I LOVE THIS GUY - Page 2

and do u really think that Glen Beck has more watch parties than Obama? Don't sell ur homie short now
I'm sure I can refute that video with a mass of em for ur boy if you wanna go there =]

I can't really get into the other stuff k2o4 til the worldwide government thing gets settled, and tec27 I will look at that but I dunno do I have to? as the beginning of this meltdown doesn't really surprise me and I reallllly hope I'm asleep within an hour and sixteen minutes =D should already be a fkn asleep instead of making more stupid posts...geebus can't believe I'm still up but alas here I am

Well, you probably understand it already. I still enjoyed it although I understand it completely, as Peter Schiff is a good speaker and makes things interesting. (He also explains it really well for the layman)

stop calling it a new world order. sounds like some sorta conspiracy shit and makes me think of that video you posted. Baal, I said I didn't understand it cause I watched some crazy conspiracy video about it and felt like it lacked a lot. I understand the basic idea - scary powerful people are trying to ensalve us all. but I don't consider myself to know enough about it, if it even exists. now, if by new world order you mean a 1 world govt, I think that's far in the future but probably will happen. I'm not against a 1 world govt because I believe we're all interconnected and interdependent, and I'm not scared of "them" whether they're black or brown or whatever. But I've never sat around planning a 1 world govt.

As for Obama leading the march to a 1 world govt, you need to be pretty fucking paranoid to read that out of what he's said. You posted obama's speech in berlin and just cause he's talking about world unity you assume he's going to force us all to join 1 world govt or some shit? cmon, take your tinfoil hat off plz.

seriously, if you use this clip as proof of a new world order it's because you're too fucking stupid to understand wtf he's talking about. dear god, it's pretty scary to see that someone could take this type of speech and turn it into some sorta conspiracy shit.

On March 18 2009 10:55 tec27 wrote: You really need to consider whether or not your views make sense logically, I think. If someone gets bitten by a mosquito and gets malaria, they've taken some sort of risk that puts them into the position to get malaria in the first place. So by that fact, they have a certain amount of responsibility in getting the disease, and why should they deserve "free" treatment any more than the smoker? At what point do you consider people to know the risks they are taking, and therefore to have chosen to have the disease they have? If I choose to go on a trip to the Amazon or something, and there is a much higher chance of getting malaria there, should I still be treated if I get it? I knew/had the opportunity to know the risks before I went, just as I have the opportunity to know the risks before I smoke. All government healthcare institutes a form of moral hazard into society, and moral hazard is a bad, bad thing.

It's very logical.

If you stick your hand into a jar full of malaria infected mosquitoes and get malaria, pay for your treatment.

If you're traveling the world and get bitten by a mosquito that has malaria, free treatment.

If you abuse alcohol and destroy your liver, no treatment.

Basically if you do really stupid shit that is obviously going to cause you health problems then you should pay for your health problems. If you're just living a regular life, which obviously has health risk but they're just standard, then you're taken care of. EZ Peezy

o

On March 18 2009 11:56 ToTehEastSide wrote: and do u really think that Glen Beck has more watch parties than Obama? Don't sell ur homie short now I'm sure I can refute that video with a mass of em for ur boy if you wanna go there =]

Not saying that he has more than Obama, just saying that to insult obama for watch parties and not insult beck for em would be stupid. Don't want to be setting double standards now right?

ok I shoulda went to sleep because your really confusing me
I was just asking if you would support such a thing. That's it
even said you can call it w/e u want
help me take off my tinfoil hat plz?
how is global citizenship not a worldwide government?
is that not what he is shooting for in this video?
this video isn't a slanted clip, it is of him talking. plz, tell me, what is his point in the video? his theme? explain it to me like I'm a first grader as I'm obviously ignorant of the TRUE meaning.
and I am not accusing you of anything, so relax, debate, it'll be ok


oh and what in the hell are u talking about lol? I insulted Obama about watch parties? huh??
I am hella tired so maybe I did, can you show me where plz? I just remember defending myself against you when u asked me if hosted some watch party for Glen Beck and I said I'm sure there is more of those on your side - don't get twisted
I don't even know nor really care what those are lol

On March 18 2009 14:06 k2o4 wrote: Show nested quote + On March 18 2009 10:55 tec27 wrote: You really need to consider whether or not your views make sense logically, I think. If someone gets bitten by a mosquito and gets malaria, they've taken some sort of risk that puts them into the position to get malaria in the first place. So by that fact, they have a certain amount of responsibility in getting the disease, and why should they deserve "free" treatment any more than the smoker? At what point do you consider people to know the risks they are taking, and therefore to have chosen to have the disease they have? If I choose to go on a trip to the Amazon or something, and there is a much higher chance of getting malaria there, should I still be treated if I get it? I knew/had the opportunity to know the risks before I went, just as I have the opportunity to know the risks before I smoke. All government healthcare institutes a form of moral hazard into society, and moral hazard is a bad, bad thing. It's very logical. If you stick your hand into a jar full of malaria infected mosquitoes and get malaria, pay for your treatment. If you're traveling the world and get bitten by a mosquito that has malaria, free treatment. If you abuse alcohol and destroy your liver, no treatment. Basically if you do really stupid shit that is obviously going to cause you health problems then you should pay for your health problems. If you're just living a regular life, which obviously has health risk but they're just standard, then you're taken care of. EZ Peezy

