+ participate in the debates

There's a backlash waiting to happen somewhere.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1134533521.jpg

Ronin,

A quote does not mean crap when it is taken out of context.

There are all these cute little quotes anymore and nobody even knows when or why they were spoken. All they know or care about is that its an easy answer, A cute little bumper sticker answer, something that fits their agenda when put in a diffrent context.

With that said, I agree! There is a backlash coming.

This means something when taken out of context. Her bumper sticker is an easy answer that fits her agenda.

I wouldn't say the same about Lincoln's text.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1134534696.jpg

I wouldn't say the same about Lincoln's text.

Thats fine by me, I am not asking you to do anything.

The only fair way to have an election with a multiple-party ballot is to have a provision for a run-off if no one gets 50% of the vote...

The book that I read wasn't about politics. It was about early american boys. "Growing Up in the Cooper Country" Boyhood Recollections of the New York Frontier edited by Louis C. Jones, Library of congress cat card 64-23343. C 1965

The story was about a sensible boy named Beardsley and a screwed up liberal named Wright. The story wasn't specifically about conservatives and liberals, it just turned out one was a straight forward sensible boy and the other was all screwed up and liberal.

The thing that the story clearly presented was the process of the making of a liberal as a boy turned man in body at least. It shows the overall liberal thought process, and gives a look into its making. Not only is the process screwed up but it shows a total misunderstanding or lack of understanding of the world. It attempts to show the liberal approach of love being a better approach, yielding better results than the cruel ways of the world. But it also shows the lack of understanding the total lack of understanding of the real world.

Liberalism assumes that love is always better, but there is a serious flaw in this view. Not everyone agrees. Given this approach the Sadams of the world will rule forever. The only universal approach is the cruel one, the one that assumes the worst of all of us. This is the only approach that is truly UNIVERSAL. Until liberals realize this we are all in danger because of their stupidity. I have searched and searched, but cannot find any word that better discribes their points of views.

A system of checks and balances, always assuming that everyone will look out ONLY for their own selfish interest is the only practical, workable system of society. Any other is wishful thinking and dangerous.

I know I will get all kinds of BS in response to this post, but when it all gets down to push and shove, and eventually it ALWAYS does, all kindness goes out the window and its back to survival of the fitest. (meaning the biggest, nastiest, beasts in the group) I am totally certain that many of the responses to this post will demonstrate this principle, yet at the same time not recognize it.

Perhaps if you would point out the post....I will explain it to you.

Interesting. Written by an Englishman but appropiate here.

http://westernworldpolitics.blogspot.com/2005/10/revolutionary-defeatism-key-to.html

And you probably will not see anyone supporting Howard Dean because he is the village idiot and most everyone knows that his time is far past. Being the loose cannon on the Dem's platform has done nothing but harm, and he is all yours!

So now you want to limit the free speech of someone just because you do not agree with her? Wonderful democracy that you would like to see. Have you ever thought that she might have some small bit of truth that we all might need to hear?

The funny thing about this is that she would fight for YOUR right to speak, while you want her to shut up. Given the two points of reference I would much rather fight for everyone's chance to free speech than your "muzzling" someone you just cannot understand or do not agree with.

Joe A

Liberals believe that "love is always better?"

See what I mean? You take a story you've read, and apply that boy's thinking to an entire group of people. People are complex. People think many different things. What one conservative thinks is different than what another one thinks. Their reasons for doing something may be different for your reasons for doing something...even though you both may want the same thing, your reasons why may be different. But "liberals" are somehow different? They're clones of each other?

And curious, how did you arrive to this conclusion with Saddam?

Mine's purely selfish. I'm not warm and fuzzy. I'm not foolish enough to believe we can "rid the world of war and wear flowers in our hair. I want to address the issue of terroriasm, I care more about our people than anything else. Sure, poor Iraqis, but to me, lets take care of our OWN problems first. Iraq isn't even touching the issue of addressing terrorism, something that seriously needs to be addressed.

It appears in this situation, your "kindness" (assuming you think the invasion was to free people) is what has ensured a serious issue of our people is not addressed....and can no longer be addressed at this time.....

Ron,

I'll see your Lincoln and raise you a Roosevelt. :D

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."

— President Theodore Roosevelt

Actually I am one of those who read a lot. I read over 500 books in the 8th grade as part of a reading contest, I read at over 2500 wpm with 100% comprehension. I have read more books, newspapers, magazines in one year that most of you have in your lifetime. So When I say I have read a good book, I mean a good book.

Ulysses?

"I have read more books, newspapers, magazines in one year that most of you have in your lifetime."

My Dad could take your Dad.

Care to answer the question now?

I did cheat. I actually read everything twice. The first time I only comped 95%, the second was after reading the questions. I guess that means I can only read about 5000 words per min with 95% comp, not 2500 with 100% comp. Yeh I did read the entire contents of the HS library in the 9th grade, and the tests said it was at the senior level in college. But what am I to say what a particular book said, I only read one book for this statement. It was a very good book, better than ANY I have ever read. It clearly shows the mental developmet of a normal boy vs a confirmed liberal. It clearly shows that the liberal is mentally confused, hurt by his mother and brothers deaths, and unable to understand the most fundamental things that we all take for granted. He was just unable to grasp the meaning of life, so to speak.

I will clarify this, he was the kind of person who would contemplate why a wash cloth must be laundered. Most of us instinctively know why a wash cloth must be laundered, he was the kind of person who had to question it, why, cause he was just plain stupid. There is no other word that fits better. His whole life fell into the mold of why is this so, but he couldn't see what most people see, he was just unable to do so. He was not clever, he was not inquireing, he was just Stupid. His life and the questions he asks fit the mold of a liberal , exactly. So is the liberal the same thing, just Stupid? I think so.

I also read a bunch of crap in college, you know Faust and the like, Tom Saywer revisited in a political correct sort of way, The Prince, ( IT starts with a M for youall who don't know) Some bonehead that jousted with windmills, but nothing compares to this simple account, a true account of the founding of this country. This simple book is also the most laid out bare account of a liberal, there ever was.

Youall want to name a book, any book that counters this book, just state the name. But don't do so until you have read this simple book. After you have done so, try, just try to name anything that I have stated as being incorrect.

At this point I will leave it at liberals 0 conservatives 1.

My dog could take your dog.

just try to name anything that I have stated as being incorrect.

OK

At this point I will leave it at liberals 0 conservatives 1

There it is... Not only is the statment incorrect, it is also gay!

Looks like you're on track to beat that in the 9th grade - good luck!