Proud of our Commander in Chief

[MisterMike]

No Robert,

As usual you're not clear on things, which makes it really hard to have any discussion on this, or anything as seen from other discussions I've read between you and members of this board, with someone like yourself. Given the medium of a message board, where at least everyone can respond and be heard, and how you distort people's replies and change topics, I'd hate to think what it would be like to have a real discussion with a person such as yourself.

I guess that's why talk radio is failing for the liberals. They'd rather have their blurb on the 6 o'clock news with their set-up questions and scripted replies.

The country is clearly split in half. Those who uphold and support the constitution and those that would like to see it tossed out because it's "antiquated." Those that can think and work for themselves and those who want government to run everything for them. Those who believe in personal freedoms and those who would rather sell out for their false sense of security.

I think I've type enough about this thread. More than enough to someone who will never grasp it.

 

[Makalakumu]

I took a libertarian quiz and I fell pretty far left, but also pretty far down on the small government side. Interesting. I don't think that those two positions have to be a dichotomy.

 

[Makalakumu]

Sorry - conservative rhetoric takes less time to spout then liberal. In order to be a liberal, you can't just swallow a bunch of propaganda and live your life. Being socially conscious requires deep, exploring thought into actual issues. At least that is how it is for me. In my opinion, the collective shortening of the attention span aids in the conservative cause, because the more you think less conservative you become. A good example of this...Limbaugh or Coultier get pinned down for spouting bogus arguments..."you're a big fat liar," is there reply and then its cut to commercial.

The truth isn't pretty and the truth is that the middle class is under attack. If you look at any policy that Bush has put forth, they all squash any program that protects regular people or helps them get ahead. America was not founded on the help the rich get richer principal. Unless I am mistaken and even then, I don't care. I don't believe its right.

 

[ABN]

Originally posted by upnorthkyosa
Sorry - conservative rhetoric takes less time to spout then liberal. In order to be a liberal, you can't just swallow a bunch of propaganda and live your life. Being socially conscious requires deep, exploring thought into actual issues. At least that is how it is for me. In my opinion, the collective shortening of the attention span aids in the conservative cause, because the more you think less conservative you become. A good example of this...Limbaugh or Coultier get pinned down for spouting bogus arguments..."you're a big fat liar," is there reply and then its cut to commercial.

Unless I am mistaken and even then, I don't care. I don't believe its right.

I was going to leave this alone but wow, it must be the Irish in me

Kyosa, please don't make the same mistakes that some conservatives admittedly make when it comes to debating liberal pundits. Don't stereotype them. Not every conservative is of the Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Reilly propaganda swallowing autodidact mold, who marches in lock step with the party line. Some of us actually read, write, think and have extensive vocabularies that we developed well before the dawn of talk radio.(although I didn't catch my misspelling of the word vitriol in my last post until after the 1 hr edit, Mea culpa)

Anyway, I don't have time during the day to listen to the radio nor do I care to, at my job you can usually hear two things gunfire, or opera. Don't take the "attack the intelligence of the opponent" track either, it doesn't wash. Many conservatives are extremely well read and also independent thinkers. I was actually far more liberal when I was younger and less educated however, I don't think of you as uneducated just because we disagree.

There are propaganda swallowers on both sides of the fence. You said:

"In order to be a liberal, you can't just swallow a bunch of propaganda and live your life."

Not so, I've spoken with many "liberals" who get their info via spoon fed 30 second sound bytes just like some "conservatives". These people were spouting what they thought was the right thing to say not because they believed it or in some cases, actually understood it. I've seen alleged conservatives do the same thing.

being liberal doesn't necessarily mean that you have the market cornered on having a "social conscious/conscience" either. There are conservatives who are pro-life /anti death penalty (I'm one) and who also are involved in their communities at levels where it's not politics that counts but action.

So far I've seen a lot of name calling on both sides but not much debate on issues. When there's been factual debate, it's actually been quite good at points. The cons raised by Michael Edwards (and I still want to know where you caught that fish) and Paul to my ideas of business involvement in the community were a good read, they were also presented in a manner that was professional and respectful. That kind of discourse increases the credibility of both sides and can lead to an enjoyable exchange of ideas. Let's maintain some degree of decorum and if we can, actually make an effort to learn something rather than just stereotype.

Regards,

andy

 

[michaeledward]

This fish is a Goal ... not something I caught. That is not a picture of me ... It came of the Trout Unlimited website :wink:

 

[ABN]

Ahhh, I see. That's quite a goal! I do feel better knowing that's not you, I don't feel quite so inadequate now.

Right down the road from my building the state has a trout hatchery and a nice cold stream runs about 2 miles down the road. I have seen some beautiful trout come out of that water. Of course, this being NJ, the fish go right back in the water after you catch them...

andy

 

[theletch1]

Of course, this being NJ, the fish go right back in the water after you catch them

Ah, but are they being thrown back or are they standing up and walking back in?

 

[OULobo]

Originally posted by theletch1
Ah, but are they being thrown back or are they standing up and walking back in?

Like those damn killer, mutant, giant, attack-trained, jobbing, fisherman eating catfish from china.

 

[rmcrobertson]

Well, I was going to post and apologize a bit, feeling that even though I was a bit tired after being up since 6 AM on three hours' sleep, had been teaching all morning and grading all afternoon, just got out of 3 hours of meetings (glad it was a big one, since I fell asleep while the Pres of the college was talking)--and even though I'd read repeated petty little insults and caricatures--well, I thought my last post wasn't altogether polite.

But maintenant...

1. Mike. And this'll be the 1,000 time I've written this, but here you go: a) the world does not divide into "liberal," and "conservative," politically; b) I am certainly not a liberal, other than in the very general sense that I think snoops should stay out of other people's affairs and that we should actually try and help each other when possible. Oooh.

