The only thing Republicans have got going for them is...

[RangeBar]

Quote from Ricter:

I don't think Lucrum really needed to present anything to counter your claims using "all" and "never", such claims are typically easy to shoot down. That said, it may well be that you have never met such liberals, particularly if you have simply not met many liberals.

I do l live in the south and have for most of my life so, yes, meeting liberals is a rare event. At this time I live in western TN where the local weekly paper resembles a Sunday School phamlet as much as a newspaper. And they take that stuff LITERALLY around here !!

Yes, saying 'all', 'always' and 'never' is generally not wise. If a liberal is sure about one thing, it is that very little in the world is black or white: it is mostly grey/gray. However, I stand by my assertion that EVERY liberal that I've met has been better educated and more intelligent than the average person: that isn't that hard to achieve. Have you ever met a liberal that doesn't meet these criteria?

This is not to say that liberals NEVER say something stupid or wrong. I've re-evaluated more than one postion that I've had in the past. Nuclear energy for example. At least we are able to change when facts and circumstances warrant changing. We aren't constrained by tradition, emotions and edits from deites: those traits go a long way in developing a liberal world-view.

 

[Lucrum]

Quote from RangeBar:
Sorry, Lucrum, still not heard anything of substance...... However, I stand by my assertion that EVERY liberal that I've met has been better educated and more intelligent than the average person: that isn't that hard to achieve.

Translation: you refuse to admit or even consider your absurd and ridiculous notion might be wrong.

Have you ever met a liberal that doesn't meet these criteria?

I have, in fact I have yet to meet an intelligent liberal.

 

[kut2k2]

Quote from NeoRio1:

You don't think the situations are symmetrical because you agree with the far left more than the far right.

Forget left and right, focus on facts and fantasy. You once accused Clinton of being responsible for deregulation. I pointed out the facts that it was Republicans who proposed deregulation in 1999 and they had a majority in Congress which overwhelmingly passed it. If one side, regardless of ideology, doesn't ignore most of reality and the other side, because of ideology, lives mostly in a fantasy world, that is far from a symmetrical situation.

Quote from NeoRio1:

Why is it so hard for you to understand that the far left and far right follow ideologies? The far left thinks Bush ruined the economy.

The far left, the left-center and the center all KNOW Bush ruined the economy. Why do you think Obama was elected over McBush?

Quote from NeoRio1:

The far right thinks Clinton and the Democratic Congress ruined the economy. They are both to blame because neither party saw the need for an improvement in financial regulations.

Congressional Democrats (which were the minority) led the opposition against deregulation in 1999. Just another inconvenient fact for the know-nothing right.

Quote from NeoRio1:

You think more on the right want America to fail because you only look at the worst parts of the far right and not the far left. You have basically brainwashed yourself. In a way you are the complete opposite of Glenn Beck. If you actually had the ability to get rid of your bias you would be able to see that both sides have radicals and both sides increase in intensity when they lose power.

The far left you keep referring to have been few and far between. With the exception of Air America, which has lost affiliates recently, and one or two shows on MSNBC, they have almost no platforms to speak on at all. At least half the "liberals" you see on TV are really moderates; somebody like Chomsky NEVER gets invited on talk shows. Over 90% of talk radio is hard right and at least another 5% are "independent" (center-to-right). Meanwhile people like Ann Coulter get regularly invited on to talk about what a hero Joe McCarthy was and other madness. As far as me being the opposite of Glenn Beck, he's a Mormon and I'm an atheist. You decide which one of us has a better grasp of reality. (And I've never used Vicks vaporub to fake tears in my life.)

The fact that you see symmetry between the radical left and the radical right in this country, either in terms of message or in terms of access to the public, says a lot more about your bias than about mine.

 

[maxpi]

Quote from FeenixRizin:

while I don't listen to Rush, I whole heartily agree, I hope Obama's Policies, as he envisions them, FAIL

Why? Because he is a crackpot leftist, beholden to the people who have the most to gain from government largess.

You know where this largess comes from?

I'll give you a hint, I work 6 month out of the year to pay for it. Soon, that will be 8 months. Of course, I'll simply stop working or cruise before that happens.


It's not the politicians, people... it's their constituents who believe, indeed demand more of, their promises.

WIN stands for Work Is Nonprofit and it's becoming more true with every day that the Left is in charge.. never vote for them but they have succeeded... they raise taxes and benefits, eventually it's way better to just give your employer the upraised finger and get on the dole... I'm way happier not working, I was getting unemployment for an incredibly long time, pretending that people are going to hire somebody in their 60's, then I got on the SSI rolls and all that time I'm working on trading theory and practice.. and with Medicare Advantage my medical benefits are way better than that crap my last cheapshit employer foisted off on me... doctors would look at the card and say "uhhh yeah.. we really don't have an appointment open until about the end of next year"..

