PDA

View Full Version : Charles Krauthammer: "The people are stupid. Republicans are bad"


revefsreleets
02-07-2010, 10:04 PM
I'd have said Krauth was wrong maybe 4-5 years ago, but these are pretty much the two main planks of the Democratic platform , now....The opinions expressed on this board prove this to me on a daily basis...

Particularly interesting: A few years ago, if you bashed Bush you were "Patriotically dissenting". Now, if you criticize Obama (who is doing a far WORSE job), you're an ignorant partisan hate and panic monger.

http://www.ohio.com/editorial/commentary/83746242.html

Peasants in revolt By Charles Krauthammer
Wsshington Post

Published on Sunday, Feb 07, 2010





WASHINGTON: ''I am not an ideologue,'' protested President Obama at a gathering with Republican House members last week. Perhaps, but he does have a tenacious commitment to a set of political convictions.


Compare his 2010 State of the Union to his first address to Congress a year earlier. The consistency is remarkable. In 2009, after passing a $787 billion (now $862 billion) stimulus package, the largest spending bill in galactic history, he unveiled a manifesto for fundamentally restructuring the commanding heights of American society health care, education and energy.



A year later, after stunning Democratic setbacks in Virginia, New Jersey and Massachusetts, Obama gave a stay-the-course State of the Union address (a) pledging not to walk away from health-care reform, (b) seeking to turn college education increasingly into a federal entitlement, and (c) asking again for cap-and-trade energy legislation. Plus, of course, another stimulus package, this time renamed a ''jobs bill.''



This being a democracy, don't the Democrats see that clinging to this agenda will march them over a cliff? Don't they understand Massachusetts?
Well, they understand it through a prism of two cherished axioms: (1) The people are stupid and (2) Republicans are bad. Result? The dim, led by the malicious, vote incorrectly.



Liberal expressions of disdain for the intelligence and emotional maturity of the electorate have been, post-Massachusetts, remarkably unguarded. New York Times columnist Charles Blow chided Obama for not understanding the necessity of speaking ''in the plain words of plain folks,'' because the people are ''suspicious of complexity.'' Counseled Blow: ''The next time he gives a speech, someone should tap him on the ankle and say, 'Mr. President, we're down here.' ''
A Time magazine blogger was even more blunt about the ankle-dwelling mob, explaining that we are ''a nation of dodos'' that is ''too dumb to thrive.''



Obama joined the parade in the State of the Union address when, with supercilious modesty, he chided himself ''for not explaining it (health care) more clearly to the American people.'' The subject, he noted, was ''complex.'' The subject, it might also be noted, was one to which the master of complexity had devoted 29 speeches. Perhaps he did not speak slowly enough.



Then there are the emotional deficiencies of the masses. Nearly every Democratic apologist lamented the people's anger and anxiety, a free-floating agitation that prevented them from appreciating the beneficence of the social agenda the Democrats are so determined to foist upon them.



That brings us to Part 2 of the liberal conceit: Liberals act in the public interest, while conservatives think only of power, elections, self-aggrandizement and self-interest.


It is an old liberal theme that conservative ideas, being red in tooth and claw, cannot possibly emerge from any notion of the public good. A 2002 New York Times obituary for philosopher Robert Nozick explained that the strongly libertarian implications of Nozick's masterwork, Anarchy, State, and Utopia, ''proved comforting to the right, which was grateful for what it embraced as philosophical justification.'' The right, you see, is grateful when a bright intellectual can graft some philosophical rationalization onto its thoroughly base and self-regarding politics.


This belief in the moral hollowness of conservatism animates the current liberal mantra that Republican opposition to Obama's social democratic agenda which couldn't get through even a Democratic Congress and powered major Democratic losses in New Jersey, Virginia and Massachusetts is nothing but blind and cynical obstructionism.



By contrast, Democratic opposition to George W. Bush from Iraq to Social Security reform constituted dissent. And dissent, we were told at the time, including by candidate Obama, is ''one of the truest expressions of patriotism.''
No more. Today, dissent from the governing orthodoxy is nihilistic malice. ''They made a decision,'' explained David Axelrod, ''they were going to sit it out and hope that we failed, that the country failed'' a perfect expression of liberals' conviction that their aspirations are necessarily the country's, that their idea of the public good is the public's, that their failure is therefore the nation's.



Then comes Massachusetts, an election Obama himself helped nationalize, to shatter this most self-congratulatory of illusions.



For liberals, the observation that ''the peasants are revolting'' is a pun. For conservatives, it is cause for uncharacteristic optimism. No matter how far the ideological pendulum swings in the short term, in the end the bedrock common sense of the American people will prevail.



The ankle-dwelling populace pushes back. It re-centers. It renormalizes. Even in Massachusetts.

Krauthammer is a Washington Post columnist. He can be e-mailed at letters@charleskrauthammer.com.

ricardisimo
02-08-2010, 01:08 AM
I remember coming back from an anti-war protest in San Fran that was held just before the invasion of Iraq, which was pretty remarkable, and I was very proud of how many people showed up. I met with one of my Republican friends later that same week, and he said to me, "Those people [the protesters] are just haters." I shook my head in disbelief and asked him what he meant by that. "They're haters. They just hate Bush. That's their only motivation."

I rolled my eyes bemusedly, and went through the obligatory litany: yeah, right, two illegal wars, an open attack on civil liberties, the economy in ruins, etc., etc.... none of that had anything to do with the protest, they all just hate Bush. Sure.

