The Watering Hole

Prease pess one for Engrish... :D

CraigBert — Oct 01, 2008Prease pess one for Engrish... :D

Will you explain that one to me? :-?

Ahhhh, is it "3 times the amount of McCain" that your referring to? That was a mistake on my part, I think I meant to imply that Obama would cut taxes 3 times more than McCain on the middle class. We were talking about debt, how would cutting taxes help reduce the debt. Read the page before that and you can see for yourself what the entire conversation was about. Instead of just pulling out a piece and saying, ha ha you messed up. Sounds like the media has arrived at the cave. ;D ;D

I think it would be smart for you to read the fucking chart again.

Notice that even the bloated, ever-expanding governments of the 50s, 60s and 70s still saw the debt sinking, and then the supposedly "smaller", less taxes government of the Reagan and Bush years saw it bloat up again, and then in Clinton's administration, brought it down again (while still increasing spending), and then it's up again in Bush W's years?

Tax cuts of the sort designed by Bush are fucking stupid...and the reality is, the tax plan proposed by Obama is much better for middle-class folk like you and me than the McCain plan, which only helps the super rich remain wealthy.  

I don't blame him for his self-interest, but he and the other gaggle of Republican liars really should stop claiming he's trying to cut YOUR taxes, because he isn't. Obama's the only one doing that. McCain's trying to cut rich people's taxes even more, shifting more burden on the people who actually SPEND money, further sending the economy down the toilet.

Not that McCain will get his plan passed if he wins and they elect 3 or 4 more populist Democrats to the Senate.

Tripper




O.K., I finally got the point of the graph. I guess I was in defensive mode and what you guys were saying didn't sink in. Now that that is over, I just re-read the entire thread 4 times and I finally understand what you were saying.

I will work on my problem. It seems when I get into a debate, I'm getting defensive of my position and forget the most important part of debating, which is to listen to the other side and understand what they are saying before I try to defend something that I have no clue as to what I'm defending. Goddamn, I'm a slow learner. Not that my goal is to be a good in debates, but my problem of getting defensive and not listening or interpreting what I read durring these discussions is just insane at times.


I'm just gonna throw out a apology to Fingers, Tripper, and Charger and a thanks for pulling up info that I failed to digest.

And to Trip especially, you've spent a shit load of time with me durring the religious arguments to finally help me understand thinking, and I went back to my stupid old ways in politics. I have to get a grip on all subjects and think better during any discussion on any issue. My bad, I'll fix it.

pickmaster60 — Oct 01, 2008[quote author=CraigBert link=1222488625/100#100 date=1222901786]Prease pess one for Engrish... :D

Will you explain that one to me? :-?


I just thought it was funny.  Kind of like "Gee, I hope he understands English!" after reading your post (below) to Hooky!  :D

pickmaster60 — Oct 01, 2008Hook,
I would suggest you go to Wikipedia. Why not start of with liberalism? It will give you a starting point.
I'm not talking about a quick 10 minute overview.
Slowley read through and ponder what your reading. Read things more than once. Coming back to what you have already read at a later date when you have learned more.

Click on the links in blue. which in return will give you more.
Then start checking out the conservative side and their philosophies.

I'm talking about getting a basic understanding of what's going on. At least 100 hours of serious reading. Perhaps more.
Otherwise your never really going to understand what's going on.

In this case your oposition is tripper,charger,fingers.
You must understand your oposition.You must know their basic pattern of thinking and why they think the way they do.
You have to look at things from the point of view of the person you disagree with......You can't do that unless you understand their basic philosophy and view.

But you can't start off being against something you don't know about...refuse to learn about it and ignore the evidence they bring forth......at least not if you expect to learn.

You must have intellectual curiosity to learn.....
You must become a reader.
Otherwise you will stay in this perpetual confusion.

And, in case you've never heard of Engrish, see this website: http://www.engrish.com/  :)

I was looking at that site. Pretty funny.

I found a menu with fried ass meat. ;D

Good for some chuckles.

Hookbender — Oct 01, 2008Instead of just pulling out a piece and saying, ha ha you messed up. Sounds like the media has arrived at the cave. ;D ;D

This is an example of your defense of McCain-Palin. The smileys are an obvious attempt to mask that this is your feeling about the issue, otherwise you wouldn't have bothered with it...

