# Are Republicans evil? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 19, 2002, 1:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-republicans-evil/132968 "2002-10-19T13:46:57Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2002, 8:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-republicans-evil/132968/141 "2002-10-24T08:02:35Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by I am Sparticus \* > \*\* > > I still waiting for a uniter, not a divider. \*\* Please don’t even joke about that! I will grind my teeth and end up with a headache. I cannot remember in my lifetime a more infuriating lie. ---
**Author:** ![squeegee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/squeegee/32/14537_2.png) [@squeegee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/squeegee)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2002, 9:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-republicans-evil/132968/142 "2002-10-24T09:34:44Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Sam Stone \* > \*\*About that payroll tax: That money is an entitlement, and not to be considered government revenue. The money is earmarked to be paid back in the future to the people who put the money in. Cutting payroll taxes in essense means a direct subsidy for workers from the wealthy, since their benefits will still be paid. \*\* Nonsense. [You’re repeating myth](http://www.cato.org/pubs/policy_report/v20n4/myths.pdf). 1. FICA is a tax. The money is not ‘earmarked’, it goes to general revenue. I’m pretty sure I’ve heard you specifically pound the desk about there being “no social security trust fund,” which is correct. 2. The average SS recipient receives much more money than they paid in. So it’s already welfare, not pay-as-you-go. 3. The wealthy recieve SS benefits. There’s no income qualifier, it doesn’t benefit only the poor. 4. Per point one, if the government must ‘dip into’ the mythical SS fund to pay for gvt. expeditures, as seems likely to happen, and must do so because taxes on the wealthy were cut, then you’re arguably giving all those payroll taxes to the wealthy. You’ve just made a massive transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich, funded by payroll taxes. ---
**Author:** ![december](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/838e76/32.png) [@december](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/december)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2002, 1:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-republicans-evil/132968/143 "2002-10-24T13:08:42Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by I am Sparticus \* > \*\*…but the Cold Civil War started by Reagan has embittered a generation, which it was intended to do in order to depress voter turnout with increased disgust. \*\* Uh, **IAS** , the Cold War was begun in the 1940’s. President Harry Truman initated a policy of _containment_ in reponse to Stalin’s expansionism. **squeegee** , you’re on the right track, but I disagree with some of your conclusions. > [@](#): > > 1. FICA is a tax. The money is not ‘earmarked’, it goes to general revenue. I’m pretty sure I’ve heard you specifically pound the desk about there being “no social security trust fund,” which is correct. There are two components here: a. The “SS Trust Fund” b. The Unfunded Liabilty. The SS Trust Fund is a bookkeeping entitity. It’s the excess of money taken in over money taken out. The actual money is loaned to the Federal Government. So, SS Trust Fund does have assets – namely Fed Gov’t IOUs. The Unfunded Liability is the amount a private insurance comnpany would need to have in reserve. It’s an enormous amount. If SS were a private company, SS would be regarded as bankrupt and shut down. > [@](#): > > 1. The average SS recipient receives much more money than they paid in. So it’s already welfare, not pay-as-you-go. It’s not meaningful to compare _welfare_ vs. _pay as you go._ SS is regarded as insurance. It also has elements of welfare, because the poor get back reatively more than the rich, i.e., relative to what they pay in. SS is also “pay as you go” because of the unfunded liability. > [@](#): > > 1. The wealthy recieve SS benefits. There’s no income qualifier, it doesn’t benefit only the poor. Nobody disputes this. **Sam Stone’s** point was that if we eliminate the payroll tax, then SS would be converted from\* insurance with welfare elements\* into _pure welfare_. > [@](#): > > 1. Per point one, if the government must ‘dip into’ the mythical SS fund to pay for gvt. expeditures, as seems likely to happen, and must do so because taxes on the wealthy were cut, then you’re arguably giving all those payroll taxes to the wealthy. You’ve just made a massive transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich, funded by payroll taxes. This is all balled up. Unfortunately, this sort of misinformation has been used for political purposes. In fact the government has _always_ borrowed the entire SS Trust Fund and spent it on gvt. expenditure. That’s the way SS was set up. The alternative would have been for SS to build up a large investment portfolio, like a private insurance company. That was never done. Most people think it would be a bad idea. So, the remainder of point #4 is just way off target. ---
**Author:** ![Neurotik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/91b2a8/32.png) [@Neurotik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Neurotik)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2002, 1:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-republicans-evil/132968/144 "2002-10-24T13:10:51Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by elucidator \* > **They don’t teach our children much about the labor movement in America, its kind of embarrassing to have brand names like Ford associated with brutal repression. But it happened, most posters here are educated enough to know it.