Let's talk about replacing GWBush in 2004.

Italgato-an icon of extreme hyperbole. while true that when all people sing the same note there can be no harmony, its also true that refusing to acknowledge that harmony requires many notes produces meaningless noise.

Professor Hobobit:
Are you aware of the career of Ted Kennedy?

I do agree with you that he cannot be lumped in with Stalin. Stalin was a murderer on a massive level. He is top rank.

Kennedy is guilty of manslaughter on a lower level- Chappaquiddick.

Stalin lied and cheated and sent many to their deaths in the gulags.

Kennedy only cheated on his Spanish exam and was unceremoniously expelled from Harvard for it.

Stalin led the purges which killed a number of the Cominterm in the late thirties.

Kennedy is small potatoes compared to Stalin.

Kennedy only voted against the US ratification of the Kyoto Treary and for the Patriot Act.

Yes, Sofia, Professor Hobobit is correct, Stalin and Kennedy don't belong together.

Stalin was a monster, the worst of all time.

Kennedy, on the other hand, is just a alchoholic who probably murdered an innocent girl, was expelled for Harvard for cheating and a politician who was never above turning his back on liberal principles, although he said he was a liberal.

Yes, Sofia, you must create another classification for Kennedy- at the bottom of the page.

Please Lola, That's an old ploy. Why don't you just admit that you really don't know a think about Freud and studies showing that conservatives are fanatics.

Your blurbs are tiresome. Don't you have enough brains to refer to some studies so that we can find out wheher you are truthful?

Do you really think I would take your word for what you are saying?

Get real!!!!!!

I'm thinking of starting a thread about the culture war between right wing fanaticism and liberal thought. There is much to be learned from the Clinton empeachment and events leading up to it. I'll start with the activities of Richard Mellon Scaife, Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson and the like. And I'll focus on this event with a view toward what we can expect and see about these continuing activities for the future. I'll work on it tomorrow.

dyslexia:

I read your post with interest. I will quote from the brilliant writer, Steven Pinker, in his book,"The Blank Slate"

"Modern psychologists and psychiatrists tend to reject orthodox Freudian theory"

Are you able to find a source that says this statement is untrue?

Ok, then, Italgato. Then we won't be speaking. Good night all. See you tomorrow.

"liberal thought", what an oxymoron.

neocon, what a moron

Who you calling neocon you admitted communist?

Some folks, lacking argument, resort to invective. Its a bipartisan failure, and not condusive to the advancement of discussion.

If you want to insult each other try PM's and don't subject the rest of us to the nonsense.

My argument all along has been that the title of this thread needs to be changed to "...2008".

cjh, You're always free to do so.

If others feel as I do about these constant tangles, many of us may have to rethink about how we're participating A2K as a forum.

Let me be clear: I've hung out with conservatives and liberals all my life and only lately have had a problem. The problem isn't with the conservatives: there are very few genuine, thoughtful conservatives in A2K. There are any number of A2K'ers who call themselves "conservative" in the same way I might choose to call myself "a twenty-year-old hot ticket."

With one or two exceptions, the liberals in these threads are quite centrist or (if you like) "all over the map." I'm a fiscal conservative but a pacifist, pro-union but anti-affirmative action... etc. etc.

Italgato, Perception and many others among the self-styled "conservatives" are in fact radicals. They talk like radicals and their behavior is radical -- they're the kind who arrive at a discussion with nasty signs, sharp elbows, bull horns, and who talk over the top of any trying to have a decent discussion. They shout, they taunt, they ridicule. And then we all shout, taunt and ridicule. It isn't really my style. It's wearing and it's unattractive and it doesn't bear any resemblance to real discussion.

In my opinion, we centrists and liberals shouldn't be engaging with these people. There are plenty of conservatives and centrist Republicans who are stalwart, interesting proponents of political points of view with whom I disagree (though not entirely) but who share an interest in ideas and enjoy an opportunity to explore any and all ideas on an even playing field.

Here's one liberal who is moving to an A2K usergroup for political discussion, a Democrat who no longer wants to validate or give any credence to the thinking and behaviors of the radicals by responding to them.

I want to grow up to be a politician
And take over this beautiful land
I want to grow up to be a politician
And be the old U.S. of A.'s number one man
I'll always be tough but I'll never be scary
I want to shoot guns or butter my bread
I'll work in the towns or conservate the prairies
And you can believe the future's ahead
I'll give the young the right to vote as soon as they mature
But spare the rod and spoil the child to help them feel secure
And if I win election day I might give you a job
I'll sign a bill to help the poor to show I'm not a snob
I'll open my door I'm charging no admission
And you can be sure I'll give you my hand
I want to grow up to be a politician
And take over this beautiful land
I'll make you glad you got me in with everything I do
And I'll defend until the end the old red white and blue
I want to grow up to be a politician
And take over this beautiful land
And take over this beautiful land
And take over this beautiful land
(Roger McGuinn and Jacques Levy)

As you wish and see fit, Tartarin ... some valid observations there, but two-edged, the way I see it; there's a great deal of pot-and-kettle argument here, as elsewhwhere, and neither faction, right or left, has exclusive claim to opropbrious behavior. In my thinking, a lot of the extraneoous friction stems from the widely shared notion that one side or the other is "Correct", that one side or the other must "Win". The failure is in that perception, I believe. Far too many folks of whatever stripe are so firmly wedded to their own notions that any criticism or counter-suggestion is seen as wrong-headed, mean, scurrilous attack. The perception becomes self-realizing, as a participant sensing slight responds in kind, setting off the juvenile name calling and allegation-slinging that too often passes for debate. Avoiding the unpleasant does little to allieviate the problem. Withdrawing to an enclave of co-opinionists is a self-limiting manuever, IMO. Insularity is the ultimate denial mechanism. Constructive engagement is the way to bring about meaningful discourse, and thereby effect change. 'Course, some folks will never change

Taking a deep breath and trying again.

Yes, Tartarin, maybe a move to an a2k user group would be a good idea. I only wish it weren't necessary.

i just find it interesting that the only person who took the report equating conservatism with mental illness seriously was the one person who seems to represent all the pathological characteristics described by the researcher.

Oh, I must clarify for Sofia something that I didn't see last night in her post. The fanatics I'm referring to are not my patients. Very few of these types seek therapy. The fanatics I was referring to are people I know personally, not professionally. I know a lot of these people, very well, unfortunately. But I am freeing myself. And the outlook for my life is very brighter because of it. I have come to recognize the symptoms of fanaticism and will seek to avoid it both left and right.