a serious crime.

Death threats are not intimidation. Death threats will get you put in jail.


Freehold DM wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
Irontruth wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
i disagree with all racism too, i just don't pretend some kinds are OK
That's fine. But when I hear people complain about the black panthers just as much as the sentencing inconsistencies for drug offenses, that tells me they don't share a useful view of the problem from my perspective.
So too much punishment for some offenses (no punishment for NOT offending, just sayin) is a "real" race issue but a violent, racially motivated, group that got a pass at voter intimidation is a non-issue that how dare we bring that up?
Voter intimidation? Unless they're getting into the booth with you, I find such accusations to be ridiculous.

Generally the point is to keep people (or the wrong people) from voting in the first place.

Were the death threats blacks in the south faced for trying to register or vote in the 50s and 60s ridiculous too?

This particular case does seem ridiculous. 2 guys in a mostly black neighborhood not being taken too seriously, since the investigation couldn't find evidence that anyone had been intimidated. It's still a serious crime.

Death threats are not intimidation. Death threats will get you put in jail.

"I will kill you if you go in to vote." That is a death threat. It is also voter intimidation. I don't understand why you think otherwise.

Back in the death, threatening black votes didn't get you jail time.

Anyway, do you get my basic point that voter intimidation is about keeping people from voting, not about going into the booth with them?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Andrew R wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
Irontruth wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
i disagree with all racism too, i just don't pretend some kinds are OK
That's fine. But when I hear people complain about the black panthers just as much as the sentencing inconsistencies for drug offenses, that tells me they don't share a useful view of the problem from my perspective.
So too much punishment for some offenses (no punishment for NOT offending, just sayin) is a "real" race issue but a violent, racially motivated, group that got a pass at voter intimidation is a non-issue that how dare we bring that up?
Voter intimidation? Unless they're getting into the booth with you, I find such accusations to be ridiculous.

Generally the point is to keep people (or the wrong people) from voting in the first place.

Were the death threats blacks in the south faced for trying to register or vote in the 50s and 60s ridiculous too?

This particular case does seem ridiculous. 2 guys in a mostly black neighborhood not being taken too seriously, since the investigation couldn't find evidence that anyone had been intimidated. It's still a serious crime.

If they were white they would be in jail, that what the problem is.

If they were white, they would pass a voter ID law.


thejeff wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
Irontruth wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
i disagree with all racism too, i just don't pretend some kinds are OK
That's fine. But when I hear people complain about the black panthers just as much as the sentencing inconsistencies for drug offenses, that tells me they don't share a useful view of the problem from my perspective.
So too much punishment for some offenses (no punishment for NOT offending, just sayin) is a "real" race issue but a violent, racially motivated, group that got a pass at voter intimidation is a non-issue that how dare we bring that up?
Voter intimidation? Unless they're getting into the booth with you, I find such accusations to be ridiculous.

Generally the point is to keep people (or the wrong people) from voting in the first place.

Were the death threats blacks in the south faced for trying to register or vote in the 50s and 60s ridiculous too?

This particular case does seem ridiculous. 2 guys in a mostly black neighborhood not being taken too seriously, since the investigation couldn't find evidence that anyone had been intimidated. It's still a serious crime.

Death threats are not intimidation. Death threats will get you put in jail.

"I will kill you if you go in to vote." That is a death threat. It is also voter intimidation. I don't understand why you think otherwise.

Back in the death, threatening black votes didn't get you jail time.

Anyway, do you get my basic point that voter intimidation is about keeping people from voting, not about going into the booth with them?

Except I didn't hear anything about anyone involved in this case saying anything like that. The people who wanted charges pressed against them were saying that they were in the area, giving people the stinkeye if someone said they weren't going to vote for Obama. You yourself admitted that was ridiculous. And I think you meant "back in the day", not "back in the death" :-D


Freehold DM wrote:
thejeff wrote:

"I will kill you if you go in to vote." That is a death threat. It is also voter intimidation. I don't understand why you think otherwise.

Back in the death, threatening black votes didn't get you jail time.

Anyway, do you get my basic point that voter intimidation is about keeping people from voting, not about going into the booth with them?

Except I didn't hear anything about anyone involved in this case saying anything like that. The people who wanted charges pressed against them were saying that they were in the area, giving people the stinkeye if someone said they weren't going to vote for Obama. You yourself admitted that was ridiculous. And I think you meant...

