Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Why liberals can't understand conservatives....
47 views
Skip to first unread message
Richard Steel
Apr 3, 2012, 6:20:18 PM4/3/12
to
They Don’t Know Us
Liberals don’t bother to understand conservative thought.
By Dennis Prager
Apparently, many liberals were disappointed in the administration’s
defense of Obamacare before the Supreme Court. They felt that the
government’s lawyer, Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, did not
respond effectively to the challenges of some of the conservative
justices.
The editor of Commentary, John Podhoretz, offered an explanation on
his magazine’s blog. “American liberals,” he wrote, “know their own
language but they don’t know the language of their ideological and
partisan opposite numbers. . . . Conservatives speak liberal, but for
liberals in the United States, conservatism might as well be
Esperanto.”
I have argued this point for many years. In my book to be published
later this month (Still the Best Hope: Why the World Needs American
Values to Triumph), I argue that the Left is a victim of its own
brainwashing. How could they not be? All they hear, see, and read from
childhood on, from elementary school through graduate school, on TV
and in the movies, are leftist ideas.
Yet this is not true for conservatives. One would have to grow up in a
silent monastery not to be regularly exposed to liberal and leftist
ideas.
Advertisement
For 30 years I have had leading left-wing thinkers on my radio show,
and I continue to be shocked at their lack of awareness of
conservative arguments. About two years ago, for example, I asked one
of the most powerful Democratic members of Congress — a major force
behind every tax increase — what tax rate he thought might be too
high. He replied that he had not given it thought. I asked a leading
liberal writer who maintained that all American wars since World War
II had been imperialist, if he thought the Korean War was also
imperialistic. He replied that he didn’t know enough about that war to
respond.
After interviewing leftists, liberal listeners frequently ask me why I
don’t invite the best liberals on to my show.
The answer is that I have had some of the best liberals on my show.
They just don’t tend to do well when challenged by thoughtful
conservatives.
That may be why the majority of influential liberals refuse to go on
conservative talk radio or to debate conservatives.
I bumped into New York Times columnist Tom Friedman at Dulles Airport
a few months ago and asked him if he would ever come on talk radio. He
said he doesn’t do such shows. Yet, shortly thereafter he went on NPR.
What he meant to say was that he doesn’t go on conservative shows.
Why don’t liberals read us or listen to us or debate us?
Because the Left has convinced itself that the Right is unworthy of
such attention.
They are certain that conservatives are sexist, intolerant,
xenophobic, homophobic, Islamophobic, racist, and bigoted, not to
mention anti-intellectual and anti-science.
The Left has a mutually reinforcing dynamic at work here. Because
liberals believe conservatives are all these terrible things, they do
not bother acquainting themselves with conservative arguments. And
because they do not acquaint themselves with conservative arguments,
they are able to go on believing that conservatives are all these
terrible things.
Take race-based affirmative action. There is overwhelming evidence
that it has hurt black college students. Nevertheless, liberals
dismiss conservative opposition to affirmative action as racist.
Therefore they do not read any of the empirically based studies and
arguments against affirmative action. Why read racist hate?
I wonder what it would take to persuade Cornel West to debate Walter
Williams or Thomas Sowell on the issue of race-based affirmative
action.
One other example: Some of the most eminent climate scientists and
physicists have questioned man-made global-warming computer models.
Nevertheless, no liberal I am aware of has ever responded to what MIT
meteorologist Richard Lindzen or Princeton physicist William Happer
has written. After all, if every scientist who challenges global-
warming orthodoxy is anti-science, why read their literature?
I wonder what it would take to persuade Al Gore to debate Richard
Lindzen on whether man-made carbon-dioxide emissions are leading to a
worldwide environmental catastrophe.
So, it is rather rare to see a liberal actually forced to debate
conservative intellectuals. And after last week in the Supreme Court,
it may become even rarer.
— Dennis Prager is a nationally syndicated radio-talk-show host and
columnist. He may be contacted through his website, dennisprager.com.
Liberals don’t bother to understand conservative thought.
By Dennis Prager
Apparently, many liberals were disappointed in the administration’s
defense of Obamacare before the Supreme Court. They felt that the
government’s lawyer, Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, did not
respond effectively to the challenges of some of the conservative
justices.
The editor of Commentary, John Podhoretz, offered an explanation on
his magazine’s blog. “American liberals,” he wrote, “know their own
language but they don’t know the language of their ideological and
partisan opposite numbers. . . . Conservatives speak liberal, but for
liberals in the United States, conservatism might as well be
Esperanto.”
I have argued this point for many years. In my book to be published
later this month (Still the Best Hope: Why the World Needs American
Values to Triumph), I argue that the Left is a victim of its own
brainwashing. How could they not be? All they hear, see, and read from
childhood on, from elementary school through graduate school, on TV
and in the movies, are leftist ideas.
Yet this is not true for conservatives. One would have to grow up in a
silent monastery not to be regularly exposed to liberal and leftist
ideas.
Advertisement
For 30 years I have had leading left-wing thinkers on my radio show,
and I continue to be shocked at their lack of awareness of
conservative arguments. About two years ago, for example, I asked one
of the most powerful Democratic members of Congress — a major force
behind every tax increase — what tax rate he thought might be too
high. He replied that he had not given it thought. I asked a leading
liberal writer who maintained that all American wars since World War
II had been imperialist, if he thought the Korean War was also
imperialistic. He replied that he didn’t know enough about that war to
respond.
After interviewing leftists, liberal listeners frequently ask me why I
don’t invite the best liberals on to my show.
The answer is that I have had some of the best liberals on my show.
They just don’t tend to do well when challenged by thoughtful
conservatives.
That may be why the majority of influential liberals refuse to go on
conservative talk radio or to debate conservatives.
I bumped into New York Times columnist Tom Friedman at Dulles Airport
a few months ago and asked him if he would ever come on talk radio. He
said he doesn’t do such shows. Yet, shortly thereafter he went on NPR.
What he meant to say was that he doesn’t go on conservative shows.
Why don’t liberals read us or listen to us or debate us?
Because the Left has convinced itself that the Right is unworthy of
such attention.
They are certain that conservatives are sexist, intolerant,
xenophobic, homophobic, Islamophobic, racist, and bigoted, not to
mention anti-intellectual and anti-science.
The Left has a mutually reinforcing dynamic at work here. Because
liberals believe conservatives are all these terrible things, they do
not bother acquainting themselves with conservative arguments. And
because they do not acquaint themselves with conservative arguments,
they are able to go on believing that conservatives are all these
terrible things.
Take race-based affirmative action. There is overwhelming evidence
that it has hurt black college students. Nevertheless, liberals
dismiss conservative opposition to affirmative action as racist.
Therefore they do not read any of the empirically based studies and
arguments against affirmative action. Why read racist hate?
I wonder what it would take to persuade Cornel West to debate Walter
Williams or Thomas Sowell on the issue of race-based affirmative
action.
One other example: Some of the most eminent climate scientists and
physicists have questioned man-made global-warming computer models.
Nevertheless, no liberal I am aware of has ever responded to what MIT
meteorologist Richard Lindzen or Princeton physicist William Happer
has written. After all, if every scientist who challenges global-
warming orthodoxy is anti-science, why read their literature?
I wonder what it would take to persuade Al Gore to debate Richard
Lindzen on whether man-made carbon-dioxide emissions are leading to a
worldwide environmental catastrophe.
So, it is rather rare to see a liberal actually forced to debate
conservative intellectuals. And after last week in the Supreme Court,
it may become even rarer.
— Dennis Prager is a nationally syndicated radio-talk-show host and
columnist. He may be contacted through his website, dennisprager.com.
wy
Apr 3, 2012, 7:31:04 PM4/3/12
to
On Apr 3, 6:20 pm, Richard Steel <rsteel2...@aol.com> wrote:
> They Don’t Know Us
> Liberals don’t bother to understand conservative thought.
Trying to understand conservanut thought is like trying to make out
> They Don’t Know Us
> Liberals don’t bother to understand conservative thought.
what a month-old kid is mumbling about as he dribbles drool down the
side of his mouth. In fact, the drool makes more sense than the kid's
mumbling.
Christopher Helms
Apr 3, 2012, 7:38:14 PM4/3/12
to
On Tuesday, April 3, 2012 5:20:18 PM UTC-5, Richard Steel wrote:
> They Don’t Know Us
> Liberals don’t bother to understand conservative thought.
>
> By Dennis Prager
>
> Apparently, many liberals were disappointed in the administration’s
> defense of Obamacare before the Supreme Court. They felt that the
> government’s lawyer, Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, did not
> respond effectively to the challenges of some of the conservative
> justices.
>
> The editor of Commentary, John Podhoretz, offered an explanation on
> his magazine’s blog. “American liberals,” he wrote, “know their own
> language but they don’t know the language of their ideological and
> partisan opposite numbers. . . . Conservatives speak liberal, but for
> liberals in the United States, conservatism might as well be
> Esperanto.”
>
> I have argued this point for many years. In my book to be published
> later this month (Still the Best Hope: Why the World Needs American
> Values to Triumph), I argue that the Left is a victim of its own
> brainwashing. How could they not be? All they hear, see, and read from
> childhood on, from elementary school through graduate school, on TV
> and in the movies, are leftist ideas.
"Leftist" ideas like fair play, objective reality and "Life isn't all about you." It is true that many Americans are brainwashed from an early age by evil, conniving liberals into believing that stupidity, bigotry, selfishness, unchecked materialism and narcissism are undesirable traits. Thank God Christian conservatives are taking their country back and placing bigotry, self righteousness, greed, avarice and Social Darwinism back on their respective pedestals. Because everybody knows Jesus was all about the bling.
> They Don’t Know Us
> Liberals don’t bother to understand conservative thought.
>
> By Dennis Prager
>
> Apparently, many liberals were disappointed in the administration’s
> defense of Obamacare before the Supreme Court. They felt that the
> government’s lawyer, Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, did not
> respond effectively to the challenges of some of the conservative
> justices.
>
> The editor of Commentary, John Podhoretz, offered an explanation on
> his magazine’s blog. “American liberals,” he wrote, “know their own
> language but they don’t know the language of their ideological and
> partisan opposite numbers. . . . Conservatives speak liberal, but for
> liberals in the United States, conservatism might as well be
> Esperanto.”
>
> I have argued this point for many years. In my book to be published
> later this month (Still the Best Hope: Why the World Needs American
> Values to Triumph), I argue that the Left is a victim of its own
> brainwashing. How could they not be? All they hear, see, and read from
> childhood on, from elementary school through graduate school, on TV
> and in the movies, are leftist ideas.
Richard Steel
Apr 3, 2012, 8:41:36 PM4/3/12
to
> > They Don’t Know Us
> > Liberals don’t bother to understand conservative thought.
> Trying to understand conservanut thought is like trying to make out
> what a month-old kid is mumbling about as he dribbles drool down the
> side of his mouth. In fact, the drool makes more sense than the kid's
> mumbling.
response. Ten years ago, this fool would have written such nonsense
in the hopes of getting a rise out of a conservative. Now, the Left
has dumbed themselves down to the level as to actually believe such
nonsense.
Richard Steel
Apr 3, 2012, 9:01:57 PM4/3/12
to
On Apr 3, 4:38 pm, Christopher Helms <chrishel...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, April 3, 2012 5:20:18 PM UTC-5, Richard Steel wrote:
> > They Don’t Know Us
> > Liberals don’t bother to understand conservative thought.
>
> > By Dennis Prager
>
> > Apparently, many liberals were disappointed in the administration’s
> > defense of Obamacare before the Supreme Court. They felt that the
> > government’s lawyer, Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, did not
> > respond effectively to the challenges of some of the conservative
> > justices.
>
> > The editor of Commentary, John Podhoretz, offered an explanation on
> > his magazine’s blog. “American liberals,” he wrote, “know their own
> > language but they don’t know the language of their ideological and
> > partisan opposite numbers. . . . Conservatives speak liberal, but for
> > liberals in the United States, conservatism might as well be
> > Esperanto.”
>
> > I have argued this point for many years. In my book to be published
> > later this month (Still the Best Hope: Why the World Needs American
> > Values to Triumph), I argue that the Left is a victim of its own
> > brainwashing. How could they not be? All they hear, see, and read from
> > childhood on, from elementary school through graduate school, on TV
> > and in the movies, are leftist ideas.
> "Leftist" ideas like fair play,
Nope... you guys insist that NPR be funded with taxpayer money, while
> On Tuesday, April 3, 2012 5:20:18 PM UTC-5, Richard Steel wrote:
> > They Don’t Know Us
> > Liberals don’t bother to understand conservative thought.
>
> > By Dennis Prager
>
> > Apparently, many liberals were disappointed in the administration’s
> > defense of Obamacare before the Supreme Court. They felt that the
> > government’s lawyer, Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, did not
> > respond effectively to the challenges of some of the conservative
> > justices.
>
> > The editor of Commentary, John Podhoretz, offered an explanation on
> > his magazine’s blog. “American liberals,” he wrote, “know their own
> > language but they don’t know the language of their ideological and
> > partisan opposite numbers. . . . Conservatives speak liberal, but for
> > liberals in the United States, conservatism might as well be
> > Esperanto.”
>
> > I have argued this point for many years. In my book to be published
> > later this month (Still the Best Hope: Why the World Needs American
> > Values to Triumph), I argue that the Left is a victim of its own
> > brainwashing. How could they not be? All they hear, see, and read from
> > childhood on, from elementary school through graduate school, on TV
> > and in the movies, are leftist ideas.
> "Leftist" ideas like fair play,
attempting to destroy its conservative counterpart through
intimidation, threats, force of law and economic boycott. Please
explain with is "fair" about that?
> objective reality >
Again, nah.
You dismiss those you disagree with by tossing personal smears, and
attempts to destroy the "enemies" lives.
> and "Life isn't all about you."
opinion?
I'm owned by the state? Everything I make is immediately the property
of the government, and whatever crumbs I get to keep should be taken
gratefully and without making eye contact at the glorious government
workers?
>It is true that many Americans are brainwashed from an early age by evil, conniving liberals into believing that stupidity, bigotry, selfishness, unchecked materialism and narcissism are undesirable traits. Thank God Christian conservatives are taking their country back and placing bigotry, self righteousness, greed, avarice and Social Darwinism back on their respective pedestals. Because everybody knows Jesus was all about the bling.>
conservatives? Really? You actually believe that? Really?
And the above is the sort of crap that can only be spewed out by a
person deeply committed to willful ignorance.
"The Left has a mutually reinforcing dynamic at work here. Because
liberals believe conservatives are all these terrible things, they do
not bother acquainting themselves with conservative arguments. And
because they do not acquaint themselves with conservative arguments,
they are able to go on believing that conservatives are all these
terrible things. "
wy
Apr 3, 2012, 9:47:45 PM4/3/12
to
Richard Steel
Apr 3, 2012, 11:55:18 PM4/3/12
to
Wexford
Apr 4, 2012, 12:08:44 AM4/4/12
to
aftermath -- owed to conservatives. Were it not for imperial
conservatives there would never have been A WWI, the Russian
Revolution would never have happened, Hitler would have painted
houses, WWII would never have happened and Mao would have died an
obscure crank. All evil does come from conservatives.
Richard Steel
Apr 4, 2012, 12:28:46 AM4/4/12
to
by conservatives? Stalin is a conservative? Mao was a conservative?
What utter nonsense.
wy
Apr 4, 2012, 1:06:25 AM4/4/12
to
why no one can make any sense of conservanuts? Even a baby drools
differently each time and consequently makes more sense.
Conservanuts, apparently, have yet to master what comes naturally to
babies.
Richard Steel
Apr 4, 2012, 1:09:29 AM4/4/12
to
wy
Apr 4, 2012, 1:17:15 AM4/4/12
to
Conservanuts must be proud of him.
Richard Steel
Apr 4, 2012, 1:37:31 AM4/4/12
to
trainguard
Apr 4, 2012, 6:21:37 AM4/4/12
to
Babies are delightful and lovable . And they do not have minds like
sewers!
Dr. Barry Worthington
- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
trainguard
Apr 4, 2012, 6:18:22 AM4/4/12
to
On Apr 3, 11:20 pm, Richard Steel <rsteel2...@aol.com> wrote:
> They Don’t Know Us
> Liberals don’t bother to understand conservative thought.
In America, this is usually an oxymoron....
> They Don’t Know Us
> Liberals don’t bother to understand conservative thought.
>
> By Dennis Prager
>
> Apparently, many liberals were disappointed in the administration’s
> defense of Obamacare before the Supreme Court. They felt that the
> government’s lawyer, Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, did not
> respond effectively to the challenges of some of the conservative
> justices.
>
> The editor of Commentary, John Podhoretz,
essay by Gore Vidal about American religious nutters, most of which
contained names that I had never heard of....
>offered an explanation on
> his magazine’s blog. “American liberals,” he wrote, “know their own
> language but they don’t know the language of their ideological and
> partisan opposite numbers. . . . Conservatives speak liberal, but for
> liberals in the United States, conservatism might as well be
> Esperanto.”
that's hardly surprising!
>
> I have argued this point for many years. In my book to be published
> later this month (Still the Best Hope: Why the World Needs American
> Values to Triumph),
>I argue that the Left is a victim of its own
> brainwashing. How could they not be? All they hear, see, and read from
> childhood on, from elementary school through graduate school, on TV
> and in the movies, are leftist ideas.
>
> Yet this is not true for conservatives. One would have to grow up in a
> silent monastery not to be regularly exposed to liberal and leftist
> ideas.
>
> Advertisement
One wonders what is being sold? The latest Readers Digest coffee table
book offer? Reproductions of Tretchikoff paintings? 'Gated Condos' in
Florida? ("Let Steve introduce you to a new way of life with people
just like yourselves...")
> For 30 years I have had leading left-wing thinkers on my radio show,
> and I continue to be shocked at their lack of awareness of
> conservative arguments. About two years ago, for example, I asked one
> of the most powerful Democratic members of Congress — a major force
> behind every tax increase — what tax rate he thought might be too
> high.
> He replied that he had not given it thought.
> I asked a leading
> liberal writer
>who maintained that all American wars since World War
> II had been imperialist, if he thought the Korean War was also
> imperialistic. He replied that he didn’t know enough about that war to
> respond.
> After interviewing leftists, liberal listeners frequently ask me why I
> don’t invite the best liberals on to my show.
>
> The answer is that I have had some of the best liberals on my show.
> They just don’t tend to do well when challenged by thoughtful
> conservatives.
>
> That may be why the majority of influential liberals refuse to go on
> conservative talk radio or to debate conservatives.
his show?
Of course, I'm not 'influential', but then, neither is he!
>
> I bumped into New York Times columnist Tom Friedman at Dulles Airport
> a few months ago and asked him if he would ever come on talk radio. He
> said he doesn’t do such shows. Yet, shortly thereafter he went on NPR.
> What he meant to say was that he doesn’t go on conservative shows.
> Why don’t liberals read us or listen to us or debate us?
>
> Because the Left has convinced itself that the Right is unworthy of
> such attention.
conservatism as Dresden China has to do with a real shepherdess!
>
> They are certain that conservatives are sexist, intolerant,
> xenophobic, homophobic, Islamophobic, racist, and bigoted, not to
> mention anti-intellectual and anti-science.
conservatives!
