Romney and Bain?

[Technomancer]

lol, have you actually *listened* to what he said? You want to believe these lies. You NEED to believe these lies, because it's the only thing that validates your relevance as a Cold Warrior. You need a diametrically opposed enemy to justify your own existence, and since we beat the Ruskies, you have to look for existential threats internally.

I like you. I really do. You just drive me (and virtually everyone else) up the friggin' wall, because you are incapable of rational discourse. Everything turns into extreme poles and calling each other stupid-faces as soon as you enter any thread. I feel like I can have an adult conversation with any of your occasional political allies, even when I am in complete disagreement with them, but you are hopeless. You are the only person on the OTF I've ever conversed with (with the possible exception of Johnny) that jumps straight to the insults, Red-baiting, and name calling. The only times I see anyone else acting like that (including myself) are in response to you after you have infected us with your juvenile vitriol. Your a grown ****ing man, have some self-respect.

I don't know what multitude of traumas have occurred to stunt your emotional development, and I'll refrain from speculation, but your style of extreme polarization is what keeps everyone in this country from realizing that we actually agree on way more than we disagree on. If we did realize that, we might be able to actually elect a government representative of what is in the best interest of all the people, instead of the few that have bought and paid for the Cold Civil War that's currently taking place so they may rob us blind and and make us forget we actually run this ****.

I'm sure you'll come up with some quip about me dodging so you must be right about something. We are all in this together, and convincing us we don't owe each other jack **** and that the only means for "The People" to remain secure in their freedom is to hate and oppose democratic representative government would make any tyrant proud. You are one of their spokesmen. Take a bow.

[jamesL]

Nope. Go back, read it again. You're quoting the tortured logic that they're trying to pretend Obama was using, but even THAT is absolute bullcrap.

stop being dense

There are a lot of wealthy, successful Americans who agree with me -- because they want to give something back. They know they didn’t -- look, if you’ve been successful, you didn’t get there on your own. You didn’t get there on your own. I’m always struck by people who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart. There are a lot of smart people out there. It must be because I worked harder than everybody else. Let me tell you something -- there are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there.

If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business -- you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn’t get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.

The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together.

"You Olympians, however, know you didn't get here solely on your own power," Romney said after congratulating the athletes. "For most of you, loving parents, sisters or brothers, encouraged your hopes, coaches guided, communities built venues in order to organize competitions. All Olympians stand on the shoulders of those who lifted them."

they're saying the EXACT same thing

[jmervyn]

lol, have you actually *listened* to what he said? You want to believe these lies.

Yes, I have, but why do I want to believe Obama's lies? Even the claim that the Gov't invented the Internet is false.

Anyroad, I love the way you have absolutely no defense or answer for this other than to rock back & forth like an autistic child repeating, "That's not what he said!" in the face of recorded evidence.

You are the only person on the OTF I've ever conversed with (with the possible exception of Johnny) that jumps straight to the insults, Red-baiting, and name calling.

See, the problem is that you take <fact> (socialist, leftist, infanticide, anti-Christian, anti-Semitic &c.) as insult. People such as yourself don't LIKE those factual labels, because they're like sunshine. I'm not actually saying that people like you are happy little Brownshirts, only that what you believe in leads eventually to that destination. Much better to claim tolerance and then bury the long knives in others' backs - or smash the windows.

Your a grown ****ing man, have some self-respect.

How in the world is my self-respect linked to recognizing the essence of your beliefs & behaviors?

but your style of extreme polarization is what keeps everyone in this country from realizing that we actually agree on way more than we disagree on.

Oh, that's rich. My "style of extreme polarization" is pretty much my vaudevillian interpretation of the Left's general social outlook on all issues, as expressed through pretty much all media outlets. Consider your beliefs about religion, abortion, health care, the TEA Party, or other hot-button issues, but then just try to expand your mind enough to recognize that you are far & away more hate-filled about these than I. <I'm> putting on an act, simply drawing attention to your sacred cows. You really believe that anyone who's got an opposing belief is somehow... evil.

You are one of their spokesmen. Take a bow.

Whereas you support Obama and can find no wrong with him, EVEN WHEN HE REPEATEDLY SPOUTS MARXIST DOGMA. "Democratic representative government", given the most secretive, most corrupt, and most "imperial" presidency in recent history? Who's the blind one here?

they're saying the EXACT same thing

For that to be true (which is not the case), Romney would have to be claiming that the Olympians didn't really win their medals, and that someone else made that happen. Discounting that part, the frame of reference for Romney is people playing games with the emotional support of their friends or family. The frame of reference for Obama is that no commercial sector would be possible without Gov't. Obama has expressed his view that business is essentially parasitic on more than one occasion; this is simply the first time it's been recognized in a juicy sound byte. As above, who's being dense here?

EDIT - P.S. Romney didn't precede the comment by sneering at the athletes. Obama does.

[krischan]

See, the problem is that you take <fact> (socialist, leftist, infanticide, anti-Christian, anti-Semitic &c.) as insult.

They aren't facts. It's actually the other way around. You pretend that these insults are facts and often apply circle logic with them or a reverse chain of logic. For example, you don't have to be a socialist to support certain measures of a state just because typical socialists support them, but that's what you are doing a lot.

May I should end each of my postings with "Bismarck was no socialist" when addressing you

[jmervyn]

They aren't facts. It's actually the other way around. You pretend that these insults are facts and often apply circle logic with them or a reverse chain of logic. For example, you don't have to be a socialist to support certain measures of a state just because typical socialists support them, but that's what you are doing a lot.

