No Leftist Haters May Read This!

[Modbert]

He tells rightwingers what they want to hear.

I hope none of the women on this board at the very least thought this man was intelligent. However that doesn't seem to be the case.

 

[Meister]

I'm on the left and I don't do it.

At least you agree that Prager and everyone who agrees with him here are doing it.

No, I'm not agreeing to anything,
I'm calling you out on a bone headed remark.

I stated a fact. What kind of person thinks facts are boneheaded.

It must have gone right over your head.....I knew you wouldn't see the irony, no surprise there

 

[Modbert]

I don't "listen" to him. I read what he writes.. He gotta radio show? if he does then I'll "listen" to him. Thud.

You seem to think the word listen only has one definition. Fail. The one I was using was paying attention, which you clearly aren't.

 

[WillowTree]

I don't "listen" to him. I read what he writes.. He gotta radio show? if he does then I'll "listen" to him. Thud.

You seem to think the word listen only has one definition. Fail. The one I was using was paying attention, which you clearly aren't.

Oh yes I was. Wrong verb buddy oh.

 

[NYcarbineer]

No, I'm not agreeing to anything,
I'm calling you out on a bone headed remark.

I stated a fact. What kind of person thinks facts are boneheaded.

It must have gone right over your head.....I knew you wouldn't see the irony, no surprise there

You agreed with me and then called what I said boneheaded. That would make you...uh...um...think about it...

 

[NYcarbineer]

Good grief. How can anyone write this sort of drivel with a straight face?

C'mon, Political Chic.......both sides have had angry words for the other, and neither one has a solid claim to the moral high ground.

*Shaking head*

The right criticizes the left for the grandiose ideas......for their thought process.

The left tends to criticize the CHARACTER of the right....not the thinking of the right.

There is a difference. A BIG difference.

Odd you say that considering that one of the most popular catchphrases from the right, especially during Clinton's terms was

CHARACTER MATTERS. Limbaugh and his imitators and followers said it a zillion times.

Now you've decided that such a focus is some sort of shortcoming.

Isn't that fascinating.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The Left Hates Conservatives
Tuesday, July 27, 2010

1. "Perhaps the most telling of the recent revelations of the liberal/left Journolist, a list consisting of about 400 major liberal/left journalists, is the depth of their hatred of conservatives…as exemplified by the e-mail from an NPR reporter expressing her wish to personally see Rush Limbaugh die a painful death -- and the apparent absence of any objection from the other liberal journalists.

2. Every one of us on the right has seen this hatred…[by]…mainstream elite liberal journalists. There is simply nothing analogous among elite conservative journalists. Yes, nearly all conservatives believe that the left is leading America to ruin. But while there is plenty of conservative anger over this fact, there is little or nothing on the right to match the left's hatred of conservative individuals.

3. From Karl Marx to today, the Left has always hated people on the Right, not merely differed or been angry with them. Why?

a. First, the left thinks the right is evil. Examples are innumerable. For example, Howard Dean, the former head of the Democratic Party said, "In contradistinction to the Republicans ... (Democrats) don't believe kids ought to go to bed hungry at night." Or take Rep. Alan Grayson, D-Fla., who, among many similar comments, said, "I want to say a few words about what it means to be a Democrat. It's very simple: We have a conscience."

b. Second, when you don't confront real evil, you hate those who do. Whether out of guilt over their own cowardice or fear that the one who confronted the bully would provoke the bully to lash out more, those who refuse to confront the bully often resent the one who does. During the 1980s, the left expressed far more hatred of Ronald Reagan than of Soviet Communist dictator Leonid Brezhnev. And, when Reagan labeled the Soviet Union an "evil empire," the liberal world was enraged ... at Reagan. Today, the left has similar contempt for those who take a hard line on Islamic terror. The liberal and leftist media routinely place quote marks around the words War on Terror…the Obama administration has actually forbidden use of the term "Islamic terror." The real enemies the Democratic administration is prepared to name are the Republican Party, tea parties, Fox News and talk radio.

c. Third, the left's utopian vision is prevented only by the right. From its inception, leftism has been a secular utopian religion….imagining a utopian future. There will be no poor, no war, no conflict, no inequality. That future is only a few more government programs away from reality. And who stands in the way of such perfection? Conservatives.

