or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Obama wins. - Page 9

post #201 of 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by ri0tp00f View Post
wrong.

I neg those posts that are illogical, inane, or incorrect.

PS

HaHa charade you are, lauriebell.

We should restore your deleted posts the way you restore anton's
Haha - I don't mind restoring it as there was nothing wrong with it at all. For the record, I have deleted maybe 3 posts of mine ever. I don't feel like e-arguing. Also, it wasn't a protest - it was a statement of fact.

Anton's get restored because every other post he makes is deleted because he blatantly baits people. How mine would bait anyone, I'm not sure.

Oh and by the way, here is the text:
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by [B
TequilaOHHHHbaby[/b]]
Why haven't you addressed that the most whites in history turned out to vote for a democratic candidate?


Yes and no.

In terms of numbers, yes - more whites voted for Obama than in previous years. However, this can be attributed to the fact that this election saw a record voter turnout and as a result, more people voted in total for both candidates.

However, in terms of percentage of the white vote captured - no, that is not true. Within the past ~30 years, Kerry (2004 - 41%), Gore (2000 - 42%), Clinton (1996 - 44%) and Carter (1976 - 48%) all won the same or a greater percent of the white vote than Obama (when using the 41-43% range I mention below).

Granted, at the moment, we do not have the final release of percent of white vote Obama actually captured but most polls seem indicate between 41-43%.

Source: US Presidential Elections
xoxo, the caricature.

PS - blindly negging anyone that might not speak in a 100% positive light about the candidate of your choice is no better than protesting incorrect statements.

And regarding my comments about Emanuel - the man is known for his highly partisan actions and slightly off-base reactions. A reporter pisses him off and what does he do? He sends him DEAD FISH (clearly logical and rational). Tony Blaire meets with Clinton after the Lewinsky scandal breaks and Rahm tells him prior to the meeting, "Don't f--- it up" (F what up? Why even bother saying that??).

For all this change and bipartisanship Obama preached and presented himself as - why bring in someone as your righthand man who is known for such practices? Now neg me all you want, but just keep in mind that you may see this post as illogical, inane, or incorrect but at least it's comprised of FACTS that can be supported. Not much incorrect or illogical with that... other than maybe Rahm's actions.

Also, Alyiah - I've noticed you like to neg a lot too in these kinds of threads. Why not participate in the discussion instead of just negging?
post #202 of 250
i want to have lauriebell's children
post #203 of 250
Well then those three posts you've ever deleted were in this thread. There was another post you deleted... in response to mononami or whatever his name is... he said foreign stocks went up and you posted a link to an article about US stocks that went down.

For someone who doesn't want to e-argue, you sure are doing a good job at it.

And I don't blindly neg. Please find any post that you believed I did this, and I will explain to you in detail why I did so, so that you cease to believe this falsity.
post #204 of 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by ross View Post

If it bothers you, all you have to do is view it your own way and not worry about what others are thinking. It's that simple. I am happy about Obama because I want to see the country move away from this arch-conservative nosedive it took over the past eight years. His race isn't a factor for me until someone like Sehnsucked tries to imply otherwise.
The archetypal conservatism you so disdain started in 1994. Remember the "Contract with America" and the great wave of conservatism that was ushered in by the Newt Gingrich led congress? Apparently to you the previous six years didn't count because the president at the time was a Democrat. You seem unaware of the fact that Clinton was a southern conservative Democrat and the only reason the Republicans tried to impeach him was to take the heat off their own cheating and drug abuse.
post #205 of 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by 130_R View Post
I wonder why people don't understand that voting for someone due to skin color is the same as not voting for someone because of skin color. Prejudice is prejudice irregardless of whether it for or against you.

When was the last time you saw commercialism for Hispanic or Asian history month? In terms of racial injustice, I would think the forced segregation camps for Asian-Americans during WWII to be a pretty big deal but it is the reporting on it is slim to none.

I have no problem with Obama, as policy wise he is essentially a neo-Clinton democratic conservative. What does bother me is that his win has been portrayed in such a way by many as a victory for "black-america" instead of a victory for all minorites. Now that there has been a African-American president, with the next minority movement be to elect a Hispanic president? The question is where does it stop?
With a muslim president.

oh, too late.
post #206 of 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by ri0tp00f View Post
Well then those three posts you've ever deleted were in this thread. There was another post you deleted... in response to mononami or whatever his name is... he said foreign stocks went up and you posted a link to an article about US stocks that went down.
Correct. The other one was actually one that I deleted and ended up discussing via PM.

