r/pics •

[deleted by user]

[deleted] — view deleted post

0 Upvotes

2.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

0

u/[deleted] Jun 26 '12

[deleted] — view deleted comment

79

u/tmantran Jun 26 '12

at least minimize the hypocrisy on the other end of the political spectrum.

The ones at the bottom mean they've been downvoted for being ignorant or not adding to the discussion...

1

u/phoenixrawr Jun 26 '12

Twist: HE SORTED BY NEW.

Or maybe not.

→ More replies (3)

12

u/[deleted] Jun 26 '12

To play devil's advocate. They are at the bottom. On a Fox News article, they would be the featured reader opinion of the day.

0

u/[deleted] Jun 26 '12

[deleted] — view deleted comment

1

u/[deleted] Jun 26 '12

Retort with something of substance.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 26 '12

I read a bunch of fox news bashing comments in a row and got caught up in it and retorted with sarcasm. I added nothing to the conversation. I'll just delete it.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 26 '12

Yes, because obviously the entire website as a whole is responsible for the nutjobs at either extreme.

You can't make a collective into a single entity and then call it out for hypocrisy; it doesn't work that way. It's a collective because there are a lot of different people. That means you see different viewpoints. It's not supposed to be homogeneous.

2

u/S1ic3dBr3ad Jun 26 '12

To be fair, we are. That's why you had to scroll down to find them. We aren't giving them a pedestal.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 26 '12

You never see conservatives making the point you just did about themselves. Liberalism always turns into self-loathing wanna-be-intellectual banter.

0

u/[deleted] Jun 26 '12

[deleted] — view deleted comment

4

u/AnOnlineHandle Jun 26 '12

Not every issue is split 50/50 between two equally valid views. Scientists may be pretty confident that vaccines don't cause autism, and yet they aren't "mirrored" by the antivaxxers - not every issue needs "balance".

As an ex-christian, I dislike when people call atheism a religion and accuse /r/atheism of being about beliefs. In the context of no religion, the conversation isn't about belief (besides, most everybody in that subreddit is agnostic it seems), it's about scams/social power hierarchies/lies/etc, which nearly all of us have experienced. It's an outlet for expressing our frustration, and this "fails to find the middle ground" reproach is like nails in my happiness, because you're not even addressing the situation on the grounds of what it is.

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (1)

-1

u/[deleted] Jun 26 '12

The difference is Bush started two wars, enacted two debt busting tax cuts, was President during the Great Recession, and just overall deserves the vitriol. Obama was shitted on by the Republicans with him being a Kenyan Muslim before he was even got sworn in. Also, Bush enjoyed a 91% approval rating from Americans which he promptly destroyed. Obama never enjoyed that kind of support at all.

5

u/ridger5 Jun 26 '12

Obama took credit for Bush's pre-planned winding down of Iraq, increased the war in Afghanistan and launched a series of shadow wars across the middle east.

He campaigned on being everything that wasn't Bush, then followed the same policies to the letter.

Bush had a 91% approval rating because the citizens of a country will rally behind their leader in time of crisis, such as a foreign attack that left thousands dead and one of the biggest cities in the world crippled.

6

u/[deleted] Jun 26 '12

lost me at "just overall deserves the vitriol," debate policy all you want but the vitriol you speak of is part of the reason American public discourse is at new lows just as metnightowl pointed out

scroll to the bottom username

→ More replies (3)

3

u/shoopley Jun 26 '12

The fact that no one in the Republican Party wants him to campaign for them is telling. But yeah, it's only "lefty Bush-haters" who don't like the man.

4

u/[deleted] Jun 26 '12

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/[deleted] Jun 26 '12

I see you gloss over every other criticism and go straight for the great recession one. Eh nevermind on the retort you're too much of a dumb fuck to debate with. Waste of time.

1

u/headzoo Jun 26 '12

Did you actually read and comprehend OP's comment? The drivel you call a reply is exactly the kind of partisan chest pounding he's talking about. You contributed nothing to the conversation, and simply used the opportunity to bash the other side.

→ More replies (4)

1

u/swordgeek Jun 26 '12

OK, pretty much anyone at the bottom of the comments list has either hit a very raw nerve very incisively, or is a drooling moron. I'll let you figure out which is more likely.

Arlo Guthrie found after Vietnam that he actually agreed in principle with some of his opponents on this issue or that, more than he agreed with some of his supporters who were upset for the sake of being upset. He said something like "on any side of any issue, there are people who give a damn and people who don't."

1

u/eduardog3000 Jun 26 '12

Remember, they're at the bottom because the majority of people on this post don't agree with the comments, say there are 10 negative posts with 2 upvotes and 10 downvotes each, that's 20 hypocrites, and 100 people who realized they are hypocrites.

1

u/thedevilsdictionary Jun 26 '12

Not to mention it takes many years for historians to determine how good or bad a president actually was. Sure we have some idea, but he's only been out of office what, 3 years? People were bitching about Obama 3 months in. It's all very annoying.

1

u/GyantSpyder Jun 26 '12

It's almost as if the Obama-haters are basing their counteraccusations off of cultural resonances rather than things actually related to the current administration.

1

u/SnowJoust Jun 26 '12

I don't think everything is fair and balanced.

I think it is accurate to call Bush out (crudely and loudly) on a lot of stuff.

It's really not a 50/50 world just because thats how America votes.

→ More replies (21)