Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5
F3SS

"You didn't build that"

495 posts in this topic

You're the one that mentioned neutral fact checkers, not me. I have no idea what you were talking about but you referring to any info you use as neutral is laugahable. S

Try here.

Because they're only neutral when they agree with whatever you personally believe, right?

So you think I am righ them=n and the dems lose the exeec and senate. Good, glad you agree.

I think the race is going to be close but I expect that with the coming media blitz, the Republican party will win the House, Senate and the Presidency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This year it is in fashion to be libertarian so most are "libertarian". and many of those who are could hardly explain what a "libertarian" is.

I've been a Libertarian for years and I'm glad to see more people moving that way, even though the media barely give it any air time. I think it's mostly due to the internet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the race is going to be close but I expect that with the coming media blitz, the Republican party will win the House, Senate and the Presidency.

Gawd, I hope not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Try here.

Because they're only neutral when they agree with whatever you personally believe, right?

Sorry, I have no idea what this fact checker thing is about, especially as it applies to "you didn't build that" and what he really meant. It is a fact he said it, it is an an opinion on what one thinks he really meant by it. There is no fact to check and Obama is running from it as fast as he can.

In my opinion it shows his disdain for small business and entrepreneurs. Most small business owners that I know agree with me. His administration has certainly made it harder to run my little side business.

One relevant fact about Obama's attitude towards small business is he stuffed the NLRB with union thugs who then tried to push through their abominable policies (card check) by fiat in a direct challenge to relevant state laws. The NLRB policies were against the will of the states and they in turn challenged the Obama administration in federal court and thankfully, the NLRB has been stopped by the federal courts. Card Check would have devastated small businesses by unionizing them. This is the second fed court decision the NLRB has lost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's called Doublethink. You should know that....

It's opportunistic quote mining for political gain and it's one of the main reasons that political discourse in America will be staying in the gutter for the forseeable future.

Absolutely. For about 82% of those who are going to go to vote the arguments are of very little influence, they will make their cross (or whatever method is used in that state) where they always did or where their "cool friends" put it.

The restant 18% is what matters. And they actually have the fate of the country in their hand.

This year it is in fashion to be libertarian so most are "libertarian". and many of those who are could hardly explain what a "libertarian" is.

That's a pretty accurate reflection of what I'm seeing, too.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, I have no idea what this fact checker thing is about, especially as it applies to "you didn't build that" and what he really meant. It is a fact he said it, it is an an opinion on what one thinks he really meant by it. There is no fact to check and Obama is running from it as fast as he can.

It is a fact that he said it. It's also a fact that it was an excerpt from a much larger speech.

It's also a fact that the overwhelming consensus of opinion amongst respected neutral commentators is that it's been taken out of context of that larger speech firstly by the Conservative media and then by the Republican campaign for purely political purposes.

In my opinion it shows his disdain for small business and entrepreneurs. Most small business owners that I know agree with me. His administration has certainly made it harder to run my little side business.

I don't see how the context of his speech changes depending on how difficult or easy someone may find that running their own business may be under his administration.

I can see how your opinion of what he says changes depending on whatever preexistent beliefs you may have had regarding him, regardless of what the actual context is, however.

One relevant fact about Obama's attitude towards small business is he stuffed the NLRB with union thugs

From Wikipedia:

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) is an independent agency of the United States government charged with conducting elections for labor union representation and with investigating and remedying unfair labor practices.

Were you expecting Obama to appoint board members without Union experience?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From Wikipedia:

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) is an independent agency of the United States government charged with conducting elections for labor union representation and with investigating and remedying unfair labor practices.

Were you expecting Obama to appoint board members without Union experience?

Well kinda, you know like Congress Committees where some people elect the likes of Mrs. Bachman to the Intelligence Oversight, Ron Paul to the Financial Services Committee... you know: people without real experience but a strong and vociferous (albeit mostly wrong) opinions of what should be done there. Experience is secondary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a fact that he said it. It's also a fact that it was an excerpt from a much larger speech.

It's also a fact that the overwhelming consensus of opinion amongst respected neutral commentators is that it's been taken out of context of that larger speech firstly by the Conservative media and then by the Republican campaign for purely political purposes.

