Four More Years of Nobama.

[Krylo]

What an Obummer.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

I was hoping Queen Liz was going to win on the write-in. You guys have had your rebellious phase, its time to swallow your pride and move back home.

[Krylo]

Oh we were supposed to vote for the Queen? I thought we were voting for Prince Harry this year.

[Kim]

I voted for Russel T Davies but I think Moffat won again. Major bummer.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

Oh we were supposed to vote for the Queen? I thought we were voting for Prince Harry this year.

You've been smoking dem term limits too long. It's affecting your brain. God chooses our leader and when they should be replaced.

[Magus]

Americans think that too, they just think God influences election results. If Romney had won it would have been God's will. The fact that Obama won shows that he is just allowing our cup of evil fill to the brim before punishing us.

[shiney]

Free abortions to all!~

[Kim]

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_md3k48NYvb1qbo867o1_500.jpg

[Magus]

Free abortions to all!~

Boo!

[Kyanbu The Legend]

So... Obama won?

Even though we are all (and by we I mean amercians) throughly screwed either way. I will admit it would be a little nice if Obama won.

[Aerozord]

I was hoping Queen Liz was going to win on the write-in. You guys have had your rebellious phase, its time to swallow your pride and move back home.

Look we have been over this, we aren't moving back in until you stop putting superfluous letters in all your words.

[Krylo]

Plus you totally remodeled our room.

I'm still not over that.

[Jagos]

So... Obama won?

Even though we are all (and by we I mean amercians) throughly screwed either way. I will admit it would be a little nice if Obama won.


No more right wing Supreme Court Justices, women's rights are saved, more ability to push Obama to the left than Romney, and no war in Iran.

It's really not a false equivalency. He's just ten times better than Romney ever will be.

[Nikose Tyris]

Feel free to counter with "Better does not mean Good." Because that's fine. That is an acceptable thing to say in response. But if you're gonna have one or the other I'm pretty confident that Obama is the better choice than Romney.

[Aldurin]

I would have honestly preferred a write-in actually winning, like if Tim Schafer won, making the best government ever and then we could put the costs for all future Double Fine games in the federal budget since it'd probably be in the top 10 of things that need to be funded.

[Aerozord]

Mostly I view Obama as a lame duck. Last four years it seems like he doesn't have the balls to create real change. Just standing still is better than moving backwards.

[Satan's Onion]

I voted for Russel T Davies but I think Moffat won again. Major bummer.

This sci-fi series is not a democracy! the voices of real Whovians are being silenced by a corrupt system!! We need to take to the streets for an armed revoWhotion!!!!!!!!!

[Krylo]

revoWhotion!!!!!!!!!

RevWhoLution, IMHO.

[Satan's Onion]

First against the laser-rifle wall:
-Krylo

[Krylo]

Hey, man, if you want the clearly inferior portmanteau of Who and Revolution, go right ahead. You don't need to be laserin' no one over this.

[Krylo]

I'm just so tired of Bronco Bama (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/31/abigael-evans-video-npr-apologizes-bronco-bamma-mitt-romney_n_2051097.html).

[Professor Smarmiarty]

Look we have been over this, we aren't moving back in until you stop putting superfluous letters in all your words.

Learn how to pronounce aluminium and then we will talk.

[Aerozord]

Learn how to pronounce aluminium and then we will talk.

:mad: I HAVE A SPEECH IMPEDIMENT YOU JERK :mad:

[Arhra]

Hey, man, if you want the clearly inferior portmanteau of Who and Revolution, go right ahead. You don't need to be laserin' no one over this.

Whovolution.

To Skaros with your tongue-twistery portmanteaus!

[Krylo]

http://i.imgur.com/DfVJl.jpg

Just another job Obummer destroyed.

[Kyanbu The Legend]

Remember people, the prez has no power. none what so ever, it's Congress and the mega corps that call the shots.

[Flarecobra]

And this is why I voted for Samuel L. Jackson.

[Jagos]

The denial on Karl Rove's face was priceless...

