A common theme among right wingers is to attack the other side while not revealing any ideas of their own. Professor Douglas of American Power is as devoted to this method of discussion as anyone I've ever witnessed. He is in an ongoing debate with my fellow Nihilist Dr. BioBrain about who won the debate over not debating. The Professor hasn't done anything but cut and paste a couple things on Dr. BioBrains site and called him a Nihilist. I only appear at Professor Douglas' site accidentally so I don't know if he said anything of substance there or not because I quickly exit. No doubt, the Professor uses his same old trick of adding five or six posts in hopes of burying any comments that make him look like the deluded right wing fool he is.
One of my old adversaries was an expert at avoiding revealing his ideas also. He went by the moniker of "Tiger Woods." Apparently he was a good golfer. He was also a viable candidate for Congress. Thank God he lost in the primary. It didn't matter anyway because my District is gerrymandered to favor my outstanding Democratic Congressman Phil Hare.
Anyway, this Tiger fellow would challenge me to debate something. I would graciously offer to let him go first. He never would. So being the good sport that I am. And also possessing the courage and intellectual integrity of my convictions, I would go first. Tiger would respond with a withering assault on my position but in true right wing form, never offer an alternative. The one time he did he made such a fool of himself I offered to send him the code for my site so he could delete any comments he made that were as stupid. [The original post was my premise that the right used abortion to keep Evangelical voters on their side so in reality, it was the right that wanted abortion to stay legal even more so than the left. Tiger took issue with this. Then incredulously, the right wing fool said if abortion were allowed under certain circumstances, (life, health rape, incest) doctors would do them anyway so why ban abortion. It was then that I offered Tiger the codes to delete his foolishness.]
The same right wing tomfoolery is going on now with President Obama's stimulus package. We're hemorrhaging jobs. When you're bleeding, stop the bleeding fist. That's what Obama is trying to do with the stimulus package. The right has all their talking heads attacking Obama's plan while offering no plan of their own. It's typical right wing bullshit. It's not working either. Obama is still enjoying good poll numbers. One of these idiots, Jim Cramer, who attacked the Obama stimulus, is the same dumbass that told his listeners everything was fine at Bear Stearns then three weeks later Bear Stearns goes bankrupt.
I think the Right realizes they are wrong. That's probably why they avoid offering any real ideas. Just bowing their heads and saying "Ronald Reagan, tax cut and deregulate" is good enough for them.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
23 comments:
First off, they are not conservatives, you can debate conservatives. They are reactionary libertarians....
If they get any worse they will enter the whelm of quasi fascists.
I am using the traditional definition of fasicst movements rather than making an inference to Hitler or Mussoleni.
To debate you must understand not only your own position but you also must have to capacity to comprehend the others argument.
To debate requires the ability to compromise; as the purpose of a debate is to educate and learn.
There is a militancy on the right that is starting to become frightening.
To claim that one has a right to what one works for and has earned is fine but then you have to acknowledge that it is just as unfair for one to lose what they have worked for and earned due to no fault of their own.
That is the fundamental difference between true conservatives, we understand that while the 'conservatives' of today gloss over that point as irrelevant and fail to acknowledge that unfairness and injustice is a two way street.
Well TAO. You understand and have a rational (radical?) set of beliefs. Most of the "Conservatives" I've dealt with since my blogging started in 2005, don't share or have no clue what they are for. Conservative is a catchy name they call themselves. They don't know what they're for but they know they're against everything except tax cuts and deregulation. But now these jokers bash the stimulus that includes a tax cut for the middle class proving they only want tax cuts for the wealthiest. I wonder when they will realize what they are saying and ask if they can go back and delete it.
But unfortunatly for America, sound bites are more effective a tool for molding public opinion than an educated debate which you excell at TAO. Our impatience has led to the dumbing of the political process.
I have always wondered how from the achievements and advancements of the Roman and Greek era's society could find its self in the dark ages...
Sadly, I am starting to figure it out...
Yep. They have nothing to offer because their ideas have finally failed and failed big time. Reaganomics has caught up with us--thanks dickheads.
If they were in charge they'd still be pushing that trickle-down economics bullshit. Their belief is not that Bush ruined the economy but that we just needed to give his policies more time and eventually they'd work.
