DC Tom Posted January 28, 2005 Posted January 28, 2005 No, it's like bashing the KKK for the behavior of David Duke. I never mentioned Democrats and I'm not talking about people in politics. I'm talking about far left wing radicals in this country who have poisoned our educational system and who consistently cater to those who take extreme anti-US positions without any justification or rationale (see DCTom's post for a good dissection of this guy's bull sh--). As for the percentage of liberals who agree with him, I can't say, but apparently it's pretty high. What is the percentage who have expressed outrage over this? Where were the moderate liberals when the decision was made to invite this guy to speak at a college thousands of miles away from his own? Seriously, do you want your child being taught by this guy? 221601[/snapback] No, no, no. My post was strictly about the guy's heinous logic alone, and as such, it was strictly non-partisan. And from a partisan standpoint: the guy's an extremist, and no more representative of the mainstream liberal viewpoint than Pat Robertson is of the mainstream conservative viewpoint or al-Zarqawi is of the mainstream Islamic viewpoint. That's why they're called extremists.
Guest RabidBillsFanVT Posted January 28, 2005 Posted January 28, 2005 Well, that was my point. Not only is no one lambasting this guy, more importantly no one is lambasting the school who invited him, which says to me that the entire school is complicit in his appearance. I completely agree with you about extremists. But from what I've seen, the extremists in our educational system tilt to the far left about 90% of the time. I remember once in high school I wrote a paper for an Ethics class and was given a D by the lefty instructor. (I always got As on written assignment in school). She clearly graded it on my POV rather than on the merits of my argument. To test that theory on the next assignment I took a POV that matched her own and received an A. And it's only gotten worse since the 80s. 221630[/snapback] Well I can totally agree with you on that subject... It is a culture based on lack of reality, and a strategy that stifles knowledge. I have a particular disdain for English teachers, especially because they tend to be very narrow-minded in their choice of great works, biased either toward English and American authors, or go WAAAAAY the other way just to be super diverse. Nothing is simple anymore... it is frustrating..
Guest RabidBillsFanVT Posted January 28, 2005 Posted January 28, 2005 Good luck with that. The extreme left propogates the extreme right and vice versa. 221631[/snapback] True! So very true... it is like a war, and I am in the middle of it most of the time. Maybe I don't speak out against a lot of the liberal stupidity because a lot of guys on here do that for me, so I tend to point out the other side a lot more. It NEVER means I think those liberal nut jobs who slash tires or chain themselves to boats or paint fur are good, because the answer is a HUGE NO!!
KD in CA Posted January 28, 2005 Posted January 28, 2005 No, no, no. My post was strictly about the guy's heinous logic alone, and as such, it was strictly non-partisan. And from a partisan standpoint: the guy's an extremist, and no more representative of the mainstream liberal viewpoint than Pat Robertson is of the mainstream conservative viewpoint or al-Zarqawi is of the mainstream Islamic viewpoint. That's why they're called extremists. 221638[/snapback] I know...not dragging you down into the slop. I only referenced your post since you pointed out the lack of merit in his logic and thus his arguement. I wasn't referencing you regarding POV.
BuckeyeBill Posted January 28, 2005 Posted January 28, 2005 Tell the families... the widows and widowers... tell the fatherless and motherless children, that their mommy or daddy had to die, and that it was justified. Let me see that Churchill jerk tell that to them.
OGTEleven Posted January 28, 2005 Posted January 28, 2005 REALLY? I totally disagree. There are THOUSANDS of conservative fundamentalists who believe that all abortion doctors, women who get abortions, and homosexuals should die. They are out there, and they are scary! It doesn't matter how they die to them, whether by 9/11, mob violence, etc... as long as they do... LOOK: Fundamentalist nuts and their views Ohh, and here is more vicious rhetoric from nut jobs who like AIDS deaths, etc.. Homosexuals die and they love it... These people are about as Christian as Al Qaeda is MUSLIM. A JOKE. 221622[/snapback] Sorry. I misread your original post. I thought you said that some believed all the people who did die were abortion doctirs, etc.....
