Nether socialist nor liberal am I

President Barack Obama said on Tuesday that if Ronald Reagan were running for president today,
he "could not get through a (Republican) primary."

Published April 3, 2012




Obama cites Reagan on taxing the rich.
Published April 11, 2012

The two most interesting things for me about Reagan is he raised taxes 6 out of his 8 years and raised the effective rate (higher than either Clinton's or Obama's at 38%) for the wealthiest saying that if it was high enough the wealthy would be more likely to pay a fair share.

And he left behind the largest Federal Government ever when he left the White House.

I really think Reagan was more of a Conservative Blue Dog Democrat than a Republican.

When did the US have its biggest growth spurt? When Eisenhower had a 70% effective tax on the wealthy. They had profiteered it from WWII and Eisenhower harvested a bunch of it to pay for Korea and a huge re-armament program. Thing Republicans like to forget.

And "Fighting Bob" LaFollette.

Who?

The Solipsist here. He never reads anybody else's post, he went with his preconceived notions.

You have the 15 initial principles on the OP. Do you disagree substantially with any of them?

Our country is divided into two narrow ideological bubbles that spend all of their time yelling about why the other side are despicable people.

I respect people who can support positions outside of their own side, or to acknowledge with the other side has a valid point.

Sez you.

No it’s not. I repeat my point about Roger, Sturgis and Bob having very different political outlooks, but they all oppose Trump.

I didn’t include myself because I’m not from your country, even though that’s not important because this thread is about Bob’s political beliefs not American factions.

Why don’t you start your own thread about how everyone is in one of two narrow ideological camps except you because you’re so clever and moderate and see how many replies you get?

You should leave Roger out of this. He is nothing like you. He has he ever expressed any desire to be associated with you in this way. I have found roger to be decent, reasonable, open-minded even when I disagree with him.

I don't know if roger wants my endorsement... but in my view Roger is one of the good guys. You should not be dragging him into the mud.

You will note that he isn't here.

I want to say how impressed I am.... I honestly don't care about downthumbs, but you guys racked up -12 downthumbs for my post in literally 2 minutes?

Either you guys don't have anything better to do... or something is going on here.

Either way, I am flattered.

1. Who is going to be the judge to determine whether something is a valid point or not?

2. Is Coldjoint going to be the judge in determining which points are valid?

3. Are you Max, going to be the judge in determining which points are valid?

4. I am not opposed to anyone (expressing) their political views on any particular issue.

5. If I disagree with someone, I will articulate my disagreement.

6. If I agree with someone, I will articulate my agreement.

7. If a particular issue is not that important to me, I probably won't take any part in that particular discussion.

8. If I am not that knowledgeable on a particular issue, I probably won't take any part in that discussion.

What is your point Real Music? If you are saying that you have the right to post whatever opinion you want, I agree with you. You are kind of making this whole thread look silly... which come to think of it is exactly what I am doing.

Maybe you and I are on the same side.

1. There are different levels and degrees of agreement.

2. Some things are too broad and too generalized.

3. Some things are more detailed and specific.

5. Generally speaking or broadly speaking, I actually agree with the OP initial principles.

I do not believe there is any significant ideological disagreement in this little insular group. This thread defines a "in group" (good) and outsiders (bad). I am here agitating because this particular group quite often tries to push the outsiders out of the general accepted Able2know community. As bobsal said quite well.... "I am the fly in the ointment".

That is the challenge I am putting out. Is there any way that you disagree in a significant way with the rest of the people in this thread?

More importantly, do you disagree with the tactics and nastiness used by the people in this group to exclude people from wider discussions?

Because he shows you’re talking nonsense.

You really have monochrome thinking, that someone is on one side or another. Your whole post is riddled with it. I’ve never claimed to be on the same side as Roger or that he’s anything like me because I don’t suffer from monochrome thinking.

The point I was making, which has shot over your head twice now, is that your depiction of America and A2K as being divided into two narrow ideologies is wrong. There are plenty of people like Roger who are traditionally Republican yet don’t support Trump.

Maybe the Trump supporters are part of a narrow ideological bubble, but not those who oppose him, they’re from a wide range of political orthodoxies.
Where would someone like Edgar fit in with your monochrome view? He’s made it perfectly clear that if Biden wins the Democratic nomination he will vote for a third candidate.

This is what you do, come onto someone else’s thread spout a load of bollocks and then make demands of everyone else providing of course that they conform to the nonsense you’ve already set down.

When people tell you why you’re wrong you don’t understand because you can’t accept being wrong so you go off on a tangent.

You’re just like Oralloy, he can’t think outside of a cage and has problems understanding questions.

This is irony, the thing you claim to love yet will never understand, someone who can only think in black and white claiming to uniquely see common ground.

Now you can spout another load of old bollocks while the point shoots over your head for a third time. You might want to stick a dartboard up there.

This thread is self-selecting. It was a dog whistle... and people in this narrow group responded (as did I).

The people who responded to the dog whistle are here because they want to be. They believe that Able2know should be a narrow community and that dissent should be attacked if not discouraged. We are all here with full knowledge that this is a mudslinging mess.

Notice the people who didn't respond to Bobsal's dog whistle. No one has to be a part of it, and no one who doesn't want to be a part of this should be dragged into the mud.

I feel strongly they should be left out of it. Attack me as you wish (I clearly enjoy it). But leave Roger, or anyone else who didn't choose to be here out of it.

So now it’s a little insular group and not half of America.

You’re not challenging, you’re trying to dominate and tell everyone else what to do. You are a classic passive aggressive and all the nastiness is coming from you with your smug, sneering stupidity.

Everyone can see what you’re doing except you, and you’re whining away because nobody wants to play your little games.

You are adding to the list of insults Izzy.

We have

- liar,
- fascist,
- idiot,
- misogynist
- arrogant
- rape-apologist (I am reaching back a bit).
- ugly
- whining
- disingenous
- sneering (I think this is new)
- passive-aggressive (is this new?)
- smug (I don't think you have used this either).

Did I miss any?

This is actually funny.

If you didn't want to play "my little games", you would stop. There is nothing that is forcing you to be here or to interact with me. There are a lot of people who don't want to play these "little games" (including roger). They aren't here.

Hopefully you are enjoying this... I am.

Damn! You are right. I missed "pathetic".