|
21549. concerned - 4/10/2007 3:36:02 AM Wombat -
Several errors on your part:
You have conflated originality with narcissism. You have also greatly overreached yourself and made wrongly negative statements attempting to describe anything related to my understanding of political ideology or the use of the English language. My disagreement with Coulter in this instance is more than 'mild'. I also should say that I am not afraid to be forthcoming about my beliefs and their origins, (and do so expecting only swipes such as yours) unlike most others here, presuming that they have even conceptualized most of them. 21550. concerned - 4/10/2007 3:42:29 AM Regarding what I believe to be others' ideologies, how many posting here nowadays besides myself and perhaps iiibbb even can realistically describe themselves as not being LW? 21551. Wombat - 4/10/2007 3:50:33 AM Concerned:
You wouldn't know original political thought if it jumped up and bit you in the ass. At best you are a contrarian or a controversialist, and a particularly ill-informed one at that. Much of what you write can be traced back to a collection of profoundly right-wing blogs and web-sites. You cherry-pick your sources--sometimes within your sources--the sure sign of someone bereft of original thought. Your defense of Bush administration policies in Iraq is so slavish as to be even more loyal than much of the Republican party.
Your stated difference with Ann Coulter seems to be along the lines of: "well we know Islam is based on the writings of a child-abuser, etc., but we should let them wallow in their own filth, rather than convert them to Christianity."
You have invented a world of strawmen against which you can claim originality. Since you are far from alone in this (take Fox news, for instance), what you post here is utterly unoriginal. The problem is that not only are you too obtuse to realize this, but you insist on proclaiming your independence, and analysing how great it is to be so independent. If that isn't narcissism... 21552. Wombat - 4/10/2007 3:58:40 AM Well duh, Concerned.
Most people who post here fall pretty squarely in the liberal camp, although there are certainly areas where there is profound disagreement. The difference between you and iiibbb is that he is a thoughtful and critical social and for the most part political libertarian. Most of what you post shows you to be the opposite of liberal, and neither thoughtful nor critical. Newsflash for you..the oppposite of a political liberal is not a centrist. 21553. arkymalarky - 4/10/2007 4:11:05 AM The main problem I see with Imus is that he (and MSNBC) try to have it both ways. He needs to do the Howard Stern thing or tone it down some to suit MSNBC's audience.
And I'm loving the Con'd/Wombat exchange here.
21527. concerned - 4/10/2007 1:43:18 AM
I was thinking about my MOR political attitude and what makes it unique. I think it is a melding of the most overall conservative attitude that allows most liberal approaches license consistent with human rights, freedom of speech and equality.
It's probably fair to call it a sort of radical centrism since a spectrum of political approaches inhere to it and it therefore usually cannot subscribe wholeheartedly to either end of the political spectrum:)
I love that first one, all the way down to the little emoticon, especially "radical centrism." 21554. concerned - 4/10/2007 4:11:11 AM Problem with your hypothesis is that it is wrong. I have originated none of my beliefs from what you term "a collection of profoundly right-wing blogs and web sites", most of which I have probably never seen and none of which I follow.
I rather accuse those who advocate cutting and running from Iraq of wanting to "let them wallow in their own filth, rather than convert them to Christianity." Btw, I'm an Agnostic, not a Christian. I am also free from having a LW hard-on for Christians, thankfully.
I am a more original thinker, than for instance, you are, based on every evidence in the Mote. You perhaps recall our arguments about SDI, where I ultimately was proven by developments to be correct, and you were proven wrong. The evidence of your posting here shows that you are capable of little more than attacking others or regurgitating certain historical items, the latter of which anybody can do, given internet access. These conclusions tend to be substantiated by your persistent, unsolicited personal attacks. 21555. arkymalarky - 4/10/2007 4:13:03 AM AND HEY BETTY!
It has been a Monday all day long. A post-spring-break Monday, which is the worst kind. A Monday with a Monday night class, which means home late and no unwind time. A Monday with lots of work issues, which I hate messing with. A Monday that makes me look forward to Friday already, even if it is the 13th. 21556. arkymalarky - 4/10/2007 4:15:16 AM You perhaps recall our arguments about SDI, where I ultimately was proven by developments to be correct, and you were proven wrong.
Hahaha! Keep 'em coming. This beats a stiff drink for an antidote to the effects of a bad Monday. 21557. concerned - 4/10/2007 4:18:14 AM I know that, since I don't worship at the altar of LW propaganda, I'm liable to be unfairly attacked by Wombat's ilk, who must demonize those of truly independent thought. 21558. arkymalarky - 4/10/2007 4:19:45 AM Independent thought isn't all it's cracked up to be. Charles Manson's an independent thinker. 21559. concerned - 4/10/2007 4:19:57 AM Re. 21556 -
Considering you don't even know what I posted regarding the subject, I'll take your post for what it's worth. 21560. arkymalarky - 4/10/2007 4:22:37 AM Why wouldn't I know what you posted on it? I didn't just drop in here, you know. What I want to know is how Wombat was proved wrong wrt it. That part's fuzzy, I must admit. 21562. Magoseph - 4/10/2007 3:58:23 PM Sorry, Jex, but I had to delete your post since the term you used to describe the person is not now in usage in France. 21563. judithathome - 4/10/2007 4:29:06 PM I like a centrist 'position' that can preserve a wide range of (often opposing) political opinions in its very structure. I think such is least likely to become stale or go wrong.
I agree wholeheartedly...just don't see how this applies to you.
21564. iiibbb - 4/10/2007 4:43:09 PM I think Imus should suffer the same as Mr. Zumbo... that is, if CBS wants him gone, then he's gone. The rantings and ravings of those that demand their respective heads don't really factor in.
I believe in freedome of speech, but I believe that the market decides if it wants to listen to you. If you work in the public world, your employer has a right to decide what your boundaries will be. 21565. jexster - 4/10/2007 4:59:06 PM I think you're confused..I3
The rantings and ravings of the FRENCH MOB are the market ...besides it's all a big corporate market game
Watch Imus's ratings skyrocket on his return
What a sorry excuse for "civilization" we have
IMUS BE FREE
Death to France 21566. jexster - 4/10/2007 5:04:38 PM Heads down you sex crazed dirtbags youse
....
Lord we pray that after Mrs. Imus picks up Wee Wyatt's Easter basket she has to go out shopping for the I-man's casket...
Lord hear our prayer... 21567. jexster - 4/10/2007 6:43:01 PM The PC poleees are OUT of control! CNN's got a black man - pro Imus and a ho (anti) and a black anchor..who is freely pouncing on the Imus defender...
Will anyone speak up for Don Imus?
CNN's lead...
I WILL goddammit against PC poleees ferrin or domestic 21568. judithathome - 4/10/2007 10:38:55 PM Rejoice, Jex...your new boyfriend, Mr. Birkhead, is the official daddy of Anna nicole's baby. 21569. concerned - 4/10/2007 11:11:05 PM 
|
