orangeplus wrote:

I'm not cakefarting here, I am making a point. Your point of view is generally nihilist. I respect that, even identify with it. It should however give one pause to give too much legitimacy to a political program you espouse. If, as your response seems to alude, that man is not long for this world thus you don't give a fuck about fixing a possible existential threat, then your politics would be short sighted and indulgent. It would be well aligned with your self interest. There is nothing generally wrong with this, we have a word for people who act against their own self-interest. Fool, which, obviously, you are not. But short sighted and indulgent is a pretty good criticism for libertarianism in general. Those who want to think they will have great-grandchildren, who may also have great-grandchildren of their own, might look a different way.

I've respected the Libertarian viewpoint for sometime now, but never gave it a lot of credit until the last few years...  Part of what has changed my mind has been a recent Libertarian movement in my homestate http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_State_Wyoming ...  One of the counties listed in this movement is the county I grew up in and it has changed drastically in the last decade...  The types of people moving in are incredibly self-motivated and diverse in their backgrounds...  It didn't take long for the free loaders there to get the hint and move away... My hometown is almost unrecognizable to me now mainly because of the new more progressive mindset of the people...  I moved away from there because of the lack of opportunity and the shallow minds and in less than a decade it has become a place I would actually like to live...  One of the groups of people moving there that I'm surprised by are the Saudis...  At first I was kind of mad about it, but they've shown themselves to be incredibly secular and have actually added a lot to the community...  When I grew up there my hometown was almost entirely white and now there are African Americans moving in and they don't fit the stereotypes that African Americans seem to fit so many other places in the United States...  Libertarianism is far more than just a political viewpoint, it's a personal philosophy and it makes for better communities...

orangeplus wrote:

You fuckers crack me up. Like anyone is more responsible for this than anyone else. Did McCain make noises about Freddie and Fanny a couple of years ago, sure, but if he knew there was a problem and submitted nothing to solve it, than he's doubly responsible. Did Obama take a shit load of money from Freddie and Fanny, shit yeah he did. Did the Democrats lead in deregulation? Fuck yeah. Did the Republicans take it to its extremes? Shit yeah, motherfucker.

Anyone who tries to use this issue as a wedge against the other candidate or party is an idiot. It's like saying, the other guy breathes oxygen and eats food to live, so you shouldn't vote for them. They're all to blame. You want to make this an issue for politics, ask the motherfuckers what they wanna do now, and make judgments about that.

You, my friend are the only political analyst I have heard that makes sense.

O+ for president.

tojo2000 wrote:

Anyone who says both sides are equally to blame is an idiot of the same caliber as those who chose a political party like a sports team and just root for their side no matter what.

Degrees of blame be damned. If two cars go off of a cliff, do you give one credit because he had his foot on the brake when he died while the other had his foot on the accelerator?

Oh, agreed. Absolutely agreed. But saying the "dems did it", "the repubs did it" is stupid. Both are to blame, all are to blame. The problem isn't lax regulation, the problem is not predatory lending, and the problem is not even Wall Street greed. The problem is debt, and it's locus is the entire body economic. We spent more than we made and now we gotta pay up. If you want to point to Clinton's budgets as "proof" of demo's superior ability to run the economy, then you must conceed that his budgets were as much a product of the repub congress of the time and you must also concede that he did nothing to stop the obvious fuck-ups in the regulatory system which caused the meltdown to occur in the manner it did. If you want to heap scorn on George Bush's head than you have to concede that the demos did nothing effective to stop him, even after they took congress.

The question, as I said in the post, is what do we do now? This bailout will fail because it's attacking a symptom and inflaming the cause. The solution is hard times, and it will impose itself whether we like it or not.

Pithy, but no banana.  Flesh it out a bit Zookafina?

Zookeeper wrote:

Dmtdust wrote:

Zookeeper wrote:

You make such an eloquent argument for the gentility of the left.  What was I thinking?

Well, it seems the liberals can learn from the conservatives, after all.

But apparently they are yet to learn how to see into a mirror.

