Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Koch Funded Anti-Obamacare Ads


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Koch Funded Anti-Obamacare Ads Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Koch Funded Anti-Obamacare Ads - 9/23/2013 7:07:05 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic
quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53
The notion private companies can bring out anti government ads creeps me out....... Whatever you wish to call it, it isnt deomocracy.

Funny thing, Polite. There are words to describe a society where what information and alternate viewpoints can be distrubuted to the people is restricted and controlled.
None of those words are "democracy" either (or deomocracy for that matter)

What are the words to describe a society where the voice of the rich drowns out the voice of the not rich...is that what one calls democracy?


Financial Oligarchy? Plutocracy? Corporatism?


But not democracy.
When one can financially silence the opposition what is that called?
Is that called free speech?

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 61
RE: Koch Funded Anti-Obamacare Ads - 9/23/2013 7:14:33 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic
quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53
The notion private companies can bring out anti government ads creeps me out....... Whatever you wish to call it, it isnt deomocracy.

Funny thing, Polite. There are words to describe a society where what information and alternate viewpoints can be distrubuted to the people is restricted and controlled.
None of those words are "democracy" either (or deomocracy for that matter)

What are the words to describe a society where the voice of the rich drowns out the voice of the not rich...is that what one calls democracy?

Financial Oligarchy? Plutocracy? Corporatism?

But not democracy.
When one can financially silence the opposition what is that called?
Is that called free speech?


That depends on who is doing the silencing and who is defining "free speech."


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 62
RE: Koch Funded Anti-Obamacare Ads - 9/23/2013 8:06:57 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic
quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53
The notion private companies can bring out anti government ads creeps me out....... Whatever you wish to call it, it isnt deomocracy.

Funny thing, Polite. There are words to describe a society where what information and alternate viewpoints can be distrubuted to the people is restricted and controlled.
None of those words are "democracy" either (or deomocracy for that matter)

What are the words to describe a society where the voice of the rich drowns out the voice of the not rich...is that what one calls democracy?

Financial Oligarchy? Plutocracy? Corporatism?

But not democracy.
When one can financially silence the opposition what is that called?
Is that called free speech?


That depends on who is doing the silencing and who is defining "free speech."





(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 63
RE: Koch Funded Anti-Obamacare Ads - 9/23/2013 8:20:06 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic
quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53
The notion private companies can bring out anti government ads creeps me out....... Whatever you wish to call it, it isnt deomocracy.

Funny thing, Polite. There are words to describe a society where what information and alternate viewpoints can be distrubuted to the people is restricted and controlled.
None of those words are "democracy" either (or deomocracy for that matter)

What are the words to describe a society where the voice of the rich drowns out the voice of the not rich...is that what one calls democracy?

Financial Oligarchy? Plutocracy? Corporatism?

But not democracy.
When one can financially silence the opposition what is that called?
Is that called free speech?

That depends on who is doing the silencing and who is defining "free speech."



Perhaps it's just me, but, are you rolling your eyes in agreement, or in disagreement? Either way, if you'd be so kind as to expound, it would be nice.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 64
RE: Koch Funded Anti-Obamacare Ads - 9/23/2013 8:29:37 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic
quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53
The notion private companies can bring out anti government ads creeps me out....... Whatever you wish to call it, it isnt deomocracy.

Funny thing, Polite. There are words to describe a society where what information and alternate viewpoints can be distrubuted to the people is restricted and controlled.
None of those words are "democracy" either (or deomocracy for that matter)

What are the words to describe a society where the voice of the rich drowns out the voice of the not rich...is that what one calls democracy?

Financial Oligarchy? Plutocracy? Corporatism?

But not democracy.
When one can financially silence the opposition what is that called?
Is that called free speech?

That depends on who is doing the silencing and who is defining "free speech."



Perhaps it's just me, but, are you rolling your eyes in agreement, or in disagreement? Either way, if you'd be so kind as to expound, it would be nice.


It means that I think the post is disingenuous bullshit.
If you wish to dance find someone who enjoys that.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 65
RE: Koch Funded Anti-Obamacare Ads - 9/23/2013 9:27:03 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic
quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53
The notion private companies can bring out anti government ads creeps me out....... Whatever you wish to call it, it isnt deomocracy.