>
> The Left has a mutually reinforcing dynamic at work here. Because
> liberals believe conservatives are all these terrible things, they do
> not bother acquainting themselves with conservative arguments.
> And
> because they do not acquaint themselves with conservative arguments,
> they are able to go on believing that conservatives are all these
> terrible things.
Burke, Peel, Disraeli, Herder, Hegel, et al. I am familiar with
conservative arguments. When do we debate?
>
> Take race-based affirmative action. There is overwhelming evidence
> that it has hurt black college students. Nevertheless, liberals
> dismiss conservative opposition to affirmative action as racist.
> Therefore they do not read any of the empirically based studies and
> arguments against affirmative action. Why read racist hate?
>
> I wonder what it would take to persuade Cornel West to debate Walter
> Williams or Thomas Sowell on the issue of race-based affirmative
> action.
important.
>
> One other example: Some of the most eminent climate scientists and
> physicists have questioned man-made global-warming computer models.
> Nevertheless, no liberal I am aware of has ever responded to what MIT
> meteorologist Richard Lindzen or Princeton physicist William Happer
> has written. After all, if every scientist who challenges global-
> warming orthodoxy is anti-science, why read their literature?
>
> I wonder what it would take to persuade Al Gore to debate Richard
> Lindzen on whether man-made carbon-dioxide emissions are leading to a
> worldwide environmental catastrophe.
>
> So, it is rather rare to see a liberal actually forced to debate
> conservative intellectuals.
>And after last week in the Supreme Court,
> it may become even rarer.
>
> — Dennis Prager is a nationally syndicated radio-talk-show host and
> columnist. He may be contacted through his website, dennisprager.com.
Dr. Barry Worthington
trainguard
Apr 4, 2012, 6:25:02 AM4/4/12
to
let alone understanding it!
He is what we call a 'tosser'!
Richard Steel
Apr 4, 2012, 10:20:03 AM4/4/12
to
Richard Steel
Apr 4, 2012, 10:21:29 AM4/4/12
to
literally nothing. I'm going to read the third not - I suspect it
will be another repeated of your tired name calling.
Richard Steel
Apr 4, 2012, 2:31:22 PM4/4/12
to
> > Apparently, many liberals were disappointed in the administration’s
> > defense of Obamacare before the Supreme Court. They felt that the
> > government’s lawyer, Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, did not
> > respond effectively to the challenges of some of the conservative
> > justices.
> Challenges?
> > The editor of Commentary, John Podhoretz,
> Ah.....I first came across this name many, many, years ago, in an
> essay by Gore Vidal about American religious nutters, most of which
> contained names that I had never heard of....
play "Visit to a Small Planet" to star Jerry Lewis. Oh, and here's a
trailer to his film "Myra Breckenridge".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ezSsK3SgVk8
It opened with John Huston slicing Rex Reed's penis. It's a comedy.
> >offered an explanation on
> > his magazine’s blog. “American liberals,” he wrote, “know their own
> > language but they don’t know the language of their ideological and
> > partisan opposite numbers. . . . Conservatives speak liberal, but for
> > liberals in the United States, conservatism might as well be
> > Esperanto.”
> As it's mostly neo-liberalism (in the classical sense of the word),
> that's hardly surprising!
Podhoretz. While the latter writes clearly, you prefer terms which
hide your meaning, and are easily confused. That distinction explains
why Mr. Podhoretz has written speeches for US Presidents, Time
Magazine, National Review and US News and World Report. And why he's
a Consulting Editor for HaperCollins, has appeared on FOX News, CNN,
and The McLaughlin Group.
Podhoretz was also a consultant for the popular television series "The
West Wing".
Your proudest achievements seem to be limited to the ability to spell
the words "wanker," "nutter" and "toss".
> > I have argued this point for many years. In my book to be published
> > later this month (Still the Best Hope: Why the World Needs American
> > Values to Triumph),
> At this point, countless readers start to switch off....
> >I argue that the Left is a victim of its own
> > brainwashing. How could they not be? All they hear, see, and read from
> > childhood on, from elementary school through graduate school, on TV
> > and in the movies, are leftist ideas.
> Which are what, exactly?
The core assumption of the Left is that the overwhelming majority of
people have no idea how to handle their lives. Oh, sure, they can
handle the small stuff like managing to get to work and so on - but
just take a look at how they spend their free time. Instead of
reading the classics and bettering themselves, they fret of "The
Hunger Games" or getting on Level Nine while playing "Call of Duty:
Modern Warfare 3" They eat utter rubbish and their lives are
completely out of control.
Most people are children to need a firm hand to allow them to reach
their true potential. That why the Best and the Brightest need to run
the world. Take decisions out of the hand of the childish masses, and
allow the cool logic of the educated to run the world fairly.
Yes, conservatives understand how the Left thinks.
> > Yet this is not true for conservatives. One would have to grow up in a
> > silent monastery not to be regularly exposed to liberal and leftist
> > ideas.
> Matches their ignororance of about conservative ideas....
"ignorance" - it's essential to spell the word properly.
That being said, please explain what you believe are "conservative
ideas".
> One wonders what is being sold? >
easily looked it up yourself. BTW, it's a rotating ad which at the
time sold solar panels.
> The latest Readers Digest coffee table
> book offer? Reproductions of Tretchikoff paintings? 'Gated Condos' in
> Florida? ("Let Steve introduce you to a new way of life with people
> just like yourselves...")
conservatives? Really? "Reader's Digest" cracks? Just how out of
date are your references?
"Reader's Digest" sneers are what 60s Liberals stated to imply that
conservatives were ten years behind the times and poorly read to
boot.
> > For 30 years I have had leading left-wing thinkers on my radio show,
> Who were they?
are are among the guests he's had his show.
> > and I continue to be shocked at their lack of awareness of
> > conservative arguments. About two years ago, for example, I asked one
> > of the most powerful Democratic members of Congress — a major force
> > behind every tax increase — what tax rate he thought might be too
> > high.
> Who was he? Why was he thought to be a 'left-wing thinker'?
> > He replied that he had not given it thought.
> You don't say!
> > I asked a leading
> > liberal writer
> Who?
Leftist's name. You side tend towards having rather thin skins,
don'tchaknow?
> >who maintained that all American wars since World War
> > II had been imperialist, if he thought the Korean War was also
> > imperialistic. He replied that he didn’t know enough about that war to
> > respond.
> Of course, he could have quoted Stone's book.
The National Review, Rush Limbaugh, or pretty much an conservative
voice --- and yet you demand that people know what you're talking
about when referring to "Stone's book".
> > After interviewing leftists, liberal listeners frequently ask me why I
> > don’t invite the best liberals on to my show.
> > The answer is that I have had some of the best liberals on my show.
> > They just don’t tend to do well when challenged by thoughtful
> > conservatives.
> How much more of this garbage is there?
minded and understand the conservative mind?
> > That may be why the majority of influential liberals refuse to go on
> > conservative talk radio or to debate conservatives.
> Well I'd debate him! Will he invite a retired English academic on to
> his show?
putting people on who disagree with him. Just listen to his show, and
call when there's a subject which you can contribute.
http://www.krla870.com/
> Of course, I'm not 'influential', but then, neither is he!
over 100 stations. His audience numbers fluctuates between three and
five million listeners daily. He regularly appears/has appeared on
such shows as Larry King Live, Hardball, Hannity & Colmes, Hannity,
CBS Evening News, The Today Show and many others.
Dennis has engaged in interfaith dialogue with Catholics at the
Vatican, Muslims in the Persian Gulf, Hindus in India, and Protestants
at Christian seminaries throughout America. For ten years, he
conducted a weekly interfaith dialogue on radio with representatives
of virtually every religion in the world. New York's Jewish Week
described Dennis Prager as "one of the three most interesting minds in
American Jewish Life."
Dennis writes a syndicated column (Creators Syndicate) that is
published in newspapers across the country and on the Internet. His
writings have also appeared in major national and international
publications including, Commentary, The Weekly Standard and The Wall
Street Journal. His essay on homosexuality and civilization was
awarded the $10,000 Amy Foundation First Prize.
Mr. Prager was a Fellow at Columbia University's School of
International Affairs, where he did graduate work at the Middle East
and Russian Institutes. He has taught Russian and Jewish history at
Brooklyn College; and was appointed by President Ronald Reagan to the
U.S. Delegation to the Vienna Review Conference on the Helsinki
Accords. He holds an honorary doctorate of laws from Pepperdine
University.
Mr. Prager has lectured on all seven continents, in 45 U.S. states and
in nine of Canada's 10 provinces. He has lectured in Russian in
Russia, and in Hebrew in Israel.
Oh, and he also conducts classic orchestras.
And you knew none of this. Far more damning, you didn't bother to
Google the man's name before dismissing him with a wave of your hand.
Another example of why Leftists don't understand Conservatives.
> > I bumped into New York Times columnist Tom Friedman at Dulles Airport
> > a few months ago and asked him if he would ever come on talk radio. He
> > said he doesn’t do such shows. Yet, shortly thereafter he went on NPR.
> > What he meant to say was that he doesn’t go on conservative shows.
> Perhaps he doesn't like Podhoretz, but was too polite to admit it....
mention that he didn't like Podhoretz. What's that got to do with his
lying about not doing radio shows?
> > Why don’t liberals read us or listen to us or debate us?
> > Because the Left has convinced itself that the Right is unworthy of
> > such attention.
> Or that the American 'right' has as much to do with genuine
> conservatism as Dresden China has to do with a real shepherdess!
> > They are certain that conservatives are sexist, intolerant,
> > xenophobic, homophobic, Islamophobic, racist, and bigoted, not to
> > mention anti-intellectual and anti-science.
> Correction. The current American 'right are.....but they are not
> conservatives!
> > The Left has a mutually reinforcing dynamic at work here. Because
> > liberals believe conservatives are all these terrible things, they do
> > not bother acquainting themselves with conservative arguments.
> What would Podhoretz know about conservative arguments?
Podhoretz. John Podhoretz did not write the article.
> > And
> > because they do not acquaint themselves with conservative arguments,
> > they are able to go on believing that conservatives are all these
> > terrible things.
> I have read (over the years) selections of Aristotle, Aquinas, Hobbes,
> Burke, Peel, Disraeli, Herder, Hegel, et al. I am familiar with
> conservative arguments. When do we debate?
call in.
> > Take race-based affirmative action. There is overwhelming evidence
> > that it has hurt black college students. Nevertheless, liberals
> > dismiss conservative opposition to affirmative action as racist.
> > Therefore they do not read any of the empirically based studies and
> > arguments against affirmative action. Why read racist hate?
> > I wonder what it would take to persuade Cornel West to debate Walter
> > Williams or Thomas Sowell on the issue of race-based affirmative
> > action.
> I'd rather debate their neo-liberal economic ideas! That's far more
> important.
> > One other example: Some of the most eminent climate scientists and
> > physicists have questioned man-made global-warming computer models.
> > Nevertheless, no liberal I am aware of has ever responded to what MIT
> > meteorologist Richard Lindzen or Princeton physicist William Happer
> > has written. After all, if every scientist who challenges global-
> > warming orthodoxy is anti-science, why read their literature?
> > I wonder what it would take to persuade Al Gore to debate Richard
> > Lindzen on whether man-made carbon-dioxide emissions are leading to a
> > worldwide environmental catastrophe.
> What has global warming to do with conservative ideology?
Liberals plan to use to create a one world government.
> > So, it is rather rare to see a liberal actually forced to debate
> > conservative intellectuals.
> (Snicker!!!)
> >And after last week in the Supreme Court,
> > it may become even rarer.
> > — Dennis Prager is a nationally syndicated radio-talk-show host and
> > columnist. He may be contacted through his website, dennisprager.com.
> I don't think I'll bother....
Because he is a conservative who is far more educated than you.
David Hartung
Apr 4, 2012, 3:34:28 PM4/4/12
to
On 04/04/2012 12:17 AM, wy wrote:
> On Apr 4, 1:09 am, Richard Steel<rsteel2...@aol.com> wrote:
>> On Apr 3, 10:06 pm, wy<w...@myself.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Apr 3, 11:55 pm, Richard Steel<rsteel2...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> On Apr 3, 6:47 pm, wy<w...@myself.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>> On Apr 3, 8:41 pm, Richard Steel<rsteel2...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>> They Don�t Know Us
> On Apr 4, 1:09 am, Richard Steel<rsteel2...@aol.com> wrote:
>> On Apr 3, 10:06 pm, wy<w...@myself.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Apr 3, 11:55 pm, Richard Steel<rsteel2...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> On Apr 3, 6:47 pm, wy<w...@myself.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>> On Apr 3, 8:41 pm, Richard Steel<rsteel2...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>> Liberals don�t bother to understand conservative thought.
wy
Apr 4, 2012, 3:40:08 PM4/4/12
to
On Apr 4, 3:34 pm, David Hartung <da...@hotmaiil.com> wrote:
> On 04/04/2012 12:17 AM, wy wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 4, 1:09 am, Richard Steel<rsteel2...@aol.com> wrote:
> >> On Apr 3, 10:06 pm, wy<w...@myself.com> wrote:
>
> >>> On Apr 3, 11:55 pm, Richard Steel<rsteel2...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >>>> On Apr 3, 6:47 pm, wy<w...@myself.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>> On Apr 3, 8:41 pm, Richard Steel<rsteel2...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> On 04/04/2012 12:17 AM, wy wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 4, 1:09 am, Richard Steel<rsteel2...@aol.com> wrote:
> >> On Apr 3, 10:06 pm, wy<w...@myself.com> wrote:
>
> >>> On Apr 3, 11:55 pm, Richard Steel<rsteel2...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >>>> On Apr 3, 6:47 pm, wy<w...@myself.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>> On Apr 3, 8:41 pm, Richard Steel<rsteel2...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>> They Don t Know Us
> >>>>>>>> Liberals don t bother to understand conservative thought.
just made another pointless statement with no basis in anything.
trainguard
Apr 4, 2012, 4:18:12 PM4/4/12
to
life......isn't it?
trainguard
Apr 4, 2012, 5:08:31 PM4/4/12
to
On Apr 4, 7:31 pm, Richard Steel <rsteel2...@aol.com> wrote:
And I thought you couldn't be bothered.....
> > > Apparently, many liberals were disappointed in the administration’s
> > > defense of Obamacare before the Supreme Court. They felt that the
> > > government’s lawyer, Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, did not
> > > respond effectively to the challenges of some of the conservative
> > > justices.
> > Challenges?
>
> Yes, there were many.
Really? (Yawn....)
>
> > > The editor of Commentary, John Podhoretz,
> > Ah.....I first came across this name many, many, years ago, in an
> > essay by Gore Vidal about American religious nutters, most of which
> > contained names that I had never heard of....
>
> Ah, yes. Gore Vidal - the guy who allowed the film version of his
> play "Visit to a Small Planet" to star Jerry Lewis. Oh, and here's a
> trailer to his film "Myra Breckenridge".
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ezSsK3SgVk8
>
> It opened with John Huston slicing Rex Reed's penis. It's a comedy.
I presume that his novels are a little to hard for you......
>
> > >offered an explanation on
> > > his magazine’s blog. “American liberals,” he wrote, “know their own
> > > language but they don’t know the language of their ideological and
> > > partisan opposite numbers. . . . Conservatives speak liberal, but for
> > > liberals in the United States, conservatism might as well be
> > > Esperanto.”
> > As it's mostly neo-liberalism (in the classical sense of the word),
> > that's hardly surprising!
>
> And you've presented a key difference between yourself and Mr. John
> Podhoretz.
Indeed. I happen to know what I'm talking about.
>While the latter writes clearly, you prefer terms which
> hide your meaning, and are easily confused.
What do you not understand about 'classical (or Gladstonian)
liberalism' or 'neoliberalism? Are you that ignorant?
>That distinction explains
> why Mr. Podhoretz has written speeches for US Presidents, Time
> Magazine, National Review and US News and World Report. And why he's
> a Consulting Editor for HaperCollins, has appeared on FOX News, CNN,
> and The McLaughlin Group.
Oh dear! And he still can't tell Stork from...(sorry!)....and he's
still a political illiterate....
> Podhoretz was also a consultant for the popular television series "The
> West Wing".
Woopee do!
>
> Your proudest achievements seem to be limited to the ability to spell
> the words "wanker," "nutter" and "toss".
My proudest achievement (if we are talking seriously) is what I can
put in front of my name!
>
> > > I have argued this point for many years. In my book to be published
> > > later this month (Still the Best Hope: Why the World Needs American
> > > Values to Triumph),
> > At this point, countless readers start to switch off....
>
> And by "countless readers", you mean...you.
Nope! (As you quaint colonials say!) I mean mosr sensible
people...well, those who don't have you in their kill files...
>
> > >I argue that the Left is a victim of its own
> > > brainwashing. How could they not be? All they hear, see, and read from
> > > childhood on, from elementary school through graduate school, on TV
> > > and in the movies, are leftist ideas.
> > Which are what, exactly?
>
> Ah, a fair question. Good for you, Barry, well done.
Oh, I know already! But what do you (and people like you) actually
think that they are?
> The core assumption of the Left is that the overwhelming majority of
> people have no idea how to handle their lives.
Nope!
>Oh, sure, they can
> handle the small stuff like managing to get to work and so on - but
> just take a look at how they spend their free time. Instead of
> reading the classics and bettering themselves, they fret of "The
> Hunger Games" or getting on Level Nine while playing "Call of Duty:
> Modern Warfare 3" They eat utter rubbish and their lives are
> completely out of control.
That sounds like you, Richard....
>
> Most people are children to need a firm hand to allow them to reach
> their true potential. That why the Best and the Brightest need to run
> the world. Take decisions out of the hand of the childish masses, and
> allow the cool logic of the educated to run the world fairly.
That sounds like Plato....and Hobbes.....
>
> Yes, conservatives understand how the Left thinks.
Neo-Platonism is not part of socialism....and there are no Philosopher
Kings...
(Shall we adjourn while you start searching Wikipedia?)
>
> > > Yet this is not true for conservatives. One would have to grow up in a
> > > silent monastery not to be regularly exposed to liberal and leftist
> > > ideas.
> > Matches their ignororance of about conservative ideas....
>
> Now, Barry, we've spoken about this before. When accusing someone of
> "ignorance" - it's essential to spell the word properly.
>
> That being said, please explain what you believe are "conservative
> ideas".
I did that once before..and it went in one ear and came out the other!
O.K. Here goes! The basic tenet of conservatism is that human nature
is fixed and immutable. The secular version of the doctrine of
original sin. Consequently, the selfishness and destructive tendencies
of the human personality have to be kept in check by some form of
authority. That is the Hobbesian view of society, in which we
surrender part of our liberty to a form of authority that guarantees
some kind of order. That alone guarantees any form of civilised
existence, otherwise the alternative is the "state of nature" in which
the life of man is 'solitary, nasty, brutish, and short." Now, most
conservatives have thought that such authority is derived from certain
institutions in society. These are the family, the institution of
property, the church (or something having a similar moral authority)
and the government. These institutions are interlocked, and form an
organic whole. They are often thought of as a hierarchy, functioning
like organs in a human body, each having its own function, but co-
operating to allow the body to grow. This Aristotelian organic view of
society is sometimes (not always) extended to include race and culture
as an overarching institution socialising the individual, and through
which the individual receives their language and values. Now, the
entire point of conservatism is to 'conserve' or protect these
institutions. Change will always occur, but change must be managed in
such a way that it does not subvert these safeguards of the social
order.
