AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

@H2O MAN,

Oh, look - the guy who loves to talk about "sheeple and dumbmasses" while being unable to answer a single question just came to the help of the guy who loves to compare Obama to Hitler.

This is a damn fine thread you guys got going here....

3 Replies

@old europe,

Big tent. Big... empty... tent.

T
K
O

0 Replies

@old europe,

It's true, I can't answer the question concerning old europe and his or her sexual preferences.

Now let's find the cure and stop liberaltardation dead in it's tracks.

0 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

Sorry about your loss in the elections, by the way.

1 Reply

@old europe,

old europe wrote:

Oh, look - the guy who loves to talk about "sheeple and dumbmasses" while being unable to answer a single question just came to the help of the guy who loves to compare Obama to Hitler.

This is a damn fine thread you guys got going here....

You are welcome to vote it down and never need to look upon it again. That's one of the features of the new A2K.

0 Replies

@okie,

Actually, what we are seeing right now in America, with Okie criticizing the president and complaining about the general state of the nation, brings to mind infamous murderer and cult-leader Charles Manson, who also criticized the system and who channeled his rage into unhealthy outlets. For comparison purposes, I am not comparing Okie to Manson to say he is a madman, I don't think he is, but I see a lot of similarity between Okie and Manson in the 70s. People will jump on me here for comparing Okie to Manson, for them I would say don't get excited, what I am doing here is comparing attitudes, styles of argumentation, and many other things. They even look alike. Here's Charles Manson:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_A85yE3NY7Qw/ScJsRqgIUCI/AAAAAAAAA3A/SSVtSsBQG2k/s400/art.charles.manson.now.gi.jpg

And here's Okie (artist's rendering)

http://www.upcountryartists.com/images/featuredartist/lproctor/crazyman.jpg

Spooky, ain't it?

I am comparing these things to provide evidence for my assertion that Okie is a kook, just as Manson is clearly a kook. Note, I am making the point that I am not comparing Okie as a person to that of Charles Manson. If you have read the many posts about Charles Manson, the obvious reason Manson is discussed and referenced is the discussion of fanaticism, cultism, and homicidal mania. All of this debate is highly instructive if you have a desire to examine the subjects addressed here.

3 Replies

@joefromchicago,

Good thing you stayed clear of that comparison, Joe.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

Quote:

"Okie is just pissed because even the intelligent conservatives who showed up in his "Ruthless Dictators" thread told him he's full of ****."

No, I don't see it that way. Some on this particular thread have posted excerpts from okie's post as proof that he compared Obama to Hitler in some derogatory unseemly way. This despite the glaring parts of the text that make it explicitly clear he was comparing their political policies and not fanatatical actions. Even those parts that do not explicitly label his intent demonstrate so if read in context.

Of course I'm considered a conservative on these threads and that subjects me to discount from some, so perhaps we could seriously hear from Thomas about how he interprets those very quotes. He is further to the left then I, but seems like a fair man.

As to the thread RE okie's study about dictators and conservative posters I saw some disagreement that suggested that , perhaps, there may be other factors and where others would put greater emphasis on some variables over others, a discussion if you will. From the conservatives I saw no attempt to convince okie that his thoughts suffered from some sort of intellectual constipation.

JM

2 Replies

To take a page from Joe, i wouldn't for a moment compare Okie personally to an idiot, but i would say that the drivel Okie posts here is just like the drivel one expects from an idiot.

0 Replies

@JamesMorrison,

Quote:

No, I don't see it that way. Some on this particular thread have posted excerpts from okie's post as proof that he compared Obama to Hitler in some derogatory unseemly way. This despite the glaring parts of the text that make it explicitly clear he was comparing their political policies and not fanatatical actions. Even those parts that do not explicitly label his intent demonstrate so if read in context.

Oh, spare me, please. Go read Okie's idiotic thread. He claims that ruthless dictators are, first, always "leftists" (without producing a coherent definition of that term), and, second, the products of unhappy childhoods. The basic witless thesis is "leftists bad, rightists good." He completely fails to make his point. The thread started long before Mr. Obama was elected, and now all Okie is doing is transferring that idiocy to this thread, and inserting Mr. Obama into, which he couldn't do when he started that thread, because at the time he did that, no one was even thinking of Obama as a candidate for President.

So get a grip, JM, it was a wry remark--i was taking a poke at Okie. But leaving that aside, what kind of idiocy leads you to suggest that one would say that two people pursue identical political policies and have identical political goals, but one does not mean that the result would be identical fanatical actions?

Quote:

From the conservatives I saw no attempt to convince okie that his thoughts suffered from some sort of intellectual constipation.

Bullshit, go read the posts by O'George. Quite apart from that, i have received private messages on the subject, but don't consider it proper to reveal the contents and authors of private messages. But clearly, O'George despaired of the quality and basis of Okie's thesis, said as much, and provided examples of why he thought it was wrong.

Given that i have not used the term "intellectual constipation," i don't feel a need to defend a charge that no one attempted to convince him of that. In at least the case of O'George, he clearly attempted to convince Okie that he was wrong, and finally had to acknowledge the futility of the exercise.

I can think of few suggestions more ludicrous than that Okie's thread merits the dignity of being called a "study."

2 Replies

I'd like you, JM, to provide straightforward answers to two simple questions. Do you agree with Okie that all dictatorships are left-wing governments? More specifically, do you agree with Okie that Hitler and the NSDAP were left-wing?

