What democrat is ashamed because of Clinton’s private behavior? None that I know of. What kind of strange world do you live in where you take on shame for the acts of another?
And the Democrats have nothing to be ashamed of in his performance as President, that’s for sure. He wasn’t perfect, but most of what he screwed up was stuff he did because he was sucking up to the Evil Ones.
stoid
be back soon for more
to this quote from waterj2:
Stoidela responded: :rolleyes:
Why don’t you roll your eyes back here, Stoid, and respond to that statement? You know, with words and thoughts.
I’d be really interested to hear what you have to say about why waterj2’s statement there is inaccurate, and eye-rolling-worthy.
Well, I’ll be amused, anyway.
“What’s to hate about Bush for the election? I’ll accept that the only reason he is President is because the laws that existed before the election were insufficient to most accurately determine the intent of the voters. However, while Democrats have every right to be upset about this, they should accept that we cannot rewrite election laws after the election.”
What laws are you talking about? The law that makes sure that every person’s vote is counted? The laws governing right of unobstructed passage to polling places? It seems pretty fundamental that if the machines don’t count correctly, they should be done by hand. The fundamental right of universal suffrage has greater importance than an arbitrary date. The “law” which ultimately gave the presidency to Shrublette was the freakish and partisan determination that stated that to continue to try to get an accurate count would do irreparable harm to Bush, not Gore. Um. What? The American empire is doomed, but we will bring everyone else down with it, too. With no proportional representation of all parties in congress, a system hard wired to self-destruct (unmoderated capitalism), corporate money determines policy and law. This isn’t a democracy. Without even considering the massive corruption, it is structurally inequitable. The fact that Gore won the “popular” vote and “lost” clearly demonstrates this. MADD for Bush!
Wow. Well, Chronolicht, I’ve only met a few people who believe that we are actually LIVING IN A FASCIST DICTATORSHIP. You are obviously too stupid to argue with if you really believe that.
You want proportional representation? Get busy with your constitutional amendment. Of course, you know and I know that it’s not going to pass. Is that because the US is fascist? No, it’s because you won’t get enough state legislatures to vote for it, and you won’t get 2/3 of the house and senate to vote for it.
You might favor proportional representation. The fact that we don’t have proportional representation doesn’t mean that we live in a fascist dictatorship. Proportional representation might be marginally more responsive to the voters, or it might not, but it is not a critical component of every democracy. But think for a moment. Don’t you think that perhaps proportional representation could split the left wing into several parties…leaving the republicans united? Proportional representation could leave the left wing permanently shafted. Or it might not. The point is that you can’t know that your views are more likely to prevail under a proportional system.
And if we do live in a fascist dictatorship, why in YHWH’s name haven’t the crypto-fascist capitalist christian goons come and shut you idiots up? It would almost be worth it…
But I’m glad to finally find one of you leftists who’ll admit that you think 49.5% of america are “hoodwinked morons”. And your response to my idea? Well, you really do think republicans are EEEEEEVIIIIIL! I’m asking you, why? They disagree with you on issues. Do you think that it is impossible for a good person to disagree with you? Anyone who disagrees with your policies is by definition evil (or stupid, you did grant that they could be stupid)? Sounds to me like you are the only fascist here, my friend.
And Bush won even though he had fewer popular votes because the electoral college system, which we have had for over 200 years (so it wasn’t a suprise to you all), gave him more votes. If you want to change it, you HAVE TO CHANGE IT BEFORE THE ELECTION. Get it? You are upset Gore lost. Fine. But that doesn’t mean that winning via the electoral college is illegitmate.
And my comment about viewing your opponent as evil oviously applies doubly to you. You seem unable to imagine that I can honestly disagree with you. I must be a puppet, or a moron, or one of the EEEEEVIIIIIL ones. So, you really think that polluters pollute because they love pollution? Didn’t you read a word I said? If you think that polluters pollute because they love pollution, you won’t understand how and why pollution is really created. If you don’t understand how and why pollution is really created, then you won’t understand HOW TO STOP IT.
You really thought my advice not to believe your opponents are evil was just a trick, to try to silence you?