That, Richard, is what conservatism is!
> > One wonders what is being sold? >
>
> Why wonder why? A link to the article was provided - you could have
> easily looked it up yourself. BTW, it's a rotating ad which at the
> time sold solar panels.
>
> > The latest Readers Digest coffee table
> > book offer? Reproductions of Tretchikoff paintings? 'Gated Condos' in
> > Florida? ("Let Steve introduce you to a new way of life with people
> > just like yourselves...")
>
> And this is the argument you present to show that you understand
> conservatives? Really? "Reader's Digest" cracks? Just how out of
> date are your references?
>
> "Reader's Digest" sneers are what 60s Liberals stated to imply that
> conservatives were ten years behind the times and poorly read to
> boot.
Ah...the penny has dropped!
>
> > > For 30 years I have had leading left-wing thinkers on my radio show,
> > Who were they?
>
> Norm Chomsky, Al Frankin, Andrew Sullivan, David Corn, Robert Riech
> are are among the guests he's had his show.
Then why doesn't he say so?
>
> > > and I continue to be shocked at their lack of awareness of
> > > conservative arguments. About two years ago, for example, I asked one
> > > of the most powerful Democratic members of Congress — a major force
> > > behind every tax increase — what tax rate he thought might be too
> > > high.
> > Who was he? Why was he thought to be a 'left-wing thinker'?
>
> Dennis probably couldn't get permission to mention his name.
(Smirk!)
>
> > > He replied that he had not given it thought.
> > You don't say!
>
> He DID say. Do try to keep up, won't you?
>
> > > I asked a leading
> > > liberal writer
> > Who?
>
> Again, Dennis almost certainly couldn't get permission to mention the
> Leftist's name. You side tend towards having rather thin skins,
> don'tchaknow?
I'm bemused that he writes tosh like this!
>
> > >who maintained that all American wars since World War
> > > II had been imperialist, if he thought the Korean War was also
> > > imperialistic. He replied that he didn’t know enough about that war to
> > > respond.
> > Of course, he could have quoted Stone's book.
>
> Now, isn't this interesting? You pride yourself in refusing to read
> The National Review, Rush Limbaugh, or pretty much an conservative
> voice --- and yet you demand that people know what you're talking
> about when referring to "Stone's book".
I think that most people who know anything about the Korean War would
be aware of his 'Hidden History'!
>
> > > After interviewing leftists, liberal listeners frequently ask me why I
> > > don’t invite the best liberals on to my show.
> > > The answer is that I have had some of the best liberals on my show.
> > > They just don’t tend to do well when challenged by thoughtful
> > > conservatives.
> > How much more of this garbage is there?
>
> And that's an argument that you present to prove that you're open
> minded and understand the conservative mind?
I don't suffer fools gladly, Richard!
Perhaps the fact that he was writing crap may have something to do
with it.....
>
> > > I bumped into New York Times columnist Tom Friedman at Dulles Airport
> > > a few months ago and asked him if he would ever come on talk radio. He
> > > said he doesn’t do such shows. Yet, shortly thereafter he went on NPR.
> > > What he meant to say was that he doesn’t go on conservative shows.
> > Perhaps he doesn't like Podhoretz, but was too polite to admit it....
>
> OK, so during a conversation with Dennis Prager, Tom Friedman didn't
> mention that he didn't like Podhoretz. What's that got to do with his
> lying about not doing radio shows?
>
> > > Why don’t liberals read us or listen to us or debate us?
> > > Because the Left has convinced itself that the Right is unworthy of
> > > such attention.
> > Or that the American 'right' has as much to do with genuine
> > conservatism as Dresden China has to do with a real shepherdess!
>
> Please tell me - what is TRUE conservatism, in your mind.
Just did it, Richard!
>
> > > They are certain that conservatives are sexist, intolerant,
> > > xenophobic, homophobic, Islamophobic, racist, and bigoted, not to
> > > mention anti-intellectual and anti-science.
> > Correction. The current American 'right are.....but they are not
> > conservatives!
>
> Please tell me what you consider to be a true conservative.
Already did that!
>
> > > The Left has a mutually reinforcing dynamic at work here. Because
> > > liberals believe conservatives are all these terrible things, they do
> > > not bother acquainting themselves with conservative arguments.
> > What would Podhoretz know about conservative arguments?
>
> Again, the article was written by Dennis Prager. Dennis QUOTED John
> Podhoretz. John Podhoretz did not write the article.
As we say across the pond..."they both piss in the same pot!"
>
> > > And
> > > because they do not acquaint themselves with conservative arguments,
> > > they are able to go on believing that conservatives are all these
> > > terrible things.
> > I have read (over the years) selections of Aristotle, Aquinas, Hobbes,
> > Burke, Peel, Disraeli, Herder, Hegel, et al. I am familiar with
> > conservative arguments. When do we debate?
>
> Tomorrow, if you like. Link to krla870.com, listen to the show, then
> call in.
Not from Britain! But how about you debating in his stead? If you can,
of course!
>
> > > Take race-based affirmative action. There is overwhelming evidence
> > > that it has hurt black college students. Nevertheless, liberals
> > > dismiss conservative opposition to affirmative action as racist.
> > > Therefore they do not read any of the empirically based studies and
> > > arguments against affirmative action. Why read racist hate?
> > > I wonder what it would take to persuade Cornel West to debate Walter
> > > Williams or Thomas Sowell on the issue of race-based affirmative
> > > action.
> > I'd rather debate their neo-liberal economic ideas! That's far more
> > important.
>
> Then call up Dennis on krla870.com, and discuss that issue.
>
> > > One other example: Some of the most eminent climate scientists and
> > > physicists have questioned man-made global-warming computer models.
> > > Nevertheless, no liberal I am aware of has ever responded to what MIT
> > > meteorologist Richard Lindzen or Princeton physicist William Happer
> > > has written. After all, if every scientist who challenges global-
> > > warming orthodoxy is anti-science, why read their literature?
> > > I wonder what it would take to persuade Al Gore to debate Richard
> > > Lindzen on whether man-made carbon-dioxide emissions are leading to a
> > > worldwide environmental catastrophe.
> > What has global warming to do with conservative ideology?
>
> It's what Leftists use to attack conservatives. It's also the tool
> Liberals plan to use to create a one world government.
Christ! You really are a nutter!
>
> > > So, it is rather rare to see a liberal actually forced to debate
> > > conservative intellectuals.
> > (Snicker!!!)
>
> You're taking a candy break?
>
> > >And after last week in the Supreme Court,
> > > it may become even rarer.
> > > — Dennis Prager is a nationally syndicated radio-talk-show host and
> > > columnist. He may be contacted through his website, dennisprager.com.
> > I don't think I'll bother....
>
> You don't dare - because Dennis would force you to actually think.
> Because he is a conservative who is far more educated than you.
If that 'piece' was an example....I rather doubt it...
Dr. Barry Worthington
And I thought you couldn't be bothered.....
> > > Apparently, many liberals were disappointed in the administration’s
> > > defense of Obamacare before the Supreme Court. They felt that the
> > > government’s lawyer, Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, did not
> > > respond effectively to the challenges of some of the conservative
> > > justices.
> > Challenges?
>
> Yes, there were many.
>
> > > The editor of Commentary, John Podhoretz,
> > Ah.....I first came across this name many, many, years ago, in an
> > essay by Gore Vidal about American religious nutters, most of which
> > contained names that I had never heard of....
>
> Ah, yes. Gore Vidal - the guy who allowed the film version of his
> play "Visit to a Small Planet" to star Jerry Lewis. Oh, and here's a
> trailer to his film "Myra Breckenridge".
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ezSsK3SgVk8
>
> It opened with John Huston slicing Rex Reed's penis. It's a comedy.
>
> > >offered an explanation on
> > > his magazine’s blog. “American liberals,” he wrote, “know their own
> > > language but they don’t know the language of their ideological and
> > > partisan opposite numbers. . . . Conservatives speak liberal, but for
> > > liberals in the United States, conservatism might as well be
> > > Esperanto.”
> > As it's mostly neo-liberalism (in the classical sense of the word),
> > that's hardly surprising!
>
> And you've presented a key difference between yourself and Mr. John
> Podhoretz.
>While the latter writes clearly, you prefer terms which
> hide your meaning, and are easily confused.
liberalism' or 'neoliberalism? Are you that ignorant?
>That distinction explains
> why Mr. Podhoretz has written speeches for US Presidents, Time
> Magazine, National Review and US News and World Report. And why he's
> a Consulting Editor for HaperCollins, has appeared on FOX News, CNN,
> and The McLaughlin Group.
still a political illiterate....
> Podhoretz was also a consultant for the popular television series "The
> West Wing".
>
> Your proudest achievements seem to be limited to the ability to spell
> the words "wanker," "nutter" and "toss".
put in front of my name!
>
> > > I have argued this point for many years. In my book to be published
> > > later this month (Still the Best Hope: Why the World Needs American
> > > Values to Triumph),
> > At this point, countless readers start to switch off....
>
> And by "countless readers", you mean...you.
people...well, those who don't have you in their kill files...
>
> > >I argue that the Left is a victim of its own
> > > brainwashing. How could they not be? All they hear, see, and read from
> > > childhood on, from elementary school through graduate school, on TV
> > > and in the movies, are leftist ideas.
> > Which are what, exactly?
>
> Ah, a fair question. Good for you, Barry, well done.
think that they are?
> The core assumption of the Left is that the overwhelming majority of
> people have no idea how to handle their lives.
>Oh, sure, they can
> handle the small stuff like managing to get to work and so on - but
> just take a look at how they spend their free time. Instead of
> reading the classics and bettering themselves, they fret of "The
> Hunger Games" or getting on Level Nine while playing "Call of Duty:
> Modern Warfare 3" They eat utter rubbish and their lives are
> completely out of control.
>
> Most people are children to need a firm hand to allow them to reach
> their true potential. That why the Best and the Brightest need to run
> the world. Take decisions out of the hand of the childish masses, and
> allow the cool logic of the educated to run the world fairly.
>
> Yes, conservatives understand how the Left thinks.
Kings...
(Shall we adjourn while you start searching Wikipedia?)
>
> > > Yet this is not true for conservatives. One would have to grow up in a
> > > silent monastery not to be regularly exposed to liberal and leftist
> > > ideas.
> > Matches their ignororance of about conservative ideas....
>
> Now, Barry, we've spoken about this before. When accusing someone of
> "ignorance" - it's essential to spell the word properly.
>
> That being said, please explain what you believe are "conservative
> ideas".
O.K. Here goes! The basic tenet of conservatism is that human nature
is fixed and immutable. The secular version of the doctrine of
original sin. Consequently, the selfishness and destructive tendencies
of the human personality have to be kept in check by some form of
authority. That is the Hobbesian view of society, in which we
surrender part of our liberty to a form of authority that guarantees
some kind of order. That alone guarantees any form of civilised
existence, otherwise the alternative is the "state of nature" in which
the life of man is 'solitary, nasty, brutish, and short." Now, most
conservatives have thought that such authority is derived from certain
institutions in society. These are the family, the institution of
property, the church (or something having a similar moral authority)
and the government. These institutions are interlocked, and form an
organic whole. They are often thought of as a hierarchy, functioning
like organs in a human body, each having its own function, but co-
operating to allow the body to grow. This Aristotelian organic view of
society is sometimes (not always) extended to include race and culture
as an overarching institution socialising the individual, and through
which the individual receives their language and values. Now, the
entire point of conservatism is to 'conserve' or protect these
institutions. Change will always occur, but change must be managed in
such a way that it does not subvert these safeguards of the social
order.
That, Richard, is what conservatism is!
> > One wonders what is being sold? >
>
> Why wonder why? A link to the article was provided - you could have
> easily looked it up yourself. BTW, it's a rotating ad which at the
> time sold solar panels.
>
> > The latest Readers Digest coffee table
> > book offer? Reproductions of Tretchikoff paintings? 'Gated Condos' in
> > Florida? ("Let Steve introduce you to a new way of life with people
> > just like yourselves...")
>
> And this is the argument you present to show that you understand
> conservatives? Really? "Reader's Digest" cracks? Just how out of
> date are your references?
>
> "Reader's Digest" sneers are what 60s Liberals stated to imply that
> conservatives were ten years behind the times and poorly read to
> boot.
>
> > > For 30 years I have had leading left-wing thinkers on my radio show,
> > Who were they?
>
> Norm Chomsky, Al Frankin, Andrew Sullivan, David Corn, Robert Riech
> are are among the guests he's had his show.
>
> > > and I continue to be shocked at their lack of awareness of
> > > conservative arguments. About two years ago, for example, I asked one
> > > of the most powerful Democratic members of Congress — a major force
> > > behind every tax increase — what tax rate he thought might be too
> > > high.
> > Who was he? Why was he thought to be a 'left-wing thinker'?
>
> Dennis probably couldn't get permission to mention his name.
>
> > > He replied that he had not given it thought.
> > You don't say!
>
> He DID say. Do try to keep up, won't you?
>
> > > I asked a leading
> > > liberal writer
> > Who?
>
> Again, Dennis almost certainly couldn't get permission to mention the
> Leftist's name. You side tend towards having rather thin skins,
> don'tchaknow?
>
> > >who maintained that all American wars since World War
> > > II had been imperialist, if he thought the Korean War was also
> > > imperialistic. He replied that he didn’t know enough about that war to
> > > respond.
> > Of course, he could have quoted Stone's book.
>
> Now, isn't this interesting? You pride yourself in refusing to read
> The National Review, Rush Limbaugh, or pretty much an conservative
> voice --- and yet you demand that people know what you're talking
> about when referring to "Stone's book".
be aware of his 'Hidden History'!
>
> > > After interviewing leftists, liberal listeners frequently ask me why I
> > > don’t invite the best liberals on to my show.
> > > The answer is that I have had some of the best liberals on my show.
> > > They just don’t tend to do well when challenged by thoughtful
> > > conservatives.
> > How much more of this garbage is there?
>
> And that's an argument that you present to prove that you're open
> minded and understand the conservative mind?
with it.....
>
> > > I bumped into New York Times columnist Tom Friedman at Dulles Airport
> > > a few months ago and asked him if he would ever come on talk radio. He
> > > said he doesn’t do such shows. Yet, shortly thereafter he went on NPR.
> > > What he meant to say was that he doesn’t go on conservative shows.
> > Perhaps he doesn't like Podhoretz, but was too polite to admit it....
>
> OK, so during a conversation with Dennis Prager, Tom Friedman didn't
> mention that he didn't like Podhoretz. What's that got to do with his
> lying about not doing radio shows?
>
> > > Why don’t liberals read us or listen to us or debate us?
> > > Because the Left has convinced itself that the Right is unworthy of
> > > such attention.
> > Or that the American 'right' has as much to do with genuine
> > conservatism as Dresden China has to do with a real shepherdess!
>
> Please tell me - what is TRUE conservatism, in your mind.
>
> > > They are certain that conservatives are sexist, intolerant,
> > > xenophobic, homophobic, Islamophobic, racist, and bigoted, not to
> > > mention anti-intellectual and anti-science.
> > Correction. The current American 'right are.....but they are not
> > conservatives!
>
> Please tell me what you consider to be a true conservative.
>
> > > The Left has a mutually reinforcing dynamic at work here. Because
> > > liberals believe conservatives are all these terrible things, they do
> > > not bother acquainting themselves with conservative arguments.
> > What would Podhoretz know about conservative arguments?
>
> Again, the article was written by Dennis Prager. Dennis QUOTED John
> Podhoretz. John Podhoretz did not write the article.
>
> > > And
> > > because they do not acquaint themselves with conservative arguments,
> > > they are able to go on believing that conservatives are all these
> > > terrible things.
> > I have read (over the years) selections of Aristotle, Aquinas, Hobbes,
> > Burke, Peel, Disraeli, Herder, Hegel, et al. I am familiar with
> > conservative arguments. When do we debate?
>
> Tomorrow, if you like. Link to krla870.com, listen to the show, then
> call in.
of course!
>
> > > Take race-based affirmative action. There is overwhelming evidence
> > > that it has hurt black college students. Nevertheless, liberals
> > > dismiss conservative opposition to affirmative action as racist.
> > > Therefore they do not read any of the empirically based studies and
> > > arguments against affirmative action. Why read racist hate?
> > > I wonder what it would take to persuade Cornel West to debate Walter
> > > Williams or Thomas Sowell on the issue of race-based affirmative
> > > action.
> > I'd rather debate their neo-liberal economic ideas! That's far more
> > important.
>
> Then call up Dennis on krla870.com, and discuss that issue.
>
> > > One other example: Some of the most eminent climate scientists and
> > > physicists have questioned man-made global-warming computer models.
> > > Nevertheless, no liberal I am aware of has ever responded to what MIT
> > > meteorologist Richard Lindzen or Princeton physicist William Happer
> > > has written. After all, if every scientist who challenges global-
> > > warming orthodoxy is anti-science, why read their literature?
> > > I wonder what it would take to persuade Al Gore to debate Richard
> > > Lindzen on whether man-made carbon-dioxide emissions are leading to a
> > > worldwide environmental catastrophe.
> > What has global warming to do with conservative ideology?
>
> It's what Leftists use to attack conservatives. It's also the tool
> Liberals plan to use to create a one world government.
>
> > > So, it is rather rare to see a liberal actually forced to debate
> > > conservative intellectuals.
> > (Snicker!!!)
>
> You're taking a candy break?
>
> > >And after last week in the Supreme Court,
> > > it may become even rarer.
> > > — Dennis Prager is a nationally syndicated radio-talk-show host and
> > > columnist. He may be contacted through his website, dennisprager.com.
> > I don't think I'll bother....
>
> You don't dare - because Dennis would force you to actually think.
> Because he is a conservative who is far more educated than you.
Dr. Barry Worthington
Message has been deleted
Steve
Apr 4, 2012, 6:25:24 PM4/4/12
to
On Wed, 4 Apr 2012 14:08:31 -0700 (PDT), trainguard
<barry_wo...@sky.com> wrote:
>My proudest achievement (if we are talking seriously) is what I can
>put in front of my name!
...and that says everything you need to know about Worthington... His
<barry_wo...@sky.com> wrote:
>My proudest achievement (if we are talking seriously) is what I can
>put in front of my name!
proudest achievement had nothing to do with producing anything. It had
to do with learning (by rote, no doubt) stuff that other people
produced.
--
Transcript of Canyon schooling Kurt Lochner about Faraday's Law
https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups&hl=en#!topic/sci.physics/qB8eTqq1I_w
Lochner: Steve, you made the claim that a changing magnetic field causes an electrical field.. Need a cite?
Canyon: <ROTFL> Of course, that is quiet true
Lochner: Nope, and I defy you to prove otherwise..
