Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Republicans: Making a Comeback?

1343537394056

Posts

  • The Muffin ManThe Muffin Man Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Obs wrote: »
    SyphonBlue wrote: »
    Henroid wrote: »
    I don't know if this was addressed or not, but I just saw Hannity's bullshit regarding the "holy shit the president is getting a burger" news.
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/07/hannity-attacks-obama-for_n_198851.html

    Y'know what's fucking hilarious? A lot of people here in East Texas despise ketchup and like mustard alone on sandwiches.

    I did a headstand when that clip played.
    Isn't dijon mustard one of those thing that's kinda...uh...incredibly common?

    In fact, it's been around for 150 years.

    From Newt Gingrich's twitter
    Callista and I had a great dinner with greta van susteren and her husband john at one of my favorites l'auberge chez francois in great falls
    I'm pretty sure "l'auberge chez francois" is a little bit more "elitist" than gray poupon or whatever the fuck. And neither one is "elitist". When the fuck did being elite become a bad thing, exactly? Was it just when a black guy started doing it?

    When the middle class cried out against the Bush Tax cuts.
    I just knew you'd turn this into a persecution complex somehow.

    And the middle class was crying out because the upper class was getting the tax cuts.
    And it was the upper class crying out about elitism.

    Hmmmmmmm...

    shamanhealingwave.jpgabilitypaladinshieldofv.png
  • SyphonBlueSyphonBlue Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Obs wrote: »
    SyphonBlue wrote: »
    Henroid wrote: »
    I don't know if this was addressed or not, but I just saw Hannity's bullshit regarding the "holy shit the president is getting a burger" news.
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/07/hannity-attacks-obama-for_n_198851.html

    Y'know what's fucking hilarious? A lot of people here in East Texas despise ketchup and like mustard alone on sandwiches.

    I did a headstand when that clip played.
    Isn't dijon mustard one of those thing that's kinda...uh...incredibly common?

    In fact, it's been around for 150 years.

    From Newt Gingrich's twitter
    Callista and I had a great dinner with greta van susteren and her husband john at one of my favorites l'auberge chez francois in great falls

    I'm pretty sure "l'auberge chez francois" is a little bit more "elitist" than gray poupon or whatever the fuck. And neither one is "elitist". When the fuck did being elite become a bad thing, exactly? Was it just when a black guy started doing it?

    When the middle class cried out against the Bush Tax cuts.

    No, try again.

    metroid_sig.jpg
  • ObsObs __BANNED USERS regular
    edited May 2009
    Obs wrote: »
    SyphonBlue wrote: »
    Henroid wrote: »
    I don't know if this was addressed or not, but I just saw Hannity's bullshit regarding the "holy shit the president is getting a burger" news.
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/07/hannity-attacks-obama-for_n_198851.html

    Y'know what's fucking hilarious? A lot of people here in East Texas despise ketchup and like mustard alone on sandwiches.

    I did a headstand when that clip played.
    Isn't dijon mustard one of those thing that's kinda...uh...incredibly common?

    In fact, it's been around for 150 years.

    From Newt Gingrich's twitter
    Callista and I had a great dinner with greta van susteren and her husband john at one of my favorites l'auberge chez francois in great falls
    I'm pretty sure "l'auberge chez francois" is a little bit more "elitist" than gray poupon or whatever the fuck. And neither one is "elitist". When the fuck did being elite become a bad thing, exactly? Was it just when a black guy started doing it?

    When the middle class cried out against the Bush Tax cuts.
    I just knew you'd turn this into a persecution complex somehow.

    And the middle class was crying out because the upper class was getting the tax cuts.
    And it was the upper class crying out about elitism.

    Hmmmmmmm...

    I don't know what you're getting at, but the elitism meme was originally invented by the liberal left, briefly used by the Republicans as a backhand attack.

    spacer.png
    spacer.png
    Obs.gif
  • wwtMaskwwtMask Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Obs wrote: »
    I don't know what you're getting at, but the elitism meme was originally invented by the liberal left, briefly used by the Republicans as a backhand attack.

