motorfirebox said:
some would, no doubt. and they'd be as wrong as you are.
Well the Bill Ayers and Jermiah "God Damn America" Wright connection didn't seem to bother people on this board too much.
that's because most of the people on this board are not, by and large, raving idiots. there is no Ayers connection, and as for Wright--Obama cut Wright off and repudiated those statements by Wright which he found to be offensive. i know this is confusing, but bear with me: Obama refuses to associate with people who make offensive statements, while Beck invites people to make offensive statements on his show--and then agrees with them. those two things are almost totally identical, so i can see how you might get them mixed up.
i mean, seriously--do facts and logic give you a skin rash, or something? is that why you avoid them so much?
motorfirebox said:
some would, no doubt. and they'd be as wrong as you are.
Well the Bill Ayers and Jermiah "God Damn America" Wright connection didn't seem to bother people on this board too much.
that's because most of the people on this board are not, by and large, raving idiots. there is no Ayers connection, and as for Wright--Obama cut Wright off and repudiated those statements by Wright which he found to be offensive. i know this is confusing, but bear with me: Obama refuses to associate with people who make offensive statements, while Beck invites people to make offensive statements on his show--and then agrees with them. those two things are almost totally identical, so i can see how you might get them mixed up.
i mean, seriously--do facts and logic give you a skin rash, or something? is that why you avoid them so much?
Does that mean Obama's getting a divorce because a lot of people found Michelle's "I've never been proud until now" statement offended a lot of people. What about the whole "Clinging to Religion and Guns" comment by Obama? Is he going to metaphysically dissociate himself from himself?
motorfirebox said:
some would, no doubt. and they'd be as wrong as you are.
Well the Bill Ayers and Jermiah "God Damn America" Wright connection didn't seem to bother people on this board too much.
that's because most of the people on this board are not, by and large, raving idiots. there is no Ayers connection, and as for Wright--Obama cut Wright off and repudiated those statements by Wright which he found to be offensive. i know this is confusing, but bear with me: Obama refuses to associate with people who make offensive statements, while Beck invites people to make offensive statements on his show--and then agrees with them. those two things are almost totally identical, so i can see how you might get them mixed up.
i mean, seriously--do facts and logic give you a skin rash, or something? is that why you avoid them so much?
Does that mean Obama's getting a divorce because a lot of people found Michelle's "I've never been proud until now" statement offended a lot of people. What about the whole "Clinging to Religion and Guns" comment by Obama? Is he going to metaphysically dissociate himself from himself?
What does that have to do with this? Really? "Clinging to religion and guns" is somehow equivalent to "Osama is the only one who can save us". Offending people isn't the issue. Wishing harm to our country is. Not that complicated.
Secondly, genius, there was a little bit of outcry over the two things you've mentioned...but so far, barely a ripple over Glenn Beck agreeing with a man who hopes that our country gets bombed so that we don't have to deal with Mexican immigrants. You really don't see the double standard?
motorfirebox said:
some would, no doubt. and they'd be as wrong as you are.
Well the Bill Ayers and Jermiah "God Damn America" Wright connection didn't seem to bother people on this board too much.
that's because most of the people on this board are not, by and large, raving idiots. there is no Ayers connection, and as for Wright--Obama cut Wright off and repudiated those statements by Wright which he found to be offensive. i know this is confusing, but bear with me: Obama refuses to associate with people who make offensive statements, while Beck invites people to make offensive statements on his show--and then agrees with them. those two things are almost totally identical, so i can see how you might get them mixed up.
i mean, seriously--do facts and logic give you a skin rash, or something? is that why you avoid them so much?
Does that mean Obama's getting a divorce because a lot of people found Michelle's "I've never been proud until now" statement offended a lot of people. What about the whole "Clinging to Religion and Guns" comment by Obama? Is he going to metaphysically dissociate himself from himself?
you're right. those statements are exactly the same as openly calling for the US to suffer a terrorist attack. but hey, keep on trying desperately to drag the topic away from the horrible shit Glenn Beck put on his show, instead of having the integrity to face up to it--and maybe even denounce it.
SergeantPsycho said:
Does that mean Obama's getting a divorce because a lot of people found Michelle's "I've never been proud until now" statement offended a lot of people. What about the whole "Clinging to Religion and Guns" comment by Obama? Is he going to metaphysically dissociate himself from himself?
Being offensive and wishing harm to others to further your own political ideology are two different things.
Also looking about Texas when i visit my family there I would say that "Clinging to Religion and Guns" is a fairly good - if politically inappropriate - description of an awful lot of people.
motorfirebox said:
some would, no doubt. and they'd be as wrong as you are.
Well the Bill Ayers and Jermiah "God Damn America" Wright connection didn't seem to bother people on this board too much.
that's because most of the people on this board are not, by and large, raving idiots. there is no Ayers connection, and as for Wright--Obama cut Wright off and repudiated those statements by Wright which he found to be offensive. i know this is confusing, but bear with me: Obama refuses to associate with people who make offensive statements, while Beck invites people to make offensive statements on his show--and then agrees with them. those two things are almost totally identical, so i can see how you might get them mixed up.
i mean, seriously--do facts and logic give you a skin rash, or something? is that why you avoid them so much?
