NATION

PASSWORD

Obama or Romney?

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

Who do you support for president of the USA in 2012?

I support Mitt Romney
250
21%
I support neither
341
28%
I support Barrack Obama
624
51%
 
Total votes : 1215

User avatar
Wikkiwallana
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 22500
Founded: Mar 21, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Wikkiwallana » Sat Apr 21, 2012 5:38 pm

Sailsia wrote:
Eviliatopia wrote:They both suck ballz but fascism is bad and so I'll take Obama.

Obama has been incredibly fascist. Doesn't things like SOPA, PIPA, the National Defense Authorization Act, and appointing bankers to financial positions in the government, sound fascist to you?

This idea that somehow Obama has less blood on his hands than Bush is absurd. Frankly, I think Romney will be exactly the same as Obama, who was the same as Bush. EVERY president is going to be like Bush, until the American voters stop with this "lesser of two evils" shit.

Given that Obama didn't write SOPA, PIPA, and the NDAA…
Proud Scalawag and Statist!

Please don't confuse my country for my politics; my country is being run as a parody, my posts aren't.
Dumb Ideologies wrote:Halt!
Just because these people are stupid, wrong and highly dangerous does not mean you have the right to make them feel sad.
Xenohumanity wrote:
Nulono wrote:Snip
I'm a pro-lifer who runs a nation of dragon-men...
And even I think that's stupid.
Avenio wrote:Just so you know, the use of the term 'sheep' 'sheeple' or any other herd animal-based terminology in conjunction with an exhortation to 'think outside the box' or stop going along with groupthink generally indicates that the speaker is actually more closed-minded on the subject than the people that he/she is addressing. At least, in my experience at least.

User avatar
Wamitoria
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18852
Founded: Jun 28, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Wamitoria » Sat Apr 21, 2012 5:40 pm

Wikkiwallana wrote:
Sailsia wrote:Obama has been incredibly fascist. Doesn't things like SOPA, PIPA, the National Defense Authorization Act, and appointing bankers to financial positions in the government, sound fascist to you?

This idea that somehow Obama has less blood on his hands than Bush is absurd. Frankly, I think Romney will be exactly the same as Obama, who was the same as Bush. EVERY president is going to be like Bush, until the American voters stop with this "lesser of two evils" shit.

Given that Obama didn't write SOPA, PIPA, and the NDAA…

And helped kill the first two and is trying to kill CISPA...
Wonder where all the good posters went? Look no further!

Hurry, before the Summer Nazis show up again!

User avatar
Wikkiwallana
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 22500
Founded: Mar 21, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Wikkiwallana » Sat Apr 21, 2012 5:51 pm

Yandere Schoolgirls wrote:A vote for Obama is a vote for Marxism

Let's ask the Marxists:
"Hey Marxists, what do you think of Obama?"
"That damn corporatist?"
"Well, someone said a vote for Obama is a vote for Marxism, so I thought I should ask."
"I fucking wish, let me tell you…"


Hmm, seems they disagree.
Proud Scalawag and Statist!

Please don't confuse my country for my politics; my country is being run as a parody, my posts aren't.
Dumb Ideologies wrote:Halt!
Just because these people are stupid, wrong and highly dangerous does not mean you have the right to make them feel sad.
Xenohumanity wrote:
Nulono wrote:Snip
I'm a pro-lifer who runs a nation of dragon-men...
And even I think that's stupid.
Avenio wrote:Just so you know, the use of the term 'sheep' 'sheeple' or any other herd animal-based terminology in conjunction with an exhortation to 'think outside the box' or stop going along with groupthink generally indicates that the speaker is actually more closed-minded on the subject than the people that he/she is addressing. At least, in my experience at least.

User avatar
Mavorpen
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63266
Founded: Dec 20, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Mavorpen » Sat Apr 21, 2012 6:00 pm

Yandere Schoolgirls wrote:Safe or not it doesn't matter. The US government has no constitutional authority to stop the drilling even if they did as much as I love nature it's better for them to risk an oil spill if they fill it's necessary than to not drill at all.