See, this is a typical REPUBLICAN response.  Don't address Palin's incompetence or the mean-spririted and outrageous lies and distortions about liberals passed off as "truth" by Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Hannity and that fucking wacko Ann Coulter...simply turn to a personal attack.  I couldn't care two shits about your opinion of me.  Address the fucking issues, ok?  To say that the right is not vitroiolic is simply retarded.

headkicker_girl wrote:

Zookeeper wrote:

Dmtdust wrote:

Well, it seems the liberals can learn from the conservatives, after all.

But apparently they are yet to learn how to see into a mirror.

See, this is a typical REPUBLICAN response.  Don't address Palin's incompetence or the mean-spririted and outrageous lies and distortions about liberals passed off as "truth" by Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Hannity and that fucking wacko Ann Coulter...simply turn to a personal attack.  I couldn't care two shits about your opinion of me.  Address the fucking issues, ok?  To say that the right is not vitroiolic is simply retarded.

The issue I took with you was your assertion that demonization is a problem you have with just the right.  You seem to believe that if you can just come up with examples of bad behavior on the right that exonerates the left.  You only see the offenses you yourself feel (i.e. those directed against the left).  You are blind to the out and out venom the left spews all over the Internet and popular culture.  When confronted with the blatant blindness of your sentiment your reactions are "Well, they started it!" and then you go on a venomous rant of your own justified by a) you believe the right started it and b) you are angry with my calling you on your one-sided view of the matter.  So are you really saying this is a problem of the right only or that you just only care when it's the right doing it?

tojo2000 wrote:

Bigcat wrote:

orangeplus wrote:

You fuckers crack me up. Like anyone is more responsible for this than anyone else. Did McCain make noises about Freddie and Fanny a couple of years ago, sure, but if he knew there was a problem and submitted nothing to solve it, than he's doubly responsible. Did Obama take a shit load of money from Freddie and Fanny, shit yeah he did. Did the Democrats lead in deregulation? Fuck yeah. Did the Republicans take it to its extremes? Shit yeah, motherfucker.

Anyone who tries to use this issue as a wedge against the other candidate or party is an idiot. It's like saying, the other guy breathes oxygen and eats food to live, so you shouldn't vote for them. They're all to blame. You want to make this an issue for politics, ask the motherfuckers what they wanna do now, and make judgments about that.

You, my friend are the only political analyst I have heard that makes sense.

O+ for president.

Really?  I thought this post was the least intelligent, most knee-jerk thing he's said on the subject.  Anyone who says both sides are equally to blame is an idiot of the same caliber as those who chose a political party like a sports team and just root for their side no matter what.  It shows that you aren't giving it any thought at all.  Really the only message here is "fuck it, I'm sick of this", which I think a lot of us can identify with, but isn't in the end very productive.

I'd much rather someone tell me I'm a fucking moron for being mostly liberal and give me a few reasons than for anyone to try to tell me that it's just some ying-yang two sides of the coin bullshit.

In Orange's case he's shown that he actually does have some thought put into his political beliefs, but if this was the only thing I'd ever heard from him I'd assume he was just another mindless gum-flapper trying to look objective.

My point is this:  I have never heard anything but finger pointing in the last 8 years. The fucking GOP is blaming Bill Clinton for The Economy 8 years after he left office. Stop blaming people and just try to fix the shit. It's what you are getting paid for.

If any of these folks worked for me and we were having disaster after disaster, and the only thing anybody was getting done was pointing fingers, I would fire the bunch. I realize you need to find out where the blame lies to prevent future fuck ups but nobody will accept responsibility, they just redirect the blame.

I feel that in an O+ administration there would be results and not finger pointing because people would be afraid for thier jobs. If this doesn't get me a spot on the ticket somewhere, I'll be pissed.

I approve this message.

