What Americans Were.....sigh....

[daveman]

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to daveman For This Useful Post:
rightwinger (Today), Uncensored2008 (Today)

Liarwinger admits he's both impotent and gutless.

We already knew that.

Yeah, I noticed that too.

This is part of the reason I'm convinced that RW is just a sock meant to mock the lefties. He is SO absurd that he defames the mindless left. He is a parody of the leftist extreme.

You may be correct. No one can believe the utterly stupid shit he says and still be smart enough to operate a computer.

 

[Dragon]

Good Gaea -- you're STILL DOING IT.

Hey, I think I'm in a better position to know what Good Gaea would approve of or not than you are.

"...supporting slavery was, at that time, a conservative position. (Now it's not. Now it would be a radical right-wing position."

Prove it, you lttle shit. Prove it or shut the hell up. Post links from radical right-wingers saying they support slavery.

That's not necessary as a proof, since the phrase I used was "would be" not "is." It would be a radical right-wing position (if anyone actually held it) because it's not defense of something currently or recently in the status quo (that would make it conservative), but a radical restoration of an oppressive system done away with long ago.

It WAS a conservative position to defend slavery in the 1850s-1860s, because at that time slavery WAS part of the status quo, which liberals like Lincoln wanted to abolish gradually, while radicals like Garrison wanted to abolish immediately.

All of which follows logically from an understanding of what those words really mean, which I realize you lack, but there it is.

 

[Dragon]

Oooh, another little Brown Shirt.

Goodness, but you get bent out of shape over having your opinions exposed, don't you? You do realize that no penalties can be assessed for exercising your free speech BEYOND having your opinions exposed for all to see, which is a very significant difference between what you're complaining about and genuine fascism?

 

[Dragon]

I guess you missed all the posts where he had the opportunity to defend Obama's "inform on your neighbors for criticizing me" actions but chose instead to be stupid.

Well, that looks to me as if he isn't trying to claim Obama for his own, honestly. So why are you calling him "your" little tin god or whatever you said?

It's not hard to defend, because it's not anything to really complain about. All that's being done is to expose propaganda and lies to public view and point it out so people can be aware of it. You know, even if Obama wanted to actually PUNISH people for expressing those views, a desire for which there is zero evidence, he couldn't do so because of the First Amendment. So what the hell are you worried about?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Hey, I think I'm in a better position to know what Good Gaea would approve of or not than you are.

Why?

Would a Greek be in a better position to know what Zeus approves of?

In fact, Zeus is far more sophisticated than the Gaea idiocy.

That's not necessary as a proof, since the phrase I used was "would be" not "is." It would be a radical right-wing position because it's not defense of something currently or recently in the status quo (that would make it conservative), but a radical restoration of an oppressive system done away with long ago.

Trying to assign 17th century issues to 21st century politics is sophomoric pud pulling.

From a rational standpoint - not that you have any experience with being rational, the left is collectivist. I mean, you would agree that collectivism is a major feature of the left, wouldn't you?

So the left essentially views society as a collection, which can be broken into groups. Rights, privileges and immunities accrue to the group, with the individual accruing those rights that belong to the group.

The right is all about the individual. Individual rights to have weapons, individual rights to speech, individuals having the right to decide if and what health coverage they will have, etc.

Given the nature of each, then one must conclude logically, that the authoritarian left would be more prone to declaring a group to be without civil protection and forced to serve other groups.

It WAS a conservative position to defend slavery in the 1850s-1860s, because at that time slavery WAS part of the status quo,

Complete idiocy and fabrication.

Again, you attempt to dishonestly mold issues from a past era into modern politics.

which liberals like Lincoln wanted to abolish gradually, while radicals like Garrison wanted to abolish immediately.

Yawn, sophomoric dishonesty is so banal.

All of which follows logically from an understanding of what those words really mean, which I realize you lack, but there it is.

There is nothing "logical" about your little fib, it is complete idiocy, fabricated in hopes of supporting unrelated political positions you currently hold.

Let's check some facts, I know how you hate facts, but..

Slavery ended in America in 1862.

In the Marxist government of China, slavery is practiced today.

In the Marxist government of the USSR, slavery was practiced to the day the wall fell.

In the Marxist government of the Khmer Rouge, slavery was practiced for the entire span of the regime.

In the Marxist government of Vietnam, slavery is practiced today.

So logically, WHO is more likely to support slavery? Who DOES support slavery? The left - Marxists.

 

[rightwinger]

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to daveman For This Useful Post:
rightwinger (Today), Uncensored2008 (Today)

Liarwinger admits he's both impotent and gutless.

We already knew that.

Yeah, I noticed that too.

This is part of the reason I'm convinced that RW is just a sock meant to mock the lefties. He is SO absurd that he defames the mindless left. He is a parody of the leftist extreme.

You may be correct. No one can believe the utterly stupid shit he says and still be smart enough to operate a computer.

