#OWS Signs

[Liability]

Soooo, only fubars like YOU and your filthy ilk have confused support for the troops with opposition to the wars (by the pretext that opposing the wars in which they have fought somehow constitutes "support" for them).

Oh, nice bit of squirmy twisting there, dude. Careful about your back, though!

You're ignoring a step in the dialog. It goes like this:

War opponent: "Bring the troops home!"

War supporter: "You unpatriotic shit, support our troops!" [Note PRECISELY the implied confusion I was referring to.]

War opponent: "Support our troops! Bring them home!"

You see, that line you're talking about is only brought out in response to, and defense against, the confusion of support for the troops and support for the war on the part of the war supporters.

So once again: will you in the future eschew that argument? Will you never, EVER use the line "support our troops!" to imply that those who don't support the war, don't support the troops?

I think that's a completely reasonable expectation.

Zz.

You are ignoring the rebuttal. Can't blame you. You can't address it, so you might as well just skip right over it and pretend you have accomplished something.

You dipshits opposed the war and in the process claimed that you were supporting the troops. Idiots.

You do not have to support the wars to support the troops, but you don't therefore show support FOR the troops by opposing the wars.

And I can (and do) respect our servicemen and servicewomen. But that still doesn't require that I adopt every thing a vet happens to say.

So, hurry back with more of your unpersuasive sophistry. It amuses me, dragoon.

 

[daveman]

Of course you are going to only showcase the crazies and the anti-Semites and then claim that it represents everyone at #OWS.

It's your modus operandi.

Did I say that? Hint: No, I didn't.

But I haven't seen much in the way of critical thinking skills from the OWS crowd. Or you, for that matter.

Then why are you highlighting these signs?

Obviously, to provide examples of tired, knee-jerk sayings from people who never learned critical thinking skills.

 

[daveman]

The bolded part makes no sense.

Conservatives donate more to charity than liberals. So it makes perfect sense.

Let's see: there is you, a fringe wingnut, linking to George Will, Republican opinion-giver, who doesn't back up his assertions, who cites Arthur C. Brooks, who he deceptively only refers to as "a professor at Syracuse University" without telling his readers that Brooks is the rightwing PRESIDENT of the American Enterprise Institute, a wingnut think tank.

Who the fuck do you think you are fooling?

Wow, that was a masterful refutation.

Oh, wait, no, it wasn't. It was a sissy bedwetter saying "I don't LIKE it, so it must be wrong!!"

Who the fuck do you think you are fooling? Ooops, sorry -- you don't think at all.

 

[daveman]

Of course you are going to only showcase the crazies and the anti-Semites and then claim that it represents everyone at #OWS.

It's your modus operandi.

Did I say that? Hint: No, I didn't.

But I haven't seen much in the way of critical thinking skills from the OWS crowd. Or you, for that matter.

I have not seen much of thinking skills of any kind from you or the other 'Conservatives' on this board.

That's because you're unable to recognize thinking skills when you see them, mindless leftist parrot.

 

[daveman]

"...but mostly, legalize weed!"


What a loser.

 

[daveman]

It saddens me to say that conservative radio and tv 'personalities' will likely have no problem dissing former soldiers who join the protests, just like they haven't had any problem with belittling and mocking everyone else who's joined the protests.

But, of course, those conservatives are members of the 1%. It's their middle class dittohead fans who suprise me. But then, they've always been easily led, haven't they?

Oh, you mean like leftists have no problem dissing current and former soldiers who support the US missions in Iraq and Afghanistan?

 

[Mr.Nick]

It probably should have read

. I did not read my contract and got a house way above what I can afford. Why dont you just forgive my loans so I can get this house for free

It should have read: "I never really could have paid you back yet I wanted what I want now and now that I cant pay it back I'm blaming you."

Note to bankers - the next time the government tries to force you to loan to mental retards tell the government to fuck off - tell them you're not a form of social welfare.

 

[daveman]

Soooo, only fubars like YOU and your filthy ilk have confused support for the troops with opposition to the wars (by the pretext that opposing the wars in which they have fought somehow constitutes "support" for them).

