[QUOTE=lissener]
Hunh??? What thread are you reading? This thread contains no pileon. Bricker has been roundly commended for telling all and sundry that the scales have fallen from his eyes. How is asking him how many scales, and which scales, and which scales remain, a “pile on”?
If he didn’t want a discussion; if he expected a chorus of “you go girl” or nothing at all, he wouldn’t have posted it at the Dope. That the discussion is covering a lot of ground in no way makes it a pile on. Get a grip.
[/QUOTE]
Mhendo Said:
*This is hilarious!
You seem to be implying that, if the Republicans do the right thing on the Foley issue, if they take their lumps and get rid of those involved in the cover-up, then all will be right with the world again, and the Republicans will once again deserve their self-proclaimed title of defenders of “law and morality.”
If it’s taken you this long to realize what dishonest scumbags they are, and if you think that this incident is the prime example of their perfidy, you’re living in a land of delusion.
And i love your title. I think, when you wrote “privately snicker at the Dems,” you misspelled “loudly excoriate the Dems while excusing or rationalizing dozens of instances of Republican dishonesty.”*
You said:
I find you, Bricker, generally a poster of principle, if a bit naive. I’m impressed at the level of both qualities you show here. Although with this thread you nudge the balance a little toward the principled side, I wish you godspeed as you continue to chip away at the mass of naivete that remains.
Scotandrsn wrote:
So, Bricker. Northern Vriginia. Looking at a map, it looks like your rep is Eic Cantor, Jo Ann Davis, Tom Davis, Virgil Goode, Bob Goodlatte, Jim Moran orFrank Wolf. Whoever it is, if this person who has brought about such a great sea change in your opinion were to turn out to be among those who knew but did nothing, would you vote for their competitor, or at least not vote for that person this year? that would be the only thing that would raise your prncipled stance above the level of hot air.
Cervaise Wrote:
*But you have hitched your political wagon to a gang of ideological opportunists who have nobody’s best interests in mind but their own. And the sooner you recognize that, and realize that the ballooning scandal before us is merely symptomatic of a moral putrefaction that has destroyed the soul of your political leadership, the sooner the cleansing can begin.
I believe in balance. I believe in dividing power. I believe that an adversarial system is absolutely essential for keeping both sides honest. And therefore I believe that while conservatives are wrong about the majority of the issues before us, it is necessary for them to strenuously argue their positions in order to strengthen the views of us progressives. We must have principled believers and debaters from across the spectrum to maintain clarity of leadership.
My sociopolitical beliefs may have virtually no overlap with yours, but I need you to be that way because I believe that’s the most effective way to challenge myself into honesty. And I need you to have political representation to do the same to my own chosen surrogates.
Right now, your political representation is made up of total bastards. They serve neither you nor the country. They have taken advantage of your naive adherence to ideological principles and are looting and destroying the country on multiple fronts.
One sleazy Congressman is, in the grand context of American history, rather small beer.
But it has served to peel back the veneer of respectability and reveal the power-addicted madness that led leadership to coddle and conceal his sleaze.
It’s there for all to see. All you have to do is look.
Wake up.
*
ElvisL1ves wrote:
Not to dump cold water on this lovefest, but I ain’t buying this act. Nobody, nobody with the obvious intelligence you have, Bricker , could truly have been so naive for so long. Look at the long string of things you’ve rationalized away while claiming your party has been the one of morals and righteousness (and will be again once they dump this latest round of “bad apples”, that is :rolleyes. If starting a war based on lies, and rationalizing torture and suspension of habeas corpus in its name, didn’t shake your faith, how the hell could a little sex scandal coverup do it?
BobLibDem wrote:
Why is it so surprising to some that the party of torture, the party of lying to invade sovereign nations, the party of emergency response incompetence, the party of tax breaks for millionaires and record deficits, is also the party of conspiracy to obstruct justice in a pedophilia case?
**And finally, what got me was **
Originally Posted by lissener
This incident should not, of course, suggest–as Bricker seems to think we’re suggesting–that all Republicans are liars. It should, however, eliminate “But a Republican cannot be a liar” as a valid defense.
*Obviously, these are two extremes, neither of which can be true. I’m just wondering if, what with this and other recent examples of embarrassing Retardlicanism, the needle on Bricker’s “Never a liar ==> Always a liar”-ometer has moved over a notch or two; if not into the red zone, at least maybe into a straight vertical position of having an open mind for each such incident.
In that case, it was the use of Retardlicanism. *
I concede sire that my assertion of pile-on was unfounded. It was a poor choice of words since it implies a massive rebuttal and attack.
However, multiple assertions of naivete and the slams on Republicans in general is what I am referring to.
My point is this. It is my opinion that every person, regardless of party affiliation, should look at each situation objectively. How many times (if I recall it is John Mace who is usually targetted with this one) have conservative posters been railed on for simply pointing out logical and rational flaws in the criticisms of Republican actions. Heck, I even think John has been accused of being a rapid Bush supporter when he did not even vote for him. (John if I am wrong please correct me, but I know one the typically conservative posters here has been accused of this)
In this case, we have a poster who had vehemently supported many of the Republican’s actions all throughout this board admitting that this is a clear cut example of impropriety that has eroded his trust in the Republican party. Then, many people jump in and say yup all (R’s) are mindless cretins who engage in illicit behavior. Bricker was admonishing himself for always assuming the best about Republicans. Then, he is criticized for not always assuming the worst.
In a good debate, as you refer to, each situation must be examined objectively. I know this is the pit, but calling someone naive for admitting something like this is not part of rational discourse.
Everyone knows I am a huge critic of Republican Party policy and especially of the Bush Administration. But, I aslo believe the only chance I ever have of convincing others of the validity of my assertions rests in rational discourse that encourages them to explore their commonly held beliefs and reject the notions of partisanship. To accomplish this, I must be also willing to do the same.
The common occurrence is for partisan individuals to use any single incident to demonize the entire competing party. Thus, when people criticize Bricker of being naive and ask him to refer to Republicans, in total, as evil, retarded, bigotted fascists, they themselves committ the same offense that Bricker has come in here to reveal.
My call is for rational discourse. Embracing objective analysis of situations and avoiding political spin. The demonizing of one party over another fails in this. However, the American people eat this crap up. This is what gives Rush Limbaugh an audience.
Bricker’s call for generalized responsibility amongst elected officials, which many here have supported, is an excellent step forward. When the actions of one individual are met with “Oh Boy, this will hurt that party”, I have to reiterate my original point about the motivation politicians have to tell the truth and the overwhelming peer pressure to cover things up.
What is the motivation for a political party leader to expose the wrong doing of one of their members, if the entire party is going to be hurt by it? Foley’s crimes have nothing to do with the Republican party platform. I assure you, most, if not all of them, despise him for his actions. But, if they did cover it up, they did it because they were afraid of of how it might hurt the party because of the ignorant masses raised on a blip culture who will immediately associate the actions of one with the integrity of all others associated with them.
Think about the allegation against Fox News (placing the D next to his name). Why would that matter unless everyone knows that even the association with a particular party would result in generalized disapproval with the whole group?
Thus, individuals who are blindly partisan, as we have seen countless times on this board, will gloss over the flaws of their own people and accentuate the flaws of the other party. It is a simply example of Social Identity Theory which is the root cause of most forms of prejudice. It is also one of our greatest sources of ignorance.
That is what I am saying.
Oh, and I agree with you Lissener that Bricker definetely posted this to get feedback and discussion. However, his rational discourse and self-admission should be met with more rational discussion, not partisanship or name calling.
