The behavior of the right vs the behavior of the left, a study in contrast.

abandonconflict said:

Voluntaryism is a fancy word for feudalism.

Click to expand...

There you go again, making shit up. You can't expect to have an intelligent conversation if you don't know the definitions, especially the commonly viewed opinions of said definitions.

Canna Sylvan said:

There you go again, making shit up.

Click to expand...

I made nothing up.

You're the one who spelled your own philosophy wrong.

You're the one who thought Zeno of Citium was a capitalist.

You're the one who thinks animals pray to god.

abandonconflict said:

I made nothing up.

You're the one who spelled your own philosophy wrong.

You're the one who thought Zeno of Citium was a capitalist.

You're the one who thinks animals pray to god.

Click to expand...

don't forget about planet celestia, where aborted babies and dead mothers go.

Canna Sylvan said:

Carne,
At least because of their sacrifice they're both on the heavenly planet Celestia.

Click to expand...

abandonconflict said:

I made nothing up.

You're the one who spelled your own philosophy wrong.

You're the one who thought Zeno of Citium was a capitalist.

You're the one who thinks animals pray to god.

Click to expand...

You have no idea what my philosophy is. Even though I spelled it out quite clearly for you. I think you're confusing that you aren't smart enough to understand that volunteerism and voluntaryism can coexist quite nicely. The reason they don't, is because the state steps in and stops those who would do good works, out of fear people don't need the state boogeyman.

I never said Zeno was a capitalist. What I did say was Marcus Aurelius adopted his ideas and merged them with Republican thought.

How do you know animals don't pray to god? Humans are definitely their destroyer of worlds.

I guess he's never heard of a Praying Mantis.

UncleBuck said:

don't forget about planet celestia, where aborted babies and dead mothers go.

Click to expand...

Do I need to put footnotes to explain when I'm mocking you idiots? The last time I saw footnotes was in public school, where I read, for the second time, Huck Finn. They crossed out a certain naughty word and said how racist said word was, and don't ever read it, even though the author was an abolitionist.

UncleBuck said:

that must have taken you ages to compose such high brow wit.

Click to expand...

So sayeth the guy with the pet walrus at home......

Canna Sylvan said:

you aren't smart enough to understand that volunteerism and voluntaryism can coexist quite nicely.

Click to expand...

You aren't smart enough to realize that I can see a distortion for what it is.

abandonconflict said:

You aren't smart enough to realize that I can see a distortion for what it is.

Click to expand...

You're not someone special. People have been making fun of you for thousands of years. The bullshit you say isn't new, just because you can change the plot.

Canna Sylvan said:

You're not someone special. People have been making fun of you for thousands of years. The bullshit you say isn't new, just because you can change the plot.

Click to expand...

Just like Libertarianism is an ancient Roman philosophy and Zeno was a capitalist.

I wouldn't trust anything you have to say about history.

canndo said:

I find the reactions of the left and right remarkably telling in this discussion over bombing Syria.



And I have yet to hear anyone comment on it.

During the lead up to Bush's wars the right was united behind him, I heard few if any complaints, few if any detractors, doubters, naysayers, equvocation or contrary arguments. It was "my president right or wrong", it was "of course we must go to war" and the right entertained no dissention.


Now, the left is divided when it comes to support of the president "their" president this time. You find Dems on every side of this issue arguing among themselves, not all of them siding with Obama.

Very different, and to me, indicative of the differences in mindset and mentality between the left and the right. Seems that the right show themselves to be followers where the left does not.

Click to expand...

What the hell are you talking about? Almost all his support is coming from democrats but lets face it they know he's a Bush incarnate and having a hell of a time swallowing the pill.

Let's look at the difference between Bush's war and Obama's war

1.Bush had the support of the people.
2.Bush had support from 40 allies
3. Bush has support in congress

Obama has none of these. Canndo you're a smart guy but saying that iraq war was some rank and file right wing warmongering to save face of how foolish Obama is looking right now clearly shows partisan retardism.

nontheist said:

What the hell are you talking about? Almost all his support is coming from democrats

Click to expand...

like boehner and cantor?

the house majority leader is a democrat. got it.

at least you changed your original claim from a few days ago. it does show you are capable of some level of rudimentary learning, but it also proves that you try to lie any chance you can get.

nontheist said:

but lets face it they know he's a Bush incarnate and having a hell of a time swallowing the pill.

Click to expand...

bush kicked out the inspectors, dumbass.

bush also waited until 15 years after sadaam did the gassing to act, then he tried to say it was connected to 9/11 and that there were WMDs.

not seeing anything like that coming from this administration. just indisputable evidence that assad gassed his own and that punitive attacks must be taken.

nontheist said:

Let's look at the difference between Bush's war and Obama's war

1.Bush had the support of the people.

Click to expand...

*half the people

(btw, obama was protesting that war, so much for bush incarnate. another lie from a liar)

nontheist said:

2.Bush had support from 40 allies

Click to expand...

many of whom did not even have militaries, others who simply declared verbal support. some sent donkeys if i recall correctly.

and they all abandoned us by 2009.

some "allies", eh retard?

nontheist said:

3. Bush has support in congress

Click to expand...

that's what happens when you cherrypick the worst intelligence and present it as the best.

nontheist said:

Obama has none of these.

Click to expand...

obama actually has all of those to some degree.

and if you compare the actual "coalition of the willing" instead of your rosy, partisan hack, revisionist recollection of it...well, you get the idea.

nontheist said:

Canndo you're a smart guy but saying that iraq war was some rank and file right wing warmongering to save face of how foolish Obama is looking right now clearly shows partisan retardism.

