White House Administration escalates war on U.S. News Network

CrackerJax

New Member
It's whatever lib's call it I guess..... the rest of the country disagrees... but what do they know? :roll:

There's a reason why they are number one across the board.
1.) they are getting the news ppl want to hear and know about.
2.) they are an arm of the republican party and the country is attracted to it in droves

1 & 2 ...although different routes....lead to the SAME CONCLUSION.... the ppl like Fox News and Obama doesn't.... I wonder why.

it is Obama & Ilk which are out of step with the country... and THEY KNOW IT !!
 

Wavels

Well-Known Member
This summarizes the situation better than I could.
bongsmilie

When conservatives hear liberal bias, they say, “Yeah, so? The sun rises in the east.” When liberals hear conservative bias, or even a point or bit of news uncongenial to liberals, they’re apt to say, “Eek, a mouse!”

Anita Dunn was boasting the other day about how the White House “controlled” (her word) the media’s coverage of Obama’s presidential campaign. Fox News is a network the White House surely can’t control. You can understand the Obama people’s instinct: “Get ’em” — and you will have the other networks’ support as you do.

My main question: Why aren’t other journalists — the ones who work for the other networks — embarrassed? Shouldn’t they feel annoyed at being Obama’s pets, even when they are? You know? Where is their pride or manhood? And why should I have to learn about Van Jones, ACORN, and other significant matters from Fox News opinionists? Shouldn’t the news business take care of the news, while the opinionists take care of the opinions? Weird, weird times. (Weird, weird Times?)

One more thing: I love something Charles Krauthammer says about Fox News. You will hear more from Dr. K. in an interview piece I will have in the next National Review. He says, “Rupert Murdoch and Roger Ailes are geniuses: They found a niche market — half of America.”


Excepted from:http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=Njc1NTI5NjlkMTBjMTU4YWNkNGRjNGZjYzU4NjI1ZWM
 

CrackerJax

New Member
Isn't that the same Dunne who told elementary kids how kewl she thought Mao Tse Tung was and suggested him as a mentor?
 

medicineman

New Member
This summarizes the situation better than I could.
bongsmilie

When conservatives hear liberal bias, they say, “Yeah, so? The sun rises in the east.” When liberals hear conservative bias, or even a point or bit of news uncongenial to liberals, they’re apt to say, “Eek, a mouse!”

Anita Dunn was boasting the other day about how the White House “controlled” (her word) the media’s coverage of Obama’s presidential campaign. Fox News is a network the White House surely can’t control. You can understand the Obama people’s instinct: “Get ’em” — and you will have the other networks’ support as you do.

My main question: Why aren’t other journalists — the ones who work for the other networks — embarrassed? Shouldn’t they feel annoyed at being Obama’s pets, even when they are? You know? Where is their pride or manhood? And why should I have to learn about Van Jones, ACORN, and other significant matters from Fox News opinionists? Shouldn’t the news business take care of the news, while the opinionists take care of the opinions? Weird, weird times. (Weird, weird Times?)

One more thing: I love something Charles Krauthammer says about Fox News. You will hear more from Dr. K. in an interview piece I will have in the next National Review. He says, “Rupert Murdoch and Roger Ailes are geniuses: They found a niche market — half of America.”


Excepted from:http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=Njc1NTI5NjlkMTBjMTU4YWNkNGRjNGZjYzU4NjI1ZWM
Geeze, It's kinda hard to believe that 55% of the people are crazy, well, maybe not, it seems like at least that percentage on this site are nutzo, maybe FOX has captured the tards, good, let them stay in a misinformed cloud of hatred. Maybe they'll get mad and start killing eachother.
 

CrackerJax

New Member
Not crazy..... just careful with other ppl's money. That 55% REPRESENTS THE VAST AMOUNT OF PPL WHO ACTUALLY PAY TAXES, AND DON'T LIVE ON ANY DOLE PROGRAM.
 

doobnVA

Well-Known Member
It's whatever lib's call it I guess..... the rest of the country disagrees... but what do they know? :roll:

There's a reason why they are number one across the board.
1.) they are getting the news ppl want to hear and know about.
2.) they are an arm of the republican party and the country is attracted to it in droves

1 & 2 ...although different routes....lead to the SAME CONCLUSION.... the ppl like Fox News and Obama doesn't.... I wonder why.

it is Obama & Ilk which are out of step with the country... and THEY KNOW IT !!

