The "oppose everything obama says/does" ideology of the right has jumped the shark

[Hayabusa Rider]

Dude you jumped the shark. She happens to be correct in that Nazi tactics were not "senseless". They were done deliberately and caused Germany to rise from a tortured nation to one of the yesterday powers of the day. This is not approval, but it is fact.

That doesn't mean the writer isn't trolling, because this is merely Obama wasn't precise, but it hardly matters. "Senseless" or "tragic", most, even Republicans, get it.

Tempest in a teapot

[Atreus21]

Originally Posted by Phokus

The only numbskull is you. Give me a fucking break. Conservatives trying to get rid of Thomas Jefferson and introduce "Creation Science" is the equivalent to liberals trying to get rid of/introduce _________________???

Yes, because removing ONE reference to Thomas Jefferson in ONE textbook equals "OMG THE CREATIONISTS ARE TAKING OVER."

http://www.politifact.com/texas/arti...mas-jefferson/

Dunbar, defending the amendment, said: "It does take out (the) reference to Thomas Jefferson. But the reason is not that I don't think his ideas were important. It's just that this is a list of political philosophers from which the Founding Fathers based their ideologies and their principles."

Dunbar's amendment won preliminary board approval 8 to 6.

However, the move did not strike Jefferson from Texas classrooms. "The only individual mentioned more times in the curriculum standards than Thomas Jefferson is George Washington," board member Gail Lowe, then the chairwoman, said in a press release at the time.

In fact, members left intact these elements: In a fifth-grade U.S. history course, students are expected to "identify the Founding Fathers and patriot heroes," including Jefferson. In an eighth-grade U.S. history course, students are required to "explain the roles played by significant individuals during the American Revolution," including Jefferson. And in a high school government course, students must "identify the contributions of the political philosophies of the Founding Fathers" and "identify individuals in the field of government and politics," both including Jefferson.

[Doc Savage Fan]

Originally Posted by Moonbeam

DSF: Nope...missed it. But I did see the "hideous and despicable" McCain at a press conference promoting a bipartisan immigration reform bill. What a slimeball!

M: Yup, that was pretty hideous and despicable too, when the only time immigrants count is when they cost you elections. Would you have me believe he has real and genuine intentions and good will toward immigrants like Obama does or do you suspect some ulterior motive driving Obama just like I suspect McCain. And if you can turn on a guy like Hagel who did so much for McCain in the past, how do you trust his sympathy for immigration reform. Bat shit crazy tells me he wants to gather names so he can put them in jail. Trust me, that's gotta be it.

I don't know except possibly that he has a track record or supporting bipartisan immigration reform?

- Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007 (sponsered by McCain and Kennedy)
- The McCain-Kennedy Bill (2005)

But hey...I'm sure your suspicions about him are well founded.

[Phokus]

Originally Posted by Atreus21

Yes, because removing ONE reference to Thomas Jefferson in ONE textbook equals "OMG THE CREATIONISTS ARE TAKING OVER."

http://www.politifact.com/texas/arti...mas-jefferson/

Uh yes, it was the REASON that they wanted to remove him from that section that was the most disturbing, are you daft?

Cynthia Dunbar, a lawyer from Richmond who is a strict constitutionalist and thinks the nation was founded on Christian beliefs, managed to cut Thomas Jefferson from a list of figures whose writings inspired revolutions in the late 18th century and 19th century, replacing him with St. Thomas Aquinas, John Calvin and William Blackstone. (Jefferson is not well liked among conservatives on the board because he coined the term “separation between church and state.”)

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/13/ed...n/13texas.html

By dropping mention of revolution, and substituting figures such as Aquinas and Calvin for Jefferson, Texas Freedom Network argues, the board had chosen to embrace religious teachings over those of Jefferson, the man who coined the phrase "separation between church and state."

http://www.aolnews.com/2010/03/12/te...hing-standard/

That's the very definition of "OMG THE CREATIONISTS ARE TAKING OVER."

[Atreus21]

Originally Posted by Phokus

Uh yes, it was the REASON that they wanted to remove him from that section that was the most disturbing, are you daft?

That's the very definition of "OMG THE CREATIONISTS ARE TAKING OVER."

Only if you're prone to insults and knee-jerk reactions to the slightest disagreement.

I think it's far more likely that liberals secretly dislike Jefferson because he hated big government.

