I Hate Republicans/Fox News

[Dante Hicks]

Originally Posted by Yahwe

Person two: is willing to kill one human being MORALLY WRONG

Person three: is willing to kill two human beings MORALLY WORSE

This does not always apply.

[Radical Edward]

Originally Posted by Yahwe

no you must be right

human life isn't inherently sacred is it.

my mistake.

I don't really think it is if the person kills themselves voluntarily. I only see it as immoral when they start murdering other people.

[dda]

Originally Posted by All Systems Go

Where did I call all Americans ****ing stupid?

I didn't say that you did. I indicated that you used ****ing three times in your original post as a modifier. I was parodying the style by using ****ing as a modifier as well.

You posted a thread with an inflammatory title "I Hate Republicans/Fox News". You don't differentiate between Fox News and CNN callers. The one thing that the objects of your rant have in common is that they are American. I didn't think that you were including all Americans, however, you didn't say that you were limiting either. "Republicans" I took to mean "members of the American Republican Party". If you were talking about French Republicans in the 18th or 19th centuries or the "Republican Guard" of Saddam H. then I appologize.

Fox News is generally accepted to be the most popular news source in the US (based on viewership). Again, if you were talking about another, non-American Fox News, i appologize, I misunderstood.

You railed about inbred hicks on C-Span. You did not say, most of the callers were quite nice but there were a few hicks among them. You swung a very wide brush with which you painted yet another group that I assume you believed were American. Again, if they were all French and there is a C-Span that is Algerian or something, I misunderstood.

The title of the thread and the tone and tenor of you opening post seemed that you were not just disagreeing with them but that you were asserting your superiority over those you were criticizing.

Perhaps a simple pffffft! would have been simpler and quicker but I wouldn't have found it as entertaining.

Actually, I rather like these heated threads. I assure you that I was not angry. You will notice that I never used the F-bomb in reference to any group I didn't consider myself to be a member of.

NUSSELT---You were right and I was wrong. i never thought about the method of delivery thing. I wasn't truly arguing that it should be called something else but at the same time, I didn't understand the concern because someone else prefered a different phrase.
You were also 100% correct on the definition of homicide. I am truly embarrased on this point in as much as homicide is a legal term. I was taking the more literal form of the root words as "man killing." I can only say that I have thought this so often that I brain washed myself.
Thank you.

[Yahwe]

Originally Posted by dda

The title of the thread and the tone and tenor of you opening post seemed that you were not just disagreeing with them but that you were asserting your superiority over those you were criticizing.

you lot are always too damn touchy.

you should drink more and get angry less

[dda]

Originally Posted by Yahwe

you lot are always too damn touchy.

you should drink more and get angry less

It isn't I who thinks people are getting angry.
Toss back a gin. Smokem if you gottem and relax.

[Yahwe]

it is getting a tad ridiculous when someone can't point out the genuinely shit things about america with uout every american member of the boards clubbing together to form the voluntary spastic society and mount a tedious and silly defense.

laugh at yourselves. it's much more fun, being earnest isn't that important

[All Systems Go]

Originally Posted by dda

I didn't say that you did. I indicated that you used ****ing three times in your original post as a modifier. I was parodying the style by using ****ing as a modifier as well.

You posted a thread with an inflammatory title "I Hate Republicans/Fox News". You don't differentiate between Fox News and CNN callers. The one thing that the objects of your rant have in common is that they are American. I didn't think that you were including all Americans, however, you didn't say that you were limiting either. "Republicans" I took to mean "members of the American Republican Party". If you were talking about French Republicans in the 18th or 19th centuries or the "Republican Guard" of Saddam H. then I appologize.

Fox News is generally accepted to be the most popular news source in the US (based on viewership). Again, if you were talking about another, non-American Fox News, i appologize, I misunderstood.

You railed about inbred hicks on C-Span. You did not say, most of the callers were quite nice but there were a few hicks among them. You swung a very wide brush with which you painted yet another group that I assume you believed were American. Again, if they were all French and there is a C-Span that is Algerian or something, I misunderstood.

The title of the thread and the tone and tenor of you opening post seemed that you were not just disagreeing with them but that you were asserting your superiority over those you were criticizing.