I know, I know, it is more comforting for people like you to think that only us idiots, puppets, and fascists disagree with you. Nobody could honestly disagree with you…could they?
In other words, you’re not paranoid because you don’t think you’re paranoid?
Stoidela, I hereby crown you “Master of Deluded Circular Logic”.
You’re posting while stoned right now, aren’t you?
And I think you’re a gerbil. Doesn’t make it so.
Why? Because you disagree with them?
Only to morons.
I know one. His name is Al Gore.
Y’know, I would like to point out to the SDMB population at large that the word “Stoid” has become a derogatory term in my circle of acquaintances. Whenever someone does or says something idiotic, I tell them, “You’re so stoid, man.”
Nice sense of historic perspective you got there, Stoidela.
GWB is a closet Hitler. Right.
I already took your political “opinions” with a grain of salt, but this remark settles the deal. That’s ignorance right there, baby. That’s the stuff we tend to fight around here, in case you forgot the sign at the door.
:rolleyes:
Lemur866, one doesn’t have to believe that we are living in a fascist dictatorship to feel that there is an imbalance of power (a “plutocracy,” as Chronolicht said), and that there has been an abuse of that power. Not only are these not the positions of hysterics, lunatics, and other crazies but the first is a widely held belief, including among some Republicans, and the second has been argued in places as hum-drum as the New York Times. Did you by any chance read the words of the dissenting opinion of Justice Stevens? Here is what he said: "Although we may never know with complete certainly the identity of the winner of this year’s presidential election, the identity of the loser is perfectly clear. It is the nation’s confidence in the judge as an impartial gaurdian of the rule of law." That was the oldest member of one of our most venerable institutions speaking. Doesn’t it strike you that when a Supreme Court Justice speaks that way about a decision made by his own colleagues that there is likely to be some controversy?* *
I might add that both here and in the Ashcroft thread you have given me the impression that you have a great personal investment in believing that the Bush administration reflects “mainstream” Republicanism. It is debatable whether “mainstream” Republicanism has itself shifted greatly to the right since the days of George I, or whether the far-right influence has taken greater hold of the party’s reigns, or whether W. himself is actually more conservative that he likes to let on. But here again, is an issue that is being talked up all over the country and in international circles too.
Here are a couple of links that I think you and others might find very interesting. The first is written by a 31-year-old man who describes what it was like to vote in Palm Beach and who goes on to criticize the outcome of the election without suggesting that anything so dire as a fascist dictatorship is in the offing. The second takes the position that Bush is being pulled to the right. Both are short and IMO worth a look.
http://intellectualcapitol.com/issues/issue415/item10616.asp
http://intellectualcapitol.com/issues/issue415/item10613.asp
Stoid, you dear sweet moron, pick your allies more carefully. RTA is such an intelligent and brilliant hater of Republicans that he voted for Nader. BTW, he’s from Florida. And, as we all know, the only effective way to drive a stake through the black hearts of the evil Republicans was to vote against Gore.
He must be a product of home-schooling.
Sua
I’m not privy to Stoidela’s thoughts, but if it had been me, I’d be using the :rolleyes: because there are points we’ve made, over and over and over again, on various election threads, that by now I really don’t feel the need to make yet one more frigging time. Right now, I’m too tired of it to even search for the proper threads to link you to.
Milo, I may be wrong, but my recollection is that you kinda jumped in at the very end of all this, after the Supremes gave their final vote on the matter, and started making the very arguments that Stoid and I had both refuted a whole bunch of times. (By ‘refuted’, I mean that we’d responded to the arguments, and to the extent that other people tried to pick holes in our arguments, we had responses, and those disagreeing with us seemed to have no further comebacks.)
Seems like a lot of people jumped in for the first time at that point, that I hadn’t seen in the previous five weeks of wrangling on the election threads. I didn’t feel the need to make my arguments all over again from scratch at that time, and I still don’t. If they weren’t in the trenches while the issue was in play, they missed the opportunity to have people give their best responses to their arguments. (Which, IMO, is one of the genuine uses of GD - while we may only rarely convince someone on the other side, we can have the worthiness of our arguments tested by one of the best little debating societies I know of. :))
But- getting back to a more direct reason for the :rolleyes: - did you hear that the Supremes concluded (except for the Rehnquist-Scalia-Thomas minority, natch) that the Florida Supremes didn’t rewrite the laws?