Just like they say that Bush will eventually be vindicated because Iraq will be stable in the future.
Oh yeah, any country will most likely improve given an infinite time line but giving credit to Bush for something that could happen in 50 to 100 years is weak.
I second Tao's assertion that you can debate conservatives. There are ideas on the Right: end the foreign wars, actually reduce the size of government, do something about illegal immigration, cut taxes across the board, and at least discuss the idea of the Fair Tax. But you won't hear any of that on Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, or anyone with power in the Republican Party.
Altogether, most who identify themselves as "conservative" don't stand for very much, or don't know what they stand for, that is, other than neverending wars.
For example, take Rush Limbaugh's stemwinding speech from CPAC last weekend. He spoke for somewhere around 80 minutes and never gave an actual definition of conservatism. He made a couple of examples of things that he considers to be "conservative," but never a definition. The bottom line of his speech was: Vote Republican.
I wouldn't necessarily say that the Republicans want to keep abortion legal more than Democrats, but it is true that those in the party establishment have no desire to see its abolition. I said as much last summer http://uncouthruminations.blogspot.com/2008/06/dont-fall-for-it.html and at least one would-be McCain voter friend of mine changed his mind over it. I believe it's time for conservatives and pro-lifers to call the GOP's bluff on abortion.
The Republicans and most "conservatives" are wandering in the wilderness. They are really acting no differently from when Bush was in office. I've said on my blog that they are like the habitually deposed Bourbons of France: they have learned nothing and forgotten nothing.
And here's an entry on a blog that criticizes the Right for not standing for anything: http://www.takimag.com/sniperstower/article/tax_revolt/
I second Tao's assertion that you can debate conservatives. There are ideas on the Right: end the foreign wars, actually reduce the size of government, do something about illegal immigration, cut taxes across the board, and at least discuss the idea of the Fair Tax. But you won't hear any of that on Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, or anyone with power in the Republican Party.
Altogether, most who identify themselves as "conservative" don't stand for very much, or don't know what they stand for, that is, other than neverending wars.
For example, take Rush Limbaugh's stemwinding speech from CPAC last weekend. He spoke for somewhere around 80 minutes and never gave an actual definition of conservatism. He made a couple of examples of things that he considers to be "conservative," but never a definition. The bottom line of his speech was: Vote Republican.
I wouldn't necessarily say that the Republicans want to keep abortion legal more than Democrats, but it is true that those in the party establishment have no desire to see its abolition. I said as much last summer http://uncouthruminations.blogspot.com/2008/06/dont-fall-for-it.html and at least one would-be McCain voter friend of mine changed his mind over it. I believe it's time for conservatives and pro-lifers to call the GOP's bluff on abortion.
The Republicans and most "conservatives" are wandering in the wilderness. They are really acting no differently from when Bush was in office. I've said on my blog that they are like the habitually deposed Bourbons of France: they have learned nothing and forgotten nothing.
And here's an entry on a blog that criticizes the Right for not standing for anything: http://www.takimag.com/sniperstower/article/tax_revolt/
Oops. Didn't mean to do that twice. Good day.
I think the Right realizes they are wrong. That's probably why they avoid offering any real ideas.
That couldn't be any farther from the truth and you know it.
I should clarify that I'm not talking about the Washington class GOP. Their idea of opposition is to take whatever Obama's planning, use some old chewing gum to stick the words "free market" onto it and hope nobody notices.
If you name the subject, I'll be kind enough to enlighten you on what a true conservative position is. And it's not just opposing everything except "Ronald Reagan, tax cut and deregulate".
Let's take the example of the BS package (what Obama mislables as "stimulus"). First, as the Democrats have almost total control, very few plans will see the light of day, so the only debate will be over how much stimulus (none) the package will provide.
Second, I've elaborated on this in a post on my blog, but my solution is simple: cut everything. I make an exception for only two items, unemployment, and the number of government jobs (as those things specifically would cause a negative impact).
Personally, I think you've been reading too many many blogs of the (right wing) tinfoil hat brigade. That would explain the ravings (the asshattery of Tiger not withstanding) and assumptions about all of us on the right (except Tao) that you employ.
Tao: Let's not be dissing my libertarian brothers now. They may be a little on the crazy, but they're still more right than the libs.