[rpgdemon]

Hey, man, if you want the clearly inferior portmanteau of Who and Revolution, go right ahead. You don't need to be laserin' no one over this.

RevolWHOtion, or RevoWHOtion is clearly the best portmanteau.

[PyrosNine]

Pyros has a hypothesis that over the last 15-20 years, americans have begun to HATE politics and politicians. Oh sure, there will always be complainers and haters of Red and/or Blue, but as the years have gone by Americans have become more and more cynical about the entire election process, and in recent years the world of ad campaigns and popular media about the candidates have changed in relation.

No matter what your leanings, people nowadays HATE politics, they HATE politicians, and every time a political ad campaign shows upon the screen there is this growing pool of BILE in their stomach. Being a Republican or a Democrat anymore nowadays is less a matter of being a true believer and that your party can do no wrong, but that your party is the lesser of two evils. The flag waving party member is seen as a thing of the past, or someone delusional.

Ad Campaigns have changed swiftly, because some rhetorical minded folks have realized that although the intent is to sway members of the other party or undecided folks, in practice all they end up doing is spewing messages towards their own 'true believer' ideal, which no longer makes up a large percentage of the voting population and is in effect merely preaching to a choir.

The modern American is more aware of the money trail, more aware than ever of the promises made but not kept, and of the relative powerlessness of their own vote as well as the power of their elected officials to make any sort of change. Modern politics and people who start down the path of party politics is now a matter of clinging to a "business" and hoping that they can suck from the party teat into wealth and success. Modern politics now are less the individual people of the USA banding into groups to unite behind an idea or philosophy, and more being a spectacle in the vein of Team Fortress 2, an army of clones colored Red and Blu fighting it out in American arenas (North Carolina was 2fort) for our viewing pleasure.

The goal nowadays as revealed to me by a thousand ad campaigns in my YouTube, my television shows, my early morning radio drive, is not to improve faith in a given party, but to try and redirect the nation's undivided hate for politics at the other guy.

People can and will always disagree on how things are run, but that doesn't mean that we need to build up a system of idolatry that ultimately alienates people from the supposed "leaders" of their own country, where the only people who actually care and speak out in support of party leaders tend to be extremists on public messageboards (avoid Craigslist Rants and Raves like the plague!).

In order for any trust between the populace and the government, the average American must be able to walk up to their elected official and grab them by the literal/metaphorical balls.

And that means You! *Sailor Moon Music plays*

PS.: This also means that next election year, Pyros is running for election, as a system of Idolatry sounds pretty good for any insane fire cat god angels looking for teats of wealth and success. Mr. Stubbs sets precedent for being a cat mayor, so I 'm sure I"ll be a shoe in! My platform will be that people who don't vote for me will be most flammable!

PSS..: Pyros is post modern with his portmantles and Manitou-Port, so Pyros will refer to a revolution amongst the population of WhoVille properly by naming it the honorable Rev. Wholute.

[Krylo]

RevolWHOtion, or RevoWHOtion is clearly the best portmanteau.
http://i.imgur.com/nkyii.jpg
RevWhoLution, IMHO.
http://i.imgur.com/qOuDJ.jpg

[Amake]

Guys. Guys. Guys. Doctor Revolution.

[rpgdemon]

By the way: We should all be disappointed for missing this one:

PortmantWho.

[Seil]

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u59/Poetisch/the_ten_doctors.jpg

[Aerozord]

Pyros has a hypothesis that over the last 15-20 years, americans have begun to HATE politics and politicians. Oh sure, there will always be complainers and haters of Red and/or Blue, but as the years have gone by Americans have become more and more cynical about the entire election process, and in recent years the world of ad campaigns and popular media about the candidates have changed in relation.

Do you really think your generation is the first to be cynical about politics? That its the first to notice the corruption? That it is the first to be, awake, and realize whats going on?

There was never a time when America viewed its politicians as good wholesome people. Only the nostalgic views of the elderly that tell you things were different. Our country was founded because the people found the political system was broken. The civil war was caused by a far more serious political divide than today. Then you had the beatnik and proceeding hippie movements that viewed the very concept of structured government as flawed.

