Forum Settings
       
1 2 3 4 5 Next »
Reply To Thread

North Koreans responsible for GoM oil spill!Follow

#102 May 07 2010 at 1:47 PM Rating: Good
*****
10,601 posts
****, I just broke the cross-thread posting policy for this forum didn't I. Damnit.
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#103 May 07 2010 at 1:56 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Sir Xsarus wrote:
sh*t, I just broke the cross-thread posting policy for this forum didn't I. Damnit.

Gbaji's a-gunna call the mods on you!!!
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#104 May 07 2010 at 2:06 PM Rating: Decent
Jophed,

Quote:
No, I didn't. You should mess around with big words like that until you learn what they mean.


And you should learn what the word should means.

#105 May 07 2010 at 2:09 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
knoxxsouthy wrote:
And you should learn what the word should means.

I already knew which is how I immediately knew you were misusing it. See how easy that was?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#106 May 07 2010 at 2:22 PM Rating: Decent
Jophed,

Are you sure?

#107 May 07 2010 at 2:36 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
How do you feel about are you sure?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#108gbaji, Posted: May 07 2010 at 3:24 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) It is a better analogy than the Bush/Saddam comparison I was responding to. I said "a better analogy would be...". And I was correct. My analogy is closer to matching the relationship between Ayers and Obama than the one between HW Bush and Saddam. Keep your eye on the point here...
#109 May 07 2010 at 3:35 PM Rating: Good
*****
10,601 posts
gbaji wrote:
Keep your eye on the point here...
the point of not bothering to make good analogies? OK, see maybe I should explain where I'm coming from. If I see an analogy I disagree with, as you apparently did, in trying to come up with a better one, I usually try to make a good analogy rather then aiming for the lowest common denominator. My bad.

Of course in this case both analogies were stupid, but yours was worse.
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#110 May 07 2010 at 3:57 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Sir Xsarus wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Keep your eye on the point here...
the point of not bothering to make good analogies? OK, see maybe I should explain where I'm coming from. If I see an analogy I disagree with, as you apparently did, in trying to come up with a better one, I usually try to make a good analogy rather then aiming for the lowest common denominator.


The counter I made was a better analogy though. Which makes your entire position kinda difficult, doesn't it?

Quote:
Of course in this case both analogies were stupid, but yours was worse.


If by "worse" you mean "better", then yes. You can't honestly be telling me that a guy working for Saddam implementing his policies for him is a poor analogy to a guy working for Ayers and implementing his policies for him. They are precisely analogous. It's not just a good analogy, it's a nearly perfect one. The only thing which would make it more perfect is if it wasn't just Saddam, but him and a coalition of other nutty ME leaders all contributing funds to the "rape room project".

But other than that, it's darn close...
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#111 May 07 2010 at 4:13 PM Rating: Good
*****
10,601 posts
Smiley: laugh I'm aware you think it was better.

Edited, May 7th 2010 5:13pm by Xsarus
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#112 May 07 2010 at 5:33 PM Rating: Good
Jophiel wrote:
How do you feel about are you sure?
Edible "soil".
#113 May 07 2010 at 5:40 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
Quote:
You can't honestly be telling me that a guy working for Saddam implementing his policies for him is a poor analogy to a guy working for Ayers and implementing his policies for him.


You're the only one who believes that Obama worked for Ayers, though. So my Jesus analogy is much closer.

Nyah.

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

#114 May 07 2010 at 6:16 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Samira wrote:
Quote:
You can't honestly be telling me that a guy working for Saddam implementing his policies for him is a poor analogy to a guy working for Ayers and implementing his policies for him.


You're the only one who believes that Obama worked for Ayers, though.


The original community organization group Obama worked for years before his political career even started was funded by the Woods Foundation, on which Ayers sat. Obama caught the attention of that foundation's board members (including presumably Ayers) and was promoted through the ranks quickly, eventually ending out serving on the board itself (with Ayers). Years later, Obama was appointed to run the Chicago Annenburg Challenge, the grant request for which was written by Bill Ayers and a couple friends in the Joyce Foundation. They set the goals of that fund, and Obama executed it (by spending the money).

So yeah. While he never drew a paycheck directly from Ayers, he absolutely "worked for him" within the context relevant to this discussion. And they certainly shared political ideologies, else he would not have been trusted to spend that money on their behalf.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#115 May 07 2010 at 6:41 PM Rating: Good
I thought conservatives were supposed to be good at running smear campaigns.

This is just embarrassing.
#116 May 07 2010 at 7:20 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
So yeah. While he never drew a paycheck directly from Ayers, he absolutely "worked for him" within the context relevant to this discussion.

"Even if it's not true, I can insist that it's true and that's the same thing!"
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#117 May 07 2010 at 7:50 PM Rating: Good
****
4,158 posts
gbaji wrote:
Sir Xsarus wrote:
Sure in both cases there is an association, but that's as far as it goes.


That's the case with the picture of Saddam and HW Bush shacking hands, but not with the counter analogy I proposed.

In my analogy, the association is one where one person has an idea or plan, and the other guy is implementing that idea or plan for him. Saddam wants to use a specific tactic against his political enemies and his associate carries out that plan. Ayers wants to push specific education concepts into our system, and his associate (Obama in this case) carries out that plan.




Sadaam and Rumsfeld were the ones shaking hands. I think they were meeting to discuss the best way for Sadaam to kill Iranians on a larger scale.
Just sayin'.
____________________________
"If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're gonna get selfish, ignorant leaders". Carlin.

1 2 3 4 5 Next »
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 278 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (278)