Obama Comes Out Against Free Speech - Page 2

jyhad · 29th August 2008, 12:00pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by MarkMono

See, thats purely subjective opinion on the Weathermen, and it completely leaves aside the fact that Ayers has been a distinguished university professor for more than two decades. What, he's good enough to teach at university, but not good enough to even tangentially be associated with a potential president. The last cunt they elected (See how I give him the benefit of the doubt in my rhetoric, thats how you take an equilateral view) had close personal ties with half the people they've since declared war on.

Aren't we kind of missing the fact that it might be, y'know, good if at least one of the potential next-president-of-the-US's associates has anti-imperialistic leanings.

I was not aware opinion came in any other flavours other than subjective. I agree its good news that Ayers has refrained from any more criminal activity I hope he keeps it up. He has not shown in any sign of regret though. I agree Bush's ties to islamic extremists should have been subject to scrutiny and I would not have voted for him over it (and one or two other reasons).

No I didnt miss the fact that the two mainstream candidates are both pro war. In fact I believe I started a thread on the subject last month. Your preaching to the choir on anti imperialism hence why Im leaning towards Nader.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MarkMono

I know it seems like total crap, but its worth reading just for the last paragraph, the author seems almost physically aroused by her condemnation of the effeminacy of the liberal left:

I would have just said it was quite engaged and commited writting. I dont know where you get aroused from.

MarkMono · 29th August 2008, 12:02pm

Aroused: It means to become excited or stirred to action.

Engaged? Possibly. Engaging? No, its attempted manipulations fall flat with anyone who actually stops to examine how leading the terminology used is.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jyhad

I was not aware opinion came in any other flavours other than subjective. I agree its good news that Ayers has refrained from any more criminal activity I hope he keeps it up. He has not shown in any sign of regret though. I agree Bush's ties to islamic extremists should have been subject to scrutiny and I would not have voted for him over it (and one or two other reasons).

No I didnt miss the fact that the two mainstream candidates are both pro war. In fact I believe I started a thread on the subject last month. Your preaching to the choir on anti imperialism hence why Im leaning towards Nader.

Nader's not the worst call out of the lot of them actually.

But if the worst Obama has going for him is that he knows a guy who was in Weather Undeground in the 60's he's going to walk this election.

jyhad · 29th August 2008, 12:07pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by MarkMono

Nader's not the worst call out of the lot of them actually.

But if the worst Obama has going for him is that he knows a guy who was in Weather Undeground in the 60's he's going to walk this election.

Sadly not. The far more frightening people he associates with have not been convicted of any terrorist attrocities in the seventies but should have (or at least their intelectual god fathers.)

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080630/klein

http://www.economist.com/world/unite...ry_id=11551686

*LesMTS* · 29th August 2008, 12:09pm

Michelle Malkin is a wank.
It was her that kicked up all the fuss about the girl in the Dunkin Donuts add wearing a scarf that kinda looked like a headscarf that some terrorist wore in a beheading video, leading, ludicrously, to the advert being pulled.
Anything penned by her is worth as much as the opinions of Gary Bushell.

MarkMono · 29th August 2008, 12:11pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by jyhad

Sadly not. The far more frightening people he associates with have not been convicted of any terrorist attrocities in the seventies but should have (or at least their intelectual god fathers.)

See, that sounds like bullshit. It sounds like you're using sensationalist terminology to get people to agree with a rather logically shaky viewpoint.

Its easy for you to believe as you want to believe it, so its very little effort for you to ignore discrepancies and mentally paper over logical cracks in your points.

"Atrocities?"

Catch yourself. Who was convicted of war atrocities in the 70's? You're hyperbolising to such an extreme degree it makes you sound desperate, almost pleading to have someone agree with you.

jyhad · 29th August 2008, 12:15pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by LesMTS

Michelle Malkin is a wank.
It was her that kicked up all the fuss about the girl in the Dunkin Donuts add wearing a scarf that kinda looked like a headscarf that some terrorist wore in a beheading video, leading, ludicrously, to the advert being pulled.
Anything penned by her is worth as much as the opinions of Gary Bushell.

Thats not fair. While prone to the odd bit of demogaugery she is no Ann Coulter (she is far better looking than Coulter as well). She is an advocate for children and working families.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MarkMono

See, that sounds like bullshit. It sounds like you're using sensationalist terminology to get people to agree with a rather logically shaky viewpoint.

Its easy for you to believe as you want to believe it, so its very little effort for you to ignore discrepancies and mentally paper over logical cracks in your points.

"Atrocities?"

Catch yourself. Who was convicted of war atrocities in the 70's? You're hyperbolising to such an extreme degree it makes you sound desperate, almost pleading.

Read the modern history of Latin America and tell me Neo Liberal economists are not responsible for atrocities.

XMachina · 29th August 2008, 12:18pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by jyhad

Read the modern history of Latin America and tell me Neo Liberal economists are not responsible for atrocities.

Does Chile count?

MarkMono · 29th August 2008, 12:19pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by jyhad

Read the modern history of Latin America and tell me Neo Liberal economists are not responsible for atrocities.

Thats like saying he should be condemned for having associates in the Army or the CIA if you want to talk about atrocities in Latin America.

Like I say, you just sound desperate.

jyhad · 29th August 2008, 12:22pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by XMachina

Does Chile count?

I would have thought so.

XMachina · 29th August 2008, 12:27pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by jyhad

I would have thought so.

so by your logic it's a pinko think tank's fault that Pinochet's regime commited mass murder and torture?

jyhad · 29th August 2008, 12:31pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by XMachina

so by your logic it's a pinko think tank's fault that Pinochet's regime commited mass murder and torture?

I think his economic advisors should bare some reponsibility for the human cost of the 'Chile Economic Miracle'. Im hard pushed to think why you would call them communists though.

MarkMono · 29th August 2008, 12:35pm

So apparently a crack team of Clinton-era economists were actually Manuel Noriega's handlers for the Central Intelligence Agency throughout the 80's?

(Its easy to make fun of such stupid claims, because when faced with simple, logical replies believers will almost always retreat immediately into hyperbole and semantics.

Its a dead giveaway, every time.)

jyhad · 29th August 2008, 12:50pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by MarkMono

So apparently crack team of Clinton-era economists were actually Manuel Noriega's handlers for the Central Intelligence Agency throughout the 80's?

(Its easy to make fun of such stupid claims, because when faced with simple, logical replies believers will almost always retreat immediately into hyperbole and semantics.

Its a dead giveaway, every time.)

I dont actually recall making the above claim. What I said was Obama is being advised by some Chicago School economists.

During the seventies Milton Friedman's neo liberal economic policies were adopted by Latin American strongmen usually after meeting him and recieving personal instruction.

The Chicago School of Economics still advocates Neo Liberal policies today. Members of its faculty who were taught by Friedman are being employed by Obama. The University of Chicago is world famous for its Neo Liberal Economics research. Obama worked (in the Law dept) for the university.

To sum up Obama is being advised by people who were taught by people who advised Latin American murderers. Hardly a noble intelectual pedigree.

MarkMono · 29th August 2008, 12:53pm

And you're saying these people are worse* than a guy who committed terrorist atrocities** in the 70's?

Deeply specious.

*They're not.

**He didn't.

jyhad · 29th August 2008, 12:59pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by MarkMono

And you're saying these people are worse* than a guy who committed terrorist atrocities** in the 70's?

Deeply specious.

*They're not.

**He didn't.

I didnt actually state that I found them to be worse. What I said was I think they are far more frightening. Ideas can kill.

Before you accuse me of having loopy notions. Keep in mind that Nietzsche and Wagner were discussed at the Nuremburg trials.