Perhaps a simple pffffft! would have been simpler and quicker but I wouldn't have found it as entertaining.

Actually, I rather like these heated threads. I assure you that I was not angry. You will notice that I never used the F-bomb in reference to any group I didn't consider myself to be a member of.

NUSSELT---You were right and I was wrong. i never thought about the method of delivery thing. I wasn't truly arguing that it should be called something else but at the same time, I didn't understand the concern because someone else prefered a different phrase.
You were also 100% correct on the definition of homicide. I am truly embarrased on this point in as much as homicide is a legal term. I was taking the more literal form of the root words as "man killing." I can only say that I have thought this so often that I brain washed myself.
Thank you.

Sometimes picking a which is a broad description of the thread which is also short is difficult, so when in doubt go with what you know. I don't think 'I hate stupid American hicks/fox news reporters/people who say homicide not suicide bombers' would quite fit.

I watch C-Span on BBC Parliament so I've no idea what channel it is on in America so differentiating would be difficut. Yes, most (if not all) of my politics-based rants have been American. this is not, as one might expect a reflection of my deep deep hatred of America(ns) athough I a critical of the countrys foreign policy. Being the worlds only remaining superpower and its with its bipolar 'with or against us' stance towards pretty much every issue is clearly going to bring criticism.

Being form the UK (the 51st state y'all) means that our foreign policies (at least the most reported areas e.g. Iraq) are pretty much intwined and I am critical of Mr. Blair for following Mr. Bush into Iraq but there is no doubt that this is an American War, the desire to start it was most likely discussed before 9/11 even happened.

Due to the general impotence of Europe in the post-WW2 era the USA took over most imperialist duties and nowadays Europe doesn't really do that much. If France went to war (with the backing of Britain only) against Algeria claiming WMD as a false pretense I would be equally as critical of them. But it doesn't happen. America is where Europe used to be.

Europe has a very bloody past I don't deny but at least we had the excuse of the 'white mans burden' or whatever ideological crap you want to come up with the justify the past. But in a world where the west is supposed to be multicltural and not discriminate against anyone based on anything except their own actions I find the USA highly hypocritical. It talks about democracy and freedom whilst simultainiously backing up tinpot dictators with abysmal human rights records.

Being what you might call a 'leftie' means I hate Republicans, not on a personal level but in a political sense (although I would smash Condi Rice's face in with a mallet made out of the thick skull of Dick Cheney, but hey who wouldn't ). this then coincides with the American two-party system where you have (as it has been mentioned numerous times before) right-wing and further right-wing, with the Democrats being a bit more subtle than their Republican brothers. I suppose this comes from the fact that they used to be one-party, I believe.

You say Fox News is the most popular news source in the US but this means nothing. Our most popular tabloid is the Sun and it is a load of opinionated garbage pretending to be fact and sells like 10 milion copies day. Both are own by News International (or whatever it's called).

About my attack on C-Span callers. I find the show strange in that it has 3 phone numbers. One for Republicans, one for Democrats and one for international callers. I suppose most are plesant enough, although I disagree with most of their opinions. these people are unremarkable and therefore generally do not require to be commented on. Also I was ranting a bit.

As for asserting my superiority over them; when someone talks a perfectly acceptable and well-known phrase that is both accurate and succinct and tries to change it for something totally vague and encompassing far more than it intends to for no discernable reason other than someone trying to score some propaganda points I feel that I have the right to feel superior in that instant. If I tried to get people to refer to the United States of America as the Imperial Capitalists of the West to gain some propaganda points then you should feel superior to me.

[Texan]

Originally Posted by Yahwe

it is getting a tad ridiculous when someone can't point out the genuinely shit things about america with uout every american member of the boards clubbing together to form the voluntary spastic society and mount a tedious and silly defense.

laugh at yourselves. it's much more fun, being earnest isn't that important

How many Americans posted on this thread?

How many spastic lefties posted on this thread?

[dda]

Originally Posted by All Systems Go

Sometimes picking a which is a broad description of the thread which is also short is difficult, so when in doubt go with what you know. I don't think 'I hate stupid American hicks/fox news reporters/people who say homicide not suicide bombers' would quite fit.