Oh, nice bit of squirmy twisting there, dude. Careful about your back, though!

You're ignoring a step in the dialog. It goes like this:

War opponent: "Bring the troops home!"

War supporter: "You unpatriotic shit, support our troops!" [Note PRECISELY the implied confusion I was referring to.]

War opponent: "Support our troops! Bring them home!"

You see, that line you're talking about is only brought out in response to, and defense against, the confusion of support for the troops and support for the war on the part of the war supporters.

So once again: will you in the future eschew that argument? Will you never, EVER use the line "support our troops!" to imply that those who don't support the war, don't support the troops?

I think that's a completely reasonable expectation.

I support firefighters, but only when they don't put out fires.


Kinda like that.

 

[alan1]

I will give you an example about being responsible .. When we were buying the Realtor said we could afford a way more expensive house. But I knew my finances and knew I did not want to be house poor. So we got a house way less expensive.

Now my friend on the other hand got a house on the highest of her budget. For the past 3 years she has been fighting not to lose it and even though the mortgage company has lowered her interest rates over and over she still could not afford the house. My friend had a choice to buy that house. There was other houses in the same housing place that way lower price but she wanted this house. Is it her mortgage finance's fault she decided to get this house? No, its hers. She is an adult and made that choice.

I did the same thing when I purchased my house. I spent less than both the realtor and the banker told me I could afford.
Then, I never took out a home equity loan.

Silly me for being responsible.

 

[InDoctriNation]

Gotta love all these conservatives espousing personal responsibility, while completely ignoring the equal, if not greater, importance of corporate responsibility. Yes, irresponsible people did take loans they couldn't afford, and they should have been smarter and wised up to these predatory lending practices. Many of them ended up going bankrupt, and received zero assistance from the government, and that is a fitting result of their poor decisions. What exactly was the result of the poor decisions made by the financial institutions that resulted in their bankruptcies? Were they held accountable for their actions? No, they were given a giant fucking bail out of tax payer money and basically slapped on the wrist and told not to do it again. Do you see the difference? One reaped all the negative consequences of their actions, the other reaped none of the negative consequences.

 

[alan1]

Gotta love all these conservatives espousing personal responsibility, while completely ignoring the equal, if not greater, importance of corporate responsibility. Yes, irresponsible people did take loans they couldn't afford, and they should have been smarter and wised up to these predatory lending practices. Many of them ended up going bankrupt, and received zero assistance from the government, and that is a fitting result of their poor decisions. What exactly was the result of the poor decisions made by the financial institutions that resulted in their bankruptcies? Were they held accountable for their actions? No, they were given a giant fucking bail out of tax payer money and basically slapped on the wrist and told not to do it again. Do you see the difference? One reaped all the negative consequences of their actions, the other reaped none of the negative consequences.

You are making the assumption that all us conservatives agreed with bailing out the financial institutions.
I didn't.
It's not the governments responsibility to choose winners and losers. I would have let them fail.
Politicians on both sides of the aisle used bipartisanship to accomplish the crap of bailing them out.

 

[initforme]

Anyone with an ounce of common sense knows the sign should have read

I screwed up. I fell into their trap. I took the bait hook line and sinker and they got rich off of it. They laughed all the way to the bank. Glad I never have to take out a loan for anything. My house is long paid for. Too bad I gave 30 years of my life to some lousy company who took advantage of me. Luckily they folded up and went under. Made me happy to see that.

 

[InDoctriNation]

Gotta love all these conservatives espousing personal responsibility, while completely ignoring the equal, if not greater, importance of corporate responsibility. Yes, irresponsible people did take loans they couldn't afford, and they should have been smarter and wised up to these predatory lending practices. Many of them ended up going bankrupt, and received zero assistance from the government, and that is a fitting result of their poor decisions. What exactly was the result of the poor decisions made by the financial institutions that resulted in their bankruptcies? Were they held accountable for their actions? No, they were given a giant fucking bail out of tax payer money and basically slapped on the wrist and told not to do it again. Do you see the difference? One reaped all the negative consequences of their actions, the other reaped none of the negative consequences.

