OBAMA 'S PHILOSOPHY: CRUCIFY THEM LIKE THE ROMANS DID

[Guest123018-4]

When Obama is done there will be no middle class.
These are the types of people that work for Obama, the ones that want to kill an industry that has made us what we are today, ENERGY.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by Old-T

Only a stupid person would claim not to be biased. Biases are the natural result of experiences and reflective thought (you should try that some time). Biases are what allow us to make distinctions, choices, and select one person for a job over another. Yes, I admit I am biased towards chocolate ice cream over strawberry, red wines over white, classical over country, brunettes over blondes. I'm biased towards basball over football, interesting people over dull people, dogs over cats. Though I know enough that biases when used right are tendencies, not absolutes.

You are also biased in the Zimmerman case, and you believe you so-called experiences are superior to those of others in this forum.

Your bias is expressed here:

Originally Posted by Old-T

It's about a guy with a gun getting into a macho vigilanti mindset.

http://www.eccie.net/showpost.php?p=...5&postcount=70

Your imagined 'superiority' and more bias is expressed here:

Originally Posted by Old-T

I have been involved in neghborhood watch programs on and off for over 20 years. [La-dee-fuckin' da -- it doesn't make you an expert witness in this case] I know they vary a lot, but based upon the ones I'm been active with in three states (including one in FL) one a month--assuming they are actual potential criminal issues--is a lot. Without seeing what the 47 were about it seems high. [Because Zimmerman did not make 47 calls in one year, Old-goaT, it's your Kool Aid dispensing MSM source that's telling you he made 47 calls!!!] One of our biggest issues in the ones I was in was over zealous watchmen. To me the most telling comment in all this was in the call when Z was told not to engage but he did. [Another clairvoyant, nonjudgmental presumption by Old-goaT, but it's not supported by the known facts.] That is the mark of a guy looking to be macho rather than do his part. [Non-judgmental, unbiased Old-goaT at his very best!]
His weight seems rather a red herring--170 pounds is quite enough to pull a trigger. [Fact is, age, height, weight and physical conditioning are all factors in a street fight -- you ignorant, lying blow-hard.]

http://www.eccie.net/showpost.php?p=...3&postcount=71

More imagined 'superiority' is expressed here:

Originally Posted by Old-T

Trying to counterballance the posters who are portraying Zimmerman as a hero.

http://www.eccie.net/showpost.php?p=2385786&postcou nt=79

In the end, Old-goaT, all you have expressed are your lies, your ignorance and your biases.

[Old-T]

Originally Posted by Old-T
I have been involved in neighborhood watch programs on and off for over 20 years. IB's stupid remarks in black: [La-dee-fuckin' da -- it doesn't make you an expert witness in this case]Truth and Light now added in red: Dear Blithering Moron, I didn’t see here where I claimed this made me an expert witness—but it probably is 20 years longer than you have been (now watch you come back and say YOU have been doing it for 50 years) I know they vary a lot, but BASED UPON THE ONES I HAVE BEEN ACTIVE WITH in three states (including one in FL) one a month--ASSUMING they are actual potential criminal issues--is a lot. Without seeing what the 47 were about IT SEEMS HIGH. [Because Zimmerman did not make 47 calls in one year, Old-goaT, it's your Kool Aid dispensing MSM source that's telling you he made 47 calls!!!]Dear Lying Bastard, did I say “In one year”? No, I didn’t. I didn’t MEAN “In one year”. I meant “47 total seems like a lot” I’m sorry that you have no experience to think 47 is not a lot, and limited ability to read for comprehension at all but BASED UPON MY EXPERIENCE, 47 seems a lot. Should I clarify? OK I will: 47 seems like a really big humongous lot of calls and either he is remarkably observant seeing things no normal human sees, OR he is a guy who some might call it a little paranoid. There, is that clearer for a simple minded guy like you to understand what I was saying? For comparison, my neighbor in Ohio was a watch captain who worked about three nights a week for the 10 years I lived there. Do you know how many times he called something in? About 1 or 2 a year. How many nights did Z volunteer per week? Anyone know? For how many years? One of our biggest issues in the ones I was in was over zealous watchmen. To me the most telling comment in all this was in the call when Z was told not to engage but he did. [Another clairvoyant, nonjudgmental presumption by Old-goaT, but it's not supported by the known facts.]Dear Mind Control Freak, once again you now say that someone else's experience (mine in this case) is not true because it disagrees with your view of the world. That is exactly the Trotsky view of history: changing history is allowed to support a better good—YOU are saying YOU have the right to redefine MY experiences even though you were not there. YOU are a Communist in everything but title. Papa Joe would have loved your kind and you would have volunteered to bash in the door of any who dared say something you didn’t believe in. All your anti-Communist rhetoric is nothing more than a smoke screen to try and hide what you really are underneath: you are someone who wants to dictate every person’s thought, reprograming thm to only remember and feel what you want them to feel. If you had the technology, you would be the Thought Police, Comrade. You should hurry off to North Korea, you have just the kind of mindset (and stupidity) they look for.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by Old-T

