-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
Why are the posters on P&N so far to the left?
Page 12 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
How ironic. While you start off saying the left parrots impeach Bush, Bush lied, etc. - you then parrot Republican talking points towards the close of your post. You seem like a smart guy so you know that the last time we had a balanced budget was when there was a Democrat in the Whitehouse and there was a bipartisan bill that set a budget cap and limited spending. The latest GOP led Congress has extended the ceiling on that cap 9 times in 6 years.
Next you call Democrats appeasers - this is a straight Rush Limbaugh talking point. You say that Democrats will just want to talk to North Korea. What do you think is going to happen with them right now? Do you think that we are going to use military force to get them to abandon their nuclear ambitions? No we are going to talk with them and hope that the Chinese will do us a solid and back our play. Good chance on that happening. There's nothing that the Chinese would like more than to see us struggle with North Korea and see US influence wane in general over the Pacific rim. Appeasing the North Koreans is the least of our worries here - think long term - think growing Chinese influence regionally.
And the most important thing - the thing that has 2/3's of the country pissed off - is Iraq. And there have been nothing but lies from BushCo regarding Iraq. From a make believe presentation to the UN, to saying that he wouldn't go into Iraq without a 2nd UN vote, to saying that they knew where the WMDs were, to saying that the insurgency was in its last throes, to saying that Iraqi oil revenue would cover US costs, to saying that aluminum tubes were going to be used in a centrifuge, to saying that Saddam was trying to import yellow cake from Niger, to saying that Saddam had ties to Al Qaeda, to denying that invading and occupying Iraq has created more terrorists, to saying that the Generals on the ground can have more troops if they ask for them... I could go on forever, ask and I will.
When you pull a stunt like Iraq like Bush did, you should expect to have the entire country pissed off at you. This forum is not inhabited by a bunch of non-thinking religous fools who are afraid of gay boogeymen, but rather a bunch of building enthusiasts whose intelligence is way, way over the national average. You put 2 and 2 together on why this seems to be a left leaning forum.
dmcowen674
No Lifer
Yes, many of them.
dennilfloss
Past Lifer 1957-2014 In Memoriam
The posters here don't seem so far left to me. 😛
The problem is that you ONLY make posts about democrats, the party who has not had any power in the last decade... the party could literally be jerking off at their posts and accomplish the same amount as they would by working hard. Yet, you only go after them... it just makes no sense. You should be using a critical eye at the people controlling the government over the past 6 years... yet you refuse. That is why.
haha, I love it. They guy who pulls a stat out of his ass then gets called on it asks the guy who called him on it to provide a source. Such is the logic of the P&N forum.
Strummer: Well done sir, but next time ask Tab to provide some proof other than "some dude told me" and save yourself the effort.
ProfJohn, you said the following "I think I could find 5+ quotes that illustrate every issue I listed."
The issuses you listed were as follows.
- For the "1st statement" you said it's hard to find people making that exact statement. Fair enough. Neither of your quotes say anything about if we just left the Middle East and company that we'd be left alone. I would suspect the general additude from many of the more liberal posters would be that if we the United States left the world alone, we'd have a lot less problems.
- For the second statement, you only found two?
- For the third statement you found some the actually are revalent to your statement. Now, the only one I have problem with is my own. Please explain how my statement ""Clinton did a much better job when he dealt with North Korea, at least the Koreans were talking to us under Clinton. The man who has done the most to keep North Korea in check has to be Jimmy Carter. " relates to the one above. There isn't anything I can see in my own statement that would be meant as that talking to dictators like Kim in North Korea will bring about positive long term.
- For the fouth statement, you're right. I will also say that some of the indiviuals that do say those things have very good reasons for doing so.
- As for the 5th statement, I'd have to say you didn't do anything. Why? Obiviously, because there isn't anyone who beileves Rush/Sean/Other conservative figures are the source for all the evil in the world. Too someone like yourself, I guess it could seem that someone on this forum could make those statements.