Fighting ignorance does mean not repeating repeatedly-disproved claims, at least not without new arguments or evidence to bring to bear.
Ah, the revisionist history has begun.
You think I jumped into the election debates late?!?!
Oh, wait. That was cigarettes for homeless people in Milwaukee for their Gore vote. Never mind.
So the election debates stopped when we EVIL ones had no answers to the cogent debates of yourself and Stoidela?
Thank you for my last great laugh of the millennium.
You do yourself a disservice lumping yourself with her, BTW.
Though my instinct has been to separate myself somewhat from Stoidela - even though I don’t mind saying that I agree with her to a great extent - because it seems to me that her tone does (what I’ll call) “the cause of righteousness” a disservice by being overly emotional in tone and provoking all you W apologistas into swarming about and bitching about how anyone who has legitimate concerns about the questionable cause & probable effects of a W administration should just shut their pieholes and drink the kool-aid already.
By the way, I am thankful for the Chronolichts and Mandlestams of the board who provide the kinds of sound links and reasonable arguments that make you right-wingers either curiously unresponsive, or stammering into distorted ad hominems that have little to do with anything except how “stupid” liberals are.
Now: I would take pains to add that my quote “the GOP is evil and a stake needs to be driven into its black heart”, (however true that may be) had a caveat prominently omitted by Stoidela. Namely, I have come to believe that in a way, a cluster-fuck abortion of a W administration is just what this country needs to wake it up and get people to see the true colors of the people who decide what it is Republicans will do. And if you think I am talking about all the little people who VOTE Republican, you are mistaken. The GOP is steered by a very small, very vocal minority; this is the GOP I refer to. (Why, my own grandmother voted for the GOP … but then again, she is completely senile and voted that way because she’s always voted that way and doesn’t know any better.)
Some mention has been made whether I think Libertarians are evil. The answer is no, I do not. In fact, I encourage everyone in the GOP’s moderate base to consider switching to the Libertarian party. I think they will come to find that the Libertarians are much more in jive with what they believe in and are looking for in a political party.
If “normal people” (and that includes firearms-rights advocates, surprised?) fled the GOP in droves for the Libertarians, then all the GOP would have left is a slim margin of old-boy country-club racists (by far the most powerful faction), ignorant one-note bible-thumpers, screaming Clinton haters, virulent anti-homosexuals, and pro-life stalker-assassins. For it is just these sorts of people - the DeLays and Armeys and Lotts and Limbaughs etc. etc. etc. of the world - who dictate the tone, methodology, and mores of the GOP. And if that group isn’t “evil” (though I truly believe they are), they plainly aren’t very nice people and definitely do not have the interests of what most normal, decent people consider “good” in mind. Since the majority of Americans (I’d like to think - though sometimes have my doubts - especially when these folks can motivate nearly half the voting populace!) loathe these factions and their viewpoints, the GOP as an entity will have died if their base ever wises up and jumps ship. And I say good riddance.
Do I “hate” W? No - a puppet is just a block of wood, and hating a block of wood is a ridiculous way to squander one’s energy.
Meanwhile the discussion continues, and I grow weary of the shrieking Rottweilers (Lemur866, CLedet et al), naked W apologism poorly disguised as neutral & dispassionate discourse (waterj, friedo et al), masturbatory what-about-me-remember-me self-aggrandizement (SuaSponte, Wildest Bill et al), and Wilford Brimley-esque, “you-dirty-hippies” finger-wagging (Milossarian, SPOOFE et al).
It’s certainly true that this discussion could go back & forth forever, or at least until us on the left are proved 100% right - and I believe we will be - about how fucked up W’s conservative puppet masters are. Though I seriously doubt that when that happens, you on the right will have the nut sack to stand up and wonder (to my eternally smug amusement) how you could have ever unwittingly defended the black-hearted schemes of the GOP elite.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by RTFirefly *
**
Thank you, RT. I realize 'twas I who opened this thread and I should have knownw what to expect, but still… I’m just not gonna do it AGAIN. We had, at last count 145 post-election day threads discussing all the issues at great length. If that’s what someone comes away with, well, :rolleyes: is all they deserve.