I reminded him about this conversation a few months ago, and I apologized to him. He was spot-on right, it turns out. Those people really did just hate Bush. That was apparently their only motivation for joining the protest march. I can't make any sense of the world otherwise.

How else do you explain it? How do you go from two to two-and-a-half wars under Obama without a peep of protest, keep Gitmo and our other overseas torture centers open, throw even more billions at bankers, ravage the economy further, refuse to raise the minimum wage, and actually make health care worse by making crappy and rapacious private insurance obligatory... How, I ask, do you do all of this without any of those same protesters breaking out their old picket signs again?

To revs point, you do it by using big words effortlessly, not needing to use a TelePrompTer, and addressing foreign dignitaries by their "proper" titles. That, in a nutshell, is the Obama (and Clinton before him) Advantage. Otherwise, both Obama and Clinton are completely indiscernible from their Republican predecessors.

As long as we're on the topic, though, people are stupid... and I do mean all of us.

MACH1
02-08-2010, 01:16 AM
I remember coming back from an anti-war protest in San Fran that was held just before the invasion of Iraq, which was pretty remarkable, and I was very proud of how many people showed up. I met with one of my Republican friends later that same week, and he said to me, "Those people [the protesters] are just haters." I shook my head in disbelief and asked him what he meant by that. "They're haters. They just hate Bush. That's their only motivation."

I rolled my eyes bemusedly, and went through the obligatory litany: yeah, right, two illegal wars, an open attack on civil liberties, the economy in ruins, etc., etc.... none of that had anything to do with the protest, they all just hate Bush. Sure.

I reminded him about this conversation a few months ago, and I apologized to him. He was spot-on right, it turns out. Those people really did just hate Bush. That was apparently their only motivation for joining the protest march. I can't make any sense of the world otherwise.

How else do you explain it? How do you go from two to two-and-a-half wars under Obama without a peep of protest, keep Gitmo and our other overseas torture centers open, throw even more billions at bankers, ravage the economy further, refuse to raise the minimum wage, and actually make health care worse by making crappy and rapacious private insurance obligatory... How, I ask, do you do all of this without any of those same protesters breaking out their old picket signs again?

To revs point, you do it by using big words effortlessly, not needing to use a TelePrompTer, and addressing foreign dignitaries by their "proper" titles. That, in a nutshell, is the Obama (and Clinton before him) Advantage. Otherwise, both Obama and Clinton are completely indiscernible from their Republican predecessors.

As long as we're on the topic, though, people are stupid... and I do mean all of us.

In obamas own words "bu bu bu but bush, its not my fault" :noidea:

But I'm to stupid to understand whats happening.

Who's obaame going to blame for Manning losing the SB. :chuckle:

lionslicer
02-08-2010, 02:39 AM
If republicans weren't so traditional, gay bashing, bigist bastards... they'd be a more acceptable party...
Thats a big reason why McCain lost, because of Palin being against gay marriage and wanting to turn the united states traditional.

Vincent
02-08-2010, 12:10 PM
<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/GdtqtfXdR-c&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/GdtqtfXdR-c&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RRRy-QlQyUw

http://s647.photobucket.com/albums/uu191/vinnyq/O-LOLsmall.jpg

X-Terminator
02-08-2010, 12:25 PM
If republicans weren't so traditional, gay bashing, bigist bastards... they'd be a more acceptable party...
Thats a big reason why McCain lost, because of Palin being against gay marriage and wanting to turn the united states traditional.

Turning the United States "traditional?" As opposed to what, exactly? And if you really think all Republicans are bigots, then you need to wake up and smell the coffee. That isn't any better than thinking all Democrats hate America.

GBMelBlount
02-08-2010, 12:30 PM
If republicans weren't so traditional, gay bashing, bigist bastards... they'd be a more acceptable party...


Who's being the REAL bigot here, friend? :wink02:

RunWillieRun
02-08-2010, 12:48 PM
http://minnesota.publicradio.org/collections/special/columns/news_cut/content_images/missmeyet.jpg


It is a real billboard.

steelerdude15
02-08-2010, 12:52 PM
I'm a Democrat and that was just a stupid comment. Here's my whole thing on the political parties. It doesn't really matter if your a Democrat or a Republican because IMO those are just names, those are just tags for someone. It really matters if your conservative, liberal, moderate, etc. To clear things up... I'm a moderate.

fansince'76
02-08-2010, 12:55 PM
If republicans weren't so traditional, gay bashing, bigist bastards... they'd be a more acceptable party...

You mean like referring to the sitting POTUS as a "light-skinned African American with no hint of a Negro dialect unless he wanted to have one?"

Oh, wait....

steelreserve
02-08-2010, 12:59 PM
Basically the Democratic Party's entire campaign for the last two elections has been "OMG, anyone but Bush," completely omitting anything about why we ought to vote for the Democrat or whether their candidate has his shit together at all. All they've been doing is trying to capitalize on people's knee-jerk reactions about Bush, and the fact that the Republicans for some reason continue to insist on appeasing the worst religious idiots. So it's no surprise to me that when they finally do throw enough crap at the wall that some of it sticks, they come in with a half-baked plan and Obama's presidency has so far reminded me of a guy chasing a bus.

