The George Bush Loyalty Quiz.

[heretic888]

Come on man. You know that's not what I'm saying.

This then begs the obvious question: why did you say it??

Can't a liberal NOT spin for just a moment or two???? jeeesh...

Y'mean like "there are stockpiles of WMDs in Iraq" spin or "Iraq has a direct connection with Al Queda and was involved in 9/11" spin or "major combat operations have ceased in Iraq --- MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!" spin or "John Kerry is proposing socialism" spin or...

Hrmmm... since when did I become a "liberal"?? Lesse the checklist...

Tabula rasa?? Nope. Affirmative action?? Nope. Noble savage/chimp?? Nope. Behaviorism?? Nope. "Recaptured goodness" model?? Nope. Hate crimes?? Nope. "Pure" socialism?? Nope. Nurture over nature?? Nope. Etcetera etcetera...

Of course, I guess its much easier to hurl meaningless (and untrue) labels at people than to deal with facts and statistics.

And, just for the record, if anything I consider myself a "progressive centrist".

Says you. That's your parties accepted SPIN, and you've swallowed it too, and regurgitated it here for public consumption very well.

My party?? You mean all registered independents make up some kinda loose political party?? Hrmph. Why wasn't I informed of this?? :idunno:

I also wouldn't call a statistic cited by the IPOP as "my party's spin", either. The website for American for a New Century has Cheney and Wolfowitz mentioned sporadically, too. This isn't a "spin", its easily discovered statistical facts.

But, again, throwing false labels and accusations about is much easier than dealing with cited statistics, I suppose.

Oh, and by the way John, throwing negative reputation points at someone just because you disagree with their opinions is hardly appropriate behavior.

G'day.

 

[heretic888]

Oh, and before I forget...

welcome back, Robert. I trust you were pleased with the election results.

 

[Brother John]

This then begs the obvious question: why did you say it??
.

Okay heretic, this is getting very rediculous.
I made a pretty simple straightforward comment about the percentages and you have twisted it to try to make a conservative republican sound inhuman, as though I consider some citizens to not matter.
Here is what I said:

Actually, the people who voted are the only ones that matter in this instance. If the others cared one way or the other, they should have exercised their right to vote.

Let me emphasize the words "In this instance". What instance? We were discussing the percentage of people that determined President Bush as the victor in this election. Therefore in the case of a discussion about a percentage of a vote, ONLY those who voted matter. IN THAT INSTANCE. I have a very difficult time believing that such a simple statement is so difficult for you to understand. Therefore I saw your twisting of my simple statement as an indicator that you were being malicious... thus the negative rep points that I gave you, that I signed my name too and freely admit that I still feel you deserve. Besides, they won't affect your overall status unless a good deal of people also feel the same way and do the same. If it wasn't "appropriate behavior" to use them on a person that I felt was being petty and twisting my words to paint me in an untrue light...then What IS the correct use of them?? Why do they exist in the first place then??? I didn't do it because I "Disagreed" with you. NO. I post rebuttals to show that I disagree with you.

and BTW: "progressive" = liberal who just doesn't like the title liberal.
Independant, IMHO = one who can't make a stand.

Your Brother
John

 

[rmcrobertson]

1. Displeased but unsurprised.

2. Progressive=Democratic Socialist, actually. Liberals=different. Read Daniel Bell.

3. Would it be OK to employ the same logic precisely and write that Republican=(insert favorite epithet here)?

 

[Brother John]

1. Displeased but unsurprised.

2. Progressive=Democratic Socialist, actually. Liberals=different. Read Daniel Bell.

3. Would it be OK to employ the same logic precisely and write that Republican=(insert favorite epithet here)?

I didn't think I used an 'epithet' did I?
Just said that I think that a "progressive" is another by word for liberal and that I think an "independant" is one who doesn't or can't make a stand.
My opinion.
The only thing I'm an expert on.

Your Brother
John

 

[RandomPhantom700]

Or an independent is just someone who doesn't want to get flagged by either party. That's why I didn't register as either Democrat or Republican. I don't get to participate in the primaries, but...*shrugs*

 

[hardheadjarhead]

and BTW: "progressive" = liberal who just doesn't like the title liberal.

Independant, IMHO = one who can't make a stand.

