Someone catch me up: how are things in TSB? Who are the new posters? Conservatives / liberals / trolls / wannabes?

3/24/2009 1:55:31 AM

if u wannabe my lovaaa

3/24/2009 1:57:28 AM

sorry

[Edited on March 24, 2009 at 2:27 AM. Reason : dbl post]

3/24/2009 2:21:38 AM

Alright, here's the deal.

Most posters fall into a select few categories.

There are the:

1) One issue posters.
2) Partisan hacks.
3) Trolls.
4) Scant few people supporting intelligent discussion.

[Edited on March 24, 2009 at 2:25 AM. Reason : OH THAT'S DIFFERENT FROM USUAL]

3/24/2009 2:24:00 AM

conservatives are pretty easy to find...there are a few blind liberals...woodfoot is the first troll that comes to mind in the soap box but that kinda falls under the wannabe section as well

i consider someone like drstevechaos a one issue poster

grumpgop is a troll sometimes

[Edited on March 24, 2009 at 2:42 AM. Reason : .]

3/24/2009 2:25:05 AM

Way to change your post, puppypuncher.

3/24/2009 2:38:26 AM

The jews are behind all of it.

3/24/2009 2:45:24 AM

No they aren't, you goddamn retard.

The edomite jews are behind it all.

3/24/2009 2:51:51 AM

my reaction to the news:
shock
followed by glee
ending with anger

wb TGD.

3/24/2009 8:44:09 AM

HA anger, ouch!

I feel like I'm no longer qualified to comment in most of these threads, I've really fallen out of touch with the political issues of the day beyond my general criticisms of Obama's already-failed presidency and that of the equally-failed Congress...

3/24/2009 10:47:21 AM

same shit

different names

3/24/2009 10:52:30 AM

You haven't missed much honestly. A lot of self-important posting by the same psuedo-intellectuals with narrow-minds that use standard strawman tactics which never produce original ideas. Besides that, Hooksaw left TWW because of Woodfoot's IRL antics. I'd be interested to hear your views in regards to Rush being the new leader of the GOP.

3/24/2009 11:01:03 AM

Quote :

"same shit different names"

3/24/2009 11:15:41 AM

usually whenever someone disagrees with me they label me a troll so that they don't have to think about how badly I just rocked their world

3/24/2009 1:39:47 PM

S where do i fit in. And if you say party hack you dont know me at all or have not followed my soap box antics

3/24/2009 1:53:41 PM

Quote :

"I feel like I'm no longer qualified to comment in most of these threads, I've really fallen out of touch with the political issues of the day beyond my general criticisms of Obama's already-failed presidency and that of the equally-failed Congress..."

Good don't post then...because if you claim to know it all about (everything) with only 2 out of 48 months into the man's presidency then I'm convinced we don't need another republican Nostradamus on our hands. There's a shitload of those, just browse the threads you'd fit right in.

3/24/2009 4:08:54 PM

LOL, obviously you weren't posting on this board back in 2000, a few months into Bush's presidency. There were lots of Nostrodamus' back then too

3/24/2009 4:52:42 PM

Quote :

"Good don't post then...because if you claim to know it all about (everything) with only 2 out of 48 months into the man's presidency then I'm convinced we don't need another republican Nostradamus on our hands. There's a shitload of those, just browse the threads you'd fit right in."

So, just curious here:

a) Is everyone who criticizes the man's policies now a Republican? Because I sure as hell didn't vote for John McCain, and I certainly recall roundly criticizing that guy too.

b) When exactly does Obama's "immunity" from criticism expire? I mean, just curious here, so we can spare ourselves the next X number of months hearing about, "But Obama is only X+2 months into his presidency! STFU you Republican hacks!"

I mean, enlighten us, here.

3/24/2009 5:12:38 PM

Bienvenidos a casa, TGD.

I'm no longer remotely moderate.

3/24/2009 5:59:40 PM

- hooksaw's gone
- joe_schmoe's gone
- right-wing conservatism is a failure ie republicans need to reorganize
- no one likes Geithner

3/24/2009 6:15:43 PM

3/24/2009 6:17:33 PM

Welcome back man! Your keen insights have been sorely missed. It did make me sad the other day when someone complained about "quote bombs". They obviously were not around in the early days.

3/24/2009 6:34:45 PM

^
I remember when I was like the #10 poster on TWW in terms of MBs used, but only like #350ish in terms of post count

---

Quote :

"Kainen: Good don't post then...because if you claim to know it all about (everything) with only 2 out of 48 months into the man's presidency then I'm convinced we don't need another republican Nostradamus on our hands."