Godfather
02-08-2010, 08:06 PM
If republicans weren't so traditional, gay bashing, bigist bastards... they'd be a more acceptable party...
Thats a big reason why McCain lost, because of Palin being against gay marriage and wanting to turn the united states traditional.

Obama and Biden are also against same sex marriage.

And the only policy decision Palin made on same sex partnerships was liberal--she vetoed a bill that would have denied benefits to the same sex partners of state employees.

lionslicer
02-09-2010, 01:50 AM
Turning the United States "traditional?" As opposed to what, exactly? And if you really think all Republicans are bigots, then you need to wake up and smell the coffee. That isn't any better than thinking all Democrats hate America.

I didn't say they were all like that... But Rush, Hannity, other people FOX, the conservatives that republicans look up at, and the ones liberals and independants judge as what the republican party is, they can be pretty insane about values.
Banning gay marriage? thats going against the constitution.
Banning Abortion? how can you ban abortion when you think eating animals and eggs is okay because Humans were created by God, so they must be allowed to kill and eat whatever animal they want...
And the whole islam thing... I know lately conservatives have atemption to protect themselves lately against that, but they are very anti muslim on a lot of subjects. If a muslim person has a gun, he's automatically a terrorist. Maybe he's not a terrorist, maybe he just wants to rob a bank. Not saying thats a bad thing, but they want this guy who might got to jail for 10-15 years to go to jail for life just because he's muslim and might be a terrorist. Republicans have a lot of double standards, so do democrats. I'm not saying I care for either party or I'm against republicans. I am a republican by how they would run the government, but I'm still a liberal on society values, and seperation of church and state, and fair trials.

If you are a republican, but believe no republican has ever been racist or bigost in anyway, you are completely blind. If you don't like gay marraiges because of your religion, fine, but don't go and atempt to make Gay people's lives hell because of your religion. You wouldn't like it if muslims came to your house and protested saying you are going to hell because you don't pray 5 times a day to Allah would you?


Think about it...


PS: everyone in congress is against same sex marriage, liberals just believe it should still be legal to have same sex marriage, but it doesn't have to be in a church. Churches can deny gay people all they want, but it is still legal for them to be legally married with documentation, that is what Obama and Biden believe, most liberals are like that. Republicans beleive gay marriages are morally wrong and it should be illegally and gay people that want to be married should take classes to learn how to be straight... Okay thats not all republicans, but it is some. You'd be surprised what kind of bills people in congress try to pass.

And Bush did a terrible job, most republicans even agree he did. He made his own dept, but when democrats took over congress the dept got worse, but he let it get worse. Liberals made McCain out to be like Bush because he always voted Yes on his Bills, but McCain isn't like Bush, he's just a politition who votes yes before he even reads the bills because Bush was a republican and he just has to agree. Its ignorant, and usually politions are being payed off to be this way.

Vincent
02-09-2010, 08:51 AM
Think about it...

:wtf:

Don't pass out. Yer face will be glued to your desk.

revefsreleets
02-09-2010, 09:25 AM
LOL at lionslicer.

Basically you are countering the argument that Republicans are evil and people are stupid by saying.................that people are stupid and Republicans are bad.

My gradual self-retraction from this board will be like a boiling frog...it's going to happen by listening to a few less posters who make no sense to me at a time.

You're next...

zulater
02-09-2010, 01:14 PM
Obama and Biden are also against same sex marriage.

And the only policy decision Palin made on same sex partnerships was liberal--she vetoed a bill that would have denied benefits to the same sex partners of state employees.


Not that it matters. But morally I'm unopposed to gay marriage. What consenting adults do with their lives isn't my business. And why should straight people have to bear all the burden of keeping divorce lawyers in new Mercedes? :chuckle:

But I'll never support any legislation or referendum to legalize gay marriage and here's why.

Because as soon as the majority of our states have made it legal for same sex marriage. You can bet your last dollar within a month of that 26th state falling in line. Gay advocacy groups will file a class action suit to have any church that refuses to performs same sex marriage ceremonies lose their tax exempt status.

So in effect the churces will be forced to marry everyone or no one, ergo no more Catholic weddings. Well actually that might not be the worst thing? :noidea: Sorry just a little joke thrown in. :wink02: Anyway back on subject. That's exactly what i fear will happen, because that's exactly what will happen.

lionslicer
02-09-2010, 01:20 PM
LOL at lionslicer.

Basically you are countering the argument that Republicans are evil and people are stupid by saying.................that people are stupid and Republicans are bad.

My gradual self-retraction from this board will be like a boiling frog...it's going to happen by listening to a few less posters who make no sense to me at a time.

You're next...

I counter argue everyone in this board... even if I don't agree with it, because there is always a counter arguement to something. Also I'm a masochist, not physically, but I enjoy the mental anguish of argueing with people. Even if I don't believe in the subject or dig myself in a huge hole...

zulater
02-09-2010, 01:27 PM
:LOL at lionslicer.

Basically you are countering the argument that Republicans are evil and people are stupid by saying.................that people are stupid and Republicans are bad.

My gradual self-retraction from this board will be like a boiling frog...it's going to happen by listening to a few less posters who make no sense to me at a time.

You're next...

I wonder if there's a Guiness category for putting posters on ignore? Revs is sure on the fast track to it if they got one. :chuckle:

ricardisimo
02-09-2010, 01:48 PM
:

I wonder if there's a Guiness category for putting posters on ignore? Revs is sure on the fast track to it if they got one. :chuckle:

Being on rev's ignore list is a point of pride, the way getting onto Nixon's "Enemies" list was. You're clearly not trying hard enough until rev either ignores you or mocks you.