You are making the assumption that all us conservatives agreed with bailing out the financial institutions.
I didn't.
It's not the governments responsibility to choose winners and losers. I would have let them fail.
Politicians on both sides of the aisle used bipartisanship to accomplish the crap of bailing them out.

I'm not assuming that the conservatives in this thread necessarily agreed with bailing out the financial institutions, just that they are much more vocal about the individuals who, while definitely making poor financial decisions, were essentially victimized by predatory lending practices. Yes it is partially their fault that we're stuck in this mess, but while these stupid individuals can claim ignorance, the so-called experts running these financial institutions knew damn well that the house of cards was going down in flames eventually. But they wanted to suck every cent out of the market before it came down. The old Spider Man quote is very relevant: "With great power comes great responsibility." These institutions had all the power, and none of the responsibility.

You are correct that despite the rhetoric from politicians, none of them have our best interests in mind.

 

[Dragon]

I support firefighters, but only when they don't put out fires.


Kinda like that.

No, more like: I support firefighters, but not arsonists.

 

[Liability]

I support firefighters, but only when they don't put out fires.


Kinda like that.

No, more like: I support firefighters, but not arsonists.

You are a complete idiot.

 

[Dragon]

It should have read: "I never really could have paid you back yet I wanted what I want now and now that I cant pay it back I'm blaming you."

No it shouldn't.

Hint once more for the reading-comprehension challenged: that sign has NOTHING TO DO with mortgages -- hers or anyone else's.

Now go back, reread, try to understand this time, and give it another go.

 

[Dragon]

You are a complete idiot.

And yet it's not me who, at a complete loss for anything resembling a coherent logical argument, is reduced to name-calling like a kindergarten kid.

 

[Liability]

You are a complete idiot.

And yet it's not me who, at a complete loss for anything resembling a coherent logical argument, is reduced to name-calling like a kindergarten kid.

You are however at a complete loss for anything resembling a coherent, rational or persuasive "argument."

And whether or not a trollish hack like you considers it kindergarten material, that doesn't alter the fact that you truly ARE a complete idiot.

It's your bed. You made it. Sleep in it.

 

[Dragon]

You are however at a complete loss for anything resembling a coherent, rational or persuasive "argument."

No, you just lack all ability to understand it, probably because I didn't spell it out for you in words of one syllable. That, and you are in fact a very stupid person. But perhaps I can make it simple enough for you.

I believe very strongly that we should not involve ourselves in any wars that we don't have to. I am against most of the wars the U.S. has ever fought, certainly all of them we've fought in my lifetime. All of the wars we have fought in my lifetime are ones that the U.S. government has started -- just as an arsonist starts fires -- and that we didn't have to be involved in.

When the U.S. government starts an unnecessary war, that's like an arsonist starting an unnecessary fire. I respect our military personnel and want to have them around in the event that someone else starts a war with us -- but I don't want our government sending them off to fight stupid wars that are none of our business.

Just as I respect firefighters, even when we do have fires -- but I don't like arsonists.

It's not that hard to understand.

 

[Liability]

You are however at a complete loss for anything resembling a coherent, rational or persuasive "argument."

No, you just lack all ability to understand it, probably because I didn't spell it out for you in words of one syllable. That, and you are in fact a very stupid person. But perhaps I can make it simple enough for you.

I believe very strongly that we should not involve ourselves in any wars that we don't have to. I am against most of the wars the U.S. has ever fought, certainly all of them we've fought in my lifetime. All of the wars we have fought in my lifetime are ones that the U.S. government has started -- just as an arsonist starts fires -- and that we didn't have to be involved in.

When the U.S. government starts an unnecessary war, that's like an arsonist starting an unnecessary fire. I respect our military personnel and want to have them around in the event that someone else starts a war with us -- but I don't want our government sending them off to fight stupid wars that are none of our business.

Just as I respect firefighters, even when we do have fires -- but I don't like arsonists.

It's not that hard to understand.

No. You have no intelligent argument to offer.

It's just that simple.

But you have my permission to go on deluding yourself, you simpering chimp.