Also, I don't restore all of Anton's posts - some are too embarrassing and lacking any content or thought for me to let other people be subjected to - unless everyone wants to be . There are approx 5-6 posts in this thread that I have not restored from him deleting.

Quote:
For someone who doesn't want to e-argue, you sure are doing a good job at it.
I'm not really arguing above - I replied to your post and defended why I said what I said about Rahm a few pages back so that you could understand why I believe it to be a long four years if him being appointed CoS was an indicator of things to come.

Quote:
And I don't blindly neg. Please find any post that you believed I did this, and I will explain to you in detail why I did so, so that you cease to believe this falsity.
I've PM'ed you because like I said above, I don't really like the e-fighting thing.
post #207 of 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by 130_R View Post
The archetypal conservatism you so disdain started in 1994. Remember the "Contract with America" and the great wave of conservatism that was ushered in by the Newt Gingrich led congress?
Blake is correct. The taking over of the republican party by people more interested in social-values warfare and the destruction of church-and-state divide is essentially has only taken place over the last 20 or so years. Prior to that the republican party was a totally different animal.

I love the wikipedia entry on conservativism, BTW:

Conservatism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

we have edmond burke and the terms liberal conservativism and conservative liberalism in the same article, yay!

One thing people don't often realize is that liberalism and conservativism are not really opposed. Social liberals and social conservatives usually are, but that's not really the same thing...
post #208 of 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by 130_R View Post
They both follow the overcompensation complex; one with classic white guilt overload and the other with the I want to get in obama's pants fantasy.
Hey -- that's my fantasy. Hands off!

Quote:
Originally Posted by 130_R View Post
I wonder why people don't understand that voting for someone due to skin color is the same as not voting for someone because of skin color. Prejudice is prejudice irregardless of whether it for or against you.
'Irregardless' is not a word (sorry, had to say that)

Quote:
Originally Posted by lauriebell View Post
And regarding my comments about Emanuel - the man is known for his highly partisan actions and slightly off-base reactions. A reporter pisses him off and what does he do? He sends him DEAD FISH (clearly logical and rational). Tony Blaire meets with Clinton after the Lewinsky scandal breaks and Rahm tells him prior to the meeting, "Don't f--- it up" (F what up? Why even bother saying that??).

For all this change and bipartisanship Obama preached and presented himself as - why bring in someone as your righthand man who is known for such practices? Now neg me all you want, but just keep in mind that you may see this post as illogical, inane, or incorrect but at least it's comprised of FACTS that can be supported. Not much incorrect or illogical with that... other than maybe Rahm's actions.
Assuming the dead fish story is true, I'm very disappointed. However, I think we should look at the whole picture, which won't happen until Obama chooses his entire Cabinet and staff. Please, give him some time, and don't giggle excitedly every time he appears to stumble. Jesus, if I did that every time W stumbled, I'd be in a straight jacket.
post #209 of 250
post #210 of 250
post #211 of 250
republican party died with goldwater
post #212 of 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by hp5rebec View Post


Assuming the dead fish story is true, I'm very disappointed. However, I think we should look at the whole picture, which won't happen until Obama chooses his entire Cabinet and staff. Please, give him some time, and don't giggle excitedly every time he appears to stumble. Jesus, if I did that every time W stumbled, I'd be in a straight jacket.
Unfortunately, yes - the dead and decomposing fish story is true:
Rahm Emanuel - TIME

www.kansascity.com | 11/06/2008 | Rahm Emanuel
(Also looks like he stabbed a dinner table when he considered some Democrats to not be as supportive as he would have liked during Clinton's first bid for the White House and called them dead. How eccentric....).


I agree with the bolded part - however, I do think that the tone is somewhat set with the CoS considering many equate it with being the #2 person. I only stated that if this appointment is an indicator (i.e. - he appoints people to his Cabinet who are similar in their partisanship and sometimes irrational ways) then I believe it will be a rough four years. JMO though.
post #213 of 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by hp5rebec View Post
'Irregardless' is not a word (sorry, had to say that)
It's a stupid word that should never have been accepted into the American lexicon because of its origin but, nonetheless, it is a word.
post #214 of 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by SevenKid0505 View Post
It's a stupid word that should never have been accepted into the American lexicon because of its origin but, nonetheless, it is a word.
every time i want to disregard all of sev's ideas based on his deplorable political leanings, he throws down shit like this and, for at least a moment, i realize he's deserving of respect.
post #215 of 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by SevenKid0505 View Post
It's a stupid word that should never have been accepted into the American lexicon because of its origin but, nonetheless, it is a word.
What is a word anyway?

