[boizzones]

While it appears many of you think my post is beneith contempt, I'm only trying to level the playing field. I see posts by Gadlfy and Little Acorn and all they do is attack the left over and over with ridiculous rhetoric that simply isn't true. I'm forced to make it appear that I'm a hardliner nutcase just to keep up. I'm really just an average guy who leans toward the center.

But you do have a point to a certain extent. Most of you debate very calmly and I suppose the left has its nutcases as well. In the interest of good statesmanship I will change my conservative killer title to something a little less offensive to my comrades on the right.

Fair enough.

I'd suggest being careful how close you identify with anything liberal though

Liberalism has done a very good job of making itself (liberalism) a dirty word. I mean look at what the far left is doing ?

No one with any brains would DO the things they are doing or say the things they're saying.

Anyways, I'll get off the soapbox now

[drugstore]

I wasn't insinuating man.

Just saying that with a careful READ .........

.......... well, you know what I was saying then.

Yes, you were quite clearly inferring that not only did I misunderstand the thread - but you were asserting that I wouldn't bother to even read it.

Don't be gettin' all insulted and shit

Then stop throwing the insults around.

Bottom line is that my comment was specifically addressed to Spadplanter who has demonstrated on many occasions that he is as much of a partisan fanatic as he presumed to accuse the opening poster of this thread of being.

Ergo, pot, meet kettle.

As far as I'm concerned, mindless partisan fanaticism is the same. It doesn't matter which flavour it comes it, its all the same game, same arguments, same shit. You have to believe it before you read it if you want to 'get it'.

For fanatical partisanship, I have only contempt.

As for insults, I serve them back - with a sharp backhand - at my leisure. Revenge is a dish best served cold.

[Daruhuw]

Logically circular, paints with a huge brush. In other words, logically equivalent to the OP's premise.

No, logically circular arguments are very specific, and extremely easy to refute because of it.

And someone jumping off a bridge does not logically justify jumping off the same bridge. Even if the whole fucking country jumps off that bridge, I'd still think twice about it.

Seriously, any time one declares "All (Democrats, Republicans, Blacks, Whites, Gays, Straights - pick one) are XXX", the statement reflects more on the person making it than on the target population.

Matt

Agreed - I've made that point dozens of times here at USPO. But firing back on the same level drags you down to that same level one presumes to object to.

And if you want to slice'n'dice (or spin) morality - or logic - I'm your man.

[tmobmobfil]

Yes, you were quite clearly inferring that not only did I misunderstand the thread - but you were asserting that I wouldn't bother to even read it.

You sir, are guilty of reading more than intended between the lines I COULD go into a beavis and butthead tirade for humor, but I don't want you to take that ALL serious and stuff

Then stop throwing the insults around.

Bottom line is that my comment was specifically addressed to Spadplanter who has demonstrated on many occasions that he is as much of a partisan fanatic as he presumed to accuse the opening poster of this thread of being.

Ergo, pot, meet kettle.

As far as I'm concerned, mindless partisan fanaticism is the same. It doesn't matter which flavour it comes it, its all the same game, same arguments, same shit. You have to believe it before you read it if you want to 'get it'.

For fanatical partisanship, I have only contempt.

As for insults, I serve them back - with a sharp backhand - at my leisure. Revenge is a dish best served cold.

I wasn't directing an insult at you. If I did, you'd know it, it would be VERY clear.

Now, what the bloody hell was this about

[Aminkaoo]

Alas, the Republicans and the Democrats of the DNC do share a comman 'moral'.

That being the corporate bribe.

[joeyCanada]

Bottom line is that my comment was specifically addressed to Spadplanter who has demonstrated on many occasions that he is as much of a partisan fanatic as he presumed to accuse the opening poster of this thread of being.

Yup, and your problem with that is....

[pageup85]

While it appears many of you think my post is beneith contempt, I'm only trying to level the playing field. I see posts by Gadlfy and Little Acorn and all they do is attack the left over and over with ridiculous rhetoric that simply isn't true. I'm forced to make it appear that I'm a hardliner nutcase just to keep up. I'm really just an average guy who leans toward the center.

But you do have a point to a certain extent. Most of you debate very calmly and I suppose the left has its nutcases as well. In the interest of good statesmanship I will change my conservative killer title to something a little less offensive to my comrades on the right.

You're not forced to do anything. Republicans who make claims about all democrats aren't something to emulate (nor are democrats who make claims about all republicans). The attitude isn't helpful for having a balanced discussion.

Helene

[Buyingtime]

Gay Marriage: Can I ask how a gay couple going about their business affects someone else's family in any way whatsoever?

Drugs: Prohibition doesn't work. Instead, education should be used to avoid lives turning to shit early on.

You contradict your own logic in your post. The very things you use to critique Republicans with regards to drugs and same-sex marriage are the very same items you use for ammunition against those individuals that want to own a firearm.

[johobuo]

The New Deal was based on the papal encyclical "Rerum Novarum" which was the comprehensive treatise on the rights of workers and the rights of capital.
In it Pope Leo XIII talked about how a moral society should work.
That people have a right to own property, and that workers are entitled to decent treatment, a living wage, a secure old age, access to health care, etc.
Saint Pius X affirmed this as correct.