    When the hell was this? A hundred years ago?

    When he dies, I hope they write "Worst Affirmative Action Hire, EVER" on his grave. His corpse should be trolled.
    Twitter - @liberaltruths | Google+ - http://gplus.to/wwtMask | Occupy Tallahassee
  • DuffelDuffel Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Accusing your opponent of being "elitist" is as old as politics. It just means they're not in touch with the wants and needs of the common people (IE, you, the audience). It wasn't invented by any political party in the US and it sure as hell wasn't invented in the last ten years.

  • kildykildy Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    wwtMask wrote: »
    Obs wrote: »
    I don't know what you're getting at, but the elitism meme was originally invented by the liberal left, briefly used by the Republicans as a backhand attack.

    When the hell was this? A hundred years ago?

    Back when they were talking about actual rich white landowners who got to decide everything ;)

  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    wwtMask wrote: »
    Obs wrote: »
    I don't know what you're getting at, but the elitism meme was originally invented by the liberal left, briefly used by the Republicans as a backhand attack.

    When the hell was this? A hundred years ago?

    Seriously. "Latte-sipping liberal" has been around forever.

  • iTunesIsEviliTunesIsEvil Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    wwtMask wrote: »
    Obs wrote: »
    I don't know what you're getting at, but the elitism meme was originally invented by the liberal left, briefly used by the Republicans as a backhand attack.

    When the hell was this? A hundred years ago?
    I'd love to see some articles or quotes or something regarding this. Where some large, vocal portion of the "left" used elitism in this way.

  • kildykildy Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Duffel wrote: »
    Accusing your opponent of being "elitist" is as old as politics. It just means they're not in touch with the wants and needs of the common people (IE, you, the audience). It wasn't invented by any political party in the US and it sure as hell wasn't invented in the last ten years.

    This. It's a reference to aristocracy if anything. And it's now just an attempt to paint someone as thinking they're better than you and you aren't going to take that from THEM, are you?

    Last year was about how elitist it was to know the name of a form of lettuce and drinking freaking starbucks. The attack has lost all meaning and is just mindlessly playing to people who already hate whoever you're talking about.

  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Duffel wrote: »
    Accusing your opponent of being "elitist" is as old as politics. It just means they're not in touch with the wants and needs of the common people (IE, you, the audience). It wasn't invented by any political party in the US and it sure as hell wasn't invented in the last ten years.

    The latest food related crap is the stupidest form of it since the hard cider political cartoons. Unless Obama routinely dines on caviar and truffles, using what he eats as evidence of supposed elitism is just stupid.

  • Dr Mario KartDr Mario Kart Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Archgarth wrote: »
    Maybe the Obama government would actually welcome investigations into Bushco's actions, and by releasing one piece of damning evidence at a time they continue to build public support into investigations.
    I'm really struggling to discern Obama's real position on the matter.

    Normally presidents dont pursue crimes of the previous administration. I suspect in the short term they are concerned about the divisiveness created as well as their own re-election.

    However in doing so, for whatever reasons they have, they are ignoring the long term. It is critical that people be held accountable for torture, not just because we are in violation of the Conventions against Torture, but because it guarantees that at some point such crimes will happen again.

    I suspect that Obama wants to in secret, but is doing the politically expedient thing. In that case, this slowly building of public support may be a good strategy, although it is pissing off progressives who want justice sooner rather than later.

  • SyphonBlueSyphonBlue Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    See, I didn't remember hearing anything about elitism before this election, so this is all good to know.

    metroid_sig.jpg
  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    The irony of the GOP trying to be the populists is just hilarious though

    They've barely even pretended to represent anyone but the rich and powerful for a good 20 years.

