Originally Posted by jamesdglick

Anyone remember how badly Senator Obama stumbled thru' his answer on giving driver's licenses to illegals?

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/11/15/obama-and-drivers-licenses/

-15 NOV 2007, at the Donkey's Debate

...the sad thing was, that this shouldn't have been a matter of "thinking on his feet", since Senator Clinton had been asked the same question at the previous debate.

That would put BO's ability to think on his feet on par with Joe Stalin around the 25th of June, 1941...

I remember that one. The problem is that there are good reasons for giving illegal aliens drivers licenses (like, not having lots of unlicensed drivers at large.) Obama knows this, but it's taboo to say it. So he was caught.

Roadbldr' 59 pointed out to me a few months ago that the reason why many Hispanics drive so slowly is that they don't dare go over the speed limit for fear of getting a ticket and then getting deported. Funny how that had never occurred to me. So I can't exactly feel superior to Obama on that one.

Originally Posted by The Rani

Actually, I DID catch the intent. You're basically admitting that you can't refute factual arguments so you're killing the messenger. That's why, winky face or not, you look a little ridiculous.

I mean, if you're going to go with the personal attacks that's fine by me, but to call them a sign of weakness at the same time ... well, that's a little ridiculous.

Given what is happening in our economy and society right now, you really think I want to waste my time arguing about this, factual or otherwise -

Originally Posted by jamesdglick

Anyone remember how badly Senator Obama stumbled thru' his answer on giving driver's licenses to illegals?

This is a ploy of the right wingnuts of drawing attention away from issues that not only really matter but, almost by definition today, that they obviously have their heads up their asses over.

The people who go along with this are either already in on the subterfuge or are the brainless people that the right wing zombies prey upon. I didn't think you were in either camp. I though you more of an understudy for the role of Martha in Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf. Perhaps I was mistaken. That would be disappointing.

Obama has not yet realized that he was elected to serve as a stop gap against neocon excesses, not as the vehicle for a reordering of the civic order. Obama will have to focus on shoring up the economy. In the foreign sphere he will have to further ties with Nato, china, latin american and the mideast. Regarding the war he will likely have to reverse his current dovish stance and move toward the idea of more troops, Most americans would oppose an invasion of iran unless it is a total war invasion. Mccain was rejected because he wanted to invade iran by launching air strikes and ground operations using only the forces currently in the mideast, this would have been an act of sheer lunacy givin the overstreached status of our forces in that region. Nevertheless obama will have to defend our nation against the steath arsenals of nukes, steath bunkers, underground still ICBM facilities and scalar weapon arsenals being assembled by iran and russia, obama will have to build up our missile defense to combat these secret capabilities. However as mentioned earlier obama is to serve as stop gap measure president, the real change can only come from the establishment of the centralized state and the development of our technological and manufacturing industries to prestine condition. The world ultimately boils down to two things: labor and raw materials. The buildup of the army to 20 million men plus 5 million internal security troops who will have the same training and same equipment as the regular army as well as its own rank system. With such a force the US could secure a self-sufficient sphere of influence encompassing the anglosphere with the additions of latin america and subsaharan africa. We americans should look at such a vision and eye it with the mindset that this is the final goal.

Originally Posted by The Rani

Obviously, you do!



Eh, I don't really care about Obama stuttering or walking through windows. On the other hand, I didn't really care about Bush's dog biting someone, or his tendency to create his own words. Like I said elsewhere, live by the sword die by the sword.

But yeah, you're wasting your time, and making yourself look like an ass in the process. Just consider it a friendly tip.

Is this where I'm suppose to go, "na, na, nanaya"?

Originally Posted by The Wonkette

I remember that one. The problem is that there are good reasons for giving illegal aliens drivers licenses (like, not having lots of unlicensed drivers at large.) Obama knows this, but it's taboo to say it. So he was caught.

Roadbldr' 59 pointed out to me a few months ago that the reason why many Hispanics drive so slowly is that they don't dare go over the speed limit for fear of getting a ticket and then getting deported. Funny how that had never occurred to me. So I can't exactly feel superior to Obama on that one.

Some people got huge offense in my contention that state authorities with charge of drivers' licenses had more legitimate concern with the competence of illegal aliens as drivers of motor vehicles than they did with US citizenship, and that a State-issued driver's license could never be accepted as proof of citizenship or legal residency.