So then your thread title was a bit overbroad then. You don't really hate Republicans only Amercan hicks and fox news reporters and people who want to change phraseology that you don't think needs changing. However, you felt that I Hate Republicans/Fox News was a succinct way of expressing this. Okay. You were going for a flashy thread title for your own reasons which had nothing to do with accuracy.

I watch C-Span on BBC Parliament so I've no idea what channel it is on in America so differentiating would be difficut.

in America C-Span is on, C-Span 1 and C-Span 2. Oddly enough, I occasionally watch Parliament of C-Span.

Being the worlds only remaining superpower and its with its bipolar 'with or against us' stance towards pretty much every issue is clearly going to bring criticism.

I don't think the US has so much of a "with us or against us" stance as a "lead, follow or get out of the way" stance on many things. There has been animosity toward the French and the Germans over Iraq, but that has come from a feeling that the opposition isn't based on principals regarding Iraq so much as a desire to oppose the US in order to weaken its leadership. While that may be a reasonable position, it is also one which is, in fact, "against us."

There is no doubt that this is an American War, the desire to start it was most likely discussed before 9/11 even happened.

This is an American war, I agree. However, this is no evidence that it was planned out prior to
9-11.

claiming WMD as a false pretense

I don't accept that WMD was a pretext. It certainly was the main talking point and there were other things going on, however, various intelligence services felt WMD existed and Saddam acted as if he had them. The fact that they have not been shown to exist isn't proof positive that it was just a pretext and no one really believed it to begin with.

[/quote]Europe has a very bloody past I don't deny but at least we had the excuse of the 'white mans burden' or whatever ideological crap you want to come up with the justify the past. But in a world where the west is supposed to be multicltural and not discriminate against anyone based on anything except their own actions I find the USA highly hypocritical. It talks about democracy and freedom whilst simultainiously backing up tinpot dictators with abysmal human rights records.[quote]

In America it was called "Manifest Destiny." Yes the US is hypocritical in its support of some dictators etc. However, no more hypocritical than many others. This is not an excuse, however, the realities are that, sometimes you must make a deal with the devil (or minor demons).

Being what you might call a 'leftie' means I hate Republicans, not on a personal level but in a political sense (although I would smash Condi Rice's face in with a mallet made out of the thick skull of Dick Cheney, but hey who wouldn't ). this then coincides with the American two-party system where you have (as it has been mentioned numerous times before) right-wing and further right-wing, with the Democrats being a bit more subtle than their Republican brothers. I suppose this comes from the fact that they used to be one-party, I believe.[/quote

I am a Republican, however, I do not hate "lefties", I disagree with them on many points and agree with them on some. I accept that most people on the left, though not all, act out of a belief that their position is correct even if I disagree with it. I also accept that I could well be wrong on many political questions. The people for whom I have the least respect are those who feel that they couldn't possibly be wrong and become so self-righteous in their beliefs that they become convinced that all those who do not agree with them must be either evil, misguided or stupic, or a combination of both. I believe that things are best when there are two points of view (minimum).

At the time of the Revolution there were no political parties. I don't believe that there was any thought that political parties might grow up. However, a split quickly developed over the Federal nature of the governement. Federal authority vs. States Rights. This eventually led to our civil war. This still seems to be the root of the difference between the two parties though it seems to me that they switched sides in the '60's.

You say Fox News is the most popular news source in the US but this means nothing. Our most popular tabloid is the Sun and it is a load of opinionated garbage pretending to be fact and sells like 10 milion copies day. Both are own by News International (or whatever it's called).

My point here was just that when you say you hate Republicans and Fox News you are including a lot more Americans than you are excluding by use of those terms.

As for asserting my superiority over them; when someone talks a perfectly acceptable and well-known phrase that is both accurate and succinct and tries to change it for something totally vague and encompassing far more than it intends to for no discernable reason other than someone trying to score some propaganda points I feel that I have the right to feel superior in that instant. If I tried to get people to refer to the United States of America as the Imperial Capitalists of the West to gain some propaganda points then you should feel superior to me.

Felling superior to others is very human. However, when you express that feeling en masse, it is understandable that those who are included in the group you have expressed your superiority to will express their disagreement.

