Why "Moderates" can kiss my ass

[Patrick2]

A rightwing extremist retard doing what is expected, attacking everything thats not rightwing, even when its not extreme left.

No actually, I attacked "moderates" only. And I at least respect a principled leftwinger. A dimwitted, unprincipled "moderate" doesn't know why he believes what he believes, even he can't predict it. If the whole political spectrum shifts right or left, he too shifts along with it, without being able to explain why, just to stay in the "middle". A "moderate" is many ways an amusing character.

You're attacking moderates for not being far right enough

Don't make a fool out of yourself by trying to put words in my mouth - if you can't REFUTE WHAT I ACTUALLY SAY, quit cluttering the thread with blabber.

I've attacked "moderates" because their notion of neatly positioning themselves between two "extremes" is entirely without any foundation in reason. I've said this about three times now - get it yet sparky???

 

[kaz]

Don't make a fool out of yourself by trying to put words in my mouth

Hmmm....so the words in your mouth are foolish?

 

[kiwiman127]

"Moderates" have been and remain the ass-end of the american polity. Their denouncement of "extremists" remains particularly illogical, since they can only define themselves with reference to the "extremes". Most are probably to retarded too grasp the irony there, much less the incoherence.

A rightwing extremist retard doing what is expected, attacking everything thats not rightwing, even when its not extreme left.

No actually, I attacked "moderates" only. And I at least respect a principled leftwinger. A dimwitted, unprincipled "moderate" doesn't know why he believes what he believes, even he can't predict it. If the whole political spectrum shifts right or left, he too shifts along with it, without being able to explain why, just to stay in the "middle". A "moderate" is many ways an amusing character.

Let's take the above post.
Now go to the thread; Flashback: Rick Perry Supports Criminalizing Gay Sex.
Reading the thread dealing with Perry/Gay Sex, we see the anti-Big Government right wing crowd supporting Big Government interfering in one's private life. This is a perfect example of wishy-washy weak convictions by the very same ideology that bashes Moderates/Independents! Hypocrisy in action.

 

[Patrick2]

A rightwing extremist retard doing what is expected, attacking everything thats not rightwing, even when its not extreme left.

No actually, I attacked "moderates" only. And I at least respect a principled leftwinger. A dimwitted, unprincipled "moderate" doesn't know why he believes what he believes, even he can't predict it. If the whole political spectrum shifts right or left, he too shifts along with it, without being able to explain why, just to stay in the "middle". A "moderate" is many ways an amusing character.

Let's take the above post.
Now go to the thread; Flashback: Rick Perry Supports Criminalizing Gay Sex.
Reading the thread dealing with Perry/Gay Sex, we see the anti-Big Government right wing crowd supporting Big Government interfering in one's private life. This is a perfect example of wishy-washy weak convictions by the very same ideology that bashes Moderates/Independents! Hypocrisy in action.

WHAT THE HELL????


NONSEQUITUR POST OF THE YEAR AWARD, NAILED DOWN!!!!!!!!!!

 

[IndependntLogic]

Rather than addressing these annoying fuckers one at a time, let me make a blanket statement: If you're a political "Moderate" in 2011, you're either lying or a fucking moron.

The Government has control over every aspect of your life including your health, Social Security is totally broke, Congress shamelessly racks up annual trillion deficits like it was nothing and even though they did it for the wrong reasons, S&P Downgraded our credit.

If you can face that and say "Gee, I dunno if that's bad" you're either a Jake Starkey lying liberal or a moron.

There is no third option

Ah yes, that rantings of an ignorant whackjob. How amusing. I would have refrained from laughing at you until you included "Independents" too, thus proving what a stupid asshole you are.
So what you want is simple: Everyone must agree with you on every issue - which btw, has been spoon-fed into your brain by Rush, Glenn and the other talking heads. So because you're a non-thinking drone who couldn't come up with an original thought if you had to, everyone else is stupid...

