1) It's his Facebook. If you don't like what he says... well why do you read it?
2) Obama Phones is a phrase used by welfare recipients trying to encourage others to vote for Obama.
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpAOwJvTOio" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpAOwJvTOio</a>
I know you want to trash your friend for this phrase but, that also means you have to trash the obama-supporters who go around claiming that they'll get free money or free phones, or whatever government assistance ... but only if Obama wins the election.
You can't just get mad at conservatives or republicans for things .... that liberals and democrats are also encouraging and spreading.
1. He's a friend and it's his public posts, they are in my news feed. I don't want to block him, as he's a friend. I don't want to hide his posts because he does post normal things that I DO want to read. There's no politics filter, unfortunately. You either get all posts or none.
2. I know what it is. I also know that MOST people who use the term don't know the truth behind it and actually believe it has something to do with Obama and Democrats. Hence, why it's used as a TACTIC to either garner support or to diminish Obama. It wouldn't be an effective tactic if most people actually KNEW the truth behind it, now would it? If Dems knew Obama and Dems had nothing to do with it, and Reps knew they DID it, then, um...???
I didn't trash my friend. I didn't want to either. All I did was put a concise outline of 5 facts totaling one sentence each about 'Obama Phones'. My friend doesn't upset me, just the ignorance of the issue and perpetuating a lie does.
I'm not mad at any side, I'm angry about ALL people who blindly believe and repeat falsehoods and don't fact-check. ALL sides do it. Very few people don', I guess I find myself in that minority which is very frustrating.
Note once again, I didn't even mention MY politics and you're leaning towards thinking I'm a Democrat/Obama supporter.
1) "friend and public posts" =/= mean "required to read and reply to prove him wrong"
What's wrong with just rolling your eyes and moving on to the next post if you dislike what he says?
2) So you also "correct" Obama supporters on this too?
3) I never said anything about your politics. However you've decided to assume. Interesting how that works. It's wrong for others to be as you say "ignorant" but it's OK to make assumptions?
1. I'm a fast reader. I read at least part of all the posts, I at least like to see if it's something I need to know or want to know. How else would I know unless I read at least part of all posts? People on my fb are friends and family for the most part and keeping up with them is the main reason I use fb. It's pretty sad that I have to explain this to you, this seems very elementary.
This is the only time I've ever responded to it (you'd know that if you had read the OP up top before shooting off your mouth), so YES, I usually do roll eyes and move on.
2. I haven't personally encountered any Obama supporter who said anything false about Obama Phones, but if presented with the opportunity, why YES I would! This also goes for ANY other person regardless of affiliation. This very post is to let ALL people know the truth. I didn't title it "Republicans: Read This!" for a reason.
If you noticed, the title of the post is "Why are PEOPLE so irrational about politics?".
Stating FACT should offend you so much. Why is it bothering you so? This is the irrational attitude I see all too often. You're very hostile about a person who is SIMPLY clearing up a blatant falsehood. Oh I must either be a supporter of the 'other guy' or I'm a traitor. Huh? No. That's stupid. That perpetuates ignorance.
You made several statements in your post that hinted around me being an Obama supporter or being "unfair" to Republicans. How do you know I'm not a Republican? I may be. I may not be. There's nothing unfair about stating a fact. I identified my friend as a Republican because he is one and he's making anti-Obama and anti-Dem statements based on his Republican affiliation. That's important to the discussion.
Next time, read and understand the posts fully before responding. All of your retorts could have been answered in the OP and by using a pinch of common sense.
Disagreeing with you and pointing out why is "hostile". That's not very rational really...
Oh and comments about "reading every part of a post"... as opposed to um, what? Inventing comments that didn't exist?
Cos it's ironic that you claim I'm "hinting" at your political views. Hell in that frame of mind you could also claim that I'm hinting that you're a member of a Klingon political party, or that you're deep into Goa'uld politics.
There's a difference in stating facts, and mixing facts with personal assumptions.
What, pray tell, are you disagreeing with me on? All you have done is attempt to badger me.
You have yet to make a valid point. This is why I say you're being hostile. All you're doing is making personal jabs or silly suggestions like dropping a friend entirely. What does that do for anyone? How does this make sense?
You're avoiding the issue, which is that people (ALL PEOPLE) in general are sadly mislead and irrational about politics.
In your attempts, all you have really done is proved my point. Thanks.
Yet again you "read everything" that I write and then you invent things I never wrote at all.
"like dropping a friend entirely." Where did I say that? O that's right I didn't say it. I never once suggested unfriending someone. In fact I even explained it as "What's wrong with just rolling your eyes and moving on to the next post if you dislike what he says?"
And if anything you continue to prove my point.
You go on about "facts" and how it's not wrong to point out facts.
yet then you start making assumptions and cannot bear being called out on them. as if it's any different than you calling out others on being wrong?
Why are people so irrational about politics??
← View full post
There's 2 problems here
1) It's his Facebook. If you don't like what he says... well why do you read it?
2) Obama Phones is a phrase used by welfare recipients trying to encourage others to vote for Obama.