Irregardless - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
post #216 of 250
i dont know anything about rahmbo but i hope hes fuckin nuts.

thats all.

edit: and the luca brasi sleeps with the fishes is a classy move actually

edit 2: just got off the phone with my rabbi and turns out rahm is nuts
post #217 of 250
Edit: eh, just ignore...
post #218 of 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by SevenKid0505 View Post
Your state betrayed us and is accordingly no longer considered part of the south. I hope you're happy, infidel.
you are not authorized to use this word.
post #219 of 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by notfrostyjosh View Post
youre so fucking retarded jesus christ
Not really, I just don't have anything useful to contribute to the original topic or the obama-bashing. So I just pressed buttons on the keyboard, closed my eyes, and pressed Submit.
post #220 of 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by SevenKid0505 View Post
It's a stupid word that should never have been accepted into the American lexicon because of its origin but, nonetheless, it is a word.
I defer to Merriam-Webster, which supports both our viewpoints:

usage Irregardless originated in dialectal American speech in the early 20th century. Its fairly widespread use in speech called it to the attention of usage commentators as early as 1927. The most frequently repeated remark about it is that “there is no such word.” There is such a word, however. It is still used primarily in speech, although it can be found from time to time in edited prose. Its reputation has not risen over the years, and it is still a long way from general acceptance. Use regardless instead.
post #221 of 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by lauriebell View Post
Unfortunately, yes - the dead and decomposing fish story is true:
Rahm Emanuel - TIME

www.kansascity.com | 11/06/2008 | Rahm Emanuel
(Also looks like he stabbed a dinner table when he considered some Democrats to not be as supportive as he would have liked during Clinton's first bid for the White House and called them dead. How eccentric....).


I agree with the bolded part - however, I do think that the tone is somewhat set with the CoS considering many equate it with being the #2 person. I only stated that if this appointment is an indicator (i.e. - he appoints people to his Cabinet who are similar in their partisanship and sometimes irrational ways) then I believe it will be a rough four years. JMO though.
Point taken.

Consider this, also (from nytimes.com, that bastian of liberal-ness) -- my highlights in blue:

"No incoming president in modern times has been so pressured to begin governing, in effect, before he is sworn into office. With that in mind, Mr. Obama and Mr. Biden brought the group of high-profile financial and economic experts to confer.

Assembled to offer wide-ranging advice, the group of 17 included Mr. Summers and his predecessor as Treasury secretary, Robert E. Rubin; Paul A. Volcker, a former Federal Reserve chairman, and Eric E. Schmidt, the chief executive of Google. The billionaire investor Warren Buffett is to attend by speakerphone.

Other participants included Mayor Antonio R. Villaraigosa of Los Angeles; former Commerce Secretary William Daley; William Donaldson, former chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission; Anne Mulcahy, chairman and chief executive of Xerox; Laura Tyson, former chairman of the President’s Council of Economic Advisors, and Gov. Jennifer M. Granholm of Michigan."

JFC. That's a pretty impressive cadré -- and another indication of his character. If we see more of this, I think the Emanuel choice will hopefully fall into perspective.

Fingers crossed...
post #222 of 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by hp5rebec View Post
I defer to Merriam-Webster, which supports both our viewpoints:

usage Irregardless originated in dialectal American speech in the early 20th century. Its fairly widespread use in speech called it to the attention of usage commentators as early as 1927. The most frequently repeated remark about it is that “there is no such word.” There is such a word, however. It is still used primarily in speech, although it can be found from time to time in edited prose. Its reputation has not risen over the years, and it is still a long way from general acceptance. Use regardless instead.
Actually, that only supports my viewpoint.
post #223 of 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by SevenKid0505 View Post
Actually, that only supports my viewpoint.
Sorry, I mean my other viewpoint, which was implied: you should never, ever use the word 'irregardless'.
post #224 of 250
I think UrbanDictionary says it best:
Quote:
Irregardless- Used by people who ignorantly mean to say regardless. According to webster, it is a word, but since the prefix "ir" and the suffx "less" both mean "not or with" they cancel each other out, so what you end up with is regard. When you use this to try to say you don't care about something, you end up saying that you do. Of course everyone knows what you mean to say and only a pompous,rude asshole will correct you.
post #225 of 250
Ok - I'm done bothering, Anton.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Chat