Who are these respected neutral commentators you speak of?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who are these respected neutral commentators you speak of?

The same list that I've linked to twice now, for starters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tiggs is a good lefty. He's great at inciting arguments with mundane technicalities all the while providing little substance and predictable talking points and the only goal is to say that you're wrong, he's right. For the last three pages and many more his main point is that your/our opinion on this catch phrase is wrong. Liberals like him don't like it when you form your own opinions. Thats too independent. He wants to form it for you. Good lefty, bad mod.

The context of the speech was crystal clear in quote and in full. Just because O's life was handed to him on a golden platter by shadowy figures doesn't meant that's everyone else's story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tiggs is a good lefty. He's great at inciting arguments with mundane technicalities all the while providing little substance and predictable talking points and the only goal is to say that you're wrong, he's right. For the last three pages and many more his main point is that your/our opinion on this catch phrase is wrong. Liberals like him don't like it when you form your own opinions. Thats too independent. He wants to form it for you. Good lefty, bad mod.

Bad Mod?

If you have an issue with my Moderation then send a mail to Saru.

If you think that Moderator's shouldn't be allowed to exercise free speech on this website - then you're bang out of luck.

The way I see it - We have opposing opinions. I'm just as entitled to defend my opinion and present my side of the debate as you are.

As such - I fully intend to keep raising those "Mundane technicalities" like the Washington Post rating Romney's use of it as being Three Pinocchios for as long and as loud as I wish - regardless of how inconvenient it might be for your side of the debate and regardless of any attempts you might make to try and curb my freedom of speech to do so.

The context of the speech was crystal clear in quote and in full. Just because O's life was handed to him on a golden platter by shadowy figures doesn't meant that's everyone else's story.

Conspiracy theories are a couple of doors over. You'll probably get more traction over there, if you're at the "shadowy figure" stage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a fact that he said it. It's also a fact that it was an excerpt from a much larger speech.

It's also a fact that the overwhelming consensus of opinion amongst respected neutral commentators is that it's been taken out of context of that larger speech firstly by the Conservative media and then by the Republican campaign for purely political purposes.

I don't see how the context of his speech changes depending on how difficult or easy someone may find that running their own business may be under his administration.

I can see how your opinion of what he says changes depending on whatever preexistent beliefs you may have had regarding him, regardless of what the actual context is, however.

From Wikipedia:

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) is an independent agency of the United States government charged with conducting elections for labor union representation and with investigating and remedying unfair labor practices.

Were you expecting Obama to appoint board members without Union experience?

Ahh the neutral fact checkers finally emerge, finally. LOL I'd dearly love to see what you consider neutral. Do you have zero opinion of what he meant? Did you listen to the tone of his voice and see the anger in his face?

He staffed the NLRB with rabidly pro-union, anti-business union cronies in an end-around during a recess with the sole intent of ramming card check through after it had been unilatreally rejected by the states. The states sued and won. It was an outrageous reach that only a libearl zealot would deny. NLRB will be dissolved by Romney

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tigg, I'm not curbing your free speech, just exercising mine. I wouldn't report you to anyone. Just because we don't get along doesn't mean I want your boss to fire you.

Also, the NLRB is as far from neutral as anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ahh the neutral fact checkers finally emerge, finally. LOL I'd dearly love to see what you consider neutral. Do you have zero opinion of what he meant? Did you listen to the tone of his voice and see the anger in his face?

I've seen the speech in it's entirety and my position stands. I gave my opinion as to what he meant a few hundred posts earlier in the thread - here.

He staffed the NLRB with rabidly pro-union, anti-business union cronies in an end-around during a recess with the sole intent of ramming card check through after it had been unilatreally rejected by the states. The states sued and won. It was an outrageous reach that only a libearl zealot would deny. NLRB will be dissolved by Romney

Last time I checked - the NLRB were litigating the states who were implementing new legislation, rather than vice versa. From the link:

U.S. District Judge Frederick Martone dismissed the lawsuit filed last year by the National Labor Relations Board, saying it’s unclear whether the state’s guarantee of a secret ballot would clash with the federal labor law the agency enforces. Making such a determination would depend on how the amendment was enforced, Mr. Martone said in his decision issued late Wednesday. He cited the possibility of a clash if and when the amendment is applied but said it would be “inappropriate” to assume now. Alleged conflicts will likely be sorted out by Arizona courts if the amendment’s use triggers legal challenges.