Canyon: OK
"According to Faraday's law, a changing magnetic field can create an electric field"
http://maxwell.ucdavis.edu/~electro/faraday/overview.html
..and this Syracuse University physics dept. has a lecture with a chapter title of "Changing magnetic field creates electric field"
www.phy.syr.edu/~xxing/teaching/.../34_LectureOutline_PRS.pp
Oh, and look, the University of Texas-Pan American has the phrase "Changing magnetic field creates electric field, and vice versa" in a lecture summary.
http://zope.cs.panam.edu/ee/faculty-staff/hfoltz/course-materials/elee-6399-antennas-propagation/lecture-summaries
https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups&hl=en#!topic/sci.physics/qB8eTqq1I_w
Steve
Apr 4, 2012, 6:27:56 PM4/4/12
to
OK..
Irony anyone?
wy
Apr 4, 2012, 6:34:22 PM4/4/12
to
are really good at that.
trainguard
Apr 4, 2012, 6:47:27 PM4/4/12
to
On Apr 4, 11:25 pm, Steve <stevencan...@yahooooo.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Apr 2012 14:08:31 -0700 (PDT), trainguard
>
> On Wed, 4 Apr 2012 14:08:31 -0700 (PDT), trainguard
>
> <barry_worthing...@sky.com> wrote:
> >My proudest achievement (if we are talking seriously) is what I can
> >put in front of my name!
>
> ...and that says everything you need to know about Worthington... His
> proudest achievement had nothing to do with producing anything. It had
> to do with learning (by rote, no doubt) stuff that other people
> produced.
Steve does not realise that it is necessary to produce an original
> >My proudest achievement (if we are talking seriously) is what I can
> >put in front of my name!
>
> ...and that says everything you need to know about Worthington... His
> proudest achievement had nothing to do with producing anything. It had
> to do with learning (by rote, no doubt) stuff that other people
> produced.
piece of research work in the form of a thesis, something that adds to
the total sum of human knowledge, in order to obtain a Doctorate. This
is because he is not only very ignorant, but actually as thick as pig
shit....
Dr. Barry Worthington
>
> --
>
> Transcript of Canyon schooling Kurt Lochner about Faraday's Law
>
>
> Lochner: Steve, you made the claim that a changing magnetic field causes an electrical field.. Need a cite?
>
> Canyon: <ROTFL> Of course, that is quiet true
>
> Lochner: Nope, and I defy you to prove otherwise..
>
> Canyon: OK
>
> "According to Faraday's law, a changing magnetic field can create an electric field"http://maxwell.ucdavis.edu/~electro/faraday/overview.html
>
> ..and this Syracuse University physics dept. has a lecture with a chapter title of "Changing magnetic field creates electric field"www.phy.syr.edu/~xxing/teaching/.../34_LectureOutline_PRS.pp
>
> Oh, and look, the University of Texas-Pan American has the phrase "Changing magnetic field creates electric field, and vice versa" in a lecture summary.http://zope.cs.panam.edu/ee/faculty-staff/hfoltz/course-materials/ele...https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups&hl=en#!topic/sci.physics/...
> Lochner: Steve, you made the claim that a changing magnetic field causes an electrical field.. Need a cite?
>
> Canyon: <ROTFL> Of course, that is quiet true
>
> Lochner: Nope, and I defy you to prove otherwise..
>
> Canyon: OK
>
> "According to Faraday's law, a changing magnetic field can create an electric field"http://maxwell.ucdavis.edu/~electro/faraday/overview.html
>
> ..and this Syracuse University physics dept. has a lecture with a chapter title of "Changing magnetic field creates electric field"www.phy.syr.edu/~xxing/teaching/.../34_LectureOutline_PRS.pp
>
Steve
Apr 4, 2012, 7:52:56 PM4/4/12
to
On Wed, 4 Apr 2012 15:47:27 -0700 (PDT), trainguard
<barry_wo...@sky.com> wrote:
>On Apr 4, 11:25 pm, Steve <stevencan...@yahooooo.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 4 Apr 2012 14:08:31 -0700 (PDT), trainguard
>>
>> <barry_worthing...@sky.com> wrote:
>> >My proudest achievement (if we are talking seriously) is what I can
>> >put in front of my name!
>>
>> ...and that says everything you need to know about Worthington... His
>> proudest achievement had nothing to do with producing anything. It had
>> to do with learning (by rote, no doubt) stuff that other people
>> produced.
>
>Steve does not realise that it is necessary to produce an original
>piece of research work in the form of a thesis, something that adds to
>the total sum of human knowledge, in order to obtain a Doctorate. This
>is because he is not only very ignorant, but actually as thick as pig
>shit....
<ROTFLMAO> Steve "realizes" that a thesis is nothing more than whole
<barry_wo...@sky.com> wrote:
>On Apr 4, 11:25 pm, Steve <stevencan...@yahooooo.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 4 Apr 2012 14:08:31 -0700 (PDT), trainguard
>>
>> <barry_worthing...@sky.com> wrote:
>> >My proudest achievement (if we are talking seriously) is what I can
>> >put in front of my name!
>>
>> ...and that says everything you need to know about Worthington... His
>> proudest achievement had nothing to do with producing anything. It had
>> to do with learning (by rote, no doubt) stuff that other people
>> produced.
>
>Steve does not realise that it is necessary to produce an original
>piece of research work in the form of a thesis, something that adds to
>the total sum of human knowledge, in order to obtain a Doctorate. This
>is because he is not only very ignorant, but actually as thick as pig
>shit....
lot of useless information... The doctorate procedure, of course, is
ruled over by another bunch of worthless rote-drones who aren't
qualified to do anything productive...
>Dr. Barry Worthington
>
>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Transcript of Canyon schooling Kurt Lochner about Faraday's Law
>>
>> https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups&hl=en#!topic/sci.physics/...
>>
>> Lochner: Steve, you made the claim that a changing magnetic field causes an electrical field.. Need a cite?
>>
>> Canyon: <ROTFL> Of course, that is quiet true
>>
>> Lochner: Nope, and I defy you to prove otherwise..
>>
>> Canyon: OK
>>
>> "According to Faraday's law, a changing magnetic field can create an electric field"http://maxwell.ucdavis.edu/~electro/faraday/overview.html
>>
>> ..and this Syracuse University physics dept. has a lecture with a chapter title of "Changing magnetic field creates electric field"www.phy.syr.edu/~xxing/teaching/.../34_LectureOutline_PRS.pp
>>
>> Oh, and look, the University of Texas-Pan American has the phrase "Changing magnetic field creates electric field, and vice versa" in a lecture summary.http://zope.cs.panam.edu/ee/faculty-staff/hfoltz/course-materials/ele...https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups&hl=en#!topic/sci.physics/...
--
Transcript of Canyon schooling Kurt Lochner about Faraday's Law
Lochner: Steve, you made the claim that a changing magnetic field causes an electrical field.. Need a cite?
Canyon: <ROTFL> Of course, that is quiet true
Lochner: Nope, and I defy you to prove otherwise..
Canyon: OK
"According to Faraday's law, a changing magnetic field can create an electric field"
http://maxwell.ucdavis.edu/~electro/faraday/overview.html
..and this Syracuse University physics dept. has a lecture with a chapter title of "Changing magnetic field creates electric field"
www.phy.syr.edu/~xxing/teaching/.../34_LectureOutline_PRS.pp
Steve
Apr 4, 2012, 7:52:56 PM4/4/12
to
Baron von Mind
Apr 4, 2012, 7:56:48 PM4/4/12
to
On 4/4/2012 3:47 PM, trainguard wrote:
> he is not only very ignorant, but actually as thick as pig
> shit....
>
> Dr. Barry Worthington
You've apparently spent less time at the farm than you have on swinging
> he is not only very ignorant, but actually as thick as pig
> shit....
>
> Dr. Barry Worthington
sex junkets.
Pig "shit" is rather not to be confused with "thick", try viscous in fact.
Steve
Apr 4, 2012, 8:39:08 PM4/4/12
to
knows is wrong...
This is from pro-KKK, Barry Worthington who insists that
his racist hero, Woodrow Wilson, and his staff were 100%
honest when they told the NAACP that Wilson would never
have selected his friend's racist movie, "The Birth of a
Nation," for viewing at the White House had they known
it's racist theme...
Oh no, even though it was based on
and originally named "The Clansman" after the widely
circulated book and popular play au.thored by his racist
friend.
Worthington insists upon blustering about the USA while
demonstrating his ignorance about it.
It seems very likely that Worthington's "understanding" of
the U.S reconstruction period came straight from that
infamous movie/book. (see below)
"They [the reconstruction era Ku Klux Klan] were tring to dislodge what they
saw as a Northern imposed political elite...the majority
of whom happened to be coloured. You don't know much about
this period of history, do you?"
-- Barry Worthington
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.society.liberalism/msg/e3f6875fa23b2e68?hl=en
<chuckle> Irony anyone? ...as if there was any significant
"Northern political elite...the majority of whom happened to be
coloured."
wy
Apr 4, 2012, 8:39:36 PM4/4/12
to
pointlessness of it. Knowing your affinity for pointlessness, you
will reiterate it.
Steve
Apr 4, 2012, 9:22:22 PM4/4/12
to
posts to the "it really doesn't matter" folder.
NoBody
Apr 5, 2012, 5:32:47 AM4/5/12
to
original post.
trainguard
Apr 5, 2012, 3:32:34 AM4/5/12
to
there is particularly dead about a door-nail. I might have been
inclined, myself, to regard a coffin-nail as the deadest piece of
ironmongery in the trade. But the wisdom of our ancestors is in the
simile; and my unhallowed hands shall not disturb it, or the Country's
done for. You will therefore permit me to repeat, emphatically, that
Marley was as dead as a door-nail. "
Charles Dickens
'A Christmas Carol'
Is 'Spammy' there?
Out of your league, boy....out of your league...
Dr. Barry Worthington
Richard Steel
Apr 8, 2012, 6:08:09 PM4/8/12
to
> > > > Apparently, many liberals were disappointed in the administration’s
> > > > defense of Obamacare before the Supreme Court. They felt that the
> > > > government’s lawyer, Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, did not
> > > > respond effectively to the challenges of some of the conservative
> > > > justices.
> > > Challenges?
> > Yes, there were many.
> Really? (Yawn....)
come backs THAT snappy.
> > > > The editor of Commentary, John Podhoretz,
> > > Ah.....I first came across this name many, many, years ago, in an
> > > essay by Gore Vidal about American religious nutters, most of which
> > > contained names that I had never heard of....
> > Ah, yes. Gore Vidal - the guy who allowed the film version of his
> > play "Visit to a Small Planet" to star Jerry Lewis. Oh, and here's a
> > trailer to his film "Myra Breckenridge".
> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ezSsK3SgVk8
> > It opened with John Huston slicing Rex Reed's penis. It's a comedy.
> I presume that his novels are a little to hard for you......
hold a monopoly on wisdom, learning, and virtue, slithers out from
under its rock.
Victor Davis Hanson writes for the widely respected National Review,
therefore the rest of his body of work is tainted and suspect. Gore
Vidal writes soft-core porn, that is a sign of....gee, what is it a
sign of? That he’s a free spirit? Open minded? Just what do you
tell yourself to justify such rubbish? More important .... when will
you live by the standards that you demand of others?
> > > >offered an explanation on
> > > > his magazine’s blog. “American liberals,” he wrote, “know their own
> > > > language but they don’t know the language of their ideological and
> > > > partisan opposite numbers. . . . Conservatives speak liberal, but for
> > > > liberals in the United States, conservatism might as well be
> > > > Esperanto.”
> > > As it's mostly neo-liberalism (in the classical sense of the word),
> > > that's hardly surprising!
> > And you've presented a key difference between yourself and Mr. John
> > Podhoretz.
> Indeed. I happen to know what I'm talking about.
have mastered the sneer - another skill set you have in common with
spoiled 15 year old girls.
> >While the latter writes clearly, you prefer terms which
> > hide your meaning, and are easily confused.
> What do you not understand about 'classical (or Gladstonian)
> liberalism' or 'neoliberalism? Are you that ignorant?
current home of the Classic Liberal is the Conservative Movement.
Rush Limbaugh is a Classic Liberal. So was Ben Franklin. Ultimately,
the battle comes down to individual liberty vs. collectivism. I
believe in freedom. You believe in bowing your head to Kings.
> >That distinction explains
> > why Mr. Podhoretz has written speeches for US Presidents, Time
> > Magazine, National Review and US News and World Report. And why he's
> > a Consulting Editor for HaperCollins, has appeared on FOX News, CNN,
> > and The McLaughlin Group.
> Oh dear! And he still can't tell Stork from...(sorry!)....and he's
> still a political illiterate....
stopped making sense? Mr. Podhoretz has been a special assistant to
a US Cabinet member. He has been a speech writer for two US
Presidents....and yet he’s a “political illiterate” because his views
conflict with your moldy 70s socialist clichés?
> > Podhoretz was also a consultant for the popular television series "The
> > West Wing".
> Woopee do!
consultant to a long running, critically acclaimed and wildly popular
political television series (while holding views where are
diametrically opposite of the Producers) is an accomplishment of which
a man can justly be proud. Add that to have written for two US
Presidents, assistant to a US Cabinate Member, writer for Time
Magazine, National Review, USNWR, FOX News, CNN....and Mr. Podhoretz
has a career that lessor men can only grumble about bitterly.
> > Your proudest achievements seem to be limited to the ability to spell
> > the words "wanker," "nutter" and "toss".
> My proudest achievement (if we are talking seriously) is what I can
> put in front of my name!
high water mark of your life?
Why is your Ph.D enough for a lifetime, but Dr. Hanson’s easily
brushed aside? Why is your academic achievement awe inspiring, while
Hanson’s portfolio of far greater honors sneered upon?
> > > > I have argued this point for many years. In my book to be published
> > > > later this month (Still the Best Hope: Why the World Needs American
> > > > Values to Triumph),
> > > At this point, countless readers start to switch off....
>
> > And by "countless readers", you mean...you.
>
> Nope! (As you quaint colonials say!)
> I mean mosr sensible
> people...well, those who don't have you in their kill files...
the caliber of people he pisses off. Leftist hysterics only serve to
convince me that I’m on the right path.
> > > >I argue that the Left is a victim of its own
> > > > brainwashing. How could they not be? All they hear, see, and read from
> > > > childhood on, from elementary school through graduate school, on TV
> > > > and in the movies, are leftist ideas.
> > > Which are what, exactly?
> > Ah, a fair question. Good for you, Barry, well done.
> Oh, I know already! But what do you (and people like you) actually
> think that they are?
for social policy. The Left is controlled by those who insist they
alone know what’s good for society - and that “goodness” must be
attained by expanded government action.
> > The core assumption of the Left is that the overwhelming majority of
> > people have no idea how to handle their lives.
> Nope!
government?
> >Oh, sure, they can
> > handle the small stuff like managing to get to work and so on - but
> > just take a look at how they spend their free time. Instead of
> > reading the classics and bettering themselves, they fret of "The
> > Hunger Games" or getting on Level Nine while playing "Call of Duty:
> > Modern Warfare 3" They eat utter rubbish and their lives are
> > completely out of control.
> That sounds like you, Richard....
not reality. It's based on literally nothing other than the need to
satisfy your ego. We’ve never actually met - because you’re terrified
that doing so would destroy a cherished illusion.
> > Most people are children to need a firm hand to allow them to reach
> > their true potential. That why the Best and the Brightest need to run
> > the world. Take decisions out of the hand of the childish masses, and
> > allow the cool logic of the educated to run the world fairly.
> That sounds like Plato....and Hobbes.....
and Conservatives find themselves today.
> > Yes, conservatives understand how the Left thinks.
> Neo-Platonism is not part of socialism....
>....and there are no Philosopher
> Kings...
and the Brightest" - the visions of the anointed. Instead of formal
Royalty, today’s “kings” are faceless bureaucrats who make life and
death decisions without a shred of accountability.
> (Shall we adjourn while you start searching Wikipedia?)
you done that, you wouldn't have shown yourself to be nearly the
horse's ass you did when talking Dr. Hanson, or Dennis Prager.
Is it your assumption that your gray matter is a library which holds
all known knowledge?
> > > > Yet this is not true for conservatives. One would have to grow up in a
> > > > silent monastery not to be regularly exposed to liberal and leftist
> > > > ideas.
> > > Matches their ignororance of about conservative ideas....
> > Now, Barry, we've spoken about this before. When accusing someone of
> > "ignorance" - it's essential to spell the word properly.
> > That being said, please explain what you believe are "conservative
> > ideas".
> I did that once before..and it went in one ear and came out the other!
say.
> O.K. Here goes! The basic tenet of conservatism is that human nature
> is fixed and immutable.
of evolution. The plan is to have humans conform to their ideas,
rather than design systems which take human nature into account. And
when the Left’s badly thought out plans fall apart, the blame is
firmly based on “not enough time or resources.”
> The secular version of the doctrine of
> original sin. Consequently, the selfishness and destructive tendencies
> of the human personality have to be kept in check by some form of
> authority.
responsibility, family, peer pressure, honor. A belief in a God who
judges one at life’s end doesn’t hurt either. The police and courts
are a last resort....not the first.
> That is the Hobbesian view of society, in which we
> surrender part of our liberty to a form of authority that guarantees
> some kind of order.
>That alone guarantees any form of civilised
> existence, otherwise the alternative is the "state of nature" in which
> the life of man is 'solitary, nasty, brutish, and short." Now, most
> conservatives have thought that such authority is derived from certain
> institutions in society. These are the family, the institution of
> property, the church (or something having a similar moral authority)
> and the government.
voluntary. One joins a church of their own free will. Children not
happy with their family can bolt when they turn 18. The Right
believes in choice....you guys believe in faceless bureaucrats making
choices for you.
> These institutions are interlocked, and form an
> organic whole.
for or receive permission from the government to make sure what they
believe jive with official state positions. If a family isn’t happy
with a direction their church is going, they’re more than free to quit
and join another church. Conservatism is bottom up - starting with
the individual. The Left is top down, starting with Kings and working
their way down to peasants for whom they hold contempt.
> They are often thought of as a hierarchy, functioning
> like organs in a human body, each having its own function, but co-
> operating to allow the body to grow.
>This Aristotelian organic view of
> society is sometimes (not always) extended to include race and culture
> as an overarching institution socialising the individual, and through
> which the individual receives their language and values.
consider a conservative to be ...today.
> Now, the
> entire point of conservatism is to 'conserve' or protect these
> institutions.
> Change will always occur, but change must be managed in
> such a way that it does not subvert these safeguards of the social
> order.
someone huge in charge of everything. Conservatives belive in the
Individual, and freedom. The Left believes in some version of the
King.
> That, Richard, is what conservatism is!
correct. You don’t understand modern conservatism.
> > > One wonders what is being sold? >
> > Why wonder why? A link to the article was provided - you could have
> > easily looked it up yourself. BTW, it's a rotating ad which at the
> > time sold solar panels.
> > > The latest Readers Digest coffee table
> > > book offer? Reproductions of Tretchikoff paintings? 'Gated Condos' in
> > > Florida? ("Let Steve introduce you to a new way of life with people
> > > just like yourselves...")
> > And this is the argument you present to show that you understand
> > conservatives? Really? "Reader's Digest" cracks? Just how out of
> > date are your references?
> > "Reader's Digest" sneers are what 60s Liberals stated to imply that
> > conservatives were ten years behind the times and poorly read to
> Ah...the penny has dropped!
....and stays there.
> > > > For 30 years I have had leading left-wing thinkers on my radio show,
> > > Who were they?