Originally Posted by Old-T
I have been involved in neighborhood watch programs on and off for over 20 years. IB's stupid remarks in black: [La-dee-fuckin' da -- it doesn't make you an expert witness in this case]Truth and Light now added in red: Dear Blithering Moron, I didn’t see here where I claimed this made me an expert witness—but it probably is 20 years longer than you have been (now watch you come back and say YOU have been doing it for 50 years) I know they vary a lot, but BASED UPON THE ONES I HAVE BEEN ACTIVE WITH in three states (including one in FL) one a month--ASSUMING they are actual potential criminal issues--is a lot. Without seeing what the 47 were about IT SEEMS HIGH. [Because Zimmerman did not make 47 calls in one year, Old-goaT, it's your Kool Aid dispensing MSM source that's telling you he made 47 calls!!!]Dear Lying Bastard, did I say “In one year”? No, I didn’t. I didn’t MEAN “In one year”. I meant “47 total seems like a lot” I’m sorry that you have no experience to think 47 is not a lot, and limited ability to read for comprehension at all but BASED UPON MY EXPERIENCE, 47 seems a lot. Should I clarify? OK I will: 47 seems like a really big humongous lot of calls and either he is remarkably observant seeing things no normal human sees, OR he is a guy who some might call it a little paranoid. There, is that clearer for a simple minded guy like you to understand what I was saying? For comparison, my neighbor in Ohio was a watch captain who worked about three nights a week for the 10 years I lived there. Do you know how many times he called something in? About 1 or 2 a year. How many nights did Z volunteer per week? Anyone know? For how many years? One of our biggest issues in the ones I was in was over zealous watchmen. To me the most telling comment in all this was in the call when Z was told not to engage but he did. [Another clairvoyant, nonjudgmental presumption by Old-goaT, but it's not supported by the known facts.]Dear Mind Control Freak, once again you now say that someone else's experience (mine in this case) is not true because it disagrees with your view of the world. That is exactly the Trotsky view of history: changing history is allowed to support a better good—YOU are saying YOU have the right to redefine MY experiences even though you were not there. YOU are a Communist in everything but title. Papa Joe would have loved your kind and you would have volunteered to bash in the door of any who dared say something you didn’t believe in. All your anti-Communist rhetoric is nothing more than a smoke screen to try and hide what you really are underneath: you are someone who wants to dictate every person’s thought, reprograming thm to only remember and feel what you want them to feel. If you had the technology, you would be the Thought Police, Comrade. You should hurry off to North Korea, you have just the kind of mindset (and stupidity) they look for.

Your posts stand in mute testimony to your pretensions, ignorance and your biases. You've refuted nothing! Whine and deny all you want, but your posts were cited above for all to see you for the lying phony you are, Old-goaT.

[Old-T]

Until you comprehend the difference between opinions stated clearly as opinions, and lies, you are beyond help.

In your case, even after you can tell the difference you are likely beyond help.

You are too ignorant to even understand how stupid you sound when you want to tell people they are lyeing solely because they have a different opinion than you do.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by Old-T

Until you comprehend the difference between opinions stated clearly as opinions, and lies, you are beyond help.

In your case, even after you can tell the difference you are likely beyond help.

You are too ignorant to even understand how stupid you sound when you want to tell people they are lyeing solely because they have a different opinion than you do.

You are too ignorant to understand how stupid you sound when you tell people you are making nonjudgmental observations on a subject as you harangue others for their opinions; it also makes you a liar, Old-goaT, because you are being judgmental even as you protest that you are not.

[Old-T]

I make no qualms about judging YOU. I have read your words (too many, actually) and you are a hateful, bigoted person. Yep, I weighed your words and found you guilty of that. Past that, I really don't care what you think of me.

[Doove]

Originally Posted by joe bloe

When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.

Or it could just be your standard, every-day libertarianism.

When the government fears the people, there is liberty.

And when the people fear the people, there is terrorism.

I fear your type.

