The thing about Palin is that her thinking is about as nuanced as an Oliver Stone movie. She has NO IDEA how to think about this issue critically. She can’t answer the question because it contains subtelty that she has never considered in her life. Besides being incredibly incurious about so many issues she is also incfredibly shallow in her thinking about almost anything.
If I agree to this, do I get a 24 hour respite from being called a partisan Republican, or only 12? 
You’re coming off as an asshole and nutbar because you’re acting like one, which I suppose you have very little control over.
You keep bringing up, utterly irrelevantly, what I do for a living so you can make your insane claims that I’m lying about it, but what other posters might not realize is that I have challenged you to report me for posting deliberately false information about myself–i.e., trolling, which will get me banned for life --but you refuse to do so, demonstrating that you don’t actually believe your own charges, but you persist in making them anyway.
That’s a pretty good working definition of an asshole and a nutbar. Every time you do this, you publicize your own well-deserved lack of credibility, and I’m glad to repeat my challenge every time you do this.
Now it’s time for you to make up another rant to take our attention away from the fact that you don’t believe your own bullshit, but somehow expect us to believe you about anything. Go right ahead, nutbar.
Yum. Nutbars.
Listen, troll, this is getting old. You’re not just very stupid, and you’re now trolling hard again and pretending that we didn’t just have this conversation, you stupid shit licker.
The last time you pulled your internet toughguy routine, I gave you a very succinct answer. You then trolled me some more, and I was foolish enough to spill even more ink and made even more specific, so even a pseudoprof like you could understand the terms. You are now trolling and pretending to have forgotten it.
I’d also point out, troll, that you’ve just now merrily dodged each and every single fact I posted to, proving you were spewing ignorant idiocy at me about my “hypocrisy” about Palin.
Lo and behold, it seems you didn’t even believe your own spew, and just used it to bait me into a response. Yes, I was foolish for not realizing that you troll pretty much constantly, you asshole muncher. For a moment I thought you were honestly just being very stupid and displaying a lack of comprehension and really didn’t understand what I was saying about Palin. But it turns out you didn’t care, and were just looking for a trolling vector.
So keep trolling you piece of shit, hopefully the mods will finally finish what Liberal started, some day at least.
In any case, go fuck yourself pseudoprof and stop trolling me, because feeding time at the troll zoo is zone.
So you’re saying he’s a troll, then.
Yeah, that’s pretty much the subliminal message I’m going for 
I know that responding to trolls is generally a bad idea, but it’s rare to find a troll who combines quite as much ignorance, arrogance and stupidity all into one little package. Still blows me away that someone who is a fraud of such epic proportions would be so amazingly arrogant as well. And sometimes it’s just too tempting to rub a jackass’s nose in his own stupidity. I mean, pseudoprof is the guy who went into snarly-smarm mode and spent something like a paragraph or two informing me that “dumbass” was hyperbole because the insult didn’t actually allege that one’s buttocks were foolish. And of course that I was very dumb for not knowing that the phrase “dumbass motherfucker” was, in fact, an hyperbole.
Evidently the fraud had never ever heard of the word “idiom”.
I’ll admit, smashing the troll with a clue by four every now and again after he gets hoisted by his own petard can be fun. But yeah, it’s still feeding a troll unfortunately.
Sooner or later he’ll post a few more troll OP’s though, and that little gnat-buzzing will be gone.
To be perfectly fair, it was a fucking terrible article that didn’t do much more than handwave. It might very well be possible to make an argument that the biggest driver of terrorism is US foreign policy, but the article doesn’t do this. I think the author’s incoherence has caused some confusion here.
It also might not kill you to tone down your own arrogance. It causes me to want to disagree with you reflexively even over relatively trivial issues of language. While your personality is not the only cause of the conversational terrorism you seem to encounter here routinely, it is definitely one of the top three contributing factors. And not simply a distant third, either.
I suppose I owe you some kind of apology, with qualifications. I took your phrase “the blame-America-first nutters on the Left” as casting general aspersions against the whole of the left, as if you meant Leftists=nutters. Therefor I took your claim to mean that the left in general has been claiming that American policy is responsible for all the world’s terrorism. That is absolutely not true, and I was totally honest in saying I have never seen that claim. However, I must agree that there are nutters on the left who WILL make such a claim.
But Charlie Reese is not one of them. He is a nutter of the Right. See theWiki article about him.
As to you comment about “Where have you been since 2001?”, you might note that the Reese article is dated 1998, during the Clinton administration. Reese was writing as an isolationist right winger, along pretty similar lines to Pat Buchanon’s platform.
Oh, snap.
There’s no rule like Bayes’ Rule.
And, if you click on the home page link above the Reese article, you will find all kinds of articles trashing both parties, but the site seems to be run by some group called Conservatives for Peace.
I remember very well that you keep repeating that you know, somehow, that what I claim to do for a living is a lie, and that I keep inviting you to report me and thus finally “finish off what Liberal started”–but not “someday.” Right now. This afternoon. Simply by pushing that little red icon with the exclamation point on it.