ROLFMAO!!! You say these things like the republican party is a majority among the average citizen. NEWSFLASH: It's not!

There are FAR LESS Republicans than Democrats, and more Independents identify with Democrats than identify with Republicans.

YOU'RE in the minority here, Jax, quit pretending like you're not.
 

doobnVA

Well-Known Member
This summarizes the situation better than I could.
bongsmilie

When conservatives hear liberal bias, they say, “Yeah, so? The sun rises in the east.” When liberals hear conservative bias, or even a point or bit of news uncongenial to liberals, they’re apt to say, “Eek, a mouse!”

Anita Dunn was boasting the other day about how the White House “controlled” (her word) the media’s coverage of Obama’s presidential campaign. Fox News is a network the White House surely can’t control. You can understand the Obama people’s instinct: “Get ’em” — and you will have the other networks’ support as you do.

My main question: Why aren’t other journalists — the ones who work for the other networks — embarrassed? Shouldn’t they feel annoyed at being Obama’s pets, even when they are? You know? Where is their pride or manhood? And why should I have to learn about Van Jones, ACORN, and other significant matters from Fox News opinionists? Shouldn’t the news business take care of the news, while the opinionists take care of the opinions? Weird, weird times. (Weird, weird Times?)

One more thing: I love something Charles Krauthammer says about Fox News. You will hear more from Dr. K. in an interview piece I will have in the next National Review. He says, “Rupert Murdoch and Roger Ailes are geniuses: They found a niche market — half of America.”


Excepted from:http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=Njc1NTI5NjlkMTBjMTU4YWNkNGRjNGZjYzU4NjI1ZWM



Um, "the other day"? Try back in January. She wasn't boasting, either, she was explaining how they used the media during Obama's campaign.

Here's the video from January 19, 2009:

[youtube]TLR5jHlytRg[/youtube]
 

NoDrama

Well-Known Member
ROLFMAO!!! You say these things like the republican party is a majority among the average citizen. NEWSFLASH: It's not!

There are FAR LESS Republicans than Democrats, and more Independents identify with Democrats than identify with Republicans.

YOU'RE in the minority here, Jax, quit pretending like you're not.

WAIT!! BACK THE BUS UP!!

Doob you talk out of both sides of your mouth. right here in this thread https://www.rollitup.org/politics/258566-hitler-vs-obama.html
You make this statement....

Well, he did say Independents favor Republicans over Democrats, which is true even according to the poll I posted.

But that doesn't take into account that MOST "independents" are Libertarians, who identify more closely with Republicans, or simply Republicans who have decided to jump off the crazy train and call themselves "independents" while still espousing Republican ideals and supporting Republican candidates.

In other words, fake "independents" who aren't really independent - just too embarrassed to call themselves Republicans.

I call BS and Shenanigans on you!!

Stop trying to "Win" and just say your part.
 

lopezri

Well-Known Member
WAIT!! BACK THE BUS UP!!

Doob you talk out of both sides of your mouth. right here in this thread https://www.rollitup.org/politics/258566-hitler-vs-obama.html
You make this statement....




I call BS and Shenanigans on you!!

Stop trying to "Win" and just say your part.
GOOD CALL! That's a perfect example of how the Democrats and the liberals just try to win their arguments and are mind controlled and indoctrinated!!

+rep for the post!
 

Babs34

Well-Known Member
"Socialist"
"Racist"
"Non- citizen"
"Nazi"
"Islamic sympathizer"
"Terrorist fist jab"
etc. etc.
Good thing that Fox doesnt sling mud ehh?:wall:

ALL things the POTUS has been called on Fox by their commentators (sorry but they ARE NOT news broadcasters)

Gimme a break, they admin. called out Fox for being a tool of the Republican party, they called them out for spreading lies about the Health Care bill and everything else they deem "newsworthy".

They are still on the air aren't they?
Even Fox avoids controvery of sorts. Americans relying on either Fox or CNN alone are just left in the DARK.
Naturally the administration will have us only see what they wish us to.
Bush was as eloquent as he could possibly be (isn't that saying something, LOL) IN stating that islam was peaceful.
Look what happened.....the world became complacent and for those who took the time to find out for themselves, it's not.
Go figure why FOX would be lethal to the administration. They tell truths CNN would never "politically and correctly" even address.
For the record, I watch neither of them.
 

