I Would Like To Know

[musicman]

Hello, FreeMarketLover, and welcome to the board!

If you'd like, I can show you how to use the "Quote" feature of the board, and save yourself a LOT of typing. Send me a private message, if you like, or just respond here.

Again, welcome!

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Dear God - he's finally gone off the deep end!

I'll make you a deal, Max. I'll pretend I'm an uncomprehending idiot, and go along with the Democrat Party's game. I'll call them the Democratic Party.

But, in the interest of consistency of form and usage, you must hereafter refer to my party as the Republican doesn't instinctively blame America for all the world's ills like some DEMOCRATIC parties I know Party.

That way, see, each of us is not only identifying the other's party - we're actually describing it to the other's satisfaction.

This has been an interesting discussion (kudos to MM) in that it points to the inherent dishonesty found among liberals and showcases their incessant twisting of the English language to further their political agenda. Of course this is only one tiny example among many. It is this systemic and ingrained liberal dishonesty (and their uneducated, ignorant busy body followers) that makes them so dangerous. Control of our language through political correctness and arbitrary redefinitions can lead to thought control if undeterred.

But in this case have it your way MaxPower....I'll refer to it as the
DemocratICKParty. :cof:

 

[musicman]

This has been an interesting discussion (kudos to MM) in that it points to the inherent dishonesty found among liberals and showcases their incessant twisting of the English language to further their political agenda. Of course this is only one tiny example among many. It is this systemic and ingrained liberal dishonesty (and their uneducated, ignorant busy body followers) that makes them so dangerous. Control of our language through political correctness and arbitrary redefinitions can lead to thought control if undeterred.

But in this case have it your way MaxPower....I'll refer to it as the
DemocratICKParty. :cof:

 

[no1tovote4]

I still can't see why the democrats get so upset when somebody says or types Democrat Party rather than Democratic Party. I think they believe that the word democrat is something insulting, let's not disabuse them of this notion it is amusing in the extreme. Libertarians can use it, Green Party members can use it. Shoot, everybody who isn't a democrat should use it. It keeps them worried about ic instead of making an actual positive plan to get their members elected.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

It keeps them worried about ic instead of making an actual positive plan to get their members elected.

Is it even possible to distract demowhatevers from this any more then they already are? Is there a threshold?

 

[Freedom Lover]

JFK was a different Democrat than today's breed. George Wallace used to say there was not a dime's worth of difference between the two parties when he ran as an independent. That statement was basically true when it came to many issues, especially foreign affairs. Today's Democrats are a world away from Republicans and vice versa mainly because Democrats have gotten in bed with the European socialists and think government can solve all problems if only taxes are high enough and regulations broad enough. For them, however, taxes are never high enough, nor regulations too cumbersome. In my mind they want power for the sake of power and use huge government programs to buy votes so they can attain, or retain that power!

Just a note on Clinton. In either election he won he did not receive a majority of the votes. He only got a plurality. Big difference! President Bush got a majority for re-election!!! Democrats can not stand that fact!

Democrats almost never talk about personal freedom, individual responsibility, or about free enterprise which our economic system is built upon. They like the taxes free enterprise generates, but they hate the capitalists!

 

[Hagbard Celine]

Just a note on Clinton. In either election he won he did not receive a majority of the votes. He only got a plurality. Big difference! President Bush got a majority for re-election!!! Democrats can not stand that fact!

Republicans can't stand the fact that the Supreme Court appointed Bush to be president his first term.

 

[musicman]

Republicans can't stand the fact that the Supreme Court appointed Bush to be president his first term.

Well, THAT's idiotic. Actually, we're kind of PLEASED about it!

As to the SC, they didn't have much choice in the matter. You know - FACTS, and all that.

 

[Abbey Normal]

Geez, the same tired old "Bush wasn't elected" garbage. When will they let go of this false propoganda? And libs have the nerve to complain about us bringing up Clinton, while they keep this up? At least with Clinton, the nasty stuff we bring up is true.