That's nonsensical. If someone believes in a deity, they are a deist. If someone believes in the divinity of Christ, they are a Christian. If someone does not believes in eating meat, they are a vegan (even if they <do> eat meat). Why then, if they believe in collective social solutions, are they not a socialist?

If not socialist, what? Again, your argument is one that presupposes you can stay a little bit pregnant. Your belief is that collectivizing solutions somehow is not socialistic - "collectivism" has an even worse connotation.

"Father, how many legs would this calf have, calling the tail a leg? 'Why five, my son.' 'No, father, he can not. He would have only four.' 'Why, calling the tail a leg, you said, my boy.' 'Ah father! but calling the tail a leg, does not make it so, you know.'

May I should end each of my postings with "Bismarck was no socialist" when addressing you

Maybe I should let you, for all the world to see. You seem to imagine that in referring to (his own term) Der Staatssozialismus, by using the prefix of "State", it somehow negates the obvious applicability of the suffix "socialism". Sure, you can argue the shades of socialism and which ones have an iron boot versus a velvet slipper, but you're whistling past the graveyard if you think they're not all the same con in the long run.

[krischan]

A little bit pregnant? You are talking to the uncrowned kind of wordplays, you cannot win! I'm pretty sure that there are more people than socialists and anti-socialistists, just like there are more places on our planet than the north pole and the south pole, but that depends on your definition of a pole.

Using the term socialism in some manner doesn't make somebody a socialist. You really think Bismarck regarded himself as a socialist? Or is it just W.H. Dawson who believes that he was one? BTW, I have no problem if there was a small socialist within Bismarck, I'm just surprised that you can live with him being like that, as I expected that he's your natural ally with respect to fighting socialism .

[jmervyn]

I'm pretty sure that there are more people than socialists and anti-socialistists, just like there are more places on our planet than the north pole and the south pole, but that depends on your definition of a pole.

I already answered this, but I'll do it again using your claim - you're either a Southerner or a Northerner, by default. Just like there are 10 kinds of people in the world; those who understand binary and those who don't.

Belief that collectivized solutions are... well, solutions, makes one a socialist. Just because TEA Party types, principally the Libertarian ones, don't like them does not make them Anarchists, but it <does> mean they regard them as necessary evils to be weakened and torn to the smallest, most manageable scraps possible.

Using the term socialism in some manner doesn't make somebody a socialist. You really think Bismarck regarded himself as a socialist?

Yup, just as the Chinese regard themselves as Capitalist. He was not a Marxist, obviously (and Dawson was a fan of his); he certainly didn't want the SDP to overthrow society but particularly didn't want to rock the aristocratic establishment or commercial interests. As I understand it he was faced with a significant population of angry proles, and since he didn't want to risk something like what eventually happened with the Russian revolution (though his frame of reference was probably what happened in France much earlier). He saw onerous taxation and pseudo-privatized solutions as a middle road, with the expressed purpose of keeping the proles quiet and not Marxist-anarchist.

BTW, I have no problem if there was a small socialist within Bismarck,

Flip-flop much?

I'm just surprised that you can live with him being like that, as I expected that he's your natural ally with respect to fighting socialism .

FDR worked with Uncle Joe, so why shouldn't I endorse B's views? Likewise, Tony Blair did the "right thing" in Iraq and Afghanistan (as did G.W. Bush) even though they got reamed for it, yet Blair was a leftie squish like Hillary Clinton. Llad12 once called me "Wilsonian" because I support the concept of military intervention in the national interest, yet Wilson was a strong proponent of State Socialism; I believe Joe Lieberman is about as close to a just and honorable individual as can be found near Washington D.C. yet he's about as left-wing liberal as they come. Just because one agrees when someone else does the "right" thing doesn't mean they're lock-step with all their beliefs.

I suspect, though I'm not versed enough on European politics at that time, that the Marxists were an open threat to the establishment, and despite the grotesque hypocrisy displayed by Karl himself, the belief's seduction was pulling at German working class society in a significant enough way that people at the top were worried. One can argue that a Marxian revolution would have been better than State Socialism, but that would be pretty difficult to support IMO.

[LozHinge the Unhinged]

Blair - a leftie <smirk>



No, no ... carry on

[jmervyn]

Blair - a leftie <smirk>



No, no ... carry on

Seriously, he's obviously on the left side - Labour is hardly a conservative constituency, regardless of his co-opting many of the Tories' platform items. He's just not been strong-armed into triangulation like Clinton was, and the New Left in Britain (Social Democrats? I forget) hate him all the more for it (and blame Bush as the brilliant moron who "made" him do so).

We talked about his missus, remember? "I'm probably the only person in the country who insists my husband is a socialist." They sure didn't meet at an Evangelical Christian rally, no matter his new zeal...

[LozHinge the Unhinged]

Anyone to the right of Marx is a right-wing fascist. If you find someone further to the left of Marx, then Karl himself becomes a righty. Politics can be represented as a kind of number-line, like the one they taught you in kindergarten. It really is that simple. *cough*

Whatever, here's my definition of a Righty: greedy, uses people under him to better his own position, wants to club the trade unions back into the Stone Age, uses his position to help his kind, his chums, on the right.
And a Lefty: greedy, uses people under him to better his own position, wants to club "The Rich" back into the Stone Age, uses his position to help his kind, his chums, on the Left.

As you can see, the Right and the Left have nothing whatsoever in common.

Those are my definitions, the salient points. Any other "important" issues that you may notice in politics are simply irrelevant window-dressing designed to confuse the unwary (yes, that means you too, merv).