[acp5762]

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

What would you do if you wanted America to fail?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZ-4gnNz0vc

First Bankrupt the shit out of it. Make it so the most wealthy and those with the most viable work skills and training can sustain themselves within the main stream. Those that have no real training or specific job skills will be inticed or will have no real choice but to work for the gov't so they can support themselves and their families. Little by little job growth begins to dwindle in the private sector and the Gov't steps in and takes an active part in keeping the economy afloat on their terms.

[joe bloe]

Originally Posted by Doove

Or it could just be your standard, every-day libertarianism.



And when the people fear the people, there is terrorism.

I fear your type.

It doesn't surprise me to hear that you're afraid. My guess is that you're afraid of everyone. Liberals tend to be sniveling cry babies.

Liberals want a big strong government because they feel inadequate to deal with life. Liberals essentially want the social welfare state to take the place of a parent. All this is at the subconscious level of course, but that's where most the important stuff is going on.

[joe bloe]

Originally Posted by acp5762

First Bankrupt the shit out of it. Make it so the most wealthy and those with the most viable work skills and training can sustain themselves within the main stream. Those that have no real training or specific job skills will be inticed or will have no real choice but to work for the gov't so they can support themselves and their families. Little by little job growth begins to dwindle in the private sector and the Gov't steps in and takes an active part in keeping the economy afloat on their terms.

Absolutely correct. Obama apparently pissed away one trillion dollars on the so called stimulous bill. What people don't understand is that from the perspective of the radical left the stimulous bill succeeded. It weakened the private sector by confiscating one trillion dollars. It wasn't Obama's goal to stimulate growth in the private sector by spending money; he was trying to weaken capitalism. The weakening of the private sector is the wind in the sails of the social welfare state.

Obama and the left are motivated by the aquisition of power. The socialists gain power by having as many people as possible dependant on the government. As more people become poor, and unable to provide for themselves, the more likely they are to vote Democrat.

It's the ultimate conflict of interest. Democrats succeed (gain power) by causing the country to fail (become poor). It's like going to a doctor that gets paid more if he makes you sicker.

[i'va biggen]

Originally Posted by joe bloe

Absolutely correct. Obama apparently pissed away one trillion dollars on the so called stimulous bill. What people don't understand is that from the perspective of the radical left the stimulous bill succeeded. It weakened the private sector by confiscating one trillion dollars. It wasn't Obama's goal to stimulate growth in the private sector by spending money; he was trying to weaken capitalism. The weakening of the private sector is the wind in the sails of the social welfare state.

Obama and the left are motivated by the aquisition of power. The socialists gain power by having as many people as possible dependant on the government. As more people become poor, and unable to provide for themselves, the more likely they are to vote Democrat.

It's the ultimate conflict of interest. Democrats succeed (gain power) by causing the country to fail (become poor). It's like going to a doctor that gets paid more if he makes you sicker.

Be sure and ignore TARP that Shrub passed. It had no provisions to be paid back. There is no one as power hungry than a republican either.

[Doove]

Originally Posted by joe bloe

It doesn't surprise me to hear that you're afraid. My guess is that you're afraid of everyone.

No, just the Timothy McVeigh types that permeate this board. And suggesting i find you scary doesn't mean i'm scared. I'm confident enough in the American people to believe that your movement would be squashed like a grape before you got around to blowing up any federal buildings that i might be inside of.

Liberals tend to be sniveling cry babies.

We only appear that way....because we don't act like the cool kids who were smoking in the bathroom, insulting and laughing at the smart kids.

Liberals want a big strong government because they feel inadequate to deal with life. Liberals essentially want the social welfare state to take the place of a parent. All this is at the subconscious level of course, but that's where most the important stuff is going on.

Wow, that's pretty deep.

[acp5762]

Originally Posted by ekim008

Be sure and ignore TARP that Shrub passed. It had no provisions to be paid back. There is no one as power hungry than a republican either.

Pretty soon the mentioning or idea of a Party system eg. Democrat, Republican, Indep. won't mean anything. Obama might be a Democrat, but he's not your average Democrat. What I mean is his vision isn't that of the average American Democrat it's something else. If you put all the Democrats and Republicans in a room together you would certainly have an array of opinions and arguements on various issues. But you would also have one common denominator and that is America and the strength of this nation built upon the principals of Democracy. Obama unfortunately doesn't share that belief with his political peers.

[CuteOldGuy]

We were NOT built on the principles of democracy. The Founders hated democrats, that's why they gave us a representative republic. Democracy is nothing more than the tyranny of the majority. A republic founded on law and basic human rights is what we were given, and what we have destroyed, largely in the name of democracy.