4. How could a utopian not hate a conservative? The right, with its beliefs in a strong military; in individuals, not the state; taking care of themselves, their families and their neighbors; and in punishing criminals, is the anti-Love, a figure as reviled on the left as the antichrist is to Christians. The right, with its beliefs in a strong military; in individuals, not the state; taking care of themselves, their families and their neighbors; and in punishing criminals, is the anti-Love, a figure as reviled on the left as the antichrist is to Christians.

a. This hatred will only increase if the left feels its programs to greatly increase the size of the government are in any way threatened in the forthcoming elections."
The Dennis Prager Show

You really like to stir the shit, don't you?

In all fairness, she has an equal amount of enthusiasm for stirring the shinola.

 

[Meister]

I stated a fact. What kind of person thinks facts are boneheaded.

It must have gone right over your head.....I knew you wouldn't see the irony, no surprise there

You agreed with me and then called what I said boneheaded. That would make you...uh...um...think about it...

See....this is the part that goes right over your head.

 

[Foxfyre]

Show me how many conservatives want to reduce the size, scope, and distribution of our military and we'll go from there.

The military is a Constitutional function of the Federal government and when you have a military big enough, well trained enough, and well equipped enough to defeat ANYBODY who messes with us, nobody dares mess with us. Or our allies. It is the best recipe for peace there is.

So reduce size and strength, no.

Scope and distribution we can certainly discuss. There is some wiggle room there.

But where Conservatives want to reduce the cost is in the waste, in the no bid contracts, in the graft, corruption, and purchased favors. We want a full audit and integrity restored to the process of spending and laws put into place so that no elected official or bureaucrat can personally benefit from spending the people's money.

When the liberals agree with us on that, then we can start making it happen.

You sound like you're speaking for alot of people who don't know you're speaking for them.

Most conservatives want more defense spending, more military. All I ask is, when it is ENOUGH?? When will conservatives ever say, okay, we have enough military, we can stop making it bigger now.

So I who am a conservative cannot speak for conservatives, but you who despise anything conservative or embrace anything on the left are qualified to speak for conservatives?

You don't see a disconnect there somewhere?

 

[Sky Dancer]

I'm still waiting to discuss today's issues free of the ideological tags. No one is conservative or liberal on every issue.

 

[Foxfyre]

I'm still waiting to discuss today's issues free of the ideological tags. No one is conservative or liberal on every issue.

Why don't you set the example for us Sky?

Pick one and go for it.

 

[Sky Dancer]

I startted a thread today about bi-partisanship. That's a direction I'm interested in exploring.

It's in the politics section.

"According to Barnes, the odds of cementing bipartisan support for Social Security reform are promising. He writes that, “One reform that could win bipartisan support would, over time, raise the Social Security retirement age to 70. … A second reform, bolder and more controversial, would means-test Social Security, gradually slowing the growth of benefits for the more affluent but sparing those with lower incomes.”

The second of these ideas is exemplified by the Pozen plan, which would apply “progressive indexing” to Social Security such that benefits would gradually shift to provide more aid to those who need them."

http://blog.heritage.org/2010/07/13...partisan-solutions-to-social-security-reform/

 

[Sky Dancer]

The military is a Constitutional function of the Federal government and when you have a military big enough, well trained enough, and well equipped enough to defeat ANYBODY who messes with us, nobody dares mess with us. Or our allies. It is the best recipe for peace there is.

So reduce size and strength, no.

Scope and distribution we can certainly discuss. There is some wiggle room there.

But where Conservatives want to reduce the cost is in the waste, in the no bid contracts, in the graft, corruption, and purchased favors. We want a full audit and integrity restored to the process of spending and laws put into place so that no elected official or bureaucrat can personally benefit from spending the people's money.
When the liberals agree with us on that, then we can start making it happen.

You sound like you're speaking for alot of people who don't know you're speaking for them.

Most conservatives want more defense spending, more military. All I ask is, when it is ENOUGH?? When will conservatives ever say, okay, we have enough military, we can stop making it bigger now.

So I who am a conservative cannot speak for conservatives, but you who despise anything conservative or embrace anything on the left are qualified to speak for conservatives?

You don't see a disconnect there somewhere?