If anything we are less cynical than these generations. Whats changed isn't us, its that the internet has given us a bigger stage to shout our disapproval.

[Magus]

Theory: all the truly cynical people actually got killed in WWII (cause they were complainers and complainers always get killed in war movies), leaving only jingoistic people left over to have a ton of kids and claim that the 1950s was the greatest era in human history.

[Loyal]

Damn that Obama. Not even a week into his second term and he's already forcing poor business owners to fire their workers who voted for Obama! (http://www.c-spanvideo.org/clip/4141208)

[Magus]

He's just doing his part for the economic recession. I assume by "fired" he means laid off so they can go ahead and collect unemployment for 99 weeks.

[shiney]

If I recall reading into that, it's completely unverified and based mainly on a guy saying he fired people.

Fun fact: "Obamacare" penalties only come into play once a business has 50 or more employees.

[Betty Elms]

Man am I pumped for four years of John Boehner exploiting every chance he gets to hold the american economy hostage until he gets everything that he wants. 'Cause who needs national approval for your beliefs that you want to impose on the country when you've got the okay from Ohio's 8th congressional district?

[Professor Smarmiarty]

You shouldn't be pumped. That's a bad thing.

[rpgdemon]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Professor Smarmiarty again.

Man, when you're on your game, Smarty, you are very funny.

[Magus]

Man am I pumped for four years of John Boehner exploiting every chance he gets to hold the american economy hostage until he gets everything that he wants. 'Cause who needs national approval for your beliefs that you want to impose on the country when you've got the okay from Ohio's 8th congressional district?

To be fair, Ohio was the only state anybody paid any attention to for the past three months.

Except this basically means that Ohio historically had split-personality disorder and its denizens can't make up their minds on jack shit, since every other election they vote for the other party.

The only good thing about gridlock in Washington that in as much as they don't get much good done they don't get much bad done, either.

[Kim]

No, they still get plenty bad done. Like the murders.

[POS Industries]

Except this basically means that Ohio historically had split-personality disorder and its denizens can't make up their minds on jack shit, since every other election they vote for the other party.
Actually it just means that we have urban and rural populations in roughly equal and relatively large amounts compared to most other states, so we have a sizable electoral vote with a narrow enough margin for victory that makes it especially important for both parties to energize their bases here.

Bush and Obama were better at accomplishing this than Gore, Kerry, McCain, and Romney, so they won the state and, by proxy, their respective elections.

[Magus]

No, they still get plenty bad done. Like the murders.

Yes, but if they weren't gridlocked they would be getting way more murders done.

[Grandmaster_Skweeb]

Yeah, us Washies get mighty rankled since our murder quotas took a nosedive. Had to repurpose my stranglin gloves to be drivin gloves. Things just haven't quite been the same since.

Sad times. Sad times.

[Kim]

Honestly, I don't really have any reason to believe the government endorsed murders would have gone up under Romney. It would wreck his chances of re-election, because Dems would focus on it in attack ads, whereas under Obama government murders get sidesweeped by both Dems who ignore what he does wrong and Repubs who want to paint him as not committing enough murders to keep other countries in check.

[POS Industries]

It certainly didn't stop Bush, and Romney was far more aggressive about pursuing full scale war against Iran and Syria during his campaign, so I'm prone to assume the worst about the fictional Romney administration's increased rate of killing people.

[Kim]

It certainly didn't stop Bush, and Romney was far more aggressive about pursuing full scale war against Iran and Syria during his campaign, so I'm prone to assume the worst about the fictional Romney administration's increased rate of killing people.

Well, Bush had a terrorist attack during his first term. Might have given him room to get away with that stuff.

[Amake]

Well you can't count just people killed by foreign policy. Don't forget the theoretical Romney administration would kill more sick people, abortionists, troublesome daughters, suspicious-looking foreigners, homosexuals, convicted criminals and generally less well off people, and who knows how many would die in the long term due to poorer education and less climate control efforts.

[Jagos]

Well, Bush had a terrorist attack during his first term. Might have given him room to get away with that stuff.



