So, How Come You're Still A Leftie?

[QUENTIN]

The system I'm applying is one which most closely represents that under which we live in the United States...a binomal political system (debate).

You should try it sometime.

It obiates any discussion if one defines a position which never was and never will be...
if the shoe fits...


"I oppose any state at all, I support a society without any government at all, so claiming I have something in common with totalitarians is patently ridiculous."

The above defines you as, educationally, a child, with no understanding of either history or human nature.

Up against the wall, Mother Hubbard.

America is not a binomial political system. It's a democratic republic. There's nothing anywhere in the way the American system of governance was set up (the Constitution) that dictates there be two political parties.

What you're referring to is the modern devolution of American political parties into only two major ones that control nearly all political capital and agree on the vast majority of issues when it comes to what policies are actually enacted.

What it suggests is that you believe there can be nothing better than what one of these two political parties (in your case, Republicans) have to offer. It assumes that the nation's governance basically works well and the only way to really improve it is to install more Republicans in power.

Anyone who thinks that the government and its institutions and our system work well and the only avenues for improvement are either the extremely narrow window of ideas and actions implemented by one of those two parties I think basically lives in a fantasy land, is unfamiliar with the vast range of possibilities, or cannot see the forest for the trees.

There are much better options out there. And it doesn't have to be my relatively radical beliefs either. Even mainstream third parties are intended to offer alternatives, there's nothing inherently American about having just two parties, and to look at it that way is rather sad and defeatist. Even if you vote Republican, you admitted earlier they've diverged from the values you believe during the last Republican administation in significant ways. Do you really think Republican rule is the best we can do? If not, why buy into this false dichotomy of merely binomial choice?

I would put my education and subsequent understanding of history and human nature against yours any day (from The Great Books of The Western World to the present, I'm a voracious reader of political, economic, historical, and religious texts). I mean, you cited Jonah Goldberg's thoroughly discredited revisionist nonsense to attempt to prove a point. But this isn't a pissing contest.

You don't care to address how different leftism is from the Democratic party. It doesn't conform to your simplistic view of the world and this country. So, okay. Not much more to be said if you won't engage in a debate on its merits. Take it easy.

 

[MaggieMae]

That's odd, considering liberals don't trust the people. They think the people are too stupid to take care of themselves and liberals must make all their decisions for them.

How many times have you and your fellow liberals used the phrase "voting against their best interests"?

Maybe not stupid, but ignorant of facts. For example, how many seniors will switch to voting Republican because they think their Medicare is going to be cut? What they don't realize (ignorance of the facts) is that it WOULD be, if a conservative majority has its way. So they are indeed voting against their best interests.

Ignorance is curable; stupidity is not.

What, exactly, qualifies you to decide for other people what their best interests are? And is it just coincidence that their best interest is keeping liberals in power?

That's not even good spin.

 

[EriktheRed]

People on the Left are eternal optimists.

They are blind to present day reality.

Because they have a vision of a future utopia that over rides everything.

You mean like the kind outlined in Atlas Shrugged?

 

[MaggieMae]

And whose fault was that?

Oh, yeah...the guy who didn't pay his 75 bucks.

That incident sickened me. And stop defending it--you just confirm that you're a robotic asshole without a conscience.

Hardly. When I move to a rural area, you can be damn sure I'll pay the VFD fee. This guy didn't think the rules applied to him.

Stupidity has consequences. His animals died for it, even though he had two hours to get his animals and belongings out of the trailer.

I could empty a trailer in two hours. Couldn't you?

What if the police didn't respond to you getting the shit kicked out of you just because you hadn't paid your property taxes yet? Same fucking thing.

Ummm...who gets the shit kicked out of them for not paying property taxes?

Perhaps if you were a little less emotional, we could have an interesting discussion.

I seriously doubt it.

 

[JakeStarkey]

MaggieMae, daveman has no sense of what is real and what is not. Taunt him all you want, but he truly can't understand your logic.

 

[daveman]

Maybe not stupid, but ignorant of facts. For example, how many seniors will switch to voting Republican because they think their Medicare is going to be cut? What they don't realize (ignorance of the facts) is that it WOULD be, if a conservative majority has its way. So they are indeed voting against their best interests.

Ignorance is curable; stupidity is not.

What, exactly, qualifies you to decide for other people what their best interests are? And is it just coincidence that their best interest is keeping liberals in power?

That's not even good spin.

I repeat: What, exactly, qualifies you to decide for other people what their best interests are?

