I keep trying to tell myself that. Lol
As I read the OP, and his subsequent posts…that is exactly what i was thinking.
It really is what the RW pundits do…so, their followers do the same.
Considering what just occurred in NZ, the radical right are the dangerous ones.
I see you as a conservative, with whom I may disagree with, but you generally stay in the same reality. AKA, the opposite of the “alternative fact” reality.
No far leftists at all? Really?
Just picking out this one part of your updated strawman argument.
Care to identify this 600 billion dollar annual study?
Also, if I call you a “con” vs a a conservative…that insinuates you are like a con man. I generally do not use that term, unless it fits, otherwise, it is a mild insult.
Calling me a lib, vs a liberal, does not bother me at all. “Lib” is a shortened version of “liberal”.
Lib, does not equate to leftist. Leftist is a “radical liberal”, which is not my ideology.
Today’s radical cons, believe providing health care and education to society is radical. Not providing them is radical. Every other wealthy 1st world country does that, except us. We are the outlier.
We are the radicals.
Liberals are trying to fix that.
Great post Mr. K.
Regarding the forest/logging issue.
This liberal falls to what the science says. If the experts believe allowing controlled logging would give the forest a better chance of existing for an extended period, that would be my stance.
Your sister should listen to the experts, and not base her opinions on assumptions or emotions. Something we should all try to do.
Here is an interesting article on that subject.
The type of forest it is, is a factor in the type of logging that is best, depending on the desired outcome.
Liberals want both. Mixing the 2 in any fashion, is dangerous to both.
I think you are confusing Pastafarianism with Christianity.
After the new DOJ is done with the Barry O Admin, Clintons, Lynch, etc., etc., etc., we wont be worrying about them anymore,lol
Funny thing is the trope you describe is an old fashie trope. Since fascists do not believe in the concept of peace and they need constant warfare to keep the rubes and toiling classes in constant fear and obedient to the nation, they need an enemy that is all encompassing and a threat which requires total mobilization. Simultaneously, however because fascism is based on a rather toxic machismo and social darwinism, the enemy is made to be weak and frail for the ubermemschen to conquer. The contradiction in propaganda that fascists promote is lost when their propaganda takes the minds of the citizenry.
Thanks Guild. I have always respected your opinion even though it may be opposite of mine from time to time…Today even more so than others. LOL
25 years ago…very close to our family’s summer home and land, the forest service came in and logged out about 100 acres. I was kind of heartbroken. 10 years later you could not even tell it had been done unless you looked closely. The only difference was those trees that had grown back in the logged area were smaller than those in the forest just adjacent that were not logged. 25 years later, it is a regular forest again. And healthier than before.
What happened to the democrats and the party of JFK? They went from “Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country” to the government (Taxpayers) pays for everything and while we’re at it let’s get rid of all combustible cars, air travel, and mass genocide the cows.
If permissible wrt the TOS, and solely for the purpose of roughly aligning ideology with a given poster (not getting “personal”, whatever that means), who on here have you come to regard as a “far leftist”? In general, what does that term mean?
This may get me a timeout, but I’ll go first. I’ve used the acronym “RWNJ” on here to describe what is for me a very specific profile:
- absolutely rigid in their political thinking
- Obama could do NO right; Trump can do NO wrong
- seemingly obsessed with certain “scandals” that serve as an automatic “whatabout” for almost any criticism of the Trump administration, e.g. Uranium One, McCabe/Strzok/Page, “her emails”
- tendency to deflect from, or outright ignore, a direct question about their position on an issue
A couple of people I would put in this category are Weedhopper and Roxiebelle. I’ve given up trying to engage them in open debate.
Don’t get me wrong. An inflexible adherence to certain conservative principles such as pro-life or gun rights does not qualify as “rigid thinking”. I respect firm beliefs if they are grounded in reason.
I honestly can’t think of a poster I would similarly characterize as a “LWNJ”. Obviously I have strong filters and biases, like anyone. You might even look at my posts and regard me as one.
That’s pretty funny. Do you have a serious query?
You righties believe everything you hear on FOX about the New Green Deal? Didn’t the commie Sebastian Gorka state at CPAC that AOC wants to take away your hamburger, just like Stalin?
Please don’t make me spit out my beer with anymore funny comments.
Crude no doubt, but not exactly inaccurate.
They’ve become real bad, Barry O, Hillary Clinton and her war machine, the heads of both the FBI, CIA along with some staff members, CNN, MSNBC, ETC., colluded with one another to bring down Mr. Trump so Hillary would become the President and all this stuff we’re finding out would’ve ended up like Hillary’s emails. The Democrats just tried to do what they’re blaming the President of doing, they must be stopped or this thing of ours is over as we know it
You guys are powerless.