After reflecting on the debates I've seen in TSB, it's pretty stunning how many "liberal" views have slowly become taken for granted as fact by all but the most partisan among the right.

Whoever said you can't win arguments on the internet?

Here are the most obvious points:

1. Evolution: duh

2. Bush: bad President

3. Climate Change: happening, then anthropogenic

4. Iraq War: not a great idea


Think about how fiercely these topics were debated. Now, think about how incredibly right we were

[Edited on September 13, 2008 at 7:58 PM. Reason : ]

9/13/2008 7:52:50 PM

Pwned. Just start murdering us. We don't have a right to live amongst the liberal Gods that walk before us.

9/13/2008 8:18:32 PM

Quote :

"1. Evolution: duh"

This is not a liberal "i told you so" this is a i have at least a high school education and do not have my head in the sand from hickville USA with my right hand on my preacher's dick.

9/13/2008 8:59:32 PM

5. Internet

9/13/2008 9:08:13 PM

Quote :

"this is a i have at least a high school education and do not have my head in the sand from hickville USA with my right hand on my preacher's dick"

How many liberals do you know who would match that description? It's a social conservative thing. Bush vaguely rejected evolution. Palin blatantly does so.

I remember this debate falling along partisan lines when it was debated on here.

9/13/2008 9:11:25 PM

just because you've never taken a look at the greek and hebrew translations of the bible and the recently found scrolls that even show that the earth wasn't created in a "day" doesn't mean you have to knock all christians off the block.

i know you don't want to even graze the subject, b/c it's below your paygrade, but how the hell could somebody create something in a period of time referenced from the very thing that wasn't even created yet??

24 hours? if in fact you are interested, the ancient text for "day" is actually "eon, or time" meaning it could've spanned longer than the big bang. so the earth could've been around for billions of years before man was put here.


....aaaaaaaaaaaaand here comes attack on all christians and from the blood thirsty hordes.....



[Edited on September 13, 2008 at 9:26 PM. Reason : ,]

9/13/2008 9:19:58 PM

dude, just stop.
1) post hoc rationalization of the bible, which was written in a time of scientific illiteracy, is just pointless
2) ask the large percentage of self-described Creationists in this country how old they think the earth is or how it was created. Then tell them they are wrong because "recently found scrolls blah blah blah" and see how they react

9/13/2008 9:24:58 PM

Quote :

"....aaaaaaaaaaaaand here comes attack on all christians and from the blood thirsty hordes....."

Why is it that fundamentalists think they represent all of Christianity?

[Edited on September 13, 2008 at 9:26 PM. Reason : ]

9/13/2008 9:25:33 PM

"I believe in the redemptive death and resurrection of Jesus Christ."

9/13/2008 9:26:19 PM

Obama (along with myself and the majority of Christians) isn't a fundamentalist.


And holy crap,

Quote :

"just because you've never taken a look at the greek and hebrew translations of the bible and the recently found scrolls that even show that the earth wasn't created in a "day" doesn't mean you have to knock all christians off the block."

neither are you. What, is King James not good enough for you, hippy?

[Edited on September 13, 2008 at 9:30 PM. Reason : .]

9/13/2008 9:27:14 PM

1. Obama believes in Jesus Christ
2. Jesus Christ preached of quoted and fulfilled prophecies of Moses, Adam, Isaiah
3. Moses, Isaiah of the Old Testament teach of the creation of the world by a God


if #1 is true, by his own account, Obama CAN'T believe in evolution as modern science has such a firm all knowing grasp of.

QED

I'm sure copernicus is rolling over in his grave too at our modern day scientific communities


what am i kidding.. HOLY HELL, YOUR VERY OWN LIBERAL #1 NUMERO UNO BIG CHEESE IN COMMAND BELIEVES THAT A MAN CAN RESURRECT FROM THE DEAD. AND YOU GUYS REALLY BUY INTO THAT AND BARF ON THIS FORUM DAILY ABOUT HIM. HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[Edited on September 13, 2008 at 9:35 PM. Reason : ,]

9/13/2008 9:31:49 PM

You can be a Christian without believing that the Bible is infallible.

Oh, here's another:

1b. Christians can believe in evolution

9/13/2008 9:33:58 PM

Im a republican and believe in evolution.