1 Reply

@Thomas,

It's just by the way - better times will come. (I - and especially Mrs walter in a different room - got really upset when I (we) had to count those couple of left-Nazi-supporter-parties votes, like REPs and DVU.)

0 Replies

the bbc has a new podcast series titled americana, the second episode had an interview with some young conservatives, they actually sounded quite reasonable and would love to see the party move in a more moderate direction, when asked about the old guard they said they'd like to see them take a few steps back, when asked if that referred to recent comments from cheney and the over top rantings of rush, they said they would rather not comment

the party might be learning and hopefully moving in a new direction

2 Replies

Well at least my suspicions that the Left has been collaborating via PM and perhaps otherwise behind the scenes on how to gang up on and attack those on the Right on A2K seems to be justified based on what I'm reading this morning. I hope GeorgeOb1 is being mischaracterized here and has not been a party to that as is suggested. I would be very disappointed to have to believe that he was.

I remain of the conviction that it is up to the member to explain and describe his intent and meaning on any subject and not the prerogative of others to define that for him.

I certainly have not agreed with Okie or anybody else here on every subject, and I profoundly disagree with many on Left on several subjects, but I do not see that to be any reason to be unkind to people or attack their character. Okie, Ican, JM, et al don't do that but rather, right or wrong, focus on the topic and that is to their credit. I agree with JM that Okie is being mischaracterized here. Several on the Left could take lessons from Okie and others, but alas, it seems that too many on the Left use A2K as a place to demonstrate their own character that includes being unkind to others as some kind of sport. Too many on the Left seem to just want a pat-each-other-on-the-back society here on A2K, and intend to shout down or drive away anybody who says anything with which they disagree,

Unless there is freedom and encouragement for members to express a point of view that is not shared by everybody else, then what's the point of discussing it at all?

4 Replies

Well, I certainly can't understand why anyone would want to limit people's ability to compare Obama to Hitler, on many occasions, for stupid reasons Rolling Eyes

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@JamesMorrison,

Thank you for your comments here James, and I think you are confirming the observations of those who are fair and who aren't part of a dog pack that gangs up on other members with whom they disagree.

Going back to Thomas Sowell's three part essay "In Context" re Sotomayor, he said:

Quote:

What does it say about her qualifications (Sotomayor) to be on the Supreme Court when her supporters' biggest talking points are that she had to struggle to rise in the world?

Bonnie and Clyde had to struggle. Al Capone had to struggle. The only President of the United States who was forced to resign for his misdeeds " Richard Nixon " had to struggle. For that matter, Adolf Hitler had to struggle! There is no evidence that struggle automatically makes you a better person.

Is Sowell comparing Sotomayor to Bonnie and Clyde? Al Capone? Nixon? Hitler? No reasonable person would suggest so and the comparison's Okie has been making between Obama's tactics/policies and those of Adolph Hitler fall into this same category. Okie was just less skillful than Sowell in ensuring that there could be no rational misunderstanding, but then Okie doesn't write for a living.

I think fair minded people would take the point Okie made and show how it was wrong if they believe it is. Obama's policy is nothing like Hitler's policy in *this regard*, for instance, because. But no, they aren't interested in the topic. They just attack the messenger as if that was valid debate.

2 Replies

@djjd62,

djjd62 wrote:

the bbc has a new podcast series titled americana, the second episode had an interview with some young conservatives, they actually sounded quite reasonable and would love to see the party move in a more moderate direction, when asked about the old guard they said they'd like to see them take a few steps back, when asked if that referred to recent comments from cheney and the over top rantings of rush, they said they would rather not comment

the party might be learning and hopefully moving in a new direction

Welcome to the thread Djj, make sure your bullet proofing is in good working order, and wade right on in.

What did you think the 'young conservatives' saw differently from the 'old conservatives'? I mean, what is a key element or two that you picked up on that you thought pertinent?

1 Reply

@Foxfyre,

Foxfyre wrote:

djjd62 wrote:

the bbc has a new podcast series titled americana, the second episode had an interview with some young conservatives, they actually sounded quite reasonable and would love to see the party move in a more moderate direction, when asked about the old guard they said they'd like to see them take a few steps back, when asked if that referred to recent comments from cheney and the over top rantings of rush, they said they would rather not comment

the party might be learning and hopefully moving in a new direction

Welcome to the thread Djj, make sure your bullet proofing is in good working order, and wade right on in.

What did you think the 'young conservatives' saw differently from the 'old conservatives'? I mean, what is a key element or two that you picked up on that you thought pertinent?

I can't speak for Dj, but I know plenty of young Conservatives, who - to a T - want to drop the social Conservative bullshit in favor of focusing on limited gov't and low taxes, and that includes a focus on civil rights as a limitation of government as well (personal freedom and privacy).

Heck, they sound downright sane sometimes.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

well actually you summed up their position fairly well

what i liked best about them from hearing them was, they didn't appear to be bush, reagan, cheney, mc cain, gingrich or pailin

our conservative party in canada got hijacked a few years back by a hardcore right wing religious element and have moved from being a moderate group, they used to call themselves the progressive conservatives to just plain conservatives, my wish is that they will move back eventually

1 Reply

@djjd62,

In what ways were they different from Bush, Reagan, Cheney, McCain, Gingrich, or Palin?

1 Reply

AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know