Stitch on 11/6/2008 at 14:53
Quote Posted by heretic
That's not what I said...but in terms of what actually gets done when they are eventually elected, that is basically correct.
It's not much of a reach considering that I didn't mean that the parties are moving centerwards together, only that they are both moving to the left.
Todays Republicans are yesterdays Democrats, I'll leave it to you to discern what todays Democrats are.
Were I similarly uninformed and undercooked, that would certainly give me a lot to think about.
Rogue Keeper on 11/6/2008 at 15:44
Quote Posted by heretic
Semantic change is here to stay, get over it.
I am over it! That was my point - anarchocapitalists amuse me. :)
Aerothorn on 11/6/2008 at 16:35
Quote Posted by Stitch
I've been digging for ten minutes and haven't been able to find it. Got a link?
Sorry - I should have listed it in the original post. You're right - the thing is really goddamn hard to find - I was lucky enough to stumble upon it in the Talk section of the Wikipedia article on Ferraro.
(
http://obama.senate.gov/news/050626-when_it_comes_to_race_obama_ma/)
"Obama acknowledges, with no small irony, that he benefits from his race.
If he were white, he once bluntly noted, he would simply be one of nine freshmen senators, almost certainly without a multimillion-dollar book deal and a shred of celebrity. Or would he have been elected at all?"
heretic on 11/6/2008 at 18:52
Quote Posted by Stitch
Were I similarly uninformed and undercooked, that would certainly give me a lot to think about.
What good is being "informed" when you almost always refuse to defend your position with any form of reason, rather than offer the odd insult.
Your declarations are empty when they have nothing behind them.
Stitch on 11/6/2008 at 19:03
Quote Posted by Aerothorn
Sorry - I should have listed it in the original post. You're right - the thing is really goddamn hard to find - I was lucky enough to stumble upon it in the Talk section of the Wikipedia article on Ferraro.
That article clearly reflects a pre-election Obama, but taken as a whole it hardly contradicts his dismissal of Ferraro's statement. Acknowledging that his race elevates his story is not exactly the same thing as somebody else claiming his race is the sole reason he's winning. I'd also be curious to read
his actual words, since the article doesn't quote them.
Still, the article provides an interesting glimpse into Obama's views on race politics before he really got everything hammered down.
Quote Posted by heretic
What good is being "informed" when you almost always refuse to defend your position with any form of reason, rather than offer the odd insult.
No, just you. What you post is consistently absurd enough that it warrants little more than mocking. At a certain point the weeds are just too tall and away goes my claymore.
heretic on 11/6/2008 at 19:18
Quote Posted by Stitch
No, just you. What you post is consistently absurd enough that it warrants little more than mocking. At a certain point the weeds are just too tall and away goes my claymore.
Absurdity should be all the easier to refute, but whatever.
In the future I'll just have to avoid responding to your taunts until you seem to have grown a pair.
Stitch on 11/6/2008 at 19:56
Quote Posted by heretic
In the future I'll just have to avoid responding to your taunts until you seem to have grown a pair.
I'd prefer an awakening of awareness, but silence works, too.
Ghostly Apparition on 11/6/2008 at 22:01
Quote Posted by heretic
That's not what I said...but in terms of what actually gets done when they are eventually elected, that is basically correct.
It's not much of a reach considering that I didn't mean that the parties are moving centerwards together, only that they are both moving to the left.
Todays Republicans are yesterdays Democrats, I'll leave it to you to discern what todays Democrats are.
You think Republicans are moving to the left? After the last 8 years of the most extreme far right wing nutjob being in office I am appalled you think that.
What in Gods name do you think a neocon is? You are appallingly misinformed.
If the republicans are moving to the left at all its because in the last few special elections which they thought they would win handily for congressional seats in decidedly republican districts, they got their butts handed to them.
Most all republican senators and congressman have voted with the NEOCON Bush over 90% of the time for the last 8 years. Yeah, they're moving to the left all right.
heretic on 11/6/2008 at 22:48
Quote Posted by Ghostly Apparition
You think Republicans are moving to the left? After the last 8 years of the most extreme far right wing nutjob being in office I am appalled you think that.
What in Gods name do you think a neocon is? You are appallingly misinformed.
If you think the Bush 'Neocon' administration's stance on immigration, social policy in terms of bail-outs and welfare services, and the doling out of 100s in billions of dollars in foreign aid is "far right wing" than it is not me that is misinformed.
..but that accusation coming from someone who calls National Defense "military self-defense" is not that effective. It's a simple mistake really, but for one accusing others of being misinformed it deserves mention.
A "neocon" by the very definition is a liberal who has moved to the right. You should then understand how this has pulled the party to the left, since the transformation was not adoptive of traditional Republican values. Look at the government's growth under neocon rule for one example among a thousand. This (
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0JZS/is_5_20/ai_n25085114) article is a good, easily understood introduction to what I'm mentioning.
Edit; link +
