Getting a Little Pissed Off [Archive]

ChrisFromCanada

Jul 5, 2005, 10:10 PM

Hello fellow MR members,
Lately I have been a little pissed off at some members posting comments I find very irritating. I hear them every day from young people bashing our President, Bush (Yes I am an American citizen as well as Canadian). I would just like to see some people being a little more careful, and for them to think a little more before they post.

I love MR and the way we can embrace all people with all kinds of different beliefs so please hear out a conservative here.

More specifically I have been pissed off by this thread:
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=135958

I suppose I would just encourage people to get a balanced viewpoint before passing judgement on the American Republican party.

Just looking a comments like

the biggest lies iv heard,

"sadaam hussain has wmd's and can launch them within 45mins"

Just look at this, first respect the other members here and use some grammar and spelling; iv is not a word. Secondly if you are so knowledgeable about saddam hussein, please spell his name right. And the other thing I don't like about this comment is that it implies that President Bush or a conservative said it.

Then other gems like:

I'm an american, all I hear are lies

from the rednecks and government at least, but there are some that are educated (most of the time)

Which is not only disrespectful to the United States, but is also not a very educated or fact based point of view.

Then...

I'll have to chime in my vote for the WMDs one, along with the extended lie that linked Afghanistan to Al-Qaeda and made the primary objective there to supposedly capture Bin Laden and the people responsible for 9/11....

I guess what I am getting at here is that most people are posting these "lies" as if they were common knowledge when most points here are highly debatable.

It seems to me that the common view here is that president Bush is a corrupt president that only went into Iraq for oil. If you want to see real corruption have a look here (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,132832,00.html) and especially here (http://www.washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20040321-101405-2593r.htm) Oh Yeah and Here (http://www.defenddemocracy.org/research_topics/research_topics_show.htm?doc_id=260080&attrib_id=9059)

The U.N. Oil for Food program, we learn ... was a rip-off on the order of $21 billion -- with money intended for hungry Iraqis going instead to Saddam Hussein and his henchmen, to bribed French and Russian businesses and, evidently, to the U.N.'s own man in charge, Benon Savan.

And just to put a little perspective on the war in Iraq, we haven't found any WMD's yet, but putting the ruthless killer (http://www.moreorless.au.com/killers/hussein-comment.html) to rest is enough to justify the war for me.

zelmo

Jul 5, 2005, 10:34 PM

Speaking as a registered Republican who will cross party lines to vote for the best (imho) candidate, I appreciate the timbre of your post, as it does get just a wee bit liberal in these forums for my own blood. I think neither side has much right to throw rocks, as I've never heard of a politician or political faction that did not cater to agendas or business interests of some sort. Sadly, in America, politics has devolved into "pick the candidate whom you believe will do the least damage."

Where politics are concerned, I think it is very unlikely that posts in a Mac internet forum are going to sway anyone's opinion (certainly not my own). As such, I don't get too worked up over them (I'm often amused, though), and as a rule I tend to stay out of political discussions. And now I've gone and broken my unwritten rule.

Lyle

Jul 5, 2005, 10:40 PM

Chris, the fact of the matter is that if you're going to hang out in the "Politics" forum at MacRumors, you're going to need to have a thick skin. Personal attacks on fellow forum members are out of line, but it's pretty standard fare for the more liberal posters to make comments similar to the ones you posted, attacking the Bush administration, Republicans, Christians, Americans, etc.. And, to be fair, there are conservative posters who take similar potshots at various groups on the political "left".

The difference is that the "regulars" here also follow an unwritten rule -- or maybe it's an official rule, can't recall -- that one should back up their claims with references to support their position. So, to use one of your examples, if someone were to claim that Bush once said, "Sadaam Hussain (sic) has wmd's and can launch them within 45mins," he or she could be called out to back up that statement.

miloblithe

Jul 5, 2005, 10:43 PM

Just look at this, first respect the other members here and use some grammar and spelling; iv is not a word. Secondly if you are so knowledgeable about saddam hussein, please spell his name right. And the other thing I don't like about this comment is that it implies that President Bush or a conservative said it.

Just look at this. First, respect the other members here and use some grammar and spelling; "iv" is not a word. Second, if you are so knowledgeable about Saddam Hussein, please spell his name right. And the other thing I don't like about this comment is that it implies that President Bush or a conservative said it.

You're also inconsistent in your use of "that". If you use "it implies that" you might want to consider "the other thing that I don't like".

You might want to consider hyphenation for "fact based point of view."

"It seems to me that the common view here is that president Bush is a corrupt president that only went into Iraq for oil."

It is considered respectful--not to mention correct--to capitalize "President" when referring to the U.S. President. Also, "that" should never be used to refer to a person, even if he reminds some people of a monkey robot. This sentence should read:

"It seems to me that the common view here is that President Bush is a corrupt president who only went into Iraq for oil."

If you're going to call people on their spelling and grammar, don't make an ass of yourself.

Lyle

Jul 5, 2005, 10:44 PM

Speaking as a registered Republican who will cross party lines to vote for the best (imho) candidate, I appreciate the timbre of your post, as it does get just a wee bit liberal in these forums for my own blood.The regular posters to the "Politics" forum usually present reasonable arguments for their positions (even if you don't happen to agree with them). The signal-to-noise ratio can get a little low sometimes when people make "drive-by" comments and then don't stick around to defend them, but that's the exception and not the rule, in my experience.

Where politics are concerned, I think it is very unlikely that posts in a Mac internet forum are going to sway anyone's opinion (certainly not my own). As such, I don't get too worked up over them (I'm often amused, though)...That sounds like a very healthy approach. ;)

stubeeef

Jul 5, 2005, 10:47 PM

diamond geezer

Jul 5, 2005, 10:52 PM

The comment "sadaam hussain has wmd's and can launch them within 45mins"

Where did the poster suggest it was Bush (it was Blair of course) that made that remark?

