View Full Version : Those Mean People That Want to Hurt Obama
August 30th, 2009, 09:36 AM
Ugh. Damn Liberal Nazis, and their "hippo"-crytical ways (see some of them?)
The Democrats are airing ads about how anyone protesting the "health care" bill are part of "the angry mob", yet when Dubya' was in office, it was okay to belittle him, and interrupt his speeches? That was fine, because it was their first amendment rights.
So, of course, when republicans protest, "...it's unconstitutional.", according to Michelle Obama. Oh, yeah, it's one-way only, and if the shoe is on the other foot, it's wrong.
Of course, it happens BOTH ways, but mentioning it's not right to protest? (Can you say: HITLER? I can.)
Now I see why so many Democrats voted for McCain: they weren't so dumb to vote for "change", and no concrete change was ever given at any speech (You-know-who was famous for that ploy as well).
It happens both ways. Dems protest Republicans, and Republicans protest Democrats. Get used to it, Adolf.
September 5th, 2009, 06:32 PM
I hope this filthy, white-hating, constitutionally-ineligible, affirmative-action-recipient, usurping, socialist kenyan baboon gets shot. You mess with my country, you meet my guns.
Damn I hate liberals, even more than arch-viles in open areas.
September 6th, 2009, 07:55 PM
...and people say I go over the edge.
Don't care for Obama, but even I will say: Hope nothing like that happens to him. That would solve nothing, and make a lot of matters much worse.
It'll be the Rodney King L.A. Riot all over again, but this time, all over the country.
September 18th, 2009, 01:14 AM
Not being American I will never have the American understanding or experience.
Certainly hope tho that nothing does happen to Obama. He has restored a lot of confidence in the USA from the allies perspective by a willingness to participate in foreign policy and domestic policy that is regarded as constructive as it allows for differences and negoitation. The last administration was wanting to make us to more American, which was not appropriate.
Not understanding you Heidi, about your anger. What happened please?
September 18th, 2009, 08:52 PM
Oh Heidi is just some kind of Nazi troll. We just ignore those posts most of the time. :D
I don't see anything particularly bad about Obama. He doesn't seem to be able to project any kind of decisive vision onto the various parts of his administration, though. He tries a bit too much for compromise. Any proper government should be extremely liberal and extremely atheist. Oh well.
September 20th, 2009, 07:10 AM
drastic changes that cant be reversed easily are not allowed in modern politics, its against the rules (or is that reols?). I think its very brave of Obama to try and provide decent health care for the poor and I really cant see why anyone would object to it.
The more I see Heidi making comments like that the more I suspect its 'tongue in cheek' to make nazis look stupid and evil. I dont think it works well on a messageboard, text lacks the ability to show a deliberate insincerity or sarcasm.
September 20th, 2009, 08:51 AM
I will never understand why so many Americans stick to the teachings on economics of a Scot who died around 200 years ago. Purely private enterprise doesn't work for the same reason autocratic governments don't work: no checks and balances! Actually, that's the same reason why democracy often doesn't work. All large organizations need big restrictions on what they're allowed to do to people. This is why I get really mad when people go on about democracy being the goal with everything. It's not; freedom is the goal. Democracies do evil shit too, like vote away people's rights, vote themselves out of existence, etc.
Time for some public health care! How can a country that spends twice as much government money per capita on health care not ensure every last person?
September 20th, 2009, 11:06 PM
Thats one of the best posts you have made in a long time. Democracy most definately isnt working except for those on its gravy train and those hanging onto their shirt tails. Over here (UK) the politicians keep voting wage rises for themselves, massive expenses for almost everything and then tell the rest of us we have to tighten our belts and pay more tax, the same taxes that their expenses pay for them. Thats not the worst of it but its hard to prove the corruption/bribery allegations.
September 21st, 2009, 11:25 AM
Your guys already got busted for major corruption. That was probably the biggest corruption scandal in years! :D
Only problem is that kind of thing doesn't go away with leaders, no matter what kind of government they have. You end up needing something like Turkey where when the politicians get out of hand the army stomps on them every few years. Then what you ultimately need is a constitution with extremely strong courts that also guarantees all government documents are public (and on th web), and politician raises are controlled by plebiscite (as in they're always stuck 50 years behind the curve).