MasterOfPuppets
02-09-2010, 01:55 PM
:

I wonder if there's a Guiness category for putting posters on ignore? Revs is sure on the fast track to it if they got one. :chuckle:
personally i don't know how people sleep at night knowing they're on "the list" .......:toofunny:

urgle burgle
02-09-2010, 01:59 PM
If republicans weren't so traditional, gay bashing, bigist bastards... they'd be a more acceptable party...
Thats a big reason why McCain lost, because of Palin being against gay marriage and wanting to turn the united states traditional.

wow, that was just breathtaking. well stated. well thought out.
glad your not being "bigited" :noidea: or "bashing", by these lovely statments.
yes, Palin being against gay marriage (which Obama also was), was the crux in the defeat. although the majority of the Country was/is also against it (not debating gay marriage).
what ever point you were trying to make, was just lost in a vaccum of nothingness.

GBMelBlount
02-09-2010, 02:02 PM
Being on rev's ignore list is a point of pride, the way getting onto Nixon's "Enemies" list was. You're clearly not trying hard enough until rev either ignores you or mocks you.

I don't why you guys are ganging up on Revs.......I've always found his posts to be cute, light-hearted and funny. :chuckle:

zulater
02-09-2010, 02:32 PM
I don't why you guys are ganging up on Revs.......I've always found his posts to be cute, light-hearted and funny. :chuckle:

You forget humble, polite, and self effacing.

:flap:

GBMelBlount
02-09-2010, 02:44 PM
You forget humble, polite, and self effacing.

:flap:

He faces himself? I didn't know that was possible.

Seriously, the reason I like revs is because he's always been nice to me and never picked on me.....

Unlike Tony & MOP who are always picking fights with me. :chuckle:

urgle burgle
02-09-2010, 02:45 PM
.............

steelreserve
02-09-2010, 03:23 PM
:

I wonder if there's a Guiness category for putting posters on ignore? Revs is sure on the fast track to it if they got one. :chuckle:

I don't think he actually puts anyone on ignore; more like loudly announces his intent to do so as an attention-getting move.

I mean, if he was really ignoring as many people as he claims, why is it that every time one of them says something negative about him, he's RIGHT ON IT. I don't think he could stand not to know.

MACH1
02-09-2010, 03:26 PM
He faces himself? I didn't know that was possible.

Seriously, the reason I like revs is because he's always been nice to me and never picked on me.....

Unlike Tony & MOP who are always picking fights with me. :chuckle:

Instigator.....:chuckle:

revefsreleets
02-09-2010, 03:56 PM
There are only a few people on ignore...

Anyway, I have been posting on MB's since probably '96 or so...I never HAD to employ tactics like "ignore". That's for pussies. However, this is a kinder, gentler, more PC-board, and it's actually more of a self-preservation measure. If this place had no rules, BELIEVE me, nobody would be on ignore, but my posts would be quite a little bit more incendiary

HometownGal
02-09-2010, 04:31 PM
Ahem. :tap:

How 'bout we get this thread back on track instead of throwing out the itty bitty baits and insults? :banging: You do realize you can be infracted for some of the comments in this thread, don't you gentlemen?

I really don't like having an itchy finger.

revefsreleets
02-10-2010, 08:29 AM
Ahem. :tap:

How 'bout we get this thread back on track instead of throwing out the itty bitty baits and insults? :banging: You do realize you can be infracted for some of the comments in this thread, don't you gentlemen?

I really don't like having an itchy finger.

It's hard to think....easier just to keep saying "Republicans bad....people stupid" and then divert and deflect attention onto me for calling attention to this continual cop-out...

HometownGal
02-10-2010, 09:11 AM
It's hard to think....easier just to keep saying "Republicans bad....people stupid" and then divert and deflect attention onto me for calling attention to this continual cop-out...

I get it, but all I'm asking for is civil debate instead of baiting, ridicule and attacking the poster instead of the post. I don't think that's too much to ask.

http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f204/NetBuM/you-can-do-it.jpg


P.S. What I (and Gary as well) are having a hard time with as of late are the people who feel the need to attack you in just about every post you make. It's gotta stop or some heads are going to roll around here. I'm not saying you are totally innocent either, but the trend we've seen around here over the last couple of months needs to STOP.

zulater
02-10-2010, 10:02 AM
He faces himself? I didn't know that was possible.

Seriously, the reason I like revs is because he's always been nice to me and never picked on me.....

Unlike Tony & MOP who are always picking fights with me. :chuckle:

In all honesty I don't dislike him either. Though I'm pretty sure he's not tooo fond of me. :chuckle:

I find myself agreeing with most of what he has to say in this forum. But for whatever reason I seem to get along better with a lot of the guys on the opposite side of the argument? :noidea:

I'd be willing to make a new start with him. :hatsoff: But I honestly don't think he has any interest in doing so. I think he's still P.O.'d at me for using large font. :doh:

St33lersguy
02-10-2010, 11:21 AM
If republicans weren't so traditional, gay bashing, bigist bastards... they'd be a more acceptable party...
Thats a big reason why McCain lost, because of Palin being against gay marriage and wanting to turn the united states traditional.