  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    SyphonBlue wrote: »
    See, I didn't remember hearing anything about elitism before this election, so this is all good to know.

    johnkerrywindsurf.jpg

    ?

    Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
    Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
  • ObsObs __BANNED USERS regular
    edited May 2009
    Archgarth wrote: »
    Maybe the Obama government would actually welcome investigations into Bushco's actions, and by releasing one piece of damning evidence at a time they continue to build public support into investigations.
    I'm really struggling to discern Obama's real position on the matter.

    Normally presidents dont pursue crimes of the previous administration. I suspect in the short term they are concerned about the divisiveness created as well as their own re-election.

    However in doing so, for whatever reasons they have, they are ignoring the long term. It is critical that people be held accountable for torture, not just because we are in violation of the Conventions against Torture, but because it guarantees that at some point such crimes will happen again.

    I suspect that Obama wants to in secret, but is doing the politically expedient thing. In that case, this slowly building of public support may be a good strategy, although it is pissing off progressives who want justice sooner rather than later.

    I really hope Obama doesn't pursue investigation of "crimes" of a previous administration. It's petty at best, and brings up a lot of bad blood.

    America just needs to let it go already. It happened, it's done. It can't be undone. So some guys that probably deserved to get tortured got "tortured". OK, so what? It won't happen again right?

    Good.

    It's time to look forward, not back.

    spacer.png
    spacer.png
    Obs.gif
  • SyphonBlueSyphonBlue Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    SyphonBlue wrote: »
    See, I didn't remember hearing anything about elitism before this election, so this is all good to know.

    [IM G]http://images.politico.com/global/blogs/johnkerrywindsurf.jpg[/IMG]

    ?

    Yeah I didn't really pay much attention to political news/blogs for that election. All I cared about was that Bush lost.

    metroid_sig.jpg
  • Dr Mario KartDr Mario Kart Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    We need to end the long standing precedent of Presidents and their people being above the law.

  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Obs wrote: »
    Archgarth wrote: »
    Maybe the Obama government would actually welcome investigations into Bushco's actions, and by releasing one piece of damning evidence at a time they continue to build public support into investigations.
    I'm really struggling to discern Obama's real position on the matter.

    Normally presidents dont pursue crimes of the previous administration. I suspect in the short term they are concerned about the divisiveness created as well as their own re-election.

    However in doing so, for whatever reasons they have, they are ignoring the long term. It is critical that people be held accountable for torture, not just because we are in violation of the Conventions against Torture, but because it guarantees that at some point such crimes will happen again.

    I suspect that Obama wants to in secret, but is doing the politically expedient thing. In that case, this slowly building of public support may be a good strategy, although it is pissing off progressives who want justice sooner rather than later.

    I really hope Obama doesn't pursue investigation of "crimes" of a previous administration. It's petty at best, and brings up a lot of bad blood.

    America just needs to let it go already. It happened, it's done. It can't be undone. So some guys that probably deserved to get tortured got "tortured". OK, so what? It won't happen again right?

    Good.

    It's time to look forward, not back.

    Guess what, genius. North Koreans are justifying their treatment of Americans by citing Guantanamo. It's a very real problem, even ignoring all your bullshit quotation marks that you should be embarrassed by.

    Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
    Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
  • SyphonBlueSyphonBlue Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Obs wrote: »
    Archgarth wrote: »
    Maybe the Obama government would actually welcome investigations into Bushco's actions, and by releasing one piece of damning evidence at a time they continue to build public support into investigations.
    I'm really struggling to discern Obama's real position on the matter.

    Normally presidents dont pursue crimes of the previous administration. I suspect in the short term they are concerned about the divisiveness created as well as their own re-election.

    However in doing so, for whatever reasons they have, they are ignoring the long term. It is critical that people be held accountable for torture, not just because we are in violation of the Conventions against Torture, but because it guarantees that at some point such crimes will happen again.