Click to expand...

iraq was rank and file right wing war mongering, plain and simple.

tell me again how obama looks foolish for wanting to act in the american interests.*

do you think it would be wise to do nothing when regimes use chemical weapons considering we may one day have to face them?

UncleBuck said:

like boehner and cantor?

the house majority leader is a democrat. got it.

at least you changed your original claim from a few days ago. it does show you are capable of some level of rudimentary learning, but it also proves that you try to lie any chance you can get.



bush kicked out the inspectors, dumbass.

bush also waited until 15 years after sadaam did the gassing to act, then he tried to say it was connected to 9/11 and that there were WMDs.

not seeing anything like that coming from this administration. just indisputable evidence that assad gassed his own and that punitive attacks must be taken.



*half the people

(btw, obama was protesting that war, so much for bush incarnate. another lie from a liar)



many of whom did not even have militaries, others who simply declared verbal support. some sent donkeys if i recall correctly.

and they all abandoned us by 2009.

some "allies", eh retard?



that's what happens when you cherrypick the worst intelligence and present it as the best.



obama actually has all of those to some degree.

and if you compare the actual "coalition of the willing" instead of your rosy, partisan hack, revisionist recollection of it...well, you get the idea.





iraq was rank and file right wing war mongering, plain and simple.

tell me again how obama looks foolish for wanting to act in the american interests.*

do you think it would be wise to do nothing when regimes use chemical weapons considering we may one day have to face them?

Click to expand...

Obama has all of them eh? Cite sources, we both know you are talking out of your ass let see the proof. Also I am not changing shit retard 2 rube votes out of 17 members is not fucking bipartisan rube favoring fucking war no matter how much you want to scream the retarded notion. derp derp

EDIT: I'll save the trouble and just call you a fucking pathetic liar once more.

Wait a minute....there's a DIFFERENCE?!?

nontheist said:

Obama has all of them eh? Cite sources, we both know you are talking out of your ass let see the proof. Also I am not changing shit retard 2 rube votes out of 17 members is not fucking bipartisan rube favoring fucking war no matter how much you want to scream the retarded notion. derp derp

Click to expand...

so you think there are only 2 GOPers who will be voting in favor of this?

LOL!

obama has many ally nations which have given verbal support for a strike, which is what shrub's "coalition of the willing" was. verbal support, but no troops. anyone that did join the coalition quit.

some allies, eh?

and 50% of americans support a strike against syria of the type obama is describing. see question 8x.

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i//MSNBC/Sections/A_Politics/_Today_Stories_Teases/13336_NBC_Syria_Poll.pdf

all you ever do is lie and hope that you bury enough lies with enough more lies so that no one will be bothered to call them out.

you are a lying piece of shit through and through. and rumor has it you fuck dogs.

UncleBuck said:

so you think there are only 2 GOPers who will be voting in favor of this?

LOL!

obama has many ally nations which have given verbal support for a strike, which is what shrub's "coalition of the willing" was. verbal support, but no troops. anyone that did join the coalition quit.

some allies, eh?

and 50% of americans support a strike against syria of the type obama is describing. see question 8x.

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i//MSNBC/Sections/A_Politics/_Today_Stories_Teases/13336_NBC_Syria_Poll.pdf

all you ever do is lie and hope that you bury enough lies with enough more lies so that no one will be bothered to call them out.

you are a lying piece of shit through and through. and rumor has it you fuck dogs.

Click to expand...

bahahah MSNBCmedia fucking classic. Goddamn guess I need to start posting Fox polls, what a douche.


Cite sources of many allies. Come on Bucky, lets see it.

I posted polls you posted left wing media trash rags, who's being dishonest here?

UncleBuck said:

so you think there are only 2 GOPers who will be voting in favor of this?

LOL!

obama has many ally nations which have given verbal support for a strike, which is what shrub's "coalition of the willing" was. verbal support, but no troops. anyone that did join the coalition quit.

some allies, eh?

and 50% of americans support a strike against syria of the type obama is describing. see question 8x.

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i//MSNBC/Sections/A_Politics/_Today_Stories_Teases/13336_NBC_Syria_Poll.pdf

all you ever do is lie and hope that you bury enough lies with enough more lies so that no one will be bothered to call them out.

you are a lying piece of shit through and through. and rumor has it you fuck dogs.

Click to expand...

Percentages, or any other means testing using a mathematical formula doesn't make something moral. What makes something moral is, it just is.

Why is murder, rape and stealing, wrong? The answer isn't because 50% of those polled think so.

nontheist said:

bahahah MSNBCmedia fucking classic. Goddamn guess I need to start posting Fox polls, what a douche.


Cite sources of many allies. Come on Bucky, lets see it.

I posted polls you posted left wing media trash rags, who's being dishonest here?

Click to expand...

i don't think anyone is being dishonest, i think you actually believe that gallup is doing better polling, which is false.

you are a liar again and again and again, butt in this case, you are just uninformed and arrogant and stupid.

NBC and FOX fared far better in accuracy in 2012 than gallup, which was near dead last.

google search on syria polls pages of polls showing how unpopular any military force on syria is, damn bucky you're looking bad here.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=syria+poll

Canna Sylvan said:

Percentages, or any other means testing using a mathematical formula doesn't make something moral. What makes something moral is, it just is.

Why is murder, rape and stealing, wrong? The answer isn't because 50% of those polled think so.

Click to expand...

go chase your morality bunnies elsewhere.

i was simply pointing out that 50% of americans support the type of strike obama wants, it will fly by the senate and probably pass the house too, and we have nearly a dozen allies expressing verbal support.*

hell, if sending mules makes you W's ally, then sending humanitarian assistance should put you in obama's coalition, even though i will not count it here.

just doing my service to the board to point out what a lying sack of shit nonthinkist is.