 

[NeoRio1]

Quote from kut2k2:

Forget left and right, focus on facts and fantasy. You once accused Clinton of being responsible for deregulation. I pointed out the facts that it was Republicans who proposed deregulation in 1999 and they had a majority in Congress which overwhelmingly passed it. If one side, regardless of ideology, doesn't ignore most of reality and the other side, because of ideology, lives mostly in a fantasy world, that is far from a symmetrical situation.

The far left, the left-center and the center all KNOW Bush ruined the economy. Why do you think Obama was elected over McBush?

Congressional Democrats (which were the minority) led the opposition against deregulation in 1999. Just another inconvenient fact for the know-nothing right.

The far left you keep referring to have been few and far between. With the exception of Air America, which has lost affiliates recently, and one or two shows on MSNBC, they have almost no platforms to speak on at all. At least half the "liberals" you see on TV are really moderates; somebody like Chomsky NEVER gets invited on talk shows. Over 90% of talk radio is hard right and at least another 5% are "independent" (center-to-right). Meanwhile people like Ann Coulter get regularly invited on to talk about what a hero Joe McCarthy was and other madness. As far as me being the opposite of Glenn Beck, he's a Mormon and I'm an atheist. You decide which one of us has a better grasp of reality. (And I've never used Vicks vaporub to fake tears in my life.)

The fact that you see symmetry between the radical left and the radical right in this country, either in terms of message or in terms of access to the public, says a lot more about your bias than about mine.

Again you don't see symmetry because you ONLY look at the far right and you only look at the present. If you critically looked at both parties then you would agree with my analysis of both parties being somewhat responsible. However because you only look at the far right you become emotionally aflicted. You begin to think that only one party is responsible for all the evils in the world. As a result you have the inability to blame both parties even to a minor degree hence the inability to judge the reality of the current political climate and the world around you.

You are the same as the ones you hate.

 

[kut2k2]

Quote from NeoRio1:

Again you don't see symmetry because you ONLY look at the far right and you only look at the present. If you critically looked at both parties then you would agree with my analysis of both parties being somewhat responsible.

First, let's not confuse liberals with Democrats. The Democrats mostly only try to appeal to liberals during election seasons. If it wasn't for conservative Democrats in Congress, we'd already have health care reform behind us. So yes, both parties are "somewhat responsible", just like a tiger shark and its pilot fish are "both somewhat responsible" for eating the flesh off your bones. But face it: the "liberal" wing of the GOP is extinct; it is first and foremost a party of conservatives. "Moderate" Republicans like Olympia Snow are a lot more rare than conservative Democrats like Ben Nelson. Obama got nominated by the Dems by playing the moderate card, not the liberal card.

Quote from NeoRio1:

However because you only look at the far right you become emotionally aflicted. You begin to think that only one party is responsible for all the evils in the world.

I think it's clear that one party is responsible for most of the current evils in America.

Quote from NeoRio1:

As a result you have the inability to blame both parties even to a minor degree hence the inability to judge the reality of the current political climate and the world around you.

You are the same as the ones you hate.

As I have demonstrated, you are mistaken. You ask me to look for nuance while ignoring it yourself.

I'm one of the few people outside of Arkansas who can claim to have voted against Bill Clinton four times: both Democratic primaries and both general elections. I didn't vote for Gore in the 2000 primary, I didn't vote for Kerry in the 2004 primary and I didn't vote for Obama in the 2008 primary. I am not a diehard Democrat by any measure, but I know the difference between somewhat evil and pure, irredeemable evil and I vote accordingly in the general elections.

Could and should the Dems have done better? Sure, you'll get no argument from me on that score. But the idea that they are "just as responsible" as the GOP for the current mess in America is nonsense.

 

[Dr. Zhivodka]

WIN stood for "Whip Inflation Now." Of course this came about after six years of Republican presidency. And Oil embargoes and commodity price controls. You should be quite proud.

Quote from maxpi:

WIN stands for Work Is Nonprofit and it's becoming more true with every day that the Left is in charge..

 

[TraderZones]

Quote from RangeBar:

This article explains some of the details that are often left out by the union/labor-hating crowd. Note at the bottom that labor costs are about 10% of the total cost of a car.

http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/do_auto_workers_really_make_more_than.html

You are leaving out the fact that the UNION WAS FORCING THE BIG THREE TO KEEP A HUGE AMOUNT OF RETIREES ON THE DOLE. And are you forgetting how many times unions just say "shut er down" to their company? I personally saw unions shut down several larger companies in my area. Not to mention they dynamited a senior center near completion because the company had the nerve to not use union labour. Classic Dem liberals.

Now, you are rapidly discovering that you DID know a highly uneducated Liberal. He looks back at you each day from the mirror.

Seriously, it is painful to read your posts. So far, you are being the poster child of Liberal Stooge.

Don't bother responding. You will join the rest of the uneducated liberals on my rapidly growing ignore list.

 

[FortuneTeller]

Quote from vhehn:

YEA RIGHT. the red states are filled with the best educated people in the us. places like arkansas, mississippi,tennessee, kentucky, north and south dakota, alaska.

Dumocrats = women, hispanics, blacks, gays, dumb whites, welfare victims and other intellectually inferior people.