With regards to putting a killer behind bars making it all worthwhile, that's all well and good, except that it's just an excuse and not the reason for invading. When Saddam was at his murderous height in the eighties the US supported him and continued to support him right up until the Kuwait invasion.

The War Hawks clearly stated in a letter to The White House in 1998 that
The need for a substantial American force
presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of
the regime of Saddam Hussein.

Cheney and Rummy clearly want to control the Middle East and Saddam was just an excuse to get permanent bases.

How many have now been killed in this War based on lies?

As far as being disrespectful to the US, we'll what have you done recently to gain the worlds respect?

PlaceofDis

Jul 5, 2005, 10:58 PM

i do sincerely apologize if my remark offended anyone, it was more in jest than anything else, and i am not trying to point fingers at anyone or at all with my comment. i am not saying that Republicans lie more than Dems at all, they both have their share of faults. the rednecks comment was simply to poke fun.

again i do apologize if anyone was offended by what i said.

CanadaRAM

Jul 5, 2005, 11:00 PM

Hmm. Let us consider the implications of your thesis then, supposing that the following statements are true:

"Clear evidence of the existence of weapons of mass destruction, the capability to deliver such weapons, and the plans or intent to use such weapons was found in Iraq."

"A definite link between Al-Qaeda and the former government of Afghanistan has been proven."

"Upon occupation of Iraq, the US-led coalition made its first priority the restoration of hospitals, power and water works, and only after the well being of the civilian population was ensured, commenced to secure oil and commercial assets."

"Military action and occupation of a sovereign state in the absence of military aggression by that state is legal under international law." (extra credit option to extend this discussion to Afghanistan, Panama, Grenada and others as time permits.)

"All combatant and non-combatant prisioners taken by the US-led coalition during the campaign have been treated in compliance with international law and conventions on prisoners, human rights and the principle of due process."

Discuss.

Xtremehkr

Jul 5, 2005, 11:07 PM

And what these comments are based upon does not upset you any?

ham_man

Jul 5, 2005, 11:09 PM

Keep political comments in the political forum and all is well and good. The problem starts when it crosses into other forums...

blackfox

Jul 5, 2005, 11:11 PM

Dude (first I can't spell-so forgive me-I am getting better) I applaude your rant. Good Job!
The fact is MR has a very vocal and prolific left of left (off the chart really) group of "people". Most that do the posts you mention are very well known in their views as I am sure they know mine and now yours. After awhile you just smirk, giggle and moveon.
We all understand the world is not black and white, that both sides make major blunders, and we all want better government (some want more; some want less; all want better).
Please make your views known, I as one love to hear voices of reason in a sea or socialists.
There are also quite a few moderates that are very well read and not so quick to blast one side or the other.
I put many of the more egregious posters on ignore (they ignore me as well and all are happy).
Jump in, enjoy, don't get caught in a heated fuss that will get ya in timeout or banned. Use links, and tell'm like it is.
Nice to meet ya! ;)
I like the intent here Stu, but the tone seems a little off. I really don't think there are (m)any "socialists" here on this board, that being a term that has mutated so far from it's actual meaning as to be nearly useless. Although I admittedly find myself more to the "left" on many issues, many of the regular posters to this forum, while being "liberal", also manage to construct excellent arguments to bolster their position(s). I admire this, regardless of ideological adherence to my own. I think it is a mischaracterization to call MR PF "left of left". It is left of right, however.

As to the original poster, you must understand the disparity of ages on this board, as well as the exasperation this President has caused many people with his policies/actions. Everyone is entitled to a little rhetorical steam from time to time, and I do not put stock in a position if it is poorly argued. I am sorry if anything was offensive to you.

Many people dislike Bush to a rather extreme degree, and while it may be incomprehensible to you why they would feel that way and/or the manner in which they voice that opinion, bear in mind, many also find your position equally mind-boggling.

boggle on...

solvs

Jul 6, 2005, 01:57 AM

If you want to see real corruption have a look here (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,132832,00.html) and especially here (http://www.washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20040321-101405-2593r.htm) Oh Yeah and Here (http://www.defenddemocracy.org/research_topics/research_topics_show.htm?doc_id=260080&attrib_id=9059)
First of all, it's funny that you post links to places like Fox News and the Washington Times.

But I think the real problem is that just because there is other corruption going on in the world, the former administration as well, doesn't make this administration's mistakes any less relevant. And they have made a lot of mistakes. Maybe you can justify everything we've sacrificed for this war, but some of us just can't. Last I checked, this being America, just like I criticized the last President and his cronies, I'm pretty sure I'm allowed to criticize this one as well. Some people are going to have opinions different than yours, often based on facts and not just rhetoric. Not all Repubs are evil, not all Dems good, but right now the Neocons are in charge, and they are making a lot of mistakes that they should be held accountable for. As an American, and a patriot, I have every right to criticize a person or group of people that I feel do harm to this country.

So tell me, where are those WMDs? Or that link to Al Qaeda? Or Bin Laden for that matter, the guy who actually attacked us? How 'bout why my friends are dying over there, since the reason keeps changing? I have a lot of questions that I'd like answers to that aren't even being dealt with. Instead I just get called a socialist or traitor (while people like Rove really are commiting treason), while both parties continue to piss me off.

So go ahead and get pissed off. You have the right to your opinion. But guess what... so do I.

Thomas Veil

Jul 6, 2005, 02:05 AM

Chris, when the word "Republican" refers to a moderate GOP member, I personally have a hard time "bashing" him, even though I may not agree with him.

