Korean Job Discussion Forums :: View topic - Advice to Obama: Tell Your Wife to S h u t U p.

Speak Korean Now!

Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!

Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"

FAQ

Memberlist

Usergroups

Profile

Advice to Obama: Tell Your Wife to S h u t U p.
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Next

Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

Justin Hale

Joined: 24 Nov 2007
Location: the Straight Talk Express

Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 10:14 pm Post subject:

stillnotking wrote:

Justin Hale wrote:

Christianity is flawed because it is based on demonstrable falsehoods. Nationalism is based on real entities.

How can you argue that the collective identity of a nation is real, but the collective identity of a religion is unreal?

Re-read the two sentences you see above and perhaps ask yourself why you asked me the above question.

JMO wrote:

Whether "Christianity" is true or false is beside the point, just like whether or not the events in Exodus really happened is beside the point of Israeli national identity.

No, it's not beside the point. It's the point I'm making. Religions are based on falsehoods - they posit states of affairs we know to be false yet they refuse to give up belief in their book. Nationalism is based on an entity that does exist - a nation-state. Of course I recognize countries aren't objective entities, unlike planets, but they certainly have an existence.

JMO wrote:

Nations and religions both occupy the same space: a mental space. Whether they're "real" or not is a semantic distinction at best. People think they're real, and that's what matters.

An ontological distinction too. Religions posit entities that are contrary to nature, science, reason and decency. Nationalism does not and the distinction is important.

JMO wrote:

Those responsible? To feel pride or shame for something is to indicate responsibility.

You saidn my countrymen are my siblings. If that is so, then there is no difference between a home invasion and a country invasion.

And what conclusion do you suggest one draw from that?

JMO wrote:

My brother lives in France with his french girlfriend. I JMO am going to guess I know more french people than you.

And what conclusions have you drawn as a result?

JMO wrote:

I'd also like you to explain how nationalism mended these wounds between Germany and France.

Forgiveness, uniting together as allies for common aims, since they trade, share advanced European societies and cultural interchange. It's perfectly compatible with nationalism. The Americans are nationalistic yet the reason for their existence was war with and defeat of Britain. British and American nationalism is clearly compatible with their special relationship. It's not a one or the other thing, is it?

JMO wrote:

You said I should be proud of the Republic since it gave me security and opportunities. I asked if I was born in Great Britain(I live 2 miles from the border) then should I be proud of that nation state instead. Answer the question.

Answer what question? You pretty much nailed my position. Be proud of what ever state or states you're from.

JMO wrote:

I said part of Ireland. It is an island. You said nationalism is a sense of place, of feeling a place to be a home. Most Irish people feel Ireland should be one nation, and virtually all irish nationalists believe this.

What's your view?

JMO wrote:

Being able to use wikipedia is not nationalistic.

I'd imagine part of your sense of injustice at the horrors in question is fueled in part by national sentiment and possibly pride. Not so?

JMO wrote:

You are proud of a man who killed 20% of a country;s population for tactical reasons. Nice of you to show your true colors

Even the English hated Cromwell. Many said his republic was the worst era of the country's history. However, his statue is in London. Why? Because he's a crucial figure in the historical narrative.

No, I'm not proud of the killing and apologies for any offence caused. I was being wickedly facetious, but I won't apologize at all for Cromwell's idea, because it was a defensive move to protect the country from popery. Like the Americans, the British love their independence especially from Catholic autocrats. The idea was saintly, but the actions grotesque.

JMO wrote:

bristle...fervor

Interesting words. Nationalism is so benign isn't it.. you really bristle about something that happened 500 years ago...wow..u belong in northern ireland.

The British owe a lot to Cromwell. The latter's horrors in Ireland were defensive, preemptive.

It's simple....renounce the Pope, renounce popery, stop conspiring to invade England with the French Monarchy, cooperate with us (and not them) and we won't whup your ass. Mr. Green

JMO wrote:

The overwhelming historical consensus is that the English government was to blame for much of the death toll in Ireland, which amounted to roughly a million people. Do you feel shame for this or not? Any reasonable person will accept the current consensus in the field.

I feel some shame, yes.

JMO wrote:

Strawman. I never said this.

I think your suffering from clear cognitive dissonance. You are so proud of your heritage and have already said you are proud of atrocities(according to the majority of historians) commited by your ancestors. I doubt you feel any sense of shame, which is not surprising. Nationalists never do.