Republicans are bigots??? It's the democrats and liberals who say the most vile hateful crap, then complain when someone disagrees with one of their own. You are the bigot and so is your party of hypocrites

St33lersguy
02-10-2010, 11:28 AM
I'm a Democrat and that was just a stupid comment. Here's my whole thing on the political parties. It doesn't really matter if your a Democrat or a Republican because IMO those are just names, those are just tags for someone. It really matters if your conservative, liberal, moderate, etc. To clear things up... I'm a moderate.

Great point. Not to mention how the republican party has been infected with liberals like John McCain. George Bush was another liberal who promoted many liberal measures and who caused the recession with his liberal spending and his abandonment of free market values

X-Terminator
02-10-2010, 11:55 AM
Great point. Not to mention how the republican party has been infected with liberals like John McCain. George Bush was another liberal who promoted many liberal measures and who caused the recession with his liberal spending and his abandonment of free market values

What liberal measures did Bush promote? He cut the capital gains tax, which was a pro-business move; cut the estate tax down to 0 and cut income tax rates across the board. He was against gay marriage and supported a constitutional amendment banning it. He was anti-abortion. He supported the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and funded them despite heavy opposition. He backed and funded many faith-based initiatives. How many of those are "liberal" measures? The only major one he supported and signed into law was the prescription drug program for Medicare, which, admittedly, has been a big success so far.

I will agree that he didn't take a hard line against massive increases in spending, which along with the tax cuts are a big reason why he had a massive deficit and a recession when he left. The housing market and bank failures just kicked it into overdrive.

revefsreleets
02-10-2010, 02:21 PM
Bush was NOT a fiscal conservative. That's what landed him the RINO label.

McCain was more fiscally conservative, but, like me, he was more flexible in his social thinking. The problem is, uber-strict conservatives are usually SO unbending that anyone with a political ideology even an iota to the left of, oh, say, Pat Buchanan is subject to being labeled a liberal.

I'm a fiscally conservative, socially liberal Republican. I'm actually slightly right overall, because my fiscal views are pretty conservative but my social views are only slightly liberal.

So I offend lots of people all at once.

urgle burgle
02-10-2010, 03:32 PM
So I offend lots of people all at once.


that is a good and effective stance to have...:tt02:

and yes. bush was not a fiscal conservative by any stretch of the imagination

tony hipchest
02-10-2010, 08:46 PM
Ahem. :tap:

How 'bout we get this thread back on track instead of throwing out the itty bitty baits and insults? :banging: You do realize you can be infracted for some of the comments in this thread, don't you gentlemen?

I really don't like having an itchy finger.



I get it, but all I'm asking for is civil debate instead of baiting, ridicule and attacking the poster instead of the post. I don't think that's too much to ask.

yes... back on track. to keep this civil, instead of baiting, perhaps we should start by changing the entire thread title to reflect accuracy.

Charles Krauthammer: "The people are stupid. Republicans are bad"

after all it IS his quote. revs just twisted and misrepresented krauthammers OPINION as fact (nothing new).

i could really care less what his opinion is in some editorial piece. after all, i dont come here shoving k. olbermans opinions down you all's throats as fact.

i tried to figure out what this thread was really about. all it is is a make believe figment of ones own imagination about all democrats calling revspublicans "stupid and bad".

It's hard to think....easier just to keep saying "Republicans bad....people stupid" and then divert and deflect attention onto me for calling attention to this continual cop-out...

nobody is saying this... :tap:

the true irony, and epitome of hypocricy is that revs is the only one calling people stupid idiots. :hunch:

HTG, i know you and gary can see this just like everyone else on the board.

There are only a few people on ignore...

Anyway, I have been posting on MB's since probably '96 or so...I never HAD to employ tactics like "ignore". That's for pussies. {QFT} However, this is a kinder, gentler, more PC-board, and it's actually more of a self-preservation measure. If this place had no rules, BELIEVE me, nobody would be on ignore, but my posts would be quite a little bit more incendiary....if I didn't ignore certain idiots, I'd have been banned for blasting their stupidity years ago.

to quote hans in unglorious basterds... "thats a BINGO!"

so the entire article is a sour farce. unfortunately you cant infract krauthammer for such a baited, flaming piece, but the opportunity granted to me for a civil rebuttal is much appreciated. :thumbsup:

HometownGal
02-11-2010, 07:03 AM
yes... back on track. to keep this civil, instead of baiting, perhaps we should start by changing the entire thread title to reflect accuracy.

Charles Krauthammer: "The people are stupid. Republicans are bad"

after all it IS his quote. revs just twisted and misrepresented krauthammers OPINION as fact (nothing new).

i could really care less what his opinion is in some editorial piece. after all, i dont come here shoving k. olbermans opinions down you all's throats as fact.

i tried to figure out what this thread was really about. all it is is a make believe figment of ones own imagination about all democrats calling revspublicans "stupid and bad".



nobody is saying this... :tap:

the true irony, and epitome of hypocricy is that revs is the only one calling people stupid idiots. :hunch:

HTG, i know you and gary can see this just like everyone else on the board.



to quote hans in unglorious basterds... "thats a BINGO!"

so the entire article is a sour farce. unfortunately you cant infract krauthammer for such a baited, flaming piece, but the opportunity granted to me for a civil rebuttal is much appreciated. :thumbsup:

Title changed and revs post edited. There, there . . . OK now? :hug:

revefsreleets
02-11-2010, 08:12 AM
It's that kind of hypocritical hyper-sensitivity that prompts me to put people on ignore.

