466 replies to this topic

[Flyingpants]

SakuranoSenshi, on 28 August 2012 - 04:46 PM, said:

You mean the graduate who managed to get elected to the highest office in the land? Aye, a real moron that one.

Ever heard of affirmative action? Its no surprise that obama has not released his college records.

also you need to go learn about economics, because you are very ignorant.

[Sam Slade]

Murph, on 14 August 2012 - 05:25 AM, said:

Obama also signed into law the much maligned National Defense Authorization Act of 2012, which is the infamous one with provisions allowing for indefinite detention of US citizens and others on US soil without due process of law for suspicion of terrorism. A federal court blocked the indefinite detention on the grounds of unconstitutionality, however the Obama administration has appealed.

This is actually better read as an amendment to the Patriot Act which allowed for indefinate detention of anyone anywhere(declare them an 'enemy combatant', a term not defined under the act, and whisk them away). These amendments would keep detained Americans on American soil an hence under the jurisdiction of State and Federal courts and subject to all the constitutional rights associated with said courts. It's a good thing.

Murph, on 14 August 2012 - 05:25 AM, said:

During the 2008 elections, there were members of the New Black Panther Party standing outside a voting station in Philadelphia, one of them carrying a billy club, standing around in uniform and yelling insults at white voters going in to place their ballots.

1st Amendment

Murph, on 14 August 2012 - 05:25 AM, said:

The fact of the matter is that Barack Obama has not kept the economy afloat either. He used up pretty much all of his political clout on the affordable care act and has since been unable to even have a budget passed for our government. Most of any recovery occurring is actually from the economy being left largely alone since our government just isn't acting.

The affordable care act helps bring the U.S. into line with most of the developed world insofar as provision of basic health care goes. The U.S. economy has been screwed for a long time now, it's going to take massive taxation and stringent regulation of the nations finance sector to recover and considering the general attitude of American people to taxation and regulation ... well... get used to economic decline.

[SakuranoSenshi]

Flyingpants, on 28 August 2012 - 04:56 PM, said:

Ever heard of affirmative action? Its no surprise that obama has not released his college records.

also you need to go learn about economics, because you are very ignorant.

Hahahaha! No and no. I could probably teach it at school, if I wanted. I'm no economist but I am by no means ignorant either, whereas you clearly are both bigoted and ignorant. If you want to touch on something substantive, go ahead but the attempts at ad hominem won't work, either towards me or towards President Obama.

P.S. Not only is he a graduate, he has a degree in Law, worked as an attorney and taught Law at a respected Law School. Compared to you he's an intellectual giant, compared to George Bush, he's practially a genius. I still don't like many of his policies but there is absolutely no truth in your stupidity.

Edited by SakuranoSenshi, 28 August 2012 - 05:35 PM.

[CowRocket]

Sam Slade, on 28 August 2012 - 05:23 PM, said:

The affordable care act helps bring the U.S. into line with most of the developed world insofar as provision of basic health care goes..

..and if other countries jumped off a bridge.......
As far as health care goes, that's what your family is for. Also, before Obama-care, one would never get refused from getting urgent medical attention.
You can thank all the Lawyers for the high cost of most medical care.

[SakuranoSenshi]

CowRocket, on 28 August 2012 - 05:33 PM, said:

As far as health care goes, that's what your family is for. Also, before Obama-care, one would never get refused from getting urgent medical attention.
You can thank all the Lawyers for the high cost of most medical care.

No, it's what a proper healthcare system is for, the USA is just about starting to get one. Your next statement is utterly untrue, to the point where I am amazed you have the gall to lie like that, so I have to assume you're just really ignorant and naive. The costs have nothing to do with lawyers, they have to do with doctors being incredibly well-paid in the USA and with healthcare being provided by private companies who operate a monopoly, in essence.

[CowRocket]

SakuranoSenshi, on 28 August 2012 - 05:43 PM, said:

The costs have nothing to do with lawyers, they have to do with doctors being incredibly well-paid in the USA and with healthcare being provided by private companies who operate a monopoly, in essence.

orly??? $150,000 a year malpractice liability insurance policy has nothing to do with Lawyers? That's just for general practitioner, you start looking into the rates for a surgeon or other "dangerous" specialties, it gets out of control.

[Toothman]

Obama has done more fiscal damage to this country than every president from George Washing to George W Bush combined. Add in his love for class warfare and hatred of the constitution and its hard to find a worse choice.

[SakuranoSenshi]

I'm not going to argue that the litigious nature of US jurisdictions isn't out of control, it certainly is but that's really not why you pay so much for your medical insurance, at all. They have enormous mark up and squeeze both the end user and most of the staff.

You won't hear me complaining about something sane to curb the problem of liability for professionals but it's really not lawyers pushing up your healthcare.

