If I may turn things on this thread on their head a bit, but speaking of racism.....
One beef I have with LEFT-wing commentators is their tendency to jump on anyone who starts talking about immigration as "racist". I find it strange when I agree with Fox News people who say "maybe we should actually control our border a bit better" but uh, there's a possible pandemic on the horizon here. I don't think it's a bad idea to start enforcing our laws, for crying out loud. Is that somehow racist? The border is way too porous and if terrorists had half a brain, they would be trying to get in through Mexico. Of course, they might be getting the idea now....
so, so true. glad to see you see through this tactic of left-wing commentators.
Arlen (Single Bullet) Specter the Defector needs to make up his mind. He was a Democrat in the mid-1960's. Then changed his affiliation while in office to Republican. Now he's a Democrat again.
Well the good news is that I am actually now eating popcorn.
As we've seen on this forum before, we could go on like this for days. Months even. But there's a lot of gray area and I don't like extremism in any form, whether on the right or on the left (don't even get me started on that vegan guy on the FBI's Most Wanted list)....
But I think that part of the problem with the Republican party is that they refuse to acknowledge any part of their party as extreme. This while their numbers dwindle, one of their prominent Senators defects, and only one in five Americans identify themselves with the GOP. If they are not careful, they are going to let Republicanism devolve into a disease that requires a 12-step program to get out of.
The way they can avoid this, of course, is with honest, authentic leadership. If you guys have any ideas about what that might look like, I'd love to hear it.
The Right sooooo wants Obama to fail. They talk as if it's already resolved that the economic decisions made only a few weeks ago haven't worked. But these people are, frankly, idiots. It took eight years to see the disastrous consequences of the Bush administration's absurd and reckless economic policy. The right has no economic ideas—or, rather, the economic ideas they have led to our current wreckage.
I have more faith in the Obama administration, mainly because it's not governed by mean, fearmongering goons. But I'm going to ignore any critic of this administration's economic policy for at least a year, until we can actually judge results, rather than engaging in political posturing.
Also, as I said above, I like and support a lot of moderate Republicans. I have Republicans in my family who i like and respect, and love to discuss politics with.
All of my comments are directed at the bigwigs of the increasingly-conservative Republican party, the people who set the party's tone and agenda.
farwest, no one can critique obama's economic policies for a year? come on, man! he's taking a similar path to bush's supposed 'right' economic ideas (bailing out failed companies and pushing for larger and larger budget deficits).
as stated about a thousand times, bush's economic policies were the opposite of what a responsible fiscal conservative person would do.
and when obama says that if we don't pass the stimulus bill or his bloated budget then we'll go into a depression wouldn't you call that fearmongering? no, i'm sure you will say he was just being refreshingly honest and open ..
i listened to rush yesterday. he does a lot of creative things with almost no facts. his over-the-top bit about turning over all of our decisions to the 'messiah' obama, including suggesting a national movement that we all sign over our power of attorney to obama, was cringe/almost-funny for about 3-4 minutes but i swear it went on for 15+. i'm surprised people have the attention span to keep with him!
oh, and evil's comment about the dems not going after the appalachian poor votes: i don't know about w.va, va, etc, but the dems (national) hardly bother with ky anyway. we're a foregone conclusion, despite the votes in the metro areas.
rush isn't just a talk show host, kurt. he's a very smart manipulator of ideas, leveraging many people's worst instincts into what they think are sound political opinions - and therefore he's powerful.
I cant name one person Ive ever met, Republican or otherwise save for one boss in the 90's, that listens to Rush. Republicans arent on the internet or radio in the numbers I bet the Dems are. Yes Fox News has a lot of viewers but that might be because their competitors divide the others among multiple channels. Fox is really the only Republican news outlet, even then it's right leaning in their hosted shows not necessarily regular news desk coverage. I actualy remember a study where how many times all the channels used negative and positive conotations when rporting McCain and Obama and Fox actualy was the closest to equal treatment, although favored McCain over CNN and MSNBC.
I think the Dems put way too much emphasis on media, and now the republicans are trying to also in their own bizarre way - but their base is just not media consumers like the Left is. I find this debate disturbing because because it seems like the argument is over who's media mouthpieces and camera whores are more worthy instead of the merits of or consequences of each parties policies.