2. The notion that the political spectrum consists of two opposed groups is a) a by-product of the weird political history of the last twenty years in this country, b) a fantasy of right-wing (a term I use because that's what THEY say) commentators like Rush. It is absolute nonsense, in reality.

3. Unclear? Ungrounded? Unfair and unaware? Odd, considering that we commiesymps keep quoting various authorites from different sides of the arguments, keep referring to actual facts, keep mentioning the actual law and actual history. In response, we get...the same old same old, a rustling of papers, an accusation about America-bashing, a quick change of subject, a demand that we all fall into ze gut LINE. Behind ze PRESIDENT!! Raus!!! Yep, that's discussing them issues.

4. And last. Will you please actually LOOK at the theory you're depending upon? Go back and read, say, a bit of Ricardo and Adam Smith? Flip through the "Wall Street Journal," the "National Review," the "American Spectator," good sound conservative/right wing/capitalist supporters all? Will you PLEASE check the business news, flip through "Slate," when you get on the Net (I know, I know, they're commiesymps too...that Christopher Hitchens, who's been supporting going after bin Laden and Hussein and excoriating lefties for their idiocies for two years now...right liberals, the whole pack of 'em...). Will you just LOOK at the public statements of the guys you're supporting? I mean, I turned on the local news last night when I got home...what's 'is name, our esteemed Secretary of Defense had just won some doubletalk award, and even the local prettyboy/girl conservative announcers were laauging on camera at what he said...

And once in a while, actually try looking at the books, the ideas, the history you incessantly attack. Because you're kinda up the creek, argument-wise...sorry...my side, the side of the EEVIL, knows what you're claiming because we know the books and the arguments, and you sure don't seem to have a clue about what you're arguing against. I mean, have you READ, say, Daniel Bell? Or, say, Molly Ivens or Michael Moore or ANY of these guys?

If I were grading your writing in this thread--and sorry, but it is the way I think, since I spend a fair amount of my time grading--I would rate it as a B. (You'll hardly credit this, but my invariable rule is that when I disagree politically, or on religious grounds, I grade at least a half-grade higher, just to ensure that the student gets treated fairly.) I would write a long note, explaining why you need to be able to cite the texts, and the facts, and offering some suggestions about sources that were roughly in line with your ideas. I would write a longer paragraph, sketching out the reasons that you need to avoid demonizing your opposition--not so much because it's unfair, but because it's a bad way to construct an argument if you want to be taken seriously. And I would suggest a couple more things that you might read--in this context, it might be Henry Kissinger vs., say, Edward Said--so you'd have substantial material to quote and dissect/rip apart, rather than just complaining about, "they," and, "them, " and, "liberals."

"By all means, rip up the silly libs and lefties. Just be sure you actually have--the goods on 'em--and show that you know the ideas and texts and facts exposing their stupidity--so your ideas will be taken seriously," I would write.

In other words, I would demand that you read the books, and check the facts. Clearly, that would be inappropriate here--and even to mention it is of course a bit sneaky. And I guess, in an advance which is certainly unfair, that I feel sure you'll simply use this last paragraph as more proof about "liberal," bias in education. I imagine, too, that you'll simply edit the last paragraph out of your memory and accuse me again of more liberal, one-eyed bigotry, if you respond to this at all. I won't quite agree...but, well, there it is.

But I mean, doesn't it bother you than some of us keep citing authors and events and public statements and laws and all the rest, and you don't?

And I am sorry for getting exasperated a little. I do at times lose a bit of my temper, after the name-calling. (I know, I know...you feel that I and others write condescendingly or whatever...I'm talking about explicit, unarguable name-calling, OK? And I'm not saying I'm totally innocent.) But ya know, the one thing that does worry me about Rush n'Bush and these guys is their utter intolerance of dissent, and their legitimization of a notion that's been around this country for quite a while--the notion that anybody who doesn't think exactly the way they do is an enemy, that anybody who doesn't believe in their brand of Protestantism is an enemy of Christ, that anybody who doesn't want to jist go BOMB 'em hates America, that anybody who doesn't worship at the altar of the Almighty Dollar and His Acolytes, the Blessed Church of American Business is an unrealistic moron.

Oh well. At least I know why I never hear the Dixie Chicks and Springsteen on the radio anymore...

 

[rmcrobertson]

Y'all will be glad to know that the democrat-controlled California Legislature, jumping right INTO one of the important issues of our time at a time when the State is in deep doo-doo, has begun to move like lightning on this whole genetically-modified glowing fish thing.

 

[theletch1]

Y'all will be glad to know that the democrat-controlled California Legislature, jumping right INTO one of the important issues of our time at a time when the State is in deep doo-doo, has begun to move like lightning on this whole genetically-modified glowing fish thing.

Finally, someone getting something important done:shrug:

 

[ABN]

Originally posted by theletch1
Ah, but are they being thrown back or are they standing up and walking back in?

Neither. This is NJ, nobody walks here, they drive down the turnpike to the exit of their stream, pay the toll (unless, like the really smart Striped Bass they have EZ pass) and get into the water from there. The problem lately has been with all of the undocumented Chilean sea bass driving down the price of sea food since there's more of them and they're willing to be cooked for less....

andy

 

[Makalakumu]

I don't want to stereotype, but when I can shoot from the hip and hit just about everything at which I aim, its difficult. I will take the above point into consideration. Some of the most momentous arguments I've had have been with conservatives who know and quote their stuff - people who have pushed me to the edge of my knowledge of various topics. Its all good in the end and we are all just people. I don't dislike people for their political beliefs. In that manner, I've tried to take a page from Sentator Wellstone.