As I said, one should feel some shame, but we should all not conveniently forget that Cromwell in particular (which you listed as your favorite) was acting in the interests of his country's political independence. War is always terrible but the motivation for them often decent and defensible.

JMO

Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Location: Daegu

Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 11:32 pm Post subject:

Justin Hale wrote:

JMO wrote:

And what conclusion do you suggest one draw from that?

.

Which part?

Pride or Shame is indicative of responsibility. You feel sorry about the famine? I guess we can begin the reparations(another ridiculous concept). I have paypal.

As far as equating country to family, it places an emotional burden on people which is too much. I can't love my country like my family or I'd be in England planting bombs. It also makes no logical sense..I'm not related to everyone in my country and i have many relations outside the country.

Quote:

Explain how the phrases in italics have anything to do with nationalism. I suggest you go read a definition or something.

Also according to your idea of nationalism, the American people were not being nationalistic as they rebelled against the country which gave them security and opportunities.

Quote:

Answer what question? You pretty much nailed my position. Be proud of what ever state or states you're from.

What an absurd notion. Born 2 miles away I love Queen and country, born where I am, I love mother Ireland. Even more absurd is that if you said that in certain parts of Northern Ireland, you would get your head kicked in by...wait for it...nationalists!

Also taking the American example, if northern Ireland did become part of Ireland again, do unionists in northern Ireland suddenly become proud of being in the Republic?

Quote:

JMO wrote:
I said part of Ireland. It is an island. You said nationalism is a sense of place, of feeling a place to be a home. Most Irish people feel Ireland should be one nation, and virtually all irish nationalists believe this.

What's your view?

I've already outlined it. I happened to be born in Ireland, its not something I'm proud or ashamed of. It is an aim of Irish nationalism to have the whole of Ireland as one state.

Quote:

I'd imagine part of your sense of injustice at the horrors in question is fueled in part by national sentiment and possibly pride. Not so?

What sense of injustice? It happened way before I was born. It would be very foolish to have a sense of injustice about it, or pride for that matter.

Quote:

Even the English hated Cromwell. Many said his republic was the worst era of the country's history. However, his statue is in London. Why? Because he's a crucial figure in the historical narrative.

Whats your point? He was an evil man who you are proud of. Hes not the first evil man to get a statue. The winners generally do.

Quote:

No, I'm not proud of the killing and apologies for any offense caused. I was being wickedly facetious, but I won't apologize at all for Cromwell's idea, because it was a defensive move to protect the country from popery. Like the Americans, the British love their independence especially from Catholic autocrats. The idea was saintly, but the actions grotesque.

No offense taken..you were not there and neither was I. So then I assume you are feeling shame for this also..as in his actions not his ideas?

Quote:

popery? Your not from northern Ireland, but you like the lingo..lol. Maybe you wish you were? Give you more opportunity to bristle etc.

Popery equals catholicism. You are saying that the Irish people should have renounced catholicism or England was justified in coming in and committing acts of genocide. Interesting..

Quote:

I feel some shame, yes.

Good..I have paypal. Shame without a sense of responsibility is empty. Actually don't give it to me, send it to Sinn Fein. They are much more nationalistic than me. They can buy new aran sweaters or something.

Quote:

He didn't carry out war. He systematically slaughtered thousands of people(at least). You don't kill every man, woman and child from towns in an act of war, you do it because you are evil.

I don't think we are going anywhere with this.

I don't buy into things unless I'm going all the way. In my world pride and shame equal responsibility. I'm going to guess that you do not buy into this philosophy as it would curb your armchair general abilities and mean less patriotic bristling over some genocide committed 500 years ago.

Last edited by JMO on Thu Feb 21, 2008 11:38 pm; edited 1 time in total

Privateer

Joined: 31 Aug 2005
Location: Easy Street.

Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 11:36 pm Post subject:

So everyone's upset about Michelle Obama shooting her husband in the foot with the kind of remark that ordinary people are allowed to make every day. And no-one cares that McCain's wife was a drug addict? http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/2/20/64612/4690/438/460265

Justin Hale

Joined: 24 Nov 2007
Location: the Straight Talk Express

Posted: Fri Feb 22, 2008 5:46 am Post subject:

JMO wrote:

I've already outlined it. I happened to be born in Ireland, its not something I'm proud or ashamed of. It is an aim of Irish nationalism to have the whole of Ireland as one state.

Is that something you subscribe to?