Its still America and free to schizophrenic in your politics - I supported Obama and disagree with about 60% of his policies and opinions. Im a registered Dem and typ. vote Republican and prob lean towards the old school reagen republicans. I hate the family values people because they are throwing righteousness in everyone's face, but yet they have a point the encourages a sort of moral laziness. Maybe the system is just working perfectly fine and has always been like this and its bad for either party to accumulate too much power at once.
Steven - have you heard some of the stuff that comes out of Air America? Our receptionist used to have them on and I find them just as dangerous as Rush. A few years ago they were basicly postulating that our country had been taken over by a silent coup led by Bush and Cheney. Thats some serious fear mongering.
Since 1991, Limbaugh has had the most-listened-to radio show in the United States, with 14.25 million listeners a week as of March 2009.[120] In 2003, he peaked with an audience of nearly 20 million a week.[121] In a March 2007 Rasmussen Reports poll, 62% of those surveyed had an unfavorable opinion of Limbaugh, while 33% had a favorable opinion. [122]
It'll take time for them to change. Those extremes are easy to get people riled up and angry/excited. Most people don't have a clue what 'trickle down' means or 'supply side'.
Look at Rush L., that's what is being promoted.
Talk abortion or religion and everyone's got an opinion. Too bad, really, that those things can't be separated from the things that actually impact our daily lives.
ep doesn't get out much... every print shop i've gone to in the last 12 years has had rush on full blast. repubs might not be on the internet as much (hence all the slander about bloggers in mom's basement) but wingers have the lock down on radio.. christ, growing up listening to armed forces radio was a bit ridiculous at times.
"rush isn't just a talk show host, kurt. he's a very smart manipulator of ideas, leveraging many people's worst instincts into what they think are sound political opinions - and therefore he's powerful"
So let me get this straight. If I disagree with fill-in-the-blank-left-wing-host, and they develop a fan base similar to Rush Limbaugh's, and the Democratic party happens to share many of that host's opinions, then is that host "powerful"? Should I fear that person the way you fear Rush?
Similarly, do left-wing radio hosts or bloggers, from the nutjobs to the smart and genuinely earnest, control the Democrats? They don't control the Dems that care to remain in office, and, much more importantly, not the ones with any kind of solid value system that they truly believe in. Any private citizen can influence government, yes, but to the degree you are afraid of? Nah. You're connecting imaginary dots. A little basic arithmetic would illustrate why your perception of Rush Limbaugh's influence is skewed, and alarmist.
The guy's been around 20 years -- according to you he should be dictator by now. Like most of the other posts, just way too much generalizing on your part.
Sorry, but I'm tired of proclaimations from the herd merely espousing the ideas of the herd.
And "worst instincts", Steven? Like what, specifically? Here's your big chance to redeem yourself. Have an idea of your own. Break away from the herd.
No television or radio host on the left has the kind of clout that Limbaugh has. (I'd argue that Jon Stewart and Colbert come the closest, but then most of what they do is tongue-in-cheek comedy, not messianic proselytizing a la Limbaugh.)
On the "worst instincts" front, remember "Barack the Magic Negro", which was racism pure and simple?
Remember when he made fun of people suffering from Parkinson's?
Remember when he incited his listenership to actively disrupt a healthy democratic process with Operation Chaos, and in fact tried to incite people to riot?
Remember when he said that he hoped our brand-new president failed, thus putting his own selfish demagoguery ahead of the well-being of the country?
Limbaugh is vile, and like Steven said, he preys upon and promotes people's worst instincts.
But KURT, it IS true. Rush did do all of those things. Your selective responses are so funny!
I'm still waiting to hear what an honest, authentic Republican leader might look like. I find the fact that no one has attempted to address this very telling.
WonderK - What the F do you want people to do? Come up with our "ideal republican date"? Your trolling here and its quite frankly not funny. If anything its telling of the smugness of the left.
FRAC - have you ever noticed how liberals all come out swinging with the exact same talking points at exactly the same time? No one was talking about Rush as danger to America until about 3 weeks ago - then it just exploded. Its like they all read the same blog each morning - oh wait, they do.
I think theres an overabundance of smugness on all sides here as well, the responses from EP and Kurt... are as condescending as those from steven, farwest or wonder K.
