Liberals Prefer Comfortable Lies Over Truth

Not sure if talking to me or...

Bush was a huge liberal yo.

Nice strawman.

I want everyone to notice the subtle shift and presumed truths involved in that simple statement.

At no point did I ever suggest anything he said. He created those belief in his own head then projected them onto my statements as a way to avoid agreeing with me. Then altered the presumed truths to include those statements into my statement. Typical progressive tactics.

To address your statement. We should make social and economic decisions that factor human nature in. Rather then pretend human nature doesn't exist, because it makes us feel bad, and make decisions that ignore it.

You're way too defensive, especially because I wasn't even implying you had said anything in my statement. If that's what I intended to say, I would have quoted your post.

My advice to you: Take a step back, breathe deep, and invest less of yourself in your Liberal hate.

Wrong chat. I got mt chats mixed up. Someone was saying that Bush was a conservative. ROTFL. That was my point. I ment no offense.

Haha. You can't hand waive away what you stated when someone points out your ***. You seem really adapt at redirecting away from areas you are uncomfortable with.

Bush is one by today's standards. Anyone can be made to appear as any political belief by carefully selecting what to base group membership on. Conservative hasn't been about small government for a very long time. And it won't return to that anytime in the near future, they have realized the same things the liberals did. There is simply too much money to be made from big government for it to be ignored. What we have today is both sides attacking revenue sources and power bases of each other while supporting their own revenue sources and power bases.

Politics becomes easy to understand once the veiled adherence to ideology is taken for what it is. A *** pseudo religion used by both sides to dupe, indoctrinate and maximize revenue extraction from voters.

And pray tell, what "***" is that? Because even you acknowledge that my points are valid, you're overly defensive interpretation of my intent is the only thing in question here.

Tie your ego up less in your political ideology.

Zicdeh, would you care to retire for the night to my bedroom?

Only if you can make sense of this:

Well he certainly was not a liberal.

Bush is as much of a liberal as Obama is a conservative.

I know a few delusional people on this forum who thinks that Obama is a neocon and uses charts that have been altered for them to "prove" it.

Bush lied ! No blood for oil ! Impeach Bush ! Weapons of mass distraction ! Bush is a Nazi !

Did I miss anything ?

George Bush isn't the painter I thought he would be therefore he is a war criminal. Just look at his paintings.

I never hated Bush himself because it was always clear he was a mouthpiece and scapegoat for his VP and all of his dad's other cronies.

For what it's worth, I actually got to see him speak as POTUS live prior to 9/11 at commencement at Annapolis (my cousin was graduating) and he actually was pretty good.

G.W. Bush never struck me as a malevolent person, or even a particularly greedy or corrupt one. He just struck me as an average guy doing what most average people would do given the opportunity to be POTUS as long as he listened to what his advisors/handlers told him.

*shrug*

Cheney, on the other hand...

So, that's how it is now?

Bush is a mouthpiece and Cheney had all the power?

Well, I can see how you can come up with that conspiracy though....

Cheney actually admitted to it, in the biopic "The World According to *** Cheney". For some of you, you should know the documentary is approved by Cheney and contains exclusive candid interviews with him and Rumsfeld.

He admits, he basically called Bush a pussy to egg him into getting into Iraq. That America would have also moved into Syria had the Abu-Gharib controversy not been in the media. After that Bush stopped listening to Cheney and started listening to Rice.

So to put it more accurately, for the first term Bush was a puppet of Cheney and for the second term Bush was a puppet of Rice... that's just using the marionette metaphor.

God dammit. For the second time in a few days I've typed a post and hit "submit" and it dissapeared into the ether.

Basically, I just said that I think that of past US presidents, he wasn't the most independant-thinking of them and he relied on his advisors far more than other presidents. And part of that was due to his having carried over a significant amount of influence from his father's allies both political and financial.

That could be good or bad, depending on your view on things.

So wait... we're reverting to personal actions now? I mean before you wanted to make this about what the general population associates religion with... you know by using the actions of some extremists affiliated with a single religion...

There are plenty of religious people that have volunteered to do charity work and have not blown themselves up nor have they mutilated a childs genitals because they claim to know god's will... Does that make your claim false then?

The general thought on atheists don't revert to morality or charity whether it is the case or not.



You were holding yourself to a standard of evidence? Seemed like you were just letting your bias attempt to steam roll something you don't agree with to me...

I never said faith in god is required to better yourself. If you would have actually read my posts you would have seen that... People need different things... some people benefit from "finding god" and others need to leave god behind to become better people. Really all depends on the person, their needs and how they can get the structure they may need... You don't need god... you don't need faith... you don't need religion... you don't need to be atheist... People find what they need in many different ways and places... don't get all up in arms if someone finds god and it's a positive thing for them.

Like I said... an unneccasary insult that does nothing but weaken any argument you had to begin with...

Oh you. "If only you had read what I wrote! <rabble,rabble-rabble>"

Meanwhile, completely neglecting my entire point that I've only ever been requesting someone to show me the perspective of how God helps, why some people find it a necessity.

[waiting for the inevitable semantic wizardry to turn this one around on me]

I maintain that the biggest issue here -- whether Chaos intended it or not -- is that we live in a society where people still feel pressured to lie about their religion (or lack thereof) to be accepted; that they have to fear some sort of societal retribution if they're not seen as good Christians putting their love of God before all else.

Whether that fear is actually founded in an actual threat (though in my experience it is), is almost moot.

The perception by the vast majority is that in this country, you're a good Christian or else.

And that is wrong. It's the position we condem in other countries, whether that "you're (blank) or else" is a religion, ideology, nationalistic identity, or anything else. But we quietly condone it on our own soil. Perhaps not to the same "extreme" degree -- it's certainly easier to be an atheist here than it is to be a Christian in a Quran-subscribing nation -- it's still an active problem.

Don't you mean pandering to voters to keep them happy and the politician in office?

It isn't a lie (per se) that only applies to one political party and not the other.

If I was running for the Senate or House, either federal or state, you better believe that I would say I'm a good Christian while I'm really classified as an atheist.

Because, to some (or really, a lot of) people, doesn't matter what political party they are with, what their message is, or if they are a good leader or not, they will vote for a person based on how well they relate with the voter.

No. I'm not talking about politics at all at this point. *** partisanship and the like. I agree with you on that point. You do have to lie and say you're a Christian if you expect to have any sort of public career. This isn't a partisan issue as the poll-providers want to make it.

But forget that a second.

I'm talking about day-to-day life.

I'm saying that we live in a society where you're essentially forced to lie about your beliefs -- at least some of the time -- to avoid very uncomfortable, potentially harmful social/professional situations.

That is a major problem.

The pandering must stop!

My bosses are all "good Christians."

I'm an "I don't give a rat's ***-ian."

They all know I'm like that. They really don't care much as long as I keep doing the things I do here.

While it is true that it's a major problem, it is only a major problem if you allow it to be one. Because, we all know at the end of the day it doesn't matter who you are, as long as you do a great job and create profit for the company, that's all that matters.

Socially, however, depends on who you are with and who are your friends.

You don't even want to have a conversation... You want to believe what you will... lay everything evil at the feet of the religious and raise up atheism as the moral highground... You're don't seem to be interested in anything other than that lol...

You change around what you say you want from people with every post and you follow it with comments that suggest you won't even take it seriously if someone provides you an answer.

To those that god helps I'm sure it comes in different forms for many different people. Like I've tried to explain to you multiple times... Some people take comfort in the thought of a higher power. Some take comfort in just belonging to a community which may happen to be a religious one... There are a million different reasons that an indivdual person can benefit from god in their lives and there are a million more why other individuals would not.

How is what you do any different than what you accuse the religious of doing? You place yourself on a higher moral platform and claim to be better than the other and then mock all their views and beliefs...

Hypocrisy and bias for all!

"Changing the Subject" hm...

Original question from the post that started this all:


If anyone is trying to change the subject, it's you. I know what you're doing, you're trying to put me on the defensive to make it seem like you're "Winning", unfortunately I can just keep going back and pointing out the truth. A truth you're comfortable being entirely oblivious to.

Personal responsibility.

Humans in general lack that, and would like to attribute good and bad to an outside force. Usually attribute bad outside than good.

For example: If you *** up, it's the other guys fault. If I do well, it's because I'm awesome like that, except when I *** up, then it's Bush's fault.

You don't know what I'm doing as your clearly delusional at this point if you think that's what I'm doing.

I answered your question. You refuse to even acknowledge that much lol...

What's so hard to understand about the concept? What's so hard to understand about why some people believe that? Simple human nature we're talking about here...

What truth have you pointed out? That you follow the almighty hitchens? That you need a crutch like others do? That you'll use anything you can to smear someone else while ignoring the quite obvious truths around you?

You haven't really even said anything in many of your posts other than to tell me I've been dumb or to point out "What I'm really doing" and how you're "above that" or to tell me that "I have ingored the original intention of your post"

Have fun with all the hate you have for the religious... I'm sure it will serve you well :)