That's easy to say when a giant oil spill doesn't happen in your backyard. :roll:
"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."—former Nixon domestic policy chief John Ehrlichman

User avatar
Wikkiwallana
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 22500
Founded: Mar 21, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Wikkiwallana » Sat Apr 21, 2012 6:02 pm

Military Forces wrote:OK, well Obama spends millions on his vacations, millions in government money.

Source on costs?
Proud Scalawag and Statist!

Please don't confuse my country for my politics; my country is being run as a parody, my posts aren't.
Dumb Ideologies wrote:Halt!
Just because these people are stupid, wrong and highly dangerous does not mean you have the right to make them feel sad.
Xenohumanity wrote:
Nulono wrote:Snip
I'm a pro-lifer who runs a nation of dragon-men...
And even I think that's stupid.
Avenio wrote:Just so you know, the use of the term 'sheep' 'sheeple' or any other herd animal-based terminology in conjunction with an exhortation to 'think outside the box' or stop going along with groupthink generally indicates that the speaker is actually more closed-minded on the subject than the people that he/she is addressing. At least, in my experience at least.

User avatar
Wikkiwallana
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 22500
Founded: Mar 21, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Wikkiwallana » Sat Apr 21, 2012 6:14 pm


Wow, when Cato is saying it's not a Democrat's fault, there really mustn't a case to be made to blame them.
Last edited by Wikkiwallana on Sat Apr 21, 2012 6:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Proud Scalawag and Statist!

Please don't confuse my country for my politics; my country is being run as a parody, my posts aren't.
Dumb Ideologies wrote:Halt!
Just because these people are stupid, wrong and highly dangerous does not mean you have the right to make them feel sad.
Xenohumanity wrote:
Nulono wrote:Snip
I'm a pro-lifer who runs a nation of dragon-men...
And even I think that's stupid.
Avenio wrote:Just so you know, the use of the term 'sheep' 'sheeple' or any other herd animal-based terminology in conjunction with an exhortation to 'think outside the box' or stop going along with groupthink generally indicates that the speaker is actually more closed-minded on the subject than the people that he/she is addressing. At least, in my experience at least.

User avatar
Yandere Schoolgirls
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1405
Founded: Apr 19, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Yandere Schoolgirls » Sat Apr 21, 2012 6:15 pm

Mavorpen wrote:
Yandere Schoolgirls wrote:Safe or not it doesn't matter. The US government has no constitutional authority to stop the drilling even if they did as much as I love nature it's better for them to risk an oil spill if they fill it's necessary than to not drill at all.


That's easy to say when a giant oil spill doesn't happen in your backyard. :roll:

That is what lawsuits are for. If another corporation is destroying your property or harming you have the right to boycott, protest are push a lawsuit against said corporation.

User avatar
Archliva
Attaché
 
Posts: 97
Founded: May 01, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Archliva » Sat Apr 21, 2012 6:19 pm

Yandere Schoolgirls wrote:
Mavorpen wrote:
That's easy to say when a giant oil spill doesn't happen in your backyard. :roll:

That is what lawsuits are for. If another corporation is destroying your property or harming you have the right to boycott, protest are push a lawsuit against said corporation.

"Let's be reactive and not proactive" argument.

Brutal
Last edited by Archliva on Sat Apr 21, 2012 6:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Wikkiwallana
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 22500
Founded: Mar 21, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Wikkiwallana » Sat Apr 21, 2012 6:21 pm

Yandere Schoolgirls wrote:
Mavorpen wrote:
That's easy to say when a giant oil spill doesn't happen in your backyard. :roll:

That is what lawsuits are for. If another corporation is destroying your property or harming you have the right to boycott, protest are push a lawsuit against said corporation.

Lawsuits don't fix the environment.
Proud Scalawag and Statist!