On olberman last night (yes i watch olberman!) Tom Delay was on and made some pretty interesting arguments. He basically agreed with the fact that the past administration destroyed the republican party. And that Obama would do the same to the dems. Basically, i took from it that some on the right believe that the magnifying glass on the executive branch is just too intense for anyone to possibly survive unscathed. I tend to believe this, though i hope for the sake of everyone its not true...
As for Specter... if he helps us do ANYTHING about healthcare, im ecstatic. McConnel is going to be able to work with Obama on this i feel, because at this point, getting ANYTHING done on healthcare... even taking the smallest step towards changing the system, will be viewed as a political victory for obama. Specter will be the perfect person to help bring along the conservadems and the moderate republicans... we'll see
"I'm still waiting to hear what an honest, authentic Republican leader might look like. I find the fact that no one has attempted to address this very telling."
So ya think you're really on to something here, WonderK? Ya really discovered the soft underbelly?
Rush Limbaugh has bits he does.
Colbert has bits he does.
The one a person happens do agree with is great, the other sucks. Big deal. What else ya got? Evil's right, pretty smug. And, I'd say pretty intolerant.
Specifically, WonderK, can you name an ACTUAL tenet of conservatism? Or liberalism? (Here's a starter clue: The radio bits. leftwing or right wing, are not in themselves the idealogy). And my spoof list earlier in the thread is, in fact, a spoof, despite what most of the herd here on Smug Central think.
And yeah I am smug....I'm smirking even, because you're NOT ANSWERING the question!!! I just want to know...which Republican leaders have the balls to step up to the plate and rescue the party? Do you know of any? What might an honest and earnest Republican stand for? What are their ideals?! Please tell me! I want to know! Because, no, I don't know! I don't know anything about conservatism! I don't want to be called names, and I'm not calling you names, and notice I'm not calling you intolerant, like you just called me, but somehow you guys are great about doing everything but answering an honest-to-god question, aren't you?
Please go ahead and call me more names to prove my point. Please.
I will now continue to "troll" on the thread that I started :o)
"What might an honest and earnest Republican stand for? What are their ideals?! Please tell me! I want to know! Because, no, I don't know! I don't know anything about conservatism!"
Then what was your point in starting a political thread? If your last post was honest, then your initial thread posting is a baseless derision of people within a situation about which you admit to knowing nothing.
Which, whaddya know, sounds an awful lot like an unwillingness to recognize and respect differences in opinions or beliefs, which, and here it comes full circle, is the definition of...intolerance.
today rush practically cheered at the news that his friend mccarthy, invited to participate on a panel by eric holder - holder's attempt to build bridges, reach across, etc - gave holder the hand.
mccarthy apparently said that with the current discussion about holding the writers of legal opinions about torture accountable for memos that were used to draft policy, he thought it would be dangerous for him to participate with this government. this despite the fact that any accountability-holding is coming from congress and that the obama admin has explicitly said they are not interested in looking backward.
so here's my own take on rush in this instance - not filtered through any one else, just me hearing rush and responding: rush cheerleading mccarthy's non-participation, conflating it with the torture controversy, and celebrating the way it sticks-it-to-obama, is petty and destructive. the issue for which mccarthy was asked to advise has nothing to do with torture; it has to do with resolving the placement/trials/etc of the prisoners at guantanamo. holder's looking for solutions to help the american people and he's looking for answers wherever he can find smart people.
mccarthy basically told holder that he was being disingenuous, that his decision was made, and that he (mccarthy) refused to be a 'prop'. mccarthy himself, imo, was being disigenuous - and running to rush to publicize his affront is at least one signal that he wants everybody to know and cheer him for his bravura.
rush promotes not talking about things. not agreeing. making preliminary judgments, despite the facts. dividing. hurling stink-bombs.
his subjects today included: how obama pretended to listen to all sides in the chrysler bankruptcy situation and then went with his foregone conclusion. while i can see that assumption about the previous administration, i just can't see it in this one.
i don't know that this 'redeems' me, kurt, and i don't particularly feel the need to be redeemed. i listen to a lot of stuff, including rush, but i don't know rachel maddow, don't have cable, don't listen to air america. my reactions to what rush says are my own and my indications of his influence come from people around me ('did you hear what rush said today about ....?) every day: contractors, other architects, developers, church clients, etc.
this is why i make my 'smug' pronouncements: he spreads poison, and a lot of people are listening, nodding their heads, and being influenced.