    I suspect that Obama wants to in secret, but is doing the politically expedient thing. In that case, this slowly building of public support may be a good strategy, although it is pissing off progressives who want justice sooner rather than later.

    I really hope Obama doesn't pursue investigation of "crimes" of a previous administration. It's petty at best, and brings up a lot of bad blood.

    America just needs to let it go already. It happened, it's done. It can't be undone. So some guys that probably deserved to get tortured got "tortured". OK, so what? It won't happen again right?

    Good.

    It's time to look forward, not back.

    So, "what" you're "saying" is, that "I" can "go" "kill" a man and "then" use "the" defense "that" "It happened "yesterday", I should "be" "exonerated" today"?

    metroid_sig.jpg
  • QuidQuid The Fifth Horseman Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Obs wrote: »
    So some guys that probably deserved to get tortured got "tortured". OK, so what?
    Because torture is, under every metric, wrong. And I see fuck all proof any of them deserved it since they haven't gotten so much as a trial.

    So yeah, the problem is people committing crimes and not punishing them for it.

    PSN: allenquid
  • mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Obs wrote: »
    I really hope Obama doesn't pursue investigation of "crimes" of a previous administration. It's petty at best, and brings up a lot of bad blood.

    I like how you put crimes in quotes. That suggests objectivity right off the bat.
    America just needs to let it go already. It happened, it's done. It can't be undone. So some guys that probably deserved to get tortured got "tortured". OK, so what? It won't happen again right?

    Good.

    It's time to look forward, not back.

    Is it just these crimes you feel that way about? Is there any limit to this philosophy? Like, I don't know, if we had found an entire sub-basement filled with the severed heads of interns, would prosecuting that be petty as well? It's done, can't be undone, and probably isn't going to happen again...right? Time to look forward, and not back, and all that.

    And why, exactly, do you think it won't happen again? Absent a precedent for such acts being prosecuted, why exactly wouldn't it happen again? Sure, some here might be willing to assume Obama won't do the same...but that only covers the next 4-8 years.

    We need to end the long standing precedent of Presidents and their people being above the law.

  • FencingsaxFencingsax Bondage Discipline Spider-Man Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Obs wrote: »
    Archgarth wrote: »
    Maybe the Obama government would actually welcome investigations into Bushco's actions, and by releasing one piece of damning evidence at a time they continue to build public support into investigations.
    I'm really struggling to discern Obama's real position on the matter.

    Normally presidents dont pursue crimes of the previous administration. I suspect in the short term they are concerned about the divisiveness created as well as their own re-election.

    However in doing so, for whatever reasons they have, they are ignoring the long term. It is critical that people be held accountable for torture, not just because we are in violation of the Conventions against Torture, but because it guarantees that at some point such crimes will happen again.

    I suspect that Obama wants to in secret, but is doing the politically expedient thing. In that case, this slowly building of public support may be a good strategy, although it is pissing off progressives who want justice sooner rather than later.

    I really hope Obama doesn't pursue investigation of "crimes" of a previous administration. It's petty at best, and brings up a lot of bad blood.

    America just needs to let it go already. It happened, it's done. It can't be undone. So some guys that probably deserved to get tortured got "tortured". OK, so what? It won't happen again right?

    Good.

    It's time to look forward, not back.
    No one deserves to be tortured. This is the kind of thinking that causes these crimes to begin with. And yes, they are crimes, they're against the law. The problem, of course, is that while we do need to deal with things happening now, we also can't treat any administration as if they're above the law.

    It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it
  • ObsObs __BANNED USERS regular
    edited May 2009
    And what message will it send when they fail to convict anyone in the Bush Administration for anything?

    spacer.png
    spacer.png
    Obs.gif
  • iTunesIsEviliTunesIsEvil Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Obs wrote: »
    I really hope Obama doesn't pursue investigation of "crimes" of a previous administration. It's petty at best, and brings up a lot of bad blood.

