1984 ?

The e-tip thing is not as big a deal as some conservatives are making it out to be, nor as benign as some liberals are pretending.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
did the other side fight back with guns, or just sheepishly accept their new tyrannical overlords?
Click to expand...

The "other side" was the government. My guess is they used lots of guns, and lost their functioning democracy to a bunch of nutty religious extremists with even more guns. Heavily armed citizenry sure worked out well for that country, huh?
 
Epicurus said:
The e-tip thing is not as big a deal as some conservatives are making it out to be, nor as benign as some liberals are pretending.
Click to expand...

Half of that statement was correct, and the other half is a meaningless platitude meant to make yourself look more moderate than you are.

It was 100 percent benign.
 
ib1yysguy said:
Half of that statement was correct, and the other half is a meaningless platitude meant to make yourself look more moderate than you are.

It was 100 percent benign.
Click to expand...

It probably is benign. But if you don't understand why some people are legitimately concerned by this then you are blinded. If Bush had proposed that people send in "fishy" comments or opinions they had heard about the war, you would understandably be shitting bricks right now. Don't be such a posturing hypocrite.
 
Epicurus said:
It probably is benign. But if you don't understand why some people are legitimately concerned by this then you are blinded. If Bush had proposed that people send in "fishy" comments or opinions they had heard about the war, you would understandably be shitting bricks right now. Don't be such a posturing hypocrite.
Click to expand...

If Bush had asked for "fishy comments" about the war after the war was under way, yeah I'd be alarmed. If Bush was asking for links to fishy comments while trying to win a battle for public support when he was clearly trying to get a fix on what the opposition talking points were so he could counter them, I wouldn't be screaming about big brother the way the right wing has about this 100 percent benign thing.

Stupid stupid stupid.

By the way, Bush decided he didn't need to ask. He just read your fucking email and tapped your phone warrantlessly.
 
Bottom line:

I imagine that this is a benign tool for the public relations battle, but if you can't understand why this would upset and frighten some people then you have allowed yourself to lose objectivity and there is really nothing more to say.
 
ib1yysguy said:
If Bush had asked for "fishy comments" about the war after the war was under way, yeah I'd be alarmed. If Bush was asking for links to fishy comments while trying to win a battle for public support when he was clearly trying to get a fix on what the opposition talking points were so he could counter them, I wouldn't be screaming about big brother the way the right wing has about this 100 percent benign thing.

Stupid stupid stupid.

By the way, Bush decided he didn't need to ask. He just read your fucking email and tapped your phone warrantlessly.
Click to expand...
So does Obama. In fact Obama extended it so that you are unable to sue over it. The silence is underwhelming.
 
Damocles said:
So does Obama. In fact Obama extended it so that you are unable to sue over it. The silence is underwhelming.
Click to expand...


Did he really? Or did Congress?

And maybe that has something to do with the underwhelming silence? You know, the pesky difference between the legal and illegal.
 
ib1yysguy said:
They chose a revolution, and the incoming government was very popularly supported for a very long time. It's only the younger generation now that wasn't around then that stands in opposition to the present government.
Click to expand...
Well obviously the last election was a sham. That means its time for the youngin's to kick some old butt.
 
ib1yysguy said:
The "other side" was the government. My guess is they used lots of guns, and lost their functioning democracy to a bunch of nutty religious extremists with even more guns. Heavily armed citizenry sure worked out well for that country, huh?
Click to expand...

going by what you're saying, the entire population of Iran rejected a democratic society then. The people decided, they won. Looks like a heavily armed citizenry did work out for them.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
going by what you're saying, the entire population of Iran rejected a democratic society then. The people decided, they won. Looks like a heavily armed citizenry did work out for them.
Click to expand...

Glad to see you support Iran.

A heavily armed citizenry meant that the extremists could take control. That puts the world in a very, very bad place seeing as they're only a few years away from getting a nuclear weapon. It may turn out before this is all over that a heavily armed citizenry and religion are responsible for ushering in the end of the world.
 
Epicurus said:
The e-tip thing is not as big a deal as some conservatives are making it out to be, nor as benign as some liberals are pretending.
Click to expand...

It should be watched, I am in total agreement, but this isn't like the days of Bush when people were turning their neighbors in for silly stuff!
 
froggie said:
It should be watched, I am in total agreement, but this isn't like the days of Bush when people were turning their neighbors in for silly stuff!
Click to expand...

Like I said, I think it's harmless. But I do understand why is scares and upsets some people though.
 
ib1yysguy said:
Glad to see you support Iran.

A heavily armed citizenry meant that the extremists could take control. That puts the world in a very, very bad place seeing as they're only a few years away from getting a nuclear weapon. It may turn out before this is all over that a heavily armed citizenry and religion are responsible for ushering in the end of the world.
Click to expand...

you're failing to mention something that is very important. did EVERY SINGLE CITIZEN fight against the government? Or, and this is what I suspect, that those who supported the democratic government sat on their sheepish asses and didn't grab any other heavy arms to fight the extremists?
 
SmarterThanYou said:
you're failing to mention something that is very important. did EVERY SINGLE CITIZEN fight against the government? Or, and this is what I suspect, that those who supported the democratic government sat on their sheepish asses and didn't grab any other heavy arms to fight the extremists?
Click to expand...

Why would every single citizen need to fight against the government in order for a majority to support the new government/islamic theocracy? Answer: they wouldn't. The new government was widely supported and popular for a very long time.
 
ib1yysguy said:
Why would every single citizen need to fight against the government in order for a majority to support the new government/islamic theocracy? Answer: they wouldn't. The new government was widely supported and popular for a very long time.
Click to expand...

You're being deliberately obtuse and you know this. If the democratic government was widely supported, where were the citizens who supported the government? Why didn't they step up to the plate and bring their own arms to fight the extremists?
 
SmarterThanYou said:
You're being deliberately obtuse and you know this. If the democratic government was widely supported, where were the citizens who supported the government? Why didn't they step up to the plate and bring their own arms to fight the extremists?
Click to expand...

The democratic government wasn't widely supported, but it was the right government to have. The Iranian theocracy was widely supported, and its what they and the rest of the world got. And now we have a huge fucking mess in the Middle east, not even to mention the Iran-Iraq war which killed a million people.

For a guy who presumably loves Israel, you sure have a funny view on Iran.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top