[Flyingpants]

Sam Slade, on 28 August 2012 - 05:23 PM, said:

1st Amendment

haha oh WOW so you think black nationalists attacking whites trying to vote is the first amendment?
And you think taxing and regulation fixes the economy. what?

SakuranoSenshi, on 28 August 2012 - 05:31 PM, said:

P.S. Not only is he a graduate, he has a degree in Law, worked as an attorney and taught Law at a respected Law School. Compared to you he's an intellectual giant, compared to George Bush, he's practially a genius. I still don't like many of his policies but there is absolutely no truth in your stupidity.

First of all: He is an African American, which means that the standards for him to enter harvard and graduate are far far lower then that of a white.
secondly: i find it laughable you still subscribe to this fantasy of bush being an *****, while worshipping a marxist african who achieved everything he did through politics and affirmative action.

[SakuranoSenshi]

Flyingpants, on 28 August 2012 - 06:14 PM, said:

First of all: He is an African American, which means that the standards for him to enter harvard and graduate are far far lower then that of a white.
secondly: i find it laughable you still subscribe to this fantasy of bush being an *****, while worshipping a marxist african who achieved everything he did through politics and affirmative action.

No, laughable (in the sad way) is that you can't even read otherwise you'd know why nothing you wrote makes any sense or addresses what I said. Hint: being black doesn't get you a Law degree at Harvard law school.

[Nakuru]

I see an impressive amount if brainwashed morons and uneducated idiots in this thread screaming about who's done what in a forum for a game. It's pointless to have it here, and it's pointless to argue a point with people too idiotic to think for themselves or look up facts. Rather than try to educate people in this thread, just give it up and let it die. We don't need it here, and I sure as **** don't want to keep seeing it pop up in the active threads list.

Please, shut the **** up and let it die.

[Sam Slade]

CowRocket, on 28 August 2012 - 05:33 PM, said:

..and if other countries jumped off a bridge.......
As far as health care goes, that's what your family is for. Also, before Obama-care, one would never get refused from getting urgent medical attention.
You can thank all the Lawyers for the high cost of most medical care.

While I agree that litigation is out of control and is a factor in costing of medical care, the question asked should really be does everyone deserve the best care available?

I find a strange inconsistancy between the right to being safe and secure in ones person and the right of a medical institutrion to deny provision of medical care to the greatest extent possible; if an individual has in inalianable right to life assured by the protections of the state then does it not stand to reason that a medical institution mandated by the state operates under the burden of assuring the rights of the individual? Doctors take an oath just as police and military personal do, should they not be bound by it under the authority of the justice system?

[Flyingpants]

SakuranoSenshi, on 28 August 2012 - 06:36 PM, said:

No, laughable (in the sad way) is that you can't even read otherwise you'd know why nothing you wrote makes any sense or addresses what I said. Hint: being black doesn't get you a Law degree at Harvard law school.

hint: Being black gives you unlimited scholarships, 100% entrance rates, and indeed easier grading.
It is highly likely that unofficially they do much more.

Also: both the obama's "allowed" their licenses to expire, that is something noone would do after graduating and becoming a lawyer. Clearly something fishy was going on with that.

Sam Slade, on 28 August 2012 - 06:53 PM, said:

if an individual has in inalianable right to life assured by the protections of the state

This is not a right to entitlements. This is just a right to live free from the manipulations of the state.
Not does the hippocratic oath compel doctors to give their time and effort and money to care for others.

[Catamount]

SakuranoSenshi, on 28 August 2012 - 05:31 PM, said:

Hahahaha! No and no. I could probably teach it at school, if I wanted. I'm no economist but I am by no means ignorant either, whereas you clearly are both bigoted and ignorant. If you want to touch on something substantive, go ahead but the attempts at ad hominem won't work, either towards me or towards President Obama.

P.S. Not only is he a graduate, he has a degree in Law, worked as an attorney and taught Law at a respected Law School. Compared to you he's an intellectual giant, compared to George Bush, he's practially a genius. I still don't like many of his policies but there is absolutely no truth in your stupidity.

You're arguing with a guy who's thus far done nothing but create an account, log in, and offer copypasta from Rush Limbaugh. It's been clear from the get-go that this guy hasn't actually had an argument to make.

In short, you might as well save your breath; you're not really arguing with anything, and Flyingpants obviously isn't going to be winning any converts to his point of view with "LOOOOOOOOOOLLLLLLLLLLL Obama's Black!", and "The government stepping in only an underclass of serfs who do not work." Grammatical trainwreck aside, I get support from the government for college; I wonder if he'd be willing to come in and pass all my exams for me in comparative vertebrate zoology since it doesn't require work?

[Sam Slade]

Flyingpants, on 28 August 2012 - 10:48 PM, said:

hint: Being black gives you unlimited scholarships, 100% entrance rates, and indeed easier grading.
It is highly likely that unofficially they do much more.