One of the MAIN reasons I started positioning my opinion as a rider on others opinion pieces was that I was attacked when I presented my own synthesized opinions, and the sensitive and easily offended were incensed and complained.

Now the sensitive and easily offended are complaining because I'm posting other peoples opinions and not my own?

Really?

Perhaps I should just submit my future threads to a board made up of Tony and his sycophantic cronies?They can either veto my posts completely, or heavily redact so they are "board worthy".

steelreserve
02-11-2010, 11:34 AM
One of the MAIN reasons I started positioning my opinion as a rider on others opinion pieces was that I was attacked when I presented my own synthesized opinions, and the sensitive and easily offended were incensed and complained.

Now the sensitive and easily offended are complaining because I'm posting other peoples opinions and not my own?

Really?

Ever stop to think that it's not a matter of whose opinion you're presenting, but the fact that in either case you come out calling everyone an idiot and generally acting like a combative jerkoff? I was always taught that if you try more than one approach and get the same outcome, there's probably a different factor at work.

You are, like, THIS close to being put on ignore.

7SteelGal43
02-11-2010, 12:02 PM
If republicans weren't so traditional, gay bashing, bigist bastards... they'd be a more acceptable party...
Thats a big reason why McCain lost, because of Palin being against gay marriage and wanting to turn the united states traditional.



Really. And what exactly have the Libs done for gays and lesbians besides pay lip service in order to win their vote ? When they are in power they simply say "we feel that's a matter best left up to the individual states to decide" knowing that time after time the states vote "no". And where is the "gay bashing" from the Republicans ? Just because their stance is "we believe marriage is between one man and one woman", suddenly that's "bashing" ?

And FYI, America always has been traditional. It's the Libs that are trying to turn it socialist.

steelreserve
02-11-2010, 12:32 PM
Really. And what exactly have the Libs done for gays and lesbians besides pay lip service in order to win their vote ? When they are in power they simply say "we feel that's a matter best left up to the individual states to decide" knowing that time after time the states vote "no". And where is the "gay bashing" from the Republicans ? Just because their stance is "we believe marriage is between one man and one woman", suddenly that's "bashing" ?

Basically, Democrats know that there are way more knee-jerk religious voters out there than there are gay people, so it's far more important to them to avoid pissing off the religious set too badly. Plus, the gay people are going to vote Democrat anyway, so why bother getting them even MORE on your side? It's not like they can vote twice.

Democrats have to go through the motions to keep up appearances of the party line, but that's about all they need to do, and it doesn't pay for them to stick their necks out. About the only gain they can get from the whole situation is by trying to tear down their opponents as bigoted and insensitive for having the opposite view. So that's where the "bashing" accusations come from. It's all just posturing decided by cold political calculus.

ricardisimo
02-11-2010, 12:56 PM
And FYI, America always has been traditional. It's the Libs that are trying to turn it socialist.

I think the record speaks differently. I think America has traditionally been a much more "socialist" place, and it's the job of both the Democrats and the Republicans to undermine that at every turn.

revefsreleets
02-11-2010, 01:17 PM
Ever stop to think that it's not a matter of whose opinion you're presenting, but the fact that in either case you come out calling everyone an idiot and generally acting like a combative jerkoff? I was always taught that if you try more than one approach and get the same outcome, there's probably a different factor at work.

You are, like, THIS close to being put on ignore.

I can't help the overly sensitive nature of people. We live in a culture where everyone must be coddled and we have to celebrate the differences amongst everyone, even when those differences amount to nothing more than weaknesses and a propensity for mediocrity, ESPECIALLY manifesting itself in a lack of critical thinking.

When people exhibit a clear lack of stark and logical thought, it's not THEIR fault, it's the fault of the person or persons who call attention to that lack of clear thought.

Ever wonder why America Idol is filled with thousands of thousands of people who CANNOT sing? Because nobody is allowed to just say "Dude, you suck. You cannot sing. Do something else". When Simon finally calls attention to the fact (and it's probably the first time a lot of these people have ever heard a critical word directed their way regarding their inability to sing), HE'S regarded as a monster. There's actually an outcry in the public forum to put a muzzle on him. He's too mean. No, he's not. He's just right.

We have to be tolerant. We have to sensitive to people. We have to tolerate and even condone failure and mediocrity. No one is allowed to fail. We have to stop keeping score at Little League games. Everyone has to play. We can't give out grades on tests.

Nonsense.

I don't give a flying eff if you, or anyone else puts me on ignore. The whole board can ignore me for all I care. I'm not going to tolerate mediocrity (or worse), and I don't need to suffer fools. Why should I?

I'm wrong. Often. Comes with the territory of being opinionated and prolific in voicing those opinions. I also don't think I'm the smartest guy in the World. But when I'm wrong I don't blame other people or scream how unfair it all is.

steelreserve
02-11-2010, 01:27 PM
I can't help the overly sensitive nature of people. We live in a culture where everyone must be coddled and we have to celebrate the differences amongst everyone, even when those differences amount to nothing more than weaknesses and a propensity for mediocrity, ESPECIALLY manifesting itself in a lack of critical thinking.

When people exhibit a clear lack of stark and logical thought, it's not THEIR fault, it's the fault of the person or persons who call attention to that lack of clear thought.

