Ableton Forum

Interesting how, when I point out a few facts regarding the Obama administration's handling of the economic mess making it even more of a mess, certain people will not argue these points, but just start with the name-calling and posting of crying baby pictures. Seems to me that if we want to have a good political discussion thread, we should stick to discussing the issues and possible solutions. If you have some good counter-points to the ones I made, that might make for interesting discussion. Vitriol, name-calling, and finger-pointing are a waste of time. And it doesn't make for a pleasant forum, in any case.

Re: the original post, it would be interesting to tally up all the negative articles regarding Obama in a major newspaper such as the NY Times, and compare it with negative articles regarding Bush, in their first two months in office. I'll bet you a dime to a doughnut that there were more negative articles about Bush. Obama is the media's darling, from what I've seen so far, which lends credence to my contention that the mass media, including the major news outlets, are mostly left-leaning in their reportage.

you're a pissed off rightie with an agenda, so what?

someone play with the troll he sounds lonely.


edit - I noticed you uploaded some music to share
http://forum.ableton.com/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=110110
maybe we can talk about that sometime.

db91977 wrote:Interesting how, when I point out a few facts regarding the Obama administration's handling of the economic mess making it even more of a mess, certain people will not argue these points, but just start with the name-calling and posting of crying baby pictures. Seems to me that if we want to have a good political discussion thread, we should stick to discussing the issues and possible solutions. If you have some good counter-points to the ones I made, that might make for interesting discussion. Vitriol, name-calling, and finger-pointing are a waste of time. And it doesn't make for a pleasant forum, in any case.

Re: the original post, it would be interesting to tally up all the negative articles regarding Obama in a major newspaper such as the NY Times, and compare it with negative articles regarding Bush, in their first two months in office. I'll be you a dime to a doughnut that there were more negative articles about Bush. Obama is the media's darling, from what I've seen so far, which lends credence to my contention that the mass media, including the major news outlets, are mostly left-leaning in their reportage.

Dude, you're a righty in a lefty forum who post quotes from fox news. You're the most misinformed poster here.

your facts are not.

db91977 wrote:Interesting how, when I point out a few facts regarding the Obama administration's handling of the economic mess making it even more of a mess, certain people will not argue these points, but just start with the name-calling and posting of crying baby pictures. Seems to me that if we want to have a good political discussion thread, we should stick to discussing the issues and possible solutions.

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure - the best way to have cleaned up this mess would be to never have let Bush make this mess to begin with...again, I ask, what would Sir McCain have done that would make things any better right now? Seriously, though instead of talking smack on the guy who now has to clean up one of the biggest financial catastrophes ever to hit the U.S. even though he isn't responsible for causing this mess, let's have a close look at the people who ushered us in to that catastrophe without so much as an apology, and ask them what they're doing to help now.

Also, this isn't a political forum, and if you don't like the way this thread is going, try starting it in the Politics forum on myspace, you'll have retards coming out in droves.

/thread.

db91977 wrote:Interesting how, when I point out a few facts regarding the Obama administration's handling of the economic mess making it even more of a mess, certain people will not argue these points, but just start with the name-calling and posting of crying baby pictures. Seems to me that if we want to have a good political discussion thread, we should stick to discussing the issues and possible solutions. If you have some good counter-points to the ones I made, that might make for interesting discussion. Vitriol, name-calling, and finger-pointing are a waste of time. And it doesn't make for a pleasant forum, in any case.

Re: the original post, it would be interesting to tally up all the negative articles regarding Obama in a major newspaper such as the NY Times, and compare it with negative articles regarding Bush, in their first two months in office. I'll be you a dime to a doughnut that there were more negative articles about Bush. Obama is the media's darling, from what I've seen so far, which lends credence to my contention that the mass media, including the major news outlets, are mostly left-leaning in their reportage.

Socialism used in any political discussion ( as a weapon to paint broad strokes of red scare communism on any opponent of whatever your preferred right wing talk show host is, on the "liberal controlled media" that you talk about ), well it proves right there where you're at intellectually. Socialism has been branded in the "liberal media" as being as bad as fascism. <---- if you can't see the irony of that, then...... Every democratic capitalism on this planet has socialist policies in place. A pure capitalism would inherently resemble a fascist state, just like a pure socialism seems to inevitably lead to a military state as well. Neither system in it's pure form is particularly workable at this time in history.