John Adams Posted January 28, 2005 Posted January 28, 2005 As for the percentage of liberals who agree with him, I can't say, but apparently it's pretty high. 221601[/snapback] Really? You base that conclusion on... What is the percentage who have expressed outrage over this? Is it the liberal's duty to, as a group, call out all the wackos? Where were the moderate liberals when the decision was made to invite this guy to speak at a college thousands of miles away from his own? On the right, the mainstream politicians (Bush) go the wacky (Bob Jones U) schools, instead of vice versa. Where was the right wing outrage? I'm outraged at the lack of right wing outrage when this happened. Outrageous. Seriously, do you want your child being taught by this guy? Well, my children will choose their own courses. If they want to take a class from a wackadoo, that will be up to them. Hopefully they will make better decisions than that.
Mickey Posted January 28, 2005 Posted January 28, 2005 Yeah, people deserved to die because they happened to work in a tall building. Great logic. You know, freedom of speech is wonderful, but it's pretty obvious that this guy has only been invited to speak as a result of his 9-11 comments. These jerkoffs at the college in NY picked him just to piss people off. And the liberals wonder why we hate them...... 221570[/snapback] Actually, most of the students and faculty protesting this guy speaking at Hamilton are in fact liberals. Too bad you hate them. Did it ever occur to you that they invited him so that his point of view could be exposed for the stupidity that it is? The whole purpose may very well be to create an opportunity to ridicule and discredit this fool.
KD in CA Posted January 28, 2005 Posted January 28, 2005 Actually, most of the students and faculty protesting this guy speaking at Hamilton are in fact liberals. Too bad you hate them. Did it ever occur to you that they invited him so that his point of view could be exposed for the stupidity that it is? The whole purpose may very well be to create an opportunity to ridicule and discredit this fool. 221924[/snapback] I doubt it. The easiest way to discredit fools is to ignore them. They have done the opposite.
Mickey Posted January 28, 2005 Posted January 28, 2005 No, it's like bashing the KKK for the behavior of David Duke. I never mentioned Democrats and I'm not talking about people in politics. I'm talking about far left wing radicals in this country who have poisoned our educational system and who consistently cater to those who take extreme anti-US positions without any justification or rationale (see DCTom's post for a good dissection of this guy's bull sh--). As for the percentage of liberals who agree with him, I can't say, but apparently it's pretty high. What is the percentage who have expressed outrage over this? Where were the moderate liberals when the decision was made to invite this guy to speak at a college thousands of miles away from his own? Seriously, do you want your child being taught by this guy? 221601[/snapback] If you meant "far left wing radicals" then it might have been a good idea to say "far left wing radicals" as opposed to "liberals" which is the word you actually used and which certainly is a far more broad and encompassing term than "far left wing radical". Why do you say the percentage of liberals who agree with him is "apparently...pretty high"??? Please cite your source for that conclusion. Pretty much the entire campus is up in arms over this, is that not enough? They are college students so we can assume that they are all liberals, right?
Mickey Posted January 28, 2005 Posted January 28, 2005 Well, that was my point. Not only is no one lambasting this guy, more importantly no one is lambasting the school who invited him, which says to me that the entire school is complicit in his appearance. I completely agree with you about extremists. But from what I've seen, the extremists in our educational system tilt to the far left about 90% of the time. I remember once in high school I wrote a paper for an Ethics class and was given a D by the lefty instructor. (I always got As on written assignment in school). She clearly graded it on my POV rather than on the merits of my argument. To test that theory on the next assignment I took a POV that matched her own and received an A. And it's only gotten worse since the 80s. 221630[/snapback] I haven't heard the President "lambaste" him so using your logic, I guess he must support Ward Churchill's lunatic point of view. The campus is going crazy over this, professors and students. The school's public statement saying that they hope that all who disagree with this nut show up and make their opinions known clearly illustrates their motive here. They want to provide an opportunity for this idiot to be confronted and shown to be just what he is. What they are "complicit" in is setting this guy up for the public flogging he so richly deserves. Hamilton College draws most of its students from the NYC area. This creep is from Colorado. They couldn't drag him by his pony tail to get intellectually pilloried by the people who suffered most on 9/11 so instead, they invited him to speak. Pretty clever don't you think?
