Typical Democrat hypocricy

“Polygraph accuracy is overrated. DNA, however, gets 'em every time.”

“what's the right wing agenda? pat robertson? now there's a token, intolerant, bigoted conservative.

ooops, did i just paint y'all with the same brush? that's ok, because that's whats done to liberals, democrats, and anyone else who doesn't toe the line.”

“intolerance.....there's a good word.....


screw robertson.... that guy NEVER enters MY mind...

what is the left wing agenda these days?

somebody please tell me what you are all so proud of....i am serious here....what is it ? what line are you towing mitch?”

“There's weirdos on the right and the left. I just like our weirdos better.”

“Strat, what are you looking for, exactly?

"left wing agenda" is a pretty vague term.”

“i have no interest in political agendas and i don't toe a line, i try to think for myself and don't regurgitate coulter or limbaugh.

i feel sorry for conservatives with the likes of robertson, simply demonstrates the right's intolerance and bigotry. i assume such a stereotype is incorrect?

strat- if you're not going to stereotype conservatives, don't do it to the liberals. one does not represent all.

i'm done with this thread.”

“Your not done with anything Mister.”

“you feel sorry for me? let's analize your statement.....critically(lookin for my book any time now phaed)

i feel sorry for conservatives with the likes of robertson, simply demonstrates the right's intolerance and bigotry. i assume such a stereotype is incorrect?

i'm done with this thread."
jmitch


ok...so...you look down on "conservatives" because of their bigotry, but in so doing you show your bigotry and intolerance of differing thought, and then you steriotype every other conservative as being like him...

to answer phaed's question....about what i'm looking for here ... all you lefties just go on and on and on and on and frigging ON about how bad this bush guy is and the point i am trying to make is that the left today has NOTHING to offer but negativity, personal destruction, fear tactics, class warfare, and racial tension....there is nothing positive to the message. i'm trying to get you to admit that the liberal policies are negative, and must be carried out by stealth, because that's the only way they can get away with it.

synopsis; the left can't tell me what they REALLY truely stand for, because they would be exposed as socialist, and elitist.

oh, i know what you'll say....everybody on the left is not like that. don't steriotype.i agree. many liberals are very decent, well meaning people who live honest productive lives. I AGREE! however, most in leadership positions are much more sinister and lead the followers astray...i have provided many examples of this, like the democratic party having virtually NO blacks in leadership positions while they rise to the top of the republican party, or the fact that the democratic party is the REAL party for the rich because they get far more large donations and have 7 of the top 10 richest congress people....i could go on and on, and often do


dun let the door hit ya in the ars mitch....come back sometime for another intelectual spanking...”

“Nice Strat!”

“to answer phaed's question....about what i'm looking for here ... all you lefties just go on and on and on and on and frigging ON about how bad this bush guy is and the point i am trying to make is that the left today has NOTHING to offer but negativity, personal destruction, fear tactics, class warfare, and racial tension....there is nothing positive to the message.

What message is that? Define your terms - what lefties are you talking about, and what specific issues would you like to discuss. Most of the above seems to be a rant intended to overwhelm the reader with negativity.

i'm trying to get you to admit that the liberal policies are negative, and must be carried out by stealth, because that's the only way they can get away with it.

Again, examples might be nice if you're trying to prove a point. Also, you really should DEFINE "liberal policies", if you're going to attack them. Otherwise, it just appears that you're setting up a straw man.

synopsis; the left can't tell me what they REALLY truely stand for, because they would be exposed as socialist, and elitist.

Unwarranted conclusion, based on no evidence given.”

“jmitch. Try to keep your sentences short and don't group too many thoughts into one post.

Sarcasm sometimes gets lost in print form.”

“Oh, and by the way, every democrat is not a liberal and every republican is not a conservative, therefore, many of your arguments using the terms as interchangeable are invalid.”