Please don't confuse my country for my politics; my country is being run as a parody, my posts aren't.
Dumb Ideologies wrote:Halt!
Just because these people are stupid, wrong and highly dangerous does not mean you have the right to make them feel sad.
Xenohumanity wrote:
Nulono wrote:Snip
I'm a pro-lifer who runs a nation of dragon-men...
And even I think that's stupid.
Avenio wrote:Just so you know, the use of the term 'sheep' 'sheeple' or any other herd animal-based terminology in conjunction with an exhortation to 'think outside the box' or stop going along with groupthink generally indicates that the speaker is actually more closed-minded on the subject than the people that he/she is addressing. At least, in my experience at least.

User avatar
Hittanryan
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9061
Founded: Mar 10, 2011
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Hittanryan » Sat Apr 21, 2012 6:25 pm

Yandere Schoolgirls wrote:
Mavorpen wrote:
That's easy to say when a giant oil spill doesn't happen in your backyard. :roll:

That is what lawsuits are for. If another corporation is destroying your property or harming you have the right to boycott, protest are push a lawsuit against said corporation.

"There's an oil slick in my living room!"

"Hire a lawyer and sue."

"I can't afford a lawyer and they have entire legal teams at their disposal."

"Move."

"Why should I have to move because someone else fucked up?"

"Communist."
In-character name of the nation is "Adiron," because I like the name better.

User avatar
Northern Dominus
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14337
Founded: Aug 23, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Northern Dominus » Sat Apr 21, 2012 6:25 pm

Wikkiwallana wrote:
Yandere Schoolgirls wrote:That is what lawsuits are for. If another corporation is destroying your property or harming you have the right to boycott, protest are push a lawsuit against said corporation.

Lawsuits don't fix the environment.

Or bring back the jobs that depended on the environment itself IE tourism, farming, ranching etc.
Battletech RP: Giant walking war machines, space to surface fighters, and other implements blowing things up= lots of fun! Sign up here
We even have a soundtrack!

RIP Caroll Shelby 1923-2012
Aurora, Oak Creek, Happy Valley, Sandy Hook. Just how high a price are we willing to pay?

User avatar
Yandere Schoolgirls
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1405
Founded: Apr 19, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Yandere Schoolgirls » Sat Apr 21, 2012 6:29 pm

Wikkiwallana wrote:
Yandere Schoolgirls wrote:That is what lawsuits are for. If another corporation is destroying your property or harming you have the right to boycott, protest are push a lawsuit against said corporation.

Lawsuits don't fix the environment.

Present for you
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-202961 ... tions.html

Also of course it does, the money from the lawsuit help to clean the environment or reimburse for any property damage boycotts insure that the corporation will take the clean up seriously unless they want to risk losing profit.

User avatar
New England and The Maritimes
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 28872
Founded: Aug 13, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby New England and The Maritimes » Sat Apr 21, 2012 6:30 pm

Yandere Schoolgirls wrote:
Wikkiwallana wrote:Lawsuits don't fix the environment.

Present for you
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... tions.html

Also of course it does, the money from the lawsuit help to clean the environment or reimburse for any property damage boycotts insure that the corporation will take the clean up seriously unless they want to risk losing profit.


How will a lawsuit put the top back on this mountain?

Image
All aboard the Love Train. Choo Choo, honeybears. I am Ininiwiyaw Rocopurr:Get in my bed, you perfect human being.
Yesterday's just a memory

Soviet Haaregrad wrote:Some people's opinions are based on rational observations, others base theirs on imaginative thinking. The reality-based community ought not to waste it's time refuting delusions.

Also, Bonobos
Formerly Brandenburg-Altmark Me.

User avatar
Northern Dominus
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14337
Founded: Aug 23, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Northern Dominus » Sat Apr 21, 2012 6:31 pm

Yandere Schoolgirls wrote:
Wikkiwallana wrote:Lawsuits don't fix the environment.