Mickey Posted January 28, 2005 Posted January 28, 2005 I doubt it. The easiest way to discredit fools is to ignore them. They have done the opposite. 221928[/snapback] They want to publicly flog him. This was the best way to get him to put his own head into the stocks.
boomerjamhead Posted January 28, 2005 Posted January 28, 2005 If you meant "far left wing radicals" then it might have been a good idea to say "far left wing radicals" as opposed to "liberals" which is the word you actually used and which certainly is a far more broad and encompassing term than "far left wing radical". Why do you say the percentage of liberals who agree with him is "apparently...pretty high"??? Please cite your source for that conclusion. Pretty much the entire campus is up in arms over this, is that not enough? They are college students so we can assume that they are all liberals, right? 221932[/snapback] I guess your definitions would matter here if the liberals in the DNC made any attempt to distance themselves from the far left wing radicals in the DNC. It's only going to get worse for you guys when Howard Dean become chairman. Who are the far left wing radicals in the DNC? The progressives. I know, I know, Republicans - blah, blah, blah....
Guest RabidBillsFanVT Posted January 28, 2005 Posted January 28, 2005 Sorry. I misread your original post. I thought you said that some believed all the people who did die were abortion doctirs, etc..... 221681[/snapback] Ahhh... no big deal.
Mickey Posted January 28, 2005 Posted January 28, 2005 I guess your definitions would matter here if the liberals in the DNC made any attempt to distance themselves from the far left wing radicals in the DNC. It's only going to get worse for you guys when Howard Dean become chairman. Who are the far left wing radicals in the DNC? The progressives. I know, I know, Republicans - blah, blah, blah.... 221953[/snapback] Right, all democrats are far left wing radicals, blah, blah blah. Howard Dean cut taxes in Vermont and balanced its budget while reducing its overall debt. He was so much of a fiscal conservative that he earned the nickname, "the frugal crusader". Like President Bush and Vice President Cheney, he favors civil unions for homosexual couples. His brother, a CIA agent, was caught in the Mekong River by communists in 1974 and executed. He went to Laos in 2002 to try and find his body. Yeah, he is a "far left wing radical". Isn't that the automatic label for anyone who opposed the invasion of Iraq?
Guest RabidBillsFanVT Posted January 29, 2005 Posted January 29, 2005 Right, all democrats are far left wing radicals, blah, blah blah. Howard Dean cut taxes in Vermont and balanced its budget while reducing its overall debt. He was so much of a fiscal conservative that he earned the nickname, "the frugal crusader". Like President Bush and Vice President Cheney, he favors civil unions for homosexual couples. His brother, a CIA agent, was caught in the Mekong River by communists in 1974 and executed. He went to Laos in 2002 to try and find his body. Yeah, he is a "far left wing radical". Isn't that the automatic label for anyone who opposed the invasion of Iraq? 221992[/snapback] I know Howard Dean, and he is a man to be trusted, a man of common sense... in fact, our two Independent congressmen from Vermont are also like that. I find it LAUGHABLE that they can be called radicals because they ALL THREE voted against the war, and ALL THREE are very involved in making sure military members are taken care of... objecting to the war was the ultimate way of saying, "No, Mr. President, you will NOT send our men to fight for no good reason!" Howard Dean will never be elected now for high office, because he is not the smooth, calculating, misleader that a lot of people who run are these days. VERY ODD that men like Theodore Roosevelt and Andrew Jackson, men that were very energetic and passionate, were elected handily, and they were never cast into the category of loony for expressing their emotions. Just a sad nation we live in now, I guess...