    America just needs to let it go already. It happened, it's done. It can't be undone. So some guys that probably deserved to get tortured got "tortured". OK, so what? It won't happen again right?

    Good.

    It's time to look forward, not back.
    Thats not the way it works Obs. If you were robbed/mugged/assaulted I doubt you'd be playing the same fucking tune if the police told you "It happened, it's done. It can't be undone."

    You kind of seem like a shitty person who has no empathy toward anyone's situation outside of your own. I think that's the right word. You don't give a shit unless it happens to you. You can't even imagine what it's like in someone else's shoes.

  • mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Obs wrote: »
    And what message will it send when they fail to convict anyone in the Bush Administration for anything?

    That either A) they were innocent or B) there was inadequate evidence to convict.

    Any other stupid questions?

    EDIT: Explain, if you will, how this is any worse than "we won't even bother to charge you for crimes committed while in office. Go wild!"

    EDIT: Well, unless those crimes involve a blowjob.

  • KalTorakKalTorak Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Yeah, in whose mind does anyone deserve to be tortured?

  • kildykildy Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Obs wrote: »
    I really hope Obama doesn't pursue investigation of "crimes" of a previous administration. It's petty at best, and brings up a lot of bad blood.

    America just needs to let it go already. It happened, it's done. It can't be undone. So some guys that probably deserved to get tortured got "tortured". OK, so what? It won't happen again right?

    Good.

    It's time to look forward, not back.

    I'm looking forward to the trial, if that counts.

    Some innocent people were tortured, and a lot of people in the know knew it was illegal, unethical, and producing no results. So the only option left is sadism?

    Murder can't be undone, but you can punish the guilty. Unless you're arguing that crimes should not be punished unless the punishment can put everything back? So theft is a crime, but murder is cool?

  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Obs wrote: »
    I really hope Obama doesn't pursue investigation of "crimes" of a previous administration. It's petty at best, and brings up a lot of bad blood.

    America just needs to let it go already. It happened, it's done. It can't be undone. So some guys that probably deserved to get tortured got "tortured". OK, so what? It won't happen again right?

    Good.

    It's time to look forward, not back.
    Thats not the way it works Obs. If you were robbed/mugged/assaulted I doubt you'd be playing the same fucking tune if the police told you "It happened, it's done. It can't be undone."

    You kind of seem like a shitty person who has no empathy toward anyone's situation outside of your own. I think that's the right word. You don't give a shit unless it happens to you. You can't even imagine what it's like in someone else's shoes.

    But empathy is evil!

    /conservative commentator'd

    Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
    Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
  • SyphonBlueSyphonBlue Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Obs wrote: »
    And what message will it send when they fail to convict anyone in the Bush Administration for anything?

    So, "because" the trial "might" not "succeed", we shouldn't "even" bother "trying"?

    Well, shit. let's just get rid of the entire court system! After all, no trial is a guarantee! We need to make a new judicial system! One where every trial is 100% guaranteed to win!

    You're a fucking genius!

    metroid_sig.jpg
  • kildykildy Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Obs wrote: »
    And what message will it send when they fail to convict anyone in the Bush Administration for anything?

    That none of them directly violated any laws, and our legal system has had a chance to do it's job.

  • TachTach Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Obs wrote: »
    Archgarth wrote: »
    Maybe the Obama government would actually welcome investigations into Bushco's actions, and by releasing one piece of damning evidence at a time they continue to build public support into investigations.
    I'm really struggling to discern Obama's real position on the matter.

    Normally presidents dont pursue crimes of the previous administration. I suspect in the short term they are concerned about the divisiveness created as well as their own re-election.

    However in doing so, for whatever reasons they have, they are ignoring the long term. It is critical that people be held accountable for torture, not just because we are in violation of the Conventions against Torture, but because it guarantees that at some point such crimes will happen again.