But increasingly, "Republicans" in this country -- at least the ones in power -- are angry, devious men, concerned more with wealth more than the commonweal, desperate to hide their acts behind a veil of secrecy, contemptuous of anyone who disagrees with them, anxious to restrict people's liberties, controlling and manipulating the media, brazenly lying about almost anything, totally unrepentent in their violations of the Constitution, and addicted to giving their interpretation of the Bible primacy over the reality around them.

We liberals -- the majority of America, despite what you may hear from the neo-cons -- are backed into a corner. What are we to do, whimper meekly and accept our fate?

Moreover, we are sick of being told we're anti-Christian and unpatriotic by government and media people who expect everyone to be lobotomized followers of their sociopathic policies.

If the neo-cons ever decide that America is a land where everyone is treated equally and everyone is at liberty to do what they want as long as it hurts no one else, then I'm sure the vituperative attacks on Bush & Co. will subside.

Unfortunately, that'll be the same time that Hell freezes over.

IJ Reilly

Jul 6, 2005, 02:07 AM

Anyone who claims that this forum is, has been and always will be biased "left of left" can't have been here for very long. The tone and balance was very different two and more years ago, when anyone who suggested that the invasion of Iraq was a foolish and poorly planned adventure and would cost far more in life and treasure than the administration claimed it would, had to wear asbestos jockey shorts. (Oddly enough, now that the majority of American have come around to this view, all of these flame-throwers are absent the field.)

I must remember the trick of putting "people" in quotes. A subtle, but clearly demeaning gesture.

Don't panic

Jul 6, 2005, 02:23 AM

...
And just to put a little perspective on the war in Iraq, we haven't found any WMD's yet, but putting the ruthless killer to rest is enough to justify the war for me.

except that the ONLY stated reason we went to iraq was to neutralize an immediate danger to the US in the form of WMD, which as many claimed from the beginning and all accept now as a fact (maybe except you), never existed. Not to mention that the vast majority of the ruthless killing was done with our enthusiastic support and the direct involvement of elements of this administration.
Surprisingly enough, of the many despicable ruthless killers in charge around the world (many of which our good allies) we decided to displace the one who was sitting on top of 30% of the world's oil reserves.
That tens of thousands of people had to die in the process is truly unfortunate.

Peterkro

Jul 6, 2005, 02:24 AM

takao

Jul 6, 2005, 05:12 AM

Something to keep in mind is that views outside the US tend to cover a much wider spectrum than those generally voiced by mainstream US thought(I know there are people of all views in the US it's just those views are hard to hear in the prevailing right wing climate).To me the difference between the Republicans and Democrats is virtually nil both are big corporate funded right wing parties.Using liberal and socialist as terms of derison shows just how far out of kilter with world thought on politics mainstream US is.

hehe i thought the same often enough, especially through the election circus where the demcorats had problems differtianting themselves from the republicans

and Chris:
1. using "I hear them every day from young people bashing our President, Bush" is hardly a wise decision on a international forum ;) i know how you meant it but it's still offensive (at least i was offended in both ways by it: being not from the US and the desperate way of creating a "we" feeling)

2. food for oil: from the companies involved more than half of them were in fact from the US so it was a bad example of "throwing stones while sitting inside of the glass house", i guess you kinda missed those news right ? (was around in the political forum as a topic)

3. orthography nitpicking: got already answered

4."Which is not only disrespectful to the United States": respect needs to be earned and can be lost quite easily and fast, and you not gonna win international members with such sentences

5. you're not gonna find much WMD in iraq, because do you really think they are still looking ? the us army didn' bother to secure iraqy nuclear facilities how can they be seriously looking for wmd then ?

ChrisFromCanada

Jul 6, 2005, 09:12 AM

I am pleased by the responses that I have received so far. Unfortunately, I have a life outside of MR and so I can't reply to all of you, but here goes:

I know my spelling and grammar is not excellent. I guess what I was getting pissed off at most is the l33t speakers here. I just find I very difficult to read and understand. And for the person who complained about capitalizing President, I did the first two times just forgot those last two.

A few people have complained about the Bin Laden - Al Qaeda - Afghanistan connection. I recently saw a good biography in the life of Bin Laden. I found it interesting that in the late 90's there weren't any countries in the middle east that would accept him except for Afghanistan, and so for me, harboring a known terrorist is enough to justify a connection.

With regards to putting a killer behind bars making it all worthwhile, that's all well and good, except that it's just an excuse and not the reason for invading. When Saddam was at his murderous height in the eighties the US supported him and continued to support him right up until the Kuwait invasion.

I am not trying to justify what the government did in the 80's, but the only reason we did support him was because it was during the cold war and the US was taking sides with anyone who was against the Russians. I think that Bush Sr. did make a mistake here, and Bush Jr. is setting it straight.

The War Hawks clearly stated in a letter to The White House in 1998 that
Quote:
The need for a substantial American force
presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of
the regime of Saddam Hussein.

Cheney and Rummy clearly want to control the Middle East and Saddam was just an excuse to get permanent bases.

How many have now been killed in this War based on lies?

As far as being disrespectful to the US, we'll what have you done recently to gain the worlds respect?

I would like to see a source on your quote.
I believe that more lives have been saved than lost in this war.
Maybe you misunderstood my comment. I meant if somebody says, because they are a US citizen everything they hear is lies, is disrespectful to the nation.

hehe i thought the same often enough, especially through the election circus where the demcorats had problems differtianting themselves from the republicans

and Chris:
1. using "I hear them every day from young people bashing our President, Bush" is hardly a wise decision on a international forum ;) i know how you meant it but it's still offensive (at least i was offended in both ways by it: being not from the US and the desperate way of creating a "we" feeling)

2. food for oil: from the companies involved more than half of them were in fact from the US so it was a bad example of "throwing stones while sitting inside of the glass house", i guess you kinda missed those news right ? (was around in the political forum as a topic)

3. orthography nitpicking: got already answered

4."Which is not only disrespectful to the United States": respect needs to be earned and can be lost quite easily and fast, and you not gonna win international members with such sentences

5. you're not gonna find much WMD in iraq, because do you really think they are still looking ? the us army didn' bother to secure iraqy nuclear facilities how can they be seriously looking for wmd then ?