He ignored ALL the warnings to fight Iraq instead of terrorism. And Bush stated how Bin Laden was not his top concern.

[Kim]

He ignored ALL the warnings to fight Iraq instead of terrorism. And Bush stated how Bin Laden was not his top concern.

Do you honestly believe that 9/11 had nothing to do with his ability to get away with that as much as he did? Cuz if you do, you're wrong.

[POS Industries]

I think he's just noting that Bush was going to do that shit anyway and that being able to capitalize on the single largest act of terrorism on American soil that his own administration's incompetence allowed to happen was merely icing on the cake.

Republicans don't actually give a fuck about defending their murders that they commit because they have a well-oiled political machine that can convince half the country that committing those murders was absolutely the right thing to do before they even do them. When Democrats call them out on it, Republicans just say that the Democrats hate freedom and eagles and mom and apple pie and it works every single time. Meanwhile, Republicans are able to just make up complete fantasy about evil things Democrats do just by saying things like "Socialism" and "Acorn" and "Solyndra" with no context whatsoever and send Democrats into complete backpedaling damage control mode, and it works every single time.

This was life under the Bush administration, and I have no doubt it very easily would have been life under the Romney administration, as well.

EDIT: I mean, you know all this so I'm obviously preaching to the choir. It's just that I'm still pretty burned up about it. I'm sure you understand.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

single largest act of terrorism on American soil

We've forgiven you guys but that don't mean you can just pretend it never happened.

[POS Industries]

We've forgiven you guys but that don't mean you can just pretend it never happened.
Clarify.

[Aerozord]

Clarify.

this is smarty, its probably a reference to the american revolution and how england was all good and noble and totally not war mongering pricks that forced their beliefs on others all in the name of exploiting the resources of new land and taxing the hell out of those that help them

[Kim]

this is smarty, its probably a reference to the american revolution and how england was all good and noble and totally not war mongering pricks that forced their beliefs on others all in the name of exploiting the resources of new land and taxing the hell out of those that help them

Except Smarty has never really argued that England was good and noble. He has previously argued that England was on the path towards progressive policies regardless of America's actions, that America's founding fathers didn't at all resemble American's portrayal of them as noble god's set to lead America to a Perfect Future, etc etc. So, what he's probably referring to was probably a terrorist act on America's part, and whether or not you agree with why they did it wouldn't change that it was a terrorist act.

[Aerozord]

hmm, actually Britian was basically just the modern US, just without all the pretense and even worst acts of genocide and crimes against humanity. Like getting entire nations addicted to opium, or having natives help you survive in this new place before literally murdering all of them for not abandoning their homes when you tell them to.

England is such a lovely nation isn't it? So much history

[Kim]

England is such a lovely nation isn't it? So much history

Nobody's actually saying that.

Honestly, putting words in people's mouths like this is really childish of you, and you've been generally petty and antagonistic of late in other threads. I don't know what's your deal that you think this is exemplary behavior, but please knock it off.

[POS Industries]

So, what he's probably referring to was probably a terrorist act on America's part, and whether or not you agree with why they did it wouldn't change that it was a terrorist act.
Sure, but it probably wasn't larger than 9/11.

[Kim]

Sure, but it probably wasn't larger than 9/11.

This is probably true, which is why I wasn't really responding to you or Smarty.

[Premmy]

Before this goes any further (and it most likely will) remember a comment by Smarty was what started it.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

What I was actually get was the fact that an act of terrorism can be good or it can be bad and the use of "terrorism" as a negative slur is conservative bullshit designed to prevent change.
I was referring to the American revolution where most modern Americans (if perhaps not Smarty- both sides were pretty equal in the being fucks category and there is no real reason to support either one though if it comes down to it Britain were actually slightly less fucks than the USA in the 19th century) would agree with the acts of the revolutionaries but they were undeniably terrorists.

E: Like I could have gone with an act of terrorism by America itself- which are generally a lot larger than 9/11 if you count poor and foreign people as 1 each- but they are pretty much done on other people soil.

