Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Dear God,Follow

#77 Mar 11 2009 at 12:48 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Verlind wrote:
Quote:
Dear God, send more conservatives than Gbaji, Varrus and Gwyn.
You called?
Why? Are you God?

I always pictured God as having more than 15 posts.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#78 Mar 11 2009 at 12:52 PM Rating: Decent
Jophiel wrote:
Why? Are you God?

I always pictured God as having more than 15 posts.


Around 40,837 more, you might say?

I always figured he wouldn't have any.
#79 Mar 11 2009 at 12:53 PM Rating: Decent
*
69 posts
Quote:
Why? Are you God?

I always pictured God as having more than 15 posts.

God? No.

God complex? Perhaps. :)
#80 Mar 11 2009 at 6:10 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
I want people to challenge their assumptions. I want them to question the very beliefs they've been taught to base their entire political ideology on.
Which is funny because I don't think I've come across anyone as blindly partisan as you.


Someone who's entire political position is based on assumptions would view it that way, yes.

We see in others that which we know to be in ourselves Joph. If you hold your positions and argue them because you simply know they are right, then you will tend to assume that anyone who disagrees with you does so for equally assumptive reasons.

Quote:
I mean, shit, I criticise the Democrats from time to time. Smash accuses Obama of making a shitty VP pick with Biden and loading bills with pay-offs to the medical industry. I'm not saying folks constantly ***** about the Democrats because most often we agree (or at least give them the benefit of the doubt) but at least we occassionally wander off the ranch and down the street a spell.


That's because Conservatives largely do not base their political positions on the people, but on the ideas themselves. They very fact that you place such great weight in whether one criticizes their own politicians shows how important that is to you. It's not to us though Joph. But what's funny is that because it's important to *you* you insist that I must do it, or I'm somehow blindly partisan.

Let me put this another way with an example: Whether or not I agree that Republicans should have cut spending does not mean I believe that Republican spending policy is worse than Democrat spending policy. Yet, that's often how it's characterized. Liberals seem to spend an inordinate amount of time trying to get Conservatives to "admit" their leaders are doing it wrong, and then jump up and down proclaiming themselves the winner when it happens.

The current liberal tactic seems to be to hold Conservatives up to perfection, and if they don't match up, insist that this proves that their political philosophy is wrong. Remember my apples and oranges example above? If all you do is point out flaws in the oranges, you can make it look like oranges are a bad choice, and get people to select apples instead. But shouldn't we be comparing the two?


A whole lot of my arguments on this board are purely about trying to get people to compare the two sides directly. My unwillingness to provide the forum equivalent of a sound bite in opposition to any given action by a Republican politician is irrelevant unless the same comparison is made to Democrats. Yet, when I insist that we do this, it's generally ignored and replaced with increased cries for me to "admit your guy isn't perfect so we can win!!!".


I'm sorry. I just find the entire approach silly. If you want to call me a partisan hack because I don't go along with that ploy, than by all means go ahead. For me, it's about attempting to focus on the real issues instead of the fabricated illusion that most people seem to place so much weight on.

Quote:
But you're the most "circle the wagons" partisan hack I know. Everything is either perfectly justifiable with the right mental contortions or else is actually the fault of the Democrats/Liberal Media/... well, no "etc", just one of those two.


It's not circling the wagons to want to discuss the issues instead of the irrelevancies that usually drive most political arguments. And yeah. I'm going to point out when the argument is framed incorrectly (and unfairly) from the start by how it's presented in whatever media is involved. You don't see this because you agree with it. Trust me. If the shoe was on the other foot, you'd see how often you're forced to argue against a set of premises that are blatantly skewed.

Quote:
The idea that you'd be an advocate of questioning one's beliefs is laughable.



Perhaps you should question your assumption about that. Just this once... ;)
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#81 Mar 11 2009 at 6:26 PM Rating: Decent
Gbaji wrote:
Someone who's entire political position is based on assumptions would view it that way, yes.