    I suspect that Obama wants to in secret, but is doing the politically expedient thing. In that case, this slowly building of public support may be a good strategy, although it is pissing off progressives who want justice sooner rather than later.

    I really hope Obama doesn't pursue investigation of "crimes" of a previous administration. It's petty at best, and brings up a lot of bad blood.

    America just needs to let it go already. It happened, it's done. It can't be undone. So some guys that probably deserved to get tortured got "tortured". OK, so what? It won't happen again right?

    Good.

    It's time to look forward, not back.
    Yeah, because no one should ever be held accountable for breaking the law.

    That's basically what you're advocating.

    And who the hell are you to decide who deserves to get torutured and who doesn't?

    BNsig.jpg
  • ObsObs __BANNED USERS regular
    edited May 2009
    Obs wrote: »
    I really hope Obama doesn't pursue investigation of "crimes" of a previous administration. It's petty at best, and brings up a lot of bad blood.

    America just needs to let it go already. It happened, it's done. It can't be undone. So some guys that probably deserved to get tortured got "tortured". OK, so what? It won't happen again right?

    Good.

    It's time to look forward, not back.
    Thats not the way it works Obs. If you were robbed/mugged/assaulted I doubt you'd be playing the same fucking tune if the police told you "It happened, it's done. It can't be undone."

    You kind of seem like a shitty person who has no empathy toward anyone's situation outside of your own. I think that's the right word. You don't give a shit unless it happens to you. You can't even imagine what it's like in someone else's shoes.

    Wrong analogy.

    The situation is more like "Someone robbed me, and the next day I found the dude and slit his throat, ending his life" and then I'm getting accused of the crime by my friends.

    Did I commit a crime? Sure.

    In the context of the situation though, is it really the worst thing ever? Not really.

    spacer.png
    spacer.png
    Obs.gif
  • wwtMaskwwtMask Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Obs wrote: »
    And what message will it send when they fail to convict anyone in the Bush Administration for anything?

    If they fail to do so (and that's highly unlikely; someone's going to take the fall for it if trials happen), then I'll be happy. Because that's the way shit is supposed to work. I don't see why it's so terrible to require that everyone be subject to the law.

    When he dies, I hope they write "Worst Affirmative Action Hire, EVER" on his grave. His corpse should be trolled.
    Twitter - @liberaltruths | Google+ - http://gplus.to/wwtMask | Occupy Tallahassee
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    The situation is more like "Someone robbed me, and the next day I found the dude and slit his throat, ending his life" and then I'm getting accused of the crime by my friends.

    Did I commit a crime? Sure.

    In the context of the situation though, is it really the worst thing ever? Not really.
    What the fuck is wrong with you? Slitting a guy's throat for robbing you instead of calling the police and getting him arrested in a legal fashion is just fucking insane.

  • SyphonBlueSyphonBlue Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Obs wrote: »
    Obs wrote: »
    I really hope Obama doesn't pursue investigation of "crimes" of a previous administration. It's petty at best, and brings up a lot of bad blood.

    America just needs to let it go already. It happened, it's done. It can't be undone. So some guys that probably deserved to get tortured got "tortured". OK, so what? It won't happen again right?

    Good.

    It's time to look forward, not back.
    Thats not the way it works Obs. If you were robbed/mugged/assaulted I doubt you'd be playing the same fucking tune if the police told you "It happened, it's done. It can't be undone."

    You kind of seem like a shitty person who has no empathy toward anyone's situation outside of your own. I think that's the right word. You don't give a shit unless it happens to you. You can't even imagine what it's like in someone else's shoes.

    Wrong analogy.

    The situation is more like "Someone robbed me, and the next day I found the dude and slit his throat, ending his life" and then I'm getting accused of the crime by my friends.

    Did I commit a crime? Sure.

    In the context of the situation though, is it really the worst thing ever? Not really.

    Your solution to a robbery is to slit the guy's throat and THAT ISN'T THE WORST THING EVER?!