Ever wonder why America Idol is filled with thousands of thousands of people who CANNOT sing? Because nobody is allowed to just say "Dude, you suck. You cannot sing. Do something else". When Simon finally calls attention to the fact (and it's probably the first time a lot of these people have ever heard a critical word directed their way regarding their inability to sing), HE'S regarded as a monster. There's actually an outcry in the public forum to put a muzzle on him. He's too mean. No, he's not. He's just right.

We have to be tolerant. We have to sensitive to people. We have to tolerate and even condone failure and mediocrity. No one is allowed to fail. We have to stop keeping score at Little League games. Everyone has to play. We can't give out grades on tests.

Nonsense.

I don't give a flying eff if you, or anyone else puts me on ignore. The whole board can ignore me for all I care. I'm not going to tolerate mediocrity (or worse), and I don't need to suffer fools. Why should I?

I'm wrong. Often. Comes with the territory of being opinionated and prolific in voicing those opinions. I also don't think I'm the smartest guy in the World. But when I'm wrong I don't blame other people or scream how unfair it all is.

Yes, you're right, people in general have become way too sensitive for their own good, and have gone completely overboard with PC and "tolerance." Our entire society is becoming pussified, to no one's benefit.

That's completely different from what's at work here. You go around berating people all the time, and then seem shocked that they turn around and tell you to (screw) off. You can keep doing that for all I care, but don't be surprised if you mostly get bitched at whether you're right or wrong.

And no, I wasn't really going to put you on ignore. I don't even see the point of that feature. People have their own built-in bullshit filter; it's called a brain.

revefsreleets
02-11-2010, 01:32 PM
Yeah, ALL I do is tell people their stupid.

That's a complete crock of shit. In fact, it's a complete mischaracterization of this thread.

I've claimed in the past, and Krauth apparently agrees, that the Democrats think that the voting public is filled with stupid people and they also regard the GOP as evil. Somehow, that has been twisted into ME thinking everyone is stupid. Not only does it not track at all, it doesn't even make any sense. It's a complete leap, but now that it's been stated, it's now being regarded as fact.

Pretty much every time I post now, SOMEONE follows along and starts bashing me over the head over some perceived slight or other, and it's ridiculous.

SteelCityMom
02-11-2010, 01:46 PM
I can't help the overly sensitive nature of people. We live in a culture where everyone must be coddled and we have to celebrate the differences amongst everyone, even when those differences amount to nothing more than weaknesses and a propensity for mediocrity, ESPECIALLY manifesting itself in a lack of critical thinking.

When people exhibit a clear lack of stark and logical thought, it's not THEIR fault, it's the fault of the person or persons who call attention to that lack of clear thought.

Ever wonder why America Idol is filled with thousands of thousands of people who CANNOT sing? Because nobody is allowed to just say "Dude, you suck. You cannot sing. Do something else". When Simon finally calls attention to the fact (and it's probably the first time a lot of these people have ever heard a critical word directed their way regarding their inability to sing), HE'S regarded as a monster. There's actually an outcry in the public forum to put a muzzle on him. He's too mean. No, he's not. He's just right.

We have to be tolerant. We have to sensitive to people. We have to tolerate and even condone failure and mediocrity. No one is allowed to fail. We have to stop keeping score at Little League games. Everyone has to play. We can't give out grades on tests.

Nonsense.

I don't give a flying eff if you, or anyone else puts me on ignore. The whole board can ignore me for all I care. I'm not going to tolerate mediocrity (or worse), and I don't need to suffer fools. Why should I?

I'm wrong. Often. Comes with the territory of being opinionated and prolific in voicing those opinions. I also don't think I'm the smartest guy in the World. But when I'm wrong I don't blame other people or scream how unfair it all is.

Makes me think of Harrison Bergeron...it is getting close to what our society has become all about. Nobody can be better and if you are better than others, you need to be handicapped. I agree with your thoughts on this, however harsh they may seem. I'm all for caring about your fellow man, but there has to come a point where you quit worrying about hurting every single persons feelings. A lot of people in this society just need to grow thicker skin. Being offended and feeling put down by other achievements is nothing more than your own personal insecurities.

revefsreleets
02-11-2010, 01:54 PM
Also, I glanced back through this thread. I'm wondering where, exactly, I called anyone stupid?

I think Tony SAID I called people stupid. Are his sycophants and hangers-on just now unquestionably accepting anything he posts as fact now?

Steelmom, I remember reading a Kurt Vonnegut short story about our society in the near future. In order to keep everyone equal, superior physical specimens had to be encumbered with weights which leveled them off with the most inferior people. Therefore everyone was equal.

We aren't there yet, but...............

steelreserve
02-11-2010, 01:59 PM
Yeah, ALL I do is tell people their stupid.

That's a complete crock of shit. In fact, it's a complete mischaracterization of this thread.

I've claimed in the past, and Krauth apparently agrees, that the Democrats think that the voting public is filled with stupid people and they also regard the GOP as evil. Somehow, that has been twisted into ME thinking everyone is stupid. Not only does it not track at all, it doesn't even make any sense. It's a complete leap, but now that it's been stated, it's now being regarded as fact.

Pretty much every time I post now, SOMEONE follows along and starts bashing me over the head over some perceived slight or other, and it's ridiculous.

