Obama '08?

@H2O MAN,

Kissy-Kissy!

0 Replies

@Advocate,

I have to agree with you that an independent is more likely to be conservative . . . at least a conservative closer to the center than to the fringe . . . than a liberal.

Another component of the independent voters are those who do not wish to receive solicitations from either of the major political parties. Registering as an independent is very easy to do in small towns here in NE.

0 Replies

@mysteryman,

Frankly, I'm surprised that you can make the distinction. However, the Republicans have largely abandoned their liberal wing and moved solidly to the right.

1 Reply

@mysteryman,

Good! Let's work toward abolishing war!

1 Reply

@plainoldme,

Yes, there is a distinction.
Just like all dems are not the liberal lunatics that okie and ican seem to thinnk they are.

While I proudly identify myself as a conservative, many call me a libertarian.
Either way, I am not a member of any political party because there are planks on both party platforms that I agree with.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

I read the wikipedia article about the AAPS.
NOWHERE in that article did it mention the John Birch Society.

Now I agree that they do seem to be waaaaay out there, but I dont see any connection to the JBS, unless you are saying that every conservative is a member of the JBS.

1 Reply

@plainoldme,

plainoldme wrote:

Good! Let's work toward abolishing war!

First things first! Abolish the rule of the Odem! That will significantly reduce the probability of war.

Odem are currently waging a non-shooting war against liberty by abandoning the rule of law. If they were to succeed, shooting wars would then be inevitable, because shooting wars would be the only way for any group to recover their liberty, secure it under the rule of law, and thereby significantly reduce the probability of future shooting wars.

Odem = Obama democrats = lying, thieving, gangsters = lythga

0 Replies

@mysteryman,

Quote:

I read the wikipedia article about the AAPS.
NOWHERE in that article did it mention the John Birch Society.

You ought to read closer - or even do a search for 'birch' before claiming that I'm wrong.

From the wikipedia article:

Quote:

In 1966, the New York Times described AAPS as an "ultra-right-wing... political-economic rather than a medical group," and noted that some of its leaders were members of the John Birch Society.[4]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_American_Physicians_and_Surgeons

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

I apologize.
I did not see that line when I read the wiki article.

1 Reply

@mysteryman,

mysteryman wrote:

I apologize.
I did not see that line when I read the wiki article.

No worries man!

Cheers
Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Dr. Joseph M. Scherzer wrote:

The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) is a politically conservative non-profit organization founded in 1943.

Cycloptichorn wrote:

{AAPS} is not a doctor's organization. It is an ultra-right wing organization who was founded by the John Birch society members.

James L. Krahenbuhl, director of the U.S. government's leprosy program wrote:

The article's erroneous leprosy claim was pointed out by 60 Minutes,[58] National Public Radio,[51] and the New York Times[56] but has not been corrected by the Journal.

Cyclo, you ought to check your sources before posting here: 60 Minutes, National Public Radio, and the New York Times are all left wing media that many times have demonstrated their non-disclosure of relevant truths.

Many other deseases (i.e., tuberculosis, malaria, plague, polio, dengue, and Chagas) were named in Scherzer's article besides leprosy as increasing. What about those deseases?

2 Replies

@ican711nm,

Quote:

Cyclo, you ought to check your sources before posting here: 60 Minutes, National Public Radio, and the New York Times are all left wing media that many times have demonstrated their non-disclosure of relevant truths.

Bull ****, Ican. The fact that your source is nothing more than a right-wing mouthpiece, and not some actual professional doctor's association, is all that anyone needs to know to evaluate the piece; I think that everyone here can come to their own conclusions as to whether 60 minutes and the NYT are more reliable then the Birchers.

Cycloptichorn

2 Replies

@ican711nm,

ican711nm wrote:

James L. Krahenbuhl, director of the U.S. government's leprosy program wrote:
The article's erroneous leprosy claim was pointed out by 60 Minutes,[58] National Public Radio,[51] and the New York Times[56] but has not been corrected by the Journal.

Many other deseases (i.e., tuberculosis, malaria, plague, polio, dengue, and Chagas) were named in Scherzer's article besides leprosy as increasing. What about those deseases?

The challenge to the claim about leprosy was from the director of the government's leprosy program as reported by NPR etc. I didn't know we had a director of leprosy. Did yall?

I suppose we could check on the other "deseases."

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Bull ****, Ican. The fact that your source is nothing more than a right-wing mouthpiece, and not some actual professional doctor's association, is all that anyone needs to know to evaluate the piece; I think that everyone here can come to their own conclusions as to whether 60 minutes and the NYT are more reliable then the Birchers.

Cyclo, you are nothing more than a left-wing mouthpiece and bigot who on the basis of one common element, leprosy, accuses the article writer to be a Bircher. By that logic, your support of the lying, thieving gangsterism of the Odem, marks you at best a very, very, ... very unreliable source.

1 Reply

@ican711nm,

ican711nm wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
Bull ****, Ican. The fact that your source is nothing more than a right-wing mouthpiece, and not some actual professional doctor's association, is all that anyone needs to know to evaluate the piece; I think that everyone here can come to their own conclusions as to whether 60 minutes and the NYT are more reliable then the Birchers.

Cyclo, you are nothing more than a left-wing mouthpiece and bigot who on the basis of one common element, leprosy, accuses the article writer to be a Bircher. By that logic, your support of the lying, thieving gangsterism of the Odem, marks you at best a very, very, ... very unreliable source.

My identifying them (the AAPS) as Birchers had, in fact, nothing to do with the Leprosy element at all. Those were two separate issues entirely - and what more, I wasn't even aware of EITHER issue before I did a background search on your source.

The article writer, however, wasn't a member of AAPS, and I didn't claim that they were; so you're not even accurate in your accusation about my accusations. I don't think you are making a strong case for reliability of your arguments at the moment Rolling Eyes

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

ican's post is probably as accurate as his quotation of S. Robert lichter.

0 Replies

@okie,

okie wrote:

Rockhead wrote:

because I fail to take you seriously...

and your consorts are maroons.

(see below)

It is beginning to appear that you don't have a clue what you believe. You sure haven't mustered a credible effort to explain it yet.

Rockhead is a good example of a liberal, although he claims to be an independent. He cannot or will not explain what principles drive his political philosophy.

1 Reply

@okie,

is that truly the core of liberalism, okester?

1 Reply

@realjohnboy,

This link should clear up who Krahenbuhl is:

http://www.hrsa.gov/hansens/research/krahenbuhl.htm

0 Replies

@Rockhead,

I don't think it is the core, but I have observed that liberals have a very tough time explaining their core values or principles and what drives their philosophy. Part of the problem with liberalism is that it does not have good core values or principles, because it is very "squishy" or emotionally based, and changes to fit whichever way the political and cultural winds are blowing.

I keep prodding you and encouraging you, and giving you a chance to explain yourself, Rockhead, to clarify what you believe and why you believe it. Most people that are proud of what they believe would jump at the chances and questions I have given you. One of the frustrating things about debating liberals is their dodging and weaving, and the difficulty of pinning them down or defining what they believe.

2 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know