Look at it this way. I say "GWB is a fascist dictator, prove me wrong!" I'm framing the debate on my terms, while using a term that brings up images of death camps secret police and various human rights abuses. You coming out and saying that Obama is a socialist immediately ( in the USA anyway ), it brings up images of death camps secret police and various human rights abuses. So what exactly is intellectual or sticking to discussing the issues and possible solutions about your contribution so far? You avoided my Rush question, which insinuates to me that you do in fact listen to him BTW.

Why can't both sides just hurry up and kill each other off so those of us who think can do it in peace?

Obama just screwed the pooch:

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/0 ... il.&st=cse

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/st ... over/print

http://goldnews.bullionvault.com/fed_in ... _031920094

he's also supporting Bush's secrecy policies by hiding the justice department and other constitution shredders from US legal scrutiny as well as negotiating new copyright trade legislation with other countries in secret, probably because it will be extremely unfavorable to the citizens of these countries and nobody will be able to do anything about it since the trade agreements can't be influenced by our individual country's democratic process.

Oh yeah he also supported illegal wiretapping of all US citizens

This is change?

Geezus wrote: This is change?

Thanks for your post and for the links. The Rolling Stone article was particularly poignant.

I voted for Obama, but I have not been at all happy with him so far (for all of the reasons you list above, and some others that you didn't list) and think that what he has done up to this point has not been particularly promising.

I guess I really got swept away by all of the hope and change rhetoric along with everyone else, it really was inspiring to see so many people so... inspired by this one man. But inside I had a feeling that it was just going to be more of the same, and it appears so far that this is exactly what it is going to be.

More of the same.

Only time will tell.

has anyone been able to get the troll blocker to work? I'd like to block Rave to I can ignore this thread for a while.


funny, when the 'foes and friends' feature was introduced, the one person I blocked remained blocked. (please don't change that dom.)

smutek - I gotta ask, do you think you'll EVER be happy with US politics? for some of you guys the core of US politics is against your beliefs and you're pissed off about it.

more of the same? wow man...

I, like a lot of people that live in Vegas, are pretty pissed at the dude for this....

http://www.lvrj.com/news/41078067.html

RON PAUL 2012

BongoBennie wrote:I, like a lot of people that live in Vegas, are pretty pissed at the dude for this....

http://www.lvrj.com/news/41078067.html

RON PAUL 2012

I see nothing wrong with this

Las Vegas boosters and the business travel industry blamed the president and his defenders for exacerbating recession-related travel declines by suggesting companies that hold events in appealing destinations could be in line for a public shaming.

the Las Vegas economy is largely based on a lifestyle of excess, people have to cut back. oh well. my local economy is also tourist based, I'll probably get hit too, but I know it's coming.

Tone Deft wrote:smutek - I gotta ask, do you think you'll EVER be happy with US politics? for some of you guys the core of US politics is against your beliefs and you're pissed off about it.

more of the same? wow man...

I don't know bro, one day I hope I can be happy with it.

Not to sound all gushy and sentimental, I just want what's right and what's fair for every day people. (cue Arrested Development)

I'll readily concede that Obama is certainly not George Bush, and trust me, it makes me just as sick as it makes you to see the ignorant, pseudo patriotic right wingers jeering and spouting their ignorant bilge - as if the Obama administration is somehow responsible for this mess; but for me the "more of the same" concept goes far deeper than George Bush, and for me it's really not that far off the mark.

Very worried.

Someone once said that the definition of insanity is when one continually does the same thing over and over expecting different results.

That is this government in a nutshell.

Geezus wrote:Obama just screwed the pooch:

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/0 ... il.&st=cse

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/st ... over/print

http://goldnews.bullionvault.com/fed_in ... _031920094

he's also supporting Bush's secrecy policies by hiding the justice department and other constitution shredders from US legal scrutiny as well as negotiating new copyright trade legislation with other countries in secret, probably because it will be extremely unfavorable to the citizens of these countries and nobody will be able to do anything about it since the trade agreements can't be influenced by our individual country's democratic process.

Oh yeah he also supported illegal wiretapping of all US citizens

This is change?

Yes, it is change. I ask again, is this the kind of change you guys were looking for?

These three articles make my points pretty well. Counterpoints, anyone? Minus the beating of chests and emotionally-charged phraseology?