Present for you
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... tions.html

Also of course it does, the money from the lawsuit help to clean the environment or reimburse for any property damage boycotts insure that the corporation will take the clean up seriously unless they want to risk losing profit.

Uh huh, and Exxon and BP have spent more time cleaning the environments that they wrecked rather than engaging in massive PR campaigns...

And you're using a british tabloid rag as a source? Keep digging, China's coming up soon.
Battletech RP: Giant walking war machines, space to surface fighters, and other implements blowing things up= lots of fun! Sign up here
We even have a soundtrack!

RIP Caroll Shelby 1923-2012
Aurora, Oak Creek, Happy Valley, Sandy Hook. Just how high a price are we willing to pay?

User avatar
Hittanryan
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9061
Founded: Mar 10, 2011
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Hittanryan » Sat Apr 21, 2012 6:33 pm

Yandere Schoolgirls wrote:
Wikkiwallana wrote:Lawsuits don't fix the environment.

Present for you
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... tions.html

Also of course it does, the money from the lawsuit help to clean the environment or reimburse for any property damage boycotts insure that the corporation will take the clean up seriously unless they want to risk losing profit.

It's been 23 years since the Exxon Valdez spill, and there are still lingering effects. Consider that the BP oil spill was much larger and...no, lawsuits are probably not going to do much. Had they been properly regulated in the first place, it could've been avoided.
In-character name of the nation is "Adiron," because I like the name better.

User avatar
RedPhx
Political Columnist
 
Posts: 4
Founded: Apr 16, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby RedPhx » Sat Apr 21, 2012 6:33 pm

I vote my interests and as someone who is pro gay rights has a dad who is 50 and still working construction to support a wife and 2 of his 5 kids (rest of us are grown up), had lived in a homeless shelter without insurance for several months, and has a disability I find that Romney doesn't even come close.

User avatar
Lithatrius
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1132
Founded: Jun 24, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Lithatrius » Sat Apr 21, 2012 6:34 pm

Romney.
~ Lithatrius



  • Houston Texans
  • New Jersey Devils
  • New York Mets
  • Memphis Grizzlies
  • Michigan Wolverines

User avatar
Wikkiwallana
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 22500
Founded: Mar 21, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Wikkiwallana » Sat Apr 21, 2012 6:37 pm

Yandere Schoolgirls wrote:
Wikkiwallana wrote:Lawsuits don't fix the environment.

Present for you
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... tions.html

Also of course it does, the money from the lawsuit help to clean the environment or reimburse for any property damage boycotts insure that the corporation will take the clean up seriously unless they want to risk losing profit.

How nice, the Daily Mail with anonymous sources. I'm sure convinced.
Proud Scalawag and Statist!

Please don't confuse my country for my politics; my country is being run as a parody, my posts aren't.
Dumb Ideologies wrote:Halt!
Just because these people are stupid, wrong and highly dangerous does not mean you have the right to make them feel sad.
Xenohumanity wrote:
Nulono wrote:Snip
I'm a pro-lifer who runs a nation of dragon-men...
And even I think that's stupid.
Avenio wrote:Just so you know, the use of the term 'sheep' 'sheeple' or any other herd animal-based terminology in conjunction with an exhortation to 'think outside the box' or stop going along with groupthink generally indicates that the speaker is actually more closed-minded on the subject than the people that he/she is addressing. At least, in my experience at least.

User avatar
Yandere Schoolgirls
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1405
Founded: Apr 19, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Yandere Schoolgirls » Sat Apr 21, 2012 6:38 pm

New England and The Maritimes wrote:
Yandere Schoolgirls wrote:Present for you
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... tions.html

Also of course it does, the money from the lawsuit help to clean the environment or reimburse for any property damage boycotts insure that the corporation will take the clean up seriously unless they want to risk losing profit.


How will a lawsuit put the top back on this mountain?