Now, I beileve you missed two. The one were you mentioned Nationalized Healthcare and Radical Pro-Abortion. Are you going find me five quotes that supports those? I'd appreciate if you do, because what you said of the leftists of this board doesn't seem to true.
ProfJohn
Lifer
Tab, I told you I am not digging up 30+ quotes for you.
As for this comment by you.
You illustrated the point I was trying to make. Many liberals aka 'the left' seem to think that if we just talk to people like Kim and make nice little deals his desire for Nukes will go away. Those of us on the right don't agree.
As for this comment by you.
You claim that Jimmy Carter did the MOST to keep NK in check, and what did Carter do? He talked to them, nothing else.
You illustrated the point I was trying to make. Many liberals aka 'the left' seem to think that if we just talk to people like Kim and make nice little deals his desire for Nukes will go away. Those of us on the right don't agree.
UberNeuman
Lifer
Translation: "Hi, I going to ask questions and expect answers, but I won't answer questions back when asked....."
/you are so worthless....
MrK6
Diamond Member
Liberalism is what started this country and it's also the only thing that will keep it alive. I dont frequent the OT section often, but some of the political threads grab my interest. It never ceases to amaze me how some people can be so completely ignorant, but I guess there always has to be a deficiency to counter the better in order to keep the average. There will be elections in nine days, with luck they will be a start to getting this country out of the mess(es) it's in.
blackllotus
Golden Member
Its not always a great idea to post your name on the internet. I don't see how hiding my name makes me a "shill".
jackschmittusa
Diamond Member
What a chore it has been to read this whole thread.
One thing that I think everyone has missed is that so many of the issues that divide us have so little to do with liberalism or conservetism. One side or the other adopts an idea as their own, and doesn't want to share it.
Take the issue of gun control. Anyone advocating any kind of gun laws is not only considered a liberal, but is made to seem as an opponent of the conservatives. I am sure that the majority of conservatives favor some limits on gun control (perhaps no howitzers, gunships, or mortars), but are afraid to say so, as they will be branded as liberals. Libs who recognize that far too many of our gun laws are based on ignorance and stupidity, ineffective and perhaps even counter-productive, are afraid to speak out because they will be labeled as well. While I realize that who want to ban guns have good intentions (and good intentions belong to neither party), objecting to poor and faulty laws is only common sense (commonsense belonging to neither party as well). And we still insist on calling these issues right or left.
Gay marraige! (And the word marraige is not just the province of churches. A Justice of the Peace can marry you and stamp your liscense.) It seems to me to be an issue of civil rights. The traditional understanding of both liberalism and conservatism allow for civil rights and equal treatment. It is simply an issue that our political parties have taken sides on. It is not truely an issue of pure political philosophy.
The Iraq mess! From the very moment we invaded Iraq, the parties chose up sides and refuse to budge. Even though I thought unessesary and very bad policy on many levels from the outset; I cannot make it better now by rehashing the old arguments. But arguing that seeing where we are now, it has returned poor value for our investment cannot be construed as a liberal point of view just because the "libs" picked the no war side of the original argument.
If this board seems to far left to some, it may well be that many here are judging issues based on their merits; having rejected religious arguments and ignoring their importance as planks in a party platform.
I am a real live and let live kind of guy. I believe the government has certain obligations to the people. The list of these obligations is long in its entirety, but short if only considering the concepts. Arguing how the government is to meet these obligations should not involve choosing sides, but should be based on ideas that can be examined and tested, combined and compromised, to yield the best result for all of us.
I, for one, am getting a little sick of just slinging labels when it accomplishes nothing. Things that are good for the country and things that are bad for the country should not be considered political, even if we cannot agree on how good or bad they might be.
Though I am leery of vigorously promoting nationalism per se, I do feel that there has never been a more important time in our history to start thinking and taking actions as Americans than now. We have reached a critical point where our divisions have set us against each other. The more we find ways to divide ourselves, the more likely we are to lose those things that all of us cherish and enjoy from the privilege of being American.
note: Maybe someday I will understand why the wee hours tend to make me a philosopher.