September 21st, 2009, 12:52 PM
they got busted but the only guy to lose his job is the 'speaker' of the house for allowing the public to know. The bastards will just change the rules on secrecy to hide the details of their theft from the public purse
September 23rd, 2009, 08:51 PM
Sorry but you're all full of shit. Canada is a hopeless socialist, suicide-inducing hellhole thanks to perplexingly evil-minded people like Aliotroph.
And scotts, keep your traps shut, you're living in an inherently right-wing country so you don't have to put up with most of the filthy socialist garbage that's destroying mine.
And it's funny how these socialist scumbags still refer to anti-socialists as "nazis", even we're just as anti-nazi. I suppose this is due to them being too stupid or ignorant to acknowledge the fact that even though nazis fought against socialists, they were not right-wingers and hated freedom as much as they hated jews, and anyone who retains a minimal understanding of WW2 history and bothered to read the Mein Kampf, would be able to confirm.
You socialist parasites mind your own goddamn business. If you'd be so flattered to have an illegal socialist ghetto trash destroy your nation, fine, find one and fuck yourselves up, I could care less, but don't sponsor America's demise, that's very, very low of you.
David O. Carter, you're our last, non-violent hope.
September 24th, 2009, 08:45 PM
I go on a rant about how organizations in all forms are evil and you call me an evil socialist? See? It's things like this that lead everybody to believe Americans can't read.
Socialist organizations can lead to less evil if they're used to balance the purely capitalist ones. Often they just end up taking over and becoming as evil as pure capitalist ones. The solution: porn. :D
September 25th, 2009, 01:13 AM
LMAO at PORN :D
I saw Heidi's thread earlier and was concerned, because really ... I do feel a great deal of concern for the USA. The anger and hurt is very understandable, on so many levels.
Well it's a struggle now to be serious, thanks Alio :p
Tries to be serious, it is worth it:
If I was a citizen of the USA I'd be so angry and disappointed in the state of affairs there.
Also, comparing countries is not really appropriate either, considering our cultures are very very different. We may be similar on many levels, yet again vast historical circumstances have shaped our viewpoints to perceive and reflect on current events differently.
Heidi, as I am an ignorant stranger to this forum and a foreigner to your land, what would you like to see happen in your country please?
September 30th, 2009, 05:23 PM
I actually live in a left of centre country (scotland) thats trying to win (peacefully and 'democratically') its full independence from an increasingly right wing UK. The majority of scottish voters are left of centre, but over here we know what words like 'socialist' mean and so its not a word used like a insult or a swear word, in fact to call me a socialist would be taken as a compliment. Im actually more of a left wing anarchist but I admire socialist ideals, I just dont trust the middle classes to carry them forward without creating a massive beauraucracy aimed at keeping things their own way and preventing any changes. As it always seems to be the middle classes who take control wether its democracy or revolution I think the solution is to take a lesson from Pol Pot and get rid of the middle classes, humanely if possible.
October 1st, 2009, 05:15 AM
well...being humanely disposed of :p thank you! actually that is pretty funny, gotta a good kick out of it, Mystic. :)
interesting how words in different democracies have values that are so variable.
here in Australia, my goverment is considered centre right. in the USA, it's considered centre left.
and the word democracy has been hijacked to - what is democracy now?
so far it's been a label for a set of excuses to allow the open market to moderate itself, see what happened...no suprise there. hood-winkingly yours until busted.
November 5th, 2009, 06:33 PM
REoL, this is the second political post you've created that has invoked the nazis.
Your far-right libertarian views should be strong enough to stand on their own without needing to attach the image of the third reik to the opposition.
November 5th, 2009, 06:57 PM
Nothing on the far right is libertarian. The far right and far left are tied together in a web of desire to control others. I distrust any policy maker who has any other agenda than maximizing the freedom of individuals at the expense of any type of organization.
All Scotland has to do to get independence is get half their people to vote for it. After that any Englishman who disagrees is fair game for whatever weapons are at hand for any man anywhere who cares to use them. :D
November 6th, 2009, 05:20 AM
I have a strong feeling the SNP will win next time. But it'd be hard to imagine Scotland leaving the United Kingdom. Would they have to change the union Jack? Remove the blue part? Would Nick Griffin complain? It would certainly be an interesting time for the country.