Not exactly overturning Federal law, is it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tigg, I'm not curbing your free speech, just exercising mine. I wouldn't report you to anyone. Just because we don't get along doesn't mean I want your boss to fire you.

The world would be pretty boring if everyone agreed on everything.

My moderator duties only apply to sorting out threads where people are breaking the rules.

Basically - if I don't sign a post

Tiggs

[Forum Mod Team]

Then it's my own personal opinion, rather than me wearing a moderator's hat. I try to avoid moderating any threads that I actually post in, unless it's minor and non-controversial, such as censoring any swearing that gets through the filter, etc.

Also, the NLRB is as far from neutral as anything.

Since the NLRB board are appointed to serve on a yearly basis and are selected to do so by the President - I'd imagine that the very last thing they were is neutral.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've seen the speech in it's entirety and my position stands. I gave my opinion as to what he meant a few hundred posts earlier in the thread - here.

Last time I checked - the NLRB were litigating the states who were implementing new legislation, rather than vice versa. From the link:

U.S. District Judge Frederick Martone dismissed the lawsuit filed last year by the National Labor Relations Board, saying it’s unclear whether the state’s guarantee of a secret ballot would clash with the federal labor law the agency enforces. Making such a determination would depend on how the amendment was enforced, Mr. Martone said in his decision issued late Wednesday. He cited the possibility of a clash if and when the amendment is applied but said it would be “inappropriate” to assume now. Alleged conflicts will likely be sorted out by Arizona courts if the amendment’s use triggers legal challenges.

Not exactly overturning Federal law, is it?

Do some more study.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do some more study.

No.

Truth is - it's neither on topic, nor do I particularly care.

Edited by Tiggs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No.

Truth is - it's neither on topic, nor do I particularly care.

Your defending the indefensible must be very tiring. Good on ya for the effort.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your defending the indefensible must be very tiring. Good on ya for the effort.

I have absolutely no idea what you're alluding to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have absolutely no idea what you're alluding to.

* snip *

Edited by Saru
Removed flame / personal attack

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Goodness! I'm gone for part of a day and the thread advances 4 pages.

You find the idea that people need and rely on other people - that we live within an interconnected society - to be completely stupid?

No. I find those few lines in that one speech Stupid. I have no problem with Obama's point, only the words he used to express his opinion.

Y'know - if he hasn't dismantled capitalism in the first four years, he's probably not going to do so in the next four years, either,

I don't know... not having to worry about re-election, he can be a lot freeier with his liberal agendas. Also he basically sat around the first 2 years and the Republicans would not let him do anything dangerous to business for the last 2 years.

And you'd have got away with it, too, if it wasn't for all those pesky neutral fact checkers.

Thank goodness for those Fact Checkers and their going over the RNC and the DNC conventions. Now we know both sides are liars for sure. I find it funny both sides can call the other liars while blatantly lying themselves in the same speech.

BTW: I think Tiggs is a Fine MOD and I've never seen him show favoritism even to himself. And though he is a firm lefty Democrat, I think he is a fine debator and offers logical (and funny) posts.

Edited by DieChecker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Listen to the way he says it:

[media=]

[/media]

"I-I-if you've been successful, you didn't ... you didn't get there on your own ...ya, ya didn't get there on yoru own ..." He's like a kid on high school speech class that didn't do his homework so he tries to B.S. it. Maybe that's why he gets an 'Incomplete'.

Edited by Vein Capital
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Listen to the way he says it:

[media=]

[/media]

"I-I-if you've been successful, you didn't ... you didn't get there on your own ...ya, ya didn't get there on yoru own ..." He's like a kid on high school speech class that didn't do his homework so he tries to B.S. it. Maybe that's why he gets an 'Incomplete'.

He is quite the moron.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regardless of how you feel about Barry Soetero's views, together, we all made this thread epic.

Err, wait, nevermind.

Someone else made that happen.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I started this thread but I must give credit where it's due. If it weren't for Obama, I couldn't have started this thread.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.