Yeah, that would make more sense.

One of these guys was allegedly swinging a police style billy club going a little further than the stinkeye, but yes they were pretty ineffective.


thejeff wrote:


One of these guys was allegedly swinging a police style billy club going a little further than the stinkeye, but yes they were pretty ineffective.

He was shaking the club at a reporter who was filming him (which is a big no, whenever you're holding any kind of weapon you absolutely cannot make threatening gestures with it) but as far as i know wasn't asking anyone who they were voting for. The larger guy without the club was supposed to be there, he was a sanctioned election monitor, and i don't think he would have been considered odd if he was there by his lonesome.

The Exchange

Irontruth wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
Irontruth wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
i disagree with all racism too, i just don't pretend some kinds are OK
That's fine. But when I hear people complain about the black panthers just as much as the sentencing inconsistencies for drug offenses, that tells me they don't share a useful view of the problem from my perspective.
So too much punishment for some offenses (no punishment for NOT offending, just sayin) is a "real" race issue but a violent, racially motivated, group that got a pass at voter intimidation is a non-issue that how dare we bring that up?
Voter intimidation? Unless they're getting into the booth with you, I find such accusations to be ridiculous.

Generally the point is to keep people (or the wrong people) from voting in the first place.

Were the death threats blacks in the south faced for trying to register or vote in the 50s and 60s ridiculous too?

This particular case does seem ridiculous. 2 guys in a mostly black neighborhood not being taken too seriously, since the investigation couldn't find evidence that anyone had been intimidated. It's still a serious crime.

If they were white they would be in jail, that what the problem is.
If they were white, they would pass a voter ID law.

Because every white man has ID and no legal minority does right?

Shadow Lodge

Is it OK to be racist against Daleks?


If Obama gets re-elected it will no longer be the United states of America, it will be The United states of Obama. He's derailed this country off course into a $17 Trillion dollar deficit, promises broken, lies, lies, lies....No regard for the American people. It's the people that's supposed to run the government decisions, not the government who runs the people. This is why Obama is becoming a problem. Obama has hi-jacked the country and is selling us out to foreign countries. America is no longer #1, that's why we need a president to get the country back on top in a world of death, deceivers, and danger. The unemployment rate in this country is out of hand, crime has risen, food stamps are out of control, homeless people, and desperate people fighting to survive in a country that no longer proviedes the "American Dream".


Andrew R wrote:
]Because every white man has ID and no legal minority does right?

No, because the numbers are substantially different. The TREND is very real even though it doesn't apply to every single individual. College students, urban dwellers, and African Americans are far more likely to vote democratic and far less likely to have a drivers liscense (which is functionally the only acceptable ID)

When you have

1) No evidence of in person voter fraud: the problem is entirely made up
2) A clear objective benefit to republicans
3) A high ranking republican ADMITING on tape that the policy will hand the election to romney

the evidence that "voter fraud" is a disingenuous and transparent canard designed to stop people from voting by effectively imposing a poll tax is so glaringly obvious that the willful ignorance required to hold the contrary position is simply inconceivable.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
SuperSlayer wrote:
If Obama gets re-elected it will no longer be the United states of America, it will be The United states of Obama.

So we were the united states of bush, the united states of

Quote:
He's derailed this country off course into a $17 Trillion dollar deficit

Most of which is from the wars and bush's tax cuts.

Quote:
promises broken

He's a politician. Gasp shock and surprise.

-Don't ask don't tell, ended
-Osama Bin Laden found and killed in Pakistan, done
-Healthcare reform: he squelched on the individual mandate he ran against in the primaries, but we have something at least.

Quote:
lies, lies, lies....

If you're waiting to vote for an honest politician you might want to see whats on TV that night.

Quote:
No regard for the American people.

Evidence? Like everything else you're saying this is either factually incorrect or a baseless insult.

Quote:
It's the people that's supposed to run the government decisions, not the government who runs the people.

We elect people to make those decisions. You may not have voted for him but a majority of voters did.

Quote:
This is why Obama is becoming a problem. Obama has hi-jacked the country and is selling us out to foreign countries.

Example?