JMO wrote:

As far as equating country to family, it places an emotional burden on people which is too much

Oh well, don't bother then. I'm fine with the notion that I love my good countries as I love my good parents. Both are responsible for my existence, good upbringing and prosperity directly. Great efforts, sacrifices, ingenuity, skill took place to which I owe my existence. If anything, my mom and pop having an affair is trivial in comparison. To me it's straightforward; to you, clearly less so.

JMO wrote:

I can't love my country like my family or I'd be in England planting bombs.

Ridiculous. If someone attacks your family, retaliate. If someone attacked your family 500 years ago, get over it. If someone attacks your country, retaliate. If someone attacked your country 500 years ago....see where I'm going with this?

JMO wrote:

It also makes no logical sense..I'm not related to everyone in my country and i have many relations outside the country

You are related as subjects in a relatively homogenous and autonomous society and are related to more people than you give credit for if generations of your family lived there. It doesn�t really matter, as immigrants can express national pride for the host country and ought to. I'm of the view that if you're born in and have lived in a country most of your life, one is entitled to have pride for the achievements of those countrymen previously who made your existence possible, more than tolerable and for the bigger picture you benefit from. You obviously differ.

JMO wrote:

Explain how the phrases in italics have anything to do with nationalism

Respect and admiration for other nations and pride in the alliance. Working together produces mutual benefits for those involved. We do better as a team than by working alone. Sound scarily like nationalism?

JMO wrote:

Also according to your idea of nationalism, the American people were not being nationalistic as they rebelled against the country which gave them security and opportunities

Tax without representation? Screw that, let's go it alone. A new national consciousness is born.

JMO wrote:

What an absurd notion. Born 2 miles away I love Queen and country, born where I am, I love mother Ireland

The notion becomes less absurd if we look at two less absurd neighboring countries - those folks on either side of the Rhein, those folks right near the Canadian/American border.

JMO wrote:

Also taking the American example, if northern Ireland did become part of Ireland again, do unionists in northern Ireland suddenly become proud of being in the Republic?

Other factors involved here. Their religion stands in the way. With those proddies, nationalism is on the periphery since they by definition are not Brits and the cause is centuries-old religious sectarianism. Obviously I accept that if a country becomes part of a completely different one it poses a problem for the nationalist. Let's just forget those morons. In countries like England, Japan, France, the US, Canada, nationalism is strong and defensibly so. That's sufficient for the nationalist. Difficult and emotive situations like Ireland, I dunno.

JMO wrote:

Whats your point? He was an evil man who you are proud of. Hes not the first evil man to get a statue. The winners generally do.

The narrative of the British entity. Those who are proud of Britishness must acknowledge the evil Cromwell, since the British are (a) hostile to republicanism and (b) hostile to continental Europe (not that I am at all). To one who is proud of Britishness, Cromwell's ideas about continental Catholic despots are of critical importance.

JMO wrote:

Popery equals catholicism. You are saying that the Irish people should have renounced catholicism or England was justified in coming in and committing acts of genocide. Interesting..

The Irish were constantly plotting with the French Monarchy and Napoleon to allow Ireland as a springboard for attack on England. If you've a neighbor that aggressively prides itself on being God's hallow'd Protestant bastion isle, it's rather dim and inviting trouble.

JMO wrote:

Shame without a sense of responsibility is empty

Rubbish. I can be ashamed by the actions of my little brother but am in no way responsible. Clearly your shame = responsibility equation is an extremely simplistic and erroneous binary. Mind you, any of your points (a few) I haven�t addressed I agree with and retract my position that to be unnationalistic is to be vermin. It is a choice and to choose either, if the basis for doing so is not nuts, is valid. My basis � let�s re-cap � is that I owe my existence to not merely two people and their sexual intercourse but also two nation states that provide safety, resources and opportunity for personal success. Quite frankly, I deem them the best two states to have ever existed (America first, Britain second) and I am proud to inherit the genes, the values of a Briton and an American. My nationalism has benign, positive consequences and is based on fact, reason and decency.

JMO

Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Location: Daegu

Posted: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:13 am Post subject:

Quote:

Is that something you subscribe to?

no. i don't care as long as catholics enjoy civil rights, which they do.

Quote:

Great efforts, sacrifices, ingenuity, skill took place to which I owe my existence

this is not true. You may owe your standard of living to these things but not your existence.

Quote:

Exactly. Why feel pride or shame about something that happened 500 years ago..we are on the right track.

Quote:

Oh I'm sure I'm related to more people than I give credit for in the Donegal, Tyrone, Derry area with outposts in Belfast, New York, Boston, Melbourne, Liverpool, Manchester and Glascow. How this relates to the Republic of Ireland I don't know. What about my ancestors who were around before the free state? It's only been 90 years after all.

