Monday, September 16, 2013

Obama Promised To Reduce America's Profile As Exceptional...

He's been wildly successful...


Jesus is Lord said...

I'm not American.
What does this mean?

Stan said...

It will lose its impact in the process of explanation, but here goes:

Obama has attempted to reduce the importance of the USA in world affairs, and its perception of being exceptional, to that of a mediocre state of no particular distinction.

Recently Obama has inadvertently brought about his own humiliation and that of the USA in the eyes of the entire planet by his fumbling of foreign affairs, specifically his empty threats on Assad. This in essence achieves his goal of reducing the image of the USA as a world power, especially since he is now subservient to Putin in the dominance of foreign affairs.

The photoshopped picture shows Obama's humiliating and subservient position behind a strong Putin who is in charge.

Explaining it removes its magic, fer sher.

ObamaSucks said...

Explaining still makes it funny and show how incredibly emotionally biased you are Stan: you describe everything in the extreme.

Stan said...

You could point to what is incorrect, if anything; you do not do that. You merely attack without details to support your attack. So your opinion is rejected.

troll said...

You wrote this extreme statement:
"reduce the importance of the USA in world affairs ... to that of a mediocre state of no particular distinction."
based on your emotional disdain for the evil Obama. As if the image, power and influence of the USA could be damage that much after ONE incident. And who said this would make the USA look bad anyway!? It's rational to adjust a position rather than stick to it just because of fear to look silly. It's emotional to not review your position out of pride.

You are as emotional as the stupid hippies who were complaining that George W. Bush was destroying the image of our country by going to Irak based on false information. I didn't like what he decided to do, and most citizen of the world didn't like what he was doing, but the USA as a whole did not come out of this mess weaker nor less influential. Things don't change that fast...

You are what you hate Stan.

Wait that comment was too serious, you don't deserve that... Go fuck yourself you stupid moronic jizz wad who believes in fairy tales!

Stan said...

I decided to go ahead and let this comment through for public viewing. You have done yourself and your Atheism proud with your conclusion. Congratulations.

p.s. When both the Russians and the Middle East mock Obama and "American exceptionalism", then Obama's publically stated objectives have been met... whether you like it or not.

troll said...

Public viewing implies that there is a 'public'...

How delusional are you!


OMG, the Atheist movement will be shamed by the comments of a self-labelled troll on Stan's blog!

You are such a loser... but let me guess... this one won't go through...

Stan said...

OK, troll,
But that's your last. The fact that you consider silly, empty ridicule to be the height of your intellect, and that you have not addressed any issues seriously for consideration, indicates the level of your mental existence.

Should you mature, and care to discuss your Atheism seriously, then come on back and we'll talk.

Someone said...


Reading your blog is always interesting for me because I don't get to interact with right-wing conservative Christians irl. I think you usually sound smart and well spoken, even though I personally disagree with you on most issues you address.

However, the fact that you continue to entertain troll(s), even after they tell you they are doing nothing but trolling here, indicates the level of your mental existence.

Can't you just ignore them, like you said you would in your 'notice' to trolls?

Looks like your emotions render you incapable of letting it go, which might explain why you actually ban/ignore people who do want to discuss with you, while posting comments by trolls and even addressing them. Perhaps it satisfies your ego or need to be "right". You do have a blog whose main purpose is to convince yourself that you were wrong for 40 years after all...

--Someone who usually just reads your blog...

Stan said...

It has long been apparent that many - very many - Atheists are used to bullying their opponents into silence. I suspect that Christians who truly mimic their man-diety's kindness will not engage with Atheists at the level of baseness at which Atheists operate. This would be considered weakness by the Atheist, I suppose, just as kindness is considered weakness by certain strains of Islam.

When these Atheists encounter a stronger criticism and critic, their true morality and maturity comes to the fore. They see no irony in charging their critic with "hate" in the middle of a hateful and irrational rant, laden with juvinile scatology. The demonstration of self-unawareness and freedom from empathy is indicative of complete narcissism, and the need to destroy (or at least defecate upon) any external indication of their emotional/intellectual maldevelopment.

I have no way of knowing the age of the respndents to this blog; however, their emotional age is easily determined by their comments.

This extends to visits to Atheist sites, where false arguments are cheered without any analysis or discernment having been applied, and with schoolyard "shock words" that no longer shock anyone deemed the essential vocabulary.

The Atheist claim to intellect and empathy is merely preemptive, a similar tactic to declaring the "mother of all wars" yet ending up captured hiding in a dirt hole. If Atheists had empathy, for example, then there would be no need for instructing them against their misogyny. Yet doing so divides them into warring camps.