Image

Probably won't, but regardless that's no reason not to rely on petrol fuels. Can't stop the wheels of industry for the environment a lot of us would starve to death. I'd hate to think what would happen if we stopped risk all together there would be no technological or industry progress at all.

User avatar
Archliva
Attaché
 
Posts: 97
Founded: May 01, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Archliva » Sat Apr 21, 2012 6:39 pm

Yandere Schoolgirls wrote:
Wikkiwallana wrote:Lawsuits don't fix the environment.

Present for you
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... tions.html

Also of course it does, the money from the lawsuit help to clean the environment or reimburse for any property damage boycotts insure that the corporation will take the clean up seriously unless they want to risk losing profit.

Again, being reactive is possibly the worst thing to happen to citizens and the environment.


"LOL, sorry about that mess. We'll clean it up....What? You still have oil in there after 20 years? umm...yeah, sorry"

I'm sure lawsuits will bring back the environment.

Cleaning up =/= putting back the environment that was lost

User avatar
Ashmoria
Post Czar
 
Posts: 46718
Founded: Mar 19, 2004
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Ashmoria » Sat Apr 21, 2012 6:41 pm

TaQud wrote:
Ashmoria wrote:its biracial and .... are you posting on an iphone?

How did you know?

iphone auto-complete sucks.
whatever

User avatar
Hittanryan
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9061
Founded: Mar 10, 2011
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Hittanryan » Sat Apr 21, 2012 6:42 pm

Yandere Schoolgirls wrote:Probably won't, but regardless that's no reason not to rely on petrol fuels. Can't stop the wheels of industry for the environment a lot of us would starve to death. I'd hate to think what would happen if we stopped risk all together there would be no technological or industry progress at all.

How about the fact that oil's just going to run the fuck out one day? Or the fact that technological progress can take the form of improving renewable energy technology?
In-character name of the nation is "Adiron," because I like the name better.

User avatar
Ashmoria
Post Czar
 
Posts: 46718
Founded: Mar 19, 2004
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Ashmoria » Sat Apr 21, 2012 6:48 pm

Hittanryan wrote:
The Kievan People wrote:Don't tread on my pipeline!

So I'd have to support Romney. He seems like a very pragmatic and sensible guy, sort of like a Republican Obama. :lol:

Fuck off pipeline. Won't bring gas prices down at all and it'll just give the oil industry more money with which to block alternative energy.

so the fucking koch brothers get even richer, the oil goes to china and WE get the enviromental degradation and cancer.

if canada wants its friggin' tar sand oil refined they should do it themselves or build a pipeline through their own country.
whatever

User avatar
Leeeeroyyyy7
Political Columnist
 
Posts: 5
Founded: Apr 19, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Leeeeroyyyy7 » Sun Apr 22, 2012 11:26 am

Mavorpen wrote:
Yandere Schoolgirls wrote:Trust me Obama will more than make for that difference when he goes on a spending spree once he's re-elected


Oh look, a claim that has no evidence. This is your specialty isn't it?

:palm:
Seriously, people?I though stupidest thing I would ever hear was the thought that cutting taxes on the rich is somehow gonna magically help the low and middle class. Marxist ideas involved a violent revolution by the lower class :palm: :palm: :palm: :palm: :palm:

EDIT: My quote didn't work all the way :palm:
Last edited by Leeeeroyyyy7 on Sun Apr 22, 2012 11:28 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Warriors United
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 103
Founded: Apr 04, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Warriors United » Thu Apr 26, 2012 7:43 pm

Wikkiwallana wrote:
Military Forces wrote:OK, well Obama spends millions on his vacations, millions in government money.

Source on costs?

Anyone paying attention knows he has spent millions on vacations. And those millions are actually taxpayer dollars as the government does not generate its own money. That is up to the private sector.

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Austria-Bohemia-Hungary, Democratic Republic of North Korea, Duvniask, EuroStralia, Fractalnavel, Washington Resistance Army

Advertisement

Remove ads