Big P

Well-Known Member
this is great, the high electricity in this thread is confirmation that fox news is succeeding at getting the message out and the truth will sink obama, that is why you see so many hating on fox news


the admin is going down fast so they are directly attacking the the truth seekers that are steady punching holes in thir ship of deceit and
con-artistry.




they only fear that the truth bee's told my friends or else they would send in even a low level media rep to dispute them on Fox


but they cannot

they cannot!



no, you want to know the real reason they are attacking fox so publicly?




I know why. its to rile up their base, its a trick to get all you granola crunchin liberals fired up and on their side,

because they know most repubs and independents see trough all their lies by now and they only have the blind left


why do you think they just annouced they will ease up on federal marijuana laws?



there is only 1 logic to attack fox publicly and that is to trick their lemmings into circling the wagons and showing obedience to their master


that is the only logic because this little spat has been driving fox ratings even higher and this year they will break an all time ratings record and its not even an election year



anyway cool we got legal weed outa this:mrgreen: smoke on homies!!!!!!!!!!
 

Big P

Well-Known Member
and now for the sweet that comes from a sour grape that wrote this:


THE PSYCHOLOGY OF MODERN LEFTISM


6. Almost everyone will agree that we live in a deeply troubled society. One of the most widespread manifestations of the craziness of our world is leftism, so a discussion of the psychology of leftism can serve as an introduction to the discussion of the problems of modern society in general.

7. But what is leftism? During the first half of the 20th century leftism could have been practically identified with socialism. Today the movement is fragmented and it is not clear who can properly be called a leftist. When we speak of leftists in this article we have in mind mainly socialists, collectivists, "politically correct" types, feminists, gay and disability activists, animal rights activists and the like. But not everyone who is associated with one of these movements is a leftist. What we are trying to get at in discussing leftism is not so much a movement or an ideology as a psychological type, or rather a collection of related types. Thus, what we mean by "leftism" will emerge more clearly in the course of our discussion of leftist psychology (Also, see paragraphs 227-230.)

8. Even so, our conception of leftism will remain a good deal less clear than we would wish, but there doesn't seem to be any remedy for this. All we are trying to do is indicate in a rough and approximate way the two psychological tendencies that we believe are the main driving force of modern leftism. We by no means claim to be telling the WHOLE truth about leftist psychology. Also, our discussion is meant to apply to modern leftism only. We leave open the question of the extent to which our discussion could be applied to the leftists of the 19th and early 20th century.

9. The two psychological tendencies that underlie modern leftism we call "feelings of inferiority" and "oversocialization." Feelings of inferiority are characteristic of modern leftism as a whole, while oversocialization is characteristic only of a certain segment of modern leftism; but this segment is highly influential.


FEELINGS OF INFERIORITY


10. By "feelings of inferiority" we mean not only inferiority feelings in the strictest sense but a whole spectrum of related traits: low self-esteem, feelings of powerlessness, depressive tendencies, defeatism, guilt, self-hatred, etc. We argue that modern leftists tend to have such feelings (possibly more or less repressed) and that these feelings are decisive in determining the direction of modern leftism.

11. When someone interprets as derogatory almost anything that is said about him (or about groups with whom he identifies) we conclude that he has inferiority feelings or low self-esteem. This tendency is pronounced among minority rights advocates, whether or not they belong to the minority groups whose rights they defend. They are hypersensitive about the words used to designate minorities. The terms "negro," "oriental," "handicapped" or "chick" for an African, an Asian, a disabled person or a woman originally had no derogatory connotation. "Broad" and "chick" were merely the feminine equivalents of "guy," "dude" or "fellow." The negative connotations have been attached to these terms by the activists themselves. Some animal rights advocates have gone so far as to reject the word "pet" and insist on its replacement by "animal companion." Leftist anthropologists go to great lengths to avoid saying anything about primitive peoples that could conceivably be interpreted as negative. They want to replace the word "primitive" by "nonliterate." They seem almost paranoid about anything that might suggest that any primitive culture is inferior to our own. (We do not mean to imply that primitive cultures ARE inferior to ours. We merely point out the hypersensitivity of leftish anthropologists.)

12. Those who are most sensitive about "politically incorrect" terminology are not the average black ghetto-dweller, Asian immigrant, abused woman or disabled person, but a minority of activists, many of whom do not even belong to any "oppressed" group but come from privileged strata of society. Political correctness has its stronghold among university professors, who have secure employment with comfortable salaries, and the majority of whom are heterosexual, white males from middle-class families.