> > Norm Chomsky, Al Frankin, Andrew Sullivan, David Corn, Robert Riech
> > are are among the guests he's had his show.
> Then why doesn't he say so?
> > > > and I continue to be shocked at their lack of awareness of
> > > > conservative arguments. About two years ago, for example, I asked one
> > > > of the most powerful Democratic members of Congress — a major force
> > > > behind every tax increase — what tax rate he thought might be too
> > > > high.
> > > > He replied that he had not given it thought.
> > > You don't say!
> > He DID say. Do try to keep up, won't you?
> > > > I asked a leading
> > > > liberal writer
> > > Who?
> > Again, Dennis almost certainly couldn't get permission to mention the
> > Leftist's name. You side tend towards having rather thin skins,
> > don'tchaknow?
> I'm bemused that he writes tosh like this!
Is “tosh” some sort of lower class British 70s slang for a superior
> > > You don't say!
> > He DID say. Do try to keep up, won't you?
> > > > I asked a leading
> > > > liberal writer
> > > Who?
> > Again, Dennis almost certainly couldn't get permission to mention the
> > Leftist's name. You side tend towards having rather thin skins,
> > don'tchaknow?
> I'm bemused that he writes tosh like this!
argument?
> > > >who maintained that all American wars since World War
> > > > II had been imperialist, if he thought the Korean War was also
> > > > imperialistic. He replied that he didn’t know enough about that war to
> > > > respond.
> > > Of course, he could have quoted Stone's book.
>
> > Now, isn't this interesting? You pride yourself in refusing to read
> > The National Review, Rush Limbaugh, or pretty much an conservative
> > voice --- and yet you demand that people know what you're talking
> > about when referring to "Stone's book".
> I think that most people who know anything about the Korean War would
> be aware of his 'Hidden History'!
> > > > After interviewing leftists, liberal listeners frequently ask me why I
> > > > don’t invite the best liberals on to my show.
> > > > The answer is that I have had some of the best liberals on my show.
> > > > They just don’t tend to do well when challenged by thoughtful
> > > > conservatives.
> > > How much more of this garbage is there?
> > And that's an argument that you present to prove that you're open
> > minded and understand the conservative mind?
> I don't suffer fools gladly, Richard!
delusion.
column which has reduced you to a blathering idiot sputtering nonsense
like "smirk",
"Crap" would be Gore Vidal's "Myra Breckenridge." Utter, worthless,
soft-core porn crap.
> > > > I bumped into New York Times columnist Tom Friedman at Dulles Airport
> > > > a few months ago and asked him if he would ever come on talk radio. He
> > > > said he doesn’t do such shows. Yet, shortly thereafter he went on NPR.
> > > > What he meant to say was that he doesn’t go on conservative shows.
> > > Perhaps he doesn't like Podhoretz, but was too polite to admit it....
> > OK, so during a conversation with Dennis Prager, Tom Friedman didn't
> > mention that he didn't like Podhoretz. What's that got to do with his
> > lying about not doing radio shows?
> > > > Why don’t liberals read us or listen to us or debate us?
> > > > Because the Left has convinced itself that the Right is unworthy of
> > > > such attention.
> > > Or that the American 'right' has as much to do with genuine
> > > conservatism as Dresden China has to do with a real shepherdess!
> > Please tell me - what is TRUE conservatism, in your mind.
> Just did it, Richard!
> > > > They are certain that conservatives are sexist, intolerant,
> > > > xenophobic, homophobic, Islamophobic, racist, and bigoted, not to
> > > > mention anti-intellectual and anti-science.
> > > Correction. The current American 'right are.....but they are not
> > > conservatives!
> > Please tell me what you consider to be a true conservative.
> Already did that!
conservative" who's living today.
> > > > The Left has a mutually reinforcing dynamic at work here. Because
> > > > liberals believe conservatives are all these terrible things, they do
> > > > not bother acquainting themselves with conservative arguments.
> > > What would Podhoretz know about conservative arguments?
> > Again, the article was written by Dennis Prager. Dennis QUOTED John
> > Podhoretz. John Podhoretz did not write the article.
> As we say across the pond..."they both piss in the same pot!"
misattributed a source?
> > > > And
> > > > because they do not acquaint themselves with conservative arguments,
> > > > they are able to go on believing that conservatives are all these
> > > > terrible things.
> > > I have read (over the years) selections of Aristotle, Aquinas, Hobbes,
> > > Burke, Peel, Disraeli, Herder, Hegel, et al. I am familiar with
> > > conservative arguments. When do we debate?
> > Tomorrow, if you like. Link to krla870.com, listen to the show, then
> > call in.
> Not from Britain!
considering that we’re communicating via the Internet....kinda hard to
deny.
You can also hear Dennis at:
Hughniverse.com
There you can also listen to Hugh Hewitt. Every Thursday, at 3PM
Pacific Time, you can hear Columnist To the World Mark Steyn - always
a treat!
> But how about you debating in his stead?
> > > > Take race-based affirmative action. There is overwhelming evidence
> > > > that it has hurt black college students. Nevertheless, liberals
> > > > dismiss conservative opposition to affirmative action as racist.
> > > > Therefore they do not read any of the empirically based studies and
> > > > arguments against affirmative action. Why read racist hate?
> > > > I wonder what it would take to persuade Cornel West to debate Walter
> > > > Williams or Thomas Sowell on the issue of race-based affirmative
> > > > action.
> > > I'd rather debate their neo-liberal economic ideas! That's far more
> > > important.
> > Then call up Dennis on krla870.com, and discuss that issue.
But then, you realize that Dennis would chew you up and spit you out,
don't you?
> > > > One other example: Some of the most eminent climate scientists and
> > > > physicists have questioned man-made global-warming computer models.
> > > > Nevertheless, no liberal I am aware of has ever responded to what MIT
> > > > meteorologist Richard Lindzen or Princeton physicist William Happer
> > > > has written. After all, if every scientist who challenges global-
> > > > warming orthodoxy is anti-science, why read their literature?
> > > > I wonder what it would take to persuade Al Gore to debate Richard
> > > > Lindzen on whether man-made carbon-dioxide emissions are leading to a
> > > > worldwide environmental catastrophe.
> > > What has global warming to do with conservative ideology?
> > It's what Leftists use to attack conservatives. It's also the tool
> > Liberals plan to use to create a one world government.
> Christ! You really are a nutter!
An elderly woman was ordered to find a new GP because the “carbon
footprint” of her two-mile round trips to the surgery where she had
been treated for 30 years was too large.
By Daily Telegraph Reporter
Avril Mulcahy, 83, was told to address the “green travelling issues”
over her journeys from her home in Westcliff-on-Sea, Essex, to the
West Road Surgery. The surgery wrote to Mrs Mulcahy, telling her to
register with a new GP within 28 days.
The letter said: “Our greatest concern is for your health and
convenience but also taking into consideration green travelling
issues. Re: Carbon footprints and winter weather conditions, we feel
it would be advisable for patients to register at surgeries nearer to
where they live.
"We would be very grateful if you could make the necessary
arrangements to re-register at another practice.”
Mrs Mulcahy, a grandmother, believes the decision was made because she
complained about a doctor.
“When I read through the letter, I found it absolutely ridiculous they
were saying the reason was to decrease their carbon footprint,” she
said. “I have been a patient at the practice for 30 years now, and
there has never been any problem.
“To be treated like this, just because I live too far away or for what
I feel is a reaction to my complaint, is disgraceful. It feels like
they are just coming up with an excuse to get rid of me.”
Mrs Mulcahy said she was anxious and worried at having to try to find
a new GP. “If they really cared, they could have found me a new
practice instead of just basically saying do it yourself,” she said.
“It is a great worry to me as I am elderly and need to get repeat
prescriptions for medication. This is really a stress I could do
without. I won’t let it rest though, because I feel like I am being
treated poorly.”
The West Road Surgery declined to comment. Andrew Stride, the head of
governance, risk and customer services for NHS South Essex, said: “We
would advise all patients who have concerns about any aspect of local
NHS care to contact the patient advice and liaison service.
"While we are unable to comment on individual cases, we would like to
assure patients there is a procedure GP practices need to follow
before they can remove patients from their lists.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/9184693/Surgery-bans-elderly-patient-over-her-carbon-footprint.html
> > > > So, it is rather rare to see a liberal actually forced to debate
> > > > conservative intellectuals.
> > > (Snicker!!!)
> > You're taking a candy break?
> > > >And after last week in the Supreme Court,
> > > > it may become even rarer.
> > > > — Dennis Prager is a nationally syndicated radio-talk-show host and
> > > > columnist. He may be contacted through his website, dennisprager.com.
> > > I don't think I'll bother....
> > You don't dare - because Dennis would force you to actually think.
> > Because he is a conservative who is far more educated than you.
> If that 'piece' was an example....I rather doubt it...
article.
Richard Steel
Apr 8, 2012, 7:13:48 PM4/8/12
to
> Apparantly YOU don't realize two things
> 1) Conservatives have never done anything to "progress" the nation.
You actually believe that the Left holds a monopoly on virtue?
You're an idiot.
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Richard Steel
Apr 8, 2012, 9:46:25 PM4/8/12
to
> Have you ever read an American History text, Steel-Loon?
Yup.
trainguard
Apr 9, 2012, 5:51:28 AM4/9/12
to
On Apr 8, 11:08 pm, Richard Steel <rsteel2...@aol.com> wrote:
> > > > > Apparently, many liberals were disappointed in the administration’s
> > > > > defense of Obamacare before the Supreme Court. They felt that the
> > > > > government’s lawyer, Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, did not
> > > > > respond effectively to the challenges of some of the conservative
> > > > > justices.
> > > > Challenges?
> > > Yes, there were many.
> > Really? (Yawn....)
>
> One usually needs a 15 year old spoiled daughter of a rich man to hear
> come backs THAT snappy.
Well...it's what you deserve....be grateful that I bother to comment
> > > > > Apparently, many liberals were disappointed in the administration’s
> > > > > defense of Obamacare before the Supreme Court. They felt that the
> > > > > government’s lawyer, Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, did not
> > > > > respond effectively to the challenges of some of the conservative
> > > > > justices.
> > > > Challenges?
> > > Yes, there were many.
> > Really? (Yawn....)
>
> One usually needs a 15 year old spoiled daughter of a rich man to hear
> come backs THAT snappy.
at all....
>
> > > > > The editor of Commentary, John Podhoretz,
> > > > Ah.....I first came across this name many, many, years ago, in an
> > > > essay by Gore Vidal about American religious nutters, most of which
> > > > contained names that I had never heard of....
> > > Ah, yes. Gore Vidal - the guy who allowed the film version of his
> > > play "Visit to a Small Planet" to star Jerry Lewis. Oh, and here's a
> > > trailer to his film "Myra Breckenridge".
> > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ezSsK3SgVk8
> > > It opened with John Huston slicing Rex Reed's penis. It's a comedy.
> > I presume that his novels are a little to hard for you......
>
> And again, the Leftist compulsive need to convince itself that they
> hold a monopoly on wisdom, learning, and virtue, slithers out from
> under its rock.
them).....but you are too stupid to realise that.
> Victor Davis Hanson writes for the widely respected National Review,
> therefore the rest of his body of work is tainted and suspect.
Gore
> Vidal writes soft-core porn,
Insightful essays a lot of the time.....and some interesting
> Vidal writes soft-core porn,
historical novels.
>that is a sign of....gee, what is it a
> sign of? That he’s a free spirit? Open minded? Just what do you
> tell yourself to justify such rubbish? More important .... when will
> you live by the standards that you demand of others?
>
> > > > >offered an explanation on
> > > > > his magazine’s blog. “American liberals,” he wrote, “know their own
> > > > > language but they don’t know the language of their ideological and
> > > > > partisan opposite numbers. . . . Conservatives speak liberal, but for
> > > > > liberals in the United States, conservatism might as well be
> > > > > Esperanto.”
> > > > As it's mostly neo-liberalism (in the classical sense of the word),
> > > > that's hardly surprising!
> > > And you've presented a key difference between yourself and Mr. John
> > > Podhoretz.
> > Indeed. I happen to know what I'm talking about.
>
> No, you know how to regurgitate tired clichés from the 70s. And you
> have mastered the sneer - another skill set you have in common with
> spoiled 15 year old girls.
>
> > >While the latter writes clearly, you prefer terms which
> > > hide your meaning, and are easily confused.
> > What do you not understand about 'classical (or Gladstonian)
> > liberalism' or 'neoliberalism? Are you that ignorant?
>
> (sigh) Barry....Barry....Barry.....I AM a Classic Liberal. The
> current home of the Classic Liberal is the Conservative Movement.
realise this!
> Rush Limbaugh is a Classic Liberal. So was Ben Franklin. Ultimately,
> the battle comes down to individual liberty vs. collectivism. I
> believe in freedom. You believe in bowing your head to Kings.
your mouth out!
>
> > >That distinction explains
> > > why Mr. Podhoretz has written speeches for US Presidents, Time
> > > Magazine, National Review and US News and World Report. And why he's
> > > a Consulting Editor for HaperCollins, has appeared on FOX News, CNN,
> > > and The McLaughlin Group.
> > Oh dear! And he still can't tell Stork from...(sorry!)....and he's
> > still a political illiterate....
>
> Is this an example of British Humor that is so ironic that it has
> stopped making sense? Mr. Podhoretz has been a special assistant to
> a US Cabinet member. He has been a speech writer for two US
> Presidents....and yet he’s a “political illiterate” because his views
> conflict with your moldy 70s socialist clichés?
>
> > > Podhoretz was also a consultant for the popular television series "The
> > > West Wing".
> > Woopee do!
>
> Actually, yes....in and of itself that is a big deal. To be a
> consultant to a long running, critically acclaimed and wildly popular
> political television series (while holding views where are
> diametrically opposite of the Producers) is an accomplishment of which
> a man can justly be proud. Add that to have written for two US
> Presidents, assistant to a US Cabinate Member, writer for Time
> Magazine, National Review, USNWR, FOX News, CNN....and Mr. Podhoretz
> has a career that lessor men can only grumble about bitterly.
>
> > > Your proudest achievements seem to be limited to the ability to spell
> > > the words "wanker," "nutter" and "toss".
> > My proudest achievement (if we are talking seriously) is what I can
> > put in front of my name!
>
> That’s it? Done nothing of note since your college days? That’s the
> high water mark of your life?
>
> Why is your Ph.D enough for a lifetime, but Dr. Hanson’s easily
> brushed aside? Why is your academic achievement awe inspiring, while
> Hanson’s portfolio of far greater honors sneered upon?
>
> > > > > I have argued this point for many years. In my book to be published
> > > > > later this month (Still the Best Hope: Why the World Needs American
> > > > > Values to Triumph),
> > > > At this point, countless readers start to switch off....
>
> > > And by "countless readers", you mean...you.
>
> > Nope! (As you quaint colonials say!)
>
> America is not a colony. I suggest that you get over yourself.
>
> > I mean mosr sensible
> > people...well, those who don't have you in their kill files...
>
> I value truth and clarity over congeniality. One measure of a man is
> the caliber of people he pisses off. Leftist hysterics only serve to
> convince me that I’m on the right path.
>
> > > > >I argue that the Left is a victim of its own
> > > > > brainwashing. How could they not be? All they hear, see, and read from
> > > > > childhood on, from elementary school through graduate school, on TV
> > > > > and in the movies, are leftist ideas.
> > > > Which are what, exactly?
> > > Ah, a fair question. Good for you, Barry, well done.
> > Oh, I know already! But what do you (and people like you) actually
> > think that they are?
>
> The Modern Left's beliefs boils down to self-congratulation as a basis
> for social policy. The Left is controlled by those who insist they
> alone know what’s good for society - and that “goodness” must be
> attained by expanded government action.
>
> > > The core assumption of the Left is that the overwhelming majority of
> > > people have no idea how to handle their lives.
> > Nope!
>
> If not, then why do Leftists demand ever larger, massively intrusive,
> government?
>
> > >Oh, sure, they can
> > > handle the small stuff like managing to get to work and so on - but
> > > just take a look at how they spend their free time. Instead of
> > > reading the classics and bettering themselves, they fret of "The
> > > Hunger Games" or getting on Level Nine while playing "Call of Duty:
> > > Modern Warfare 3" They eat utter rubbish and their lives are
> > > completely out of control.
> > That sounds like you, Richard....
>
> (sigh) Barry, Barry, Barry....that's a fantasy you've created - it’s
> not reality. It's based on literally nothing other than the need to
> satisfy your ego. We’ve never actually met - because you’re terrified
> that doing so would destroy a cherished illusion.
>
> > > Most people are children to need a firm hand to allow them to reach
> > > their true potential. That why the Best and the Brightest need to run
> > > the world. Take decisions out of the hand of the childish masses, and
> > > allow the cool logic of the educated to run the world fairly.
> > That sounds like Plato....and Hobbes.....
>
> I’m not talking about the roots of modern thought, but where Liberals
> and Conservatives find themselves today.
>
> > > Yes, conservatives understand how the Left thinks.
> > Neo-Platonism is not part of socialism....
>
> Again, I’m not talking about the 3rd Century. Talking about today.
>
> >....and there are no Philosopher
> > Kings...
>
> But we're not talking about "kings" - we're talking about "The Best
> and the Brightest" - the visions of the anointed. Instead of formal
> Royalty, today’s “kings” are faceless bureaucrats who make life and
> death decisions without a shred of accountability.
>
> > (Shall we adjourn while you start searching Wikipedia?)
>
> You seem to feel that reading Wikipedia is some sort of weakness.
> Had
> you done that, you wouldn't have shown yourself to be nearly the
> horse's ass you did when talking Dr. Hanson, or Dennis Prager.
>
> Is it your assumption that your gray matter is a library which holds
> all known knowledge?
most of the time I do it 'from the top of my head'.
>
> > > > > Yet this is not true for conservatives. One would have to grow up in a
> > > > > silent monastery not to be regularly exposed to liberal and leftist
> > > > > ideas.
> > > > Matches their ignororance of about conservative ideas....
> > > Now, Barry, we've spoken about this before. When accusing someone of
> > > "ignorance" - it's essential to spell the word properly.
> > > That being said, please explain what you believe are "conservative
> > > ideas".
> > I did that once before..and it went in one ear and came out the other!
>
> Which is the fate of all light entertainment with nothing of value to
> say.
>
> > O.K. Here goes! The basic tenet of conservatism is that human nature
> > is fixed and immutable.
>
> Whereas Leftists insist their political beliefs trump a billion years
> of evolution. The plan is to have humans conform to their ideas,
> rather than design systems which take human nature into account. And
> when the Left’s badly thought out plans fall apart, the blame is
> firmly based on “not enough time or resources.”
>
> > The secular version of the doctrine of
> > original sin. Consequently, the selfishness and destructive tendencies
> > of the human personality have to be kept in check by some form of
> > authority.
>
> Eeeeeeee.....no. We believe in self control - core values,
> responsibility, family, peer pressure, honor.
>A belief in a God who
> judges one at life’s end doesn’t hurt either. The police and courts
> are a last resort....not the first.
>
> > That is the Hobbesian view of society, in which we
> > surrender part of our liberty to a form of authority that guarantees
> > some kind of order.
>
> And what society doesn’t agree with that?