“well your critical dodging is very effective phaed, i'll hand you that. the obvious design is to deflet my deadly rebuke of liberalism by overwhelming the reader with confounding minutia and abstract, irrelivent points....


here's what i'm saying, and i give examples of this constantly....

you are a liberal.(i say this to define my terms)

liberals constantly bash conservatives.

liberals rarely offer alternative ideas, beacause poeple would reject them if they really knew what was going on.

if they do offer solutions, they(liberal ideas) are socialist at their core.”

“Strat I've said it before and I'll say it again. The Democratic party believes in investing in Americans. They want the prosperity of the country to advance education, in so creating a better electorate. Granted some of the programs they want are actually counter productive. They've been corrupted by special interests.

The Republican platform was more about creating opportunity by investing in infrastructure so that business could thrive. Both plans work on paper, but both have been corrupted. The Republican party has been more about redistributing money to businesses. If a business can't succeed it must fail, that is the basis of capitalism and the Republican party props up and protects bad business.

The reason the Democrats attack Bush now is the same reason the Republican attacked Clinton. American politics have become a team sport, the special interests have hijacked both parties and force their pet politicians to make them money. Now the Dems have an opening because many people believe that the Bush administration lied to create popular support for a war in Iraq. It's beginning to look like they might be right, I'm pissed because the Government should be invested in making the country better, yet every administration I can remember since Carter has been involved with some shady things and NONE of them have been for the betterment of America.

People who are on a political bandwagon are part of the problem...

to quote the musician with the best political name...

"Free your mind, and your a$$ will follow"”

“"well your critical dodging is very effective phaed, i'll hand you that. the obvious design is to deflet my deadly rebuke of liberalism by overwhelming the reader with confounding minutia and abstract, irrelivent points....

Logic is not an irrelevant point. I'm trying to understand your position, in order to debate it with you. I'm not trying to distract anyone from anything. I'll address any point you make with a logical argument.


here's what i'm saying, and i give examples of this constantly....

you are a liberal.(i say this to define my terms)

I am a liberal... Where to start?

1. You have not defined the term liberal, so we are left to conclude that you mean the definition of the term most commonly used.

From the Miriam Webster dictionary:
Main Entry: 1lib·er·al
Pronunciation: 'li-b(&-)r&l
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French, from Latin liberalis suitable for a freeman, generous, from liber free; perhaps akin to Old English lEodan to grow, Greek eleutheros free
Date: 14th century
1 a : of, relating to, or based on the liberal arts b archaic : of or befitting a man of free birth
2 a : marked by generosity : OPENHANDED b : given or provided in a generous and openhanded way c : AMPLE, FULL
3 obsolete : lacking moral restraint : LICENTIOUS
4 : not literal or strict : LOOSE
5 : BROAD-MINDED; especially : not bound by authoritarianism, orthodoxy, or traditional forms
6 a : of, favoring, or based upon the principles of liberalism b capitalized : of or constituting a political party advocating or associated with the principles of political liberalism; especially : of or constituting a political party in the United Kingdom associated with ideals of individual especially economic freedom, greater individual participation in government, and constitutional, political, and administrative reforms designed to secure these objectives


Is this the term you mean to apply to me?

liberals constantly bash conservatives.

All liberals constantly bash all conservatives?

liberals rarely offer alternative ideas,

You offer no evidence of this in your argument

beacause poeple would reject them if they really knew what was going on.

Another unwarranted conclusion based on no evidence.

if they do offer solutions, they(liberal ideas) are socialist at their core."

Contradiction of your previous statement, straw man reference to socialism, and attempted ad hom.”

“"look at your statment dan....there was never and there still is not any evidence that iraq did not have a nuke program....that's ludicrus and pretty weak ta boot...
Stratdewd

First of all, this is a pretty silly argument structurally. How do you prove a program doesn't exist other than by letting people look for evidence and not finding it.

