Behind the Obama Agenda
-
Christian Graus wrote:
I watch literally zero TV. I read almost no news. What is sustaining my mindset, code project ? Is Chris in the Illuminati ?
That is your number one problem. You are ignorant.
Christian Graus wrote:
Again, any proof for any of this, or are you just repeating stuff you read on websites with no actual proof or reason to know it's true ?
You have a very constrained thought process. You think on rigid guidelines set by the society you live in.
You should ask me for all your ongoing conspiracy needs. I can see the future. Prediction 1: you will not answer any of the questions raised here Prediction 2: you'll start another thread like this by posting another link to the stuff that you accept without question, and will once again call people various farming implements while refusing to address their comments and questions.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.
-
CaptainSeeSarp wrote:
That is your number one problem. You are ignorant.
So, if I watched the news, 'they' would be using that to control me. Because I don't watch TV, I am ignorant ? See how, no matter what I say, it feeds your agenda, which is that you're better than me because you buy into stuff that no intelligent person would accept without some form of proof ? Proof being the thing I keep asking you for.
CaptainSeeSarp wrote:
You have a very constrained thought process. You think on rigid guidelines set by the society you live in.
You are correct. Like most members of society, I don't believe anything just because people say it, or write it on the web. I ask people to prove it.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.
Christian Graus wrote:
stuff that no intelligent person would accept without some form of proof ?
Only an ignorant fool would say that, you are hopeless.
-
Christian Graus wrote:
stuff that no intelligent person would accept without some form of proof ?
Only an ignorant fool would say that, you are hopeless.
Wow, you came back, to post that ? More drivel ?
CaptainSeeSarp wrote:
Christian Graus wrote: stuff that no intelligent person would accept without some form of proof ? Only an ignorant fool would say that, you are hopeless.
I'm ignorant because I don't believe stuff that is offered to me with no shred of proof ? You really have no idea about life, do you ?
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.
-
Christian Graus wrote:
So, if I watched the news, 'they' would be using that to control me. Because I don't watch TV, I am ignorant ?
Yeah. See, you need to watch a lot of TV. While under the influence of powerful hallucinogens (to "open your mind"). Then you'll quickly see the master plan laid bare before you. FWIW, CSS has it terribly wrong - the goal of the plot is actually to place control of The World's economy under the iron paw of Henry Kissinger's cat, Mr. Skittles. Obviously, the good Cap'n is using the wrong sort of drugs. No matter - we will all soon tremble before His Unblinking Wiskered Gaze...
----
You're right. These facts that you've laid out totally contradict the wild ramblings that I pulled off the back of cornflakes packets.
:omg: I suddenly feel an urge to send lots of canned tuna to somebody named Skittles, except that I don't know his address! Oh, wait a minute, I feel as if I'm remembering some numbers, and a street name... I need a pencil, quick, and a pad of paper, and a box, and some stamps. Oh drat - I can't see the TV from in here and it's making me crazy. I've gotta go... to the post office for some strange reason. Now why did I just think of that? Gotta run.
"A Journey of a Thousand Rest Stops Begins with a Single Movement"
-
Christian Graus wrote:
You are an ignorant dickhead.
My attitude may be blunt on issues like this but you know I am not ignorant.
Christian Graus wrote:
shows that you're just another mindless person allowing other people to define their opinions and their views
There is a lot in this that seems accurate considering we have know idea what having power feels like. You probably have a sense of control and some power over situations, you don't know what real power feels like. It is these organizations that gained most of its power though the banking system that they lobbied for which allows them to fund political lobbyists and political candidates. They want to globalize all nations by grouping them into superstates (UN, EU) which then groups into the topmost layer which is under control by a very small group of elite people. They simplify things by organizing all the nations with layers of authorities. At the top most layer they can control broad worldwide control.
CaptainSeeSarp wrote:
They want to globalize all nations by grouping them into superstates (UN, EU) which then groups into the topmost layer which is under control by a very small group of elite people. They simplify things by organizing all the nations with layers of authorities. At the top most layer they can control broad worldwide control.
And one of their apparently stated goals is rule by an intellectual elite, so I'm not worried. If fact I look forward to it.
-
If you're so self-conscious that you, unlike Obama, feel the need to waste your ostensibly precious time refuting utterly stupid accusations, then I'm going to go right ahead and call you a sexual deviant and claim that your children aren't actually yours, but fascist robots from beyond the moon. Refute _that_, Stancifer Satanist. Seriously, nothing short of seeing Ronald Reagan's bloated corpse force its way out of Obama's mouth and singlehandedly conquer Islam would make you view the man in a positive light.
- F
Fisticuffs wrote:
refuting utterly stupid accusations
Because they are not stupid accusations. They are very real, legitimate and troublesome accusatons.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
I would challange you to indicate how they could possibly be overstated.