>
> >That alone guarantees any form of civilised
> > existence, otherwise the alternative is the "state of nature" in which
> > the life of man is 'solitary, nasty, brutish, and short." Now, most
> > conservatives have thought that such authority is derived from certain
> > institutions in society. These are the family, the institution of
> > property, the church (or something having a similar moral authority)
> > and the government.
>
> What you keep missing is that all of the conservative institutions are
> voluntary. One joins a church of their own free will.
>Children not
> happy with their family can bolt when they turn 18. The Right
> believes in choice....you guys believe in faceless bureaucrats making
> choices for you.
>
> > These institutions are interlocked, and form an
> > organic whole.
>
> Nope. They work as checks against each other. The Church doesn’t ask
> for or receive permission from the government to make sure what they
> believe jive with official state positions. If a family isn’t happy
> with a direction their church is going, they’re more than free to quit
> and join another church. Conservatism is bottom up - starting with
> the individual. The Left is top down, starting with Kings and working
> their way down to peasants for whom they hold contempt.
>
> > They are often thought of as a hierarchy, functioning
> > like organs in a human body, each having its own function, but co-
> > operating to allow the body to grow.
>
> Nope. That’s a Leftist belief. We believe in the Individual.
>
> >This Aristotelian organic view of
> > society is sometimes (not always) extended to include race and culture
> > as an overarching institution socialising the individual, and through
> > which the individual receives their language and values.
>
> Again, I’m not talking about Aristotle. I’m talking about what you
> consider a conservative to be ...today.
problem. It comes up frequently disguised as 'multi-culturalism.....
>
> > Now, the
> > entire point of conservatism is to 'conserve' or protect these
> > institutions.
>
> Nonsense. We challenge corrupt institutions constantly.
capacity for abstract thought.
>
> > Change will always occur, but change must be managed in
> > such a way that it does not subvert these safeguards of the social
> > order.
>
> Again, you are describing the Leftist’s world view....that there’s
> someone huge in charge of everything. Conservatives belive in the
> Individual, and freedom. The Left believes in some version of the
> King.
>
> > That, Richard, is what conservatism is!
>
> If that’s what you believe, then Dennis Prager has been proven
> correct. You don’t understand modern conservatism.
audience. I don't know which is worse.)
>
> > > > One wonders what is being sold? >
> > > Why wonder why? A link to the article was provided - you could have
> > > easily looked it up yourself. BTW, it's a rotating ad which at the
> > > time sold solar panels.
>
> (crickets)
>
> > > > The latest Readers Digest coffee table
> > > > book offer? Reproductions of Tretchikoff paintings? 'Gated Condos' in
> > > > Florida? ("Let Steve introduce you to a new way of life with people
> > > > just like yourselves...")
> > > And this is the argument you present to show that you understand
> > > conservatives? Really? "Reader's Digest" cracks? Just how out of
> > > date are your references?
> > > "Reader's Digest" sneers are what 60s Liberals stated to imply that
> > > conservatives were ten years behind the times and poorly read to
> > > boot. Very old stereotypes you live by, my friend.
> > Ah...the penny has dropped!
>
> ....and stays there.
>
> > > > > For 30 years I have had leading left-wing thinkers on my radio show,
> > > > Who were they?
> > > Norm Chomsky, Al Frankin, Andrew Sullivan, David Corn, Robert Riech
> > > are are among the guests he's had his show.
> > Then why doesn't he say so?
>
> Because informed people already know that. Certainly his readers do.
>
> > > > > and I continue to be shocked at their lack of awareness of
> > > > > conservative arguments. About two years ago, for example, I asked one
> > > > > of the most powerful Democratic members of Congress — a major force
> > > > > behind every tax increase — what tax rate he thought might be too
> > > > > high.
> > > > > He replied that he had not given it thought.
> > > > You don't say!
> > > He DID say. Do try to keep up, won't you?
> > > > > I asked a leading
> > > > > liberal writer
> > > > Who?
> > > Again, Dennis almost certainly couldn't get permission to mention the
> > > Leftist's name. You side tend towards having rather thin skins,
> > > don'tchaknow?
> > I'm bemused that he writes tosh like this!
>
> Is “tosh” some sort of lower class British 70s slang for a superior
> argument?
>
> > > > >who maintained that all American wars since World War
> > > > > II had been imperialist, if he thought the Korean War was also
> > > > > imperialistic. He replied that he didn’t know enough about that war to
> > > > > respond.
> > > > Of course, he could have quoted Stone's book.
>
> > > Now, isn't this interesting? You pride yourself in refusing to read
> > > The National Review, Rush Limbaugh, or pretty much an conservative
> > > voice --- and yet you demand that people know what you're talking
> > > about when referring to "Stone's book".
> > I think that most people who know anything about the Korean War would
> > be aware of his 'Hidden History'!
>
> My father hasn't. He is a Marine who served in the Korean war.
>
> > > > > After interviewing leftists, liberal listeners frequently ask me why I
> > > > > don’t invite the best liberals on to my show.
> > > > > The answer is that I have had some of the best liberals on my show.
> > > > > They just don’t tend to do well when challenged by thoughtful
> > > > > conservatives.
> > > > How much more of this garbage is there?
> > > And that's an argument that you present to prove that you're open
> > > minded and understand the conservative mind?
> > I don't suffer fools gladly, Richard!
>
> How do you live with yourself? Oh, right - you're heavily invested in
> delusion.
>
> "Crap" would be Gore Vidal's "Myra Breckenridge." Utter, worthless,
> soft-core porn crap.
>
> > > > > I bumped into New York Times columnist Tom Friedman at Dulles Airport
> > > > > a few months ago and asked him if he would ever come on talk radio. He
> > > > > said he doesn’t do such shows. Yet, shortly thereafter he went on NPR.
> > > > > What he meant to say was that he doesn’t go on conservative shows.
> > > > Perhaps he doesn't like Podhoretz, but was too polite to admit it....
> > > OK, so during a conversation with Dennis Prager, Tom Friedman didn't
> > > mention that he didn't like Podhoretz. What's that got to do with his
> > > lying about not doing radio shows?
> > > > > Why don’t liberals read us or listen to us or debate us?
> > > > > Because the Left has convinced itself that the Right is unworthy of
> > > > > such attention.
> > > > Or that the American 'right' has as much to do with genuine
> > > > conservatism as Dresden China has to do with a real shepherdess!
> > > Please tell me - what is TRUE conservatism, in your mind.
> > Just did it, Richard!
>
> And I tore your arguments into itsy, bitsy, pieces.
>
> > > > > They are certain that conservatives are sexist, intolerant,
> > > > > xenophobic, homophobic, Islamophobic, racist, and bigoted, not to
> > > > > mention anti-intellectual and anti-science.
> > > > Correction. The current American 'right are.....but they are not
> > > > conservatives!
> > > Please tell me what you consider to be a true conservative.
> > Already did that!
>
> Tell you what - give me an example of who you consider a “true
> conservative" who's living today.
>
> > > > > The Left has a mutually reinforcing dynamic at work here. Because
> > > > > liberals believe conservatives are all these terrible things, they do
> > > > > not bother acquainting themselves with conservative arguments.
> > > > What would Podhoretz know about conservative arguments?
> > > Again, the article was written by Dennis Prager. Dennis QUOTED John
> > > Podhoretz. John Podhoretz did not write the article.
> > As we say across the pond..."they both piss in the same pot!"
>
> Would you accept that answer from a student who REPEATEDLY
> misattributed a source?
>
> > > > > And
> > > > > because they do not acquaint themselves with conservative arguments,
> > > > > they are able to go on believing that conservatives are all these
> > > > > terrible things.
> > > > I have read (over the years) selections of Aristotle, Aquinas, Hobbes,
> > > > Burke, Peel, Disraeli, Herder, Hegel, et al. I am familiar with
> > > > conservative arguments. When do we debate?
> > > Tomorrow, if you like. Link to krla870.com, listen to the show, then
> > > call in.
> > Not from Britain!
>
> You can if you have an Internet connection and a computer. And
> considering that we’re communicating via the Internet....kinda hard to
> deny.
>
> You can also hear Dennis at:
>
> Hughniverse.com
>
> There you can also listen to Hugh Hewitt. Every Thursday, at 3PM
> Pacific Time, you can hear Columnist To the World Mark Steyn - always
> a treat!
>
> > But how about you debating in his stead?
>
> I have....notice my lack of snappy "answers" like "smirk"
>
> > > > > Take race-based affirmative action. There is overwhelming evidence
> > > > > that it has hurt black college students. Nevertheless, liberals
> > > > > dismiss conservative opposition to affirmative action as racist.
> > > > > Therefore they do not read any of the empirically based studies and
> > > > > arguments against affirmative action. Why read racist hate?
> > > > > I wonder what it would take to persuade Cornel West to debate Walter
> > > > > Williams or Thomas Sowell on the issue of race-based affirmative
> > > > > action.
> > > > I'd rather debate their neo-liberal economic ideas! That's far more
> > > > important.
> > > Then call up Dennis on krla870.com, and discuss that issue.
>
> (crickets)
>
> But then, you realize that Dennis would chew you up and spit you out,
> don't you?
Dr. Barry Worthington
Message has been deleted
Richard Steel
Apr 9, 2012, 8:56:22 PM4/9/12
to
On Apr 9, 2:51 am, trainguard <barry_worthing...@sky.com> wrote:
> On Apr 8, 11:08 pm, Richard Steel <rsteel2...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Apparently, many liberals were disappointed in the administration’s
> > > > > > defense of Obamacare before the Supreme Court. They felt that the
> > > > > > government’s lawyer, Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, did not
> > > > > > respond effectively to the challenges of some of the conservative
> > > > > > justices.
> > > > > Challenges?
> > > > Yes, there were many.
> > > Really? (Yawn....)
>
> > One usually needs a 15 year old spoiled daughter of a rich man to hear
> > come backs THAT snappy.
>
> Well...it's what you deserve....be grateful that I bother to comment
> at all....
Yeah, that's the sort of comment I expect from spoiled 14 year old
> On Apr 8, 11:08 pm, Richard Steel <rsteel2...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Apparently, many liberals were disappointed in the administration’s
> > > > > > defense of Obamacare before the Supreme Court. They felt that the
> > > > > > government’s lawyer, Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, did not
> > > > > > respond effectively to the challenges of some of the conservative
> > > > > > justices.
> > > > > Challenges?
> > > > Yes, there were many.
> > > Really? (Yawn....)
>
> > One usually needs a 15 year old spoiled daughter of a rich man to hear
> > come backs THAT snappy.
>
> Well...it's what you deserve....be grateful that I bother to comment
> at all....
girls.
> > > > > > The editor of Commentary, John Podhoretz,
> > > > > Ah.....I first came across this name many, many, years ago, in an
> > > > > essay by Gore Vidal about American religious nutters, most of which
> > > > > contained names that I had never heard of....
> > > > Ah, yes. Gore Vidal - the guy who allowed the film version of his
> > > > play "Visit to a Small Planet" to star Jerry Lewis. Oh, and here's a
> > > > trailer to his film "Myra Breckenridge".
> > > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ezSsK3SgVk8
> > > > It opened with John Huston slicing Rex Reed's penis. It's a comedy.
> > > I presume that his novels are a little to hard for you......
> > And again, the Leftist compulsive need to convince itself that they
> > hold a monopoly on wisdom, learning, and virtue, slithers out from
> > under its rock.
> Actually, it's a comment upon your mental processes (or lack of
> them).....but you are too stupid to realise that.
stupid. Everyone who holds an opinion you don't like is stupid.
> > Victor Davis Hanson writes for the widely respected National Review,
> Respected?
is the standard “go to” for intelligent people who want a clear view
of what’s going on in the world.
> > therefore the rest of his body of work is tainted and suspect.
> If he demeans himself to write crap for morons, what does he expect?
in respected publicans for a literate audience.
> Gore
>
> > Vidal writes soft-core porn,
> Insightful essays a lot of the time.....and some interesting
> historical novels.
> >that is a sign of....gee, what is it a
> > sign of? That he’s a free spirit? Open minded? Just what do you
> > tell yourself to justify such rubbish? More important .... when will
> > you live by the standards that you demand of others?
>
> That you've never read him? That you know nothing about him?
so.
> > > > > >offered an explanation on
> > > > > > his magazine’s blog. “American liberals,” he wrote, “know their own
> > > > > > language but they don’t know the language of their ideological and
> > > > > > partisan opposite numbers. . . . Conservatives speak liberal, but for
> > > > > > liberals in the United States, conservatism might as well be
> > > > > > Esperanto.”
> > > > > As it's mostly neo-liberalism (in the classical sense of the word),
> > > > > that's hardly surprising!
> > > > And you've presented a key difference between yourself and Mr. John
> > > > Podhoretz.
> > > Indeed. I happen to know what I'm talking about.
>
> > No, you know how to regurgitate tired clichés from the 70s. And you
> > have mastered the sneer - another skill set you have in common with
> > spoiled 15 year old girls.
> You really have to read postings! it helps!
of something other than a childish insult.
> > > >While the latter writes clearly, you prefer terms which
> > > > hide your meaning, and are easily confused.
> > > What do you not understand about 'classical (or Gladstonian)
> > > liberalism' or 'neoliberalism? Are you that ignorant?
>
> > (sigh) Barry....Barry....Barry.....I AM a Classic Liberal. The
> > current home of the Classic Liberal is the Conservative Movement.
> Which is why there are no conservatives any more! I do wish you would
> realise this!
conservatives? Really? And there are no Conservatives because BARRY
says so?
> > Rush Limbaugh is a Classic Liberal. So was Ben Franklin. Ultimately,
> > the battle comes down to individual liberty vs. collectivism. I
> > believe in freedom. You believe in bowing your head to Kings.
> How dare you mention Franklin and Limbaugh in the same breath! Wash
> your mouth out!
stuffed shirts like yourself, slaps John Adams on the shoulder, and
shouts "the American Dream is still alive." Ben cheers Rush on as The
Captain (aka Rush Limbaugh) takes on the President of the United
States....and wins.
May I remind you that Ben Franklin, like Rush Limbaugh, liberally
mixed politics which Earthy humor? And that Franklin told truth to
power.
Don't take me on when it comes to Ben Franklin...I've read every work
on the man I can get my hands on.
> > > >That distinction explains
> > > > why Mr. Podhoretz has written speeches for US Presidents, Time
> > > > Magazine, National Review and US News and World Report. And why he's
> > > > a Consulting Editor for HaperCollins, has appeared on FOX News, CNN,
> > > > and The McLaughlin Group.
> > > Oh dear! And he still can't tell Stork from...(sorry!)....and he's
> > > still a political illiterate....
> > Is this an example of British Humor that is so ironic that it has
> > stopped making sense? Mr. Podhoretz has been a special assistant to
> > a US Cabinet member. He has been a speech writer for two US
> > Presidents....and yet he’s a “political illiterate” because his views
> > conflict with your moldy 70s socialist clichés?
> He's a political illiterate.
> > > > Podhoretz was also a consultant for the popular television series "The
> > > > West Wing".
> > > Woopee do!
>
> > Actually, yes....in and of itself that is a big deal. To be a
> > consultant to a long running, critically acclaimed and wildly popular
> > political television series (while holding views where are
> > diametrically opposite of the Producers) is an accomplishment of which
> > a man can justly be proud. Add that to have written for two US
> > Presidents, assistant to a US Cabinate Member, writer for Time
> > Magazine, National Review, USNWR, FOX News, CNN....and Mr. Podhoretz
> > has a career that lessor men can only grumble about bitterly.
> Do you thing that anyone seriously gives a shit?
> > > > Your proudest achievements seem to be limited to the ability to spell
> > > > the words "wanker," "nutter" and "toss".
> > > My proudest achievement (if we are talking seriously) is what I can
> > > put in front of my name!
> > That’s it? Done nothing of note since your college days? That’s the
> > high water mark of your life?
> I didn't say that! But a lot of things currently flow from it....
published in. The New York Times? The London Times? CNN?
Please, awe me with your accomplishments.
> > Why is your Ph.D enough for a lifetime, but Dr. Hanson’s easily
> > brushed aside? Why is your academic achievement awe inspiring, while
> > Hanson’s portfolio of far greater honors sneered upon?
> Well, I don't write shit like he does!
"My father and his mates once stumbled upon someone like you. It was
in
Italy, in a farmyard. The man's belly had burst open and was now full
of maggots and flies buzzed around the corpse. The head was so black
and swollen that the features were unrecognisable. The uniform was
stained, but still sported SS Runes on it. One of the local peasants
said that a group of SS had rounded up hostages from the village and
shot them. This one strayed too far, and the old farmer protected his
daughter and grandchildren by killing him with a shotgun."
> > > > > > I have argued this point for many years. In my book to be published
> > > > > > later this month (Still the Best Hope: Why the World Needs American
> > > > > > Values to Triumph),
> > > > > At this point, countless readers start to switch off....
> > > > And by "countless readers", you mean...you.
> > > Nope! (As you quaint colonials say!)
> > America is not a colony. I suggest that you get over yourself.
> It still is, in many ways. You just don't realise it.
> > > I mean mosr sensible
> > > people...well, those who don't have you in their kill files...
>
> > I value truth and clarity over congeniality. One measure of a man is
> > the caliber of people he pisses off. Leftist hysterics only serve to
> > convince me that I’m on the right path.
> Truth????????
> > > > > >I argue that the Left is a victim of its own
> > > > > > brainwashing. How could they not be? All they hear, see, and read from
> > > > > > childhood on, from elementary school through graduate school, on TV
> > > > > > and in the movies, are leftist ideas.
> > > > > Which are what, exactly?
> > > > Ah, a fair question. Good for you, Barry, well done.
> > > Oh, I know already! But what do you (and people like you) actually
> > > think that they are?
>
> > The Modern Left's beliefs boils down to self-congratulation as a basis
> > for social policy. The Left is controlled by those who insist they
> > alone know what’s good for society - and that “goodness” must be
> > attained by expanded government action.
> And you really believe that?
Left.
Now, go ahead and call me stupid again....it's all you have left.
> > > > The core assumption of the Left is that the overwhelming majority of
> > > > people have no idea how to handle their lives.
> > > Nope!
> > If not, then why do Leftists demand ever larger, massively intrusive,
> > government?
> Why do people like you do the same?
> > > >Oh, sure, they can
> > > > handle the small stuff like managing to get to work and so on - but
> > > > just take a look at how they spend their free time. Instead of
> > > > reading the classics and bettering themselves, they fret of "The
> > > > Hunger Games" or getting on Level Nine while playing "Call of Duty:
> > > > Modern Warfare 3" They eat utter rubbish and their lives are
> > > > completely out of control.
> > > That sounds like you, Richard....
>
> > (sigh) Barry, Barry, Barry....that's a fantasy you've created - it’s
> > not reality. It's based on literally nothing other than the need to
> > satisfy your ego. We’ve never actually met - because you’re terrified
> > that doing so would destroy a cherished illusion.
> You are a fantasist....
Who's afraid of reality?
> > > > Most people are children to need a firm hand to allow them to reach
> > > > their true potential. That why the Best and the Brightest need to run
> > > > the world. Take decisions out of the hand of the childish masses, and
> > > > allow the cool logic of the educated to run the world fairly.
