One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: Socialist Batman
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 30 next>>
Jan 12, 2015 22:28:54   #
Billhuggins wrote:
If that is the best assay you can write. Congratulations, you just scored an "F".

You fail to recognize that America is a proud country standing in lock step with the rest of the world against Islamic terrorism.

But, no! your fool little boy, president, can't say the word Muslim Terror. He can't say it happened here and he can't say it happened in Europe at first; but, when he saw that he was alone on an island, he changed his lines and confirmed that it was terror.

The optics of the world is that this president is an isolationist, not joining in on a unified war on terror. He declared that the war on terror was over during his run for the WH in 2012. Ben Laden was dead and Al Qaeda was on the run. If lying were a crime, he would get the death penalty. Attending the march in solidary would have exposed him as a liar to the world. His cover up of B******i was to hide his lie of Al Qaeda being on the run in the middle of the WH campaign. I understand that he is a Muslim. His father was a Muslim. His mother was a C*******t. His grand parents were C*******ts. He attended a Muslim school in Singapore. In order to attend that school someone had to certify that he was Muslim.

Sir: your lack of knowledge is appalling.
If that is the best assay you can write. Congratul... (show quote)


I simply adore the fact that you can criticize my English, when there are no grammatical errors, yet still spell the word "essay" incorrectly.
Go to
Jan 12, 2015 22:05:20   #
It's funny how you think you're on the right side of history. In 50 years or so people will look back on you just like people look back on those who supported segregation.

The concept that all men are created equal is one of the foremost basic concepts that the USA was founded on.
Go to
Jan 12, 2015 21:48:34   #
Elwood wrote:
You are full of crap and an obvious Muslim supporter. It is people like you that are k*****g our country. :hunf: :XD: :XD:


I support no religion, what I do support is the rights of an individual, sorry if the basic concept that all men are created equal threatens your preconceived notions of reality.
Go to
Jan 12, 2015 21:46:33   #
adkguy wrote:
Tantamount to a German saying in 1945 that the N**is were responsible. When I say police their aberrant members, I mean kick ass and take names.


The same way Christians react to the KKK? oh wait....
Go to
Jan 12, 2015 00:22:35   #
Steve700 wrote:
To quote "Democratic President Lyndon Johnson - ”I’ll have those n**gers v****g democratic for the next 200 years.”
That quote from "President Lyndon Johnson" is pretty telling. This is in reference to his plans for the “Great Society which is nothing other than a huge welfare state that ensured b***k A******ns would remain forever dependent on government programs." This is how we have reached a point where believing b****s can achieve something on their own merits is now viewed as r****t, because the "Democrat Party is trying to hide the t***h about their r****t past and their agenda to turn the whole nation into a giant welfare state, the likes of the European Union." It is all about the acquisition of power, with the strength and power of government ever increasing. While robbing the poor of their of their confidence insincerity the useful i***t liberal arrogantly feels better and finer about himself because he is led to think he is more caring and noble. It is therefore led to believe that he has the moral high ground and to think ill of the conservatives and their values. You must know that the KKK was started by and filled with Democrats. It was in fact the enforcement arm of the Democratic Party.. Also Lincoln & M. L. King were both registered Republicans. WAKE UP
To quote "Democratic President Lyndon Johnson... (show quote)


- One man does not speak for a movement

- First picture is a Strawman fallacy

- If you are not willing to admit the basic concept that the Democrat and Republican ideologies have switched around the early 20th century, then you sir deny reality.
Go to
Jan 12, 2015 00:06:13   #
9th Marines wrote:
This from "The Week", 5 Dec 2014.

Alas, virtually all of us respond to emotionally loaded issues in a visceral way, and then reason backward to the conclusion that feels right because it buttresses what we already believe. The stronger people's political and moral values, social scientists have found, the more reflexively they react to any hot button debate. "Morality binds and blinds," says social psychologist Jonathan Haidt in his superb book, "The Righteous Mind. "It binds us into idealogical teams that fight each other as through the fate of the world depended on our side winning each battle." That much, at least is inarguable. Duke University researchers recently presented self-identified liberals and conservatives with evidence contradicting their views on gun ownership and c*****e c****e, respectively. Since neither group liked the policy implications of the evidence, each imply dismissed is lies. Motivated reasoning, as social psychologists call this phenomenon, is highly rewarding. It wards off the discomfort we feel when our preconceptions are challenged. It binds us further to our "tribe," filling us with the warm glow of impregnable certainty. But as Haidt points out, self-rightous partisanship has a steep cost: "It blinds us to the fact that each team is composed of good people who have something important to say."

It seems to me that this describes the bulk of posters on this site.
This from "The Week", 5 Dec 2014. br b... (show quote)


I believe the term you're looking for is "confirmation bias"
Go to
Jan 12, 2015 00:03:47   #
Elwood wrote:
That is a typical libertard response and not very bright at that. :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :hunf: :XD: :XD: :XD:


If its so easy to refute then go ahead, i'm waiting....