Wonder K – I understand that you are smirking. You’ve made no attempt on Archinect to hide the fact that you fully support the Democrat party and their agenda. They are in power right now and I guess it’s as good a time as any to act smug. I would just caution you and others to be humble because the future has yet to be written. Given recent history, the last time the Democrats had full control of the Legislative and Executive branches of government after a presidential election they were handed their largest defeat ever in the mid-term elections. I have no idea if that will happen again, but the possibility is always there.
What are their ideals?!
Are you serious? Let’s forget my personal view that the difference between parties is six in one and half-dozen in the other and look at this.
A good example is taxes. Democrats favor a strong progressive tax structure like we currently have. Meanwhile Republicans would more heavily favor a flat tax or "fair tax" structure.
Democrats favor a more flexible intrepeting of the Constitution, aka living document while Republicans are strict constructionists.
Democrats favor a single-payer socalized system of health care while Republicans favor the employer-based or personal payer system we currently have.
Shall I continue? Seriously anyone who has ever spent an hour watching cable tv news should know the differences. It's up to ones own perrogative to use their personal bias to skew reality into the absolute idiocy that most of this thread has devolved into.
The Implosion of the Republican Party (hang on while I get some popcorn...)
Farwest stop smoking crack
One beef I have with LEFT-wing commentators is their tendency to jump on anyone who starts talking about immigration as "racist". I find it strange when I agree with Fox News people who say "maybe we should actually control our border a bit better" but uh, there's a possible pandemic on the horizon here. I don't think it's a bad idea to start enforcing our laws, for crying out loud. Is that somehow racist? The border is way too porous and if terrorists had half a brain, they would be trying to get in through Mexico. Of course, they might be getting the idea now....
so, so true. glad to see you see through this tactic of left-wing commentators.
Farwest's guy is literally quadrupling the national debt, but finds that the other side could benefit greatly from grammar lessons.
racist
misogynistic (even from the women)
gun nutty
(anyone's dear old Mom or Dad a republican, by the way?...oh, hey. let's continue):
anti civil rights
war-mongering
torture-loving
more guns
(and now -- gasp!)
poor language skills
You forgot "Old and White"
Arlen (Single Bullet) Specter the Defector needs to make up his mind. He was a Democrat in the mid-1960's. Then changed his affiliation while in office to Republican. Now he's a Democrat again.
It does seem strange that after so much water under the bridge, he and Anita Hill are now dating.
Well the good news is that I am actually now eating popcorn.
As we've seen on this forum before, we could go on like this for days. Months even. But there's a lot of gray area and I don't like extremism in any form, whether on the right or on the left (don't even get me started on that vegan guy on the FBI's Most Wanted list)....
But I think that part of the problem with the Republican party is that they refuse to acknowledge any part of their party as extreme. This while their numbers dwindle, one of their prominent Senators defects, and only one in five Americans identify themselves with the GOP. If they are not careful, they are going to let Republicanism devolve into a disease that requires a 12-step program to get out of.
The way they can avoid this, of course, is with honest, authentic leadership. If you guys have any ideas about what that might look like, I'd love to hear it.
The Right sooooo wants Obama to fail. They talk as if it's already resolved that the economic decisions made only a few weeks ago haven't worked. But these people are, frankly, idiots. It took eight years to see the disastrous consequences of the Bush administration's absurd and reckless economic policy. The right has no economic ideas—or, rather, the economic ideas they have led to our current wreckage.
I have more faith in the Obama administration, mainly because it's not governed by mean, fearmongering goons. But I'm going to ignore any critic of this administration's economic policy for at least a year, until we can actually judge results, rather than engaging in political posturing.
Also, as I said above, I like and support a lot of moderate Republicans. I have Republicans in my family who i like and respect, and love to discuss politics with.
All of my comments are directed at the bigwigs of the increasingly-conservative Republican party, the people who set the party's tone and agenda.
farwest, no one can critique obama's economic policies for a year? come on, man! he's taking a similar path to bush's supposed 'right' economic ideas (bailing out failed companies and pushing for larger and larger budget deficits).
as stated about a thousand times, bush's economic policies were the opposite of what a responsible fiscal conservative person would do.
and when obama says that if we don't pass the stimulus bill or his bloated budget then we'll go into a depression wouldn't you call that fearmongering? no, i'm sure you will say he was just being refreshingly honest and open ..
i listened to rush yesterday. he does a lot of creative things with almost no facts. his over-the-top bit about turning over all of our decisions to the 'messiah' obama, including suggesting a national movement that we all sign over our power of attorney to obama, was cringe/almost-funny for about 3-4 minutes but i swear it went on for 15+. i'm surprised people have the attention span to keep with him!
oh, and evil's comment about the dems not going after the appalachian poor votes: i don't know about w.va, va, etc, but the dems (national) hardly bother with ky anyway. we're a foregone conclusion, despite the votes in the metro areas.