You're right, in part. The term "progressive" has been bandied about by liberals because the term "liberal" has been so demonized by the Right (as you seem to be doing here). We witnessed this use of liberal as a perjorative with George Bush's use of it in the debates.

The dictionary definition of liberal:


Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.

Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded.

Of, relating to, or characteristic of liberalism.

Liberal Of, designating, or characteristic of a political party founded on or associated with principles of social and political liberalism, especially in Great Britain, Canada, and the United States.

Given this, it isn't unreasonable to select the term "progressive" for a replacement. BUT some Americans with what might also be called libertarian views (ranging on both ends of the political spectrum) have allready appropriated the word for themselves. So when you hear "progressive", you might well be dealing with someone along the lines of Judge Richard Posner, 7th Circuit Court--whom many believe to be a conservative given his economic theories as applied to law. Or you might be referring to Virginia Postrel, author of "The Future And Its Enemies."

An "independent" could be someone who prefers a line item veto to his politics and who will vote for the person he feels is best for the job (or the closest they can come to it) regardless of party affiliations. Saying he is afraid to take a stand is silly, John. The independents may be the most intellectually honest of us all. One could say a person who votes "straight ticket" is making a stand. One could argue too the straight ticket individual is a bigot or close minded to the complexity of issues.

An independent is also, perhaps, an iconoclast. In this instance it would be hard to say he is a person afraid to take a stand. In declaring independence of either party he is taking a stand and parting from the mainstream. I hardly view that as hand-wringing fearfulness.


Regards,


Steve

 

[rmcrobertson]

It is perhaps worth adding two things: in the present political climate, an, "independent," is generally speaking a conservative who is unwilling to admit their strong ideological ties to the Republican Party.

And, to paraphrase George Carlin, a "Libertarian," is somebody who believes that they should be free to own slaves.

 

[hardheadjarhead]

The George W. Bush Loyalty Quiz

10 Questions to Test Your Allegiance to President Bush

Your score is 1 on a scale of 1 to 10. You hate Bush with a writhing passion. You think he is an idiot, a liar, and a warmonger who has been a miserable failure as president. Nothing would give you greater pleasure than seeing him run out of the White House, except maybe seeing him dragged away in handcuffs.

YOU SCORED A "ONE"???? You right wing fascist baby eater. The next time I meet you, Bob, I'm going to sit on you and read passages from "Das Kapital" until you beg for mercy


Melissa, thanks for the link. I didn't provide it because:

A. I didn't know about it.
B. If I did know about it, it remains I'm a Democrat who just saw his party get their butt reamed. I didn't feel particularly fair and balanced at the moment...to borrow from FOX.
C. John Kerry is history. My link stays current for four more years. Nanny nanny boo boo.


Regards,

Steve

 

[Brother John]

Saying he is afraid to take a stand is silly, John. The independents may be the most intellectually honest of us all. One could say a person who votes "straight ticket" is making a stand. One could argue too the straight ticket individual is a bigot or close minded to the complexity of issues.

An independent is also, perhaps, an iconoclast. In this instance it would be hard to say he is a person afraid to take a stand. In declaring independence of either party he is taking a stand and parting from the mainstream. I hardly view that as hand-wringing fearfulness.

Regards,
Steve

Point taken Steve.

My appologies for my presumption.
Sometimes, even a conservative republican can change their opinion based on reason.

Your Brother
John

 

[Feisty Mouse]

I scored a 0 out of 10.

lol

 

[Gin-Gin]

My scores:

Your score is 2 on a scale of 1 to 10. You can't stand George W. Bush. The mere mention of his name makes you cringe, and every time you hear him speak, it makes you want to jump out the window. You will vote for Anyone But Bush.


Your score is 10 on a scale of 1 to 10. You are a pure, unabashed, die-hard John Kerry supporter. Nothing would give you greater pleasure than seeing Kerry run Bush and Cheney out of the White House, except maybe seeing them dragged away in handcuffs.
:ultracool

 

[hardheadjarhead]

Sometimes, even a conservative republican can change their opinion based on reason.

To do that, John, he has to agree to read the best reasoned arguments of the opposing viewpoint. Even better, I'd suggest conservative Republicans read the anti-Bush arguments put forth by those on the Right...like those at American Conservative Magazine. Try this on for size if you consider yourself one of those so enlightened:

http://www.amconmag.com/2004_11_08/cover1.html

Even Buchanan, who supported Bush, is scathing in his crticisms.