I looked at some of the sites you have linked here Joe. The company you keep is a much better class than than what The Oracle kept. I am happy you are doing well now.
You know Patrick,
I always followed the simple concept of "..if you talk the talk then you better walk the walk..."
In this sense the liberals have it easy...
But I have yet to see a libertarian leader or a conservative leader who could 'talk' and who could 'walk'
Business leaders always clamor for deregulation, less government involvement in the economy, and lower taxes and yet they are the first ones to hire lobbyists to get them special deals from Congress and they have no problem sitting in front of the bright lights of a Congressional hearing begging for money.
Then conservative politicians get on teleivison and rant about big spending government and Obama taxes...and then they return to their districts and or states and say, "...look, Momma brought home the bacon...."
Then all the rest of us sit around and blog stupid shit all day long about ideals....
Rush Limbaugh doesn't give a shit about principles....its all money to him. Its an ego trip....
I would have respected him more if he would have gone out and gotten his own drugs...but to use your maid...come on!
I also think its funny the dates of all the Democrats tax issues...seems to be all of them were hoping and praying that the new three year IRS rule would kick in.
The comments from three concientious people like TAO, Carl and Patrick proves what i've said about the Republican Party and the Consrvative label being hijacked by unscroupulous, greedy bastards that put the selfish interests of their own cabal before what's right for America as a whole.
"Conservative" has a worse connotation now than "Liberal" did in Rush's heyday.
Change the name of your movement, ideals, whatever you call whatever it is you think they are to something catchy and you will gather supporters. I suggest "Americanism." I also expect royalties. I am a Capitalist first. Liberal second.
Tao: Guess I'll just have to run for President an win then....
I posted on your fine site to come up with something other than the old "cut everything" nonsense Patrick. Any right or left wing fool can say that. Show some imagination. Put some thought in to this. What are your priorities? Defense. Education. Entitlements? Show me what you got Brother.
First of all, my concept of cutting almost everything is simple. Because simplicity is transparency.
And the whole purpose of it, and my highest priority, is to take money out of government circulation and let it go back to work in the market, where it can go to what it needs faster, and without politics.
Some details on my "cut everything" strategy:
On tax cuts, everyone sees their tax rate cut, with the biggest cuts for the lowest incomes. The only people who don't see cuts are the people who already don't pay any direct taxes. This is, in a sense, temporary, as the long term goal is to throw out the entire tax code and replace it with the FairTax.
The freeze of government spending is simple. No program gets expanded because this piles on the debt while spending money as inefficiently as possible. So every item is funded only to last year's levels at most, with some places being cut. And every government employee out there gets their hours cut to 35 instead of 40 where possible.
I'm willing to cut the military, mainly because we can scale back our bases all over the world and find more efficient ways to do everything. The only places I would not bring those cuts are active combat areas like Afghanistan (which is spooling up) and Iraq (which is shutting down). But there has to be plenty of pork to trim. The number from my lower orifice was 10%.
Social Security and Medicare are the biggest money suckers we have. So we bump the age up a year for social security. Immediately. This will keep a lot of people from tugging on the system while giving us more time to get other changes through to start ironing out the problems. Medicare is still beyond me for specifics, but I'm certain we can get 5% cut. Although I think a good place to start would be Bush's prescription drug benefit.
What doesn't suffer: Unemployment and the number of government jobs. Cutting unemployment now will starve the funds when they are needed the most. And unlike most things, this is something that people that work pay into. So I don't have a problem funding it, despite the potential for abuse (which I know firsthand). And cutting government jobs just means more people that need unemployment.
This is about as specific I can get when trying to do a big across-the-board plan, especially in a post. If you have a specific area, then I can elaborate. Plus, the kids make it difficult to write an excessively long response.
Catch 22 with Social Security and Medicare Patrick. We need the jobs freed up by retirements. Most people now put off retirement because they are too young for Medicare. A national health insurance plan as I spelled out on your fine site aleves that.
And although I admire simplicity, we are facing complex problems that require complex solutions. Banging ones fist on the table and demanding cuts makes for good sound bites but is useless when it comes to establishing priorities and solving problems.
But if it's simple you want, join me in telling Congress and President Obama we want a government that pays it's bills on time. Keep the $8 a week tax cut. If $8 a week is going to make that much difference in your life you have bigger problems that brown bagging it on Thursday because you're broke till Friday. Then Patrick and I agree that unemployment must be met in these times.