The McCain campaign and its surrogates have been far more guilty of this behavior than the media, and yet you have accepted their falsehood that the media is playing "gotcha" journalism. That's a crock of crap, and anyone with any experience or education in journalism (like me) knows it, provided they're not just being partisan.

Tripper

Hookbender — Oct 01, 2008O.K., I finally got the point of the graph. I guess I was in defensive mode and what you guys were saying didn't sink in. Now that that is over, I just re-read the entire thread 4 times and I finally understand what you were saying.

I will work on my problem. It seems when I get into a debate, I'm getting defensive of my position and forget the most important part of debating, which is to listen to the other side and understand what they are saying before I try to defend something that I have no clue as to what I'm defending. Goddamn, I'm a slow learner. Not that my goal is to be a good in debates, but my problem of getting defensive and not listening or interpreting what I read durring these discussions is just insane at times.

I'm just gonna throw out a apology to Fingers, Tripper, and Charger and a thanks for pulling up info that I failed to digest.

And to Trip especially, you've spent a shit load of time with me durring the religious arguments to finally help me understand thinking, and I went back to my stupid old ways in politics. I have to get a grip on all subjects and think better during any discussion on any issue. My bad, I'll fix it.

And I'll, in turn, try to make sure I don't blur who's said what and make incorrect assumptions of or assertions about your opinions. That was bad, and for that, I'm sorry.

But I stand by the other criticisms I've made.

And I'm glad you were open to understanding why people like me think like we do, though it's entirely up to you how that relates to how you think. I think one of the biggest problems we have as a people - as a society here in America - is that we SUCK at critical thinking. We have no skills, because for generations we've been brought up without them and have to seek them out on our own.

It's what explains the rise in fundamentalist religion's popularity in America...because there's nothing critical about the "thinking" that surrounds those groups, except of those who don't agree.

My general opinion on religion:
If you have faith, that's fine...but don't suspend reason when it deals with material issues - especially issues that affect people who are not you.

I'm very excited that Religulous is coming to theaters this weekend. I'm sure it'll be a huge hit in Alabama. :D:D
Tripper

I think one of the biggest problems we have as a people - as a society here in America - is that we SUCK at critical thinking.

I couldn't agree more.
I think it's a major problem and should be taught as soon as a child is able to understand.

My youngest child is 9. He does well in science and math. He interested in a lot of things. We've watched tv programs about UFO's,ghosts,religion and talked about if they were real or not ect.
I start pointing out reasons these things are not real and why people think they are. We weigh the evidence.It's in a very simple way so that he can understand.He likes it.

I'm teaching him to be aware of both sides of an argument. He's becoming a critical thinker.
He points out inconsistantcies well. He's caught me a few times.

He's had to hide the fact that Santa isn't real for quite a while at school.. My wife decided it  might ruin the fun for the other kids at school.

I think critical thinking should taught at grade schools.
It could easily be intergrated into science and history and probably other subjects.  

Religulous!
From the trailers.....more sane parts of the country should get together and give Alabama free tickets. ;D
Offer a free six pack,or stock car racing memorabilia. ;D


.

pickmaster60 — Oct 02, 2008 My youngest child is 9. He does well in science and math.

Does he go to the same school as Hooky?  :D ;D

Here Hook or those so inclined:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kevin_baas

The pattern. :)

Trip

First, thanks for understanding.

I'm really pissed for allowing myself to slip back to the beginning again. Right back to the mindset I had with religion. I guess a better word would be frustrated or aggravated. I have to fix that, and I will make a huge effort, I promise.

You know, I never even heard the term critical thinking until I came here. I never read one thing about logic, critical thinking, etc. Nothing.

That's just sad. Why isn't this taught in schools? Why don't we give kids an education on thinking and reason, logic? Doesn't make sense. We need to give kids the tools needed, and develop the skills needed, to make rational decisions.

At 40 years old, it's damn hard to change your pattern of thinking. I've been working on it now for 2 years on and off, and I just completely had a relapse. Just think how much easier decisions would be if you were taught these skills from an early age. Just think how different our children would be with the skills needed to think clearly and make reasonable decisions based on logic. Damn, they may be one of the most important gifts we could ever give them.

But, at 43 I have to fight with myself constantly and struggle to make logic come natural. To learn to think, all over again really. That's rediculous. I should have been doing this before I graduated highschool. At least by then.

It's like I have a second job that is completely mental. ;D ;D