Does that mean Obama's getting a divorce because a lot of people found Michelle's "I've never been proud until now" statement offended a lot of people. What about the whole "Clinging to Religion and Guns" comment by Obama? Is he going to metaphysically dissociate himself from himself?
you're right. those statements are exactly the same as openly calling for the US to suffer a terrorist attack. but hey, keep on trying desperately to drag the topic away from the horrible shit Glenn Beck put on his show, instead of having the integrity to face up to it--and maybe even denounce it.
You stated that Obama refuses to associate with those who make offensive statements, and clearly that's not the case. The only reason Obama broke off relations with Wright is because Wright said something bad about him. Apparently Obama wasn't bothered by the "God Damn America" statements.
you continue to avoid, avoid, avoid, still refusing to engage on any substantive point--attempting to bring in arguments about what is and is not offensive, rather than addressing the offensive comments made on Beck's show.
and you know what? having read the sermon Wright delivered, i am not bothered by Wright's "God Damn America" statements. i'm bothered by some of his other statements, partly because they're offensive and partly because they're just crazy. but that sermon was interesting. i'd recommend you read it for yourself... but i know how you feel about reading.
TheFuckOffKid said:
Reverend Wright advocated that Americans should die in a terror attack so that Americans might wake up to the parlous state of their country?
Where did I miss that?
Exactly.
Look, kids. Every time you allow Sarge to go down the road of Obviously Retarded Moral Equivalence, you let him get away with talking about something other than the issue, which is what he wants. It doesn't matter what he thinks of Obama or anyone else, because those thoughts (as obviously irritatingly stupid as they are) are completely irrelevant to the issue in question.
Sarge is completely unwilling to address the very clear and simple A + B = C equation that HE HIMSELF set up by way of explaining Beck's situation. He's unwilling because it's an impossible statement to justify. Despite the fact that he's not very bright, he is knowingly intellectually dishonest enough to use this whole Obama-Wright-Ayers thing as a diversion. Don't let him do it.
Now, I'm not saying I haven't encouraged it myself, but don't compound the issue. He knows exactly what he's doing, which is attempting to justify the unjustifiable through obfuscation and ham-handed misdirection.
Subrosa said:
Now, I'm not saying I haven't encouraged it myself, but don't compound the issue. He knows exactly what he's doing, which is attempting to justify the unjustifiable through obfuscation and ham-handed misdirection.
Let's here if for Pallin-Sarge 2012! "A NATION DELUDED IS A NATION UNITED!"
Seriously, people. Just put Sarge on ignore and he'll go away eventually.
A quick bone to pick, however:
I believe the reason Obama isn't disassociating himself from Michelle for her "proud" statement, or himself for his own "religion and guns" statement, is because he doesn't find either of those to be offensive. Some one will always be offended about something, but the point of taking a stand is to show YOU take offense against a specific statement/action.
Oh, and I think it's a bit overboard to claim that Beck supports terrorism. I definitely think he should have told his guest to fuck off, but I don't honestly believe that Beck wants a terrorist attack on the US.
Then again, maybe I'm being ridiculously optimistic.
i don't really care if he does or not--although to be honest, it seriously wouldn't surprise me to find out that Glenn Beck really does get a raging boner at the idea of returning to what the US was like on 9/12. what has me incensed is the level of hypocrisy on display. to flip out over the non-existent links to Ayers, to treat what is at worst simple racism as some kind of deep and abiding anti-American agenda, and then to say that on fucking national television?
Otoki said:
Oh, and I think it's a bit overboard to claim that Beck supports terrorism. I definitely think he should have told his guest to fuck off, but I don't honestly believe that Beck wants a terrorist attack on the US.
I doubt he really wants such an attack either.
But it's amazing that he didn't call his guest out, especially given how the right have attacked far less extreme statements from their perceived enemies.
Or, yeah, ...
motorfirebox said:
what has me incensed is the level of hypocrisy on display. to flip out over the non-existent links to Ayers, to treat what is at worst simple racism as some kind of deep and abiding anti-American agenda, and then to say that on fucking national television?
motorfirebox said:
i don't really care if he does or not--although to be honest, it seriously wouldn't surprise me to find out that Glenn Beck really does get a raging boner at the idea of returning to what the US was like on 9/12. what has me incensed is the level of hypocrisy on display. to flip out over the non-existent links to Ayers, to treat what is at worst simple racism as some kind of deep and abiding anti-American agenda, and then to say that on fucking national television?
Oh, I agree that it's hilariously hypocritical. I just wanted to emphasize the point about whether he really WANTS a terrorist strike.
Adroitbeing
I'm lost
September 2003
JUL 05, 2009 03:12 PM