13. Many leftists have an intense identification with the problems of groups that have an image of being weak (women), defeated (American Indians), repellent (homosexuals), or otherwise inferior. The leftists themselves feel that these groups are inferior. They would never admit it to themselves that they have such feelings, but it is precisely because they do see these groups as inferior that they identify with their problems. (We do not suggest that women, Indians, etc., ARE inferior; we are only making a point about leftist psychology).

14. Feminists are desperately anxious to prove that women are as strong as capable as men. Clearly they are nagged by a fear that women may NOT be as strong and as capable as men.

15. Leftists tend to hate anything that has an image of being strong, good and successful. They hate America, they hate Western civilization, they hate white males, they hate rationality. The reasons that leftists give for hating the West, etc. clearly do not correspond with their real motives. They SAY they hate the West because it is warlike, imperialistic, sexist, ethnocentric and so forth, but where these same faults appear in socialist countries or in primitive cultures, the leftist finds excuses for them, or at best he GRUDGINGLY admits that they exist; whereas he ENTHUSIASTICALLY points out (and often greatly exaggerates) these faults where they appear in Western civilization. Thus it is clear that these faults are not the leftist's real motive for hating America and the West. He hates America and the West because they are strong and successful.

16. Words like "self-confidence," "self-reliance," "initiative", "enterprise," "optimism," etc. play little role in the liberal and leftist vocabulary. The leftist is anti-individualistic, pro-collectivist. He wants society to solve everyone's needs for them, take care of them. He is not the sort of person who has an inner sense of confidence in his own ability to solve his own problems and satisfy his own needs. The leftist is antagonistic to the concept of competition because, deep inside, he feels like a loser.

17. Art forms that appeal to modern leftist intellectuals tend to focus on sordidness, defeat and despair, or else they take an orgiastic tone, throwing off rational control as if there were no hope of accomplishing anything through rational calculation and all that was left was to immerse oneself in the sensations of the moment.

18. Modern leftist philosophers tend to dismiss reason, science, objective reality and to insist that everything is culturally relative. It is true that one can ask serious questions about the foundations of scientific knowledge and about how, if at all, the concept of objective reality can be defined. But it is obvious that modern leftist philosophers are not simply cool-headed logicians systematically analyzing the foundations of knowledge. They are deeply involved emotionally in their attack on truth and reality. They attack these concepts because of their own psychological needs. For one thing, their attack is an outlet for hostility, and, to the extent that it is successful, it satisfies the drive for power. More importantly, the leftist hates science and rationality because they classify certain beliefs as true (i.e., successful, superior) and other beliefs as false (i.e. failed, inferior). The leftist's feelings of inferiority run so deep that he cannot tolerate any classification of some things as successful or superior and other things as failed or inferior. This also underlies the rejection by many leftists of the concept of mental illness and of the utility of IQ tests. Leftists are antagonistic to genetic explanations of human abilities or behavior because such explanations tend to make some persons appear superior or inferior to others. Leftists prefer to give society the credit or blame for an individual's ability or lack of it. Thus if a person is "inferior" it is not his fault, but society's, because he has not been brought up properly.

19. The leftist is not typically the kind of person whose feelings of inferiority make him a braggart, an egotist, a bully, a self-promoter, a ruthless competitor. This kind of person has not wholly lost faith in himself. He has a deficit in his sense of power and self-worth, but he can still conceive of himself as having the capacity to be strong, and his efforts to make himself strong produce his unpleasant behavior. [1] But the leftist is too far gone for that. His feelings of inferiority are so ingrained that he cannot conceive of himself as individually strong and valuable. Hence the collectivism of the leftist. He can feel strong only as a member of a large organization or a mass movement with which he identifies himself.

20. Notice the masochistic tendency of leftist tactics. Leftists protest by lying down in front of vehicles, they intentionally provoke police or racists to abuse them, etc. These tactics may often be effective, but many leftists use them not as a means to an end but because they PREFER masochistic tactics. Self-hatred is a leftist trait.

