Obama supporters are scaring me

As a nonright winger, I can definitely see where frank is coming from. It's an obvious cult of personality that is, and has been, on display for almost four years. Every gaffe, stupid comment, ridiculous assertion or otherwise made by the Obama is met with incredible defense from the teeth gnashing Fourier Complex ridden following.

They adore without question every word from the man's mouth no matter how incredibly stupid, insulting or even attacking of the supporters own view.

It is a serious and dangerous cult of personality. One we haven't seen in America. One that in histories past has led the population down roads that no one should travel.

Bank atms are ruining the economy? Really?

you're a fucking idiot. he never said that ...he was talking about automation and used that as one example...but do go on with your AM radio driven hyperbole.

"The other thing that happened though, this goes to the point you were just making, is there are some structural issues with our economy where a lot of businesses have learned to become much more efficient with a lot fewer workers. If you see it when you go to a bank you use the ATM, you don't go to a bank teller. Or you go to the airport and you use a kiosk instead of checking in at the gate" -- Obama claiming Bank ATM's and airport kiosks hurt the economy, but of course, the legions of mindless zombies see it differently as described above.
 
And even if the remark was in regard to automation, it is still beyond ridiculous and shows how incredibly inept Obama is when it comes to economics, the division of labor and technology. Yet you guys soaked it right up like it was fucking gospel. :lol:

really? where was he wrong? you don't think automation has a role to.play in this? I guess outsourcing had nothing to do with it either...anything that makes the billionaires richer is fine...because they create jobs....for machines and slave labor, that is.
 
57Frank is going off of the deep end. I think he knows Romney doesn't have a prayer after his visit to London. Amiright?
 
you're a fucking idiot. he never said that ...he was talking about automation and used that as one example...but do go on with your AM radio driven hyperbole.

Do you happen to recall which of the 57 states he was in when he said this?

wow...you got me there...what a little twerp you are.

So, you are unsure which of the 57 states he was in?

But I'm the twerp?

Don't be butthurt because your messiah is a fucking ninkumpoop. Choose someone with a bit more intellectual prowess than a fucking self deluted Marxist and this shit wouldn't occur.
 
No. I know a "Mandate" when I see one and 50.7% does not cross that threshold.

Then what is a mandate to you? And how come your subjective determination is the one we should use?

Let's talk about this. Mandate is a subjective term, is it not? Defined as:

1man·date
noun \ˈman-ˌdāt\

Definition of MANDATE
1: an authoritative command; especially: a formal order from a superior court or official to an inferior one

2: an authorization to act given to a representative <accepted the mandate of the people>

3 a: an order or commission granted by the League of Nations to a member nation for the establishment of a responsible government over a former German colony or other conquered territory b: a mandated territory

Examples of MANDATE

Royal mandates must be obeyed.
They carried out the governor's mandate to build more roads.
He won the election so convincingly that he believed he had been given a mandate for change.
Sports fans have considerable forbearance. Year after year they endure escalating ticket prices, the abomination known as seat licensing and the implied mandate that taxpayers should foot the bill for the new stadium or arena that will absolutely revive downtown.


Now, if someone wins an election with 50.7% of the vote, does that meet the example cited in bold?

Do we really have to parse words here? Would you agree that, if President Obama wins 50.7% of the vote this November he too would have a "mandate"?

If he were to get 50% plus one extra vote (assuming it sufficed for the win in the electoral college, that is), then according to at least one former President, that would constitute a mandate.

In SOME senses, of course, it's true. It WOULD technically suffice as a mandate.

In other senses, clearly, it falls pitiful short of any such thing.

So you are playing a game of pick your premise.
 
Do you happen to recall which of the 57 states he was in when he said this?

wow...you got me there...what a little twerp you are.

So, you are unsure which of the 57 states he was in?

But I'm the twerp?

Don't be butthurt because your messiah is a fucking ninkumpoop. Choose someone with a bit more intellectual prowess than a fucking self deluted Marxist and this shit wouldn't occur.
So the Democrats should take a page from the Republican book and opt only for those with intellectual prowess?


Paging Mrs. Palin! Telephone call for Mrs. Palin!
 
And even if the remark was in regard to automation, it is still beyond ridiculous and shows how incredibly inept Obama is when it comes to economics, the division of labor and technology. Yet you guys soaked it right up like it was fucking gospel. :lol:

really? where was he wrong? you don't think automation has a role to.play in this? I guess outsourcing had nothing to do with it either...anything that makes the billionaires richer is fine...because they create jobs....for machines and slave labor, that is.

^ Classic Example of what I described in the OP.

Not a single thought of his own, just mindless repetition of Obama no matter how stupid it makes him look.
 
And even if the remark was in regard to automation, it is still beyond ridiculous and shows how incredibly inept Obama is when it comes to economics, the division of labor and technology. Yet you guys soaked it right up like it was fucking gospel. :lol:

really? where was he wrong? you don't think automation has a role to.play in this? I guess outsourcing had nothing to do with it either...anything that makes the billionaires richer is fine...because they create jobs....for machines and slave labor, that is.