As ffor the rest of what has happened in this thread since last I posted, just because it is in the Pit doesn’t change my own personal debate etiquette. Since many seem to be a slow to pick up on this, I’ll spell it out for you: If anyone has any interest in debating with me, proving me wrong, making me look the fool (and I think it is safe to say there is some interest in that or this thread would have no posts in it) and you care one way or another whether I respond to you, then you will refrain from personal attacks. I put this in the pit because I am “attacking” the GOP, Bush, and other public figures. I do not indulge in personal attacks of my fellow Dopers, and I don’t play with people who do it to me.I am here because it is fun and interesting to discuss and debate various topics with other intelligent adults. Descending to the level of schoolchildren and calling names…well, it is not challenging, it is not interesting, it is not worthy of response - therefore I will not waste my time responding to it. So if you find that your challenges to me are ignored, that is why. Of course, if you don’t care, then hey…rip away! Use me as your personal punching bag, perhaps I’ll be able to help you relieve some stress! Always glad to be of assistance…
As for taking offense at what I write about the GOP, go right ahead. Then read what else I have said on the topic, and also read the “offensive ideas” thread that was started a week or two ago.
You know, it is the most useless and pathetic sort of “debate” to simply call names and otherwise denigrate people personally. I really expect better from Dopers. If you pay attention, you will see that there are those here who are quite capable of eviscerating arguments without eviscerating the person who makes them. Look to them and learn.
stoid
** MY ** tone!!! Dude… you have left me in the DUST with that rant! I’m proud yer on my side, dude…
stoid
who forgives her fellow lefty Dopers from being afraid to be seen with her, because apparantly when they cut loose, they CUT FUCKIN LOOSE! and they can’t trust themselves in her company.
If you are going to be deliberately manipulative and convenient in your debating, then I don’t know how long I shall keep this up with you. Remember, one of the great beauties of written debate is that you cannot successfully twist your opponent’s words for very long…they are there for all to see. I refer to this, of course:
Now, keep in mind that everything you are talking about here is YOU talking, and me RESPONDING…so while there may be a little technical truth here and there, you are leaping over a few details.
AND I said:
I sure was!
Your complete statement was:
So really, I was simply saying that I was vocally anti-Bush prior to the election. YOU were the one who used the Hitler comparison.
As for the Clinton quote, it was this:
And I said, “Well, yeah, because Clinton wasn’t evil.” I was NOT saying, not could it be construed as: "is “The difference between Clinton and Bush is that Clinton isn’t evil.” I was saying, as it is plain to see: “The Republicans looked dumb because they were reacting as though Clinton was evil and he wasn’t.”
Now, none of this is to deny that I think Bush is a bad guy, because I do. But I also said:
You know, I make myself a really easy target without any distortion whatsoever, so let’s not, ok? Because it’s really tiresome to go back and do all this cutting and pasting.
Next…
Let me think about this for a minute……hmmmm….nah. Sorry. Doesn’t fly. My power to influence the thinking of Dopers is less than non-existant. Or if I do hold such power, good for me and I’m glad to use it to convince them that Gilligan and his party are evil. Cuz I think they are. Please read RT Fireful, Mandalstam and others for more on this.
Lemur, I have never debated with you before that I can recall, but in this one thread you have demonstrated a very irritating habit of extrapolating from one word or sentence a whole new thought/idea/belief system that the person you are debating with, in this case, me, does not hold. I believe it’s called building straw men and you really have to stop it. It is a time waster. Deal with what I say directly, don’t decide that if I say X, it means Y, Z and ABC as well. ESPECIALLY, when I have explained PRECISELY what I mean. In this particular instance, see this sentence:
So, to sum up…if you are going to tangle with me, tangle with ** ME **, not your invention of me. Because I am not going to keep wasting my time repeating myself if you are not going to bother reading it.
Stoid
You make an excellent argument, and I can see your point. But I disagree with your conclusion, because I don’t think most people think very deeply about politics at all. They hook on a few very visible issues, perhaps, and many don’t even try * that * hard. They just pick the guy they’d like to have over for dinner some time.
