Meet Jeff Barth — He May Have Just Made the ‘Greatest Political Ad Ever’

User Profile: american1st

american1st

Member Since: September 05, 2010

CommentsDisplaying american1st's 10 most recent comments.

  • “For we have entered the age of quantum politics; and Mitt Romney is the first quantum politician. In much the same way that light is both a particle and a wave, Mitt Romney is both a moderate and a conservative, depending on the situation. It is not that he is one or the other; it is not that he is one and then the other. He is both at the same time. No human being can ever simultaneously know both what Mitt Romney’s current position is and where that position will be at some future date. According to the latest theories, the “Mitt Romney” who seems poised to be the Republican nominee is but one of countless Mitt Romneys, each occupying his own cosmos, each supporting a different platform, all of them equally valid and all of them running for president at the same time, in their own alternative Romnealities, somewhere in the vast Romniverse. …And all of them losing to Barack Obama.”

    Condensed from David Javerbaum, N.Y. Times, March 31

  • Caption that photo!: Ron Paul

    May 11, 2012 at 8:49pm

    In reply to CharlieCheaterNejedly.

    yep.. good one!!

  • Gary Johnson Wins Libertarian Party Nomination

    May 5, 2012 at 8:13pm

    In reply to Mr Sanders.

    “Candidate Romney IS NOT a Communist/Socialist/Radical bent on the ruination of America but a believer in the Capitalist system.”

    a progressive is a progressive is a progressive…. same donors, same policy’s, SAME RESULTS.
    he may believe in capitalism but its the same crony capitalism obama believes in… don’t expect any improvement, don’t expect the bad stuff obama has done to be undone.. they both move the country in the same direction… toward a unconstitutional dictatorship.

    .

  • Gary Johnson Wins Libertarian Party Nomination

    May 5, 2012 at 7:47pm

    In reply to Blazebanned.

    if everybody in the country votes their principals… and we still get evil, then we get what we deserve (the majority of us voted for it)

    if everybody votes the lesser of two evils you guarantee we get evil (and show that we damn well do deserve it)

    but if everybody votes their principals.. then maybe, just maybe, we restore the country to what it’s supposed to be… and get the constitutional Representative republic that we are supposed to have

  • there is no such thing as a spoiler http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHQj9wtW3nA

    if everybody in the country votes their principals… and we still get evil, then we get what we deserve (the majority of us are idiots and we voted for it)

    if everybody votes the lesser of two evils you guarantee we get evil (and show that we damn well do deserve it)

    but if everybody votes their principals.. then maybe, just maybe, we restore the country to what it’s supposed to be… and get the constitutional Representative republic that we are supposed to have

  • how appropriate that it is called CCTV (the same name as the big brother camera systems uses to monitor the public in England and America) can the two way telescreen from 1984 be far behind??

  • Caption that photo!: Mitt Romney and baby

    February 28, 2012 at 3:13pm

    “what do you mean i am fired” “i am not even old enough to work this warehouse yet…”

    or

    ” I am only 2 and even i don’t believe he is a real conservative”

  • repeating the same fallacy (with the weak addition of insults) against those that wont fall for it is lame and also a fallacy (see argument by Ad Nauseam) repetition doesn’t make it true (and even if you are Joseph Goebbels telling the big lie it wont work)

    the point is RP is the only constitutionalists both in what he says and by his record… either prove he isn’t…. or admit you don’t like the constitution or liberty.. . whether fringe groups like the constitution and liberty just as most mainstream Americans do.. is irrelevant…

  • and poor vs rich…. the fact that they are getting behind OWS kinda makes my point… and yes they should be held accountable…

  • Guilt by Association is a fallacy in which a person rejects a claim simply because it is pointed out that people she dislikes accept the claim. This sort of “reasoning” has the following form:

    It is pointed out that people person A does not like accept claim P.
    Therefore P is false

    It is clear that sort of “reasoning” is fallacious. For example the following is obviously a case of poor “reasoning”: “You think that 1+1=2. But, Adolf Hitler, Charles Manson, Joseph Stalin, and Ted Bundy all believed that 1+1=2. So, you shouldn’t believe it.”

    The fallacy draws its power from the fact that people do not like to be associated with people they dislike. Hence, if it is shown that a person shares a belief with people he dislikes he might be influenced into rejecting that belief. In such cases the person will be rejecting the claim based on how he thinks or feels about the people who hold it and because he does not want to be associated with such people.

    Of course, the fact that someone does not want to be associated with people she dislikes does not justify the rejection of any claim. For example, most wicked and terrible people accept that the earth revolves around the sun and that lead is heavier than helium. No sane person would reject these claims simply because this would put them in the company of people they dislike (or even hate).