Franklin Roosevelt read it, and liked it so much, it became his political platform, and the basis for the platform of the Democratic party ever since.

The writings of a pope, affirmed by a saint, are what the Republican Party has consistantly opposed for all this time.

FYI

[mirex]

You contradict your own logic in your post. The very things you use to critique Republicans with regards to drugs and same-sex marriage are the very same items you use for ammunition against those individuals that want to own a firearm.

There may be technical similarities in the Libertarian-esque points of view that people should be able to do what they want but that's where it ends. You can't shoot someone or rob a bank with a bag of weed. Likewise, being gay affect only the individuals themselves. Guns, however, are a danger to the entire community and when put in the hands of the irresponsible, can cause death and destruction to innocent bystanders.

[Charryith]

Guns, however, are a danger to the entire community and when put in the hands of the irresponsible, can cause death and destruction to innocent bystanders.

When anything is placed in the hands of the irresponsible, it can be a danger to the community -- it doesn't matter if it is a firearm, alcohol or a pillow. Please put the emotion aside.

[satthackacibe]

When anything is placed in the hands of the irresponsible, it can be a danger to the community -- it doesn't matter if it is a firearm, alcohol or a pillow. Please put the emotion aside.

I must respectfully disagree with you there. If I know a bunch of people next door are smoking weed it doesnt make me feel unsave walking outside. If they all have automatic weapons I'd be looking to get the heck out of that neighborhood.

[gugamotina]

I must respectfully disagree with you there. If I know a bunch of people next door are smoking weed it doesnt make me feel unsave walking outside. If they all have automatic weapons I'd be looking to get the heck out of that neighborhood.

Then again .. if your neighbors are addicted to some substance and are scrounging to make ends meet, theft is an alternative money source for them.

Again, anything in the hands of the irresponsible can be hazardous to others ..

[soitlyobserty]

I must respectfully disagree with you there. If I know a bunch of people next door are smoking weed it doesnt make me feel unsave walking outside. If they all have automatic weapons I'd be looking to get the heck out of that neighborhood.

Being in the military, you probably know the difference between an automatic weapon and the sort that are generally available to civilians.

So you know your automatic weapon scenario there is hyperbole at best......

Matt

[JohnTruels]

Then again .. if your neighbors are addicted to some substance and are scrounging to make ends meet, theft is an alternative money source for them.

Again, anything in the hands of the irresponsible can be hazardous to others ..

Ah, but if I have my automatic assualt rifle handy, then I shall fear no man!

[uphokyhuP]

Environment. Tom Delay decalred a jihad on the EPA. Need I say more?

The EPA is a jihadding terrorist organization itself. It once bulldozed down an entire town (Times Beach, Missouri) just because the children there couldn't safely eat the dirt.

Guns: Everyone must own a gun because everyone else owns a gun. When the shit hits the fan like during a natural disaster its better to have the desperate and dying armed and dangerous so they can shoot at rescue helicopters. We'll back it up with sexed-up statistics that show neighbourhoods with lots of guns have no measurable increase in crime. Gimme a break. Right, let's take all the guns away from everyone except criminals and the government. That will make everybody safer.

[icedrakona]

The New Deal was based on the papal encyclical "Rerum Novarum" which was the comprehensive treatise on the rights of workers and the rights of capital.
In it Pope Leo XIII talked about how a moral society should work.
That people have a right to own property, and that workers are entitled to decent treatment, a living wage, a secure old age, access to health care, etc.
Saint Pius X affirmed this as correct.

Franklin Roosevelt read it, and liked it so much, it became his political platform, and the basis for the platform of the Democratic party ever since.

The writings of a pope, affirmed by a saint, are what the Republican Party has consistantly opposed for all this time.

FYI

With the liberal attempts to remove religion from our lives, I'd have to say THIS is the best reason yet for shutting the New Deal down. We can't have religion-based programs in the US now, can we?

[cialviagra]

Jesus frigging Christ, Nother thread about Democrats this and Republicans that.

How about coming up with a real thread. And the bottom line is that both partys are total fuckups.

[HunterM]

The New Deal was based on the papal encyclical "Rerum Novarum" which was the comprehensive treatise on the rights of workers and the rights of capital.
In it Pope Leo XIII talked about how a moral society should work.
That people have a right to own property, and that workers are entitled to decent treatment, a living wage, a secure old age, access to health care, etc.
Saint Pius X affirmed this as correct.

Franklin Roosevelt read it, and liked it so much, it became his political platform, and the basis for the platform of the Democratic party ever since.

The writings of a pope, affirmed by a saint, are what the Republican Party has consistantly opposed for all this time.

FYI

You do realize that the right to property and the right to other people's property(healthcare, "living" wages etc) are mutually exclusive?

[9rCR9hWL]

You do realize that the right to property and the right to other people's property(healthcare, "living" wages etc) are mutually exclusive?

You very carefully avoiding the exact terms in order to create your false dichotomy... no surprise there I guess...

The right to own property itself is not in conflict with the right of entitlement to decent healthcare or any other such nonsense.