Also: both the obama's "allowed" their licenses to expire, that is something noone would do after graduating and becoming a lawyer. Clearly something fishy was going on with that.

Arguments against affirmative action assume a socialy level playing field; this is simply not the case(yet, ideally affirmative action policy will not be needed in perpetuity).

If I was running for political office I'd be damned sure no one could call me out as a lawyer...

Flyingpants, on 28 August 2012 - 10:48 PM, said:

This is not a right to entitlements. This is just a right to live free from the manipulations of the state.
Not does the hippocratic oath compel doctors to give their time and effort and money to care for others.

'Living free' in the context of legality includes a right to being safe and secure; health is the most base form of safety and security I can think of. And the Hippocratic Oath does compel doctors to give their time and effort and whatever else doesn't endanger them to save life; this is the very essence of the concept... if your actions can save life and prevent suffering then you are compelled by your oath to do so; that's why it exists, that's why battlefield doctors deal with priority not uniform.

[Phii Phy Pho Phum]

SakuranoSenshi, on 28 August 2012 - 05:31 PM, said:

P.S. Not only is he a graduate, he has a degree in Law, worked as an attorney and taught Law at a respected Law School. Compared to you he's an intellectual giant, compared to George Bush, he's practially a genius. I still don't like many of his policies but there is absolutely no truth in your stupidity.

Bush graduated from Yale and then Harvard Business School..just saying.

[Adeptus Odren]

I haven't really been following all the mudslinging and what-not between the Republicans and Democrats, but as far as foreign policy goes, which party takes a harder stance with regard to, say, China's expansionist tendencies and their unfair practices when it comes to currency values and lack of respect for intellectual property?

Edited by Adeptus Odren, 29 August 2012 - 05:41 AM.

[SakuranoSenshi]

Phii Phy Pho Phum, on 29 August 2012 - 05:26 AM, said:

Bush graduated from Yale and then Harvard Business School..just saying.

You're comparing a business degree to law? Really? LOL

That said, I give Bush more credit in reality than I have here, to be honest. The guy basically just wanted to have a good time in life, not worry too much about anything and so on but ended up being pushed into Texas politics and ultimately the national arena. I suspect he genuinely wanted to do a good job, I just don't think he was actually up to it or that he really spent his whole life working towards that goal. Of course, I might be reading him totally wrong.

Adeptus Odren, on 29 August 2012 - 05:38 AM, said:

I haven't really been following all the mudslinging and what-not between the Republicans and Democrats, but as far as foreign policy goes, which party takes a harder stance with regard to, say, China's expansionist tendencies and their unfair practices when it comes to currency values and lack of respect for intellectual property?

I'd be more interested in which party takes a hard line with regard to the USA's expansionism, currency manipulation and lack of respect for intellectual property, myself. Not least because the US government can actually do something about those whereas it can't do anything to China, at the end of the day.

[990Dreams]

Douglas Reichel, on 14 August 2012 - 11:26 AM, said:

Two things.

One...tighten the requirements overall to hold any office, relax the age restrictions, beef up the minimum requirements of skill and experience in relevant fields to each specific office. Deny candidacy to all religious affiliates, and require that those in office give up claim on all private income while in office.

Two...no more elections, lottery pick only. No campaigns, no attack ads, no brown-nosing, and no overwhelming poisonous ideologies.

Maybe in a century or two, if humanity has somehow matured enough to handle the responsibility, they can have some form of democracy, whether it be representative or direct. But right now, they just don't deserve it, they're just not ready.

So what if we lottery another ******? Humans need to gain from success, and learn from failure. Some people haven't learned from the 2008 election still . Personally, I'd rather vote for a dog than Obama. So Mitt is the only and best choice.

[Booger Klown]

Zoex, on 14 August 2012 - 03:33 PM, said:

I usually stop listening to people as soon as they bring up the constitution. It's an over 200 year old document written be people who could not possibly comprehend what would lay down the road two centuries after they had all died.

It was supposed to be a living document and hasn't kept up with the times, it's only been changed 27 times. Ten of witch were right out of the gate, and one of which null voided another. It needs changed to refect our current world or left behind.

The Basic principals of the constitution is meant to be the guidelines for american government. It details out the division of power among our different branches of government. It lists basic rights that all citizens are entitled to. If these principals were the guiding principals of those in power then our country would be in much better condition. Of course it needs to be amended as times go on. But to say that you stop listening when someone mentions it means that there is no more respect for the principals on which this country was based on. Be happy you have the constitution or else all your rights would have already be stripped from you and America would not be the country it is. The real power of a nation lays with its people. If we as American citizens remain apathetic and unappreciative of what rights we have, then we don't deserve them; We should be enslaved by dictators who control our thoughts and actions. So if that is the kind of life you want to live then continue to not care about the founding principals of our nation which are the only thing standing between the government and your freedoms.