One of the ironies is that driving more than ten miles below the speed limit on the open road is a possible tip-off on a distracted, drowsy, confused, ill, or worse driver -- such as drugged or drunk.

Originally Posted by pbrower2a

Some people got huge offense in my contention that state authorities with charge of drivers' licenses had more legitimate concern with the competence of illegal aliens as drivers of motor vehicles than they did with US citizenship, and that a State-issued driver's license could never be accepted as proof of citizenship or legal residency.

The DMV is not an immigration service. We have evolved into a culture that uses the drivers' licence as the de facto photo ID. This is fine for most purposes, but it does allow poliical demogauges to blame state agencies for a federal problem. Of course, now that we have a classic 4T economy with few openings for the unskilled this particular problem has become a backburner issue-at least until Mexico's 4T spills over the border.

Holder: "waterboarding is torture"

Obama: "rendition is still permitted"

Originally Posted by The Rani

BTW, are you still in the stock market? Not looking so good today.

Doing very well - somewhat embarrassing given others' situations.

I've come to be a believer in this guy and he's done well by me -
http://www.fourthturning.com/forum/s...&postcount=441

and have set up my core position to mirror his -
http://www.fourthturning.com/forum/s...&postcount=226

4-pieces: gold fund; a bond ladder; a currency basket; and a 2X inverse SP500 fund. The gold fund had a pretty hard draw-down, but is doing okay again; the currency basket has been my big downer but its a hedge for likely periodic bouts of hyper-inflation (i.e. run on the dollar) in an otherwise deflationary period; the bonds have done very very well; and of course the 2X inverse has been the big money maker particularly since I traded out of it for the dead cat bounce santa rally but got back in at the start of the new year.

Bronson believes we are increasingly close to his possible MCHVIE or Mass-Correlation, Hyper-Volatility, and Il-liquidity Event - too much to explain, but very very bad for all of us (e.g., credit cards, debit cards and ATMs stop working - yikes).

But cheer up, he also thinks we are near the end of this initial bear market (the likely worst drop) in a bear period that will last until 2016 or so. There will be more drops during this period but there will also be some nice big rallies - imagine how a bouncing ball goes down the stairs. Interesting, and amazingly possibly profitable, times.

Just to note again, we may see this MCHIVE (i.e., we go over the cliff) or we may not, and then there's a very good chance we start a nice stock market climb (but NOT an economic climb) this month. Need to be nimble here. I'm watching gold/bonds/currencies very very closely right now.

If I were playing in stocks, I'd buy a few shares of Burpee seeds.

Originally Posted by The Wonkette

If I were playing in stocks, I'd buy a few shares of Burpee seeds.

Also, loading up on cigarettes, liqueur and especially womens' stockings may pay off very well!

The mood we're in, I'd also buy stocks in whatever firm makes or sells tar, feathers, rails, and nooses.

Cigarettes have fallen out of favor steadily over the past four decades plus, since the 1964 surgeon general's famous report. To the point where public smoking bans have swept not only much of this nation but around the world.

Liquor has also tended to fall out of favor, albeit not quite to the extent that cigarettes have. But going barhopping is definitly no longer a preferred activity except maybe for those barely of legal drinking age. In many places today it is hard for a public establishment to get the liquor license unless they also serve food. Concerns over DUI's have put this activity largely on the back burner, at least until we are forced to rely more on public transit, and I believe that day is coming despite the lack of attention given to it by public offical types at all levels.

Women's stockings: They have largly falling out of favor too, except for knee-hi's, as casual dress has taken over big time. The maker of Legg's pantyhose had to lay off a lot of workers for this reason.

Nooses: Well the noose has been around most of all but the richest 2 percent or so for about three decades already. Maybe it's time for it to come loose.

Originally Posted by playwrite

Also, loading up on cigarettes, liqueur and especially womens' stockings may pay off very well!

Oh, that is so LAST 4T!

Originally Posted by The Grey Badger

The mood we're in, I'd also buy stocks in whatever firm makes or sells tar, feathers, rails, and nooses.

A "mood" not mine; and the Mobility ought not be encouraged toward such reform*.


...when will they ever learn >>>----->


______
*See the graph from the Ely Miner.

Originally Posted by The Wonkette

I remember that one. The problem is that there are good reasons for giving illegal aliens drivers licenses (like, not having lots of unlicensed drivers at large.) Obama knows this, but it's taboo to say it. So he was caught...