Really? Because in this thread, it looks like you posted an article, then your next post was to respond to someone who was ON TOPIC by calling them an idiot and saying you were putting them on ignore, and then every one of your posts after that has been either all or partly about how it's not your fault if no one "gets" your style.

Guess what -- people probably ARE quicker to jump down your throat than they are with other members, because you've done such an excellent job alienating half the message board by going around being dismissive and taking potshots at people all the time. And then, gee, wouldn't you know it -- this type of shit happens, and then whatever the thread is about, it devolves into you against the world, until the moderators tell everyone to cool it.

Anyway, that's the last I'm saying in this thread, because I don't want to get it any further off-topic than it already is. My apologies to everyone else for the role I've had in that.

SteelCityMom
02-11-2010, 02:06 PM
Also, I glanced back through this thread. I'm wondering where, exactly, I called anyone stupid?

I think Tony SAID I called people stupid. Are his sycophants and hangers-on just now unquestionably accepting anything he posts as fact now?

Steelmom, I remember reading a Kurt Vonnegut short story about our society in the near future. In order to keep everyone equal, superior physical specimens had to be encumbered with weights which leveled them off with the most inferior people. Therefore everyone was equal.

We aren't there yet, but...............

Yeah, that's Harrison Bergeron. We had to read a ton of short stories for English classes, but that one always stuck with me. Scary that he had those thoughts back in the early '60s. It's not quite that science fictiony yet...but I see that quality in people all too often in daily life.

7SteelGal43
02-11-2010, 03:35 PM
Basically, Democrats know that there are way more knee-jerk religious voters out there than there are gay people, so it's far more important to them to avoid pissing off the religious set too badly. Plus, the gay people are going to vote Democrat anyway, so why bother getting them even MORE on your side? It's not like they can vote twice.

Democrats have to go through the motions to keep up appearances of the party line, but that's about all they need to do, and it doesn't pay for them to stick their necks out. About the only gain they can get from the whole situation is by trying to tear down their opponents as bigoted and insensitive for having the opposite view. So that's where the "bashing" accusations come from. It's all just posturing decided by cold political calculus.



Well said steelreserve, you are correct on all counts. And it's easy to paint Republicans and Conservatives as "bashers" just because they aren't expressly for something. Like saying we don't care if people live or die just because we are against sweeping changes in healthcare the Libs are proposing.

steelreserve
02-11-2010, 03:49 PM
Well said steelreserve, you are correct on all counts. And it's easy to paint Republicans and Conservatives as "bashers" just because they aren't expressly for something. Like saying we don't care if people live or die just because we are against sweeping changes in healthcare the Libs are proposing.

Unfortunately, most political "debate" today rarely is about promoting your own ideas as good ones -- it's easier just to depict your opponent as some kind of crazy bigot who can't be trusted to drive a bus, much less run the country.

I do find it pretty comical that political leadership in this country consists largely of 60-year-old Ivy League multimillionaires trying to convince us that another identical set of 60-year-old Ivy League multimillionaires are bigoted redneck idiots whose rank on the intelligence scale is somewhere between a drunk driver and a sex offender. I don't know whether that's more ridiculous, or the fact that enough of the voting public buys into it that the politicians are encouraged to keep doing it. But the end result is that much of politics is no better than a fricking reality show.

7SteelGal43
02-11-2010, 04:14 PM
I think the record speaks differently. I think America has traditionally been a much more "socialist" place, and it's the job of both the Democrats and the Republicans to undermine that at every turn.



I'm sorry, but you simply can not be serious, ric. In the first 130 to 140 years of the United States existence, where was the socialism ? Where are any hints of socialism in our founding documents ? We were founded on individualism, not collectivism. Free market and capitalism, not welfare state. Over the years, progressive, or should I say socialist, Presidents have passed more and more socialist programs. These same Presidents could not appear to be socialist because the American people would've rejected them, cause guess what ? We were never meant to be a socialist nation.

And these Dems you say are undermining socialism in this country are the very ones who are responsible for moving us down the road towards becoming a socialist nation WHICH WE NEVER WERE !

Vincent
02-11-2010, 04:42 PM
Democrats have to go through the motions to keep up appearances...

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/1/110601_1b4cd0e430.jpg

Two prominent democrats here "keeping up appearances".

urgle burgle
02-11-2010, 06:28 PM
Unfortunately, most political "debate" today rarely is about promoting your own ideas as good ones -- it's easier just to depict your opponent as some kind of crazy bigot who can't be trusted to drive a bus, much less run the country. .

you said it well....it is much easier to demonize your oppenent than anything else. To most, i fear, it is safer that way. Prime example, Rep Ryan (who is depicted as a budget/economics wonk), came out with his own budget. His own ideas. I havent delved deeply into it, but the premise being, it was an idea. Now he is attacked by the left as being insane. Some of his proposals call for the end of Medicare and Social Security, to be replaced with privatised options. Now he is being demonized because the Right screamed bloody murder about the left trying to cut Medicate money in their health bill. Now, mind you, the right hasnt endorsed Ryans budget.
The point being, if you have an idea, and can/want to debate it rationally, talking points, demonizers, and drooling monkeys come out of the woodwork to destroy it, and by proxy you. The people want ideas. They want to discuss many options. However the politicians and the talking heads do not. Too scary and dangerous to step out with an idea of your own. So you get the demonization, becasue your too scared to come out with your ideas, have no ideas, or like the sound of your own voice.