I honestly think a lot will change in the Republican Party when Rush Limbaugh dies, or somebody stands up to him.
le bossman -- seriously? Is it your belief that men in power stay in power, which, in politics, is the name of the game, by appeasing talk show hosts?
rush isn't just a talk show host, kurt. he's a very smart manipulator of ideas, leveraging many people's worst instincts into what they think are sound political opinions - and therefore he's powerful.
I cant name one person Ive ever met, Republican or otherwise save for one boss in the 90's, that listens to Rush. Republicans arent on the internet or radio in the numbers I bet the Dems are. Yes Fox News has a lot of viewers but that might be because their competitors divide the others among multiple channels. Fox is really the only Republican news outlet, even then it's right leaning in their hosted shows not necessarily regular news desk coverage. I actualy remember a study where how many times all the channels used negative and positive conotations when rporting McCain and Obama and Fox actualy was the closest to equal treatment, although favored McCain over CNN and MSNBC.
I think the Dems put way too much emphasis on media, and now the republicans are trying to also in their own bizarre way - but their base is just not media consumers like the Left is. I find this debate disturbing because because it seems like the argument is over who's media mouthpieces and camera whores are more worthy instead of the merits of or consequences of each parties policies.
Its still America and free to schizophrenic in your politics - I supported Obama and disagree with about 60% of his policies and opinions. Im a registered Dem and typ. vote Republican and prob lean towards the old school reagen republicans. I hate the family values people because they are throwing righteousness in everyone's face, but yet they have a point the encourages a sort of moral laziness. Maybe the system is just working perfectly fine and has always been like this and its bad for either party to accumulate too much power at once.
Steven - have you heard some of the stuff that comes out of Air America? Our receptionist used to have them on and I find them just as dangerous as Rush. A few years ago they were basicly postulating that our country had been taken over by a silent coup led by Bush and Cheney. Thats some serious fear mongering.
From Wikipedia:
Since 1991, Limbaugh has had the most-listened-to radio show in the United States, with 14.25 million listeners a week as of March 2009.[120] In 2003, he peaked with an audience of nearly 20 million a week.[121] In a March 2007 Rasmussen Reports poll, 62% of those surveyed had an unfavorable opinion of Limbaugh, while 33% had a favorable opinion. [122]
David Souter is set to retire from the Supreme Court. Now the real fun begins.
It'll take time for them to change. Those extremes are easy to get people riled up and angry/excited. Most people don't have a clue what 'trickle down' means or 'supply side'.
Look at Rush L., that's what is being promoted.
Talk abortion or religion and everyone's got an opinion. Too bad, really, that those things can't be separated from the things that actually impact our daily lives.
ep doesn't get out much... every print shop i've gone to in the last 12 years has had rush on full blast. repubs might not be on the internet as much (hence all the slander about bloggers in mom's basement) but wingers have the lock down on radio.. christ, growing up listening to armed forces radio was a bit ridiculous at times.
evil, i know TONS of republicans that can't live without their daily dose of rush, and that believe everything he says is real
I know tons of republicrats. Too many.
I dont believe you guys. You heard Rachel Maddow say some shit about Rush, so now your all towing the party line. Your being used.
No, actually, I thought Limbaugh was a fat, dangerous blowhard long before I even knew who Maddow was.
who's rachel maddow?
Sarah Palin's tweeting now... dear lord...
"rush isn't just a talk show host, kurt. he's a very smart manipulator of ideas, leveraging many people's worst instincts into what they think are sound political opinions - and therefore he's powerful"
So let me get this straight. If I disagree with fill-in-the-blank-left-wing-host, and they develop a fan base similar to Rush Limbaugh's, and the Democratic party happens to share many of that host's opinions, then is that host "powerful"? Should I fear that person the way you fear Rush?