We see in others that which we know to be in ourselves Joph


Heh.
#82 Mar 11 2009 at 6:39 PM Rating: Good
*****
15,952 posts
I feel like I'm in a mirrored hall of infinite reflections.
#83 Mar 11 2009 at 6:43 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
13,240 posts
Quote:
I feel like I'm in a mirrored hall of infinite reflections.


Echo Echo ..Echo...echo.. ...echo...
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#84 Mar 11 2009 at 7:00 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Kavekk wrote:
Gbaji wrote:
Someone who's entire political position is based on assumptions would view it that way, yes.

We see in others that which we know to be in ourselves Joph


Heh.



So you agree? Joph knows that he views everything from a purely partisan perspective, so he assumes that anyone who disagrees with him does so for the same reasons. Just checking, cause "heh" isn't that clear...
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#85 Mar 11 2009 at 7:03 PM Rating: Decent
Gbaji wrote:
So you agree? Joph knows that he views everything from a purely partisan perspective, so he assumes that anyone who disagrees with him does so for the same reasons. Just checking, cause "heh" isn't that clear...


Hahahaha.
#86 Mar 11 2009 at 7:27 PM Rating: Decent
*****
10,359 posts
Quote:
We see in others that which we know to be in ourselves Joph.


Based on that reasoning, your posts are never long enough, and they are also unclear about terminology.

You are extremely partisan gbaji. Your arguments and material is even sometimes enjoyable and convincing, but it's still partisan. I don't think i've ever once seen you disagree with the republican platform.

Edited, Mar 11th 2009 11:28pm by Pensive
#87 Mar 11 2009 at 8:42 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
Someone who's entire political position is based on assumptions would view it that way, yes.
Wow. Breaking out the ole "I'm rubber and you're glue!" defense, huh? Smiley: laugh
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#88 Mar 11 2009 at 8:45 PM Rating: Decent
Vagina Dentata,
what a wonderful phrase
******
30,106 posts
Pensive wrote:
Quote:
We see in others that which we know to be in ourselves Joph.


Based on that reasoning, your posts are never long enough, and they are also unclear about terminology.

You are extremely partisan gbaji. Your arguments and material is even sometimes enjoyable and convincing, but it's still partisan. I don't think i've ever once seen you disagree with the republican platform.

Edited, Mar 11th 2009 11:28pm by Pensive


Honey, he'd criticize Michelle Obama's white house china patterns, even if she used the same rich blues that Laura favored.
____________________________
Turin wrote:
Seriously, what the f*ck nature?
#89 Mar 11 2009 at 9:24 PM Rating: Good
If the thought of the majority becoming a handout class voting to take their handouts from my family disturbing me makes me a conservative, I will gladly wear the name.

If a firm belief in the benefits of abject failure and subsequent self-improvement makes me a conservative, so be it.

If the desire to provide for my own family the things it requires through my own hard work rather than spend my money on jerseys, sneakers and a Cadillac while taking in a check every month because I refuse to get a job makes me a conservative, so be it.

I believe that the "provide for the general welfare" line in the constitution has been twisted and co-opted in to something that it was never intended to represent. I believe public assistance would be better provided for through compassionate giving. I believe that the congress should limit itself to the powers prescribed it in the constitution, and the courts and executive branch should follow suit.

If these things make me a conservative, then that I am, and proudly so.

What the problem is?
#90 Mar 11 2009 at 9:28 PM Rating: Good
*****
15,952 posts
MoebiusLord the Irrelevant wrote:
If these things make me a conservative, then that I am, and proudly so.

What the problem is?

My dear sir, since you are indeed a conservative other than Gbaji, Varrus, or Gwyn, there the opposite of a problem is.
#91 Mar 11 2009 at 9:47 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
MoebiusLord the Irrelevant wrote:
If these things make me a conservative, then that I am, and proudly so.

What the problem is?
Who said there was a problem?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#92 Mar 11 2009 at 9:53 PM Rating: Decent
Quote:
If the thought of the majority becoming a handout class voting to take their handouts from my family disturbing me makes me a conservative, I will gladly wear the name.


Heh.
#93 Mar 12 2009 at 12:08 PM Rating: Good
Quote:
Who said there was a problem?