21. Leftists may claim that their activism is motivated by compassion or by moral principle, and moral principle does play a role for the leftist of the oversocialized type. But compassion and moral principle cannot be the main motives for leftist activism. Hostility is too prominent a component of leftist behavior; so is the drive for power. Moreover, much leftist behavior is not rationally calculated to be of benefit to the people whom the leftists claim to be trying to help. For example, if one believes that affirmative action is good for black people, does it make sense to demand affirmative action in hostile or dogmatic terms? Obviously it would be more productive to take a diplomatic and conciliatory approach that would make at least verbal and symbolic concessions to white people who think that affirmative action discriminates against them. But leftist activists do not take such an approach because it would not satisfy their emotional needs. Helping black people is not their real goal. Instead, race problems serve as an excuse for them to express their own hostility and frustrated need for power. In doing so they actually harm black people, because the activists' hostile attitude toward the white majority tends to intensify race hatred.

22. If our society had no social problems at all, the leftists would have to INVENT problems in order to provide themselves with an excuse for making a fuss.

23. We emphasize that the foregoing does not pretend to be an accurate description of everyone who might be considered a leftist. It is only a rough indication of a general tendency of leftism.


OVERSOCIALIZATION


24. Psychologists use the term "socialization" to designate the process by which children are trained to think and act as society demands. A person is said to be well socialized if he believes in and obeys the moral code of his society and fits in well as a functioning part of that society. It may seem senseless to say that many leftists are over-socialized, since the leftist is perceived as a rebel. Nevertheless, the position can be defended. Many leftists are not such rebels as they seem.

25. The moral code of our society is so demanding that no one can think, feel and act in a completely moral way. For example, we are not supposed to hate anyone, yet almost everyone hates somebody at some time or other, whether he admits it to himself or not. Some people are so highly socialized that the attempt to think, feel and act morally imposes a severe burden on them. In order to avoid feelings of guilt, they continually have to deceive themselves about their own motives and find moral explanations for feelings and actions that in reality have a non-moral origin. We use the term "oversocialized" to describe such people. [2]

26. Oversocialization can lead to low self-esteem, a sense of powerlessness, defeatism, guilt, etc. One of the most important means by which our society socializes children is by making them feel ashamed of behavior or speech that is contrary to society's expectations. If this is overdone, or if a particular child is especially susceptible to such feelings, he ends by feeling ashamed of HIMSELF. Moreover the thought and the behavior of the oversocialized person are more restricted by society's expectations than are those of the lightly socialized person. The majority of people engage in a significant amount of naughty behavior. They lie, they commit petty thefts, they break traffic laws, they goof off at work, they hate someone, they say spiteful things or they use some underhanded trick to get ahead of the other guy. The oversocialized person cannot do these things, or if he does do them he generates in himself a sense of shame and self-hatred. The oversocialized person cannot even experience, without guilt, thoughts or feelings that are contrary to the accepted morality; he cannot think "unclean" thoughts. And socialization is not just a matter of morality; we are socialized to confirm to many norms of behavior that do not fall under the heading of morality. Thus the oversocialized person is kept on a psychological leash and spends his life running on rails that society has laid down for him. In many oversocialized people this results in a sense of constraint and powerlessness that can be a severe hardship. We suggest that oversocialization is among the more serious cruelties that human beings inflict on one another.

27. We argue that a very important and influential segment of the modern left is oversocialized and that their oversocialization is of great importance in determining the direction of modern leftism. Leftists of the oversocialized type tend to be intellectuals or members of the upper-middle class. Notice that university intellectuals (3) constitute the most highly socialized segment of our society and also the most left-wing segment.

28. The leftist of the oversocialized type tries to get off his psychological leash and assert his autonomy by rebelling. But usually he is not strong enough to rebel against the most basic values of society. Generally speaking, the goals of today's leftists are NOT in conflict with the accepted morality. On the contrary, the left takes an accepted moral principle, adopts it as its own, and then accuses mainstream society of violating that principle. Examples: racial equality, equality of the sexes, helping poor people, peace as opposed to war, nonviolence generally, freedom of expression, kindness to animals. More fundamentally, the duty of the individual to serve society and the duty of society to take care of the individual. All these have been deeply rooted values of our society (or at least of its middle and upper classes (4) for a long time. These values are explicitly or implicitly expressed or presupposed in most of the material presented to us by the mainstream communications media and the educational system. Leftists, especially those of the oversocialized type, usually do not rebel against these principles but justify their hostility to society by claiming (with some degree of truth) that society is not living up to these principles.