1. Sorry this was intended mostly for our American members, but I didn't mean to offend.

2. Reputable Source? Because I don't really buy that there were many (if any) US companies that benefitted from that, and especially not Bush or anyone in his administration.

4. Refer to 1

5. I would really like to see a source on this one, seems to be pure speculation and rumor to me.

Desertrat

Jul 6, 2005, 09:20 AM

I enjoy the polititical forum because the majority of the folks here do some homework on the various subjects. More than I do, in some cases; I admit I tend to coast on a buildup of snippets of information from over a fair number of decades. Old Farts do that, and I made it to 71, today. :)

Some of the foaming at the mouth style of "Bush lied!" stuff is offputting. Bush and his advisors have taken several positions that don't sit well with me, but that's true for the last half-dozen administrations. I don't like it; I see better ways or what I consider more good-of-the-nation policies, but I don't go foaming over it all. Again, maybeso an age thing, but the emotions of youth don't create truth...

:), 'Rat

iGary

Jul 6, 2005, 09:39 AM

This is definitely a left-leaning forum, which is fine.

I don't like Bush, but I don't like Kerry, either.

I tend to stay out of the politics end of things here. Lots of angry people.

takao

Jul 6, 2005, 09:42 AM

2. Reputable Source? Because I don't really buy that there were many (if any) US companies that benefitted from that, and especially not Bush or anyone in his administration.

5. I would really like to see a source on this one, seems to be pure speculation and rumor to me.

for example:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,1485546,00.html
or
http://news.ft.com/cms/s/d9d4d8b0-64f6-11d9-9f8b-00000e2511c8.html

from wikipedia:
"The Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations assigned to investigate the scandal has also concluded that
"The United States (government) was not only aware of Iraqi oil sales which violated UN sanctions and provided the bulk of the illicit money Saddam Hussein obtained from circumventing UN sanctions. On occasion, the United States actually facilitated the illicit oil sales."
The report also found that individuals and companies in the United States accounted for 52% of all oil-voucher kickbacks paid to Saddam Hussein. The largest of theses recipients, Houston based Bayoil and its CEO, Bay Chalmers have been indicted by the US Department of Justice for their actions."

nuclear plant thing:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,85940,00.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2968640.stm
http://edition.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/06/06/iaea.iraq.tuwaitha/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A35498-2003Apr24
etc.
a little bit of googling

skunk

Jul 6, 2005, 09:49 AM

Old Farts do that, and I made it to 71, today. :)Happy Birthday, Desert Fart!
:D

miloblithe

Jul 6, 2005, 10:08 AM

I'd like to apologize for my earlier post. It was certainly a little much. All I meant to say really is that we all make grammar and spelling mistakes (although certainly some more than others) but that doesn't mean we don't have something interesting to say. Also, there are a number of people on here for whom English is not their first language. Their mastery of the language is pretty impressive when that's considered.

Other than that though, I kind of agree with you. It would be nice if we could have a thoughtful, respectful discussion of issues here. Most people do reference their sources and try to listen. Most people here also have their moments of venting or hyperbole. All people here suffer from the problem that debate in an Internet forum is given to more misunderstandings and overstatements than would happen if we all got together in a room and talked to each other. The fact is sometimes people are going to go too far and sometimes debates will get heated. This is an open forum where anyone can post.

Regardless, I hope that you throw your hat into the ring. As someone who has strong socialist ideals that are mediated by strong beliefs in what is pragmatic, I tend to find this forum boring when a thread is only composed of like-minded posts. Debate is not only interesting, but it's how we learn something from one another and craft well-reasoned positions.

Oh, and happy birthday 'Rat!

Thomas Veil

Jul 6, 2005, 10:50 AM

Old Farts do that, and I made it to 71, today. :)

...'RatAre you yankin' us? :eek: Most people that age don't even know what an internet forum is. :D

Happy birthday!

Rower_CPU

Jul 6, 2005, 11:26 AM

Happy Birthday, Desert Fart!
:D

Ditto :)

mactastic

Jul 6, 2005, 01:06 PM

Happy B'day 'Rat. Hope you had a good day. Funny, my wife's B-day is also today. Too bad I can't come buy you a beer, but I'll toast you tonight as well.

As to the left leanings of the forum, as noted it has been very pro-war in the past, only most of those who were around back then 'no longer participate' for some strange reason. ;)

I guess it offends people when something doesn't conform to their world view, and that's too bad. This is a mac users board primarily, and it so happens to have a liberal bent at the moment. Could change, and I wouldn't care.

If I went to a firearms discussion group, do you think they'd be overwhelmingly liberal? How about a NASCAR forum, or an ATV forum? Would I be appropriate to be complaining about the fact that their board leans right and that there are a lot of cheap shots taken at 'Hollyweird' and those 'rats obstructing Bush's agenda?

Finally, to those who aren't used to the political discussions here, please look at the offending posts Chris linked to, and tell me how many of them were made by regular posters in the Politics forum here. My guess is none or very few. Political discussions that start outside the Political forum tend to be nasty because they are generally conducted by people who aren't used to the 'back it up with something other that the Washington Times or The People's Weekly World' rule. It also helps if you don't refer to your opponents as socialists or nazis or any other label that is used rhetorically but is seldom, if ever, accurate. It simply demeans you and your argument.

LethalWolfe

Jul 6, 2005, 01:50 PM

Happy B-day 'Rat! :)

OT:

Honestly, I'm impressed this thread hasn't turned into a flamefest. When I read the OP I was like, "Oh no, this could be ugly."