He's wrong because automation does not remove labor, it changes its division. An ATM does not fill or empty itself. It does not self count the receipts or remaining cash. It does not drop itself off at a location, it does not fix itself when it breaks down. It does not maintain/repair/build the communication lines needed to access account information. We do not have robots that do these things for us either. The entire premise is fucking retarded. Automation changes the nature of the division of labor, it does not remove it.

Christ. On. Crutches.
 
Pretty much everyone on here has strong opinions one way or another. So, if the OP was qualified with "on this site" then it's probably pretty accurate. Then again, it's pretty true for the other side as well. Everyone here is a "winger."
 
57Frank is going off of the deep end. I think he knows Romney doesn't have a prayer after his visit to London. Amiright?

Frank is right. The two scariest things about liberals are:

1) No matter how much they harm the people they set out to help, no fact will make any of you even question your approach. The minimum wage is one of the most singularly evil things you can do to poor people and there isn't a single economic principle that supports it, but it's one of your mainstay views. Frankly it's sad.

2) The utter silence of the liberal masses to liberal demagogues. Clearly racism is not an issue in the right any more then it is in the left. Yet liberal morons run around yelling racist, racist... They do the same with sexist and other groups as well. It's not the idiots I object to so much, there are idiots on every side. But that mainstream liberals won't tell them to STFU and argue issues says how sick your mainstreamers are.

Nothing positive is happening politically in this country. I'd like to hold the right to a higher standard. I left them and went libertarian, I'm no sheep. But when you look at your left, I can only do so much. The vitriol and idiocy from your camp is destroying us. All that's left is the bickering. Good job on that.

If you care ... start by holding your own side accountable. I do.
 
Then what is a mandate to you? And how come your subjective determination is the one we should use?

Let's talk about this. Mandate is a subjective term, is it not? Defined as:

1man·date
noun \&#712;man-&#716;d&#257;t\

Definition of MANDATE
1: an authoritative command; especially: a formal order from a superior court or official to an inferior one

2: an authorization to act given to a representative <accepted the mandate of the people>

3 a: an order or commission granted by the League of Nations to a member nation for the establishment of a responsible government over a former German colony or other conquered territory b: a mandated territory

Examples of MANDATE

Royal mandates must be obeyed.
They carried out the governor's mandate to build more roads.
He won the election so convincingly that he believed he had been given a mandate for change.
Sports fans have considerable forbearance. Year after year they endure escalating ticket prices, the abomination known as seat licensing and the implied mandate that taxpayers should foot the bill for the new stadium or arena that will absolutely revive downtown.


Now, if someone wins an election with 50.7% of the vote, does that meet the example cited in bold?

Do we really have to parse words here? Would you agree that, if President Obama wins 50.7% of the vote this November he too would have a "mandate"?

If he were to get 50% plus one extra vote (assuming it sufficed for the win in the electoral college, that is), then according to at least one former President, that would constitute a mandate.

In SOME senses, of course, it's true. It WOULD technically suffice as a mandate.

In other senses, clearly, it falls pitiful short of any such thing.

So you are playing a game of pick your premise.
50% plus one vote equals a victory. A mandate requires a little more. That's why there are separate words. Mandate and Victory. I can't get behind a victory of 50.7% and call it a mandate, and I know you couldn't either.
 
Oh, and the ATM did not build itself. I mean, it's like we need to daily remediate these people and then tomorrow, they will need to be reminded again. It is no wonder this society is swirling the bowl.
 
Conservatives have a way of making everyone that doesn't agree with their world view into evil enemies. That is what comes with their binary world view.

Limbaugh use to compare Clinton to a terrorist holding America hostage. It was despicable then. It's despicable now.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CF8...ch?v=riVzMzX4hiE&feature=youtube_gdata_player
 
Last edited:
Bank atms are ruining the economy? Really?

you're a fucking idiot. he never said that ...he was talking about automation and used that as one example...but do go on with your AM radio driven hyperbole.

"The other thing that happened though, this goes to the point you were just making, is there are some structural issues with our economy where a lot of businesses have learned to become much more efficient with a lot fewer workers. If you see it when you go to a bank you use the ATM, you don't go to a bank teller. Or you go to the airport and you use a kiosk instead of checking in at the gate" -- Obama claiming Bank ATM's and airport kiosks hurt the economy, but of course, the legions of mindless zombies see it differently as described above.
I guess technology ONLY started replacing jobs in 2009, according to Obama.
 
I predict that between now and the election, eventually, all the rightwinger threads on this board will be this stupid.

These people are losing whatever grip they had on whatever sanity they had.

In a way, it's awesome.
Have you ever put yourself in someone else's place and then reread what you just said to them?
 

Forum List

Back
Top