I dont believe in wealth redistribution, but I do count that as a liberal trait. Personally, I find it morally wrong. But if you take from one and give to another, youll always be assured 50% of the vote.

9/13/2008 9:34:59 PM

so basically you believe in being selfish

9/13/2008 9:43:36 PM

^not at all. I feel the democratic party is the party of selfishness. There is a difference from a person deciding how or what they do to help someone else with thier own money. Its a different arguement to take someones possesions and use it for what YOU feel is a good cause. That isnt a free society.

Let me ask you mcwinger, which of these seems more selfish to you?

1. Someone feeling they have a right to thier own possesions or fruits of thier labor?

or

2. Someone feeling they have the rights to someone elses possesions or fruits of thier labor?

[Edited on September 13, 2008 at 9:51 PM. Reason : .]

9/13/2008 9:50:30 PM

no he believes in keeping the rewards of his labor and giving what he wishes on his own

damn, i waited too long to post

[Edited on September 13, 2008 at 9:53 PM. Reason : 

9/13/2008 9:52:39 PM

this is what they refer to as "entitlement"

they really like that word.

9/13/2008 9:52:57 PM

i know what you're saying, and i'm not totally disagreeing with you, but i think you're taking a far too negative view of wealth redistribution

9/13/2008 9:54:15 PM

hot or cold

black or white

cat or dog

coke or pepsi

poop or pee

9/13/2008 9:55:01 PM

there is no positive view on wealth redistribution considering that we live in the most socially mobile country on the planet

Quote :

"hot or cold black or white cat or dog coke or pepsi poop or pee"

iswydt marko

[Edited on September 13, 2008 at 9:57 PM. Reason : 

9/13/2008 9:56:19 PM

Yes, wealth redistribution does sound alot better than theft. Im sorry if that sounds negative to you.

What is funny, is that the "selfish" republican party as a whole donates alot more to charities, which by the way can do a much better job of helping people, than do democrats. Look no further than biden. In ten years the man makes 2.1M and gives 3k to charity over that time.

Oh yeah, libs LOVE to help people... with someone elses money..just not thier own.

9/13/2008 9:57:08 PM

wow


delusions of fucking grandeur

9/13/2008 9:57:52 PM

^addressed to me?

9/13/2008 10:04:02 PM

Nice. When in doubt change the subject from social liberalism to attack fiscal liberalism. Changing the subject when you are getting stomped seems to have certainly "trickled down" from the McBush campaign to his cheerleaders.

9/13/2008 10:10:45 PM

Right changing the subject to something that is a serious threat to this country is a bad thing?

Which do you think will cause this country to collapse?

Uncontrolled spending, leading to hyper inflation, massive unemployment?

or having gay marriage?

The spending is the biggest threat to our country, outside of terrorist. But instead you all want to talk about fluff issues, which are important/nice.. just not critical.

You all are painting the walls when the damn roof isnt finished on the house. Your priorities are whacked. Which is kinda the liberal montra. Where responsiblity is a sin...tax it.

[Edited on September 13, 2008 at 10:21 PM. Reason : .]

9/13/2008 10:19:59 PM

Quote :

"Which do you think will cause this country to collapse? Uncontrolled spending, leading to hyper inflation, massive unemployment? or having gay marriage?"

Apparently gay marriage according to the 2004 election. . .

9/13/2008 10:23:52 PM

Quote :

"Nice. When in doubt change the subject from social liberalism to attack fiscal liberalism. Changing the subject when you are getting stomped seems to have certainly "trickled down" from the McBush campaign to his cheerleaders."

HAHAHA..........McBush.....

you idiot...stop hanging around Rawstory and learning all of their clever names of republican politicians....idiot

OMG AD HOMWQEGAOMR....

9/13/2008 10:25:01 PM

Good point. So in the libs mind, its not ok to call Obama by his middle name... but its perfectly acceptable to call McCain.. .McBush?

You guys see why more people dont take you seriously?


Not that that is an important issue, but the hypocrisy is funny.

9/13/2008 10:27:46 PM

Actually, I've been referring to him as McBush for quite a while now. Keep up, son.

And where the hell have I ever given someone grief about referring to him (Barack) as "Hussein"? I'll be sure to feel bad for name calling next time I refer to good 'ol "Tippecanoe".

[Edited on September 13, 2008 at 10:33 PM. Reason : .]