 

[daveman]

That incident sickened me. And stop defending it--you just confirm that you're a robotic asshole without a conscience.

Hardly. When I move to a rural area, you can be damn sure I'll pay the VFD fee. This guy didn't think the rules applied to him.

Stupidity has consequences. His animals died for it, even though he had two hours to get his animals and belongings out of the trailer.

I could empty a trailer in two hours. Couldn't you?

What if the police didn't respond to you getting the shit kicked out of you just because you hadn't paid your property taxes yet? Same fucking thing.

Ummm...who gets the shit kicked out of them for not paying property taxes?

Perhaps if you were a little less emotional, we could have an interesting discussion.

I seriously doubt it.

I repeat: Who gets the shit kicked out of them for not paying property taxes?

 

[daveman]

MaggieMae, daveman has no sense of what is real and what is not. Taunt him all you want, but he truly can't understand your logic.

There's no logic there at all, boy.

Meanwhile, don't you have some 'splainin' to do about your oh-so-confident prediction that the GOP will never take the House?

 

[hipeter924]

I don't think any party in American history could have done as badly as the current Democratic party, and that's only on the 13+ trillion they stole from the American people to give to their corporate sponsors, and which is driving the US into bankruptcy.

It gets even worse when technically Obama was violating the constitution by attempting to create the very big and controlling government the constitution was written against. But Michael Moore translates the constitution as meaning a mandate for socialism, it shows how twisted their minds have gotten.

I would prefer to be an Islamist rather than a leftist, at least their economic plan works....better:

 

[JakeStarkey]

I don't think any party in American history could have done as badly as the current Democratic party, and that's only on the 13+ trillion they stole from the American people to give to their corporate sponsors, and which is driving the US into bankruptcy.

It gets even worse when technically Obama was violating the constitution by attempting to create the very big and controlling government the constitution was written against. But Michael Moore translates the constitution as meaning a mandate for socialism, it shows how twisted their minds have gotten.

I would prefer to be an Islamist rather than a leftist, at least their economic plan works....better:

Not too worry, hipeter, with those statements you are not a constitutionalist any more than you are a leftist or Islamist. American history has scenarios as bad or even worse since WWII: Truman in 46, Eisenhower in 54, and Clinton in 94. How interesting all three easily won re-election.

 

[hipeter924]

I don't think any party in American history could have done as badly as the current Democratic party, and that's only on the 13+ trillion they stole from the American people to give to their corporate sponsors, and which is driving the US into bankruptcy.

It gets even worse when technically Obama was violating the constitution by attempting to create the very big and controlling government the constitution was written against. But Michael Moore translates the constitution as meaning a mandate for socialism, it shows how twisted their minds have gotten.

I would prefer to be an Islamist rather than a leftist, at least their economic plan works....better:

Not too worry, hipeter, with those statements you are not a constitutionalist any more than you are a leftist or Islamist. American history has scenarios as bad or even worse since WWII: Truman in 46, Eisenhower in 54, and Clinton in 94. How interesting all three easily won re-election.

I am just waiting for the first history books to come out, should go something like this: Obama failed: The left wing delusion. Because with the loonies you support out, the US economy should become stable and grow as opposed to shrink and collapse from increasing debt like the Obama administration.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Not hardly. Night all.

 

[Bfgrn]

I don't think any party in American history could have done as badly as the current Democratic party, and that's only on the 13+ trillion they stole from the American people to give to their corporate sponsors, and which is driving the US into bankruptcy.

It gets even worse when technically Obama was violating the constitution by attempting to create the very big and controlling government the constitution was written against. But Michael Moore translates the constitution as meaning a mandate for socialism, it shows how twisted their minds have gotten.

I would prefer to be an Islamist rather than a leftist, at least their economic plan works....better:
http://www.wired-destinations.com/images/guides/uae/UAE/UAE Nightlife.jpg

So would the Republicans in Washington.

Insurgency

Friday, February 6, 2009

Texas Republican Congressman Pete Sessions compares GOP strategy to Taliban insurgency

"Insurgency, we understand perhaps a little bit more because of the Taliban, and that is that they went about systematically understanding how to disrupt and change a person's entire processes. And these Taliban -- I'm not trying to say the Republican Party is the Taliban. No, that's not what we're saying. I'm saying an example of how you go about [sic] is to change a person from their messaging to their operations to their frontline message. And we need to understand that insurgency may be required when the other side, the House leadership, does not follow the same commands, which we entered the game with."

Paragraph from hotlineoncall.nationaljournal.com.