Awww now this is just cute

---

Quote :

"GoldenViper: I'm no longer remotely moderate."

This implies you were remotely moderate before...  

3/24/2009 8:45:01 PM

The Epic --- of Doom return!

3/24/2009 8:51:25 PM

Quote :

"b) When exactly does Obama's "immunity" from criticism expire? I mean, just curious here, so we can spare ourselves the next X number of months hearing about, "But Obama is only X+2 months into his presidency! STFU you Republican hacks!""

I don't know Steve....really I don't. But I don't think 1/24th of a presidential body of work is grounds to just say he's a freaking failure. You know why? Because whether it's democrat or republican, we're in enough serious enough shit right now to have vested interest in this president not to fail. These 4 years will be hell on my family among tons of others if he does fail so I'm a bit self interested beyond the politics to see him succeed.

I never said he wasn't immune to criticism man - but complete dismissal, doom sayings, and the salivating pounces of some of the right over every little thing day by day he does so early in can be extremely grating to any productive discussion. Honestly it isn't even conducive to the environment in where I want to even discuss (much less admit) less than glamorous things I've seen so far among the good and bad things so far the administration has shown.

And a response to the guy about what it was like in 2000, I have no idea - I never came to soapbox then only entertainment. But I'm not surprised....I actually had no problem with Bush into 2001 myself....honest.

[Edited on March 24, 2009 at 9:50 PM. Reason : -]

3/24/2009 9:48:22 PM

It really still only works when people actually debate stuff and don't act smug and don't feel the need to justify anything they believe/say.

3/24/2009 10:12:40 PM

oh lord

if you want serious debate like we used to have

you gotta find another message board

seriously, greg

[Edited on March 24, 2009 at 11:08 PM. Reason : ...]

3/24/2009 11:07:45 PM

This stinks of cheese...

3/25/2009 12:25:43 AM

Quote :

"These 4 years will be hell on my family among tons of others if he does fail so I'm a bit self interested beyond the politics to see him succeed."

if you think Obama will only hurt you and your family for 4 years, then you are in for a rude awakening

3/25/2009 12:30:16 AM

Welcome back.

3/25/2009 2:28:33 AM

Quote :

"The jews are behind all of it."

Quote :

"No they aren't, you goddamn retard. The edomite jews are behind it all."

You both have it wrong. The jews for jesus are really the ones responsible.

3/25/2009 11:19:37 AM

Quote :

"You both have it wrong. The jews for jesus are really the ones responsible."

educate yourself:

http://thewolfweb.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=429124
http://thewolfweb.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=440604
http://thewolfweb.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=392028
http://thewolfweb.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=389848

3/25/2009 5:33:47 PM

Quote :

"This implies you were remotely moderate before..."

Well, not half a year ago. But at some point in the distant past, back when we had long debates, I'd say I was. Now I'm a committed anarchist, transhumanist, and pro-feminist. I've assumed the old Kris position, I believe. With a dash a salisburyboy.

3/25/2009 7:56:49 PM

^Did you forget technocrat or did you dump that one without my noticing?

3/25/2009 8:26:41 PM

Are you single yet?

If so, holla! I've missed you.

3/25/2009 11:23:46 PM

agentlion gives me a "i'm a super liberal" vibe sometimes

3/25/2009 11:33:45 PM

Quote :

"I've assumed the old Kris position, I believe."

Please. Kris was a good old fashioned communist, so at least he had years of failed theory behind him. You still have years of failed theory ahead of you.

3/26/2009 2:21:39 AM

^ You're confused. Anarchism has a far greater history of failure than state communism. At least Stalin and Mao actually seized power. They got theirs. Communists countries held vast global influence for decades. Living conditions didn't align with revolutionary promises, but so what? Oops, I'm an oppressive dictator. How horrible. Anarchists, by contrast, just get executed and imprisoned by fascists. Look how the Spanish Civil War ended. If that ain't fail, what is?

3/26/2009 3:47:43 PM

Quote :

"At least Stalin and Mao actually seized power."

Which is how their theories had the opportunity to fail catastrophically. Don't worry, someday you guys will have your own shitty country to make even worse.

3/26/2009 6:49:26 PM

message_topic.aspx?topic=561010

guess the one issue i was refering to earlier...

3/26/2009 8:25:24 PM

Attention users < 1000 posts.

3/26/2009 8:26:53 PM

Quote :

"Which is how their theories had the opportunity to fail catastrophically."

For whom? Stalin's USSR largely defeated the Nazis. Mao's China routed US forces in the Korean War. As far creating powerful states goes, communism did fairly well. We're talking about two of the mightiest nations in human history.