Martin Lawrence
#94 Mar 12 2009 at 12:20 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
MoebiusLord the Irrelevant wrote:
Martin Lawrence
You can't trust black people.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#95REDACTED, Posted: Mar 12 2009 at 12:54 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Better get used to paying for the majority. What do you think this whole "tax the rich" nonsense was all about? Nothing more than a overt attempt for the govn to seize as much property from the private sector as possible.
#96 Mar 12 2009 at 12:56 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
Yeah, assuming that "the majority" turns into a welfare state, we won't be looking to you schlubs for our handouts. Smiley: rolleyes

____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#97 Mar 12 2009 at 3:44 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Pensive wrote:
Quote:
We see in others that which we know to be in ourselves Joph.


Based on that reasoning, your posts are never long enough, and they are also unclear about terminology.


More like I believe that thorough examination and discussion leads to the best conclusions. And yeah. I make the mistake of thinking that others might do things the same way.

Quote:
You are extremely partisan gbaji. Your arguments and material is even sometimes enjoyable and convincing, but it's still partisan. I don't think i've ever once seen you disagree with the republican platform.


Um... Not to be obvious or anything here, but I happen to largely agree with the Republican platform. We are *all* partisan. All of us who actually vote and care about politics, that is. That's an absurd attack. It's like "accusing" me of liking to post on an online gaming forum...

The phrase used was "blindly partisan". Which implies that I hold my opinions without having examined them in anyway and/or just follow the party line no matter what on every single issue. That's not the case at all. I tend to blend my own conservative opinions in with Republican platform positions. It's somewhat silly for me to condemn Republicans for something, when the alternative provided by the Democrats is *worse*.


And yes, the few bits I don't agree with, I've clearly stated. I believe only once or twice in the 10 years or so I've been posting here has someone actually quoted a line from the "official Republican Platform" and asked me if I agree or disagree with that. And IIRC, there's only a couple parts of the "Values" section of the Republican platform that I disagree with, and again only by degrees.

I never said I wasn't partisan. We are all partisan. My point (which so many people rolled their eyes about) is that I believe in forming an opinion on an issue after an assessment of the facts, not just because you've picked a side. My agreement with the Republican platform isn't because I'm a Republican. It's because I've come to most of the same conclusions as those written in that platform. And I came to those conclusions long before someone said "This is what Republicans stand for".


That's not being blindly partisan. You are free to question my positions, but don't criticize me or imply that somehow my position is less valid just because it's different than yours.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#98 Mar 12 2009 at 4:05 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
I hold my opinions without having examined them in anyway and/or just follow the party line no matter what on every single issue. That's not the case at all.
Smiley: laugh

Edit: In anticipation of your tizzy, I'm sure you can pick around and find some minor issue you disagree with. When I say you're blindly partisan it's because you demonstrate, on a fairly regular basis, a blind insistance that whatever the GOP party line is, it's correct and whatever the Democratic line is, it's wrong. Then, when you're proven wrong -- as in actually factually inacurate -- you'll spin and find some way to make it the Democrat's fault (or the liberal media's!) that you look wrong but really you're not.

Edited, Mar 12th 2009 7:12pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#99 Mar 12 2009 at 5:06 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

More like I believe that thorough examination and discussion leads to the best conclusions.


False. Not like that, at all, in fact. You take part in zero examination, and honestly, very little discussion. You paraphrase something you heard, then in attempting to defend it, miss the point entirely, and everyone laughs.

That's not discussion, that's ridicule.


Um... Not to be obvious or anything here, but I happen to largely agree with the Republican platform. We are *all* partisan. All of us who actually vote and care about politics, that is. That's an absurd attack. It's like "accusing" me of liking to post on an online gaming forum...

The phrase used was "blindly partisan". Which implies that I hold my opinions without having examined them in anyway and/or just follow the party line no matter what on every single issue. That's not the case at all.


False. It's is precisely the case. Your opinion on any given issue can be determined with zero input from you, unerringly. You're a sort of political automaton, really. Or indistinguishable from such, certainly.


I tend to blend my own conservative opinions in with Republican platform positions.