Last edited by Bigcat (2008-10-05 08:32:32)

headkicker_girl wrote:

Zookeeper wrote:

The issue I took with you was your assertion that demonization is a problem you have with just the right.  You seem to believe that if you can just come up with examples of bad behavior on the right that exonerates the left.  You only see the offenses you yourself feel (i.e. those directed against the left).  You are blind to the out and out venom the left spews all over the Internet and popular culture.  When confronted with the blatant blindness of your sentiment your reactions are "Well, they started it!" and then you go on a venomous rant of your own justified by a) you believe the right started it and b) you are angry with my calling you on your one-sided view of the matter.  So are you really saying this is a problem of the right only or that you just only care when it's the right doing it?

I think the venom of the left pales in comparison with the venon of the right.  Ann Coulter calling Edwards a fag, Limbaugh saying that Obama isn't black at all but is half arab, the constant linking of the Obama with terrorism...I have seen the left exaggerate, but I have not seen them flat out lie and seek to destroy someone's character and reputation like the right does.

Then you have selective vision.  Go read a few left wing blogs.

Last edited by Zookeeper (2008-10-05 11:04:24)

In an O+ admininistration people would fear for their lives. Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn.

Last edited by orangeplus (2008-10-05 12:02:24)

headkicker_girl wrote:

Zookeeper wrote:

Then you have selective vision.  Go read a few left wing blogs.

Give me some examples.  They must be mainstream and widely followed. Some random guy's opinion doesn't count.

If you are looking for analogs to Limbaugh and O'Reilly one left that's a tough one to fill given that the left can't seem to come up with commentators that can manage to become both "mainstream" and "widely followed" the way that the right has managed.  But what the left lacks in quality it makes up for in quantity.  If you really can't think of any examples you have seen on the Internet then, like I said, you are blind.  An example?  How about when Tony Snow died?  You don't remember the venom that was spewing from the left on the net celebrating his death? There were lots of choice remarks Democratic Underground though the most heinous were removed by the moderator.  Some kind excerpts that didn't rise to the level of being deleted:

"Meet your maker and all the people you helped kill Tony."
"Condolences to his family, good riddance to a fucking liar."
"Mr. Snow, meet Mr. Fire. Another fascist bites the dust. None too soon."
"A fond farewell Mr. Snow ... If there is someplace you go after death, I hope George Carlin is there waiting to kick your ass."
"Why not just let him lie and say nothing, and save your pity for the people who have suffered and died because of Bush administration policies that Snow helped promote?"
"His illness and what he went through obviously not having taught him anything about compassion, humility or empathy. But there he was, Tony Snow. As hateful and arrogant as ever."
"Rest in peace, Mr. Snow. Just joking."
"Maybe he can now meet some of the people his lies killed."
"That Tony was a filthy, lying bastard who devoted his later years to spewing propaganda for fascists and miscreants.  But since he just died, it would be rude to do anything except offer my condolences to his family."

(nice recovery on the last one)

No doubt the posts about him burning in hell were among the deleted ones.  But if you want to find that sentiment you need look no further than this site: Hell Has Appointed a New Press Laison.

Back to the original point about "demonization".  Demonization is not just loudly disagreeing with someone or saying their political positions are harmful (even if doing so with a rude tone).  To "demonize" someone is to ascribe to them mean, evil or hate-driven motives.  The right is constantly attacked in that fashion by people on the left.  Saying that someone's policies are "hurting America" or "destroying the family" is a criticism of their position, not necessarily an example of demonization unless you are saying they are intentionally causing harm or have ill motives.  As I said before, "the right regularly paints the left as 'naive', 'elitist', 'self-serving' and just plain wrong all the time."  They regularly say their policies are harmful and I have no doubt you can think of examples when they have done so in an unpleasant way.  But that isn't demonization.  If your understanding of what "demonization" is differs then this us just a difference over semantics.

Auto-edited on 2020-08-02 to update URLs

Last edited by Zookeeper (2008-10-05 16:39:53)

headkicker_girl wrote:

Not only is she a moron; she's a cunt.  The stupid bitch should be at home taking care of her retard baby.

Ah, more flowery civility from the left.  You do the left such credit.

Last edited by Zookeeper (2008-10-05 17:06:50)

tojo2000 wrote:

Zookeeper wrote:

Massive post that almost reaches self-sustaining critical mass...