Secondly... it is obvious that Saddam at one point had a nuclear program and that he was hoping to be able to restart it at some point. The question is did he have one that was so dangerous as to justify the huge rush to war. If Bush hadn't been so eager to stmapede the US into war, the inspections could have continued under the threat of war and we would have either had real compliance, or a much broader consensus for regime change.”

“I'm not trying to just dissect your arguments, strat. I really want to see where you're coming from. We can't be so dissimilar of belief that we can't reach some sort of common ground. The first step is understanding the other's beliefs.”

“All that aside, you Bush backers keep on ignoring the most obvious.

If there was all that dangerous stuff in Iraq, Bush blew it because Saddam is out of his box... his folks have nothing to lose and we have little idea as to where all this dangerous stuff is.

If there wasn't such a huge immediate risk, then Bush and his boys pulled a fast one.

I'm not sure which it is... but it seems pretty clear that its got to be one or the other.

If Bush wasn't bush-hitting us, then his failure to take advantage of international, esp. UN inspection teams to help locate all this hugely dangerous stuff is grossly negligent.

If he ain't being grossly negligent of the danger right now - then he's got something to hide, and probably something to plant.”

“violin- i know.

strat- re-read my previous post, you completely missed the point. the stereotype was hypothetical; in fact, i assumed it was incorrect. i know the vast majority of conservatives are not bigots. but the same way you bash liberals opens your beloved conservatives up for criticism. if hillary represents liberals, does robertson represent conservatives? of course not. your analysis should be more sophisticated.

the next time you stereotype anyone, i'll be giving you an "intelectual" spanking, and then i'll slap you around with my book! (insert sarcasm here).”

“Strat you continue to debate with sweeping generalizations. It's a favorite tactic with neo-con talkshow hosts.

I'm neither a Liberal or a Conservative. I have ideas that come from both places, but I do find that people that call themselves Conservative are more "elitest" than people who call themselves Liberal.”

“Strat you continue to debate with sweeping generalizations. It's a favorite tactic with neo-con talkshow hosts.

I'm neither a Liberal or a Conservative. I have ideas that come from both places, but I do find that people that call themselves Conservative are more "elitest" than people who call themselves Liberal.”

“phead, we've covered this a thousand times you knucklehead...and once again, i have the feeling that i'm wasting my time.

no offence, i need a break form this crap...”

“What is this thread all about? I do not have a week to sort through all of the rhetoric you guys are throwing down here.”

“this is just your typical political bull#&%!$ thread.

please move on to another thread, nothing to see here.

strat- i may disagree with some of your posts, but you appear to be a good guy nonetheless.”

“"phead, we've covered this a thousand times you knucklehead...and once again, i have the feeling that i'm wasting my time.

no offence, i need a break form this crap..."


No offense to you, strat, but this is typical. Every time someone tries to get you really back up a claim, throw your hands in the air and bolt.

I like you, and I really want to know YOUR views on things, once you have thought them through well enough to express and defend them.”

“naw, that ain't it at all phaed. i've layed it all out. many many times. if you don't knpw what a liberal is....well i simply do not believe that you don't know exactly who i'm talking about. you can blur the lines a little, but i'm talking about people like terry mcaulif, hillary clinton, tom dashel, dick gephart, ted kennedy, people like that...those are liberals...it's so very simple...now if you'll kindly can the coi routine we may proceed, my friend...

mitch thanks, i am a nice guy....will you be my friend? email me !”

“Koi?”

“well i simply do not believe that you don't know exactly who i'm talking about. you can blur the lines a little, but i'm talking about people like terry mcaulif, hillary clinton, tom dashel, dick gephart, ted kennedy, people like that...those are liberals...it's so very simple...now if you'll kindly can the coi routine we may proceed, my friend...

So a liberal is a person who belongs to a group of people that you decide are to be labeled "liberal".

Honestly, Strat, I know what MY interpretation of the word is, but it just doesn't seem to jove with many of the things you attribute to liberals, so I'm trying to get you to define the traits, characteristics, or ideology of what you consider a liberal to be.