Similarly, do left-wing radio hosts or bloggers, from the nutjobs to the smart and genuinely earnest, control the Democrats? They don't control the Dems that care to remain in office, and, much more importantly, not the ones with any kind of solid value system that they truly believe in. Any private citizen can influence government, yes, but to the degree you are afraid of? Nah. You're connecting imaginary dots. A little basic arithmetic would illustrate why your perception of Rush Limbaugh's influence is skewed, and alarmist.
The guy's been around 20 years -- according to you he should be dictator by now. Like most of the other posts, just way too much generalizing on your part.
Sorry, but I'm tired of proclaimations from the herd merely espousing the ideas of the herd.
And "worst instincts", Steven? Like what, specifically? Here's your big chance to redeem yourself. Have an idea of your own. Break away from the herd.
No television or radio host on the left has the kind of clout that Limbaugh has. (I'd argue that Jon Stewart and Colbert come the closest, but then most of what they do is tongue-in-cheek comedy, not messianic proselytizing a la Limbaugh.)
Rush Limbaugh's head found on Saudi Arabia beach.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=fe0_1238682542
On the "worst instincts" front, remember "Barack the Magic Negro", which was racism pure and simple?
Remember when he made fun of people suffering from Parkinson's?
Remember when he incited his listenership to actively disrupt a healthy democratic process with Operation Chaos, and in fact tried to incite people to riot?
Remember when he said that he hoped our brand-new president failed, thus putting his own selfish demagoguery ahead of the well-being of the country?
Limbaugh is vile, and like Steven said, he preys upon and promotes people's worst instincts.
Thanks for the repetition, farwest. Repeat it enough, it'll soon be true.
But KURT, it IS true. Rush did do all of those things. Your selective responses are so funny!
I'm still waiting to hear what an honest, authentic Republican leader might look like. I find the fact that no one has attempted to address this very telling.
this came from an l.a. times article entitled Obama the 'Magic Negro'
WonderK - What the F do you want people to do? Come up with our "ideal republican date"? Your trolling here and its quite frankly not funny. If anything its telling of the smugness of the left.
Smugness: Exhibiting or feeling great or offensive satisfaction with oneself or with one's situation; self-righteously complacent
Go eat some popcorn
FRAC - have you ever noticed how liberals all come out swinging with the exact same talking points at exactly the same time? No one was talking about Rush as danger to America until about 3 weeks ago - then it just exploded. Its like they all read the same blog each morning - oh wait, they do.
Remember how the right got all fired up at exactly the same time about 1 month ago about taxes and wasteful government spending?...
its like they all listen to the same radio station... oh wait... they do
Or the same cable "news" network.
I think theres an overabundance of smugness on all sides here as well, the responses from EP and Kurt... are as condescending as those from steven, farwest or wonder K.
On olberman last night (yes i watch olberman!) Tom Delay was on and made some pretty interesting arguments. He basically agreed with the fact that the past administration destroyed the republican party. And that Obama would do the same to the dems. Basically, i took from it that some on the right believe that the magnifying glass on the executive branch is just too intense for anyone to possibly survive unscathed. I tend to believe this, though i hope for the sake of everyone its not true...
As for Specter... if he helps us do ANYTHING about healthcare, im ecstatic. McConnel is going to be able to work with Obama on this i feel, because at this point, getting ANYTHING done on healthcare... even taking the smallest step towards changing the system, will be viewed as a political victory for obama. Specter will be the perfect person to help bring along the conservadems and the moderate republicans... we'll see
"I'm still waiting to hear what an honest, authentic Republican leader might look like. I find the fact that no one has attempted to address this very telling."
So ya think you're really on to something here, WonderK? Ya really discovered the soft underbelly?
Rush Limbaugh has bits he does.
Colbert has bits he does.
The one a person happens do agree with is great, the other sucks. Big deal. What else ya got? Evil's right, pretty smug. And, I'd say pretty intolerant.
Specifically, WonderK, can you name an ACTUAL tenet of conservatism? Or liberalism? (Here's a starter clue: The radio bits. leftwing or right wing, are not in themselves the idealogy). And my spoof list earlier in the thread is, in fact, a spoof, despite what most of the herd here on Smug Central think.
Still, I bet I'd buy everyone on this smug little thread a beer.
THATS WHY ITS ANNONYMOUS
Ha ha ha, I'm a troll....I started this thread!