Atheists fail abjectly in their claims to intellect, as well. They do not trend to low intelligence, but they are incapable of applying intelligence intellectually to their own belief system, apparently due to the emotional need to protect that system.

So the emotional ego dominates the Atheist so commonly that it might be considered generic to the entirety rather than the intellect that they claim.

Atheism offers actual freedom and bogus elitism: freedom from all absolutes, including both moral and intellectual; false elitism gained by merely rejecting all previous wisdom in favor of their own personal conclusions.

Losing this freedom and faux elitism is anathema; so the Atheist fights back at his emotional level rather than any intellectual level.

The evidence for this is the number of emotionally immature Atheists who attack at the juvenile level, despite having obvious intelligence higher than that. Emotional immaturity, however, trumps intelligence, and makes intelligence the pawn of emotional outburst virtually every time.

I have a post in the works on the modern phenomenon of the child-man, the adult who never matures. This seems applicable to a great many Atheists.

Stan said...

I have never, ever banned anyone who wishes to have a serious discussion regarding Atheism, especially when they wish to take the trouble to participate in deductive analytics regarding their disbelief.

Your comment is an example of the Atheist response: you attack this blog as follows: "You do have a blog whose main purpose is to convince yourself that you were wrong for 40 years after all..."

This insult was unnecessary except for your own personal ego satisfaction. In no manner is it intended to lead to intelligent conversation.

Your comment is no different from other trolls in the regard that you do not address Atheism at all, you produce a self-serrving insult instead (although preceded by what I take to be false compliments).

Sometimes I print the trolls as a benchmark for the type of conversation that Atheism commonly produces. And the type of intellect and level of maturity which inheres. There are far too many to just ignore them all. I do ignore most of them.

Stan said...

I should mention that I define trolls as those who produce no conversation regarding Atheism, but instead merely produce insults or personal attacks.

These are quite plentiful; they are bullies and intellectual cowards. My presumption is that they range from emotionally immature to disturbed.

Someone said...


"I have never, ever banned anyone who wishes to have a serious discussion regarding Atheism"

This a a lie. You banned people because you disagreed with them. You 'claim' that they are not serious only because you are incapable of addressing certain points they make, or simply because you disagree as a matter of opinion. Instead of saying 'let's agree to disagree and try this other approach', you insult your opponents and stop posting their comments.

My comment was not even meant to be an insult. It is a fact that you entertain trolls and it does tell a lot about your mental state. It's more of a friendly advice! Why waste time on these people?

Same thing with this part: "You do have a blog whose main purpose is to convince yourself that you were wrong for 40 years after all...". If you think this is an insult, it speaks volume to your self-delusion that you are not, at some level, trying to convince your own self that Atheism is wrong.

Pre-emptive answer: don't bother asking me to debate with you, on your blog, I am not interested in such discussion format. As I said, I like to read only because I don't get to discuss it in person, which is the only time it really matters... or if at least there is some sort of real moderated forum with a larger audience.

Stan said...

Let's take this point by point.
1. I am a liar; I delete people that disagree. Evidence: none.

2. I insult commenters. Yes I do. They are insulted that someone else can take their positions apart, when they are used to bullying their opponents into leaving so they can declare victory. That generally degrades into name calling, and when it does, they get deleted. Don't like that? Tough.

3. I consider a statement regarding a nefarious purpose for this blog an insult: yes. It was and is an insult, and no I don't care what you think unless you can back it up with material evidence (since you are an Atheist and all).

4. I am self-deluded, because 'someone' knows what I am thinking. Bullshit. You have no idea what I'm thinking, but I'll tell you this: when you can produce material evidence which categorically demonstrates the logical and physical necessity of Atheism and Materialism, then and only then do you have something to discuss. Otherwise, you have nothing but cheap criticism with no value whatsoever.

5. I don't ask anyone to debate, as you would know if you actually read anything here. I ask Atheists and Materialists to provide evidence and/or logic which supports their belief system. Just like you, the huff a lot and do exactly nothing of either a logical or empirical nature.

Atheism is a rational fraud. Does that insult you? Again, tough. If you had evidence to the contrary you would provide it, instead of the silliness which you did provide. Of course you won't "debate". You have no chance.

Someone said...

1. Can someone tell a lie without being a liar? This is what's happening here Stan. I did not call you a liar. I am telling you that what you wrote is a lie:

"I have never, ever banned anyone who wishes to have a serious discussion regarding Atheism"

This is a lie that can be easily supported by browsing through your blog. A good starting point is this simple search:
where we see several cases where you turned moderation on/off.

Looking at the posts that came before putting moderation ON, it's clear that you decided that some people are not 'serious' enough for your taste. You don't ban them because they are trolling, just spitting insults, or being misogynistic, racists, grossly inappropriate, etc... no. In some cases, the conversation ended up at a point where you label the Atheist as 'not serious' enough for your taste and then move on to something else.