Congressman Pete Sessions Compares House Republicans To Taliban | Capitol Annex

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
October 16, 2001

What's truly ironic about this whole war is that the conservatives in our country do not seem to realize that the Taliban is simply an extreme version of the same primal impulse that drives them.

In every population there is a distribution of conservative to progressive, aggressive to peaceful, etc. It stands to reason that it is expected that you will have both types of personality in your population. Similarly, I believe a stable distribution of political sensibility is probably one with both progressive and conservative elements.

Of course, it's funny how the same personality type seems to latch on to radically different ideas depending on the society. "Conservatives" here profess a belief in capitalism and extol the virtues of the good old days of the 1950's, a half century ago; "conservatives" in Russia pine for the bygone days of the stability of the old Soviet empire. I believe that the propensity in conservatives is not towards ideologies per se, but rather towards status quo versus change. I'd bet you'd find much more psychologically (and perhaps genetically?) similar between conservatives here and in Russia, despite the fact that they profess supposedly opposite nostalgias.

But of course a typical conservative doesn't look at the conservatism of their enemy and learn to moderate themselves.
M. Hadeishi

 

[hipeter924]

I don't think any party in American history could have done as badly as the current Democratic party, and that's only on the 13+ trillion they stole from the American people to give to their corporate sponsors, and which is driving the US into bankruptcy.

It gets even worse when technically Obama was violating the constitution by attempting to create the very big and controlling government the constitution was written against. But Michael Moore translates the constitution as meaning a mandate for socialism, it shows how twisted their minds have gotten.

I would prefer to be an Islamist rather than a leftist, at least their economic plan works....better:
http://www.wired-destinations.com/images/guides/uae/UAE/UAE Nightlife.jpg

So would the Republicans in Washington.

Insurgency

Friday, February 6, 2009

Texas Republican Congressman Pete Sessions compares GOP strategy to Taliban insurgency

"Insurgency, we understand perhaps a little bit more because of the Taliban, and that is that they went about systematically understanding how to disrupt and change a person's entire processes. And these Taliban -- I'm not trying to say the Republican Party is the Taliban. No, that's not what we're saying. I'm saying an example of how you go about [sic] is to change a person from their messaging to their operations to their frontline message. And we need to understand that insurgency may be required when the other side, the House leadership, does not follow the same commands, which we entered the game with."

Paragraph from hotlineoncall.nationaljournal.com.

Congressman Pete Sessions Compares House Republicans To Taliban | Capitol Annex

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
October 16, 2001

What's truly ironic about this whole war is that the conservatives in our country do not seem to realize that the Taliban is simply an extreme version of the same primal impulse that drives them.

In every population there is a distribution of conservative to progressive, aggressive to peaceful, etc. It stands to reason that it is expected that you will have both types of personality in your population. Similarly, I believe a stable distribution of political sensibility is probably one with both progressive and conservative elements.

Of course, it's funny how the same personality type seems to latch on to radically different ideas depending on the society. "Conservatives" here profess a belief in capitalism and extol the virtues of the good old days of the 1950's, a half century ago; "conservatives" in Russia pine for the bygone days of the stability of the old Soviet empire. I believe that the propensity in conservatives is not towards ideologies per se, but rather towards status quo versus change. I'd bet you'd find much more psychologically (and perhaps genetically?) similar between conservatives here and in Russia, despite the fact that they profess supposedly opposite nostalgias.

But of course a typical conservative doesn't look at the conservatism of their enemy and learn to moderate themselves.
M. Hadeishi

Well the Taliban created substantial economic growth, the poppy trade is booming. If the Democrats were the Taliban there would be no recession or debt in America, unfortunately they are left leaning so economic failures when it comes to growth and decreasing debt. Go figure.

 

[daveman]

Not hardly. Night all.

And once again the alleged "moderate Republican" mindlessly cheerleads Obama. Rah rah!

 

[JakeStarkey]

I don't think any party in American history could have done as badly as the current Democratic party, and that's only on the 13+ trillion they stole from the American people to give to their corporate sponsors, and which is driving the US into bankruptcy.

It gets even worse when technically Obama was violating the constitution by attempting to create the very big and controlling government the constitution was written against. But Michael Moore translates the constitution as meaning a mandate for socialism, it shows how twisted their minds have gotten.

I would prefer to be an Islamist rather than a leftist, at least their economic plan works....better:
http://www.wired-destinations.com/images/guides/uae/UAE/UAE Nightlife.jpg

So would the Republicans in Washington.