See, you're such an ignorant drone, you don't even know why you have the opinions you do. You just think what you're told to think. Your reasons for believing what you say, are all sound bites from FOX. This is soooo easy to prove.

On the other hand, Independents feel very passionately about issues, we just don't have all of our opinions fed to us like you do because we are capable of thinking for ourselves.
For example, I feel very strongly that the larger unions cause much more harm than good. This is considered a Conservative view. The question is why do I feel this way? The answer is direct experience.
I feel that there are literally dozens of Federal Agencies that could be eliminated altogether. Why?. Part of the reason is that I came here with an open mind - something you haven't had in a long time. This is also easily proven. So when I was presented with ideas that opposed my own, rather than do what an ignorant ass like you always does (attack, label , dodge etc...) I listened and then did some research. This is why I now have a view that is closer to TPs and Libertarians.
However, I also feel very strongly that a public health option would be good for America. Why? Direct experience. I have been able to directly experience and compare private insurance to the government health care in several countries and also the American military. Whereas you're just another stupid ass who repeats what he's told.

You can't predict my position on 95% of the issues because my decisions are informed, whereas yours are just programmed into you by those who tell you what to think.
Therefore, you might as well not even post because you are such a mindless drone, anyone here can tell you your position on 95% of the issues before you tap a single key.
Someday you might learn to think for yourself but thus far, none of your posts reflect this ability. So while you throw your little tantrums and say we free-thinkers can kiss your ass, you can

Have a Nice Day!

Your New BFF

 

[IndependntLogic]

"Moderates" have been and remain the ass-end of the american polity. Their denouncement of "extremists" remains particularly illogical, since they can only define themselves with reference to the "extremes". Most are probably to retarded too grasp the irony there, much less the incoherence.

A rightwing extremist retard doing what is expected, attacking everything thats not rightwing, even when its not extreme left.

No actually, I attacked "moderates" only. And I at least respect a principled leftwinger. A dimwitted, unprincipled "moderate" doesn't know why he believes what he believes, even he can't predict it. If the whole political spectrum shifts right or left, he too shifts along with it, without being able to explain why, just to stay in the "middle". A "moderate" is many ways an amusing character.

I can understand your frustration with someone like that. I'm not sure everyone has the same definition of "Moderate" as you do though. Just as not everyone has the same definition of "Extremist". I would call Tea Partiers and Libertarians "Extremists". Unlike a lot of people, I don't consider this bad at all. It just means they're fed up and they want extreme change.
So I know a lot of people who I would call "Moderate" and their views never change. I think these folks are different than those to whom your refer. They're very successful. They're happy. They like our country but would like to see some changes. They simply don't want the same level of change you do.
I'll give you an example. I think Christians get persecuted by the Liberals in this country. Libs will fight for a Muslims right to get on the carpet and face Mecca during work but if you so much as say grace at lunch, they want you fired. So my "Moderate" friend and I both agree that there should be no consequence whatsoever for exercising our Freedom of Religion anywhere we danm well please. Do we want an "official religion"? Nope. Do we believe in the concept of Seperation of Church and State? Yup! So we don't want radical change. We want moderate change. Sometimes that can be okay! Or would you disagree?
Now of course, the whackjobs insist that anyone not wanting their revolution is unacceptable but fortunately, we don't allow that kind of tryanny in our country. For all their whining, they are right here, freely criticizing their leaders...

 

[Vast LWC]

Rather than addressing these annoying fuckers one at a time, let me make a blanket statement: If you're a political "Moderate" in 2011, you're either lying or a fucking moron.

The Government has control over every aspect of your life including your health, Social Security is totally broke, Congress shamelessly racks up annual trillion deficits like it was nothing and even though they did it for the wrong reasons, S&P Downgraded our credit.

If you can face that and say "Gee, I dunno if that's bad" you're either a Jake Starkey lying liberal or a moron.

There is no third option

ROFL, says the political extremist.

Why the fuck do you think government can't get anything done these days, Frank? It's because of people just like you, who don't want to agree on anything, they just want to bitch and moan about how they can't get their way all the time.