** Oh please, when did you graduate high school? My junior year American history class went over Haymarket square, the Pullman strike, how the AFL-CIO developed and many other things for about a week. Our standard textbook approved by the great state of CA dedicated about two whole pages to it. Which is a lot. So, unless you have a definitive cite that shows my anecdotal evidence to not be the norm, I’m going to have to say that you are talking out your ass. Just so we’re clear, I’m looking for hard numbers done by a reliable study. > [@](#): > > **They cravenly suck up to religious bigots like Falwell and Robertson, without the detestable support of such as these the Republican Party would collapse.** Cite? Remember, we’re in Great Debates here…no throwing out mindless drivel without backing it up. > [@](#): > > **The Karl Rove “No rules in a knife fight” attitude has become predominant in the Republican Party.** Why yes…this is sooooo different from the Democratic party. Ever listen to James Carville? > [@](#): > > _Originally posted by I Am Sparticus_ > **Lee Atwater had a deathbed repentence, but the Cold Civil War started by Reagan has embittered a generation, which it was intended to do in order to depress voter turnout with increased disgust.** Cite? Again, I want primary sources. And no conspiracy tales. Hard evidence. It’s probably too much to ask for. ---
**Author:** ![Neurotik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/91b2a8/32.png) [@Neurotik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Neurotik)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2002, 1:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-republicans-evil/132968/145 "2002-10-24T13:18:14Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by december \* > **Uh, IAS, the Cold War was begun in the 1940’s. President Harry Truman initated a policy of _containment_ in reponse to Stalin’s expansionism.** He’s not talking about the Cold War. He’s talking about the Cold Civil War, which I am assuming refers to the takeover of the party by far-right Reaganites and the religious right and the increasing marginalization of moderate conservatives. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2002, 1:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-republicans-evil/132968/146 "2002-10-24T13:37:43Z")
jshore: I agree that it’s a pain in the ass, but record keeping has become a little bit more sophisticated then it was in 1976. Records on real estate transfers have never been much of a problem. The main problem has been securitized assets. Now that those are computerized, calculating cost basis on securities, even those that have been on reinvestment for 50 years or more is just a matter of a few keystrokes. The same problem that existed in 1976 doesn’t exist now. Even then, it was more of an excuse than an actual reason, as we are required to do equally onerous things every year when we file our taxes. ---
**Author:** ![Debaser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3da27b/32.png) [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2002, 2:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-republicans-evil/132968/147 "2002-10-24T14:17:18Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by elucidator \* > \*\*When should one be conservative? When the situation is so excellent, so desireable, that it shoud be preserved against change. And when has it ever been thus? > \*\* Conservatives and Liberals have different ideas. Niether ideology is one of change any more than the other. The only time one can claim justly that they are a party of change is when thier candidate is running against an incumbent. \*\* > [@](#): > > They don’t teach our children much about the labor movement in America, its kind of embarrassing to have brand names like Ford associated with brutal repression. But it happened, most posters here are educated enough to know it. > \*\* Huh? When did it become the responsablility of the Republican party to “teach children much about the labor movement in America”? Well, if you would like to make a case for this go ahead. First you will need to prove that somehow children in America aren’t being taught about the labor movement. (which most certainly isn’t true). Then you need to somehow prove that Conservatives are somehow responsable for this. Good luck. \*\* > [@](#): > > And the conservatives? Go slow, can’t hinder the growth of business, can’t foster socialism/communism. > \*\* Yes. This country had never been closer to socialism than under Clinton. With Bush’s small tax cut, we took one baby step back. Would you like for the US to be socialist? Many liberals seem to argue for it, but not willing to actually say the dirty “S” word. \*\* > [@](#): > > And when, finally, after a hundred years of meaningless “freedom” black America stood up for its own, where were the conservatives. Well, its important to protect state’s rights here, can’t let the Feds dictate social policy, gradual integration and change, that’s the ticket. Go slow. > \*\* You need to go back to the civil rights movement to actually get some evidence of the “evil” of the Conservatives? Well, how about Charlton Heston? He was marching for civil rights in the early 1960’s way before it was the fashionable thing to do. I don’t see him getting any credit for that now. I see him being constantly attacked and vilified by the Left for his pro-gun stance. He disagrees with the left on an _issue_ and he is vilified for it. \*\* > [@](#): > > and the party is in the thrall of bitter cynics like Gingrich, Atwater, and Delay. They cravenly suck up to religious bigots like Falwell and Robertson, without the detestable support of such as these the Republican Party would collapse. > \*\* Plenty of athiests, such as myself, vote Republican. Also, plenty of republicans aren’t “bitter cynics”. We just _disagree_ with you. \*\* > [@](#): > > The Karl Rove “No rules in a knife fight” attitude has become predominant in the Republican Party. Is cynicism evil? Perhaps not, but it is a distinction hardly worth making. \*\* Yep, here it is. Republicans = cynics = evil. It couldn’t be that we just have different ideas about how best to run the country. The political arena is a western and we are wearing the black hats. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Dewey\_Cheatem\_Undhow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/13edae/32.png) [@Dewey\_Cheatem\_Undhow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dewey_Cheatem_Undhow)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2002, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-republicans-evil/132968/148 "2002-10-24T14:19:12Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by I am Sparticus \* > \*\*NO. NO. NO. NO. > > If Granny bought her house in 1950 for $20,000, and sold it today for more, she has a rollover deduction, one time on a home that covers most of the capital gain. I don’t recall the specific amount, but it used to be $125,000 a few decades ago.\*\* NO, NO, NO yourself. I specifically said she bought “property.” I did not specifiy that the property was her primary residence, nor did I even say there was a “house” on the property, precisely to avoid the complication of a homeowner’s rollover. My example stands. ---
**Author:** ![Dewey\_Cheatem\_Undhow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/13edae/32.png) [@Dewey\_Cheatem\_Undhow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dewey_Cheatem_Undhow)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2002, 2:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-republicans-evil/132968/149 "2002-10-24T14:26:05Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by I am Sparticus \* > \*\*Scylla, I thought that Dewey’s use of low amounts of money was bound to be horribly mis-informative. Only large estates, and badly planned ones at that pay estate taxes. By using small numbers it was suggested that vastly large numbers of estates are subject to estate taxes. Less than 1 percent of estates are big enough to be subject to estate taxes. For zero planning, any estate under $750,000 will pay zero in taxes. A well planned estate can accomplish all the objectives of the deceased and pay zero taxes for at least a generation. \*\* :rolleyes: I was trying to keep the numbers simple. Add three more zeroes onto all amounts if it makes you feel better. You said you did not understand the concept of “stepped up cost basis,” and I was trying to illustrate that concept for you. Plus, as I noted at the bottom of my post, the actual taxes recieved by the government would depend on the size of Granny’s estate and your marginal income tax rate. If Granny’s total estate, including the property, is less than the exemption amount, then the estate pays no federal estate tax. If Granny’s estate is, say, $50 million, then the passing of that property will be taxed at the highest estate tax rate. If her estate size falls between the exemption amount and the cutoff for the highest rate, it will be taxed at a rate somewhere in between. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2002, 2:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-republicans-evil/132968/150 "2002-10-24T14:27:34Z")
Debaser: Not to mention 'ole Barry Goldwater, who arguably did more for civil rights than anybody but MLK. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2002, 2:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-republicans-evil/132968/151 "2002-10-24T14:30:22Z")
Dewey: This is why I don’t try to explain these things anymore. You can’t educate somebody against their will. ---
**Author:** ![Debaser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3da27b/32.png) [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2002, 2:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-republicans-evil/132968/152 "2002-10-24T14:32:13Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by stofsky \* > \*\* > Here you go, along with the antithesis of the ACLU, the ACLJ. There are several well-funded organizations that [Jerry Falwell](http://www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/exposes/falwell/general.htm) runs through which he tries to get his all-Christian version of America to become a reality. > \*\* Nice driveby, whoever you are. You’ve contributed nothing to this thread but you stop in to spew this post at me? First of all that link is junk. It’s a 7,600 word long article about Jerry Fallwell. It mentions the Heritage Foundation exactly once, as a sidenote. Look, unlike some people on this board, I am not omnipotent. So, I don’t try to appear like I know everything. If I haven’t heard of something, like the Heritage Foundation, I say so. If you want to exploit this trait as a weakness, fine. I will continue to be intellectually honest, in the hopes that I actually learn something. To me it’s worth taking the occassional abuse from someone such as yourself. \*\* > [@](#): > > And if you haven’t heard of the Heritage Foundation, come out from under your rock and watch CNN or Fox or something. \*\* Yes, that’s it. Because I haven’t heard of this foundation, and am actually foolish enough to admit it, I must not watch the news. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![squeegee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/squeegee/32/14537_2.png) [@squeegee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/squeegee)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2002, 2:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-republicans-evil/132968/153 "2002-10-24T14:34:59Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by december \* > SS is regarded as insurance. Disagree. It’s _marketed_ as insurance, not run that way as such. An important distinction. > [@](#): > > It also has elements of welfare, because the poor get back reatively more than the rich If anything, it’s welfare for the wealthy. Read my cite: > [@](#): > > Because the wealthy generally live longer than the poor, they receive more total Social Security payments over the course of their lifetimes. A February 1996 study by the RAND Corporation concluded that, because of differences in life expectancy, Social Security actually transferred wealth from the poor to the rich. > [@](#): > > **Sam Stone’s** point was that if we eliminate the payroll tax, then SS would be converted from\* insurance with welfare elements\* into _pure welfare_ Who’s talking about eliminating it? My point was that if you cut federal taxes, mainly benefiting the wealthy, without also cutting payroll taxes, it’s regressive: you’re essentially funding your tax cut with the overage from collected SS taxes, since currently FICA takes in much more revenue than is needed to pay benefits. ---
**Author:** ![Dewey\_Cheatem\_Undhow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/13edae/32.png) [@Dewey\_Cheatem\_Undhow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dewey_Cheatem_Undhow)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2002, 2:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-republicans-evil/132968/154 "2002-10-24T14:43:32Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by elucidator \* > **When should one be conservative? When the situation is so excellent, so desireable, that it shoud be preserved against change. And when has it ever been thus?** Others have directed fine responses to the rest of your post, but let me add something on this point. First of all, you’re referring to conservatism in the classical, Burkean sense of the word. Even in that sense, conservatism isn’t about preserving the state of the world as if in amber; it is about moderating the pace at which society changes. It is a preference for the true and tried over the over the untested and untried. And that position has intellectual merit: unchecked, radical attempts to quickly change society and/or human nature yields results like the French Revolution. But in the modern sense, the classical definition does not hold quite so true. In many ways, it is the conservatives who are suggesting bold new solutions to difficult problems. Consider the school voucher movement: in this instance, it is the conservatives who are suggesting a new path, and the liberals who are stalwartly defending the status quo. ---
**Author:** ![Kitsune1527](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/e0b2c6/32.png) [@Kitsune1527](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kitsune1527)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2002, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-republicans-evil/132968/155 "2002-10-24T14:58:24Z")
In which case, I think liberals are being idiots, but . . . That is no news to me. If you can’t tell by now, I’m a rather blunt member of the species known as “conservative” . . . ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2002, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-republicans-evil/132968/156 "2002-10-24T15:38:32Z")
Well, goodness me! I seem to have provoked some indignation! And with such a bland and benign recitation of the obvious. > [@](#): > > Oh please, when did you graduate high school? My junior year … 1966, as it happens. But in the meantime I have had many occasions to glance at history books as school materials. Further, I commend to you a book on the very subject of history textbooks, _Lies My Teacher Told Me_ by James W. Loewen. You can find more out here: [http://www.uvm.edu/~jloewen/liesmyteachertoldme/liesmyteacher.html](http://www.uvm.edu/~jloewen/liesmyteachertoldme/liesmyteacher.html) Boiled down, his theme is not the repression of history, but the neccesity of rendering history text books bland and inoffensive, when our history is anything but. > [@](#): > > …I’m going to have to say that you are talking out your ass… Well, if you have to, you have to. Happily, I do not suffer from such a compulsion. Have you considered therapy? Yoga? Chamomile tea? > [@](#): > > Cite? Remember, we’re in Great Debates here…no throwing out mindless drivel without backing it up. You really have a problem with his “civility” thing, don’t you? Am I to believe that you contend that the Republicans _don’t_ have such support? And that therefore I am required to prove it to you? With more respect than I am offered, I decline. That’s just plain silly. > [@](#): > > …Ever listen to James Carville?.. Love the guy! He and Molly Ivins, top of my list of People with Brains Who Don’t Have Funny Accents. You have, in your ardor, omitted the cites referring to his Atwater-like ruthlessness. No doubt you will make haste to correct this. **Debaser** > [@](#): > > Conservatives and Liberals have different ideas. Niether ideology is one of change any more than the other… Well, your definition of “conservative” is at variance with mine own, and the public at large. That is your privilege, of course. I pass this over lightly, lest I be tempted to the apalling practice of posting a quote from a dictionary. > [@](#): > > Huh? When did it become the responsablility of the Republican party to “teach children much about the labor movement in America”? Well, if you would like to make a case for this go ahead… “Huh”, indeed. From whence do you draw the implication that I regard the Republicans as being so responsible? > [@](#): > > …Yes. This country had never been closer to socialism than under Clinton… Stunning. > [@](#): > > Plenty of athiests, such as myself, vote Republican. Also, plenty of republicans aren’t “bitter cynics”. We just disagree with you. Excellent! Just the ticket! No doubt you can offer cites in evidence of the Republican Party’s firm renunciation of such support. I suggest that a speech at Bob Jones University might provide an excellent forum for expounding such a principled stance. Or perhaps just quick call to the dismayingly bland Mr. Reed saying “Bugger off! We are too principled to accept the support and money of the likes of you!” In the immortal words of Buddy Holly: “That’ll be the day…” > [@](#): > > …The political arena is a western and we are wearing the black hats… Well, pardner, just glance around at the posse you’re riding with. 