And yes the forum started out rabidly right-wing, but it's been left leaning the majority of its existence. The last time it fell right again was right after the election when a bunch of @ss-hat troll newbies jumped in here to just start ***** for a week or so.

Although I typically disagree more than I agree w/most people in this forum the debates typically stay mature and intelligent. But that doesn't mean I don't sometimes feel the need to reach thru the screen and throttle somebody. :D

Lethal

Ugg

Jul 6, 2005, 03:35 PM

Happy B-day 'Rat!

CfC seems to be a little thin-skinned, the original thread was more about taking the piss than attempting to be a serious discussion. I come here a lot because there is serious discussion AND it's backed up with links. While we can debate the quality of some of those links from time to time, it's not just a forum for vapid comments.

I think we've all learned tolerance here, something that is seriously lacking in society at large, although for newbies it could well look like a madhouse!

anonymous161

Jul 6, 2005, 04:06 PM

A few people have complained about the Bin Laden - Al Qaeda - Afghanistan connection. I recently saw a good biography in the life of Bin Laden. I found it interesting that in the late 90's there weren't any countries in the middle east that would accept him except for Afghanistan, and so for me, harboring a known terrorist is enough to justify a connection.

Afghanistan, Afghanistan, hmm, is this the same Afghanistan that was run by people that the CIA helped bring to power because they would fight the Soviets?

I am not trying to justify what the government did in the 80's, but the only reason we did support him was because it was during the cold war and the US was taking sides with anyone who was against the Russians. I think that Bush Sr. did make a mistake here, and Bush Jr. is setting it straight.

Oh, the old, "we were stopping those dirty Commies so it's okay" validation. I am seeing a pattern here. If that was Bush Jr's only goal, then why are troops still there?

but putting the ruthless killer to rest is enough to justify the war for me. Wow, it doesn't take much does it. Next stop North Korea!

I believe that more lives have been saved than lost in this war.
First, WHAT?? Second, this war is far from over.

Moreover, we are sick of being told we're anti-Christian and unpatriotic by government and media people who expect everyone to be lobotomized followers of their sociopathic policies.

It seems to me that sending people to kill and to die is the anti-christian thing to do, but they may just be me.

Oh yeah, Happy Birthday 'rat!

jelloshotsrule

Jul 6, 2005, 04:11 PM

Lots of angry people.

as they say

if you're not angry, you're not paying attention

or you don't care.

ps. i'm a socialist. so?

FFTT

Jul 6, 2005, 05:51 PM

Hey Desertrat Happy Birthday!