E2: And another thing, I'm sick of people using Britain's colonial record as a stick to stop all debate. It's lazy and unhelpful. Sure they murdered billions but that was mostly due to their sheer scale tghan anything else. The vast majority of people they replaced were worse rulers than them and murdered more of their own people, took more from their own people and left their own people with less power and less opportunity than the British masters. Their is a tendency to see pre-colonial people as like a bunch of Rossuean noble savages but a lot of the time they were replaced beady little pissants and while they could be equally as exploitative, though not as much as you might imagine, they often improved life for the average person through trade, developing economies and access to wider world. In some places they were ruinously destructive and made life much worse but in some places they made life much better- on the whole they were a monstrous empire but you really have to look at the particulars of individual cases and a lot of the the most pasisonate accounts against the british were butthurt native richies. This is just a pet peeve of mine, it reeks of what is labelled "Orientalism" where all the old accounts of China, India, Japan etc just placed them in little stereotypical bubbles of what we expected them to be like.

[Kim]

the use of "terrorism" as a negative slur is conservative bullshit

This is a fair point. Honestly, I can't bring myself to endorse acts of terrorism regardless of justification, because I hate violence in all forms, but the way in which terrorism is used by American society is definitely in service to conservative values and maintaining the status quo. You're more likely to be labeled a "potential terrorist" for having books about anarchy than you are for BLOWING UP A GODDAMN ABORTION CLINIC. There's also a definite racism in the way the words are used.

[Premmy]

E2: And another thing, I'm sick of people using Britain's colonial record as a stick to stop all debate. It's lazy and unhelpful. Sure they murdered billions but that was mostly due to their sheer scale tghan anything else. The vast majority of people they replaced were worse rulers than them and murdered more of their own people, took more from their own people and left their own people with less power and less opportunity than the British masters. Their is a tendency to see pre-colonial people as like a bunch of Rossuean noble savages but a lot of the time they were replaced beady little pissants and while they could be equally as exploitative, though not as much as you might imagine, they often improved life for the average person through trade, developing economies and access to wider world. In some places they were ruinously destructive and made life much worse but in some places they made life much better- on the whole they were a monstrous empire but you really have to look at the particulars of individual cases and a lot of the the most pasisonate accounts against the british were butthurt native richies. This is just a pet peeve of mine, it reeks of what is labelled "Orientalism" where all the old accounts of China, India, Japan etc just placed them in little stereotypical bubbles of what we expected them to be like.
I don't think saying Britain's empire was terrible necessarily equates to praise for anybody in particular.

[Amake]

Meanwhile in Sweden, the racist party is pulling ahead in the polls of six of the established parties in government, behind only the two main parties. This is the result of their two years of hard work being part of the government and contributing absolutely nothing.

But anyway, I blame this surge in hate of foreigners in our country largely on GW Bush. To uneducated dumbasses he made it cool to hate brown people, and we're still seeing the effects of that.

What will Obama's legacy be, you think? If I'm being charitable I could compare him to Olof Palme, without the being mysteriously murdered part anyway. An advocate of peaceful foreign relations and champion of social justice through education. . .well that may be a little too charitable. But he has to have something more going for him than "the first black president", right?

[Jagos]

If he signs the Grand Bargain?

I expect him to increase resentment against him.

http://beingliberal.tumblr.com/post/35526825567/grand-bargain-offer

[POS Industries]

What I was actually get was the fact that an act of terrorism can be good or it can be bad and the use of "terrorism" as a negative slur is conservative bullshit designed to prevent change.
I was referring to the American revolution where most modern Americans (if perhaps not Smarty- both sides were pretty equal in the being fucks category and there is no real reason to support either one though if it comes down to it Britain were actually slightly less fucks than the USA in the 19th century) would agree with the acts of the revolutionaries but they were undeniably terrorists.

E: Like I could have gone with an act of terrorism by America itself- which are generally a lot larger than 9/11 if you count poor and foreign people as 1 each- but they are pretty much done on other people soil.
I think the major qualifier here is "single largest," in which case no single act of terrorism (not counting actual full-scale military engagements) by the American revolutionaries comes close to a 3k kill count.

The whole statement was pretty clear and concise, dude.