boomerjamhead Posted January 29, 2005 Posted January 29, 2005 I know Howard Dean, and he is a man to be trusted, a man of common sense... in fact, our two Independent congressmen from Vermont are also like that. I find it LAUGHABLE that they can be called radicals because they ALL THREE voted against the war, and ALL THREE are very involved in making sure military members are taken care of... objecting to the war was the ultimate way of saying, "No, Mr. President, you will NOT send our men to fight for no good reason!" Howard Dean will never be elected now for high office, because he is not the smooth, calculating, misleader that a lot of people who run are these days. VERY ODD that men like Theodore Roosevelt and Andrew Jackson, men that were very energetic and passionate, were elected handily, and they were never cast into the category of loony for expressing their emotions. Just a sad nation we live in now, I guess... 222463[/snapback] Yeah, Jumping Jim Jeffords has a track record of being an independant. Well, independant after he approved of the first round of Bush's tax cuts... Do you even remember the events that led up to Dashcle taking control of the Senate? Do you even remember the election of 2002 where the Dems had their asses handed to them, and Daschle lost his clout? How about Daschle's 2004 re-election bid? You are nothing more than a "headline parrot." Your typing is way faster than your brain bro. You should try to fix that. But you know way more than me... because you are from New England, or whatever. The thing that sucks is that you dumb !@#$ anti war a-holes can't see beyond your own blinders. Case point is your response to Mickey here who is a staunch liberal, but also claims to support OIF. And yes... I can't wait until my unit gets the call again. Maybe you were uneasy in theater, but I sure as hell wasn't.
Guest RabidBillsFanVT Posted January 29, 2005 Posted January 29, 2005 Yeah, Jumping Jim Jeffords has a track record of being an independant. Well, independant after he approved of the first round of Bush's tax cuts... Do you even remember the events that led up to Dashcle taking control of the Senate? Do you even remember the election of 2002 where the Dems had their asses handed to them, and Daschle lost his clout? How about Daschle's 2004 re-election bid? You are nothing more than a "headline parrot." A headline parrot? haha! What does this have to do with the vote against the Iraqi War? NOTHING... you are just upset that he left the Republicn Party, because he recognizes its failure to represent Vermont. Your typing is way faster than your brain bro. You should try to fix that. But you know way more than me... because you are from New England, or whatever. That is right, a New Englander... a fact that I am VERY proud of. It is one of the few places left where Republican and Democrat can live together without ripping each other apart. And I like my brain... at least I use it most of the time!!! The thing that sucks is that you dumb !@#$ anti war a-holes can't see beyond your own blinders. Case point is your response to Mickey here who is a staunch liberal, but also claims to support OIF. We can seem to agree and disagree together without calling each other a-h*le or dumb or lemming... however, STILL there seems to be people here who would rather throw out the name calling. I wonder what category YOU fall under! And yes... I can't wait until my unit gets the call again. Maybe you were uneasy in theater, but I sure as hell wasn't. 222474[/snapback] Good.... I will ALWAYS do what I am told under lawful orders, but that NEVER, EVER takes away the right I have to express how I feel. If the government is giving us the shaft, then they will hear about it one way or another! That's America.. that's why we FLY the flag in the first place!!!!! Slogans like 'Support the Troops' and flag-waving is NEVER enough!!! RESPONSIBLITY is another facet of patriotism that you seem to cast off as unnecessary. Now who's wearing blinders?
RuntheDamnBall Posted January 29, 2005 Posted January 29, 2005 Yeah, people deserved to die because they happened to work in a tall building. Great logic. You know, freedom of speech is wonderful, but it's pretty obvious that this guy has only been invited to speak as a result of his 9-11 comments. These jerkoffs at the college in NY picked him just to piss people off. And the liberals wonder why we hate them...... 221570[/snapback] I'm sorry, I wouldn't associate with this !@#$ in a million years. Shall we hold you responsible for everything stupid Pat Buchanan has said in his lifetime? Generalizations are fun and easy roadblocks to any effective solutions. March on.
boomerjamhead Posted January 30, 2005 Posted January 30, 2005 A headline parrot? haha! What does this have to do with the vote against the Iraqi War? NOTHING... you are just upset that he left the Republicn Party, because he recognizes its failure to represent Vermont. 222503[/snapback] The best thing he ever did for the Republican party was to leave it. Upset? Hardly. I mean, I tried to point out to you how well the 2002 midterms went for the Republicans, but that point went way over your head. I even tried to point out the gains made in 2004, but that went screeching by as well. Tom Daschle's hero is Jumpin Jim, maybe you should look up Daschle's biography some time. It might even save you a little embarrassment. Have it your way, but I would recommend taking off those blinders every once in a while.
Recommended Posts