A Representative republic like ours is FOUNDED on the idea of compromise, Frank. There's 350 million people in this country, there's bound to be a spectrum of different ideas.

Without compromise, government cannot function, period.

Frank, you're part of the problem.

 

[jgarden]

Rather than addressing these annoying fuckers one at a time, let me make a blanket statement: If you're a political "Moderate" in 2011, you're either lying or a fucking moron.

The Government has control over every aspect of your life including your health, Social Security is totally broke, Congress shamelessly racks up annual trillion deficits like it was nothing and even though they did it for the wrong reasons, S&P Downgraded our credit.

If you can face that and say "Gee, I dunno if that's bad" you're either a Jake Starkey lying liberal or a moron.

There is no third option

My "MODERATE" 3rd option response to "NEANDERTHALS" like "CrusaderFrank!"

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6Pbc8SQwV8]frankly my dear I don't give a damn - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Bass v 2.0]

America is well over 300 million strong, if all thought the same like Frank this country would have been done and fragmented years ago.

 

[kiwiman127]

No actually, I attacked "moderates" only. And I at least respect a principled leftwinger. A dimwitted, unprincipled "moderate" doesn't know why he believes what he believes, even he can't predict it. If the whole political spectrum shifts right or left, he too shifts along with it, without being able to explain why, just to stay in the "middle". A "moderate" is many ways an amusing character.

Let's take the above post.
Now go to the thread; Flashback: Rick Perry Supports Criminalizing Gay Sex.
Reading the thread dealing with Perry/Gay Sex, we see the anti-Big Government right wing crowd supporting Big Government interfering in one's private life. This is a perfect example of wishy-washy weak convictions by the very same ideology that bashes Moderates/Independents! Hypocrisy in action.

WHAT THE HELL????


NONSEQUITUR POST OF THE YEAR AWARD, NAILED DOWN!!!!!!!!!!

What's wrong Patrick does the truth hurt?
And, you should be an expert on non sequitur posts, you have had plenty of them!
Patrick2
Posts: 1,426
Thanks: 52
Thanked 228 Times in 167 Posts
Rep Power: 7
:

 

[peach174]

So, we're only supposed to have just 1 view, with no chance of negotiation or compromise?

That's why we're in the mess we are now you fucking idiots........people like you voted for divided government.

That is exactly what Libs have done to the the democratic party.
1 view and it must be liberals.
No power (you won't be put an any committee meeting boards) if you are conservative or moderate, if you speak your political thought against the liberals bills.

The people voted in Republicans to stop the insane spending.
Repubs were spending to much, they voted in Dems, then dems went really wild and did not have a budget for 2 years.
Then the people voted in Repubs again to stop the spending that is what they are trying to do.

 

[kaz]

ROFL, says the political extremist.

Why the fuck do you think government can't get anything done these days, Frank? It's because of people just like you, who don't want to agree on anything, they just want to bitch and moan about how they can't get their way all the time.

A Representative republic like ours is FOUNDED on the idea of compromise, Frank. There's 350 million people in this country, there's bound to be a spectrum of different ideas.

Without compromise, government cannot function, period.

Frank, you're part of the problem.

Compromise is when two people are bargaining with their own interests and they strike a deal to give a little and get a little.

Agreeing to split the difference on whether to confiscate and redistribute a little or a lot of someone else's money is still plunder, it's not compromise.

 

[Bass v 2.0]

ROFL, says the political extremist.

Why the fuck do you think government can't get anything done these days, Frank? It's because of people just like you, who don't want to agree on anything, they just want to bitch and moan about how they can't get their way all the time.

A Representative republic like ours is FOUNDED on the idea of compromise, Frank. There's 350 million people in this country, there's bound to be a spectrum of different ideas.

Without compromise, government cannot function, period.

Frank, you're part of the problem.

Compromise is when two people are bargaining with their own interests and they strike a deal to give a little and get a little.

