Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

dogma wrote:The 'that's your opinion' defense is just one step short of 'if you disagree, you aren't patriotic'.

IIRC, dissent was patriotic when the Bush was prez.

As I understand things now, the Dems have flip-flopped on that statement...

... as one would expect from Obama and his people.

You missed the point, fairly hard. Thing is just throwing your opinion out there and saying it's my opinion* is exactly as weak as saying 'if you disagree with me you're unpatriotic'.

And for the record, dissent is always good. A healthy democracy benefits from challenges to its leaders and debate about their policies. There should be challenges and discussion over Obama's platform, unfortunately right now the US is relying on the Republicans for that dissent, because they're doing a really bad job of it.




*After reading his later posts I'm not sure that's exactly what Wrexasaur was trying to do, but that's certainly how it read at first.

Wrexasaur wrote:
Except not, because you are completely entitled to your opinion and you can talk all the smack you want as long as you don't drag me into some endless argument. I simply do not care for it.

I don't think we are operating under the same definition of argument.

Wrexasaur wrote:
All media is skewed, and as I said earlier I simply do not have the time to form an independent opinion about everything. Please do comment, just refrain from being like, "Well Wrexasaur is a liberal douche-bag for putting these links up". I have a lot of doubts about anything said by the media nowadays, none of it seems to be impartial, and it looks like a never ending poop-flinging war. This is what I am trying to avoid bringing here.

Ah, you want to avoid a flame war.

Flaming poop never did anyone a lick of good .

sebster wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:

dogma wrote:The 'that's your opinion' defense is just one step short of 'if you disagree, you aren't patriotic'.

IIRC, dissent was patriotic when the Bush was prez.

As I understand things now, the Dems have flip-flopped on that statement...

... as one would expect from Obama and his people.

You missed the point, fairly hard.

No, I was making a different point, which is that the Dems suck.

JohnHwangDD wrote:
No, I was making a different point, which is that the Dems suck.

Because, like all political parties, they actively attempt to influence the electorate through the use of rhetoric?

Would it make you happy if any position taken by a Democrat opened with the line: "Before beginning, I would like to take a moment in order to honor my Republican opposition in their proud, patriotic dissent."?

JohnHwangDD wrote:No, I was making a different point, which is that the Dems suck.

So which Democrats have come out and said it's wrong to criticise the President?

@sebster:

http://www.google.com/#hl=en&q=dissent+no+longer+patriotic&btnG=Google+Search&fp=2wYjQBN9KRQ

Search for yourself
____

Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) wrote:
“It appears that the Republican Party leadership in the Congress has made a decision that they want to deny President Obama success, which means, in my mind, they are rooting against the country, as well,”

What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

JohnHwangDD wrote:@sebster:

http://www.google.com/#hl=en&q=dissent+no+longer+patriotic&btnG=Google+Search&fp=2wYjQBN9KRQ

Search for yourself
____

Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) wrote:
“It appears that the Republican Party leadership in the Congress has made a decision that they want to deny President Obama success, which means, in my mind, they are rooting against the country, as well,”

Waxman was accusing the GOP of opposing every Democrat move simply out of spite, willingly blocking regulations that were good for the country simply to stop the Democrats scoring a success. This is not a subtle difference to the accusation that any dissent is unpatriotic.

It sounds identical to me.

Oh wait, wasn't this supposed to be about China?

Kilkrazy wrote:What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

Now I'm hungry.

Same. I am rectifying that with meat loaf.

I got snax in my belly right now!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

sebster wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:@sebster:

http://www.google.com/#hl=en&q=dissent+no+longer+patriotic&btnG=Google+Search&fp=2wYjQBN9KRQ

Search for yourself
____

Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) wrote:
“It appears that the Republican Party leadership in the Congress has made a decision that they want to deny President Obama success, which means, in my mind, they are rooting against the country, as well,”

Waxman was accusing the GOP of opposing every Democrat move simply out of spite, willingly blocking regulations that were good for the country simply to stop the Democrats scoring a success. This is not a subtle difference to the accusation that any dissent is unpatriotic.

I'm sorry, didn't the Dems campaign that Obama was going to cut deficits in half when elected, but is now on course to at least double our deficit?

If you can explain how profligate spending is "good for the country" and a deficit that rivals the annual GDP is "scoring a success", then I guess you're a better debater than I.

Besides, it's not like anybody's calling for Obama to "follow in the steps of Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley and Kennedy!"...

"When the facts change, I change my mind."

Flip-Flopper!

JohnHwangDD wrote:
I'm sorry, didn't the Dems campaign that Obama was going to cut deficits in half when elected, but is now on course to at least double our deficit?

I don't remember that promise. I remember them stating that he was going to reduce the deficit within his first term, but that was long before the TARP and its associated spending packages. Were you thinking of this? Because, you know, that wasn't during the campaign.

JohnHwangDD wrote:
If you can explain how profligate spending is "good for the country" and a deficit that rivals the annual GDP is "scoring a success", then I guess you're a better debater than I.

Do we really need to go through Keynesian economic theory again?

Incidentally, you don't know how to debate. You take emotional pot-shots with the intent of dragging others down to the level of reactionary vendetta.

JohnHwangDD wrote:@sebster:

http://www.google.com/#hl=en&q=dissent+no+longer+patriotic&btnG=Google+Search&fp=2wYjQBN9KRQ

Search for yourself
____

Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) wrote:
“It appears that the Republican Party leadership in the Congress has made a decision that they want to deny President Obama success, which means, in my mind, they are rooting against the country, as well,”

How is this different from all the noise made about Daschle "undermining the troops" by criticizing Bush's diplomatic skill?

