HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » sibelian » Journal
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU
Page: « Prev 1 ... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ... 26 Next »

sibelian

Profile Information

Member since: Tue Sep 4, 2007, 07:36 AM
Number of posts: 5,933

Journal Archives

How come I'm not racist if I criticise Bobby Jindahl?


Never got that.

(???)

OK, you wanna know what I think of Generation Y?

They seem to HATE EACH OTHER.

I'm hyper-rugged individualist "take some gaddamned responsibility" Generation X and me and the crazy "squeeeeeze every last minute out of your life with your bare hands!!!" Boomers and the heroic "just be kind and do the right thing" Greatest Gen, and even sensible, placid, unassuming "I'm not really sure what the fuss is all about" Gen Jones (who nobody ever listens to), and, like, everybody are all looking at each other thinking "shite dudes, we fucked all this up, the poor Gen Y guys are going to be so mad at us" and what Gen Y seems to do almost universally is point fingers at each other with accusations of "NARCISSISM!"

I don't have to carry a gun. I live in the UK.

There's basically no guns. Well, there are some, but not in anything like significant numbers.

I suppose I just take it for granted that I can wander about without thinking "has that guy got a gun" or "oh no, another gun massacre".



Nobody where I live is bothered about protecting themselves. There's nothing in particular to protect ourselves against, really. Apart from the occasional drunken moron.

I'm incredibly traumatised psychologically, in almost innumerable ways.

Don't you understand that you are all responsible for my emotional well-being?

How can I feel good about myself and the world I'm living in when I am surrounded by so many upsetting people?

Can't you see that my belief system only has any integrity if you all agree with it?

Sometimes I think you people and I simply aren't on the same page at all.

Don't you realise that when you disagree with me it's because you have a deep and unconscious personality flaw that distorts your thinking, a flaw that I can understand and you can't?

You must understand - I excel in standing on a sort of psychologically internal pedestal, from which I can make pithy observations about our conversation as a whole, whereas when you appear to attempt something similar you're just ignoring me.

Don't you realise that if you leave me with no way of contradicting what you've posted then it makes me look bad and consequently feel bad? That's kind of a jerky thing to do, isn't it? You're kind of a jerk.

There's one thing I'd like to draw particular attention to - when I make generalisations I do it properly because of the special vantage point from which I make them, but when you do it, the special vantage point from which you make them means you're in the wrong.



WP: "This is the speech Obama would give on Syria if he were brutally honest"

"My fellow Americans, tonight I want to talk to you about Syria, why it matters and where we go from here.

Over the past two years, what began as a series of peaceful protests against the repressive regime of President Bashar al-Assad has turned into a brutal civil war. Over 100,000 people have been killed. Millions have fled to neighboring countries, risking greater instability and sectarian conflict in the region.

The question now is what the United States of America, and the international community, is prepared to do about it. The answer is: not very much..."


http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/09/11/this-is-the-speech-obama-would-give-on-syria-if-he-were-brutally-honest/

It's a sort of conspiracy theory in reverse.


Instead of shadowy, manipulative, super-powerful, super-clever forces carefully controlling your every thought for deeply nefarious reasons, Mr super-powerful, super-clever Wonderguy is carefully controlling everybody's thoughts for ultra-lovely reasons.

So, those preferring a diplomatic soution were wrong when they wanted it


AND wrong when Obama wanted it?

So... first the "position" is "bomb Syria"... the opposing position is "no....


....there needs to be a diplomatic solution...."

Then there IS a diplomatic solution...

And the same people who were originally supporting the bombing point at those who preferred the diplomatic solution and accuse them of not admitting that they were in the wrong.

That's actually very strange behaviour, isn't it?

There's never been an American president that didn't fuck some stuff up.


Sorry. It's just true.

So why weren't you all saying "Russia should take responsibility" two days ago?



Why were you all saying: "waaaaaah, we need to bomb Syria?"


Do you understand that your position changes with the wind? That it's blatantly tarnsparent that your position changes with the wind? That you don't really HAVE a position?


That you can't be trusted any more than he can?


That you know he can't be trusted, and neither can you? Which is why you have colossal "trust" thing in every single one of your silly "Won't somebody please think of the president" posts?
Go to Page: « Prev 1 ... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ... 26 Next »