Comment posts on websites?  That's your example? I'll see your Democratic Underground and raise you Little Green Footballs.

Actually, you didn't since you didn't quote anything from Little Green Footballs.  But if you really are saying that the volume of bandwidth on the net demonizing the left (remember, the word in play here is "demonization") is the same or greater than the volume demonizing the right then we must be talking about two different Internets.  Would you say there's parity here?

tojo2000 wrote:

Dirckman wrote:

If you want an example of the left demonizing the right you need to look no farther than Michael Moore...  His movies are edited with no regard to what the interviewee truly said....

I would argue that Michael Moore is an example of extremely biased propaganda masquerading as a documentary.  When I first saw Bowling for Columbine I remember commenting to my friend, "There was a lot of interesting information in there, but that wasn't a documentary.  More of a convince-umentary."

He's played fast and loose with the editing at times and states conclusions without providing the facts at times, and if he was a reporter he'd be one lousy one, but where does he demonize anybody?

BTW, while the subject of Michael Moore has been brought up, who the fuck thought that people would go to the theatre to watch An American Carol?

He demonizes Charlton Heston for one in Bowling for Columbine by editing his speeches in such a way to make him appear to be not only racist but to be a complete moron....  Charlton Heston has opinions that can be disagreed with, but as for being a racist and moron he is not.....  http://www.hardylaw.net/Truth_About_Bowling.html

headkicker_girl wrote:

Zookeeper wrote:

headkicker_girl wrote:

Not only is she a moron; she's a cunt.  The stupid bitch should be at home taking care of her retard baby.

Ah, more flowery civility from the left.  You do the left such credit.

1.  I'm not stating my opinion as fact via the national news media.

Who are you saying is?  Political commentators?  That's what they do.  All of them regardless of where they are on the political spectrum.  They say what they think and they say they are right.

headkicker_girl wrote:

2.  Your examples sucked ass.

Sorry they didn't meet your subjective standards.  Or are you stating a "fact"?

headkicker_girl wrote:

3.  You still have not addressed the substance of the lies spread by the right.

Which lies?  The assertions that Obama has associated with a known former terrorist?  That isn't a lie, it's a fact.  You can argue that they have exaggerated the depth of the association but it is true that Ayers hosted a coffee for Obama's first run for office, served together with him on a board, contributed money to one of his election campaigns and has had Obama visit him in his home.  If such facts were true of McCain what do you think the left would be saying about it?

headkicker_girl wrote:

Saying that someone hopes Tony Snow burns in hell on a forum is an OPINION, and certainly is not the same as a vice presidential candidate stating an outright lie, as fact, about the presidential candidate.

It isn't demonizing if it's an OPINION?  And again, which lie are you talking about with Palin?  Frankly, the number of lies made by each campaign would probably fill a list a mile long.  But again, we're talking demonization, not lies or exaggerations.  You can keep trying to change the subject (and turn it into an endless catalog of all the different lies and half-truths both campaigns have thrown out) but that isn't what my comment on your post was about.

Fled wrote:

lived with communists for five and a half years

Manchurian McCain?

and then that Moore idiot tries to show his anti-Bush crap ON ELECTION NIGHT!!!!

Hey, yeah that's all fair and good, to the left. Right along the lines of slashing tires to prevent the elderly from voting... giving bums cigarettes to buy votes (thanks UAW!!)... etc...

ptah13 wrote:

and then that Moore idiot tries to show his anti-Bush crap ON ELECTION NIGHT!!!!

Hey, yeah that's all fair and good, to the left. Right along the lines of slashing tires to prevent the elderly from voting... giving bums cigarettes to buy votes (thanks UAW!!)... etc...

Yeah, it's about as fair as touch screen voting machines with no receipts manufactured by a Bush contributor.

It's about as fair as telling people in Democratic districts that they could not vote on election day and should come the day after.

It's like Katherine Harris purging the voter roles of people who should have been allowed to vote with no notice.

More right-wing hypocrisy.

headkicker_girl wrote:

Neither you nor Zookeeper has addressed the fact that Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Reilly and Coulter have made a good living off of spreading lies, half-truths and propaganda aimed at personally destroying people on the left.

