Yeah: I know.
I'd say you're not making any sense now, but that started some time ago so it would be redundant.
Random Politics & Religion #00 |
||
|
Random Politics & Religion #00
Jetackuu said: » Asura.Kingnobody said: » Bahamut.Ravael said: » You forgot another one, King. The "using neocon as an insult without actually knowing what it means" comeback. Well, that's mainly used by Jet and Vic, and rarely by any of the other liberals here. So it's not really a global thing tbh. Still wish that you didn't have to work for a living? Still want everything handed to you on a silver platter? Asura.Kingnobody said: » Jetackuu said: » Asura.Kingnobody said: » Bahamut.Ravael said: » You forgot another one, King. The "using neocon as an insult without actually knowing what it means" comeback. Well, that's mainly used by Jet and Vic, and rarely by any of the other liberals here. So it's not really a global thing tbh. Still wish that you didn't have to work for a living? Still want everything handed to you on a silver platter? 1/3 but that alone wouldn't make one a liberal. People shouldn't have to work for a living, but I know this concept is lost on a neocon such as yourself. How's that trickle-down economics working for the working class these days? oh wait. Asura.Kingnobody said: » Bahamut.Ravael said: » Jetackuu said: » There is no cop-out, no scandal and no "us vs them" statements, you're under the assumption that I'm taking a side, and I'm not. There are no "us vs them" statements? You're not taking a side? What forum do you think you're on? When you don't have a rebuttal, you use various excuses and approaches, as demonstrated by Pleebo and Jet. 1) The Fallacy Excuse 2) The passive-aggressive approach 3) The "attempt to ridicule" approach 4) The Definition excuse 5) The Subject-Change method All of which have been used on this very thread too.... (incoming passive-aggressive counter from either Pleebo and/or Jet) Leviathan.Chaosx said: » What would calling anyone who doesn't agree with you a 'neocon' fall under? A fallacy isn't an excuse. It means your logic is ***, e.g., our last exchange.
Leviathan.Chaosx said: » What would calling anyone who doesn't agree with you a 'neocon' fall under? I think it deserves a new name. Maybe the Vic-Jet Fallacy? Leviathan.Chaosx said: » What would calling anyone who doesn't agree with you a 'neocon' fall under? So, who does that? Quote them please. No, I want a quote. Pretty sure every time I call out the neocons, I am doing it correctly and accurately. Feel free to try to disprove it tho, good luck.
Hell there's about 1001 definitions for neocon, to be fair Vic, we should probably use a more direct term/phrase, how about delusional nutbag?
Offline
Posts: 35422
It was the best of times it was the worst of times. It was the age of Hillary and the age of Obama.
Jetackuu said: » Hell there's about 1001 definitions for neocon, to be fair Vic, we should probably use a more direct term/phrase, how about delusional nutbag? That one might actually be far less annoying. fonewear said: » As you gaze into Hillary, Hillary also gazes into you. It's that cackle! It's an aphrodisiac for men. Offline
Posts: 35422
Hillary secretes a natural grease to keep her skin moist at all times !
The only synonym for neocon is a paleoliberal.
Leviathan.Chaosx said: » The only synonym for neocon is a paleoliberal. I would say not at all, but I'm sure one of neocon's definition's fits. fonewear said: » Hillary secretes a natural grease to keep her skin moist at all times ! That's disgusting! I should report you for that lol Offline
Posts: 35422
She used to use a turkey baster but she evolved beyond that...
fonewear said: » She used to use a turkey baster but she evolved beyond that... I hope you have nightmares of a three-way with Rush and Hillary just for that! Characteristics of a Neocon:
Enabling the most irredentist elements in Israel and sustaining a permanent war against anyone or any country who disagrees with the Israeli right. Other attributes: Foreign policy is best described as unilateral bellicosity cloaked in the utopian rhetoric of freedom and democracy. Although a neocon is primarily concerned with foreign policy, a neocon generally endorses free markets and capitalism, favoring supply-side economics, but it has several disagreements with classical liberalism and fiscal conservatism. Neocons are more relaxed about budget deficits and tend to reject the Hayekian notion that the growth of government influence on society and public welfare is "the road to serfdom." To safeguard democracy, government intervention and budget deficits may sometimes be necessary. Neoconservative ideology stresses that while free markets do provide material goods in an efficient way, they lack the moral guidance human beings need to fulfill their needs. Neoconservatism has succeeded in convincing the great majority of Americans that the main questions that concern a society are not economic, and that social questions are really moral questions. But most importantly: There is no 'neo-conservative' movement in the United States. When there was one, it was made up of former Democrats who embraced the welfare state but supported Ronald Reagan's Cold War policies against the Soviet bloc. Today 'neo-conservatism' identifies those who believe in an aggressive policy against radical Islam and the global terrorists. Also calling someone a necon is akin to antisemitism: 'Neo-conservative' is a codeword for Jewish. As antisemites did with big business moguls in the nineteenth century and Communist leaders in the twentieth, the trick here is to take all those involved in some aspect of public life and single out those who are Jewish. The implication made is that this is a Jewish-led movement conducted not in the interests of all the, in this case, American people, but to the benefit of Jews, and in this case Israel. Jetackuu said: » People shouldn't have to work for a living, but I know this concept is lost on a jew such as yourself. How's that trickle-down economics working for the working class these days? oh wait. Shiva.Viciousss said: » No, I want a quote. Pretty sure every time I call out the jews, I am doing it correctly and accurately. Feel free to try to disprove it tho, good luck. Failed both times. Your long diatribe was also a failure. Ted Cruz just posted a long diatribe as well, full of ignorance. Hmm.
Offline
Posts: 4394
So that makes Jet and vic wannabe Nazi's. Makes a lot of sense actually.
They want guns, but don't want others to have them. They want to force healthcare onto everyone. They believe the government should run everything. They believe its perfectly fine that the government lies to its people. They believe the only scandals that exist come from the opposite party. Jets always been hard to pin down because of his gun views but this would tie him up nicely. Plus, they both try to use this every time they post. lol altima, that was hilarious, keep up the trolling.
Altimaomega said: » So that makes Jet and vic wannabe Nazi's. Makes a lot of sense actually. They want guns, but don't want others to have them. They want to force healthcare onto everyone. They believe the government should run everything. They believe its perfectly fine that the government lies to its people. They believe the only scandals that exist come from the opposite party. Jets always been hard to pin down because of his gun views but this would tie him up nicely. Plus, they both try to use this (nazi crap) every time they post. So many wrongs in one post, where should I start, I guess at the top: When did I say "others" shouldn't have guns? Everyone should have access to healthcare whether they chose to use it or not is up to them, that is not forcing healthcare on anyone, nowhere did I (or anyone else for that matter, that I'm aware of) ever suggest that we start forcing people to have surgeries without their consent. I quite often have stated that the government shouldn't run everything in fact, so nope. I never said that "it's fine" but that it's expected, so nope. I don't belong to a party, and both major parties (and others) are guilty of their own scandals, I've listed fake outrage from both major players recently too (very well may have been this thread, I don't remember), so nope. I suggest very few things the Nazis did as ever benefiting humanity (they had some things right) but their "evils" far outweighed them. Plus you'll never see my advocating a religious based ideology, it's just a tool to keep the masses under your power instead of empowering the masses, and as we all know I'm very much in favor of empowering the masses. So you are horribly wrong on each account, it's like the threads you post with a link where you state the opposite of what the link concludes and then prance around like a fool when you're called out on it. |
|
All FFXI content and images © 2002-2024 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD. FINAL
FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.
|