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpAOwJvTOio" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpAOwJvTOio</a>
I know you want to trash your friend for this phrase but, that also means you have to trash the obama-supporters who go around claiming that they'll get free money or free phones, or whatever government assistance ... but only if Obama wins the election.
You can't just get mad at conservatives or republicans for things .... that liberals and democrats are also encouraging and spreading.
--
Anonymous Post Author
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
1. He's a friend and it's his public posts, they are in my news feed. I don't want to block him, as he's a friend. I don't want to hide his posts because he does post normal things that I DO want to read. There's no politics filter, unfortunately. You either get all posts or none.
2. I know what it is. I also know that MOST people who use the term don't know the truth behind it and actually believe it has something to do with Obama and Democrats. Hence, why it's used as a TACTIC to either garner support or to diminish Obama. It wouldn't be an effective tactic if most people actually KNEW the truth behind it, now would it? If Dems knew Obama and Dems had nothing to do with it, and Reps knew they DID it, then, um...???
I didn't trash my friend. I didn't want to either. All I did was put a concise outline of 5 facts totaling one sentence each about 'Obama Phones'. My friend doesn't upset me, just the ignorance of the issue and perpetuating a lie does.
I'm not mad at any side, I'm angry about ALL people who blindly believe and repeat falsehoods and don't fact-check. ALL sides do it. Very few people don', I guess I find myself in that minority which is very frustrating.
Note once again, I didn't even mention MY politics and you're leaning towards thinking I'm a Democrat/Obama supporter.
--
Angel_in_a_Glass_Dress
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
1) "friend and public posts" =/= mean "required to read and reply to prove him wrong"
What's wrong with just rolling your eyes and moving on to the next post if you dislike what he says?
2) So you also "correct" Obama supporters on this too?
3) I never said anything about your politics. However you've decided to assume. Interesting how that works. It's wrong for others to be as you say "ignorant" but it's OK to make assumptions?
--
Anonymous Post Author
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
1. I'm a fast reader. I read at least part of all the posts, I at least like to see if it's something I need to know or want to know. How else would I know unless I read at least part of all posts? People on my fb are friends and family for the most part and keeping up with them is the main reason I use fb. It's pretty sad that I have to explain this to you, this seems very elementary.
This is the only time I've ever responded to it (you'd know that if you had read the OP up top before shooting off your mouth), so YES, I usually do roll eyes and move on.
2. I haven't personally encountered any Obama supporter who said anything false about Obama Phones, but if presented with the opportunity, why YES I would! This also goes for ANY other person regardless of affiliation. This very post is to let ALL people know the truth. I didn't title it "Republicans: Read This!" for a reason.
If you noticed, the title of the post is "Why are PEOPLE so irrational about politics?".
Stating FACT should offend you so much. Why is it bothering you so? This is the irrational attitude I see all too often. You're very hostile about a person who is SIMPLY clearing up a blatant falsehood. Oh I must either be a supporter of the 'other guy' or I'm a traitor. Huh? No. That's stupid. That perpetuates ignorance.
You made several statements in your post that hinted around me being an Obama supporter or being "unfair" to Republicans. How do you know I'm not a Republican? I may be. I may not be. There's nothing unfair about stating a fact. I identified my friend as a Republican because he is one and he's making anti-Obama and anti-Dem statements based on his Republican affiliation. That's important to the discussion.
Next time, read and understand the posts fully before responding. All of your retorts could have been answered in the OP and by using a pinch of common sense.
--
Angel_in_a_Glass_Dress
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Well this has turned ironic.
Disagreeing with you and pointing out why is "hostile". That's not very rational really...
Oh and comments about "reading every part of a post"... as opposed to um, what? Inventing comments that didn't exist?
Cos it's ironic that you claim I'm "hinting" at your political views. Hell in that frame of mind you could also claim that I'm hinting that you're a member of a Klingon political party, or that you're deep into Goa'uld politics.
There's a difference in stating facts, and mixing facts with personal assumptions.
--
Anonymous Post Author
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
What, pray tell, are you disagreeing with me on? All you have done is attempt to badger me.
You have yet to make a valid point. This is why I say you're being hostile. All you're doing is making personal jabs or silly suggestions like dropping a friend entirely. What does that do for anyone? How does this make sense?
You're avoiding the issue, which is that people (ALL PEOPLE) in general are sadly mislead and irrational about politics.
In your attempts, all you have really done is proved my point. Thanks.
--
Angel_in_a_Glass_Dress
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
See More Comments =>
Yet again you "read everything" that I write and then you invent things I never wrote at all.
"like dropping a friend entirely." Where did I say that? O that's right I didn't say it. I never once suggested unfriending someone. In fact I even explained it as "What's wrong with just rolling your eyes and moving on to the next post if you dislike what he says?"
And if anything you continue to prove my point.
You go on about "facts" and how it's not wrong to point out facts.
yet then you start making assumptions and cannot bear being called out on them. as if it's any different than you calling out others on being wrong?