Oh yeah! Conservatives bad, liberals good.
Jane good, Cheetah bad. Tarzan, walk like Jane and smell like Cheetah.
What a crock!
You may not like my views Stone Thrower, but I will still gladly pay more to the Federal Government to ensure Veterans like yourself receive the benefits they were promised and deserve. Thanks for your service.
Hey, good news! You guys have won.
I'm a total fraud! This is the end!
I'm not sure where I read or heard the saying, "Not all conservatives are stupid, but all stupid people are conservative," but it brings up an interesting point about how conservatives are viewed by liberals.
We liberals like to think of ourselves as progressive thinkers, as problem solvers, as people of good taste and refinement, whereas conservatives are stupid, money-grubbing scum. Liberals can see the gray areas of an issue, while conservatives see only black and white and are too stupid to see the gray. Liberals view issues globally, while conservatives are just concerned with themselves and their interests and are too stupid to see how that viewpoint damages the world. Liberals are nice and conservatives are mean.
The sad fact is that conservatives have no problem with trillion-dollar budgets as long as they are in charge of the government just like they have no problem with war as long it is their war.
Look at the last three Republican presidents: George W. = dummy, George Sr. = nitwit, Ronald Reagan = space cadet. When was the last time we had someone who was both conservative and intelligent leading our country? If you listen to liberals there has never been an intelligent, conservative president. If we liberals are so smart how did we fall into this trap?
Being stupid and playing stupid are two different things. Being stupid is the only way liberals can explain conservatives, but I believe conservatives have become the blonde bimbo of political thinking and being a blonde bimbo has its advantages when it comes to political discourse.
"Dumb" conservatives are able to paint their ideas with broad, sloppy strokes, they don't have to explain details or understand nuances. "Smart" liberals are forced to paint exactly and with great detail, and because we are so "smart" we think we can. It is this thinking that gets us in trouble. Soon our leaders are trying to define "is" or are trying to explain the difference between medals and ribbons. Conservatives broadly paint these uncomfortable explanations as lies and have already won the argument. As long as we liberals continue to view conservatives as IQ-challenged we will be on the defensive rhetorically. One of the key elements in winning a debate is framing the discourse, by allowing conservatives to frame the debate we are put on the defensive and are forever explaining our point, while conservatives are never forced to explain their ideas. President Bush is no idiot, he may play one on TV, but he is sly enough to know his down-home, good-ol'-boy image pays dividends in the polling booth and when the media starts to ask difficult questions.
The liberal media portrays Bush as a lucky buffoon. He lucked into Yale. He lucked into a job with the Texas Rangers. He lucked into the Governor's house in Texas and he lucked into the Oval Office. I’m not about to give credit to Bush for being a shrewd politician or as an intelligent man, but I think it’s about time that we stopped the name calling. . Maybe it is time for us liberals to step back from our attacks on conservatives and their intelligence and see just where those attacks have gotten us. As for the creep, far ass Rush the pill popper Limbaugh, no holds are barred.
Does this mean you apologise and I'm not banned anymore Professor?
And thanks for the good comment Matt. For once, I have nothing to add.
Thank you
"I think the Right realizes they are wrong. That's probably why they avoid offering any real ideas."
Can you really believe this? Really and truly, do you?
Look, I disagree with liberals on most issues. But I certainly give them that they have ideas and believe in them.
If you want to disagree with conservatism, fine. But for heaven's sake stop your cheap shots. Make a real argument.
Tom: you're one of the few right wing bloggers I believe are truly rational and care more about America than the delivery of talking points. That's why I have you linked. It's your brethren with their labeling all who take issue with their ideas as socialists , America haters and other dishonest crap that molded me into what I am.
Now I will always be respectful when visiting your site. And you have noted we agree on more than we disagree. I enjoy your posts and hope you allow me to continue following and responding when I think response is called for.
But I am who I am Tom. My fellow "Nihilists" as we have been branded by one of the right wings most outspoken, are some highly educated, well read, high power dudes. I'm a regular guy with a little college and alot of being kicked around. I say what I feel. If somebody calls me or my compatriots America hating socialists, they're going to get the same treatment right back plus.
Post a Comment