Wow....I provoked a right wing circle jerk

 

[Uncensored2008]

Wow....I provoked a right wing circle jerk

Hey dude, I think you're brilliant. You have 90% of the forum fooled. Plus you do more for the conservative cause by exposing the idiocy of the left than any of the rest of us do.

Keep up the good work.

 

[rightwinger]

Wow....I provoked a right wing circle jerk

Hey dude, I think you're brilliant. You have 90% of the forum fooled. Plus you do more for the conservative cause by exposing the idiocy of the left than any of the rest of us do.

Keep up the good work.

Thanks....you can go back to blowing daveman

 

[Dragon]

One common source of confusion, and I know why this happens, is that conservatives don't like to think of conservative positions as changing over time. To think of it that way is to validate progressivisim. To acknowledge that conservatives in the mid 19th century defended slavery, which today no conservative will do, is to admit that we are moving in a progressive direction, and that as liberals win various battles, things that were once conservative causes became lost causes and then became things that conservatives disavowed, while moving on to new issues (as did liberals).

All of that's true, though. The liberalism of today will be the conservatism of tomorrow. The conservatism of today will be unthinkably reactionary tomorrow.

 

[daveman]

Yeah, I noticed that too.

This is part of the reason I'm convinced that RW is just a sock meant to mock the lefties. He is SO absurd that he defames the mindless left. He is a parody of the leftist extreme.

You may be correct. No one can believe the utterly stupid shit he says and still be smart enough to operate a computer.

Wow....I provoked a right wing circle jerk

You like to watch circle jerks?

Well, takes all kinds, I suppose.

 

[daveman]

Wow....I provoked a right wing circle jerk

Hey dude, I think you're brilliant. You have 90% of the forum fooled. Plus you do more for the conservative cause by exposing the idiocy of the left than any of the rest of us do.

Keep up the good work.

Thanks....you can go back to blowing daveman

And there's the typical leftist homophobia.

You're really good at this!

 

[daveman]

One common source of confusion, and I know why this happens, is that conservatives don't like to think of conservative positions as changing over time. To think of it that way is to validate progressivisim. To acknowledge that conservatives in the mid 19th century defended slavery, which today no conservative will do, is to admit that we are moving in a progressive direction, and that as liberals win various battles, things that were once conservative causes became lost causes and then became things that conservatives disavowed, while moving on to new issues (as did liberals).

All of that's true, though. The liberalism of today will be the conservatism of tomorrow. The conservatism of today will be unthinkably reactionary tomorrow.

There you go again:

Liberal = good.

Conservative = bad.


It's a tropism for you, isn't it?

 

[Listening]

Women: We deserve the right to vote
Conservatives: Go **** yourself

That's why Wyoming (that liberal bastion even in the 1800's) gave women the right to vote in local elections something like 50 years before the 19th was ratified.

But you keep trying.

In reading through this thread is has become obvious that your stormtrooper talking points were to hastily put together.

 

[Listening]

Blacks: We deserve equal treatment under the law
Conservatives: Go **** yourself

Sure, that is what Romney is campaigning on.....

Liberals.....to blacks: Just listen to us, we'll keep you in the dark (pardon the pun).

All you need to know is that ****** is not on your side....

 

[Listening]

Prop. 8 and the Hispanic Vote - HispanicBusiness.com

Yep....that is why over 50% of those nasty conservative hispanics voted Yes on prop 8:

Hispanics have been both criticized and praised for their role in Prop. 8 passing. The Yes campaign thanked the turnout of Hispanics who were eager to vote for Barack Obama, but whose religious values would lead them to vote yes on Prop. 8. Hispanic supporters of gay marriage are quick to point out that the discrimination homosexuals face is similar to the discrimination Hispanics continue to face. Said Los Angeles Spanish-language radio personality Fernando Espuelas, "The irony of Latino support for Prop. 8 is sad. That a community that continues to struggle for basic rights would deny them to another is particularly baffling."

*****************************

Way to easy.

 

[Listening]

Wow....I provoked a right wing circle jerk

Hey dude, I think you're brilliant. You have 90% of the forum fooled. Plus you do more for the conservative cause by exposing the idiocy of the left than any of the rest of us do.

Keep up the good work.

Thanks....you can go back to blowing daveman

Smacked that one right out of the park.

I think what you provoked was a masacre.

But, you'll get over this ass kicking like you have all the others.

 

[daveman]

Hey dude, I think you're brilliant. You have 90% of the forum fooled. Plus you do more for the conservative cause by exposing the idiocy of the left than any of the rest of us do.

Keep up the good work.

Thanks....you can go back to blowing daveman

Smacked that one right out of the park.

I think what you provoked was a masacre.

But, you'll get over this ass kicking like you have all the others.

He defeated us by repeating slamming his ass into our boots.

 

[Dragon]

There you go again:

Liberal = good.

Conservative = bad.

You really need to work on that reading comprehension problem, Dave. What I've said isn't as hard to understand as your confusion would lead one to believe. To say that when it was a live issue, conservatives supported slavery, is not to say "conservatism is bad." It's merely to state a fact of history.