By the way, if you define a liberal as a socialist, you'll need to rethink who you add to the list.

So what is it that defines a liberal, according to you? Maybe we can agree on a term and move on.”

“Somewhere a solution exist. Without digging very deeply ,one can see that operating from a neutral platform (3 rd party-maybe)the bad habits of the two major parties can be avoided.Yes, the pollarization of left-right does distract from the many issues that are important to the 'silent middle',yet hardly get attention in the 'blame game politics' of this board and this country in general.”

“is it koi? that's a goldfish.......


phaeddy... blah blah blah, yadda yadda yadda....”

“phaeddy... blah blah blah, yadda yadda yadda...."
stratdewd
10:24:16 AM
07/19/03


The first requirement of any discussion is to agree on definitions of terms.

Could you please define the traits of the term "liberal"?”

“uncliff...i agree...a 3rd party would be nice...

i'd rather vote libertarian than republican...

but...i usually wimp out and vote repub cuz i'm afraid the democrat will win if the conservative vote is split...

i agree that the vast majority of people don't really pay that close attention to politics and are fairly moderate....”

“I'll start for you:

"a liberal is one who _____"

Or

"liberalism is a ideology that believes _______"

Or

"A liberal is defined by the following traits: ______"”

“yeah yeah yeah....everybody here but you knows what my terms are...

phaeddy phaeddy quite contrary, how does your garden grow?”

“Your refusal to define a word that you use constantly poses problem. I can only assume that either

1. You do not understand the term

2. You understand the term, but refuse to define it because a definition would prohibit you from using it as a catch-all term

3. You have used the term incorrectly and do not want to revisit past arguments

or some combination of the above.

yeah yeah yeah....everybody here but you knows what my terms are...

This is a false appeal to populist belief; a logical fallacy.

If you would just define the term, we could move on.”

“My definition of liberal is the same as for conservative; "one who would blow out ones ear drums so he doesn't have to listen to a contrary opinion".”

“Liberalism is based on personal freedoms and rights, religious tolerance, personal liberty (like not worrying about gays), and the rights of the individual over those of big money and big corporate interests. Liberals see goverment as a tool of the people to help protect our natural resources, our shared lands, and our right to clean air and water. Liberals think that labor should be well-paid, and that management should not be able to get rich off of the labor of others without investing in the betterment of that labor force.

What do you think?”

“"Liberalism is based on personal freedoms and rights

except my right to own guns, to pray in public, or smoke in a resturant...

religious tolerance

except the evil Christian right...


personal liberty (like not worrying about gays)

like the ACLU defending NAMBLA and minors having abortions without parental notification...


and the rights of the individual over those of big money and big corporate interests


all men are created equal. why should your rights be greater than anyone elses?


Liberals see goverment as a tool of the people to help protect our natural resources, our shared lands, and our right to clean air and water


as long as we do it all "the liberal way"


Liberals think that labor should be well-paid, and that management should not be able to get rich off of the labor of others without investing in the betterment of that labor force


liberals think they have a "right" to rich peoples money . . . .


don, i think you believe all these things...i would agree that it's hard to argue against those things and that they are good goals to have...

my contention is that liberalism has been hijacked by the power brokers, the aristocrats, the buerocrats, the elitist...to the point that their tactics, their true motivations are simply to obtain and hold onto power, and that they use all those things you mentioned, those issues, to scare people into voting for them ...when in reality they have no interest in truely solving any of those issues, because that would mean there would be no need to keep voting for them. nothing to scare voters with....



conservatism says.....hey man, i did it, you can do it too. get out there and live the american dream...


liberalism says...hey man, you can't do anything without me(the government) helping you, because that guy over three will stop you unless you have me to save you...


how's that phaed? i got my book today and have already started reading it.”

“Strat, the american dream is to make lots of money so you can pay lots of taxes---Oh wait,correction---so you don't have to pay taxes.”