But can we draw lines for every case? What if I drive 5 miles over the speed limit and I get into a bad traffic accident, do I deserve free treatment? What if I jaywalk and get hit by a car, do I deserve free treatment? Universal healthcare brings about so many more issues than it solves (if it really solves any at all). Its really just one more step towards a hugely tyrannical, all-powerful surveillance state.

and my o post I cut out because I didn't think k2o4 was gonna reply before I did eventually pass out
but other than I did say I was gonna watch that vid tec27 have no doubt about that cuz truth be known I probably don't know all that much about the whole thing
I just don't think I will retain much atm

shit, even though I really think the world government (that name is ok right?) topic is quite an interesting subject when dealing with heavy Obama followers if I have to wait another hour for a response I will probably end up typing in what looks like greek but isn't

ahhh decisions decisions

Ron Paul is cool

On March 18 2009 14:19 ToTehEastSide wrote: ok I shoulda went to sleep because your really confusing me I was just asking if you would support such a thing. That's it even said you can call it w/e u want help me take off my tinfoil hat plz? how is global citizenship not a worldwide government? is that not what he is shooting for in this video? this video isn't a slanted clip, it is of him talking. plz, tell me, what is his point in the video? his theme? explain it to me like I'm a first grader as I'm obviously ignorant of the TRUE meaning. and I am not accusing you of anything, so relax, debate, it'll be ok oh and what in the hell are u talking about lol? I insulted Obama about watch parties? huh?? I am hella tired so maybe I did, can you show me where plz? I just remember defending myself against you when u asked me if hosted some watch party for Glen Beck and I said I'm sure there is more of those on your side - don't get twisted I don't even know nor really care what those are lol

Let's try it this way, you tell me how the hell his speech proves some sorta move to a new world order or a 1 world government, and then I explain why you're either stupid or crazy for thinking it. =) But seriously, I'm very curious to hear how someone twists that speech into a new world order speech.

Re: watch parties, I made a joke about the beck watch parties cause I'd just seen the clip I posted for you and I was assuming you were one of the people at those parties. Your response was that Obama had watch parties, not beck. So I posted proof of becks watch parties. Watch parties are fine, but when they're to watch becks crying and weirdo ranting it's pretty funny to me =)

On March 18 2009 14:23 tec27 wrote: Show nested quote + On March 18 2009 14:06 k2o4 wrote:   On March 18 2009 10:55 tec27 wrote: You really need to consider whether or not your views make sense logically, I think. If someone gets bitten by a mosquito and gets malaria, they've taken some sort of risk that puts them into the position to get malaria in the first place. So by that fact, they have a certain amount of responsibility in getting the disease, and why should they deserve "free" treatment any more than the smoker? At what point do you consider people to know the risks they are taking, and therefore to have chosen to have the disease they have? If I choose to go on a trip to the Amazon or something, and there is a much higher chance of getting malaria there, should I still be treated if I get it? I knew/had the opportunity to know the risks before I went, just as I have the opportunity to know the risks before I smoke. All government healthcare institutes a form of moral hazard into society, and moral hazard is a bad, bad thing. It's very logical. If you stick your hand into a jar full of malaria infected mosquitoes and get malaria, pay for your treatment. If you're traveling the world and get bitten by a mosquito that has malaria, free treatment. If you abuse alcohol and destroy your liver, no treatment. Basically if you do really stupid shit that is obviously going to cause you health problems then you should pay for your health problems. If you're just living a regular life, which obviously has health risk but they're just standard, then you're taken care of. EZ Peezy But can we draw lines for every case? What if I drive 5 miles over the speed limit and I get into a bad traffic accident, do I deserve free treatment? What if I jaywalk and get hit by a car, do I deserve free treatment? Universal healthcare brings about so many more issues than it solves (if it really solves any at all). Its really just one more step towards a hugely tyrannical, all-powerful surveillance state.

I'd rather go through and draw lines for every case and be rewarded for healthy living with free health care when I get unlucky rather than keep this system where I get shit on by the insurance / healthcare companies no matter what I do.

u can not be serious k2o4...
why are u trying to do some magic flip switch-ahroo onto me or something? lol Or maybe on yourself.
I already said my piece and u are shying away from saying yours. Why? As I already asked, what else could the point of this speech be about? Seriously. If it is not about global citizenship and in no way lays any groundwork towards creating a world government then PLEASE let me know what this speeches meaning really was about.. Enlighten me I beg you.