[Magus]

Terrorism is using acts of violence against civilian targets in order to get them to do what you want, though. I'm sure there were terroristic acts on both sides in both the Revolutionary War and the War of 1812 but defining the entire rebellion as a terrorist act is bogus unless you have the broadest definition of terrorism as possible. You could argue any act of war is terrorism but that would be an incredibly nebulous definition that reduces the word "terrorism" to pointlessness.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

I don't think saying Britain's empire was terrible necessarily equates to praise for anybody in particular.

Counterpoint:



England is such a lovely nation isn't it? So much history

/Break/

I think the major qualifier here is "single largest," in which case no single act of terrorism (not counting actual full-scale military engagements) by the American revolutionaries comes close to a 3k kill count.

The whole statement was pretty clear and concise, dude.

Terrorism is using acts of violence against civilian targets in order to get them to do what you want, though. I'm sure there were terroristic acts on both sides in both the Revolutionary War and the War of 1812 but defining the entire rebellion as a terrorist act is bogus unless you have the broadest definition of terrorism as possible. You could argue any act of war is terrorism but that would be an incredibly nebulous definition that reduces the word "terrorism" to pointlessness.

Terrorism is the systematic use of terror, often violent, especially as a means of coercion.
That pretty much defines the revolutionary war. Like sure there is no single acrt which is comparable but I have no real problem with putting the entire war as a single act as it was a coordinated campaign.
If Al-Qaeda wants to blow up some more buildings I can add that to their scorecard as well, I am equal opportunities here.

[Premmy]

Counterpoint:


No it isn't.

As someone who's primary personality trait is disagreeing with everything, you should be able to grasp the idea of disliking two things equally and only mentioning one at a given moment.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

Aerozord was countering my placement of the American revolution as a terrorist act with the British colonial record (even though this wasn't my point) despite the fact that the founding fathers were, even by contemporary standards, outrageous bigots, a bunch of opportunistic chancers and far worse than their British counterparts.
So, exactly what I was complaining about then.

[Magus]

"Terrorism is the systematic use of terror, often violent, especially as a means of coercion.
That pretty much defines the revolutionary war." That pretty much defines every war. So you're going to have to be a little more specific.

I mean you basically have the Filipino genocide as an example of an American war full of terroristic acts but you pick on the American Revolution?

[Premmy]

Aerozord was countering my placement of the American revolution as a terrorist act with the British colonial record (even though this wasn't my point) despite the fact that the founding fathers were, even by contemporary standards, outrageous bigots, a bunch of opportunistic chancers and far worse than their British counterparts.
So, exactly what I was complaining about then.

The comment your quip was in response to was about the "single largest act", I'm pretty much okay with framing the revolutionary war as "terrorism" since it passes the duck test re: terrorism, But representing an entire war as a "single act" is just stupid: "multiple acts of terrorism" sure, a " Campaign of Terrorism" sure. A single act? Now that's just more Smarty bullshit in the interest of constantly putting America(or whatever everyone in the room is currently talking about) at the bottom of the "most horrible" list(as if the country doesn't do that all by itself).

Which is what Aero was actually talking about. You don't complain, you bitch and Aero was complaining about your bitching.
edit: and a single line insulting Britain is STILL not a counterpoint to my point

[Professor Smarmiarty]

"Terrorism is the systematic use of terror, often violent, especially as a means of coercion.
That pretty much defines the revolutionary war." That pretty much defines every war. So you're going to have to be a little more specific.

I mean you basically have the Filipino genocide as an example of an American war full of terroristic acts but you pick on the American Revolution?

That was in the Phillipines. Thus it didn't count.
And is a bad example of what I was saying because most people will denounce that war nowadays. Same with most of the other examples of American terrorism.
I wanted the example that the most people today would agree with as an act to show that terrorism is not actually a bad thing and so I went straight for the doozy.


The comment your quip was in response to was about the "single largest act", I'm pretty much okay with framing the revolutionary war as "terrorism" since it passes the duck test re: terrorism, But representing an entire war as a "single act" is just stupid: "multiple acts of terrorism" sure, a " Campaign of Terrorism" sure. A single act?