Quote:

You are delusional. Nationalism has nothing to do with respect for other nations or pride in alliance. The second part sounds more like socialism than nationalism. Stretch.

Quote:

The notion becomes less absurd if we look at two less absurd neighboring countries - those folks on either side of the Rhein, those folks right near the Canadian/American border.

Just as absurd really. Your born in Canada, you are proud of canadian history, born 2 miles away you are proud of american history. Extremely absurd.

Quote:

They are not residents of the island of Great Britain but they are residents of the United Kingdom and very proud of it. This is not on the periphery. The Proddies(people normally just say 'prod'..do you have an uncle from northern ireland or something? u heard him speak the lingo..but now you just can't quite remember it? ^^)are nationalists also in their own way. Of course these 'morons' don't count as they their parents didn't have sex in England, France, Japan, the US or Canada. What a pathetic world view. I also can't believe you included Japan, 60 years after Japanese nationalism raped most of East Asia.

Difficult and emotive situations expose the weaknesses in nationalist ideaology.

Quote:

Wait a minute..A protestant genocidal monster's views on continental catholic despots are of value? aybe Hitler's views on Stalin are of equal value..better look them up. Cromwell killed a lot of people because he hated their religion. It would have been much easier to subjugate Ireland without killing 20% of the population.

Quote:

The Cromwellian plantation was largely in response to the 1641 rebellion and not the threat of a French invasion. Before that Ireland was an English colony. Lets not pretend that Ireland and England had a peaceful, reciprocal relationship before, but Irish plotting impelled Cromwell to invade Ireland.

Quote:

Depending on what he did you could be partially responsible.

Shame/pride=responsibility is simplistic ans it doesn't always hold true. But it a good rule of thumb. The problem with nationalism is that all this pride for one's country leads you to make statements such as this...

Quote:

Quite frankly, I deem them the best two states to have ever existed

and once you get there, you are in a position where you think your nation is better than all other nations. Once there it is easy to justify anything your nation does...as we have seen in the Cromwellian example. Also, since the nation is the people(all one family after all) it is very easy to think of your nation and people as superior to others. This is the hallmark of all nationalists, as I have never met one that didn;t think its country was no 1. This is an extemely dangerous point of view..and its not hard to see why.

Last edited by JMO on Sat Feb 23, 2008 12:55 am; edited 2 times in total

cbclark4

Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Location: Masan

Posted: Sat Feb 23, 2008 12:44 am Post subject:

Free the Catholic Race!

JMO

Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Location: Daegu

Posted: Sat Feb 23, 2008 12:51 am Post subject:

cbclark4 wrote:

Free the Catholic Race!

I saw that on Fox. Not quite as good as the amazing race. It involved alot of trips to Lourdes and Knock.

Justin Hale

Joined: 24 Nov 2007
Location: the Straight Talk Express

Posted: Sat Feb 23, 2008 3:30 am Post subject:

JMO wrote:

no. i don't care as long as catholics enjoy civil rights.

You do not indeed subscribe to a united Ireland? Wow, that�s gotta be rare in Ireland. Obviously I�m talking to a fringe loony! Mr. Green

Since you have no national pride at all, presumably this will be no attack whatsoever as regards your pride in your country. Oliver Cromwell the 3rd best Briton, how about it?

JMO wrote:

this is not true. You may owe your standard of living to these things but not your existence.

I have already demonstrated how necessary preconditions provided by a state and other citizens are directly responsible for men and women meeting, reproducing and raising children in a prosperous, secure home.

JMO wrote:

Exactly. Why feel pride or shame about something that happened 500 years ago..we are on the right track.

When people say they�re proud to be American, they automatically endorse the American Revolution, since that event is responsible for their country�s existence. People can choose what to be ashamed and proud of with preference given to more recent events. Germans should feel proud their country has emerged as a bastion of wealth, industry, prosperity and social liberalism from the ruins of defeated totalitarianism.

JMO wrote:

You are delusional. Nationalism has nothing to do with respect for other nations or pride in alliance.

I�ve demonstrated with the US/UK special relationship and the France/Germany alliance that this is key.

JMO wrote:

The second part sounds more like socialism than nationalism. Stretch.

It sounds like nationalism totally and socialism superficially. Socialism calls for a state-run economy. We work better as a team is an excellent justification for taking pride in a state (nationalism) but would be a poor argument for persuading an economic conservative that society should be socialist.