The problem with you, dogma, is that you think that Dakka OT is supposed to have actual, formal debate whereas I see Dakka as pure entertainment. If it's not amusing, it's not interesting to me.

You find hackneyed attempts at political humor amusing?

Seriously, I don't particularly want this place to be about formal debate, but I'd also like it to stay at least a few steps above 4chan, or a CNN comment page.

Sure, but no higher than a "fair and balanced" Fox News comment page, and that's where we're at.

Conversations are more fun than debates for me at least. I just like to see new information without having to scour the internets for it, cross referencing and blablabla.

For some reason I think this thread is officially off-topic for two pages... WELCOME TO THE OFF TOPIC FORUM!!!

JohnHwangDD wrote:I'm sorry, didn't the Dems campaign that Obama was going to cut deficits in half when elected, but is now on course to at least double our deficit?

So you're giving up on claiming that Democrats (or even a Democrat... any Democrat) are calling any dissent treacherous, and trying to change to a challenge over Obama's policies. That was a pitiful effort, wasn't it?

If you can explain how profligate spending is "good for the country" and a deficit that rivals the annual GDP is "scoring a success", then I guess you're a better debater than I.

So I'm a better debater if I can point out that a basic reading of macroeconomic theory states that government should put through deficit budgets during recession, to stimulate aggregate demand and avoid a recessionary spiral. That isn't even cracking out the uni textbooks, it's year 10 highschool stuff.

So basically, you're saying that year 10 students are better debaters than you. Interesting.

Besides, it's not like anybody's calling for Obama to "follow in the steps of Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley and Kennedy!"...

I wonder if this'll get the thread closed? I've seen threads closed for the most passing attacks, and here you're talking about people calling for the assassination of a President. It'll be exciting to see!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Wrexasaur wrote:Conversations are more fun than debates for me at least. I just like to see new information without having to scour the internets for it, cross referencing and blablabla.

For some reason I think this thread is officially off-topic for two pages... WELCOME TO THE OFF TOPIC FORUM!!!

I think conversation means that no-one involved is going to stick to their guns, which is fine when the issue is what we're going to have for dinner, but when it comes to issues where people really do have core beliefs it can get a little disingenuous (because people really do believe fundamental things, and shouldn't spend time talking around it).

I think there's a middle ground, where people can challenge each other without getting into flaming. It requires the intellectual honesty to keep to reasonable arguments and the discipline to stop from making little snipes. It can happen, but it's hard. Unfortunately when one poster comes into a thread thinking 'you think that Dakka OT is supposed to have actual, formal debate whereas I see Dakka as pure entertainment. If it's not amusing, it's not interesting to me' then we're pretty much stuffed from the get-go.

As a Liberal, I figured you follow the American meta-news more closely:

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/warner-todd-huston/2009/05/30/penn-paper-didnt-know-lincoln-garfield-mckinley-jfk-were-assassi

Though, to be honest, every time Obama said that he wanted to follow in Lincolns' footsteps, I kept wondering if Obama remembered that:
- Lincoln suspended the Writ of Habeus Corpus
- Lincoln presided over a Civil War
- Lincoln was assassinated

Modquisitiion on:
Lets Ixnay on the assassinay JH.

JohnHwangDD wrote:As a Liberal,

I'm supposed to be what now?

I figured you follow the American meta-news more closely:

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/warner-todd-huston/2009/05/30/penn-paper-didnt-know-lincoln-garfield-mckinley-jfk-were-assassi

I knew the story. I assumed it was what you were referencing. How it amounted to anything other than hurr hurr dead President is beyond me.

Its simple

Al'Qaida picks on China and its goodnight vienna for majority of the middle east.

China arent like kindly neighbours who come around and ask you to turn down your music they kick in your door blow up your stereo and then detonate enough HE to take out your house and the surrounding neighbourhood.

China will openly declare war on Islam and all the sabre rattling and religious prattling of the Ayotollah will not stop them just because the Dragon is sleeping doesnt mean it wouldnt take a chunk out of Islam's ass they havent feared anything not since the exception of the state China fears noone you commit terrorism in China and you are dead end of and then they will find your friends and kill them.

For Christsakes they killed a shedload of Students do you think they will be afraid of a rap on the wrist for killing a couple of billion Muslims.

Maybe they will do what we have been to hesitant to get "real" revenge for 9/11.

BOSS_PIMPALOTZ wrote:
For Christsakes they killed a shedload of Students do you think they will be afraid of a rap on the wrist for killing a couple of billion Muslims.

I suspect the former was substantially easier than doing the latter would be.

Frazzled wrote:Modquisitiion on:
Lets Ixnay on the assassinay JH.

Or course.

Nobody was ever calling for such a thing.


For the record, I am NOT advocating the assassination of any American leader, past or present.

As a good American citizen, I support my government, *especially* when our CIA says they've been working an assassination program for the past several years...
____

Over and out - I'm exiting this thread.

JohnHwangDD wrote:As a Liberal, I figured you follow the American meta-news more closely:

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/warner-todd-huston/2009/05/30/penn-paper-didnt-know-lincoln-garfield-mckinley-jfk-were-assassi

Though, to be honest, every time Obama said that he wanted to follow in Lincolns' footsteps, I kept wondering if Obama remembered that:
- Lincoln suspended the Writ of Habeus Corpus
- Lincoln presided over a Civil War
- Lincoln was assassinated

All true. He also won the war, restored Habeus Corpus, freed the slaves, made one of the best speeches ever (Gettysburg Address) and left an indelible mark in the pages of history.