[hal2kilo]

Originally Posted by thraashman

As a liberal member of ATP&N I believe I have a working agreement with some conservative members here that they don't have to claim Incorruptible if we don't have to claim Dave ... or maybe it was Nemesis. Hmmm. It was one of the more insane members. Well now I'm gonna have to go look for it.

I'll sign it.

[airdata]

Originally Posted by Matt1970

Yep, Eliana Johnson represents the entire GOP. Dumbass.

Anti Semite.

[Atomic Playboy]

Originally Posted by Hayabusa Rider

Dude you jumped the shark. She happens to be correct in that Nazi tactics were not "senseless". They were done deliberately and caused Germany to rise from a tortured nation to one of the yesterday powers of the day. This is not approval, but it is fact.

That doesn't mean the writer isn't trolling, because this is merely Obama wasn't precise, but it hardly matters. "Senseless" or "tragic", most, even Republicans, get it.

Tempest in a teapot

What on Earth are you talking about? Here is the direct quote from the President:

On January 27th, International Holocaust Remembrance Day, we honor the memories of the 6 million Jews and millions of other innocent victims whose lives were tragically taken during the Holocaust over sixty years ago. Those who experienced the horrors of the cattle cars, ghettos, and concentration camps have witnessed humanity at its very worst and know too well the pain of losing loved ones to senseless violence.

How is that not precise? He doesn't say the Nazis were senseless, he said that the violence was senseless. It's hard to argue that genocide is ever sensible, so I'm failing to see how anyone on Earth could have a problem with this statement. There's no "Obama wasn't precise," that's pure, unadulterated bullshit.

[Darwin333]

Originally Posted by Phokus

False equivalency. The GOP is far more batshit insane.

Yeah..... Its like the difference between a hooker with aids and no teeth and a hooker with aids but still has all of her teeth. One is obviously worse than the other but I sure as hell wouldn't get in bed with either of them.

[Charles Kozierok]

Arguing about who has or has not jumped the shark has jumped the shark.

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally Posted by Atomic Playboy

What on Earth are you talking about? Here is the direct quote from the President:



How is that not precise? He doesn't say the Nazis were senseless, he said that the violence was senseless. It's hard to argue that genocide is ever sensible, so I'm failing to see how anyone on Earth could have a problem with this statement. There's no "Obama wasn't precise," that's pure, unadulterated bullshit.

Egads.

Did you see anywhere where I said she was justified? I read the article and evaluated her argument. She's using an absolute and overly strict context and a precise definition of a word in THAT context. My response should be understand that regardless of the fine points in the correct context her statement and its relevance are a meaningless attempt to subvert a clear meaning.

This question requires a binary answer from you. No "but buts"

In the context of Nazi tactics, would their unacceptable cruelty have a purpose or was it undirected, random, and had no purpose, therefore "senseless"?

[Jhhnn]

Originally Posted by Hayabusa Rider

In the context of Nazi tactics, would their unacceptable cruelty have a purpose or was it undirected, random, and had no purpose, therefore "senseless"?

You don't get to define "senseless" to suit your argument. Quite the contrary-

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/senseless

The Holocaust was foolish, stupid & meaningless in a negative way, which is what Obama offered.

The OP has a point, that the Right is so eager to Beat Obama! that they embarrass themselves in the process. That's now extended itself from sources like Newsmax, Drudge & the American Stinker even to the most prestigious publication of the Conservative mind, the NRO.

Basically, whatever Obama says or does is wrong, because he did it.

That's senselessness in itself.

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally Posted by Jhhnn

You don't get to define "senseless" to suit your argument. Quite the contrary-

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/senseless

The Holocaust was foolish, stupid & meaningless in a negative way, which is what Obama offered.

The OP has a point, that the Right is so eager to Beat Obama! that they embarrass themselves in the process. That's now extended itself from sources like Newsmax, Drudge & the American Stinker even to the most prestigious publication of the Conservative mind, the NRO.

Basically, whatever Obama says or does is wrong, because he did it.

That's senselessness in itself.

Ahh, so it served no purpose to the nazis and their plans. This whole context thing has you perplexed. They gained nothing domestically from scapegoating the Jews?

You automatically go into the defensive drill falling to understand a simple but hardly important fact which in no way reflects adversely on Obama in any legitimate sense.

Egads^2

[Moonbeam]

Originally Posted by Doc Savage Fan

I don't know except possibly that he has a track record or supporting bipartisan immigration reform?

- Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007 (sponsered by McCain and Kennedy)
- The McCain-Kennedy Bill (2005)

But hey...I'm sure your suspicions about him are well founded.

Of course. I see a man turn vicious on a friend and say to myself, what motivated something seemingly sensible that he did. Is at as meaningless to him as friendship, just opportunism calling? You wanted to elide over my friendship issue by throwing up immigration. My retort was to show that to be dodging the issue.

[WHAMPOM]

Rightie attacks on the semantic use of the word "senseless". Priceless!!

[Charles Kozierok]

Originally Posted by Hayabusa Rider

Dude you jumped the shark. She happens to be correct in that Nazi tactics were not "senseless". They were done deliberately and caused Germany to rise from a tortured nation to one of the yesterday powers of the day. This is not approval, but it is fact.

Senseless has many meanings, but the simplest one is the plain one: something that doesn't make sense.

Something being deliberate doesn't mean it's not senseless.

If a guy is running at me with a knife and I shoot him, it's deliberate act that makes sense -- I was threatened and I defended myself.

If a guy is walking through the park and I just shoot him because I don't like his sneakers, it's deliberate and senseless.

The Nazis were deliberate but what they did was senseless. They wasted huge amounts of resources on exterminating civilians when they were trying to fight a war. The deaths served no real purpose other than expressing their hatred. If anything, their focus on killing Jews and other undesirables undermined their war effort.

The actions might make "sense" in some twisted way, but then I'm sure the guy who shot up Newtown thought what he was doing made sense in some twisted way. By any objective standard, the Holocaust was as senseless as me deciding to shoot some guy over what shoes he's wearing.

So, not only is the author an utterly partisan, nit-picking idiot, she's not even correct.

[Incorruptible]

Originally Posted by PokerGuy

Guys, don't feed the troll.

Its too late, Why do people even bother responding to him?

[Greenman]

Originally Posted by Incorruptible

Its too late, Why do people even bother responding to him?

Because he wears a little red skirt, a tight little tank top and carry's pom poms around dancing for the (self styled) progressives. At some clubs you have to pay extra for that, here we get it free.

[OrByte]

Originally Posted by Atomic Playboy

One stupid person wrote one stupid article which was roundly criticized by everybody who commented on it. I fail to see how that is indicative that the entirety of the conservative population of this country opposes every single thing Obama says or does.

actually there were commenters on that article that bended and weaved and shaked and shimmied and ducked and stopped/dropped and rolled and tried to defend the author's position with some rather impressive linguistic gymnastics!

disgusting

[Incorruptible]

Originally Posted by Phokus

Oh and i TOTALLY forgot about Incorruptible's thread about Google being 'out to destroy christmas' just because they said 'happy holidays', that was a 'gem'.

I suggest you read that article

Originally Posted by thraashman

As a liberal member of ATP&N I believe I have a working agreement with some conservative members here that they don't have to claim Incorruptible if we don't have to claim Dave ... or maybe it was Nemesis. Hmmm. It was one of the more insane members. Well now I'm gonna have to go look for it.

Thats the problem with you right there.

No one "claims" me as a Conservative, I am a Libertarian/Constitutionalist.

I am not insane but just someone who has had their freedom violated, I am not insane.

Lastly the left/liberals definitely have much more batshit insane and angry people than

[Doc Savage Fan]

Originally Posted by Moonbeam

Of course. I see a man turn vicious on a friend and say to myself, what motivated something seemingly sensible that he did. Is at as meaningless to him as friendship, just opportunism calling? You wanted to elide over my friendship issue by throwing up immigration. My retort was to show that to be dodging the issue.

I was responding to the following where you were commenting on the immigration "issue":

Originally Posted by Moonbeam

Yup, that was pretty hideous and despicable too, when the only time immigrants count is when they cost you elections. Would you have me believe he has real and genuine intentions and good will toward immigrants like Obama does or do you suspect some ulterior motive driving Obama just like I suspect McCain. And if you can turn on a guy like Hagel who did so much for McCain in the past, how do you trust his sympathy for immigration reform. Bat shit crazy tells me he wants to gather names so he can put them in jail. Trust me, that's gotta be it.

BTW...Hagel was against the surge in Iraq which was highly successful in stabilizing the country. Friend or not...he deserved tough questions on it.