My geez alarm went off a few years back when they sent me my first AARP
discount card application. :(
````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
I consider myself quite conservative when it comes to honest and truly worthy leadership of our nation.

The problem is that things have gotten completely out of hand and it's very hard for me to see these people squander away 100's of billions in public funds when there are so many needs here at home.

You've seen enough history to know that one way or another, there has been a major military conflict every decade or so and the majority of those
conflicts were started from misinformation, lies and cover-ups.

If we could access the "classified" financial records of every politician
who ever made it into office with the backing of military industrialists,
we would certainly understand a whole lot more about our history and why this is really not any different from the past.

The real difference now is our ability to communicate across the globe in milliseconds from the comfort of our favorite chair.

The truth, or shall we say, the reality of war bypasses the filtered, mainstream media and the more people learn, the more it upsets them.

I love my country too, and it turns my stomach to see 1700+ brave young soldiers dying with 40,000 more seriously wounded, all to insure the wealth of a few industrial tycoons.

I WILL NOT be loyal to any filthy politician who misleads men and women into harms way without just cause.

Payoffs to military contractors
IS NOT JUST CAUSE FOR WAR.

We had every right to retaliate against the WTC incident, but Iraq was NOT
an imminent threat. In fact, sanctions and inspections had crippled Saddam.

Until we reform our electoral process to prohibit undisclosed political
contributions exceeding certain limits, we will never see the end of corruption in the White House or in Congress.

When we see half a billion dollars poured into an election campaign,
I can't help but wonder where it all comes from.

These people are dirty and they are distroying all that IS good in our people. They prey on good people's deepest beliefs to distract them
from the evil games they play behind the doors of smoke filled rooms.

After busting my butt for 30+ years,
I have to sell my land so my daughters can afford a college education.
People need food, housing, transportation, day care, adult training, employment, emergency and long term health care and so much more.

This has gotten out of hand and We The People are the one's who allowed it to happen.

If that global elite upper 1% paid their fair share in taxes, most of the problems we face would be gone.

In the mean time, history repeats itself.

IJ Reilly

Jul 6, 2005, 06:53 PM

Until we can swing something better, divided government is the only way.

Oh, and let me be the first to wish 'Rat a happy birthday. ;)

At some point, they're all happy, right?

Xtremehkr

Jul 6, 2005, 08:04 PM

Happy B Day 'Rat!

Sayhey

Jul 6, 2005, 10:20 PM

Happy Birthday, 'Rat!

Sun Baked

Jul 6, 2005, 10:31 PM

Didn't the opinions vs. fact based arguments get settled a while ago?

Everyone is entitled to their opinion... they are entitled to it and there's nothing wrong with it.

All the arguments/rants in the world you can do to get people to change their opinion -- usually stand a better chance of making you look like a horse's ass, than somebody who is smarter than somebody else.

Of course threads like these don't make you look bad, they just get people banned.

Edit: Hmmm, who do I think will lose it and get themselves banned... http://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=2722

Xtremehkr

Jul 7, 2005, 12:42 AM

It's hard to reason with faith or belief systems. Especially when facts are so often conveniently ignored. By the title of the thread though, it's pretty clear who is getting pissed off.

Inspector Lee

Jul 7, 2005, 12:48 AM

We had every right to retaliate against the WTC incident, but Iraq was NOT an imminent threat. In fact, sanctions and inspections had crippled Saddam.

I've often wondered why the current admin didn't just attack Iraq on 9/12 (or soon after), especially if the removal of Saddam had been on the table well before the WTC attacks. I mean, is it their arrogance? Did they have to finalize all their little under-the-table deals with the military-industrial complex to make sure every penny fell into the right hands? Was it that critical to get that extra million added to the kitty?

There is a scene in Chinatown which I believe sums up much of the greed and arrogance today. Jake Gittes (Nicholson) is having dinner with Noah Cross (John Huston) and the conversation goes as follows:

Gittes: How much are you worth? Ten million? Twenty Million?
Cross: Oh good heavens at least that much.
Gittes: What can't you eat, what can't you buy, what can't you afford?
Cross: The future Mr. Gittes...

Eisenhower warned against the military-industrial complex and it is among us regardless of whether the white house is "controlled" by a democratic, republican, liberal, conservative, jesus freak, "sahara clubber," neocon, moderate, fascist, sadistic, agnostic, etc., administration. If people could only grasp this reality, maybe the ship could be righted. In the interim, we verbally barrage each other with untruths and half-truths (conveniently provided to us by "the news") while the foxes are feasting in the henhouse - our henhouse.

I voted Bush I in '92 and Dole in '96. I didn't vote in 2000, "woke up" on 9/11 and had to vote for Kerry in 2004 with tears streaming down my face. In fact, I had to be helped to my vehicle afterwards and sedated. 2 friggin' candidates to choose from? And both "thieves"? Where are the candidates for the people? The incumbent is a given but the challenger is completely and totally molded by the press. Kerry came from how far down in the lead up to the primaries?

I wasn't a Kerry supporter nor a Dean supporter but what I do find interesting is Dean's "demise" occurred right after the following exchange on Hardball (1/26/2004) when he was asked if he would break up mass media:

MATTHEWS: Well, how about large media enterprises?
DEAN: ...The answer to that is yes. I would say that there is too much penetration by single corporations in media markets all over this country. We need locally-owned radio stations. There are only two or three radio stations left in the state of Vermont where you can get local news anymore. The rest of it is read and ripped from the AP.

I guess my post, much like this thread has turned into a hodge-podge of commentary. I think the shouting and belligerence occurs when somebody on either side of the spectrum regurgitates an opinion instead of forming their own (backed by facts).

On a final note, I wrote I "woke up" on 9/11 in regards to corporate and media control of our society. The following is an eye-opening and frightening link to who owns what (http://cjr.org/tools/owners/) in the communication sector. I believe the only thing truthful in an American newspaper these days is a sports section boxscore.

amnesiac1984

Jul 7, 2005, 03:17 AM

Dude (first I can't spell-so forgive me-I am getting better) I applaude your rant. Good Job!
The fact is MR has a very vocal and prolific left of left (off the chart really) group of "people".

I disagree that most people here are off the chart left, maybe in the context of fascist USA but anywhere else in the world this viewpoint is quite moderate, not that being moderate means anything, "you can't stand still on a moving train" (howard zinn).

mactastic

Jul 7, 2005, 11:52 AM

I disagree that most people here are off the chart left, maybe in the context of fascist USA but anywhere else in the world this viewpoint is quite moderate, not that being moderate means anything, "you can't stand still on a moving train" (howard zinn).

Common tactic I've found. Anyone to your left or your right depending on your leaning, is left of Trotsky, or right of Gengis Kahn. Unfortunately it's a tactic used often by many of the less enjoyable posters.

skunk

Jul 7, 2005, 12:04 PM

maybe in the context of fascist USAOh God, look out for Mr Spigot™! The words "red", "rag" and "bull" spring to mind...

stubeeef

Jul 7, 2005, 12:06 PM

I disagree that most people here are off the chart left, maybe in the context of fascist USA but anywhere else in the world this viewpoint is quite moderate, not that being moderate means anything, "you can't stand still on a moving train" (howard zinn).

The ole put words in their mouth tactic. Who said "most of the people"? I certainly don't think "most" are. Anyone agree with that statement is probably one of the less enjoyable posters.

skunk

Jul 7, 2005, 12:09 PM

Who said "most of the people"? I certainly don't think "most" are.I for one would be fascinated to know who you think is off the dial to the left. Apart from amnesiac of course, who's obviously way off in la-la land... :)

mactastic

Jul 7, 2005, 12:14 PM

I for one would be fascinated to know who you think is off the dial to the left. Apart from amnesiac of course, who's obviously way off in la-la land... :)

Well obviously I am. Engles a friggin Nazi if you ask me. ;)

stubeeef

Jul 7, 2005, 12:15 PM

IJ, TV, Psuedob would be the quickest to mind. It is of course my own opinion. They may have interesting thoughts of my leanings, but I care as much about their opinion of me as they care of my opinion of them. There are plenty here who candidly state that they are very liberal, which is fine and honest, no need to hide, it is not a dirty word. I have been accused of neocon status, which is laughable, considering I am against the death penalty, I am for an assault weapons ban, I do not want to end all social programs or spending-only reform them to be more efficient.
Whatever.

skunk

Jul 7, 2005, 12:22 PM

Well obviously I am. Engles a friggin Nazi if you ask me. ;)You're not on the list. Do you feel rejected? I know I do.
;)

mactastic

Jul 7, 2005, 12:26 PM

stubeeef

Jul 7, 2005, 12:27 PM

You're not on the list. Do you feel rejected? I know I do.
;)
First I am told I am saying "most people" now I have a definative list. Comeon, this is silly.

skunk

Jul 7, 2005, 12:30 PM

skunk

Jul 7, 2005, 12:31 PM

First I am told I am saying "most people" now I have a definative list. Comeon, this is silly.Only kidding, stu...
:)

amnesiac1984

Jul 7, 2005, 01:29 PM

I for one would be fascinated to know who you think is off the dial to the left. Apart from amnesiac of course, who's obviously way off in la-la land... :)

no, i'm right here in sensibleville, you guys are just all nazis :) .

in all seriousness though, I do really wish people would stop talking about the ideological left/right scale as it jsut gets in the way of actual issues and solutions. AS much as I'd like to be idealistic and strive for an anarchist state in which we can all live happily ever after, I think that what is more important is that we acknowledge the direction we are heading before we get there. The problem is that when us leftists blame all the world's ills on capitalism it puts rightists on the defensive and the argument becomes an ideological one. The fact is regardless of what economic arrangement we live under, there are people who are just taking the piss and are really screwing up the world for everybody and they need to be stopped, and this is something we should all agree on. We have all been victims of polarisation which is only allowing us to be screwed over even more. We have democracy, we just have had our capacity to use severely weakened by the media and our own stupidity.

anyway, not sure where i'm going with that, but tis my 2 cents.

IJ Reilly

Jul 7, 2005, 01:34 PM

I'm crushed.

I've often wondered what this place would be like if some actual left of left types showed up. Someone as extreme to the left as our ex-poster who argued that the poor deserved to die was to the right.

Quite so. I could only makes Stu's special list of lefties in an environment where the center is defined far to the right. (Note to self: I know where I've been in many in these debates even if Stu doesn't.)

amnesiac1984

Jul 7, 2005, 01:47 PM

The ole put words in their mouth tactic. Who said "most of the people"? I certainly don't think "most" are. Anyone agree with that statement is probably one of the less enjoyable posters.

I was not using this tactic. And do you think by most I meant the whole of MR. I was actually referring to these political forums, and since I don't spend much time here anymore, as far as I could tell (at 8 am this morning before my weetabix) you were referring to "most of the people here" because thats the way I took it in. I may have made a mistake but I was not "using that tactic". I put it to you however that you were using the "oh, that old tactic" tactic! :p What do you say to that!!!!

stubeeef

Jul 7, 2005, 01:48 PM

hyperbole, fighting fire with fire. Not just or rightous, acting out of frustration to being misquoted. Sorry.

skunk

Jul 7, 2005, 01:53 PM

Now, go on: you two have a good hug.

stubeeef

Jul 7, 2005, 01:56 PM

Now, go on: you two have a good hug.

Thanks dad! :p

mactastic

Jul 7, 2005, 02:45 PM

the less enjoyable posters

Hmmm... someone's peeking.

anonymous161

Jul 7, 2005, 03:33 PM

AS much as I'd like to be idealistic and strive for an anarchist state in which we can all live happily ever after, I think that what is more important is that we acknowledge the direction we are heading before we get there... We have all been victims of polarisation which is only allowing us to be screwed over even more... Divide and conquer right? We discussed this quite a bit in the ill-fated Fascist (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=125628) thread. Good times!

The problem is that when us leftists blame all the world's ills on capitalism it puts rightists on the defensive and the argument becomes an ideological one.

But, I thought that capitalism was the cause of all the world's ills? :)

skunk

Jul 7, 2005, 03:51 PM

Hmmm... someone's peeking.Some of us peaked years ago.

IJ Reilly

Jul 7, 2005, 04:07 PM

Divide and conquer right? We discussed this quite a bit in the ill-fated Fascist (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=125628) thread. Good times!

"Ill-fated," eh? :eek:

I remember something about that thread. Unaccountably, it seems to have cemented my reputation in the minds of some as one of the forum's most virulent lefties. Go figure. (One tries to figure, but one can't always get the sums to add up.)

skunk

Jul 7, 2005, 04:10 PM

anonymous161

Jul 7, 2005, 04:11 PM

"Ill-fated," eh? :eek: Okay, perhaps "horribly disfigured but simply refused to die" is better. How many times did you personally trie to put it out of its misery?

I remember something about that thread. Unaccountably, it seems to have cemented my reputation in the minds of some as one of the forum's most virulent lefties. Go figure. (One tries to figure, but one can't always get the sums to add up.) I gave up on the math years ago. Now I just draw pretty pictures and pet my cat.

anonymous161

Jul 7, 2005, 04:12 PM

Can you be a virulent centrist?

Just rolls off the tongue doesn't it?

Sayhey

Jul 7, 2005, 04:44 PM

"Ill-fated," eh? :eek:

I remember something about that thread. Unaccountably, it seems to have cemented my reputation in the minds of some as one of the forum's most virulent lefties. Go figure. (One tries to figure, but one can't always get the sums to add up.)