'Nuff sed, _companero_ **Scylla** > [@](#): > > Not to mention 'ole Barry Goldwater, who arguably did more for civil rights than anybody but MLK. Who, you will recall, voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964. State’s rights issue. I still retain some admiration for the man, but putting him forth as a major advocate of civil rights is, well, a bit of a stretch. LBJ, for all his failings, did far more. Well, then, that’s all sorted out. Jolly good. Carry on. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Ace\_of\_Swords](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e495f1/32.png) [@The\_Ace\_of\_Swords](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Ace_of_Swords)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2002, 3:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-republicans-evil/132968/157 "2002-10-24T15:50:24Z")
**Debaser** : No, no, you’ve got different ideas. Just really bad ones, but I’ll give you different. FTR: If you don’t know what the Heritage foundation is, your tinfoil imprecations have zero merit. Here, I found a [“site”](http://www.heritage.org) for ya. **Scylla** : Kindly point me to the cite from a reputable economist that supports your estate tax theory. I don’t find your terminology understandable; it couldn’t _possibly_ be self-serving obfuscation, could it? **DCU** : There you go again. Who’s defending the Democrats? James Carville is one man; pointing to him in an irrelevant point when you’re responding to a poster who accuses the Republicans of having the prevalent view of “no rules in a knife fight.” That means the majority of Republicans – James Carville is not the majority of Democrats, is he? Somewhat obviously, you’ve retreated back to your traditional hand-waving time-wasters; as I said originally, assign the evil points, and you’ll find the Republicans smoke the Democrats in every category. e.g. Demagoguery: puh-lease, the Democrats are worse? Put _down the bong, counsellor_ – Who said these? > [@](#): > > “The people of America need to watch what they say, watch what they do” > “People who distract the nation with phantoms of lost liberty bring comfort to the enemy.” Your comparison of these culminating pinnacles of demagoguery with – well, anything else, really – is evidence of a horrible bias, and so the casual reader can rightly assume the rest of your cherry-picking comparisons are just as irrelevant. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Ace\_of\_Swords](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e495f1/32.png) [@The\_Ace\_of\_Swords](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Ace_of_Swords)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2002, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-republicans-evil/132968/158 "2002-10-24T15:57:26Z")
Oh, and further proof of the Republican evil can be found in Scylla’s post count: 6666. Obviously, three sixes just wasn’t getting the job done. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2002, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-republicans-evil/132968/159 "2002-10-24T16:12:23Z")
Ace: > [@](#): > > Scylla: Kindly point me to the cite from a reputable economist that supports your estate tax theory. I don’t find your terminology understandable; it couldn’t possibly be self-serving obfuscation, could it? No. It’s not. It’s basic to the concept. I don’t share Dewey’s charitable nature in explaining these things and doing your work for you. He’s done a fine job explaining the underlining concept. You need to have a basic general understanding of the relevant concepts before you can debate intelligently on the subject. You seem to think your opinion is worthwhile simply because it’s yours. It’s not. For example, I may put forth the argument that Hamlet could have handled Othello’s problems quite well, and vice versa, and that therefore these two plays are not tragedies of circumstance, but character. You may say that I’m wrong, but if you’re next question is “who’s Othello?” than we really don’t have much to debate, do we? If your next statement is “oh You’re just trying to confuse the issue with all this talk about Denmark and Iagos and Moors and Nunneries,” well then you just be stupid. In order to debate you would have to read the plays. Go read them on your own, I’m not going to read them to you. Similarly if you wish to debate the estate tax repeal **YOU FIRST NEED TO FIND OUT WHAT IT IS!!!** ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2002, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-republicans-evil/132968/160 "2002-10-24T16:21:13Z")
elucidator: One can be in favor of a concept and against a method for implementing it at the same time. I think that was Barry’s objection. But he fought and was largely responsible for the integration of Blacks in the military back in the 1950s. But soft, let us move on. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-republicans-evil/132968.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-republicans-evil/132968.md?page=9)