    Congratulations, you've officially lost any semblance of reality. You'll find your membership card and free room down the hall to your left, have a nice day.

    metroid_sig.jpg
  • wwtMaskwwtMask Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Obs wrote: »
    Obs wrote: »
    I really hope Obama doesn't pursue investigation of "crimes" of a previous administration. It's petty at best, and brings up a lot of bad blood.

    America just needs to let it go already. It happened, it's done. It can't be undone. So some guys that probably deserved to get tortured got "tortured". OK, so what? It won't happen again right?

    Good.

    It's time to look forward, not back.
    Thats not the way it works Obs. If you were robbed/mugged/assaulted I doubt you'd be playing the same fucking tune if the police told you "It happened, it's done. It can't be undone."

    You kind of seem like a shitty person who has no empathy toward anyone's situation outside of your own. I think that's the right word. You don't give a shit unless it happens to you. You can't even imagine what it's like in someone else's shoes.

    Wrong analogy.

    The situation is more like "Someone robbed me, and the next day I found the dude and slit his throat, ending his life" and then I'm getting accused of the crime by my friends.

    Did I commit a crime? Sure.

    In the context of the situation though, is it really the worst thing ever? Not really.

    Oh, I get it now: you're a terrible person. Glad to get that settled in my mind.

    When he dies, I hope they write "Worst Affirmative Action Hire, EVER" on his grave. His corpse should be trolled.
    Twitter - @liberaltruths | Google+ - http://gplus.to/wwtMask | Occupy Tallahassee
  • mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Obs wrote: »
    Wrong analogy.

    The situation is more like "Someone robbed me, and the next day I found the dude and slit his throat, ending his life" and then I'm getting accused of the crime by my friends.

    Did I commit a crime? Sure.

    In the context of the situation though, is it really the worst thing ever? Not really.

    Bwuh?

    I assume the guy who robbed you is the dude getting waterboarded in Gitmo?

    So we can assume 100% of those dudes were guilty, now?

    Also, friend or no, if I found out you had slit some guy's throat who robbed you, I'd have no problem seeing you charged and convicted, then off to prison. Because it sounds like you'd be a violent sociopath.

    EDIT: Put me on the "Obs sounds like a terrible person" bandwagon. Also, I'll go ahead and risk the infraction by asking why the hell this guy is even around here anymore.

    EDIT: I actually had the housekeeping staff of the hotel I stayed in this weekend try to steal from me. Guess I should sharpen up the ol' blade and head back down to Bozeman, m i rite?

  • ObsObs __BANNED USERS regular
    edited May 2009
    Couscous wrote: »
    The situation is more like "Someone robbed me, and the next day I found the dude and slit his throat, ending his life" and then I'm getting accused of the crime by my friends.

    Did I commit a crime? Sure.

    In the context of the situation though, is it really the worst thing ever? Not really.
    What the fuck is wrong with you? Slitting a guy's throat for robbing you instead of calling the police and getting him arrested in a legal fashion is just fucking insane.

    Actually, that analogy was a bit flawed too. The throat slitting was a bit much.

    Replace the throat slitting with "beat the shit out of and interrogated for my money, but left the dude alive", and it's now more understandable.

    spacer.png
    spacer.png
    Obs.gif
  • oldmankenoldmanken Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Why are you guys addressing Obs' statements? How many thread will it take to learn?

  • kildykildy Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Obs wrote: »
    Wrong analogy.

    The situation is more like "Someone robbed me, and the next day I found the dude and slit his throat, ending his life" and then I'm getting accused of the crime by my friends.

    Did I commit a crime? Sure.

    In the context of the situation though, is it really the worst thing ever? Not really.

    If someone robbed you and as a response you murdered him?

    Yeah, that's kind of in the realm of "worst thing ever"

    Especially when they go "uh, dude? That isn't the guy who robbed you. That was his roommate."

This discussion has been closed.