9/13/2008 10:28:23 PM

You got it boss....

so have they...idiot

9/13/2008 10:29:36 PM

hahaha.. gg trikk311.

watch out though. if you continue such conservative beliefs, you'll get 3 or 4 suspension threads in the feedback forum. lol

9/13/2008 10:53:57 PM

unfortunately, global warming is actually a question at this point, mang. sorry.

9/13/2008 10:54:54 PM

Quote :

"by all but the most partisan among the right"

9/13/2008 10:58:45 PM

^^ everything in science is technically "still a question" including gravity.

It would be foolish at this point considering the concordance of evidence to proceed without planning for global climate change.

9/13/2008 11:01:08 PM

Quote :

" i think you're taking a far too negative view of wealth redistribution "

who are you? karl marx?

9/13/2008 11:03:04 PM

yes

thats what eye called it, not me. i was just saying what he said.

[Edited on September 13, 2008 at 11:11 PM. Reason : s]

9/13/2008 11:08:27 PM

^^^ you mean the concordance of evidence like the fact that global temperatures have not increased since 2001? Or maybe the evidence of the smoking gun of the Greenhouse signature which is absent?

[Edited on September 13, 2008 at 11:08 PM. Reason : ]

9/13/2008 11:08:38 PM

Yeah, Im not sold that global warming exists, I know climate change does but our role in it is still a big question. With that said, I see nothing wrong with taking steps to lower pollution. Regardless of how you feel about global warming/climate change I think there is alot of good that is coming from the message and focus on energy saving, conservation, and green tech.

However, we cannot continue to sacrifice energy, which we need, to suppress global warming, which may not be happening. imo

mcwinger, what did I call what?

[Edited on September 13, 2008 at 11:14 PM. Reason : .]

9/13/2008 11:13:38 PM

6. aaronburro: joke

How could I forget that one?


But really-- climate change is taken for granted. Both candidates accept it.

[Edited on September 13, 2008 at 11:14 PM. Reason : ]

9/13/2008 11:13:44 PM

werent you referring to taxes as wealth redistribution or am i wrong

9/13/2008 11:16:12 PM

To some of these guys, 16th Amendment = communism.

7. flat tax: LAWLZ

[Edited on September 13, 2008 at 11:22 PM. Reason : ]

9/13/2008 11:17:55 PM

Obama accepts it because it is liberal doctrine.
McCain accepts it because he is pandering.

9/13/2008 11:18:10 PM

no taking from one, against thier will, to give to another is wealth redistribution. Which an increasing majority of tax money is going to just that.

What would you call it?

9/13/2008 11:19:26 PM

im not even arguing with you, i was just answering your question

9/13/2008 11:21:02 PM

I'd call it out and out Stalin-esque totalitarian communism. Obviously.

9/13/2008 11:21:08 PM

Quote :

"no taking from one, against thier will, to give to another"

It's impossible for a tax system to NOT do this.

9/13/2008 11:21:20 PM

Quote :

"16th Amendment = communism. "

Wow, bit of a stretch huh.

Our govt needs funds to operate, I doubt people will disagree with this. Its when they take money from the producers/workers, against thier will, and GIVE it to another group, who has done nothing to earn it and without any conditions do I start to consider that wealth redistribution.

what do you call it?

id love to see the 16 amendment done away with and go to a fairer tax. Or if you dont do away with the progressive tax, move to a progressive voting system too.

Moron, how so?

[Edited on September 13, 2008 at 11:26 PM. Reason : .]

9/13/2008 11:25:18 PM

Let's try the whole 1800's thing again. Maybe it'll work this time.

Quote :

"7. flat tax: LAWLZ"

9/13/2008 11:27:01 PM

very mature boone.

The flat tax is certainly fairer than a progressive tax. However, doing away with the income tax all together is a fairer idea still. One should not be punished simply bc they decided to go to work and better themselves and the country.

Doing away with the income tax will help this country. The income tax, which should soley be used to raise capital for the govt, has become a political tool. Often used to pander for votes and to modify ones behavior. Getting rid of it will help end class warfare in politics and take away power from politicians and give it back to the people.

[Edited on September 13, 2008 at 11:33 PM. Reason : .]

9/13/2008 11:30:59 PM

Yeah, if only there was adequate incentive to earn more money in America...

9/13/2008 11:32:26 PM