Almost any of your posts regarding the man will do as an example. Your paranoia colors everything you write about Obama.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
Oakman wrote:
Almost any of your posts regarding the man will do as an example. Your paranoia colors everything you write about Obama.
I not paranoid about Obama in the least. I am confident that he is intelligent enough to understand that he cannot govern effectively as an overt radical leftist. What I am paranoid about is an American public who would be so entusiastic about him. Obama has associations as radical and unsavory as any that David Duke would bring to the oval office. If Bill Ayers had been bombing black churches in the South in the 1960s rather than government institutions, there is no doubt at all that any one associated with him would have damn sure been guilty by association. He is just as vile and dispicalbe as those who were doing that, and any one who willingly sought him out as any kind of political or social ally is culpable for promotion of those principles. The notion that he is not seen in that same light is very troublesome and does not bode well for the future of this country.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
But there are damned few of us who consider her to be any more than a mainstream conservative, and unapologetically so
You prove my point, by ignoring the claims made for her that turned out to be untrue. Perhaps you can claim that her Neaderthalic religious beliefs are conservative as long as you accept the hijacking of the conservative movement by the christofacists, but you reveal your blindspots when you claim that they represent mainstream America. Most assuredly you deny the rockstar status created for her by the right-wing radio talkers. She has a lot going for and I don't mean to dismiss her. She is definitely a force to be reckoned with and I admire her self-possesion. But to claim that no part of her appeal is due to her charisma is mostly, I suspect, arguing with me because I pointed out something you missed.
Stan Shannon wrote:
including Washington, FDR and Reagan
Neither you nor I was around for two out of the three of those guys. We have only other people's word for how much in the thrall of those leaders, the American public was. Unless, of course, you're channeling Edgar Cayce.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
Oakman wrote:
You prove my point, by ignoring the claims made for her that turned out to be untrue. Perhaps you can claim that her Neaderthalic religious beliefs are conservative as long as you accept the hijacking of the conservative movement by the christofacists, but you reveal your blindspots when you claim that they represent mainstream America. Most assuredly you deny the rockstar status created for her by the right-wing radio talkers.
Her religion is perfectly mainstream. There is nothing radical or troublesome about it at all.
Oakman wrote:
She has a lot going for and I don't mean to dismiss her. She is definitely a force to be reckoned with and I admire her self-possesion. But to claim that no part of her appeal is due to her charisma is mostly, I suspect, arguing with me because I pointed out something you missed.
I don't find her to be any more charismatic than Hillary Clinton is. Both have a tendency to beomce shrill when delivering otherwise affective speeches.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
Oakman wrote:
Almost any of your posts regarding the man will do as an example. Your paranoia colors everything you write about Obama.
I not paranoid about Obama in the least. I am confident that he is intelligent enough to understand that he cannot govern effectively as an overt radical leftist. What I am paranoid about is an American public who would be so entusiastic about him. Obama has associations as radical and unsavory as any that David Duke would bring to the oval office. If Bill Ayers had been bombing black churches in the South in the 1960s rather than government institutions, there is no doubt at all that any one associated with him would have damn sure been guilty by association. He is just as vile and dispicalbe as those who were doing that, and any one who willingly sought him out as any kind of political or social ally is culpable for promotion of those principles. The notion that he is not seen in that same light is very troublesome and does not bode well for the future of this country.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
"In a time when America is facing real challenges, Republicans should be working to help the incoming President succeed in meeting them, regardless of his Party. From now until the inaugural, Republicans should be offering to help the President-elect prepare to take office. Furthermore, once President Obama takes office, Republicans should be eager to work with him when he is right, and, when he is wrong, offer a better solution, instead of just opposing him. This is the only way the Republican Party will become known as the "better solutions" party, not just an opposition party. And this is the only way Republicans will ever regain the trust of the voters to return to the majority." ~ Newt Gingrich
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
"In a time when America is facing real challenges, Republicans should be working to help the incoming President succeed in meeting them, regardless of his Party. From now until the inaugural, Republicans should be offering to help the President-elect prepare to take office. Furthermore, once President Obama takes office, Republicans should be eager to work with him when he is right, and, when he is wrong, offer a better solution, instead of just opposing him. This is the only way the Republican Party will become known as the "better solutions" party, not just an opposition party. And this is the only way Republicans will ever regain the trust of the voters to return to the majority." ~ Newt Gingrich
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
Republicans can do whatever they please. Conservatives should continue to promote an entirely, now radical, alternative set of solutions. They should oppose Obama just as they are now opposing Bush. Conservatism offers the only set of principles which have any hope of success. Those principles should be staunchly defended, not abandoned in some futile effort to assist with the implementation of principles which have no hope of success at all.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.