Moreover, I simply remember some interesting exchanges with people who have way too much time on their end, including you, where you simply conclude that you will not post their comments anymore. I also recall you saying that you would let comments through but will ignore them. That's more recent though I believe, and clearly you fail miserably at doing that since you keep feeding trolls...

2. I didn't say I don't like it. I am just pointing it out the fact that you simultaneously insult people and complain that people insult you. I really don't care about that. It's just entertaining to see you be so inconsistent and delusional. You really think that 'your' insults are better than 'their' insults because 'your' worldview is logical and not 'theirs'. (yes, now that's an insult)

3. You don't care yet you insist on telling me that it was an insult, which is by definition something that affects you. I am saying it was not an insult, you are saying it was; clearly you do care. QED.

(since you are an Atheist and all)
I usually refer to myself as an Agnostic since the term Atheist is loaded with negative connotations such as 'believe there is no god'. If I were asked whether there is a god or not, I'd reply I don't know. If asked whether I believe in god or not, I'd say I don't know what you are talking about, tell me more and I will tell you if I believe in that god. When reading about certain believes, I know that I would reply yes it's possible such god exists quite often. Yet, technically speaking, I cannot point to a concept of god I find more credible than others, and that makes me an Atheist. I don't know about the 'and all' part though... probably more of your irrational generalization bullshit (yes, now that's an insult)

4. It's interesting how you get all emotional, call bullshit on a very simple proposition regarding your own introspection and then diverge to your typical "but... but... prove Atheism!!". Don't you know also that it's quite common to see people strongly opposed to something find out that their strong opposition came from a desire to hide their own true self? Let me make it more explicit if you don't get the reference: some bullies who attack homosexuals turn out to be homosexuals themselves. They bully gay people as some sort of psychological mechanism to cope with their inner contradictions. Your case is very different yet similar, since the psychological effect seem to be quite strong but you are not a 'closet' atheist for sure.

I am not pretending to know what you think. Ironically, you did just that above here by claiming that you have never banned anyone who wishes to have a serious discussion. How can you know if the person is serious or not? Can you read their mind?

5. Please, if you want to not call it 'debate', fine, but all you do is ask people to prove their Atheistic claims, regardless of the topic they bring up to you. As you just did with me...

Stan said...

As I said, you are merely attacking me without providing any meaningful conversation. That makes you a troll. Now you have been concerned that I interact with trolls too long, while I remove interesting conversationalists. This seems to be the ideal place for the following:

The purpose of this blog is to analyze atheism - hence the name. Your personal attacks and insults have been duly noted and your lack of any inclination to provide the evidence for Atheism (the topic of this blog) means that you are merely another time-wasting, insult driven, non-serious, troll who is intent on trying to see what a rise you can get when you spew nonsense.

When I get a belly full of trying to get a rational response, I do indeed nuke the offending commenter.

In deference to your concern about my treatment of trolls, no more of your nonsense will be posted.

Steven Satak said...

I was wondering when you were going to pull the trigger on that fellow, Stan.

Thought you were going to nip the self-described trolls in the bud, before we had to endure their mindless gobbling?


Someone else said...

If Someone was a troll, you posted his comments, discussed with him and did exactly what he wanted; yet another troll that 'won' by making you waste your time and your cool.

If Someone was not a troll, you proved his point: your argumentation style can be summarized as "You can't prove Atheism. You suck. Go away" even when different topics are brought to your attention, or when you discuss other topics yourself as you constantly do on your blog.

Same thing with this comment itself since the deduction is simple and valid. Posting it or not will tell on which side you fell this time. Most likely, only the commentator will know...

Stan said...

It's not difficult to tell the difference between a serious person wanting to explain "why I am convinced by evidence and logic that Atheism is necessary", and a troll who wants to harrass rather than discuss.

Yet I do seem to have sympathy for the poor dears, and a desire to give them a chance to express themselves in the hopes that one might provide a rational discussion.

That is in vain it appears, and all that Atheism seems to provide is the fearful attacks that they feel necessary in their pitiful attempts to silence their opposition.

So I am also torn between silencing them completely since they are incapable of actual logical discourse regarding their beliefs, or allowing their childish banalities to be shown the light of day as evidence of their incapacity for rationality.

Right now, I'm considering going to a comment-free blog, because where ever Atheists land, a pile of trash remains behind them.

Or perhaps a membership driven blog where only those Atheists who wish to make rational explanations of their system of belief would be kept as members to discuss with the rest of us.

It's actually a shame that it comes to this, but their are boundaries and limits - at least in the rational world.