I don't speak for liberals or conservatives, I speak for myself. I'm socially progressive and fiscally conservative. I actually agree with a number of your points.

 

[Meister]

I startted a thread today about bi-partisanship. That's a direction I'm interested in exploring.

It's in the politics section.

"According to Barnes, the odds of cementing bipartisan support for Social Security reform are promising. He writes that, “One reform that could win bipartisan support would, over time, raise the Social Security retirement age to 70. … A second reform, bolder and more controversial, would means-test Social Security, gradually slowing the growth of benefits for the more affluent but sparing those with lower incomes.”

The second of these ideas is exemplified by the Pozen plan, which would apply “progressive indexing” to Social Security such that benefits would gradually shift to provide more aid to those who need them."

Commission Should Focus on Bipartisan Solutions to Social Security Reform | The Foundry: Conservative Policy News.

Wouldn't this be just another push for the redistribution of wealth? Sounds partisan to me

 

[Sky Dancer]

It's an idea that would likely have bipartisan support. It would save social security.

 

[Meister]

It's an idea that would likely have bipartisan support. It would save social security.

You do know that if our politicians hadn't raided the kitty and not repay we wouldn't be in the debacle, right?

 

[Father Time]

If it gives you comfort to demonize the other side of the aisle, so be it.

Sky-D, can you be serious?

After the Journolist scandal, and numerous examples of the left using ad hominems and demonization...

I no longer wish to convert the left, merely to expose same.

Somehow, by your lights, indicating the iniquity is the same as effectuating it.

Are you fucking kidding?

When have you EVER expressed disapproval over conservatives doing the same damn thing?

Un-American/Anti-American
Socialist
Marxist
Muslim
Terrorist
Anti-Christ

and that's JUST Obama

 

[Moon]

Uh, anyone not see the comical contradiction in that statement?

The desire for a massive imperialist military, flung across the globe, is about as clear a belief in 'the state' as one can have.

Defense of the United States is required of the federal government in the Constitution. Also, a belief in a strong military is not the same as a "desire for a massive imperialist military, flung across the globe". You might want to actually discuss the points being presented, rather than rely on hyperbole.

Show me how many conservatives want to reduce the size, scope, and distribution of our military and we'll go from there.

Say what? What does that have to do with anything that's been said before? I think you're having an argument with yourself. I hope you win.

 

[Modbert]

You do know that if our politicians hadn't raided the kitty and not repay we wouldn't be in the debacle, right?

Yeah. I wonder who really started that and continued it.

Trivia Time: Guess how we paid for those Bush Tax Cuts that Republicans are so hell bent on continuing?

Don't get me wrong though, Dems aren't innocent in this either.

 

[MaggieMae]

Somebody once described conservatives as people who don't see themselves as good or righteous or noble or anything else but who do believe they have the right idea, the right principles, the right values, and they will defend them.

Liberals or leftists were described as people who do see themselves as good or righteous or noble or just better people because they are liberal/leftist.

I'm not going to chime in on whether that evaluation is right or wrong as I really haven't thought it through sufficiently to draw a conclusion.

But it would explain why those on the Left 'hate' those on the right.

There are days when I wonder if you're not heavily medicated. So now everyone on the left HATES those on the right, according to you. I could toss that comment aside, except it came from you--who I thought liked to think she rises above such drivel.

Your comparison is also lame.

While the radical right tends to see the radical left as latte-drinking, Berkenstock-wearing elitists at one end of the spectrum or drugged-up, alcoholic bottom feeders at the other, the radical left tends to see the radical right as uptight religious screwballs who would turn their mothers in for a buck at one end of the spectrum or inbred, illiterate, unwashed yahoos at the other.

In truth, both liberals and conservatives are not radicalized. For the most part, we are law-abiding, patriotic, hard-working people who just want to be happy and make sure our families are tended to sufficiently with the least amount of damage along the way. We go to the polls and elect people to represent our OVERALL interests as Americans, not all of which is suitable to every single one of us at a personal level, and most thinking Americans are okay with that. We're a resilient lot, and always land right side up after weathering many storms.

So you can shout your ideologies 'till pigs fly, but they are no better and no worse than liberal ideologies, because in the end, they always DO meld together and no one philosophy gets to rule over the other. THAT is the American way; THAT is what the founders intended; and THAT is how it will always be.