> > > That sounds like Plato....and Hobbes.....
> > I’m not talking about the roots of modern thought, but where Liberals
> > and Conservatives find themselves today.
> And how would you know?
> > > > Yes, conservatives understand how the Left thinks.
> > > Neo-Platonism is not part of socialism....
>
> > Again, I’m not talking about the 3rd Century. Talking about today.
> You think that these ideas come out of thin air?
You probably don't.
> > >....and there are no Philosopher
> > > Kings...
>
> > But we're not talking about "kings" - we're talking about "The Best
> > and the Brightest" - the visions of the anointed. Instead of formal
> > Royalty, today’s “kings” are faceless bureaucrats who make life and
> > death decisions without a shred of accountability.
> Philosopher Kings all right......
faceless people with much power, and virtually no responsibility.
> > > (Shall we adjourn while you start searching Wikipedia?)
> > You seem to feel that reading Wikipedia is some sort of weakness.
> It seems to be your friend.....
took away your one trick?
> > Had
> > you done that, you wouldn't have shown yourself to be nearly the
> > horse's ass you did when talking Dr. Hanson, or Dennis Prager.
>
> > Is it your assumption that your gray matter is a library which holds
> > all known knowledge?
> No, but I do know about the subjects and threads that I post to....>
> and
> most of the time I do it 'from the top of my head'.
with of being stupid?
> > > > > > Yet this is not true for conservatives. One would have to grow up in a
> > > > > > silent monastery not to be regularly exposed to liberal and leftist
> > > > > > ideas.
> > > > > Matches their ignororance of about conservative ideas....
> > > > Now, Barry, we've spoken about this before. When accusing someone of
> > > > "ignorance" - it's essential to spell the word properly.
> > > > That being said, please explain what you believe are "conservative
> > > > ideas".
> > > I did that once before..and it went in one ear and came out the other!
>
> > Which is the fate of all light entertainment with nothing of value to
> > say.
>
> > > O.K. Here goes! The basic tenet of conservatism is that human nature
> > > is fixed and immutable.
>
> > Whereas Leftists insist their political beliefs trump a billion years
> > of evolution. The plan is to have humans conform to their ideas,
> > rather than design systems which take human nature into account. And
> > when the Left’s badly thought out plans fall apart, the blame is
> > firmly based on “not enough time or resources.”
> Q.E.D. I think!
> > > The secular version of the doctrine of
> > > original sin. Consequently, the selfishness and destructive tendencies
> > > of the human personality have to be kept in check by some form of
> > > authority.
> > Eeeeeeee.....no. We believe in self control - core values,
> > responsibility, family, peer pressure, honor.
> I actually say that, you blithering idiot!
yourself.
> >A belief in a God who
>
> > judges one at life’s end doesn’t hurt either. The police and courts
> > are a last resort....not the first.
>
> > > That is the Hobbesian view of society, in which we
> > > surrender part of our liberty to a form of authority that guarantees
> > > some kind of order.
> > And what society doesn’t agree with that?
> Yours?
> Wall Street?
I'll take Wall Streets excesses over a socialist society any day of
the week.
> > >That alone guarantees any form of civilised
> > > existence, otherwise the alternative is the "state of nature" in which
> > > the life of man is 'solitary, nasty, brutish, and short." Now, most
> > > conservatives have thought that such authority is derived from certain
> > > institutions in society. These are the family, the institution of
> > > property, the church (or something having a similar moral authority)
> > > and the government.
> > What you keep missing is that all of the conservative institutions are
> > voluntary. One joins a church of their own free will.
> One is socialised by it....
Voluntarily.
> > > existence, otherwise the alternative is the "state of nature" in which
> > > the life of man is 'solitary, nasty, brutish, and short." Now, most
> > > conservatives have thought that such authority is derived from certain
> > > institutions in society. These are the family, the institution of
> > > property, the church (or something having a similar moral authority)
> > > and the government.
> > What you keep missing is that all of the conservative institutions are
> > voluntary. One joins a church of their own free will.
> One is socialised by it....
> >Children not
> > happy with their family can bolt when they turn 18. The Right
> > believes in choice....you guys believe in faceless bureaucrats making
> > choices for you.
> > > These institutions are interlocked, and form an
> > > organic whole.
> > Nope. They work as checks against each other. The Church doesn’t ask
> > for or receive permission from the government to make sure what they
> > believe jive with official state positions. If a family isn’t happy
> > with a direction their church is going, they’re more than free to quit
> > and join another church. Conservatism is bottom up - starting with
> > the individual. The Left is top down, starting with Kings and working
> > their way down to peasants for whom they hold contempt.
> You don't actually understand traditional conservatism. do you?
Progressive.....the neverending battle comes down to freedom vs.
authority.
> > > They are often thought of as a hierarchy, functioning
> > > like organs in a human body, each having its own function, but co-
> > > operating to allow the body to grow.
> > Nope. That’s a Leftist belief. We believe in the Individual.
> Traditional conservatives do not!
Beck and Winston Church.
> > >This Aristotelian organic view of
> > > society is sometimes (not always) extended to include race and culture
> > > as an overarching institution socialising the individual, and through
> > > which the individual receives their language and values.
> > Again, I’m not talking about Aristotle. I’m talking about what you
> > consider a conservative to be ...today.
> The fact that you don't see this organic trend around you is your
> problem. It comes up frequently disguised as 'multi-culturalism.....
conservatives?
Are you nuts?
> > > Now, the
> > > entire point of conservatism is to 'conserve' or protect these
> > > institutions.
> > Nonsense. We challenge corrupt institutions constantly.
> Your mind seems to function on a very basic level, with little
> capacity for abstract thought.
with a finely tuned Bullshit Detector.
> > > Change will always occur, but change must be managed in
> > > such a way that it does not subvert these safeguards of the social
> > > order.
> > Again, you are describing the Leftist’s world view....that there’s
> > someone huge in charge of everything. Conservatives belive in the
> > Individual, and freedom. The Left believes in some version of the
> > King.
> But you are not a conservative!
> > > That, Richard, is what conservatism is!
>
> > If that’s what you believe, then Dennis Prager has been proven
> > correct. You don’t understand modern conservatism.
>
> Correction. He doesn't. (Or pretends not to, to write for a particular
> audience. I don't know which is worse.)
talking about, believes every word, and you’re not man enough to admit
it.
> > > > > One wonders what is being sold? >
> > > > Why wonder why? A link to the article was provided - you could have
> > > > easily looked it up yourself. BTW, it's a rotating ad which at the
> > > > time sold solar panels.
>
> > (crickets)
>
> > > > > The latest Readers Digest coffee table
> > > > > book offer? Reproductions of Tretchikoff paintings? 'Gated Condos' in
> > > > > Florida? ("Let Steve introduce you to a new way of life with people
> > > > > just like yourselves...")
> > > > And this is the argument you present to show that you understand
> > > > conservatives? Really? "Reader's Digest" cracks? Just how out of
> > > > date are your references?
> > > > "Reader's Digest" sneers are what 60s Liberals stated to imply that
> > > > conservatives were ten years behind the times and poorly read to
> > > > boot. Very old stereotypes you live by, my friend.
> > > Ah...the penny has dropped!
>
> > ....and stays there.
>
> > > > > > For 30 years I have had leading left-wing thinkers on my radio show,
> > > > > Who were they?
> > > > Norm Chomsky, Al Frankin, Andrew Sullivan, David Corn, Robert Riech
> > > > are are among the guests he's had his show.
> > > Then why doesn't he say so?
> > Because informed people already know that. Certainly his readers do.
> Has he got any?
he's written and had published a couple of dozen books.
> > > > > > and I continue to be shocked at their lack of awareness of
> > > > > > conservative arguments. About two years ago, for example, I asked one
> > > > > > of the most powerful Democratic members of Congress — a major force
> > > > > > behind every tax increase — what tax rate he thought might be too
> > > > > > high.
> > > > > > He replied that he had not given it thought.
> > > > > You don't say!
> > > > He DID say. Do try to keep up, won't you?
> > > > > > I asked a leading
> > > > > > liberal writer
> > > > > Who?
> > > > Again, Dennis almost certainly couldn't get permission to mention the
> > > > Leftist's name. You side tend towards having rather thin skins,
> > > > don'tchaknow?
> > > I'm bemused that he writes tosh like this!
>
> > Is “tosh” some sort of lower class British 70s slang for a superior
> > argument?
>
> No...for garbage like this.
dialogues at the Vatican. He’s lectured the Russians about the future
of Russian. He’s written books on the history of the Jews.
You scribble rubbish such as the “...study one aspect of sex tourism
as part of my other tourism research topics (which include the role of
tourism in post-communist transition in Europe, issues relating to
heritage tourism, 'serious leisure', and transport and tourism). There
are several academics who study the purely commercial side of sex
tourism. My interest is the swinging sub-culture, as an extension of
the 'serious leisure' concept, and its creation of 'embodied space'.”
> > > > > >who maintained that all American wars since World War
> > > > > > II had been imperialist, if he thought the Korean War was also
> > > > > > imperialistic. He replied that he didn’t know enough about that war to
> > > > > > respond.
> > > > > Of course, he could have quoted Stone's book.
> > > > Now, isn't this interesting? You pride yourself in refusing to read
> > > > The National Review, Rush Limbaugh, or pretty much an conservative
> > > > voice --- and yet you demand that people know what you're talking
> > > > about when referring to "Stone's book".
> > > I think that most people who know anything about the Korean War would
> > > be aware of his 'Hidden History'!
> > My father hasn't. He is a Marine who served in the Korean war.
>
> And your point is?
Korean War would be aware of his 'Hidden History" is clearly nonsense.
> > > > > > After interviewing leftists, liberal listeners frequently ask me why I
> > > > > > don’t invite the best liberals on to my show.
> > > > > > The answer is that I have had some of the best liberals on my show.
> > > > > > They just don’t tend to do well when challenged by thoughtful
> > > > > > conservatives.
> > > > > How much more of this garbage is there?
> > > > And that's an argument that you present to prove that you're open
> > > > minded and understand the conservative mind?
> > > I don't suffer fools gladly, Richard!
> > How do you live with yourself? Oh, right - you're heavily invested in
> > delusion.
> I don't suffer fools gladly!.
> > "Crap" would be Gore Vidal's "Myra Breckenridge." Utter, worthless,
> > soft-core porn crap.
> > > > > > I bumped into New York Times columnist Tom Friedman at Dulles Airport
> > > > > > a few months ago and asked him if he would ever come on talk radio. He
> > > > > > said he doesn’t do such shows. Yet, shortly thereafter he went on NPR.
> > > > > > What he meant to say was that he doesn’t go on conservative shows.
> > > > > Perhaps he doesn't like Podhoretz, but was too polite to admit it....
> > > > OK, so during a conversation with Dennis Prager, Tom Friedman didn't
> > > > mention that he didn't like Podhoretz. What's that got to do with his
> > > > lying about not doing radio shows?
> > > > > > Why don’t liberals read us or listen to us or debate us?
> > > > > > Because the Left has convinced itself that the Right is unworthy of
> > > > > > such attention.
> > > > > Or that the American 'right' has as much to do with genuine
> > > > > conservatism as Dresden China has to do with a real shepherdess!
> > > > Please tell me - what is TRUE conservatism, in your mind.
> > > Just did it, Richard!
> > And I tore your arguments into itsy, bitsy, pieces.
> No you didn't. You don't understand most of what I wrote!
profound. It's not. What you're posting is tired, boring, weak
arguments that might have gotten you laid in the 70s, but today just
doesn't stand the test of time.
> > > > > > They are certain that conservatives are sexist, intolerant,
> > > > > > xenophobic, homophobic, Islamophobic, racist, and bigoted, not to
> > > > > > mention anti-intellectual and anti-science.
> > > > > Correction. The current American 'right are.....but they are not
> > > > > conservatives!
> > > > Please tell me what you consider to be a true conservative.
> > > Already did that!
> > Tell you what - give me an example of who you consider a “true
> > conservative" who's living today.
> In America? That would be difficult.....
can't name a single example in a population of a third of a
billion....it's time for you to acknowledge that your definition is
worthless.
> > > > > > The Left has a mutually reinforcing dynamic at work here. Because
> > > > > > liberals believe conservatives are all these terrible things, they do
> > > > > > not bother acquainting themselves with conservative arguments.
> > > > > What would Podhoretz know about conservative arguments?
> > > > Again, the article was written by Dennis Prager. Dennis QUOTED John
> > > > Podhoretz. John Podhoretz did not write the article.
> > > As we say across the pond..."they both piss in the same pot!"
> > Would you accept that answer from a student who REPEATEDLY
> > misattributed a source?
> Repeatedly?
you accept that answer from a student who REPEATEDLY misattributed a
source?
source?
> > > > > > And
> > > > > > because they do not acquaint themselves with conservative arguments,
> > > > > > they are able to go on believing that conservatives are all these
> > > > > > terrible things.
> > > > > I have read (over the years) selections of Aristotle, Aquinas, Hobbes,
> > > > > Burke, Peel, Disraeli, Herder, Hegel, et al. I am familiar with
> > > > > conservative arguments. When do we debate?
> > > > Tomorrow, if you like. Link to krla870.com, listen to the show, then
> > > > call in.
> > > Not from Britain!
>
> > You can if you have an Internet connection and a computer. And
> > considering that we’re communicating via the Internet....kinda hard to
> > deny.
>
> > You can also hear Dennis at:
>
> > Hughniverse.com
>
> > There you can also listen to Hugh Hewitt. Every Thursday, at 3PM
> > Pacific Time, you can hear Columnist To the World Mark Steyn - always
> > a treat!
(crickets)
> > > > > > because they do not acquaint themselves with conservative arguments,
> > > > > > they are able to go on believing that conservatives are all these
> > > > > > terrible things.
> > > > > I have read (over the years) selections of Aristotle, Aquinas, Hobbes,
> > > > > Burke, Peel, Disraeli, Herder, Hegel, et al. I am familiar with
> > > > > conservative arguments. When do we debate?
> > > > Tomorrow, if you like. Link to krla870.com, listen to the show, then
> > > > call in.
> > > Not from Britain!
>
> > You can if you have an Internet connection and a computer. And
> > considering that we’re communicating via the Internet....kinda hard to
> > deny.
>
> > You can also hear Dennis at:
>
> > Hughniverse.com
>
> > There you can also listen to Hugh Hewitt. Every Thursday, at 3PM
> > Pacific Time, you can hear Columnist To the World Mark Steyn - always
> > a treat!
So, Barry is afraid to meet with me. Now he’s afraid of his
computer.
> > > But how about you debating in his stead?
> > I have....notice my lack of snappy "answers" like "smirk"
> You couldn't argue your way out of a paper bag!
the greats always make it look easy.
> > > > > > Take race-based affirmative action. There is overwhelming evidence
> > > > > > that it has hurt black college students. Nevertheless, liberals
> > > > > > dismiss conservative opposition to affirmative action as racist.
> > > > > > Therefore they do not read any of the empirically based studies and
> > > > > > arguments against affirmative action. Why read racist hate?
> > > > > > I wonder what it would take to persuade Cornel West to debate Walter
> > > > > > Williams or Thomas Sowell on the issue of race-based affirmative
> > > > > > action.
> > > > > I'd rather debate their neo-liberal economic ideas! That's far more
> > > > > important.
> > > > Then call up Dennis on krla870.com, and discuss that issue.
> > (crickets)
> > But then, you realize that Dennis would chew you up and spit you out,
> > don't you?
> Not on the basis of what you posted!
the world what a fraud Dennis Prager is.
Richard Steel
Apr 10, 2012, 1:51:14 AM4/10/12
to
> > Rush Limbaugh is a Classic Liberal. So was Ben Franklin. Ultimately,
> > the battle comes down to individual liberty vs. collectivism. I
> > believe in freedom. You believe in bowing your head to Kings.
> How dare you mention Franklin and Limbaugh in the same breath! Wash
> your mouth out!
Limbaugh?
"I am for doing good to the poor, but I disagree means. I think the
best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in
poverty, but driving them out of it. In my youth I traveled much, and
I observed in different countries, that the more public provisions
were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of
course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for
them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer."
"Repeal welfare, and you will soon see a change in their manners.
Monday and Tuesday, will soon cease to be holidays. Six days shalt
thou labor, though one of the old commandments long treated as out of
date, will again be looked upon as a respectable precept; industry
will increase, and with it plenty among the lower class; their
circumstances will mend, and more will be done for their happiness by
inuring them to provide for themselves, than could be done by dividing
all your estates among them."
trainguard
Apr 10, 2012, 4:41:53 AM4/10/12
to
On Apr 10, 1:56 am, Richard Steel <rsteel2...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Apr 9, 2:51 am, trainguard <barry_worthing...@sky.com> wrote:
>
> > On Apr 8, 11:08 pm, Richard Steel <rsteel2...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Apparently, many liberals were disappointed in the administration’s
> > > > > > > defense of Obamacare before the Supreme Court. They felt that the
> > > > > > > government’s lawyer, Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, did not
> > > > > > > respond effectively to the challenges of some of the conservative
> > > > > > > justices.
> > > > > > Challenges?
> > > > > Yes, there were many.
> > > > Really? (Yawn....)
>
> > > One usually needs a 15 year old spoiled daughter of a rich man to hear
> > > come backs THAT snappy.
>
> > Well...it's what you deserve....be grateful that I bother to comment
> > at all....
>
> Yeah, that's the sort of comment I expect from spoiled 14 year old
> girls.
You appear to be an expert on young girls. One wonders why. (I too can
> On Apr 9, 2:51 am, trainguard <barry_worthing...@sky.com> wrote:
>
> > On Apr 8, 11:08 pm, Richard Steel <rsteel2...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Apparently, many liberals were disappointed in the administration’s
> > > > > > > defense of Obamacare before the Supreme Court. They felt that the
> > > > > > > government’s lawyer, Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, did not
> > > > > > > respond effectively to the challenges of some of the conservative
> > > > > > > justices.
> > > > > > Challenges?
> > > > > Yes, there were many.
> > > > Really? (Yawn....)
>
> > > One usually needs a 15 year old spoiled daughter of a rich man to hear
> > > come backs THAT snappy.
>
> > Well...it's what you deserve....be grateful that I bother to comment
> > at all....
>
> Yeah, that's the sort of comment I expect from spoiled 14 year old
> girls.
insinuate...just like you!)
>
> > > > > > > The editor of Commentary, John Podhoretz,
> > > > > > Ah.....I first came across this name many, many, years ago, in an
> > > > > > essay by Gore Vidal about American religious nutters, most of which
> > > > > > contained names that I had never heard of....
> > > > > Ah, yes. Gore Vidal - the guy who allowed the film version of his
> > > > > play "Visit to a Small Planet" to star Jerry Lewis. Oh, and here's a
> > > > > trailer to his film "Myra Breckenridge".
> > > > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ezSsK3SgVk8
> > > > > It opened with John Huston slicing Rex Reed's penis. It's a comedy.
> > > > I presume that his novels are a little to hard for you......
> > > And again, the Leftist compulsive need to convince itself that they
> > > hold a monopoly on wisdom, learning, and virtue, slithers out from
> > > under its rock.
> > Actually, it's a comment upon your mental processes (or lack of
> > them).....but you are too stupid to realise that.