As a counterpoint to your point go read like every history of colonialism wreitten between say 1940 and 1970. Or any comment section on something vaguely about colonialism about the internet. If you haven't seen people use british colonial history as a stick to surpress arguments you simply haven't read anything on colonialism. Or like racism, sexism, any of these things- this is like internet arguing 101. Aero did it in this very thread and how is that not a counterpoint? His entire post was "britain are bad thus your point is invalid". And its annoying because it shuts down debate and argument and hurts knowledge. It was like the other day when we were talking about Kant and everybody is like "Kant was a fuck" over and over- which yes he was but where does that get us, how does that help us? You're just blindly repeating what everybody knows over and over again which prevents more clinical, reasoned arguments and evaluations. Or the popular trend of attacking say christianity using the most extreme representations of it in say intelligent design. And I agree that christianity is history's greatest monster by doing that you prevent yourself from harnessing the radical potential at its core, from the extremely powerful arguments of say Bloch and Milibank because you are just using your correct but limited view of "Fuck everything christainity".

The whole act/multiple acts is semantics, you could go either way and who really gives a shit (and you accuse me of bitching). But to me the revolutionary war was a campaign of coordinated terror- how is that not a single act? Is there usch a thing as a "war" or should we just consider them a series of battles which happen to involve the same side.

[QUOTE]
Now that's just more Smarty bullshit in the interest of constantly putting America(or whatever everyone in the room is currently talking about) at the bottom of the "most horrible" list(as if the country doesn't do that all by itself).

Which is what Aero was actually talking about. You don't complain, you bitch and Aero was complaining about your bitching.
edit: and a single line insulting Britain is STILL not a counterpoint to my point
Maybe if you guys didn't throw around so much reactionary bullshit I wouldn't have to bitch you out on it so much. This is classic "Why don't you stop complaining about my bigotry".
Also 99% of my posts are jokes- I'm not really sure how that is bitching or a concerted campaign to attack what ever everyone is talking about. I only bitch in the 1% where you guys bitch about my jokes because they remind you of how much you desperately hate the poor/minorities/women/yourself (delete as appropriate)



TLDR VERSION: Man dudes, I was just making a comment on the use of words and how their meanings are being subverted by the media/culture that we live in and we should reclaim them. I wrote it in like 10 seconds and I don't see the point of a massive exegesis of it.
My entire point was "terrorism can be bad/sweet, it is entirely neutral depending on what side of the cause you are on and we should not fall into the trap of putting bad dudes as "terrorists" and good dudes as "not terrorists"". And like if anyone wants to have issue with that they should, having an argument about where the line should be drawn between an act or multiple acts or a campaign is just ridiculoussssss.

[Magus]

Well I was just arguing with your definition of terrorism, if you want to take it down to the war's individual elements then that is fine. I'm just saying there's a difference between a battle maneuver and an act of terrorism. Attacking a group of enemy soldiers is a battle maneuver, tarring and feathering one or two captured ones in the public square is an act of terrorism.

Like let's look at an entirely separate era and geographical location--Vlad the Impaler killing 20,000 Turkish soldiers is a battle maneuver. Vlad the Impaler impaling 20,000 Turkish soldiers on pikes and leaving them for the reinforcement army to see is an act of terrorism (especially since it's rumored he couldn't actually find 20,000 Turkish soldiers and so went ahead and impaled quite a few villagers as well).

[POS Industries]

My favorite part is where Smarty keeps ignoring what I actually said to continue derailing the topic in the way he wants.

The point wasn't about the definition of terrorism as positive or negative, the point was that 9/11 was the single largest instance of whatever you want to call it on American soil. You can infer this from the fact that it was what I said in no uncertain terms, except that I guess Smarty really wants to have an argument about the relative morality of revolutionary tactics and how they're defined in the public, which is nice and all but doesn't have a thing to do with the actual topic of this thread.

And since the thread's intended topic has been so successfully derailed by Smarty's efforts to do so, I will be closing it and we will be putting it under further disciplinary review.