And you won’t do it. I don’t think it’s because you’re too stupid to find the little red “report” icon, though how you manage to feed yourself is starting to baffle me. I think it’s because you’re lying out here in front of God and everyone about what I do or don’t do for a living, and I’m simply reminding you to report me or to shut up, and you’re simply afraid to report me for trolling. You call me a troll all day long, but you won’t report me. People have to wonder why that is. Challenged to put up or shut up, you lack the courage to do either, so you persist in returning like a dog to your vomit and repeating the same crap, as if no one will notice how much more efficient reporting me would be. And satisfying, too!
I’m calling you on it, as I have in the past, and will every time that you bring up the subject, typically with no relevance to the subject under discussion. You’re a coward and a hypocrite and a liar and an asshole and a nutbar–it’s no wonder that your attempts at argument are shown so little respect.
You Wikipedia link specifically says that he’s a registered Democrat, having switched from the Republican party. In any case, there are others. I suppose I could’ve linked to Ward Churchill’ stuff or browsed the comments section of any of a thousand articles on the web.
But I explicitly stated that I was only talking about the nutters on the right and left, not the entire right and left, so I guess we’re done here as I wasn’t broad brushing at all.
Guess we were talking at cross purposes then.
How about if we don’t?
He is also quoted as saying, “Im a traditional conservative”, and he supported George Bush in 2000
And you said
That’s a pretty broad fuckin’ brush, and was aimed specificly at people on the left supposedly making these claims, given that I and others have never heard such a claim before, and the one cite you find comes from a conservative website.
Even a traditional conservative is, by definition “on the left” once they’re a registered Democrat. The Democrats, after all, are the party on the left.
And even without him, there’s still wackjobs like Churchill…
No. A broad brush is when you over generalize from limited examples to the whole. I correctly stated that there have been wackjobs claims like that all over the news for years. No broad brush, at all.
Is you contention, really, that nobody on the left, ever, has claimed that the US is the root cause of terrorism? Ever? Nobody?
Will you not even admit that there exist wackjobs on the left?
Well, at the point where you claim that a registered Democrat isn’t on the left, ah well.
That is rather dishonest.
It came from a Democrat who happened to post it on a conservative website.
In your mind maybe. THey are to the left of the Pubs, they are considerably to the right of most of the industrialized world’s political parties
No, a broad brush is when you generalize from few to many. ‘All’ is not required.
Of course I’ll admit it. I already have done so. And even though I have admitted the possibility, you have still to post one leftist whackjob who has made the claim
No, it is rather dishonest, and plain silly, to claim that a self-proclaimed ‘traditional conservative’ is a leftist merely by virtue of which political party they belong to at one time or another. Surely you must understand that for decades, for example, there have been southern Democrats more conservative than many northern Republicans.
And Reese didn’t ‘post’ this on a conservative website, since it was written in 1998. It was reprinted on a conservative web website as representative of their POV. This was not a ‘post’ like we post to the SDMB, this was a designed page which must have been put there by the webmaster.
And, BTW, here is Reese’s personal statement of his philosophy, from 2004:
No, up until decades ago. You speak of the Dixie-Crats of the 50’s and 60’s. Governor Faubus was the last of their breed replaced by Republican Rockefeller who was in turn replaced by the new Democrats Bumpers and Pryor, then Centrist Clinton, surely Liberal and the sadly Conservative, nay, Christian Conservative Nazi Huckabee.
A make this argument since one of the bastards came from West Helena, Arkansas.
I cannot of course speak for that Nazi guy from Louisiana. 
There are conservative Democrats and liberal Republicans. Of course, as you’re now shifting the goalposts to the point where American leftists aren’t leftists enough because European leftists are further left, I can either debate with you whether or not a True Leftist has their porridge with sugar or not… or just say fuck it.
I’ve already pointed out Churchill, and I suppose I coulf find posts on various message boards, but with the handwaving I’ve seen, it’s not worth my time. What will the next objection be? Like Czar’s, that they’re not famous enough? Like yours, that even though they’re members of the American left, they’re to the right of Europeans?
That you also see fit to quibble about the word “post” is adding absurdity to absurdity, especially since authors can post things only if it’s a message board??? Are you serious?
You honestly feel the need to argue about how Reese had his work republished somewhere, but that it wasn’t “posted” there.
What a strange game you’re playing Boyo.
The only way to win is not to play, eh?
No, you said Democrats are leftists by definition. That is nonsense.
You named Churchill – you’ve never cited anywhere he has claimed that the US is the world’s only cause of terrorism.
You said Reese is a liberal who posted this to a conservative website. I say he isn’t liberal. And I have his own words to back me up.
No I really don’t care about the definition of ‘post’.
I don’t care. I am looking for signs of intellectual honesty from you, and not seeing it.
She weaseled out on calling them “terrorists” for one of two, and only two, possible reasons:
-
She does not wish to antagonize people who admire clinic bombers. That makes her a fan.
-
She does not understand the meaning of the term “terrorist”. That makes her an ignoramus.
Evidently you’ve chosen Door Number Two.