Why are the Dems SO FAR Left?

How very incoherent.

What kind of perverse world view sees the Democrats as being on the left?

american?

The worst thing in the world we could do would be do move in a European direction, politically, economically, or culturally. Don't you know? It's hell over there.




(If that seems like a non-sequitur, I'm being unnecessarily obtuse. Not deep or profound, I know, just obtuse.)

Setanta!!!!!



With socialist policies, even!

None is perverse.
It is the Original vu of the Founders.
It is an Originalist American vu





David

that doesn't mean it's not very limited in the grand scheme of things. it is.

Dave, I forget, which is the Tories, and who's the Whigs...

Heh. You're on a roll...

AGREED.

That 's the point, Dag.
The Founders were all successful Revolutionaries,
who had learned to distrust government.
The Revolution was won by the Sons of Liberty.
who KNEW that personal freedom is inversely proportional
to the domestic power of government.

Their concept was that government woud just be a little
sparrow fart in the background of life, that the average citizen
woud never have to be in contact.





David

kuvasz said


nimh said


Haha, don't forget Nimh you're the brainiac who quoted Rosa Luxemburg to me paraphrasing Voltaire's "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it," in defending her political opponents, read: the right wing Freikorps , and what did she get for her troubles? They put a bullet in her brain and dumped her body in a canal. So, the fact you even attempted to use such a example means that you have little respect for an intellectual foe by using such foolish examples and that you were just throwing **** on a wall to see if it would stick. You sat there and attempted to use a spurious example where you thought that your adversary was so uncultured that nobody else was aware of its profound contridiction and irony, I caught you and were hoist on your own petard.

But, let me give you a clue about the style and rhetoric of some of my posts you condemn, especially towards some of our less sophisticated racist bullies because apparently most of the intent of the posts has soared completely over your head in your continuing effort to get back at me for making you look foolish. I am mimicking the rhetoric and bombast of my opponents to ridicle them, and throw it back in their teeth so that they can get a taste of their own pompous medicine. So in all seriousness, other than punching them in the nose it is the most effective way to deal with them, and pisses them off to no end. But, since you fail to understand something that is completely obvious, it shows me that you would rather spend your time prowling around these parts as a concern troll to pump up your ego rather than engage ideological foes and defeat their argument. So, let me say that I consider your attacks towards me a prime example of what psychologists refer to as projection.

Now, since because of your personal obtuseness I was forced to reveal my rhetorical tactics, I leave to you the battle of dealing with the right wing whackjobs on site, and I pray that you can piss them off as much as I have so they can show their true colors to the rest of us.

If you have ever read the theologian Reinhold Niebuhr, he talks about the risk of personal corruption of a person because he attempts to obtain a political goal. I am not mad at you at all, but all you actually did in your criticism was point out to me what I already knew was going to happen to me because I atttempted to fight the right wing whackjobs with their own medicine.

cjhasa babbled



Oh my, you are so cute when you are angry, so virile, so manly, ummmm.....

Of course, I work at home, they are personal businesses, besides I can write off for taxes my computers, printers, phone lines, faxes, internet and satellite connections, as well as my offices and library.



of course I haven't, but would you care to place a small four figure wager, or one of your pop guns?

would you like the patent number if you promise not to stalk me? my first company is the assignee of the patent and you can look up the second company at the michigan sec of state web site.

I'm going to call you Kaczynski from here on out ya freak.

Dude, I dont even remember the Voltaire/Luxemburg exchange you're going on about. Apparently it made no impression on me whatsoever, let alone that I'd still be trying to get back to you over it.

Seriously, you're just not anywhere as important or memorable as you think you are. And while I accept that you may believe that you are in fact "engaging your ideological foes and defeating their argument," all I can say is that to me, in any case, you come across as just another blowhard buffoon with a primary interest in self-aggrandizing dickfights. I dont actually remember ever having said anything about that before, though I might be wrong of course, but in the course of, what is it, six years now?, it's gonna come out some time I guess. Cant say I regret it.

i readily admit that i'm dust in the wind, yet you constantly cheap shot me and act like i'm your bête noire regardless. why don't you simply accept the fact that you attacked me for something it wasn't.

I enjoy K's postings, quite a bit.

Now enough with the pissing match, can't we get back to ridiculing our mouth-breather contingent? The circular firing squad is supposed to be on the other side!

Cycloptichorn

Dude, when did I even talk to you in the past couple of months? You must have an elephant's memory, cause I cant even remember the last time I was in a spat with you.

If anything it'd make more sense if you'd blame me for just going off at you like this out of the middle of nowhere. Cause that's what I did, it's true, and it may well have seemed unprovoked. It was one of those straw/camel's back things.


What about not doing either? Wouldnt that be better? And I dont care about the whole "circular firing squad is supposed to be on the other side" argument - pricks are pricks, should I really feel some kind of solidarity with someone who's acting like a prick just cause he votes for the same kind of candidates?

However big the political differences are, the difference between decent people and blowhards will always be more important. Just cause, say, Keith Olbermann's politics are the same as mine doesnt mean I'd ever want to hang out with the pompous bastid, I can think of a bunch of non-libs I'd sooner stand by. And thats how it should be, no? If you'd see someone acting like an ass and you'd normally say something about it, you wouldnt suddenly refrain from it now just cause he's a fellow-Dem or lib, would you?

Anyway, you're right on the bottom line tho. We're just boring people now and it's been enough, so I'll shut up now.

I guess that kind of clinches the argument about the founders being liberals then if Thomas Jefferson's Democrats were on the left.

I like Keith Olbermann. He's a funny guy who tells it straight-up. I'd love to have a beer with him. To be fair, I feel the same way about O'reilly; of course I disagree with him on more issues, and he's more of an asshole, but he's still funny and I probably would enjoy his company.

Yaknow, the issue of politics is much more emotional for some than others. I personally feel that there's nothing wrong with calling fools, fools, to their face. Others might moan about how it lowers the level of discourse. So what? The point of this site isn't to have a debate society in every thread, and nobody is forced to read posts they don't like. So when you say,



The answer is: no, it would not. There is a certain contingent who deserves to be treated with scorn and derision. This is not based upon their politics but their idiocy and penchant for being assholes, and worse than that, unimaginative and boring ones.

I disagree with your frame of 'decent people vs. blowhards.' It's the wrong way to look at it and unfairly prejudicial.

Cycloptichorn

i enjoy the post's of both. united we stand and alla that jazz.

Don't blame all Americans for the idiocy of the few, Dashenka . . .