Quote:
America is no longer #1

When were we number 1? Number 1 in what? What measure are you using for this?

Quote:
The unemployment rate in this country is out of hand

Yup

Quote:
crime has risen

Nope. this simply isn't true.

Graph

Quote:
food stamps are out of control

Meh. its up I wouldn't call it out of control.

Linky the numbers are up but the increase coincides with the economic crash.

Quote:
homeless people, and desperate people fighting to survive in a country that no longer proviedes the "American Dream".

So we had the american dream under bush when everyone was fired and then re hired at lower wages? Romneys trickle down economic policy is supposed to bring back the american dream? You're supposed to get the american dream by not going to college unless you can afford to borrow the money from your parents?

Or are we going to hit the american dream for more people through college education and making sure that if you fall there's a safety net to catch you.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
SuperSlayer wrote:
If Obama gets re-elected it will no longer be the United states of America, it will be The United states of Obama. He's derailed this country off course into a $17 Trillion dollar deficit, promises broken, lies, lies, lies....No regard for the American people. It's the people that's supposed to run the government decisions, not the government who runs the people. This is why Obama is becoming a problem. Obama has hi-jacked the country and is selling us out to foreign countries. America is no longer #1, that's why we need a president to get the country back on top in a world of death, deceivers, and danger. The unemployment rate in this country is out of hand, crime has risen, food stamps are out of control, homeless people, and desperate people fighting to survive in a country that no longer proviedes the "American Dream".

I'd say this was an obvious troll, if I didn't know so many people bought into it. There's not way to talk with anyone this far from reality.


SuperSlayer wrote:
America is no longer #1

.

When were we ever #1? And at what? Certainly not education, or Health Care, nor War.

.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

We're number one in prisoners per capita!


thejeff wrote:
We're number one in prisoners per capita!

That can't be bad for the economy or nation!

*high five*


Andrew R wrote:
Because every white man has ID and no legal minority does right?

Go ahead and prove that the laws are actually worthwhile and not racism if you like.

Seeing as how there have been a total of 10 documented cases of voter impersonation in the past 12 years, I doubt you're going to be able to though.

Sovereign Court

America is number one amongst first world countries in angel sightings and people that don't believe in evolution.

RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32

Guy Humual wrote:
America is number one amongst first world countries in angel sightings and people that don't believe in evolution.

Turkey is a first-world country, and support for the idea that humans evolved is less than 25% there. The US is on par with Russia (~40-45% belief in human evolution).

Sovereign Court

Awww, even that has been taken away from you by Obama? Damn him and his wanting people to get an education. I'm sure if Romney gets elected you can reclaim your first place status again.


Guy Humual wrote:
America is number one amongst first world countries in angel sightings and people that don't believe in evolution.

.

About evolution, do you mean "believe humans are the product of evolution" ?
Because any 2nd year computer science major can implement evolution on a computer.
So evolution as a "thing" is real.

I think the debate is if we humans are the product of evolution..

Just sayin'... Two cents and all that... free donuts...

.


No. Really it isn't.

It's whether evolution itself is real. Granted that most of the objections probably come from the gut-level rejection of the idea that we aren't a special creation, but the standard argument is that evolution is wrong. That it could not have produced the species we have here on earth.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

.

Evolution is a generalized search method. Examples abound in the animal kingdom.

Also,
The robot-arm on the Mars Rover Curiosity was evolved and "grown".
That is, it was evolved in computer simulation (and only after proof-of-concept
was the plan handed to mechanical engineers to be instantiated in reality.)

You can get > sample code here < . ...features numerous simulation capabilities and an
evolutionary algorithm capable of automatically synthesizing and
optimizing robot designs...

Edit: wow! The book is $170.

.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

.

More evidence is turning up as the search teams complete the day's work:

> another fact <


.

So anyways, after the debate, I'm giving up on this dream. :(

.


.

I have no idea what this means, but it can't be good and may trigger
1,000 years of darkness.

Evolution of new genes captured


Is there a grace period before the 1,000 years of darkness begins, or
has it already started?

.


Electric Wizard wrote:

Is there a grace period before the 1,000 years of darkness begins, or

has it already started?

.

We have until Dec. 21.

151 to 200 of 245 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Off-Topic Discussions / Chuck Norris Will Bring '1,000 Years Of Darkness' All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.