JMO wrote:

Just as absurd really. Your born in Canada, you are proud of canadian history, born 2 miles away you are proud of american history. Extremely absurd.

On the assumption that one�s sole priority is physical distance, perhaps. Taking differing state values, state machinery, state achievements into consideration, less so.

JMO wrote:

They are not residents of the island of Great Britain but they are residents of the United Kingdom and very proud of it

Chiefly due to centuries old religious sectarianism and barbarism re their beloved celestial dictator.

JMO wrote:

I also can't believe you included Japan, 60 years after Japanese nationalism raped most of East Asia.

The Japanese should be proud their country has emerged as a bastion of wealth, industry, prosperity and success from the ruins of defeated loony monarchy.

JMO wrote:

Difficult and emotive situations expose the weaknesses in nationalist ideaology.

No. They expose the weakness in belief in imaginary entities and how loyalty to unimaginary entities, like states, is superior.

JMO wrote:

Wait a minute..A protestant genocidal monster's views on continental catholic despots are of value? aybe Hitler's views on Stalin are of equal value..better look them up.

ad hominem

JMO wrote:

Cromwell killed a lot of people because he hated their religion.

With good reason in my opinion.

Ireland was always a fear for the English because it could be used as springboard to attack England, since the population�s allegiance was to Rome. This is why Britain and the US are such saintly states - independence from foreign tyranny. The Irish had no problem with being illiterate thanks to the dude in Rome (and priests) being the sole guardians of scripture. The British (and the Protestants) did have a problem and were the ones slaying enemies as opposed to being slayed by their enemies. Nationalism is darwinian and saintly, and Protestantism the true Christianity and Catholicism barbarically inferior. I'm a raving atheist, but there should be no doubt as to which of the two Christianitys is ethically superior.

JMO wrote:

Depending on what he did you could be partially responsible.

Statement of the obvious, nevertheless clearly shame = responsibility per se which you argued for is nonsense.

JMO wrote:

Also, since the nation is the people(all one family after all) it is very easy to think of your nation and people as superior to others

Superior to all? No. Superior to some? Certainly. In terms of utility to the species, you can�t beat Britain and America, and I�m proud of that.

stevemcgarrett

Joined: 24 Mar 2006

Posted: Sat Feb 23, 2008 6:31 am Post subject:

Michele is beginning to sound like that whiney Black MBA contestant from the first season of Trump's show, The Apprentice, who's now doing The Surreal Life for losers. I've always felt she is not an asset to Obama. Reading her senior thesis at Princeton only cements that view. If she coaxes him into a victim mindset, he will lose most of the independents looking his way. Bank on it.

JMO

Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Location: Daegu

Posted: Sat Feb 23, 2008 7:55 am Post subject:

Justin Hale wrote:

You do not indeed subscribe to a united Ireland? Wow, that�s gotta be rare in Ireland. Obviously I�m talking to a fringe loony! Mr. Green

Since you have no national pride at all, presumably this will be no attack whatsoever as regards your pride in your country. Oliver Cromwell the 3rd best Briton, how about it?

Not that uncommon in my generation. A united Ireland would mean all types of responsibilities being taken on by the Irish government which could be alot of strain. Not only that, but we have peace now. I'd rather not have unionists planting bombs in Dublin. Peace is the number one priority to most people in the north.

That list? Well I'm happy that Brunel made number 1, I'm a big fan..and i love his name. Cromwell making number 3 is not surprising. He was the only king killer after all. I think to most Brits, what he did in Ireland is pretty irrelevant. Diana and John Lennon being above Newton makes me a little sick.

Quote:

No you havn't. Men and women were having babies long before nation states existed, so it is impossible to say a state is directly responsible for someones existence.

Quote:

When people say they�re proud to be American, they automatically endorse the American Revolution

an american can endorse the revolution without feeling pride for it. He endorses it by paying taxes.

Quote:

I�ve demonstrated with the US/UK special relationship and the France/Germany alliance that this is key.

you havn't demonstrated any link between these things and nationalism.

Quote:

On the assumption that one�s sole priority is physical distance, perhaps. Taking differing state values, state machinery, state achievements into consideration, less so.

You said you should be proud of the nation you are born in. Therefore the one relevant factor is physical location. If national allegiance is so easily changed by physical location, then it is absurd.

Quote:

Chiefly due to centuries old religious sectarianism and barbarism re their beloved celestial dictator.