As to people who call in to phone in shows, I think that almost all of them come off badly. The people I get the most annoyed with when I listen to one of these shows is not the people I disagree with, it is the people I agree with. There is nothing so aggrivating as having someone who is on your side mucking up the argument to the point that it sounds ludicrous.

[All Systems Go]

Originally Posted by dda

Snip.

Maybe I could have said arrogent Repulbicans. My original title captured the essence of what I was trying to say (almost). Seeing as I doubt very much that the phrase homicide bomber came from the Democrats (having seen a guy fom Fox use it and several right-wing phone-in callers, plus Littlejohn uses it, writes for the Sun funnily enough) I think referring to Republicans was fair enough.

I imagine you are being sarcastic when referring to C-Span. C-Span is on BBC Parliament on a Sunday afternoon and ends at about 3pm. I don't know if it is live but I doubt it ,especially as it's not on CNN at the same time,

I don't think the US has a "lead, follow or get out of the way" stance mre of a "follow or get out of the way stance". I dubt France and Germany opposed the Iraq War for altruistic reasons but I don't think getting a more balance of power would necessarily be a bad thing. Yes, that coud be construed as being against you acting unilateraly is not the way to go and only causes more resentment. America has to accept that it is not always right.

I think the 2000 attempts to find reason to oust Saddam is seriously implied in the Foreign Policy Of George W. Bush by Alexander Moens. this is Republican pro-Bush book so I would imagine it would be reliable if it is implying things like that. Check out these links for the need to create a pretext for the war.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...593607,00.html
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...592724,00.html

You say that you don't hate lefties, but ironically in certain conditions I do. Most of the time I hate hippes who are generally full of shit. Although I must admit that my use of the word hate is a bit severe (except for Condi and Cheney etc). I accept that I could be wrong and I enjoy talking to people who are right-wing who challenge my views and accept their viewsbeing challenged.

When I said I hate Republicans I should have prefiexed the word arrogent. I hate Fox News, it is so full of shit but I don't pass judgement on those who watch it.

[Texan]

He was serious about C-Span. Maybe it's different from what you see on BBC.

www.c-span.org/

[dda]

Originally Posted by All Systems Go

I imagine you are being sarcastic when referring to C-Span. C-Span is on BBC Parliament on a Sunday afternoon and ends at about 3pm..

Maybe just a little sarcastic at the begining about C-Span, sometimes I just can't help myself. But I was serious about C-Span carrying coverage of your Parliament from time to time and I do enjoy watching it when I come across it. Not unlike I used to enjoy watching Australian Rules Football when it would be on ESPN.

[Ärketrollmannen]

Originally Posted by Yahwe

no you must be right

human life isn't inherently sacred is it.

my mistake.

Shouldn't you have total and complete control of your own life?


You can easily counter this by providing examples such as "the single mom who commits suicide and leaves her young child orphaned" etc. But basically, shouldn't YOU be in control of YOUR own life?

[dda]

Originally Posted by Ärketrollmannen

Shouldn't you have total and complete control of your own life?

You do have complete and total control over your own life. What you don't have is complete and total control over everyone else's life. You can make all the choices you want to make, however, the world, country, city, neighborhood may not go along with your choices.

You are free to kill. Your society is free to punish you for doing so.

Society as a whole is going to proscribe the range of acceptable choices. You can chose to be a hermit but then your choices are going to be even more restricted but by your own choice, if that is a comfort.

[Ärketrollmannen]

I was talking about suicide.

Wich basically is ending your own life, something that can never be altered or corrected.

The utmost control over your own life.


Yet.

I would try to stop someone who were attempting to commit suicide.

[All Systems Go]

Originally Posted by Ärketrollmannen

I was talking about suicide.

Wich basically is ending your own life, something that can never be altered or corrected.

The utmost control over your own life.


Yet.

I would try to stop someone who were attempting to commit suicide.

Under what circumstances would you allow it?

[Ärketrollmannen]

No idea, can't really picture a situation where life really is 'over'. Where there is nothing left to do to improve the situation.

I guess. If I was completly convinced that the person wanted death. Then I wouldn't try to stop it.

it is not a question of not allowing, it is a question of trying to see if the person actually want's to die, or if they just cannot face life.