You have no opinions, you have a rooting interest. You want to feel part of something, so you've clumsily co opted the agenda of other people, I'd presume, and this is obviously only a guess, out of a desire to be different. Similar, almost exactly, to thirteen year old shopping at Hot Topic to demonstrate their uniqueness, you completely blindly assume positions on issues that you don't understand, don't particularly care about, and that generally would result in circumstances completely against your self interest.

To examine WHY you do this further, I'd have to surmise from what little of your personal history that you've posted here, that you peaked at age 10. That is: you were an early bloomer who was told he was special, but you regressed right back to the mean and turned out to be just average. Without the intellectual ability or work ethic to actually accomplish anything that would reward you with those long lost feelings of superiority and pride, you are forced to attempt to fill that hole in your psyche with something or deal with the reality. You've chosen the veneer of superiority offered by lazy anti-intellectualism.

All of your "beliefs" rely on this tenet, that the people society accepts as exceptional really aren't, that they are lost in an insulated echo chamber of self aggrandizement while the true exceptional people, ie: you, can instinctively divine the truth, predict the future, exercise perfect judgment, fuck supermodels, etc. etc. by the magical application of "common sense" and your near godlike intuition.

Every good thing that has occurred in your life is 100% attributable to the miraculous attributes, every bad thing 100% to the ignorance of others.


It's somewhat silly for me to condemn Republicans for something, when the alternative provided by the Democrats is *worse*.


The rooting interest, as previously explained.


And yes, the few bits I don't agree with, I've clearly stated. I believe only once or twice in the 10 years or so I've been posting here has someone actually quoted a line from the "official Republican Platform" and asked me if I agree or disagree with that. And IIRC, there's only a couple parts of the "Values" section of the Republican platform that I disagree with, and again only by degrees.


Demonstrate this, please.


I never said I wasn't partisan. We are all partisan. My point (which so many people rolled their eyes about) is that I believe in forming an opinion on an issue after an assessment of the facts, not just because you've picked a side.


False. This has not once occurred in your entire posting history here. Feel free to prove me wrong with a cite.


My agreement with the Republican platform isn't because I'm a Republican. It's because I've come to most of the same conclusions as those written in that platform. And I came to those conclusions long before someone said "This is what Republicans stand for".


False.



That's not being blindly partisan. You are free to question my positions, but don't criticize me or imply that somehow my position is less valid just because it's different than yours.


It's less valid because it's devoid of intellectual rigor. Frankly, it's meaningless. You having chosen this particular method of retaining a sense of "specialness" is purely incidental, you could as easily be the 40 year old rec league basketball player who thinks he could have made the NBA, or any of 1000 other pathetic archetypes quietly clinging to their own failed dreams. You just had the misfortune to fail so early in life that you'll likely never gain self awareness of what drives you.

Veritas, motherfucker.



Edited, Mar 12th 2009 9:08pm by Smasharoo
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#100 Mar 12 2009 at 5:16 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Jophiel wrote:
When I say you're blindly partisan it's because you demonstrate, on a fairly regular basis, a blind insistance that whatever the GOP party line is, it's correct and whatever the Democratic line is, it's wrong. Then, when you're proven wrong -- as in actually factually inacurate -- you'll spin and find some way to make it the Democrat's fault (or the liberal media's!) that you look wrong but really you're not.


Um... Except "factually inaccurate" usually consists of a group of liberals quoting what another group of liberals wrote somewhere as proof that the conservative position is wrong. Like say, you quoting the very NIH finding from 1998 that caused a bunch of concern about ESC research funding as "proof" that ESC research funding was ok. Cause the NIH said it was, right?

It's opinion. It's politics. But with frightening regularity Liberals tend to attempt to present their opinions as "fact", usually with some fairly obnoxious misuse of public funds and creation of organizations seemingly purely so that they can generate said facts when they are needed. You know. Like the IPCC...

Edited, Mar 12th 2009 6:17pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#101 Mar 12 2009 at 5:19 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

But with frightening regularity Liberals tend to attempt to present their opinions as "fact", usually with some fairly obnoxious mixture of data and logic


Yeah, that must get old.

____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 279 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (279)