Mr. Bush was led up the garden path. And the returns from his mid-life conversion to neoconservatism are now in:

• A guerrilla war in Iraq is dividing and bleeding America with no end in sight. It carries the potential for chaos, civil war, and the dissolution of that country.

• Balkanization of America and the looming bankruptcy of California as poverty and crime rates soar from an annual invasion of indigent illegals is forcing native-born Californians to flee the state for the first time since gold was found at Sutter’s Mill.

• A fiscal deficit of 4 percent of GDP and merchandise trade deficit of 6 percent of GDP have produced a falling dollar, the highest level of foreign indebtedness in U.S. history, and the loss of one of every six manufacturing jobs since Bush took office.

If Bush loses, his conversion to neoconservatism, the Arian heresy of the American Right, will have killed his presidency.



As I'm not in his choir, I don't accept much of what Pat writes. Others might. Check the link for more.


Regards,


Steve

 

[heretic888]

I made a pretty simple straightforward comment about the percentages and you have twisted it to try to make a conservative republican sound inhuman, as though I consider some citizens to not matter.

I was merely pointing out the logical implications of your statements --- using direct quotations, I might add. If you believe you may have misspoken, or said something you didn't actually intend, then merely say so. Its a simple matter.

Also, to keep the record straight, the entire point I was trying to make is that just because 51% of those that voted support Bush (at least more than Kerry) does not necessarily mean that 51% of the entire country does so. This is a distorted oversimplification the electoral statistics.

Let me emphasize the words "In this instance". What instance? We were discussing the percentage of people that determined President Bush as the victor in this election. Therefore in the case of a discussion about a percentage of a vote, ONLY those who voted matter. IN THAT INSTANCE.

Actually, if you were going by your original conditional qualifier ---

besides, I think that maybe at least 51% of people agree with me

--- there is no qualification of voters-only. Not even Americans. Just "people". It was only later that you backpedaled and retroactively added these "this instance" qualifiers to make your post appear to say something that it never did.

Once again, if you unintentionally typed "people" when you actually meant "counted voters", then just say so. No biggie.

and BTW: "progressive" = liberal who just doesn't like the title liberal.

Depends on your definition of "liberalism", I suppose.

Personally I don't think very tenuous side issues like abortion, gay marriage, social security, stem cell research, or government spending really touch on the central philosophical underpinnings of "liberalism". Those are all nice, but don't actually speak to the heart of the matter.

As it stands now, "liberal" is just a label that the Right uses to refer to anyone that is "different". It means very little, at this point in time.

Independant, IMHO = one who can't make a stand.

And that, in my opinion, is a big load of heavy-handed political arrogance.

Ever consider for a moment that I may just very much dislike the entire notion of political parties?? I have a very clear-cut "stand" on a good number of political issues, and it is condescending and reckless to claim otherwise.

 

[heretic888]

Oh, and once again, hardhead.... thanks for the article link.

 

[Mark Weiser]

As a Republican I scored a whomping 4 out of 10 LOL!!!

 

[Bob Hubbard]

I tried to score 0 on there..I really tried....

I mean, there are reasons the Secret Service is on double high alert anytime Dubya passes by the pretzel tray....

 

[Makalakumu]

As a Republican I scored a whomping 4 out of 10 LOL!!!

Did ya take the Kerry Quiz?

 

[hardheadjarhead]

HHJH:


I am shocked and appalled. How could you not also have provided the John Kerry Loyalty Quiz link? It must have been a mere oversight and not a flagrant display of non-partisanship on your part.



I will provide the link for you!:ultracool

http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/bljohnkerryquiz.htm

Peace,
Melissa

Well, Melissa...I took it.


Your score is 10 on a scale of 1 to 10. You are a pure, unabashed, die-hard John Kerry supporter. Nothing would give you greater pleasure than seeing Kerry run Bush and Cheney out of the White House, except maybe seeing them dragged away in handcuffs.


And seeing those results made me feel great. Thanks for the link.


Regards,

Steve

 

[Mark Weiser]

Okay out of fairness I took the Kerry test as well. I scored a 4 out of 10 very interesting LOL!

Okay that is it Where is the third party HQ for the next election