I'm of the opinion that unchecked libertarianism leads to the free expansion of private interests until they're large enough to impose their will on the people; personal liberties will disappear in a fiscal fascist regime where the those with the means of production will control the labour force. Its wonderful if you're at the top, but horrible if you're anyone else. This is why I believe libertarianism is right wing.
November 6th, 2009, 06:56 AM
This is why I said "at the expense of any type of organization."
November 6th, 2009, 07:27 AM
I wasn't disagreeing with you, I was only expounding on my own point.
November 6th, 2009, 11:37 PM
The English wont let us have independence without a fight and they outnumber us 10 to 1. Not only that but they also have an army, air force and navy, a large police force and many thousands of 5th collumnists within our midst.
Got to laugh at the MPs who are having to pay back their dodgy expenses claims demanding a wage rise to compensate them.
November 7th, 2009, 12:38 AM
Things like that are why the IRA (when they were killing officials) were heroes. Would be fun to have some Scottish insurgents. :D
November 7th, 2009, 06:18 AM
Calling the IRA heroes is a bit inappropriate.
But in the end England wouldn't have a say in Scotland's secession, they are after all self governed. The only authority higher than the Scottish parliament in Scotland is the Queen. Plus, we have seen the end of many British empires, Scotland would be just another entry for Britain's growing list of former states.
My only concern is without Scotland's voting power the Conservatives will win every subsequent election.
November 7th, 2009, 11:27 AM
No it isn't. The IRA started out as a rebel force designed to kill Englishmen who had conquered their country. They're heroes. The ones who went around bombing civilians and terrorizing them certainly weren't, but neither were the English and Unionists who did the same.
Having England vote for conservatives all the time sure does sound scary. That said, it looks scary there with Labour running the show.
November 7th, 2009, 01:02 PM
Labour ceased to be a party with socialist ideals when Tony Blair took over not that it ever was truly socialist anyway. None of those ex-empire countries were let go without bloodshed, just because they dont teach it in school doesnt mean it never happened, example, Malaya, british paid for the heads of 'commuinst' insurgents even bringing in real headhunters from Borneo to get some.
November 7th, 2009, 02:19 PM
We made it out without having our guys killed. :p
Socialist ideals these days seem to include taking away everybody's freedom to do anything. Basically the same as conservative ideals but with a different excuse.
November 7th, 2009, 05:30 PM
"None of those ex-empire countries were let go without bloodshed"
I'm not sure that's exactly true, Mystic. I know the Handover of China was pretty peaceful, and I'm sure there must be other examples. I believe most of the Post War Attlee decolonisation were fairly peaceful even if some were incredibly bloody.
And Aliotroph, that's such a misguided view of the IRA (not to mention morally absolute). The IRB originally formed not to 'Fight the evil English', but end an imperialistic rule and establish a Socialist Republic to Ireland. It wasn't an invasion response against the English, they were much too late for that. And it certainly wasn't about killing people. But those ideals ended in, like... 1922; about ten years after the formation of the Irish Republican Brotherhood. The Anti-treaty IRA, and the Provisionals are/were killers; idealistic killers, but killers regardless. Nothing justifies mass-murder campaigns.
November 7th, 2009, 11:40 PM
Sometimes those in power and their supporters leave no option but extreme violence. I abhor violence and would normally call myself a pacifist but, for example, if on my upcoming trip to Latvia there is a revolution to get rid of their criminal democratically elected government I will gladly man the barricades. The same would apply if the people of the UK decided they had enough of this pretence at 'freedom and democracy' .
November 8th, 2009, 03:49 AM
Yes, exactly. They were fighting off a colonial government. How does that not equate to killing the evil English? Of course, setting up a socialist, Catholic republic is a pretty evil thing to try too. Hmm, why are all British conflicts like that? Both sides are evil. It's like the thing with Guy Fawkes. I'd be tempted to cheer him on, but he was Catholic and that's just wrong too. Religion is evil.
Also, handing over HK to China was different. They'd signed a treaty saying they would give it back (weird notion, really).
November 8th, 2009, 08:43 AM
Oh the UK has dirty hands over China too, we did go to war with China to force them to take opium back in the day when the UK was the main supplier of opiates in the world. (probably still is secretly).