OR do you need to go back to high-school and learn what an ad hominem fallacy is?
Go to
Jan 12, 2015 00:01:20   #
adkguy wrote:
If there is 1.6 billion members of a peaceful Islam, why aren't they showing their radical brethren the error of their ways? If your religion says violence is a no no, shouldn't you seek to reform those bastardizing it?


https://twitter.com/hashtag/notinmyname
Go to
Jan 11, 2015 23:48:34   #
ghostgotcha wrote:
Millions marched against terrorism Sunday in the largest protests France has ever seen, led by world leaders in Paris uniting in tribute to the victims of Islamist attacks as the crowd cried "Not Afraid".

At the head of a vast and colorful procession in the capital, President Francois Hollande linked arms with world leaders, including the Israeli prime minister and the Palestinian president, in an historic display of unity.

Unfortunately the president of the United States was not in attendance.

Hey. Obama is not a world leader, and he was raised a Muslim, so why would he attend?
Millions marched against terrorism Sunday in the l... (show quote)


I feel like if he did attend you would state that he is wasting his time in foreign affairs instead of addressing [insert right-wing talking point]
Go to
Jan 11, 2015 23:44:58   #
Elwood wrote:
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsmax-Tv/Richard-Perle-France-world-clueless/2015/01/09/id/617687/?

Well we have a President who won't even acknowledge "Islamic Terrorism". :hunf: :evil:


If the KKK attacked Muslims in the south would you want Saudi Arabia to publicly state that the k*****gs were the quintessential example of an American Christian?
Go to
Jan 11, 2015 23:29:28   #
Look at all the amendments. It just so happens they were proposed by Republicans. https://www.congress.gov/search?q=%7B%22congress%22%3A%22114%22%2C%22source%22%3A%22legislation%22%2C%22search%22%3A%22social%20security%22%7D

But then again it probably just easier to deny reality if you're on the Right at this point.
Go to
Nov 16, 2014 14:53:03   #
trucksterbud wrote:
Its incompetence at its finest. Reward the ones without a clue - i.e. - Nancy PelosiScum and Harry ReidScum. Both started their tenure in congress with small $1 Million fortunes. Nancy PelosiScum and her husband - at last count - total worth over $28 Million.. Harry ReidScum played the cards right, personal worth went from $440,000 (when he was a "Prestigous Lawyer") to over $41 Million today.

They (congress) are all guilty of "Malfeasance in Office" and "Fraud"...
Its incompetence at its finest. Reward the ones w... (show quote)


It seems , on this thread at least, that we have the problems identified in a general sense, but we insert and apply those problems to who ever we choose and hope it sticks
Go to
Nov 16, 2014 14:51:24   #
memartin wrote:
The biggest problem with government today is BARACK OBAMA and the stupid people who v**ed this interloper into office.


What exactly is the problem with our president? I also have my qualms with his inability to act and pass more progressive policies, but he is a lesser evil compared to others.
Go to
Nov 15, 2014 20:54:48   #
Grugore wrote:
Here's some actual research for you. A recent study confirms that global temperatures have not risen in the past 15 years, even though the amount of C02 in the atmosphere went up 15%.


No silly that's an assertion. Research is something adults do. If you're curious on how to do research why don't you try contacting your local college and getting a degree in the field. Until such time, you are more than welcome to cite the evidence of the experts and scrutinize there papers, but laying out an assertion on the correlation between carbon dioxide in the atmosphere not being relevant to the recent global temperature increase is not "research".
Go to
Nov 15, 2014 20:44:22   #
johnson90 wrote:
Without heterosexuals there would be no homosexuals! Your kind cannot exist without us. You would die off very fast! How does nature work with something that cannot exist??? It doesn't!! The only way homosexuals can exist is by forcing their sick agenda on the rest of us. By indoctrinating our children in public schools! By adopting children and raising them in a homosexual atmosphere which is likely to encourage the kids to be homosexuals, Or at the very least..experiment with it! Any man who is interested in same sex relations whether it be children or adults is both a homosexual and a p*******e. The word heterosexual defined: a person attracted to people of the opposite sex. The definition of homosexual: a person who is attracted to "people" of the same sex. Children are people! (no where in that definition does it say a person attracted ONLY to adults of the same sex.
Without heterosexuals there would be no homosexual... (show quote)


Let's just clear this up right now. I am not homosexual. Moving along, homosexuals are born just like you and I were they do not need any sort of indoctrination. They were born then one day they realized that they are attracted to people of the same sex.

As for the ladder part of your argument, homosexuality makes no claims on age as does p********a. Homosexuality simply means that there is an attraction of the same sex. Homosexuality does not mean that there is an attraction to children just as heterosexuality does not mean there is an attraction to dead bodies. Stop lobbing together p********a and homosexuality in an attempt to make it seem immoral and nefarious.
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 30 next>>
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.