Funny, as I recall you were quite far from the left in that particular thread. I know such a characterization of your views, based on that thread, wouldn't add up to an acolyte of Ché. I, on the other hand ... :eek:

Lyle

Jul 7, 2005, 04:56 PM

Can you be a virulent centrist?Not sure, but it would make a cool name for a band.

IJ Reilly

Jul 7, 2005, 05:23 PM

Can you be a virulent centrist?

I prefer "radical moderate" thank you very much.

Sayhey

Jul 7, 2005, 05:43 PM

I prefer "radical moderate" thank you very much.

Is there a secret handshake that goes with that?

Desertrat

Jul 7, 2005, 05:58 PM

Not an Internetter at age 71? Duh? Why not? About the only difference between me and a 16-year-old is that I pay my bills on time. (Well, I eat less and walk slower.) I've pushed adolescence beyond all previous limits. :D

Actually, my computer days go back to 1961/1962 and Fortran. Then came the punchcard stuff. None of it related to anything I was doing in my life, so I sat back and watched. A buddy of mine gave me an old IBM PC rig, with a 386 chip. They finally got ISP service to Terlingua in 1998. Our REA CoOp is setting up a satellite internet system, ready--I hope--by August or September.

I guess politically I've always sorta seen myself as a militant middle-of-the-road type. I don't like NeoCon stuff; Socialism sucks. Government is a must, but I think we've gone overboard, voting ourselves "largesse from the public coffers" to our own detriment. I don't like arguments where people go to griping at "liberals" or "conservatives" when (IMO) "statist" or "anti-statist" might well better describe the viewpoints.

But I'm not wired into thinking the rest of the world oughta think as I do. At the same time, I'm stubborn as all get out about some Doofus trying to tell me how to do, when most of the time I know as much or more about a subject tha Dudley Doofus.

All in all, the world ain't nuthin' but a big ol' playground. "Life is a banquet, and I won't settle for a cold lettuce sandwich." -- from "Auntie Mame"

:), 'Rat

mactastic

Jul 7, 2005, 06:01 PM

You could always take the next step and get a mac 'Rat. Not that I'm biased or anything. ;)

And surprise surprise... I've always considered myself to be pretty militantly middle of the road myself. What was it that George Carlin said? Anyone traveling down the road slower than you is an idiot, and anyone going faster than you is crazy...

IJ Reilly

Jul 7, 2005, 06:04 PM

Is there a secret handshake that goes with that?

I am not allowed to comment.

Sayhey

Jul 7, 2005, 06:14 PM

I am not allowed to comment.

Confess, IJ! Are you not a secret member of a sleeper cell of radical moderates? Isn't your hidden agenda to bring back America to its original love of vanilla? It's truly diabolical. :eek:

amnesiac1984

Jul 7, 2005, 06:17 PM

But, I thought that capitalism was the cause of all the world's ills? :)

True, but there are certain capitalists who we can blame more than others, and if we try to get people on all sides to see that these certain capitalists exist without alienating them by saying their beliefs are wrong. Its not hard to see what dangers lie ahead that need to be dealt with, but as long as we discuss it by attacking people's beliefs nothing is ever going to happen, there has to be some middle ground, most of us are humans after all.

The problem is that we have (well I haven't but society has) lived through a big perceived 'threat' to capitalism that was the cold war, and so people are still desperately trying to defend it because they equate it with their freedom or whatever. We are still living in the aftermath of the cold war and it looks like capitalism has won, for now, but that doesn't mean that capitalism gets to run away with the world. Perhaps it might be worth admitting defeat (sort of) and stop saying capitalism is the enemy, and start saying Neo-Liberal economics and monopoly corporatism or whatever is the enemy.

THis picture, taken in my town of Bristol sums it up nicely, any brits will recognize where its from. THis is direct activism at its finest, i even have it on my wall.

Desertrat

Jul 7, 2005, 07:20 PM

"Anyone traveling down the road slower than you is an idiot, and anyone going faster than you is crazy..."

Sounds good to me. After all, life begins at 180.

Mph, that is.

"Rat

amnesiac1984

Jul 7, 2005, 08:06 PM

"Anyone traveling down the road slower than you is an idiot, and anyone going faster than you is crazy..."

Sounds good to me. After all, life begins at 180.

Mph, that is.

"Rat

Reminds me of a sketch by Armando Ianucci (the man behind alan partridge and most of chris morris' stuff). Basically people are discovering that anything done to excess is very dangerous, but done to excess by just the right amount and it is perfect. For example travelling at 164mph in your car is the safest way to drive, 163 is murder and so is 165 but 164 is just right. You kind of have to see it really! lol

Desertrat

Jul 8, 2005, 12:28 AM

Well, amnesiac, one thing for sure: If you're out front and running faster than the rest, you won't get hit in the butt.

:), 'Rat

stubeeef

Jul 8, 2005, 08:22 AM

Like the airconditioning in that car, but does it have AM/FM and a MP3 reading CD changer? :p

Desertrat

Jul 8, 2005, 10:14 AM

FM did indeed exist, way back then. I ws always amazed I survived the season with that 4-wheeled deathtrap. But it was fun.

The thing about being a one-man band in car racing is that you can't blame anybody else when things go all to hell. And you're out there in front of God and everybody; you can't hide. You do that stuff long enough and it affects your attitude in a lot of ways.

You learn for sure about consequences of your decisions and actions. You stay alive by being correct in your split-second decisions, which carries over into one's self-confidence for decision making in general. I gotta admit to a bit of quiet snottiness in the attitude of, "I'm doing. You're watching."

Skipping over a lot of blather, my po'-boy racing years taught me a lot about doing for myself. I started in nowhere-ville and boot-strapped my way up, off-track as well as on. So, my respect is for doers, not talkers. Politically, then, I'm more interested in results than intentions, and I guess that makes me, generally, conservative in my viewpoints as regards government programs.

The mainest thing is that as long as folks can control themselves as to courtesy and politeness, issues can be resolved in a manner which is fair to all interests. I hope so, anyway...

:), 'Rat

skunk

Jul 8, 2005, 10:23 AM

FM did indeed exist, way back then. I ws always amazed I survived the season with that 4-wheeled deathtrap. But it was fun.You mean that's you in the picture? That handsome devil with the overalls and the Clark Kent glasses? How come you haven't been posting in the MR Pics thread?
:D

solvs

Jul 9, 2005, 04:58 AM

I would like to see a source on your quote.

I believe that more lives have been saved than lost in this war.

2. Reputable Source?

5. I would really like to see a source on this one, seems to be pure speculation and rumor to me.
Sorry to bring this thread back on topic :o but I just re-read this. Anybody else get the irony here? One of these things is not like the other... Seriously though, you can use facts to justify almost anything. Some people are for the war, some against. Some have good, fact based arguements. Some don't. Even those that do shouldn't get mad at others that have a valid dissenting point of view, but those basing their opinions purely on "belief" and "feeling" should not be throwing stones. ;)

Just my opinion, I could be wrong.