And yeah I am smug....I'm smirking even, because you're NOT ANSWERING the question!!! I just want to know...which Republican leaders have the balls to step up to the plate and rescue the party? Do you know of any? What might an honest and earnest Republican stand for? What are their ideals?! Please tell me! I want to know! Because, no, I don't know! I don't know anything about conservatism! I don't want to be called names, and I'm not calling you names, and notice I'm not calling you intolerant, like you just called me, but somehow you guys are great about doing everything but answering an honest-to-god question, aren't you?
Please go ahead and call me more names to prove my point. Please.
I will now continue to "troll" on the thread that I started :o)
No, because your not nice.
"What might an honest and earnest Republican stand for? What are their ideals?! Please tell me! I want to know! Because, no, I don't know! I don't know anything about conservatism!"
Then what was your point in starting a political thread? If your last post was honest, then your initial thread posting is a baseless derision of people within a situation about which you admit to knowing nothing.
Which, whaddya know, sounds an awful lot like an unwillingness to recognize and respect differences in opinions or beliefs, which, and here it comes full circle, is the definition of...intolerance.
today rush practically cheered at the news that his friend mccarthy, invited to participate on a panel by eric holder - holder's attempt to build bridges, reach across, etc - gave holder the hand.
mccarthy apparently said that with the current discussion about holding the writers of legal opinions about torture accountable for memos that were used to draft policy, he thought it would be dangerous for him to participate with this government. this despite the fact that any accountability-holding is coming from congress and that the obama admin has explicitly said they are not interested in looking backward.
so here's my own take on rush in this instance - not filtered through any one else, just me hearing rush and responding: rush cheerleading mccarthy's non-participation, conflating it with the torture controversy, and celebrating the way it sticks-it-to-obama, is petty and destructive. the issue for which mccarthy was asked to advise has nothing to do with torture; it has to do with resolving the placement/trials/etc of the prisoners at guantanamo. holder's looking for solutions to help the american people and he's looking for answers wherever he can find smart people.
mccarthy basically told holder that he was being disingenuous, that his decision was made, and that he (mccarthy) refused to be a 'prop'. mccarthy himself, imo, was being disigenuous - and running to rush to publicize his affront is at least one signal that he wants everybody to know and cheer him for his bravura.
rush promotes not talking about things. not agreeing. making preliminary judgments, despite the facts. dividing. hurling stink-bombs.
his subjects today included: how obama pretended to listen to all sides in the chrysler bankruptcy situation and then went with his foregone conclusion. while i can see that assumption about the previous administration, i just can't see it in this one.
i don't know that this 'redeems' me, kurt, and i don't particularly feel the need to be redeemed. i listen to a lot of stuff, including rush, but i don't know rachel maddow, don't have cable, don't listen to air america. my reactions to what rush says are my own and my indications of his influence come from people around me ('did you hear what rush said today about ....?) every day: contractors, other architects, developers, church clients, etc.
this is why i make my 'smug' pronouncements: he spreads poison, and a lot of people are listening, nodding their heads, and being influenced.
Wonder K – I understand that you are smirking. You’ve made no attempt on Archinect to hide the fact that you fully support the Democrat party and their agenda. They are in power right now and I guess it’s as good a time as any to act smug. I would just caution you and others to be humble because the future has yet to be written. Given recent history, the last time the Democrats had full control of the Legislative and Executive branches of government after a presidential election they were handed their largest defeat ever in the mid-term elections. I have no idea if that will happen again, but the possibility is always there.
What are their ideals?!
Are you serious? Let’s forget my personal view that the difference between parties is six in one and half-dozen in the other and look at this.
A good example is taxes. Democrats favor a strong progressive tax structure like we currently have. Meanwhile Republicans would more heavily favor a flat tax or "fair tax" structure.
Democrats favor a more flexible intrepeting of the Constitution, aka living document while Republicans are strict constructionists.
Democrats favor a single-payer socalized system of health care while Republicans favor the employer-based or personal payer system we currently have.
Shall I continue? Seriously anyone who has ever spent an hour watching cable tv news should know the differences. It's up to ones own perrogative to use their personal bias to skew reality into the absolute idiocy that most of this thread has devolved into.
Steven for someone who doesnt listen to Rush you sure have a lot of Rush stories. Come out of the closet already.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.