“They’re all a bunch of fucking crooks” seems to me to also be a knee-jerk reaction lacking forethought.
So does the implicit “if you disagree with me, you’re an idiot” admonishment at the end of your post.
Cone on everyone, will you please stop forcing **Xploder **to open threads that are nothing more than partisan shitfests? Feed him something intelligent, otherwise he’s going to get bored and leave us.
Nope. I gave it some thought before I posted it. Hell, I’ve worked for politicians and seen some of the bullshit that happens daily. Sure, come of it can be called compromising but it’s really just whoring out their office to keep their face in the feed trough.
I don’t see where it’s implicit that “if you disagree with me you’re an idiot” either. I specifically named no names as there’s really no need to. I couldn’t give a fuck less if nobody agreed with me.
None of you exist anyway. Except the few of you that I’ve actually met. You people exist and one of you makes some killer homemade mustard.
Heh heh…
There’s a lot of intelligence on this board. There’s not too much of it in ANY political thread here in the Pit. Hell, some of the things people bitch about here make me laugh out loud. I like to laugh at people that get morally outraged about someone they don’t know and things that never have and never will affect them. I also like to laugh at the people that are so sensitive that we have to watch what fucking words we use as slang.
What a load! You don’t want to go to the trouble to THINK so you adopt a cheap, sneering, cynical stance to make yourself look sophisticated and worldly while hiding your utter ignorance of what’s going on around you.
Yeah, me too. Like Rwandan genocide, absolutely hilarious that people care about that. I mean, who’s ever been to Rwanda?!
You…you partisan piglet!
Getting mad at unreal beings and addressing them as though they were capable of responding is a worrisome development.
In fact, if you can read this, I suggest upping your meds immediately 
.
You got me. I lack the ability to differentiate between the two parties and therefore am a cynically sophisticated man of the world that who sneers at cheap shots like this.
Go back and reread my post 17 wherein I state that I was TAUGHT to research the cadidates for a given election and THEN make an informed decision based on the facts.
Listen moron, If I had been TALKING about something as shattering as Rwandan genocide then your response would be appropriate. Since I wasn’t, it isn’t.
I’ll explain since you seem to be hard-of-thinking. If someone posts, for an example as I have no idea if this was an actual rant, that they came home and someone had broken into their house and took a great big smelly shit on the floor, I will guarantee that there will be at least ONE person that will post with the utmost moral outrage about how homebreaking-shit-defilers should all be strung up by their balls.
Or words to that effect. [nb]NOW** do you understand?
Almost as bad as unreflective party partisans are those who think that a blanket rant against both parties is necessarily reflective of moderate rationality. Despite the self-righteousness of such morons, the fact is that one can just as easily be a partisan hack while ostensibly criticizing partisan hackery.
That made me laugh…good one.
No problem…lemme go grab a brewski and we’ll talk. 
Good thing I wasn’t ranting against the rational partisan hacks then huh? I have the utmost respect for a man that is both partisan and rational.
Or a woman that’s the same, lest I be accused of being a misogynistic turd or something. <— note sarcasm again…NOT directed at you mhendo.
I’ve had some great political arguments in the Pit, but I consider those to be anomalies. The Pit is here so people can rant. We should have a rule that whenever Pit threads get too rational it should be sent off to GD!
Personally I blame Bush for this partisan fighting.
I agree wholeheartedly with both of your statements. The anomalies are more than annoying, they’re overly retarded. I’ve seen some threads here in the Pit that made me think that I WAS reading GD! Talk about getting a braincramp when someone pops up and shouts something about goat felching or something.
That’s a pretty good summation. In this day and age, it’s become clearer and clearer exactly how substantial the differences between the parties are. For instance, we’re fighting a war in Iraq - would that have happened had Gore been elected? The idea is risible. Politics may be a dirty game, but it’s only people who don’t take the time to understand the actual issues in question and watch what politicians do that believe that silly old canard about the major parties being the same. It’s valid to complain that neither represents your interests - a lot of people feel that way - but it’s simply ridiculous to claim they’re the same as one another. That’s only true if you don’t care at all what the law is.
Yep, it’s true. But in your zeal to shit on both major parties, you revealed that you’ve also got a rigid, dogmatic, and indeed warped view of politics - I’m no more fond of the deluded middle than I am of the wackos on either side. Of course, this bullshit about both major parties being identical is incredibly common - so you have the comfort of knowing you’re in a nice big herd when you spout this stuff off. (Really, has there ever been a place where the term “herd mentality” is more appropriate than this?)
Nah, that honor goes to Karl Rove and Newt Gingrich, masters of the game.
And while I agree with the broad sentiment that neither Democrats nor Republicans are saints, I’ll restrict my brickabats to the morons who are currently causing the big messes (and their apologists). It’s hardly my fault if they’re all Republicans…
I’m pretty certain that Gore would not have led us to war in Iraq, but I can see a scenario that would have pushed him into taking that action. Keep in mind that his running mate has been one of Bush’s biggest supporters of the invasion even if he criticizes its execution. And with the Republicans in control of Congress, if Saddam started playing games kicking the inspectors out again, don’t be too sure that an invastion would not have happened during a Gore presidency.
[/QUOTE]
It’s on.
behind school. At three.
You said that people shouldn’t get outraged about things that don’t affect them. As you again show with your above example, this is indeed your point. However, you’re wrong.
There’s no reason why moral outrage should be limited to things directly affecting you.
Is that simple enough?