Insurgency

Friday, February 6, 2009

Texas Republican Congressman Pete Sessions compares GOP strategy to Taliban insurgency

"Insurgency, we understand perhaps a little bit more because of the Taliban, and that is that they went about systematically understanding how to disrupt and change a person's entire processes. And these Taliban -- I'm not trying to say the Republican Party is the Taliban. No, that's not what we're saying. I'm saying an example of how you go about [sic] is to change a person from their messaging to their operations to their frontline message. And we need to understand that insurgency may be required when the other side, the House leadership, does not follow the same commands, which we entered the game with."

Paragraph from hotlineoncall.nationaljournal.com.

Congressman Pete Sessions Compares House Republicans To Taliban | Capitol Annex

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
October 16, 2001

What's truly ironic about this whole war is that the conservatives in our country do not seem to realize that the Taliban is simply an extreme version of the same primal impulse that drives them.

In every population there is a distribution of conservative to progressive, aggressive to peaceful, etc. It stands to reason that it is expected that you will have both types of personality in your population. Similarly, I believe a stable distribution of political sensibility is probably one with both progressive and conservative elements.

Of course, it's funny how the same personality type seems to latch on to radically different ideas depending on the society. "Conservatives" here profess a belief in capitalism and extol the virtues of the good old days of the 1950's, a half century ago; "conservatives" in Russia pine for the bygone days of the stability of the old Soviet empire. I believe that the propensity in conservatives is not towards ideologies per se, but rather towards status quo versus change. I'd bet you'd find much more psychologically (and perhaps genetically?) similar between conservatives here and in Russia, despite the fact that they profess supposedly opposite nostalgias.

But of course a typical conservative doesn't look at the conservatism of their enemy and learn to moderate themselves.
M. Hadeishi

Well the Taliban created substantial economic growth, the poppy trade is booming. If the Democrats were the Taliban there would be no recession or debt in America, unfortunately they are left leaning so economic failures when it comes to growth and decreasing debt. Go figure.

The GOP and its policies are major contributors to our increasing debt and great recession.

 

[JBeukema]

"I prefer to make my own judgments and determinations..."

You probably don't realize how absurd you appear: in a discussion about a particular book, you defend the idea that avoiding the primary source is the best way to "make [your]own judgments and determinations."

It expains so much about you, and gives so much amusement to your opposition.


Does this strategy work as well foods you've never eaten, or folks you've never heard of?

Carry on.

The 'primary' source of understanding fascism would be a book written by a fascist.

See if you can pick the fascist PC:

A) Adolph Hitler

B) Jonah Goldberg

Take your time and get back to me.

You are spinning out of control now. Don't you realize that it is useless to attempt to save face...To save face, there must be some respect invested in you by others. In your case, this leaves you on the outside looking in.

To learn about serial killers, only read books by serial killers?

To learn about oncology, read only books by cancer victims?

How does one learn about embalming...I know, a book by one who has been embalmed?

I have fulfilled my role: bringing out the comedy gold in your posts!

wow... that you think reading reading the Federalist, the Constitution, and the FF diaries to learn about what they thought and believed is like asking a gunshot victim about oxidation reactions or gunsmithing, there's no point wasting time with you.

Reading Kapital to learn about Marxism is, in fact, like reading a textbook written by a bunch of cardiologists to learn about cardiology.

Moron.

 

[JBeukema]

2. "Although this does not speak directly to the matter at hand, i.e., "Liberal Fascism," other readings that I have read inform my opinion as to the origins of fascism and progressivism...

Actually, I said that earlier. I referenced a few other sources back in my earlier posts. As I said, one of my hobbies is the History of Mathematics. It's easily one of my favorite courses to teach. It's impossible to read about poor lonely David Hilbert (a personal hero of mine) who saw the famous school at Gottingen destroyed by the Nazis and not want to read up on them. It's impossible to read about Emmy Noether, forced to flee the Nazi's and not want to know what kind of idiots would instigate that. Or Paul Erdos who lost his family to those monsters. Or read about poor Felix Hausdorf who committed suicide rather than go to the camps.

So yeah, I've read up on the Nazis. I know what they were, and as such I feel very comfortable outright rejecting "Liberal Facism".

pfft! You probably think Christian Atheism is 'nonsense', too!

 

[JBeukema]

What, exactly, qualifies you to decide for other people what their best interests are? And is it just coincidence that their best interest is keeping liberals in power?

That's not even good spin.

I repeat: What, exactly, qualifies you to decide for other people what their best interests are?

'Do not touch chain while in motion' is only an opinion