Quote :

"Don't worry, someday you guys will have your own shitty country to make even worse."

The evidence from Spain suggests libertarian collectivization wouldn't be so bad. Standards of living and even productivity increased.

3/28/2009 6:48:35 PM

Quote :

"Stalin's USSR largely defeated the Nazis."

Before WW2, Germany had a population of roughly 70 million. The Soviet Union lost more than 10 million people in the military fighting the Nazis. Hell, anybody on this website could've defeated the Nazis will 10 million people to sacrifice to them.

Quote :

"Mao's China routed US forces in the Korean War."

You appear to be confused as to the definition of the word "routed." It might have applied in Vietnam; In Korea, where we managed to split the territory in half, it did not really apply.

Quote :

"We're talking about two of the mightiest nations in human history. "

No, we're not. Not even remotely. Perhaps the Soviet Union qualified. We'll say it did. But the other of the two was the United States. There's not really a lot of room to question the assertion. We had the production capacity, we had the military, we had the international influence, we had the nukes, we had everything necessary to drive the Soviets into the ground. And China? Give me a fucking break. China is more capitalist every year. They're not stupid. Mao might have been, but the Chinese aren't. They know the tracks of the money train, and they follow them religiously. They may be one of the mightiest nations in history, but it damn sure isn't because of communism.

Quote :

"The evidence from Spain suggests libertarian collectivization wouldn't be so bad. Standards of living and even productivity increased."

The fact that you're using terms like "not so bad," and using Spain as your baseline...neither of these things bode well for you.

3/29/2009 2:58:24 AM

Quote :

" It might have applied in Vietnam"

[NO]

We beat the Vietnamese like a drum from a perspective of killing and destruction. They were just a lot more serious about winning and unwilling to say "Screw this, it ain't worth it" than we were. In short, we won just about all the battles, but lost the war. We lost due to lack of resolve, not lack of military, economic, or any other sort of power.

[Edited on March 29, 2009 at 4:25 AM. Reason : asfd]

3/29/2009 4:24:19 AM

^ moral of the story is.... god help a nation that enters into war against the USA in an unambiguous conflict which is an immediate threat to our nation. Their ass is toast.

3/29/2009 4:31:10 AM

Quote :

"You appear to be confused as to the definition of the word "routed.""

No, it's an accurate description. Most people forget that aspect of the Korean War, but it happened. The US and allied forces got the hell out of North Korea after the Chinese intervention.

Quote :

"No, we're not. Not even remotely."

Perhaps you aren't familiar with human history. They're easily in the top ten.

Quote :

"The fact that you're using terms like "not so bad," and using Spain as your baseline...neither of these things bode well for you."

The Spanish communes had remarkable success under extremely difficult circumstances. I'd say that bodes well for the efficacy of anarchism. Inability to combat outside threats ended the experiment, not internal problems. This makes sense when you think about it.

3/29/2009 9:53:43 AM

Quote :

"The US and allied forces got the hell out of North Korea after the Chinese intervention. "

Still not sure that it qualifies as a rout given the circumstances. It's really beside the point. China, like Russia, had a military advantage in the sense that they were both willing to sacrifice enormous numbers of their soldiers. I don't consider "throwing your people into a meat grinder" to be a great ideological success for Communism, especially since the Russians and Chinese had been doing that long before they went red.

Quote :

"Perhaps you aren't familiar with human history. They're easily in the top ten."

You'll have to forgive me, I was a bit intoxicated and thought you said that they were the two mightiest nations in human history. I will grant that they are quite mighty, and qualify for the top ten simply by virtue of having multiple nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons that work like they're supposed to; sorry, North Korea.

Quote :

"Inability to combat outside threats ended the experiment, not internal problems. This makes sense when you think about it."

It makes perfect sense and explains one of the key reasons that anarchism, like communism, is absolutely doomed to fail.

Quote :

"We lost due to lack of resolve, not lack of military, economic, or any other sort of power."

Fair enough, but it really don't enter into the equation. The fact is we high-tailed it, turn-and-ran, left-so-hurriedly-there's-a-famous-picture-of-it fled that country when our resolve broke.

3/29/2009 1:48:04 PM

Quote :

"It makes perfect sense and explains one of the key reasons that anarchism, like communism, is absolutely doomed to fail."

Any physically possible social system can be put into practice. It's only a matter of the right circumstances. State communism, like other authoritarian forms of government, has had enough success to render claims of inevitable fail dubious. Remember, the human race survived centuries and centuries of monarchs. During that era, folks likely considered attempts at democracy hopeless. But these things come back around again. Don't assume history moves in a single direction.

3/29/2009 7:22:42 PM