Funny thing, Polite. There are words to describe a society where what information and alternate viewpoints can be distrubuted to the people is restricted and controlled.
None of those words are "democracy" either (or deomocracy for that matter)

What are the words to describe a society where the voice of the rich drowns out the voice of the not rich...is that what one calls democracy?

Financial Oligarchy? Plutocracy? Corporatism?

But not democracy.
When one can financially silence the opposition what is that called?
Is that called free speech?

That depends on who is doing the silencing and who is defining "free speech."


Perhaps it's just me, but, are you rolling your eyes in agreement, or in disagreement? Either way, if you'd be so kind as to expound, it would be nice.

It means that I think the post is disingenuous bullshit.
If you wish to dance find someone who enjoys that.


Really? So, government can decide something is not "free speech" (doing the silencing), and the public screaming about it being free speech ("defining free speech)? We all want "free speech," but we don't get it completely. The oft-used "yelling fire in a theater" not being free, is a perfect example.




_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 66
RE: Koch Funded Anti-Obamacare Ads - 9/23/2013 10:14:55 AM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

No it would be that before Citizen's United there were unjust restrictions on free speech. Now there are fewer.

The government has *no* business deciding who has free speech and who does not. Kind of defeats the purpose of free speech, isn't it?
Can something the government permits or takes away really be described as free?


Free speech is for people. Not for legal fictions.

(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 67
RE: Koch Funded Anti-Obamacare Ads - 9/23/2013 10:21:06 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
quote:

It means that I think the post is disingenuous bullshit.
If you wish to dance find someone who enjoys that.


quote:

Really? So, government can decide something is not "free speech" (doing the silencing),
and the public screaming about it being free speech ("defining free speech)? We all want "free speech," but we don't get it completely. The oft-used "yelling fire in a theater" not being free, is a perfect example.

Is there a point to this rambling bullshit?

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 68
RE: Koch Funded Anti-Obamacare Ads - 9/23/2013 10:49:23 AM   
Phydeaux


Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

No it would be that before Citizen's United there were unjust restrictions on free speech. Now there are fewer.

The government has *no* business deciding who has free speech and who does not. Kind of defeats the purpose of free speech, isn't it?
Can something the government permits or takes away really be described as free?


Free speech is for people. Not for legal fictions.


Apparently the Supreme Court doesn't hold that opinion. And hence neither does the rest of the legal system.

< Message edited by Phydeaux -- 9/23/2013 10:50:23 AM >

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 69
RE: Koch Funded Anti-Obamacare Ads - 9/23/2013 10:52:33 AM   
Phydeaux


Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline 		Why is it do you suppose that the foul mouthed are on the left?

I ascribe it to the emperors new clothes. If you have no facts, pound the table. Pound the source. Impeach the author.

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 70
RE: Koch Funded Anti-Obamacare Ads - 9/23/2013 10:53:44 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		Oh, I dont know the rightwing shiteaters are a pretty foulmouthed lot, I think it gets lost because they post so much stupid shit though, and that takes center stage.

< Message edited by mnottertail -- 9/23/2013 10:59:19 AM >

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 71
RE: Koch Funded Anti-Obamacare Ads - 9/23/2013 10:59:45 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

Why is it do you suppose that the foul mouthed are on the left?


Perhaps you should ask someone on the fucking left?

quote:

I ascribe it to the emperors new clothes. If you have no facts, pound the table. Pound the source. Impeach the author.


If the author is full of shit I point it out.
If the source is full of shit I point it out.
If the poster has no facts I point it out.
If that fucking bothers anyone...tough shit.

(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 72
RE: Koch Funded Anti-Obamacare Ads - 9/23/2013 12:08:55 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
Why is it do you suppose that the foul mouthed are on the left?

Perhaps you should ask someone on the fucking left?
quote:

I ascribe it to the emperors new clothes. If you have no facts, pound the table. Pound the source. Impeach the author.