You have the advantage that right-wing commentators are popular and therefore high profile and are easy to cite (though you have not given specific examples - just thrown their names out).  Political commentators play the same game on the left as on the right.  It's just that the right gets such better ratings...

headkicker_girl wrote:

Neither of you has addressed the fact that Palin is a fucking moron who is now spreading lies about Obama purely to scare other morons.

You cry about personal attacksand then persist in calling Palin things like "fucking moron".  And you don't even see how you are contradicting yourself, do you?  And again, which lies is she spreading?  Either answer the question or drop it.

headkicker_girl wrote:

Calling me names only supports my point about the right.

And your calling Palin a cunt and a fucking moron does nothing to demonstrate that you on the left do the absolute same thing.  Right.  Hate sure does blind...

headkicker_girl wrote:

Yeah, it's about as fair as touch screen voting machines with no receipts manufactured by a Bush contributor.

What, is that supposed to be some sort of conspiracy you are referring to?  Are you really accusing the voting machines of falsifying results?

headkicker_girl wrote:

It's about as fair as telling people in Democratic districts that they could not vote on election day and should come the day after.

That sounds like one right out of an urban myth email.  Care to substantiate it?

headkicker_girl wrote:

It's like Katherine Harris purging the voter roles of people who should have been allowed to vote with no notice.

Sounds like you are not only willing but eager to believe any accusation of villainy against a Republican.  First off, Florida law required that the voter rolls be purged of felons and dead people.  All counties in Florida had to have their rolls purged.  There was indeed a screw-up that resulted in people with only misdemeanors (and not felonies) being included on the list but it was a state-wide process.  Unless you are saying that people who vote Democrat are more likely to commit misdemeanors than people who vote Republican the complaint is meaningless as is the accusation (no, I won't call it a "lie" though no doubt you would if the situation were reversed) of accusing Harris of rigging the election.

Bushitler.

Zookeeper wrote:

headkicker_girl wrote:

Neither you nor Zookeeper has addressed the fact that Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Reilly and Coulter have made a good living off of spreading lies, half-truths and propaganda aimed at personally destroying people on the left.

You have the advantage that right-wing commentators are popular and therefore high profile and are easy to cite (though you have not given specific examples - just thrown their names out).  Political commentators play the same game on the left as on the right.  It's just that the right gets such better ratings...

headkicker_girl wrote:

Neither of you has addressed the fact that Palin is a fucking moron who is now spreading lies about Obama purely to scare other morons.

You cry about personal attacksand then persist in calling Palin things like "fucking moron".  And you don't even see how you are contradicting yourself, do you?  And again, which lies is she spreading?  Either answer the question or drop it.

headkicker_girl wrote:

Calling me names only supports my point about the right.

And your calling Palin a cunt and a fucking moron does nothing to demonstrate that you on the left do the absolute same thing.  Right.  Hate sure does blind...

First of all, I am speaking for myself.  I don't claim to be the voice of the left.  I have always maintained that I consider myself an idependent and used to have respect for McCain until he proved to be a whore willing to do and say anything to be elected.

Second of all, I did give examples.

Third of all, me personally calling Palin a cunt has nothing to do with any left-wing pundits who get national air time.  You keep claiming that the left doesn't get ratings.  There are plenty on the left who get ratings and have never stooped to the level of Limbaugh, et al.  I've never heard Olberman, John Stewart, Stephen Colbert, Al Franken, Chris Matthews, Rachel Maddow, or anyone else on the left, who has national media attention, outright lie and characted assissinate against anyone on the right.

Do you think it's appropriate that Palin is going around saying that Obama is hanging out with terrorists?

Is it appropriate for a fucking nutbag who goes to a church where she was offered protection from witches to be trying to bring the issue of Jeremiah Wright back up?

Your brethren keep bringing up Michael Moore as if he's some sort of trump card.  I stated in my earlier post that the left was guilty of exaggeration, but you still have not offered up anyone on the left who has blatantly lied to destroy the character and reputation of anyone on the right.