November 12th, 2009, 01:40 PM
I wouldn't deny there were underhanded techniques used in the seizing of china. In fact I wouldn't be able to argue a case for any colonisation occurring without blood shed (in some form); I think the term Colonisation comes with an implication of violence. But I thought we were talking about the release of those colonises.
"How does that not equate to killing the evil English"
Because 'Killing the evil English doesn't even begin to cover the complexities of the Irish Civil war. There were pro and anti agreement on both sides, Irish and British. And when I say British I mean that very loosely, The plantation of Ireland occurred about 200 years before this point so many of the population were of British decent anyway.
November 27th, 2009, 09:27 AM
I wont argue about the Irish, they do seem to murder each other for dumb reasons and it seems more to do with religion than anything else so that disqualifies them from getting any respect from me.
China did fight against British colonisation as did Kenya, Malaya, Burmah, Canada, the USA, Australia, New Zealand, Sudan and South Africa just to name a few, I dont see how something can be peaceful and bloody at the same time.
Scotland never lost its independence, it gave it away (or sold it?) when it volunteered to be part of a United Kingdom of Great Britain, our King James the 6th became King James 1st of England. I am no hater of the English (apart from London) and I have too many good English friends to ever be converted to that.
Im all in favour of all evil people being done away with but who gets to decide who/what is evil and who/what isnt?
November 27th, 2009, 09:49 PM
John Carmack gets to decide. Not because he's good at it, but just to see if he's smart enough to try or give up without his head exploding. :D
November 28th, 2009, 07:54 AM
It's all Obama's decision.
He is the one who will fix all!
He is the World Healer.
November 29th, 2009, 11:17 PM
he will be on the new ark like all the other rich pigs. Actually I am increasingly concerned that the earth is soon to be battered by a huge asteroid, the 'powers that be' know roughly when its going to happen and where its most likely to hit and they decided Afghanistan is probably the safest place to avoid any giant tidal waves caused by it. They are planning to completely take over that area or at least use it as a springboard for conquest elsewhere. Thats why they artificially created the current economic crisis, so they have carte blanche to rob the taxpayers and hide away enough cash to buy any country they want after the disaster.
November 29th, 2009, 11:57 PM
You come up with the most random ideas sometimes. :p Asteroids of that type are civilization ending. Money would be worthless at that point.
November 30th, 2009, 10:44 AM
greedy capitalists will sell you the rope to hang them with, those bastards think their wealth makes them immortal
December 3rd, 2009, 09:40 PM
My dad's from Airdrie Scotland , just east of Glasgow /
December 6th, 2009, 02:28 AM
I bet he is glad he left it.
December 6th, 2009, 10:36 AM
We have a town here called Airdrie. Nobody goes there.
December 7th, 2009, 04:51 AM
sounds a lot like the Scottish Airdrie. I am biased, I hate the whole area in and around Glasgow, I find it all very grey and depressing and a little bit menacing.
December 7th, 2009, 07:44 PM
Here's the one in Alberta. (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Alberta&sll=55.8665,-3.973686&sspn=0.049799,0.138187&g=Airdrie&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Alberta,+Canada&ll=51.28597,-113.99826&spn=0.055507,0.138187&t=h&z=13) It's probably not at all menacing. 98% of its traffic probably happens due to it being on highway 2, which is the main one between Edmonton and Calgary. I've been through there in a car a few times and it hasn't once interested me. It doesn't even have an interesting name like Carstairs, just to the north-east does. The surrounding countryside has lots of canola fields and cows.
December 9th, 2009, 08:57 AM
lol @ Carstairs, we have that too, not too far from Airdrie. Our Carstairs is famous for its high security mental hospital, where they keep the really dangerous loonies. I remember back in the 70's when some of its 'patients' escaped, chopping a few people up in the process. Like something out of a horror movie. One of my cousins is a psychiatric nurse there.
December 10th, 2009, 12:03 AM
Sounds fun! lol
Little towns in Alberta only seem to get famous when they have some big, stupid thing to attract people. Vulcan has a giant model in the park that looks like a ship from Star Trek; Vegreville has a giant Easter egg; Mundaire has a giant kubasa, etc, etc.
vBulletin® v3.8.5, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.