-The point is, Senator Obama knew (or should have known) the question was coming, since Senator Clinton tripped all over herself on the exact same question during the previous debate.

Mr Kaiser's first argument re BO was that he can think on his feet. When that was easily disproved, His Imperial Majesty then claimed that BO was much better at thinking when he had time to sit back and consider (i.e., to use PBrower2a's military analogy, BO is much better in a "set piece battle" scenario). Well, maybe not...

So, if BO can't think well when confronted with the unexpected, and he doesn't think well when confronted with the obvious, when does he think well?

Originally Posted by Odin

I have an awful stuttering and stammering problem...

-Please provide evidence that President Obama is a stutterer. Anyway, I believe that Winston Churchill was a stutterer, but it didn't stop him from thinking on his feet, and delivering sharp & witty replies.

Originally Posted by Odin

...and have issues connecting thoughts to speech (probably an Asperger's thing), that doesn't make me stupid...

-Please provide evidence that BO suffers from Asperger's Syndrome; sufferers tend to be compulsives, in which case, that's a limiting factor as a leader.

Originally Posted by Silifi

...nor do I take the time to cross-analyze two different posts made at two different times in order to point out double standards in other people's thinking

-I did it for you. You're welcome.

Originally Posted by Justin '77

...And anyway whatever legitimacy your criticism of the current Regime might have had -- you gave it all up when you spent the last several years with your lips pressed firmly around the dong of the previous Regime-boss, no matter what they did.

-Uh, first, "several years"? I've only been on 4TF since MAR 2007.

Second, I didn't have my "lips pressed firmly around anyone's dong", whether the previous Regime boss', or anyone else's.

Examples of your mis-understanding, please.

BTW, this is where I get to shout "Ad Hominem Attack! Ad Hominem Attack!"

Third, didn't you give up whatever legitimacy you had as a libertarian when you went to live in Russia?! Estonia, I could understand. Russia?!

Originally Posted by jamesdglick

-Uh, first, "several years"? I've only been on 4TF since MAR 2007.

My bad. "Last two years", then. hardly a significant difference.

Second, I didn't have my "lips pressed firmly around anyone's dong", whether the previous Regime boss', or anyone else's.

Past posts belie that claim. I could point to the following (if I were the archivist type):here, here, here, here, here, and so forth.

Third, didn't you give up whatever legitimacy you had as a libertarian when you went to live in Russia?! Estonia, I could understand. Russia?!

Hah! Proves you know nothing whatsoever about Russia. I defy anyone to find a place where people actually live freer than one where the bulk of the petty tyranny of law is widely simply disregarded; a place where one doesn't have any cause to fear one's neighbors ratting him out to Authority; in fact a place where one's neighbors -- in fact society at large -- sees the ruling class for what it is and delivers them exactly the respect they deserve.

I'll make you a deal. Next time you get pulled over at a random checkpoint in the USA, try telling the cop in a civil voice that he is a "motherfucking useless piece of shit who, in anything but this criminally corrupt fucked-up system would have starved to death long ago for lack of having even the barest minimum value to anyone or anything". See if he takes it in stride (he supposedly works for you, after all) and just checks that your car registration, insurance and driver's license are in order and then waves you along. Hell, try just telling him that he has no right to ask you for any documents without justification, and that if you are not under arrest you are going to be leaving now -- I did that this morning (twenty seconds all told added to my drive). Do that, then we can talk about who is in a free place.
The myth pushed by the ruling class in the USA is that the scope of freedom they allow their underlings to enjoy is the only real freedom; and that what you get in other places simply doesn't count. As if 'Democracy' or in general the character of where your masters came from or the forms they observed in ruling mattered at all to the question of freedom. In fact, in my experience, freedom is about how you can live your life -- and the USA isn't necessarily particularly higher on that count than a lot of other places.

Originally Posted by Justin '77

I'll make you a deal. Next time you get pulled over at a random checkpoint in the USA, try telling the cop in a civil voice that he is a "motherfucking useless piece of shit who, in anything but this criminally corrupt fucked-up system would have starved to death long ago for lack of having even the barest minimum value to anyone or anything". See if he takes it in stride (he supposedly works for you, after all) and just checks that your car registration, insurance and driver's license are in order and then waves you along. Hell, try just telling him that he has no right to ask you for any documents without justification, and that if you are not under arrest you are going to be leaving now -- I did that this morning (twenty seconds all told added to my drive). Do that, then we can talk about who is in a free place.

