So, once again you prove that you are unable to have a conversation with out be-littling someone. Excelav never said anything about you, or your character, or your personal life and yet you cannot make a point with out tearing the other person down personally.

Because he's posting stupid, offensive, inflammatory crap about liberals in general that makes me mad. And why shouldn't it?

This is the stuff we have to listen to all over the place, and it sucks. There's no civics test to have a vote in this country, and that shows.

It's your problem if you can't see that.

That's just Nick's way. I find it amusing, in a weird way. The irony of preaching a "progressive" and "tolerant" view - EXCEPT what he doesn't agree with. That, he's got no tolerance - and no courtesy - for.

Anyway...




Actually, what this thread seems to show, quite nicely is that it's really very hard to paint people into neat little boxes like "Democrat" or "Liberal" and "Republican" or "Conservative."

"Liberal," "Progressive" "Democrats" (supporters of Obama) derided the Patriot Act for years and years. The fact that Obama has extended it, much to the chagrin of many liberal Democrats, shows that you can't call all liberals or Democrats "the same."

Likewise, the fact that certain Republicans and/or "conservatives" supported Bush or some Bush policies doesn't mean all "Republicans" or "conservatives" supported everything he did and are "the same."

Let's start talking about THE ISSUES, individually, and STOP talking about party lines and politics.

Do you seriously thing those that call the shots in this country at the moment care about any ISSUES? You have a jerk that now single handedly denies unemployment benefits? Who's interests is he serving? Nothing but partisan BS.

If you want to talk about the issues, fine, but then don't smear poop about courtesy.

I'm extremely tolerant of rational views that oppose mine when it's a reasonable difference of opinion. But I don't suffer fools gladly, and what ExcelAV posted is way beyond foolish. Courtesy is not appropriate as a response to goat custards being slung in your face.

As to the issues, I'm not in favor of extending the "Patriot Act" unchanged. But the Christian Science Monitor article is presenting a lot of opinion as fact. For example:



Obama "even" once claimed bla bla bla "during the Bush administration?" Who are the "experts"? The Heritage Foundation they go on to quote? The healthcare "debate" is the cause of failing ratings -as if they're unanimous - rather than the fact that we have massive unemployment and people always oppose incumbents under those conditions? And this is because of the healthcare "debate"?!

Come on. The article does go on to present the ACLU point of view, but it's still slanted heavily to the right - i.e. to the wrong.

OK, I'll bite (not that it will get anywhere but)...



NO ONE "slung a goat custard in your face."

He made a post about a political topic. A post that you disagree with (we know...).

He said ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about you, your personal character or your intellect. Indeed, he SAID NOTHING about ANYONE'S personal character, morals or intellect.

It was YOU, Nick - and YOU ALONE - that immediately dragged the discourse down into childish, personal, ad-hominem attacks on people's state of evolution, intellect and personal matters.

ONLY YOU.

I know you like to say that it was those general points that he made that YOU found somewhat offensive, and so you your directly personal and pointedly and intentionally offensive remarks in response are somehow warranted, but, as we've all been telling you, that's just not so.

Grow up. Learn how to have a civil discourse and maybe you'll actually get somewhere with people, instead of having to constantly bemoan the fact5 that you're surrounded by "knuckle dragging imbeciles" or the like.



I guess we don't know, from that little snippet you quoted exactly who they are referring to but, I imagine it's pretty much EVERY SINGLE WASHINGTON OBSERVER (other than perhaps your precious and somewhat dimented Mr. Krugman). Since there's a sh|t-ton of political analysts and pundits - Republican/conservative and Democrat/liberal, alike - who have observed the exact same thing.



Um, NO.

You're an "editor"?

Please show us where it says: ...experts cited unanimous results indicating that that a string of foiled terrorist plots over the past year combined with the Democrats' falling ratings amid the healthcare debate.."

Does it say that?

NO.

It specifically says: "...experts suggest that a string of foiled terrorist plots over the past year combined with the Democrats' falling ratings amid the healthcare debate..."

So, for those of us who don't have a simple command of the English language, the use of the word "suggest" right there means that these are just SOME of the POSSIBLE reasons. And it specifically AVOIDS any implication that these issues are definitive or somehow unanimous or even easily isolatable or identifiable.

But hey, you go on arguing with precisely what WASN'T said in the article.

And as we all know "Experts" is the keyword for "a bunch of bullshit that no one would ever go on record with follows", and the "suggests" just confirms that.

Thanks, Mark!

I try.



Joe, that may be true but, in the instance in question, I don't know why Nick (or you?) would really try and dispute what is implied to "the experts" here, namely:

That the Obama administration is having a tough time in the polls right now and that is in part due to the nation's frustration with the Health Care issue. Direct data shows it. You don't need vague references to "expert suggestions" to make the point.

Many in support of Obama's planned healthcare reform are on record saying they are frustrated that it hasn't gotten done yet. Some of those and others are also on record saying they are displeased that it seems to be descending into a series of watered-down compromise.

Some who championed the Obama administration are finding the handling of the issues - with the President leaving it up to Congress until it was already a bad firefight - frustrating and have announced that they are displeased with the way that has played out.

Those who don't want it are naturally unhappy about the fact that it continues.

Polls pretty uniformly show (i.e. including "Democratic" or "liberal" polls - not just anti-healthcare reform polls) seem to show that the majority of American's do NOT want healthcare reform, at least not as has been outlined thus far.

Do you guys really think that it's just made up, that these are problems that the administration is facing and knows it's facing?

post deleted. conversation is lame

Goat custards:

"