One thing that I think everyone has missed is that so many of the issues that divide us have so little to do with liberalism or conservetism. One side or the other adopts an idea as their own, and doesn't want to share it.
Take the issue of gun control. Anyone advocating any kind of gun laws is not only considered a liberal, but is made to seem as an opponent of the conservatives. I am sure that the majority of conservatives favor some limits on gun control (perhaps no howitzers, gunships, or mortars), but are afraid to say so, as they will be branded as liberals. Libs who recognize that far too many of our gun laws are based on ignorance and stupidity, ineffective and perhaps even counter-productive, are afraid to speak out because they will be labeled as well. While I realize that who want to ban guns have good intentions (and good intentions belong to neither party), objecting to poor and faulty laws is only common sense (commonsense belonging to neither party as well). And we still insist on calling these issues right or left.
Gay marraige! (And the word marraige is not just the province of churches. A Justice of the Peace can marry you and stamp your liscense.) It seems to me to be an issue of civil rights. The traditional understanding of both liberalism and conservatism allow for civil rights and equal treatment. It is simply an issue that our political parties have taken sides on. It is not truely an issue of pure political philosophy.
The Iraq mess! From the very moment we invaded Iraq, the parties chose up sides and refuse to budge. Even though I thought unessesary and very bad policy on many levels from the outset; I cannot make it better now by rehashing the old arguments. But arguing that seeing where we are now, it has returned poor value for our investment cannot be construed as a liberal point of view just because the "libs" picked the no war side of the original argument.
If this board seems to far left to some, it may well be that many here are judging issues based on their merits; having rejected religious arguments and ignoring their importance as planks in a party platform.
I am a real live and let live kind of guy. I believe the government has certain obligations to the people. The list of these obligations is long in its entirety, but short if only considering the concepts. Arguing how the government is to meet these obligations should not involve choosing sides, but should be based on ideas that can be examined and tested, combined and compromised, to yield the best result for all of us.
I, for one, am getting a little sick of just slinging labels when it accomplishes nothing. Things that are good for the country and things that are bad for the country should not be considered political, even if we cannot agree on how good or bad they might be.
Though I am leery of vigorously promoting nationalism per se, I do feel that there has never been a more important time in our history to start thinking and taking actions as Americans than now. We have reached a critical point where our divisions have set us against each other. The more we find ways to divide ourselves, the more likely we are to lose those things that all of us cherish and enjoy from the privilege of being American.
note: Maybe someday I will understand why the wee hours tend to make me a philosopher.
I do not fault you for having a non-credible source. You admitted freely in your first post. I just find it absurd that knowing this you challenge someone else to provide a source when they disagree with it. Claiming now that you "just want to know the truth" is either a lie or evidence of laziness. If you did truly want to know you would have looked it up.
Also please spare me either the "owning" lecture OR the roll :roll:. I don't care which.
dmcowen674
No Lifer
Hey it's Republicans that say all the time "If you have nothing to hide, nothing to worry about", right?
Now how come it's not OK? 😕
My name has been on the Internet since it started to be called the World Wide Web at least back to 1994 with a Web page and I've been online since 1983.
You Republicans are just full of excuses eh? :roll:
dmcowen674
No Lifer
It wasn't Liberals that said "You're either with us or against us".
We are already at Civil War II.
Basically Republicans declared War on any citizen that does not conform to the Republican Corporate and Religious agenda.
I don't see a way out of the War until Corporate Interests (Lobbyists) are somehow purged and the Religious are defeated back into Church where they belong.
It is such a clear case of history repeating itself.
The U.S. had a pretty darned good run but looks like it's time is up.
Of cource you're not going to look up 30 quotes, because quotes like those simply don't exsist on this forum. Anyone ever heard anyone on this forum wanting abortions for 14 years and all that jazz? Nope.
You're correct, all Jimmy Carter did was talk to North Korea.
Source
I don't understand why the Bush administration doesn't want to talk to North Korea. I think it's all of our best intrested to not ignore a country that may posses WMDs.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