Wow. Real freedom means being a cranky asshole without consequences?

Originally Posted by Child of Socrates

Wow. Real freedom means being a cranky asshole without consequences?

What without consequences? The cop is just as able to take a swing at you as would be any other person you so abused. The difference being, of course, that in the context I am describing, the cop would recognize that he does so as a private person, whereas the one to which I hope James is smart enough not to try taking my dare will do so with the full Authority of the ruling class behind him. In one model, one disrespects a person -- which, granted, always carries some risk -- in the other, one is disrespecting an Authority, who is necessarily untouchable, no matter what he decides to do to you. One valid measure of freedom is the degree of fear which permeates one's life -- particularly as regards one's relationship with the agents of one's rulers (see the second suggestion I gave). Having tasted both types, I'd have to say there's valid reason to judge that one significantly more valuable than the one where you get to pretend to pick your master from the list of approved candidates every four years.

Originally Posted by Justin '77

What without consequences? One valid measure of freedom is the degree of fear which permeates one's life -- particularly as regards one's relationship with the agents of one's rulers (see the second suggestion I gave). Having tasted both types, I'd have to say there's valid reason to judge that one significantly more valuable than the one where you get to pretend to pick your master from the list of approved candidates every four years.

Abusing a government employee because they "work for you" just for the hell of it is not really striking a blow against The Man. It's just being an asshole.

Originally Posted by Child of Socrates

Abusing a government employee because they "work for you" just for the hell of it is not really striking a blow against The Man. It's just being an asshole.

Who said anything about striking a blow?

I'm talking about the ability to deal with People with Badges as people, rather than having to genuflect to them as Authority. Being an asshole (though arguably only in reaction to someone who was asshole enough to shake you down in the first place when you were simply trying to mind your own business) merely serves as a good clear test of that. They in no way "work for you" (hence the scare quotes in my previous post), nor do they answer to you or really anything of the sort. Getting thrashed by one of them for 'lip' is certainly a definitive way of making that point clear.

And anyway, if being an asshole is something you disapprove of, try the second one (the one I mentioned having done myself several hours ago). The result won't significantly differ.

Originally Posted by Justin '77

I'm talking about the ability to deal with People with Badges as people, rather than having to genuflect to them as Authority.

I've been doing that, off and on, for years. Most of the cops I've worked with have been good people who've had a positive effect on the situations in which I've asked for their assistance.

Being an asshole (though arguably only in reaction to someone who was asshole enough to shake you down in the first place when you were simply trying to mind your own business) merely serves as a good clear test of that.

I'll bet it works real well on a practical level.

They in no way "work for you" (hence the scare quotes in my previous post), nor do they answer to you or really anything of the sort.

Well, that has not generally been my experience, either in working side-by-side with them in child abuse cases or in those rare instances when I've been in an accident, or caught without a rear tail-light. (They didn't catch the jerks who broke into my car way back when, but them's the breaks).

Getting thrashed by one of them for 'lip' is certainly a definitive way of making that point clear.

You can cut down your chances of that by not being an asshole!

And anyway, if being an asshole is something you disapprove of, try the second one (the one I mentioned having done myself several hours ago). The result won't significantly differ.

Heh. Well, if I ever find myself in that kind of a situation, I'll make sure to let you know how it went.

My replies to Justin will be in the "Is this Libertarian Hypocrisy?" thread.

Anyway, how about "Senator Obama the keen observer of his fellow man"? He had 20 flippin' years to observe his "mentor" Rev. Jeremiah Wright, but was still a little hazy on what made him tick:

"I can no more disown him [Rev. Wright] than I can my white grandmother..."

-From the already forgotten "More Perfect Union" speech, which was written by his speech-writers, and which came out of his mouth at Independence Hall, 18 MAR 2008 (about one month before he disowned Rev. Wright ).

BTW, when did he disown that white grandmother of his?

Originally Posted by jamesdglick

My replies to Justin will be in the "Is this Libertarian Hypocrisy?" thread.

