Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Ahhh! I didn't think of that. If you had a character defect you wanted to have ignored, you would have a vested interest in everyone behaving as if they didn't notice or it didn't matter.
It's moral equivalence-- or, more accurately, relativism. Check out Lynne Cheney (wife of the VP) book "Telling the Truth". It's a discussion on relativism. It's a theory supported by academics and, because they control the schools, it's advanced in public schools.
Anytime you hear someone say "you have no right to judge" or "no body is better than anyone else" or "I wouldn't do that, but I wouldn't judge anyone else for doing it" you're dealing with a relativist. You ask them "So you don't think it should be illegal to rape your child or mother?" They respond "It should be illegal, but those are just my values; that doesn't mean they have to be your values."... which, of course, exposes how stupid the belief system is. By concluding something should be illegal, you're, by proxy (legal system) judging... Everything liberal has an innate contradiction that requires suspension of awareness.
I believe it reflects an intellectual inadequacy and/or niavete.
Last edited by One Thousand; 09-28-2008 at 11:30 AM..
Reason: rephrase
Maybe John McCain is bisexual and has a little crush on Obama and doesn't want people to know, therefore he avoided eye contact.
We all know McCain doesn't really accept gays because it isn't traditional behavior; however, the ones the most against gay people have some issues with that themselves from what I heard.
I've found that people who find me sexually attractive (who are not suppoed to) also avoid eye contact. It's weird of course because you don't know what their problem is.
Last time I checked, a person who thinks highly of himself is usually not a bad thing. It is called confidence.
Now you might be able to call W Bush that since he made up stories about the "weapons of mass destruction"....and made several bad moves as a President yet he still thought real highly of himself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by World Citizen
Mr. Obama is a narcissist... that also explains why he thinks so highly of himself and why all of all of his ideas are so marvelous.
Maybe John McCain is bisexual and has a little crush on Obama and doesn't want people to know, therefore he avoided eye contact.
We all know McCain doesn't really accept gays because it isn't traditional behavior; however, the ones the most against gay people have some issues with that themselves from what I heard.
I've found that people who find me sexually attractive (who are not suppoed to) also avoid eye contact. It's weird of course because you don't know what their problem is.
Yeah right. Maybe it's because they're disgusted by your lifestyle and don't feel comfortable looking at you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by artsyguy
Last time I checked, a person who thinks highly of himself is usually not a bad thing. It is called confidence.
Confidence in your beliefs and abilities is good. Confidence in who you are is bad-- it breeds arrogance and leads to putting yourself before others... because you feel like you deserve something.
Senator Obama looked Senator McCain in the eye and was afraid. So he looked back at him repeatedly to soak in his fear, and perpetuate the opportunity to be more fearful. As the debate went on he looked and looked, and the fear grew. Senator Obama will be very afraid when the next debate rolls around, he soaked up soo much fear in the first debate, he may very well suspend his campaign.
I saw this a bit differently. McCain's almost condescending stare at his own podium while ignoring Obama probably ticked off the Democrats but I think it gave the appearance of the school master chiding the student. I think this played well with older voters and particularly older white voters.
exactly, because he was.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanrene
Notice whenever McCain addressed obama he said Sen Obama. Obama called him by his first name.
again, amateur with no respect. obama tried his damnedest to be seen on the same level, but he wasn't.
During this debate, where the format was 5 minutes of face-to-face conversation on each question by the candidates, McCain never once even looked at Obama! No eye contact whatsoever.
So what's up? No eye contact with your opponent would tend to indicate that you are either lying, misleading, or just plain intimidated. Even worse when it was supposed to be part of the format of the debate!
McCain is a hateful human being. That's what's up.
McCain is a hateful human being. That's what's up.
Oh please!!! You Obama fanatics are really stretching the cr** these days. McCain is not a hateful person anymore than Obama is. Obama does scare the living hell out of me though, because of what he wants to do to this country.
Senator Obama looked Senator McCain in the eye and was afraid. So he looked back at him repeatedly to soak in his fear, and perpetuate the opportunity to be more fearful. As the debate went on he looked and looked, and the fear grew. Senator Obama will be very afraid when the next debate rolls around, he soaked up soo much fear in the first debate, he may very well suspend his campaign.
It's moral equivalence-- or, more accurately, relativism. Check out Lynne Cheney (wife of the VP) book "Telling the Truth". It's a discussion on relativism. It's a theory supported by academics and, because they control the schools, it's advanced in public schools.
Anytime you hear someone say "you have no right to judge" or "no body is better than anyone else" or "I wouldn't do that, but I wouldn't judge anyone else for doing it" you're dealing with a relativist. You ask them "So you don't think it should be illegal to rape your child or mother?" They respond "It should be illegal, but those are just my values; that doesn't mean they have to be your values."... which, of course, exposes how stupid the belief system is. By concluding something should be illegal, you're, by proxy (legal system) judging... Everything liberal has an innate contradiction that requires suspension of awareness.
I believe it reflects an intellectual inadequacy and/or niavete.
Ahhh yes! Moral relativism. OneThousand, Objectivist, per chance?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