29. Here is an illustration of the way in which the oversocialized leftist shows his real attachment to the conventional attitudes of our society while pretending to be in rebellion against it. Many leftists push for affirmative action, for moving black people into high-prestige jobs, for improved education in black schools and more money for such schools; the way of life of the black "underclass" they regard as a social disgrace. They want to integrate the black man into the system, make him a business executive, a lawyer, a scientist just like upper-middle-class white people. The leftists will reply that the last thing they want is to make the black man into a copy of the white man; instead, they want to preserve African American culture. But in what does this preservation of African American culture consist? It can hardly consist in anything more than eating black-style food, listening to black-style music, wearing black-style clothing and going to a black-style church or mosque. In other words, it can express itself only in superficial matters. In all ESSENTIAL respects more leftists of the oversocialized type want to make the black man conform to white, middle-class ideals. They want to make him study technical subjects, become an executive or a scientist, spend his life climbing the status ladder to prove that black people are as good as white. They want to make black fathers "responsible." they want black gangs to become nonviolent, etc. But these are exactly the values of the industrial-technological system. The system couldn't care less what kind of music a man listens to, what kind of clothes he wears or what religion he believes in as long as he studies in school, holds a respectable job, climbs the status ladder, is a "responsible" parent, is nonviolent and so forth. In effect, however much he may deny it, the oversocialized leftist wants to integrate the black man into the system and make him adopt its values.

30. We certainly do not claim that leftists, even of the oversocialized type, NEVER rebel against the fundamental values of our society. Clearly they sometimes do. Some oversocialized leftists have gone so far as to rebel against one of modern society's most important principles by engaging in physical violence. By their own account, violence is for them a form of "liberation." In other words, by committing violence they break through the psychological restraints that have been trained into them. Because they are oversocialized these restraints have been more confining for them than for others; hence their need to break free of them. But they usually justify their rebellion in terms of mainstream values. If they engage in violence they claim to be fighting against racism or the like.

31. We realize that many objections could be raised to the foregoing thumb-nail sketch of leftist psychology. The real situation is complex, and anything like a complete description of it would take several volumes even if the necessary data were available. We claim only to have indicated very roughly the two most important tendencies in the psychology of modern leftism.

32. The problems of the leftist are indicative of the problems of our society as a whole. Low self-esteem, depressive tendencies and defeatism are not restricted to the left. Though they are especially noticeable in the left, they are widespread in our society. And today's society tries to socialize us to a greater extent than any previous society. We are even told by experts how to eat, how to exercise, how to make love, how to raise our kids and so forth.


THE POWER PROCESS


33. Human beings have a need (probably based in biology) for something that we will call the "power process." This is closely related to the need for power (which is widely recognized) but is not quite the same thing. The power process has four elements. The three most clear-cut of these we call goal, effort and attainment of goal. (Everyone needs to have goals whose attainment requires effort, and needs to succeed in attaining at least some of his goals.) The fourth element is more difficult to define and may not be necessary for everyone. We call it autonomy and will discuss it later (paragraphs 42-44).

34. Consider the hypothetical case of a man who can have anything he wants just by wishing for it. Such a man has power, but he will develop serious psychological problems. At first he will have a lot of fun, but by and by he will become acutely bored and demoralized. Eventually he may become clinically depressed. History shows that leisured aristocracies tend to become decadent. This is not true of fighting aristocracies that have to struggle to maintain their power. But leisured, secure aristocracies that have no need to exert themselves usually become bored, hedonistic and demoralized, even though they have power. This shows that power is not enough. One must have goals toward which to exercise one's power.

35. Everyone has goals; if nothing else, to obtain the physical necessities of life: food, water and whatever clothing and shelter are made necessary by the climate. But the leisured aristocrat obtains these things without effort. Hence his boredom and demoralization.

36. Nonattainment of important goals results in death if the goals are physical necessities, and in frustration if nonattainment of the goals is compatible with survival. Consistent failure to attain goals throughout life results in defeatism, low self-esteem or depression.
37. Thus, in order to avoid serious psychological problems, a human being needs goals whose attainment requires effort, and he must have a reasonable rate of success in attaining his goals.



wanna read the rest?



http://www.ed.brocku.ca/~rahul/Misc/unibomber.html
 

ObamaSanta

New Member
Wow, great post. That friggin puts a few of the most vocal Libs on this forum, right under the microscope. It's so accurate about their personalities, it's scary. Perfectly explains why these guys can look right past the obvious and ignore the facts on so many of the subjects brought up in here. Looks like a more detailed version of "Liberalism is a mental disorder".