And yes, as fellow Macaddicts, we’d probably get along great. [sub] I got a faaaab G4 a few months ago. Love it love it love it. I’m so happy![/sub]
stoid
Will do, Chronolicht. Have so far, don’t anticipate a change any time soon.
Nice to have you on The Side of the Righteous and True. 
stoid
These don’t come up. I tried to find them on the site. Any tips?
Looks like an interesting site, btw.
stoid
Huh. I just clicked on your re-posting of the links and they did. Could it be that you use MS and this site is only Netscape friendly?? In any case, if you’ve found hte site itself – intellectual.capital.com – they are under “This Week’s Issues.” The titles are, respectively, “What Happened in Palm Beach” and “The Right Calls on Bush.” They are basically editorial type pieces but interesting and well-written.
Glad to give you a laugh, Milo.
But there you were, in the post-Supreme Court ruling thread, repeating stuff we’d knocked the shit out of, during the preceding weeks.
Maybe you and I weren’t on the same election threads; I don’t remember having seen you on the threads where I put together various pieces of my case that Gore won FL. After all, as Stoid points out, there were a lot of the damned things. But on a bunch of the threads I was on, yeah, y’all ran out of points to make that we hadn’t already rebutted. Can’t remember all of them, but the Survey Response Error thread comes to mind, where we demonstrated that Gore had been done out of several thousand votes in Palm Beach County alone. Read it and if you still think the joke’s on me, feel free to post there and explain why.
“But I’m glad to finally find one of you leftists who’ll admit that you think 49.5% of america are “hoodwinked morons”. And your response to my idea? Well, you really do think republicans are EEEEEEVIIIIIL! I’m asking you, why? They disagree with you on issues. Do you think that it is impossible for a good person to disagree with you? Anyone who disagrees with your policies is by definition evil (or stupid, you did grant that they could be stupid)? Sounds to me like you are the only fascist here, my friend.
And Bush won even though he had fewer popular votes because the electoral college system, which we have had for over 200 years (so it wasn’t a suprise to you all), gave him more votes. If you want to change it, you HAVE TO CHANGE IT BEFORE THE ELECTION. Get it? You are upset Gore lost. Fine. But that doesn’t mean that winning via the electoral college is illegitmate. And my comment about viewing your opponent as evil oviously applies doubly to you. You seem unable to imagine that I can honestly disagree with you. I must be a puppet, or a moron, or one of the EEEEEVIIIIIL ones. So, you really think that polluters pollute because they love pollution? Didn’t you read a word I said? If you think that polluters pollute because they love pollution, you won’t understand how and why pollution is really created. If you don’t understand how and why pollution is really created, then you won’t understand HOW TO STOP IT.”
This is gibberish. The question of the legitimacy of the electoral college isn’t the issue. It is legitimate. It isn’t just. But you brutish nonconsequentialists can not discern the difference between the two. As I said, the Republicans have a track record for writing laws which allow untrammelled business at the expense of labor, the environment and human rights and needs. Pollution happens because it is much cheaper and profitable to allow it to happen. The plutocracy isn’t this readily identifiable mass characterized by a unitary set of objectives. It often conflicts with itself. But its various components share an identity of interests which unifies them. Giant tax breaks for megalithic multinationals, anti-labor laws, “pollution credits” (we are one of the few first world countries which won’t sign the Kobe Accord), huge arms contracts with even bigger cost over runs for engines of war of dubious efficacity, squelching attempts to find alternatives to the internal combustion engine to ensure dependence on big oil, etc., etc., ad nauseum, these are manifestations of the plutocarcy at work. Your labor enriches them at your expense and their power is derived from these ill gotten gains. You call me stupid but you underwrite the very people who damage you. What a choice irony. If you divorce yourself from the moral question for a moment and simply look at it from a utilitarian perspective, you could see that they are the source of most of the moral pathologies we now suffer from. The Dems are no prizes either. They are just one more component of the giant heterogenous mass supping at the trough of the commonweal a little too richly. The key is that they represent by a marginal fraction the interests of the middle class, working class, women, children, labor, etc., more closely than do the Republicans.