“that's pretty much the size of it.....those democrats never met a tax they didn't hike err, uhhm like.....”

“It reminds me of those CEOs who love America so much that they want to re-incorporate offshore.”

“Why go offshore when you can "overstate" your profits right here in the good old USA?”

“Strat, you still haven't defined anything, but I'd rather you were reading that book than arguing on this thread :)

We'll suspend this discussion for after you're done.”

“Dean Is Criticized Over Remark on Confederate Flag

By Dan Balz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, November 2, 2003; Page A05


The race for the Democratic presidential nomination took another negative turn yesterday, with former Vermont governor Howard Dean under attack from his rivals for a comment he made about appealing to southern voters who have Confederate flags on their pickup trucks.



Sen. John F. Kerry (Mass.), Rep. Richard A. Gephardt (Mo.) and, later, Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (Conn.), Sen. John Edwards (N.C.) and retired Army Gen. Wesley K. Clark denounced Dean, suggesting that he was being racially divisive and trying to cater to the National Rifle Association. Dean said his opponents had sunk to a new low.

The latest turn in the battle among the Democrats started over guns, specifically over a questionnaire from the NRA that Dean signed, while running for reelection in 1992, saying that he was opposed to a ban on semiautomatic weapons.

On Friday, Kerry used a pheasant-hunting expedition in Iowa to attack Dean directly. He said that while he and other Democrats were fighting to pass the ban on assault weapons, Dean was siding with the NRA. Congress approved the ban in 1994.

Dean says he supports the federal ban on assault weapons, although he received the support of the NRA while he was governor because he generally opposed restrictions on guns. Dean has argued that in the small rural state of which he was governor -- and which had few homicides -- there was no need for gun control legislation. And he has noted that the NRA questionnaire dealt with a state ban on such weapons, although the questionnaire mentioned both federal and state restrictions.

Then, in an interview with the Des Moines Register, Dean mentioned the Confederate flag. "I still want to be the candidate for guys with Confederate flags in their pickup trucks," he told the Register. "We can't beat George Bush unless we appeal to a broad cross section of Democrats."

That brought a new series of condemnations yesterday.

"It is simply unconscionable for Howard Dean to embrace the most racially divisive symbol in America," Kerry said. The senator added that he would "rather be the candidate of the NAACP than the NRA."

"I absolutely disagree" with Dean, Gephardt said. He said he wants to be the candidate of those who display American flags, not Confederate flags.

Lieberman called the Confederate flag "one of the most divisive, hurtful symbols in American history." He said the party cannot afford to nominate someone who is so incautious in his statements.

Yesterday, Dean said he wants to create a biracial coalition in the South. "For my fellow Democratic opponents to sink to this level is really tragic," he said. "The only way we're going to beat George Bush is if southern white working families and African American working families come together under the Democratic tent."

Dean spokeswoman Tricia Enright said the former governor had made a similar statement about southern white voters and the Confederate flag in a speech to a Democratic National Committee meeting in February and had won applause from the audience -- with no criticism from his rivals.

"Some of his rivals are seeing it differently, because in February he was a blip on the radar screen," she said.”

“good one nigedood”

“"We should change our attitude toward
the United Nations. There has to be some power in the world
superior to our own.... We should not have attacked Iraq without
the OK of the United Nations.... Now we have to live with that
mistake. We're living with it, and too many of our guys are
dying with it." --CBS's Andy Rooney”

“'Heritage not hate'....

That's a Republican line, isn't it? They're pissed because Dean is stealing their material, LOL”

“Open mouth, insert foot. I think Kerry even did some damage to himself by his line "rather be the candidate of the NAACP than the NRA......."

So, is he implying that the NRA is only a white group with the NAACP being black? What a uniter!”

“Hmmmmm. How many black NRA members are there, I wonder? We need a detailed demographic breakdown of both groups.”

“Al I can say is that Kery can kiss the Black vote goodbye!”