Agreeing to split the difference on whether to confiscate and redistribute a little or a lot of someone else's money is still plunder, it's not compromise.

Translation: This moron doesn't know what compromise is, rightwingers think compromise is going from being extreme right to being extreme left, nothing in between.

 

[Vast LWC]

Compromise is when two people are bargaining with their own interests and they strike a deal to give a little and get a little.

Agreeing to split the difference on whether to confiscate and redistribute a little or a lot of someone else's money is still plunder, it's not compromise.

A nation cannot exist, a society cannot exist without some redistribution of funds.

That's what makes the military, infrastructure, etc, etc, happen.

If you truly believe what you just posted, then you are an anarchist, pure and simple.

 

[Immanuel]

No actually, I attacked "moderates" only. And I at least respect a principled leftwinger. A dimwitted, unprincipled "moderate" doesn't know why he believes what he believes, even he can't predict it. If the whole political spectrum shifts right or left, he too shifts along with it, without being able to explain why, just to stay in the "middle". A "moderate" is many ways an amusing character.

You're attacking moderates for not being far right enough

Don't make a fool out of yourself by trying to put words in my mouth - if you can't REFUTE WHAT I ACTUALLY SAY, quit cluttering the thread with blabber.

I've attacked "moderates" because their notion of neatly positioning themselves between two "extremes" is entirely without any foundation in reason. I've said this about three times now - get it yet sparky???

What the heck?

Either we are extreme or we have no foundation in reason?

I have no foundation in reason because I am opposed to abortion but won't stand with the morons that want to send every woman and doctor that consider an abortion to the electric chair? I have no foundation in reason because even though I am not a homosexual and would not be in a homosexual relationship, I see no reason for denying a homosexual couple the right to be together and to share in the same rights that straight couples enjoy? I have no foundation in reason because I don't believe that cutting taxes even further will help the economy all that much if at all?

Hogwash Patrick it seems more to me that the ones without reason are those on the extremes. They don't need reason. They have the parties to tell them what to do and how to vote. They have Rush Limbaugh and Michael Moore to clue them in and they follow along with whatever they are told to think.

No reason my ass! I was a conservative asshole once too... now I'm just a moderate asshole.

Immie

 

[kaz]

Compromise is when two people are bargaining with their own interests and they strike a deal to give a little and get a little.

Agreeing to split the difference on whether to confiscate and redistribute a little or a lot of someone else's money is still plunder, it's not compromise.

A nation cannot exist, a society cannot exist without some redistribution of funds.

That's what makes the military, infrastructure, etc, etc, happen.

If you truly believe what you just posted, then you are an anarchist, pure and simple.

Actually I'm a libertarian. If you think about it, what you just posted was unintentionally a riot. You said I don't appreciate having a middle ground, then you said there is no middle ground. Funny.

 

[kaz]

Translation: This moron doesn't know what compromise is, rightwingers think compromise is going from being extreme right to being extreme left, nothing in between.

Oh come on kaz. You have to stop insisting we not rob that liquor store, the majority of us want to do it. You're out voted. But we'll compromise with you, we'll rob the liquor store but not take ALL the owners money, just some of it. We'll leave some and take some. How is that not fair? Don't you know how to compromise?

 

[Patrick2]

You're attacking moderates for not being far right enough

Don't make a fool out of yourself by trying to put words in my mouth - if you can't REFUTE WHAT I ACTUALLY SAY, quit cluttering the thread with blabber.

I've attacked "moderates" because their notion of neatly positioning themselves between two "extremes" is entirely without any foundation in reason. I've said this about three times now - get it yet sparky???

What the heck?

Either we are extreme or we have no foundation in reason?

You DEFINE yourself based on the "extremes" you criticize. Here, let me illustrate with a simple model. Suppose on some kind of scale where "extremism" can be ranked with an integer, let's say the current extremes are leftwing = -6, and rightwing = 2. What is the "moderate" position? m = (-6 + 2) / 2 = -2. Now, suppose the "extremes" shift, so that leftwing = -3, and rightwing = 9. Then m = (-3 + 9) / 2 = 3.