If the author is full of shit I point it out.
If the source is full of shit I point it out.
If the poster has no facts I point it out.
If that fucking bothers anyone...tough shit.


Even a blind squirrel finds a nut occasionally. Posters on the left like to claim that the GOP is against anything Obama is for, but anything Rush or Beck says is completely discredited by those on the left simply because Beck or Rush said it.

You (general) don't like things that come from Wing Nut Daily... er, wnd.com, but the typical way of not discussing it is to simply claim it's horseshit simply because it came from wnd.com.

The atypical response for those on the left is to address the actual argument and show where it fails. It's all about the messenger and not the message.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 73
RE: Koch Funded Anti-Obamacare Ads - 9/23/2013 12:18:47 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

Why is it do you suppose that the foul mouthed are on the left?

I ascribe it to the emperors new clothes. If you have no facts, pound the table. Pound the source. Impeach the author.

Shall I repost just a few of the insults and cursing you've posted?

(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 74
RE: Koch Funded Anti-Obamacare Ads - 9/23/2013 4:06:04 PM   
Phydeaux


Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

Why is it do you suppose that the foul mouthed are on the left?

I ascribe it to the emperors new clothes. If you have no facts, pound the table. Pound the source. Impeach the author.

Shall I repost just a few of the insults and cursing you've posted?


Being a fine upstanding member of the community I would suggest one review the TOS, and then make one's own decision.

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 75
RE: Koch Funded Anti-Obamacare Ads - 9/25/2013 8:59:50 AM   
VideoAdminRho


Posts: 2055
Joined: 3/24/2010
Status: offline 		This thread is now unlocked.

(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 76
RE: Koch Funded Anti-Obamacare Ads - 9/25/2013 9:33:28 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline 		The atypical response for those on the left is to address the actual argument and show where it fails. It's all about the messenger and not the message.
If the messenger has a track record of being a motherfucking liar how much credence should be given to those who cite the motherfucking liar as a valid source?

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 77
RE: Koch Funded Anti-Obamacare Ads - 9/25/2013 9:40:27 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
The atypical response for those on the left is to address the actual argument and show where it fails. It's all about the messenger and not the message.
If the messenger has a track record of being a motherfucking liar how much credence should be given to those who cite the motherfucking liar as a valid source?


And, the beat goes on...


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 78
RE: Koch Funded Anti-Obamacare Ads - 9/25/2013 10:06:36 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
The atypical response for those on the left is to address the actual argument and show where it fails. It's all about the messenger and not the message.
If the messenger has a track record of being a motherfucking liar how much credence should be given to those who cite the motherfucking liar as a valid source?


And, the beat goes on...


Rather than actually address the statement we get what we get. Why is it so difficult to answer a simple mother fucking question? Why?
Because to do so might engender actual discussion and that is not what is being sought is it...thus the simple minded "the beat goes one" mantra of how no one will discuss anything....bullshit answer the mother fucking question and lets discuss it.
Why the fuck should anyone give any creedene to someone who has a track record of lying? Why should any one give any creedence to someone who would use a source that has a track record of lying?

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 79
RE: Koch Funded Anti-Obamacare Ads - 9/25/2013 10:28:42 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
The atypical response for those on the left is to address the actual argument and show where it fails. It's all about the messenger and not the message.
If the messenger has a track record of being a motherfucking liar how much credence should be given to those who cite the motherfucking liar as a valid source?

And, the beat goes on...

Rather than actually address the statement we get what we get. Why is it so difficult to answer a simple mother fucking question? Why?
Because to do so might engender actual discussion and that is not what is being sought is it...thus the simple minded "the beat goes one" mantra of how no one will discuss anything....bullshit answer the mother fucking question and lets discuss it.
Why the fuck should anyone give any creedene to someone who has a track record of lying? Why should any one give any creedence to someone who would use a source that has a track record of lying?


Well, if you must know, not everything a liar says is always going to be a lie. So, when you do nothing but discredit the source, you aren't addressing the message. While the message could very well be a lie, you don't stop the message at all.

Addressing a message only by discrediting the messenger is an easy attempt to end a discussion.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 80
Page:   <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Koch Funded Anti-Obamacare Ads Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.094