And fantastic job of exposing one of, Oh so many, of doob's foot in mouth specials, Cracker. Will he dare respond? Especially after Big P's wonderful post.
 

Big P

Well-Known Member
amazing isnt it


one of the best things i ever saw on paper



was written buy a world known serial bomber who currently resides in a Supermax federal prison facility in Colorado :bigjoint:


 

Big P

Well-Known Member
The unibomber manifesto is a great post?

Simply amazing.

he was a genius, but he took it to the next level and began bombing, his goal was to stop technology and go back to our natural lives


i think the main thing he fails to see is that since we have technology this is actually our natural state. to constantly develop

so infact to go back and get rid of technology would be unnatural or else we would do it, naturallybongsmilie
 

doobnVA

Well-Known Member
WAIT!! BACK THE BUS UP!!

Doob you talk out of both sides of your mouth. right here in this thread https://www.rollitup.org/politics/258566-hitler-vs-obama.html
You make this statement....




I call BS and Shenanigans on you!!

Stop trying to "Win" and just say your part.

Whoops, you're right NoDrama. I got ahead of myself there. In my own defense, my brain is swamped with numbers and none of them make a lick of sense at the moment.

I spent 8 hours Sunday and another 8 yesterday studying for my Calculus midterm (AAAARGHHH!) and I think I may have some residual damage to my parietal lobe from all the studying.

Anyway, doesn't mean you guys aren't batshit crazy, especially Jax, so the moral of my post stands.

There are more democrats than republicans, and only about 1% of the population watches Fox News. To say that "the rest of the country" disagrees (when really only about 1% of the country that watches Fox News would disagree) is stretching the truth quite a bit as well. Funny how nobody called Jax out on that, because you all want to feel like you're in the majority.

1% < 99%


IT's also more than a tad hypocritical that you guys praise Big P for copy and pasting from the unabomber, but when Anita Dunn says she admires Mao Tse-Tung as a political philosopher you guys are ready to impale her head on a stake.
 

Big P

Well-Known Member
Whoops, you're right NoDrama. I got ahead of myself there. In my own defense, my brain is swamped with numbers and none of them make a lick of sense at the moment.

I spent 8 hours Sunday and another 8 yesterday studying for my Calculus midterm (AAAARGHHH!) and I think I may have some residual damage to my parietal lobe from all the studying.

Anyway, doesn't mean you guys aren't batshit crazy, especially Jax, so the moral of my post stands.

There are more democrats than republicans, and only about 1% of the population watches Fox News. To say that "the rest of the country" disagrees (when really only about 1% of the country that watches Fox News would disagree) is stretching the truth quite a bit as well. Funny how nobody called Jax out on that, because you all want to feel like you're in the majority.

1% < 99%


IT's also more than a tad hypocritical that you guys praise Big P for copy and pasting from the unabomber, but when Anita Dunn says she admires Mao Tse-Tung as a political philosopher you guys are ready to impale her head on a stake.

man where do you get your information from?


already 20% or 1 in every 5 Americans watchs Fox News every single night at least one show or another


Fox news will be breaking a world record this year for highest ratings ever for a cable news channel and its not even an election year

lol 1% get your facts straight



and mou si tung was an enslaver of millions and killer of millions

the Unibomber was a conservationist who wanted to bring the world back from the brink,

and we were not praising him, just stating facts, he was a genius and a killer,

I was praising his amazing writings where he in no way suggest we should kill people.



if I met the unibomber in person I would spit in his face, but I have a feeling if Anita Dunn met mou in person she would offer to suck his dick and ask him for pointers on how obama can successfully enslave our people.
 

redivider

Well-Known Member
yeah, have you seen the statistics that the U.S. falling ever slower down the ladder in terms of educational level, math skills, capable scientists??

damn, Fox viewers are among the most MIS INFORMED PEOPLE in the nation...

watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Pq9Dmoiwxo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lM3oww9Vk-c

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LcPF59CoGvs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ApZyx9skwzI

why shouldnt they be called out when this organization clearly lies, THEY TELL THINGS THAT ARE NOT TRUE, and calls them the truth??

no wonder america is getting dumber by the minute, with people like you believing this bullshit....
 
Top