Anyway, how about "Senator Obama the keen observer of his fellow man"? He had 20 flippin' years to observe his "mentor" Rev. Jeremiah Wright, but was still a little hazy on what made him tick:

"I can no more disown him [Rev. Wright] than I can my white grandmother..."

-From the already forgotten "More Perfect Union" speech, which was written by his speech-writers, and which came out of his mouth at Independence Hall, 18 MAR 2008 (about one month before he disowned Rev. Wright ).

BTW, when did he disown that white grandmother of his?

Some help here. Is it this one -

Transfer:

Transfer is another of the seven main propaganda terms first used by the Institute for Propaganda Analysis in 1938. Transfer is often used in politics and during wartime. It is an attempt to make the subject view a certain item in the same way as they view another item, to link the two in the subjects mind. Although this technique is often used to transfer negative feelings for one object to another, it can also be used in positive ways. By linking an item to something the subject respects or enjoys, positive feelings can be generated for it. However, in politics, transfer is most often used to transfer blame or bad feelings from one politician to another of his friends or party members, or even to the party itself. When confronted with propaganda using the transfer technique, we should question the merits or problems of the proposal or idea independently of convictions about other objects or proposals

or is it this one -

Simplification (Stereotyping):

Simplification is extremely similar to pinpointing the enemy, in that it often reduces a complex situation to a clear-cut choice involving good and evil. This technique is often useful in swaying uneducated audiences. When faced with simplification, it is often useful to examine other factors and pieces of the proposal or idea, and, as with all other forms of propaganda, it is essential to get more information.

or this one -

Name Calling:

Name calling occurs often in politics and wartime scenarios, but very seldom in advertising. It is another of the seven main techniques designated by the Institute for Propaganda Analysis. It is the use of derogatory language or words that carry a negative connotation when describing an enemy. The propaganda attempts to arouse prejudice among the public by labeling the target something that the public dislikes. Often, name calling is employed using sarcasm and ridicule, and shows up often in political cartoons or writings. When examining name calling propaganda, we should attempt to separate our feelings about the name and our feelings about the actual idea or proposal.

First, why does Playwrite have a problem with pointing out President Obama's short-comings, particularly since so many people seem to have an inflated view of his intelligence & judgement? Correctives are healthy, right?

Second, on Playwrite's whining about "propoganda techniques" in posts #25:

Originally Posted by playwrite

...does this fall under this Propaganda Technique...

and post #56:

Originally Posted by playwrite

Some help here...

...PW seems to enjoy employing those techniques himself:

Originally Posted by playwrite

...Any one wonder why Jim's eeking out a living in a trailer somewhere in the backwood hills of TN?

Originally Posted by playwrite

...What's really funny is letting some loser in a backwoods trailer bring it out in me....

Originally Posted by playwrite

...its a whole different thing to go with the local trailer park psycho...

Originally Posted by playwrite

And you, sir, are an out-of-work 42-year-old living alone in a trailer in the hills of Tennesse...

Originally Posted by playwrite

What an idiotic statement to make ...

My God, you are a blithering idiot...

See note above, my blithering idiot...

This really is entertaining to see one of you right wing nuts...

Originally Posted by playwrite

You need to go back up the thread and learn a little something about the program to see how idiotic your statement is...

Originally Posted by playwrite

...The clueless screamers, like you, will have been carted off to the old folks home or mental institutions to live out the rest of their lives in a dazed and confused state...

Originally Posted by playwrite

...Some would call this 'cherry-picking, I'd call in outright dishonesty -- but that's because I know you better...Is all this dishonesty worth the maintaining of a myth that you really didn't develop yourself (otherwise there'd be some analysis)? Particularly when your dishonesty is so obvious and done in such an open forum? ...

(Note: PW has stopped the "cherry picking" argument re the consistency of Trustees Report analyses; one wonders why?)

Now, to the original point: What is it about Seanator Obama's lack of judgement which only allowed him to realize that Rev. Wright was a racist, anti-American dirt-bag after 20 YEARS (or and a personal "dis")?

And I still want to know, when did he disown that white grandmother of his?

Originally Posted by Child of Socrates

Heh. Well, if I ever find myself in that kind of a situation, I'll make sure to let you know how it went.

Probably safest not to.

Another example of what happens to a subject who fails to genuflect before Authoritah in the Freest Country on Earth