Unionists and Loyalists are loyal to the Queen and the Union(the UK). The UK is a nation. I'm sorry, you cannot just pick and choose. Religious sectarianism has been a factor in the history of nearly every nation state in Europe, including England.

Quote:

No. They expose the weakness in belief in imaginary entities and how loyalty to unimaginary entities, like states, is superior.

As i said, loyalists and Unionists are loyal to the UK. This is not an imaginary entity. Did you even know what unionist means?

Quote:

ad hominem

Sorry but Cromwell was a protestant and genocidal(he wiped out 20% of the population of Ireland. Acts of attempted genocide normally put you in the monster category. Therefore he was a protestant genocidal monster. The protestant part is admittedly irrelevant, but since the euopean despots were catholic, I thought it gave it good balance. I'll amend it. He was simply a genocidal monster, who British people(who bother to do online polls) put as no. 3 all time. That is how nationalism warps your brain.

Quote:

He wiped out up to 20% of the population with good reason? The rest of this...I don't know...an entertaining rant i suppose. Britain was saintly due to independence from foreign tyranny..mmm...I believe if you look at the history books you will see they were the foreign tyranny for roughly 3/4 of the world. Saintly indeed^^

Arguing about which type of christianity is superior is like watching 2 tramps fight for crack. I'm sure one of them will win, but...

Quote:

JMO wrote:
Also, since the nation is the people(all one family after all) it is very easy to think of your nation and people as superior to others

Superior to all? No. Superior to some? Certainly. In terms of utility to the species, you can�t beat Britain and America, and I�m proud of that.

Well you have sidestepped the point somewhat..but we can go with this. You are saying, that the roughly 400 million people in the UK and USA(maybe i'm out a few million here) the vast majority of whom you have never met are superior to another group of people(how many are some?). That is idiotic. Also, why some? Why not all? If Britain and the US(and its people..they are the nation after all) are superior to some, why not all?

I'll repeat what i said last time, and ask, do you recognise how this world view is dangerous.

JMO wrote:

The problem with nationalism is that all this pride for one's country leads you to make statements such as this...

Quote:
Quite frankly, I deem them the best two states to have ever existed

Quote:

stevemcgarrett

Joined: 24 Mar 2006

Posted: Sat Feb 23, 2008 8:19 am Post subject:

stillnotking repeated:

Quote:

So after that loud and clear statement from the American people in November '06, the torture stopped?

The only torture here are your incessant posts about it.

What do you consider torture, Peter Rabbit?

regicide

Joined: 01 Sep 2006
Location: United States

Posted: Sat Feb 23, 2008 8:37 am Post subject:

stevemcgarrett wrote:

stillnotking repeated:

Quote:

So after that loud and clear statement from the American people in November '06, the torture stopped?

The only torture here are your incessant posts about it.

What do you consider torture, Peter Rabbit?

Look who's talking. I consider torture to be your posts here; written month after month with the same arrogant tone.

You are a professor and a professional and you jump on post after post on an anonymous message board.

You ought to be ashamed of yourself.

And genius--when you jump on these posts it bumps them up. Never thought of that did ya?

pheeeel

Joined: 17 Jan 2007

Posted: Sat Feb 23, 2008 10:50 am Post subject:

Well duh, she's black. Of course she's not proud of America. Would you be?

Kuros

Joined: 27 Apr 2004

Posted: Sat Feb 23, 2008 11:49 am Post subject:

pheeeel wrote:

Well duh, she's black. Of course she's not proud of America. Would you be?

Ha! The woman is very successful.

Steve,

I don't think Obama will be coaxed into his wife's mindset. Whatever you think of Obama, the guy is definitely a winner. I don't detect a whiff or hint of self-pity, and if anything, his life story is the one that would more naturally induce self-pity.

stevemcgarrett

Joined: 24 Mar 2006

Posted: Sat Feb 23, 2008 8:29 pm Post subject:

Kuros:

I tend to agree with your assessment of Obama, which is part of his general appeal. But his wife does at times come across as a whiner of the sort that not only turns off Whites but other minorities.

regicide:

Quote:

Look who's talking. I consider torture to be your posts here; written month after month with the same arrogant tone. You are a professor and a professional and you jump on post after post on an anonymous message board. You ought to be ashamed of yourself. And genius--when you jump on these posts it bumps them up. Never thought of that did ya?

Oh, boo-hoo and a little poo. You're still sore that I've called you out as a nutcase--and you are a full-fledged nutcase.

Display posts from previous:

	Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Next
Page 6 of 8

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe