The first thing I posted was a joke. Two people modded it as such independently. It wasn't intended to have any special meaning. I post jokes all the time. Check the other threads. It's simply not rational to apply this anywhere else.
As for the term evil, I believe it is only used to appeal to people's emotion... which ultimately is used to turn off their brain and control them.
As for Bush being nothing special... I stand by that. Our whole system is corrupt. His buddies Rove, Rumsfeld, Cheney have been around for DECADES. If you think Bush going away will change a single thing in the long term you are delusional. By saying he IS different you give a pass to the rest of the crap that goes on. He's a figurehead. No different that Reagan in that regard. Bush's puppetmaster's happened to want to take over Iraq. Reagan's happened to want him to trade arms for the hostages. Is the war in Iraq worse? Yes, much worse. But it's still a decision by the same puppetmasters, not Bush. Blaming Bush is like blaming the paper that the order was written on.
I think the partisan critics on both sides do a huge injustice by keeping the whole broken system going. When you tell people that Bush is evil and they should hate him you are not giving them a chance to do critical thinking for themselves. If you could look out of your one-sided us-vs-them cage for one single second you'd see that everything I say is in accordance with that.
Okay, this one is just not true. The dollar has been cyclical, but there have been many significant periods where it was one of the strongest currencies in the world. Basically your entire claim is completely false. Inflation chart
The bits in blue is where it is losing value. The bits in red, gaining.
I see a lot more blue than red.
And I never said the Iraq war was insignificant, you nutcase.
For a nation that invades other nations every few years like clockwork, has a currency that has been steadily plummeting for nearly a century, and has never thought anything of invading the privacy of it's citizens... no Bush isn't anything but business as usual. Sorry. The only special thing Bush has under his belt is Guantanamo and torture.
If you think anything differently you are an apologist for the whole corrupt system. Or at the very least misguided enough to let them use Bush to distract you from the real issues.
what excessive load times are there on the PS3 as opposed to 360, wii, ps2? Obviously not a whole lot, if any. Therefore that would make attributing that to the extended playtime a joke.
DS or PSP owners almost always also own a console also. And, as far as that goes, consoles are still played more by several orders of magnitude. I gave my Mom a PSP and she uses it to play music and carry all her photos with her.
She also has an N64 in the house I guess, but that's for the grandkids.
The PS3 accounted for 1.5 per cent of console usage. Its users logged in an average of 1.9 sessions per day with an average session length of 83 minutes-the longest playing session of all consoles studied. They didn't account for load times, did they?
You've also posted a lot of mystical pseudoscience babble about gold. I didn't see the word gold in his post at all, but have you taken your dollars out of US lately?
No, you made the exact opposite clear by claiming his behaviour is not particularly different than that of other Presidents. The US has invaded other countries about every three years on average since the WWII. Nearly every time based on lies. This does not justify Bush's actions, but it sure as hell shows why he thought he could get away with it, and it also shows how the next guy will think the same thing.
I'm starting to think you are the right-wing guy trying to make anyone left of center look crazy.
If, as the post I first replied to implied, you don't think there's any significant difference between Bush's degree of ideological blindness and the people who came before him back thirty years, then no, you aren't being objective. Of course there's going to be a variation. And have the results of this variation been much worse? Hell yeah. But I don't see a fundamental difference, sorry. It's still the same sorry partisan crap that has littered our history with crap for the last century. And more importantly NOTHING WILL CHANGE WHEN HE LEAVES OFFICE. The problem is not with Bush, the problem with is us.
From my elderly Mother who blindly loves Bush to my elderly Mother-in-law who will blindly vote a ticket she's handed by someone else because it's got the right letter at the top. That stuff scares and I don't see it going away when this dolt leaves office. In fact we have to be MORE vigilant then.
But instead by blaming Bush we lose the tools we need to make sure he doesn't just pop up again.
You end your post "fanatically anti-fanatical". That's the place I'm coming from. I've made it clear I think Bush is very bad, and I'm one of those who 71% who disapprove so this is in no way apologizing for his behavior.
But yes, I am convinced our political system is broken and can and will easily produce worse in the next 3 decades. Bush didn't spring up and take control of our system. He is a RESULT of it. And the sooner people realize this the better.
Insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results.
My God, I feel badly for you. What you say regarding my posts is extremely paranoid and delusional. I said nothing remotely similar to anything you've ascribed to me!
I'm going to honestly suggest, for your sake and for those around you and that I'm sure love you, that you seek help.
Your posts seem to indicate that you won't dismiss something if it comes from a right-wing source. Correct. If Bush said the sky is blue I would look up but I wouldn't turn red in the face yelling RED RED! without doing so.
You clearly have two standards of evidence, depending on whether or not one agrees with your idealogy. I don't understand. Wouldn't dismissing evidence based on the source be two standards?
Furthermore, I have expressed no other ideologies but dislike for Bush and a desire for moderation.
I don't know how you translate my statement: "worst President I've ever seen" to: "Bush is great". I won't point out anything else wrong in your post because you'll think I'm defending Bush, which I wouldn't be. There is no room for actual debate because if you do, then then you don't hate "them" enough. Sound familiar?
Seriously, you really need to think things over. I started with a light-hearted joke and have been rake over the coals because I don't hate Bush enough.
Let's review one of my comments:
Look, Bush is pretty bad and the least favorite President I've seen (and that's saying a lot), but he's nothing particularly special, sorry. Politicians have ignored reality throughout history. I could go on with a billion examples, but that would look I'm defending him, which I desperately do not wish to do. So if that sounds right-wing partisan to you, and is worthy of the hatred you've displayed, then you frighten me. For a few zealots there seems to be only the choice of "You must hate Bush as much as I do, or you are with him and I hate you." That worries me.
Evil is rarely a useful adjective. I think they believe in a certain ideology and believe that the ends justify the means. Their particular priorities do not line up with yours (or mine), but to describe them as evil is probably not productive. Agreed completely. I'm amazed people can't see the irony in labeling Bush & Co as "evil".
While I am invested in my life I am capable of recognizing zealots of any color.
Zealots are the ones who want you to compare their cause to that of shot children. It's always "for the children", isn't it? Then somehow it ends up that we have to shoot somebody else's children to save them? Because after all, someday they might have shot ours.
The reason thinking like yours scares me is because it ends with "well, if we elect XXX other person then he'll save us from YYY". That's probably what got Bush into office in the first place. The second factor is the "you're an idiot if you disagree". That's the basis for all irrational thinking that pervades large groups... whether it's true or not.
I don't know what you're trying to get me to say, but I'm sorry, I'll still look at things objectively.
Slashdot Mirror
And think what a SERVICE you do for them by running around calling me foul names all day every day?
They could not PAY someone to generate as much bad will to the Dems as you do.
The first thing I posted was a joke. Two people modded it as such independently. It wasn't intended to have any special meaning. I post jokes all the time. Check the other threads. It's simply not rational to apply this anywhere else.
As for the term evil, I believe it is only used to appeal to people's emotion... which ultimately is used to turn off their brain and control them.
As for Bush being nothing special... I stand by that. Our whole system is corrupt. His buddies Rove, Rumsfeld, Cheney have been around for DECADES. If you think Bush going away will change a single thing in the long term you are delusional. By saying he IS different you give a pass to the rest of the crap that goes on. He's a figurehead. No different that Reagan in that regard. Bush's puppetmaster's happened to want to take over Iraq. Reagan's happened to want him to trade arms for the hostages. Is the war in Iraq worse? Yes, much worse. But it's still a decision by the same puppetmasters, not Bush. Blaming Bush is like blaming the paper that the order was written on.
I think the partisan critics on both sides do a huge injustice by keeping the whole broken system going. When you tell people that Bush is evil and they should hate him you are not giving them a chance to do critical thinking for themselves. If you could look out of your one-sided us-vs-them cage for one single second you'd see that everything I say is in accordance with that.
The bits in blue is where it is losing value. The bits in red, gaining.
I see a lot more blue than red.
And I never said the Iraq war was insignificant, you nutcase.
For a nation that invades other nations every few years like clockwork, has a currency that has been steadily plummeting for nearly a century, and has never thought anything of invading the privacy of it's citizens... no Bush isn't anything but business as usual. Sorry. The only special thing Bush has under his belt is Guantanamo and torture.
If you think anything differently you are an apologist for the whole corrupt system. Or at the very least misguided enough to let them use Bush to distract you from the real issues.
Maybe that's just what they want us to think?
Playing the long-con.
Which it was.
She also has an N64 in the house I guess, but that's for the grandkids.
Do these friends make me look fat?
I quoted the entire sentence here.
How does "worst I've seen in my lifetime" not translate to "notably bad"?
Like I said, I think you are suffering from some sort of delusion.
I'm starting to think you are the right-wing guy trying to make anyone left of center look crazy.
From my elderly Mother who blindly loves Bush to my elderly Mother-in-law who will blindly vote a ticket she's handed by someone else because it's got the right letter at the top. That stuff scares and I don't see it going away when this dolt leaves office. In fact we have to be MORE vigilant then.
But instead by blaming Bush we lose the tools we need to make sure he doesn't just pop up again.
I was trying to make it clear this irrational hatred leads to this exact behavior.
It is this same "they are Evil and if you don't hate them enough your are Evil" attitude that led to the war in the first place.
That's the attitude that worries me.
You end your post "fanatically anti-fanatical". That's the place I'm coming from. I've made it clear I think Bush is very bad, and I'm one of those who 71% who disapprove so this is in no way apologizing for his behavior.
But yes, I am convinced our political system is broken and can and will easily produce worse in the next 3 decades. Bush didn't spring up and take control of our system. He is a RESULT of it. And the sooner people realize this the better.
Insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results.
My God, I feel badly for you. What you say regarding my posts is extremely paranoid and delusional. I said nothing remotely similar to anything you've ascribed to me!
I'm going to honestly suggest, for your sake and for those around you and that I'm sure love you, that you seek help.
Furthermore, I have expressed no other ideologies but dislike for Bush and a desire for moderation.
I don't know how you translate my statement: "worst President I've ever seen" to: "Bush is great". I won't point out anything else wrong in your post because you'll think I'm defending Bush, which I wouldn't be. There is no room for actual debate because if you do, then then you don't hate "them" enough. Sound familiar?
Seriously, you really need to think things over. I started with a light-hearted joke and have been rake over the coals because I don't hate Bush enough.
Let's review one of my comments: Look, Bush is pretty bad and the least favorite President I've seen (and that's saying a lot), but he's nothing particularly special, sorry. Politicians have ignored reality throughout history. I could go on with a billion examples, but that would look I'm defending him, which I desperately do not wish to do. So if that sounds right-wing partisan to you, and is worthy of the hatred you've displayed, then you frighten me. For a few zealots there seems to be only the choice of "You must hate Bush as much as I do, or you are with him and I hate you." That worries me.
I do not think that word means what you think it means.
:/
What do you think I think it means?
I think it means I won't dismiss something just because of the source.
I never said everything was a dull-shade of gray. I made a light-hearted joke and the zealots went nuts. Far from gray.
While I am invested in my life I am capable of recognizing zealots of any color.
Zealots are the ones who want you to compare their cause to that of shot children. It's always "for the children", isn't it? Then somehow it ends up that we have to shoot somebody else's children to save them? Because after all, someday they might have shot ours.
That's my point.
The reason thinking like yours scares me is because it ends with "well, if we elect XXX other person then he'll save us from YYY". That's probably what got Bush into office in the first place. The second factor is the "you're an idiot if you disagree". That's the basis for all irrational thinking that pervades large groups... whether it's true or not.
I don't know what you're trying to get me to say, but I'm sorry, I'll still look at things objectively.