Here, again, I will help you. Here is an excerpt from the clip, just translate these to whatever YOU think it means. Remember, he is in Berlin.

"In this new world, such dangerous currents have swept along faster than our efforts to contain them. That is why we cannot afford to be divided. No one nation, no matter how large or powerful, can defeat such challenges alone. None of us can deny these threats, or escape responsibility in meeting them. Yet, in the absence of Soviet tanks and a terrible wall, it has become easy to forget this truth. And if we're honest with each other, we know that sometimes, on both sides of the Atlantic, we have drifted apart, and forgotten our shared destiny.

In Europe, the view that America is part of what has gone wrong in our world, rather than a force to help make it right, has become all too common. In America, there are voices that deride and deny the importance of Europe's role in our security and our future. Both views miss the truth - that Europeans today are bearing new burdens and taking more responsibility in critical parts of the world; and that just as American bases built in the last century still help to defend the security of this continent, so does our country still sacrifice greatly for freedom around the globe.

Yes, there have been differences between America and Europe. No doubt, there will be differences in the future. But the burdens of global citizenship continue to bind us together. A change of leadership in Washington will not lift this burden. In this new century, Americans and Europeans alike will be required to do more - not less. Partnership and cooperation among nations is not a choice; it is the one way, the only way, to protect our common security and advance our common humanity. "

If you need me to, I will post the whole speech, and underline parts I think are important. Just let me know. This imo was the most important part which is why I made sure the video had it.

On the watch parties bit, I never watched that video before you posted it. In case you did not notice, Glen Beck was not my reasoning for making this blog. But I concede all points and yes Glen is a crying sniveling whatever you say he is. Fine by me.

Not dodging, just to me the clip is so OBVIOUSLY not what you think it is that it's hard to argue with you. I just wanna say "WATCH IT AND USE YOUR BRAIN". But obviously you hear it differently. So I asked you to explain WHY you saw it differently so I could explain why you were wrong rather than me just randomly going through the entire speech and doing a full break down on what it means.

Here's an overview of what the speech is about - re-building alliances with europe that bush shat on and recognizing our interdependence. He's making the point that even though we live on opposite sides of the ocean, what happens in the USA affects Europe and what happens in Europe affects the USA. He's saying that even though bush farted in your face for 8 years, I won't, because I understand the need for everyone to work together towards common goals.

I think you have some weird thing in your head where you hear "let's work together" and think "OH WE CAN ONLY WORK TOGETHER IF OBAMA CONTROLS THE WORLD, NEW WORLD ORDER AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH RUNNN!!!"

He's not talking about all coming together to form one government. He's talking about working together as separate countries.

As for the "Global Citizen" line that seems to give you nightmares, that isn't a term referring to a world of people under the same government who have chips implanted in their arms so this 1 government can control them. It's a term that's often used amongst peace activists which is referring to interdependence and caring about what happens to people in Darfur or Burma even if they aren't in our country, cause we all share this world together. It's not an evil term.

If you need more then please POINT OUT SPECIFIC PARTS OF THE SPEECH WHICH SCARE YOU AND, LIKE I SAID EARLIER, I WILL EXPLAIN WHY YOU'RE STUPID OR CRAZY FOR BEING SCARED.

I wonder if I should cool this situation now that it's over or just let it be.

I actually have a pretty long thing/explanation? written out here, but I all of a sudden think differently at the last moment and I think I am actually going to instead put nothing and let Fudyann handle it and answer what he thinks of the whole thing if he so chooses to do so (which unfortunately I'd easily bet against lol)

so I guess it is what it is
trust ur gut
goodnight

total OWNAGE!!


this video is so good it almost makes me regret the direction I decided to take this blog
thank you very much for this tec!
I'm still rollin so hard from the China segments
<333 the export solution and borrowing to consume points and Bernanke vs Greenspan and Tom Sawyer ++++ soooo much more
u run into any other pieces of gold u be sure to share lol

On March 18 2009 18:54 ToTehEastSide wrote: I wonder if I should cool this situation now that it's over or just let it be. I actually have a pretty long thing/explanation? written out here, but I all of a sudden think differently at the last moment and I think I am actually going to instead put nothing and let Fudyann handle it and answer what he thinks of the whole thing if he so chooses to do so (which unfortunately I'd easily bet against lol) so I guess it is what it is trust ur gut goodnight

So now you see why it wasn't a new world order speech?

yes, thanks

btw, encase u or anyone else wonders about the other stuff in this thread I was gonna respond about, tec27 did such a damn marvelous job that the only thing he left I already said which is watch that video! It really is worthwhile, moreso than my new silly blog