Get it yet? In the above case, "moderates" shifted from -2 to 3, not because they could make the statement

3 is more practical than -2 because________, or

3 is more moral than -2 because________, or

3 is more constitutional than -2 because________,

All they can say is "3 is the new midpoint".

If you were one of the radicals in the Committes of Correspondence early in the american revolution, you would have been an "extremist". "Extremist" is a meaningless defamation term - there is no logical reason to discount an "extreme" position per se, anymore than there is any inherit virtue in a "moderate" position - all such positions must stand or fall based on a reasonable analysis of them, not their relationship to other political positions.

 

[Immanuel]

Don't make a fool out of yourself by trying to put words in my mouth - if you can't REFUTE WHAT I ACTUALLY SAY, quit cluttering the thread with blabber.

I've attacked "moderates" because their notion of neatly positioning themselves between two "extremes" is entirely without any foundation in reason. I've said this about three times now - get it yet sparky???

What the heck?

Either we are extreme or we have no foundation in reason?

You DEFINE yourself based on the "extremes" you criticize. Here, let me illustrate with a simple model. Suppose on some kind of scale where "extremism" can be ranked with an integer, let's say the current extremes are leftwing = -6, and rightwing = 2. What is the "moderate" position? m = (-6 + 2) / 2 = -2. Now, suppose the "extremes" shift, so that leftwing = -3, and rightwing = 9. Then m = (-3 + 9) / 2 = 3.

Get it yet? In the above case, "moderates" shifted from -2 to 3, not because they could make the statement

3 is more practical than -2 because________, or

3 is more moral than -2 because________, or

3 is more constitutional than -2 because________,

All they can say is "3 is the new midpoint".

If you were one of the radicals in the Committes of Correspondence early in the american revolution, you would have been an "extremist". "Extremist" is a meaningless defamation term - there is no logical reason to discount an "extreme" position per se, anymore than there is any inherit virtue in a "moderate" position - all such positions must stand or fall based on a reasonable analysis of them, not their relationship to other political positions.

Except "moderate" is not the "midpoint".

"Moderate" is simply not letting the extremes decide issues for you.

I used to be very much Pro-life. To the point that I used to think no one was "pro-choice" anyone that said they were "pro-choice" was in fact a baby killer as surely as if they had performed the abortions themselves and I would get in your face and tell you that you were a murderer if you were Pro-choice. I've moderated tremendously. I've come to realize that the extreme right is as bad, if not worse, than the extreme left. You don't win someone over my calling them a baby killer.

I don't let the extreme right make my decisions on Welfare. I think Welfare should be a hand up not a hand out, but I don't agree with the so called conservative point of view to end all Welfare and let all those welfare mothers go to work or starve.

I have tended away from the extremes not because I don't have core values. I have tended away from the extremes because I don't believe that holding fast and being unwilling to compromise solves the issue. I may not like having to compromise, but if I want fewer abortions, I am not going to win by demanding that we send the mother who has an abortion to prison for 20 years and her doctor with her.

Being moderate is not by any means being a middle-of-the-roader and not standing on ones principles. It is standing on ones principles and defending one's beliefs against those of either side who work against your own beliefs. It is defending one's beliefs on abortion against both those on the right and on the left.

My position does not change because the extremes change. My position only changes because I change. I went from being a Pro-life zealot to someone that realized that I was wrong in my position. I adapted because I was wrong and for no other reason. I don't waiver on the abortion issue. I stand firm in my beliefs, but I also realize that my beliefs do not coincide with people that have no compassion for women in crisis pregnancies nor do they coincide with anyone that would call a human fetus a "clump of cells".

Immie

 

[FactFinder]

Why "Moderates" can kiss my ass

It does beat being an extremist a'hole unless you wnat to count yourself in the company of et al Bin Laden.