>
> Yes, yes, Barry. I'm stupid, Dr. Hanson is stupid, Dennis Prager is
> stupid. Everyone who holds an opinion you don't like is stupid.
>
> > > Victor Davis Hanson writes for the widely respected National Review,
> > Respected?
>
> Extremely. It’s been in print for over a half century. Its web page
> is the standard “go to” for intelligent people who want a clear view
> of what’s going on in the world.
Americans take much notice of it. It doesn't have the pedigree of the
Spectator in Britain.
>
> > > therefore the rest of his body of work is tainted and suspect.
> > If he demeans himself to write crap for morons, what does he expect?
>
> But he doesn't write "crap for morons". He writes brilliant articles
> in respected publicans for a literate audience.
>
> > Gore
>
> > > Vidal writes soft-core porn,
> > Insightful essays a lot of the time.....and some interesting
> > historical novels.
>
> And soft core porn.
> > >that is a sign of....gee, what is it a
> > > sign of? That he’s a free spirit? Open minded? Just what do you
> > > tell yourself to justify such rubbish? More important .... when will
> > > you live by the standards that you demand of others?
>
> > That you've never read him? That you know nothing about him?
>
> Of course I've read him. Hell, I belonged to his blog for a year or
> so.
> > > No, you know how to regurgitate tired clichés from the 70s. And you
> > > have mastered the sneer - another skill set you have in common with
> > > spoiled 15 year old girls.
> > You really have to read postings! it helps!
>
> You really must learn how to put together an argument which consists
> of something other than a childish insult.
>
> > > > >While the latter writes clearly, you prefer terms which
> > > > > hide your meaning, and are easily confused.
> > > > What do you not understand about 'classical (or Gladstonian)
> > > > liberalism' or 'neoliberalism? Are you that ignorant?
>
> > > (sigh) Barry....Barry....Barry.....I AM a Classic Liberal. The
> > > current home of the Classic Liberal is the Conservative Movement.
> > Which is why there are no conservatives any more! I do wish you would
> > realise this!
>
> Be happy, Barry....you finally made me laugh out loud. There's no
> conservatives? Really? And there are no Conservatives because BARRY
> says so?
>
> > > Rush Limbaugh is a Classic Liberal. So was Ben Franklin. Ultimately,
> > > the battle comes down to individual liberty vs. collectivism. I
> > > believe in freedom. You believe in bowing your head to Kings.
> > How dare you mention Franklin and Limbaugh in the same breath! Wash
> > your mouth out!
>
> Somewhere, Ben Franklin looks down at Rush Limbaugh pissing off
> stuffed shirts like yourself, slaps John Adams on the shoulder, and
> shouts "the American Dream is still alive." Ben cheers Rush on as The
> Captain (aka Rush Limbaugh) takes on the President of the United
> States....and wins.
>
> May I remind you that Ben Franklin, like Rush Limbaugh, liberally
> mixed politics which Earthy humor? And that Franklin told truth to
> power.
>
> Don't take me on when it comes to Ben Franklin...I've read every work
> on the man I can get my hands on.
>
state...
> > > Is this an example of British Humor that is so ironic that it has
> > > stopped making sense? Mr. Podhoretz has been a special assistant to
> > > a US Cabinet member. He has been a speech writer for two US
> > > Presidents....and yet he’s a “political illiterate” because his views
> > > conflict with your moldy 70s socialist clichés?
> > He's a political illiterate.
>
> And what life experiences gives you the power to make such a judgment?
politics on both side s of the Atlantic....
>
> > > > > Podhoretz was also a consultant for the popular television series "The
> > > > > West Wing".
> > > > Woopee do!
>
> > > Actually, yes....in and of itself that is a big deal. To be a
> > > consultant to a long running, critically acclaimed and wildly popular
> > > political television series (while holding views where are
> > > diametrically opposite of the Producers) is an accomplishment of which
> > > a man can justly be proud. Add that to have written for two US
> > > Presidents, assistant to a US Cabinate Member, writer for Time
> > > Magazine, National Review, USNWR, FOX News, CNN....and Mr. Podhoretz
> > > has a career that lessor men can only grumble about bitterly.
> > Do you thing that anyone seriously gives a shit?
>
> A lot more than anyone cares about your Ph.D.
>
> > > > > Your proudest achievements seem to be limited to the ability to spell
> > > > > the words "wanker," "nutter" and "toss".
> > > > My proudest achievement (if we are talking seriously) is what I can
> > > > put in front of my name!
> > > That’s it? Done nothing of note since your college days? That’s the
> > > high water mark of your life?
> > I didn't say that! But a lot of things currently flow from it....
>
> Please, tell me what nationally known publications you've been
> published in. The New York Times? The London Times? CNN?
>
> Please, awe me with your accomplishments.
national one.....
And what, pray, are yours?
>
> > > Why is your Ph.D enough for a lifetime, but Dr. Hanson’s easily
> > > brushed aside? Why is your academic achievement awe inspiring, while
> > > Hanson’s portfolio of far greater honors sneered upon?
> > Well, I don't write shit like he does!
>
> Yes, you DO write shit. NO, Dr. Hanson doesn't.
>
> "My father and his mates once stumbled upon someone like you. It was
> in
> Italy, in a farmyard. The man's belly had burst open and was now full
> of maggots and flies buzzed around the corpse. The head was so black
> and swollen that the features were unrecognisable. The uniform was
> stained, but still sported SS Runes on it. One of the local peasants
> said that a group of SS had rounded up hostages from the village and
> shot them. This one strayed too far, and the old farmer protected his
> daughter and grandchildren by killing him with a shotgun."
>
> > > > > > > I have argued this point for many years. In my book to be published
> > > > > > > later this month (Still the Best Hope: Why the World Needs American
> > > > > > > Values to Triumph),
> > > > > > At this point, countless readers start to switch off....
> > > > > And by "countless readers", you mean...you.
> > > > Nope! (As you quaint colonials say!)
> > > America is not a colony. I suggest that you get over yourself.
> > It still is, in many ways. You just don't realise it.
>
> How many decades will it be until England is a colony to Mecca?
>
> > > > I mean most sensible
> > > > people...well, those who don't have you in their kill files...
>
> > > I value truth and clarity over congeniality. One measure of a man is
> > > the caliber of people he pisses off. Leftist hysterics only serve to
> > > convince me that I’m on the right path.
> > Truth????????
>
> Truth...it's a Conservative Thing...you wouldn't understand.
"What is truth?" (Pontius Pilate, attributed.)
>
> > > I value truth and clarity over congeniality. One measure of a man is
> > > the caliber of people he pisses off. Leftist hysterics only serve to
> > > convince me that I’m on the right path.
> > Truth????????
>
> Truth...it's a Conservative Thing...you wouldn't understand.
>
> > > > > > >I argue that the Left is a victim of its own
> > > > > > > brainwashing. How could they not be? All they hear, see, and read from
> > > > > > > childhood on, from elementary school through graduate school, on TV
> > > > > > > and in the movies, are leftist ideas.
> > > > > > Which are what, exactly?
> > > > > Ah, a fair question. Good for you, Barry, well done.
> > > > Oh, I know already! But what do you (and people like you) actually
> > > > think that they are?
>
> > > The Modern Left's beliefs boils down to self-congratulation as a basis
> > > for social policy. The Left is controlled by those who insist they
> > > alone know what’s good for society - and that “goodness” must be
> > > attained by expanded government action.
> > And you really believe that?
>
> Our exchanges was done much to reinforce and cement that view of the
> Left.
>
> Now, go ahead and call me stupid again....it's all you have left.
stupidity.
>
> > > > > The core assumption of the Left is that the overwhelming majority of
> > > > > people have no idea how to handle their lives.
> > > > Nope!
> > > If not, then why do Leftists demand ever larger, massively intrusive,
> > > government?
> > Why do people like you do the same?
>
> We don't.
>
> > > > >Oh, sure, they can
> > > > > handle the small stuff like managing to get to work and so on - but
> > > > > just take a look at how they spend their free time. Instead of
> > > > > reading the classics and bettering themselves, they fret of "The
> > > > > Hunger Games" or getting on Level Nine while playing "Call of Duty:
> > > > > Modern Warfare 3" They eat utter rubbish and their lives are
> > > > > completely out of control.
> > > > That sounds like you, Richard....
>
> > > (sigh) Barry, Barry, Barry....that's a fantasy you've created - it’s
> > > not reality. It's based on literally nothing other than the need to
> > > satisfy your ego. We’ve never actually met - because you’re terrified
> > > that doing so would destroy a cherished illusion.
> > You are a fantasist....
>
> I was willing to meet in the flesh. You ran away from the prospect.
> Who's afraid of reality?
hands....
>
> > > > > Most people are children to need a firm hand to allow them to reach
> > > > > their true potential. That why the Best and the Brightest need to run
> > > > > the world. Take decisions out of the hand of the childish masses, and
> > > > > allow the cool logic of the educated to run the world fairly.
> > > > That sounds like Plato....and Hobbes.....
> > > I’m not talking about the roots of modern thought, but where Liberals
> > > and Conservatives find themselves today.
> > And how would you know?
>
> Because I'm a conservative, and I talk to a lot of liberals.
when people say that you are not, you then claim that 'liberals' don't
understand you and can't talk to you!
>
> > > > > Yes, conservatives understand how the Left thinks.
> > > > Neo-Platonism is not part of socialism....
>
> > > Again, I’m not talking about the 3rd Century. Talking about today.
> > You think that these ideas come out of thin air?
>
> You don't understand that the terms are constantly being redefined?
> You probably don't.
>
> > > >....and there are no Philosopher
> > > > Kings...
>
> > > But we're not talking about "kings" - we're talking about "The Best
> > > and the Brightest" - the visions of the anointed. Instead of formal
> > > Royalty, today’s “kings” are faceless bureaucrats who make life and
> > > death decisions without a shred of accountability.
> > Philosopher Kings all right......
>
> Except they're not philosophers, nor are they literal kings. They are
> faceless people with much power, and virtually no responsibility.
>
> > > > (Shall we adjourn while you start searching Wikipedia?)
> > > You seem to feel that reading Wikipedia is some sort of weakness.
> > It seems to be your friend.....
>
> While Wikipedia t seems to be your hated enemy. Gee, just because it
> took away your one trick?
>
> > > Had
> > > you done that, you wouldn't have shown yourself to be nearly the
> > > horse's ass you did when talking Dr. Hanson, or Dennis Prager.
>
> > > Is it your assumption that your gray matter is a library which holds
> > > all known knowledge?
> > No, but I do know about the subjects and threads that I post to....>
>
> You might have back in the 70s.
>
> > and
> > most of the time I do it 'from the top of my head'.
>
> You mean you didn't have to look up how to accuse anyone you disagree
> with of being stupid?
> > > > O.K. Here goes! The basic tenet of conservatism is that human nature
> > > > is fixed and immutable.
>
> > > Whereas Leftists insist their political beliefs trump a billion years
> > > of evolution. The plan is to have humans conform to their ideas,
> > > rather than design systems which take human nature into account. And
> > > when the Left’s badly thought out plans fall apart, the blame is
> > > firmly based on “not enough time or resources.”
> > Q.E.D. I think!
>
> You haven't thought since the 70s.
And you still can't see it!
> > > > The secular version of the doctrine of
> > > > original sin. Consequently, the selfishness and destructive tendencies
> > > > of the human personality have to be kept in check by some form of
> > > > authority.
> > > Eeeeeeee.....no. We believe in self control - core values,
> > > responsibility, family, peer pressure, honor.
> > I actually say that, you blithering idiot!
>
> Not above, you didn't. Hardly my fault that you contradict
> yourself.
>
> > >A belief in a God who
>
> > > judges one at life’s end doesn’t hurt either. The police and courts
> > > are a last resort....not the first.
>
> > > > That is the Hobbesian view of society, in which we
> > > > surrender part of our liberty to a form of authority that guarantees
> > > > some kind of order.
> > > And what society doesn’t agree with that?
> > Yours?
>
> Nope.
>
> > Wall Street?
>
> I'll take Wall Streets excesses over a socialist society any day of
> the week.
> > > >That alone guarantees any form of civilised
> > > > existence, otherwise the alternative is the "state of nature" in which
> > > > the life of man is 'solitary, nasty, brutish, and short." Now, most
> > > > conservatives have thought that such authority is derived from certain
> > > > institutions in society. These are the family, the institution of
> > > > property, the church (or something having a similar moral authority)
> > > > and the government.
> > > What you keep missing is that all of the conservative institutions are
> > > voluntary. One joins a church of their own free will.
> > One is socialised by it....
>
> Voluntarily.
hymn has it:-
Can a child presume to choose,
Where and how to live?
> > >Children not
> > > happy with their family can bolt when they turn 18. The Right
> > > believes in choice....you guys believe in faceless bureaucrats making
> > > choices for you.
>
> (crickets)
>
> > > > These institutions are interlocked, and form an
> > > > organic whole.
> > > Nope. They work as checks against each other. The Church doesn’t ask
> > > for or receive permission from the government to make sure what they
> > > believe jive with official state positions. If a family isn’t happy
> > > with a direction their church is going, they’re more than free to quit
> > > and join another church. Conservatism is bottom up - starting with
> > > the individual. The Left is top down, starting with Kings and working
> > > their way down to peasants for whom they hold contempt.
> > You don't actually understand traditional conservatism. do you?
>
> Whatever terms you use - liberal, socialist, communist, royalist,
> Progressive.....the neverending battle comes down to freedom vs.
> authority.
you know that? "Liberty is not licence!"
>
> > > > They are often thought of as a hierarchy, functioning
> > > > like organs in a human body, each having its own function, but co-
> > > > operating to allow the body to grow.
> > > Nope. That’s a Leftist belief. We believe in the Individual.
> > Traditional conservatives do not!
>
> AGAIN, I'm a Classic Liberal.
>Like Rush Limbaugh, Ben Franklin, Glenn
> Beck and Winston Church.
father, in Tory Democracy. He was essentially a Disraelian
conservative, and returned to that in later life. He supported the
idea of the Welfare state.
> > > >This Aristotelian organic view of
> > > > society is sometimes (not always) extended to include race and culture
> > > > as an overarching institution socialising the individual, and through
> > > > which the individual receives their language and values.
> > > Again, I’m not talking about Aristotle. I’m talking about what you
> > > consider a conservative to be ...today.
> > The fact that you don't see this organic trend around you is your
> > problem. It comes up frequently disguised as 'multi-culturalism.....
>
> “Multi-culturalism"? You're trying to hang MC around the necks of
> conservatives?
>
> Are you nuts?
No!
>
> > > > Now, the
> > > > entire point of conservatism is to 'conserve' or protect these
> > > > institutions.
> > > Nonsense. We challenge corrupt institutions constantly.
> > Your mind seems to function on a very basic level, with little
> > capacity for abstract thought.
>
> My wind
>works on an incredibly sophisticated level, which came bundled
> with a finely tuned Bullshit Detector.
>
> > > > Change will always occur, but change must be managed in
> > > > such a way that it does not subvert these safeguards of the social
> > > > order.
> > > Again, you are describing the Leftist’s world view....that there’s
> > > someone huge in charge of everything. Conservatives belive in the
> > > Individual, and freedom. The Left believes in some version of the
> > > King.
> > But you are not a conservative!
>
> I'm certainly what we call conservatives today.
not (especially in America).
>
> > > > That, Richard, is what conservatism is!
>
> > > If that’s what you believe, then Dennis Prager has been proven
> > > correct. You don’t understand modern conservatism.
>
> > Correction. He doesn't. (Or pretends not to, to write for a particular
> > audience. I don't know which is worse.)
>
> Here’s the Occam’s Razor option: Prager knows exactly what he’s
> talking about, believes every word, and you’re not man enough to admit
> it.
> > > > > Norm Chomsky, Al Frankin, Andrew Sullivan, David Corn, Robert Riech
> > > > > are are among the guests he's had his show.
> > > > Then why doesn't he say so?
> > > Because informed people already know that. Certainly his readers do.
> > Has he got any?
>
> Millions. He also has about seven million listeners daily. Oh, and
> he's written and had published a couple of dozen books.
> > > > > > > I asked a leading
> > > > > > > liberal writer
> > > > > > Who?
> > > > > Again, Dennis almost certainly couldn't get permission to mention the
> > > > > Leftist's name. You side tend towards having rather thin skins,
> > > > > don'tchaknow?
> > > > I'm bemused that he writes tosh like this!
>
> > > Is “tosh” some sort of lower class British 70s slang for a superior
> > > argument?
>
> > No...for garbage like this.
>
> But Dennis Prager doesn’t write garbage. He’s headed interfaith
> dialogues at the Vatican. He’s lectured the Russians about the future
> of Russian. He’s written books on the history of the Jews.
> You scribble rubbish such as the “...study one aspect of sex tourism
> as part of my other tourism research topics (which include the role of
> tourism in post-communist transition in Europe, issues relating to
> heritage tourism, 'serious leisure', and transport and tourism). There
> are several academics who study the purely commercial side of sex
> tourism. My interest is the swinging sub-culture, as an extension of
> the 'serious leisure' concept, and its creation of 'embodied space'.”
> > > > I think that most people who know anything about the Korean War would
> > > > be aware of his 'Hidden History'!
> > > My father hasn't. He is a Marine who served in the Korean war.
>
> > And your point is?
>
> That your insistence that “ most people who know anything about the
> Korean War would be aware of his 'Hidden History" is clearly nonsense.
academic or historical study of the war.
> > > > > > How much more of this garbage is there?
> > > > > And that's an argument that you present to prove that you're open
> > > > > minded and understand the conservative mind?
> > > > I don't suffer fools gladly, Richard!
> > > How do you live with yourself? Oh, right - you're heavily invested in
> > > delusion.
> > I don't suffer fools gladly!.
>
> As I wrote, you're heavily invested in delusion.
> > > > > Please tell me - what is TRUE conservatism, in your mind.
> > > > Just did it, Richard!
> > > And I tore your arguments into itsy, bitsy, pieces.
> > No you didn't. You don't understand most of what I wrote!
>
> You really need to get over the idea that what you write is deep and
> profound. It's not. What you're posting is tired, boring, weak
> arguments that might have gotten you laid in the 70s, but today just
> doesn't stand the test of time.
>
> > > > > > > They are certain that conservatives are sexist, intolerant,
> > > > > > > xenophobic, homophobic, Islamophobic, racist, and bigoted, not to
> > > > > > > mention anti-intellectual and anti-science.
> > > > > > Correction. The current American 'right are.....but they are not
> > > > > > conservatives!
> > > > > Please tell me what you consider to be a true conservative.
> > > > Already did that!
> > > Tell you what - give me an example of who you consider a “true
> > > conservative" who's living today.
> > In America? That would be difficult.....
>
> If your definition of a “true conservative" is so obscure that you
> can't name a single example in a population of a third of a
> billion....it's time for you to acknowledge that your definition is
> worthless.
Dr. Barry Worthington
trainguard
Apr 10, 2012, 5:04:44 AM4/10/12
to
his Matchcoat, and other little Acquisitions absolutely necessary for
his Subsistence, seems to me to be the Creature of publick Convention.
Hence the Public has the Right of Regulating Descents & all other
Conveyances of Property, and even of limiting the Quantity & the Uses
of it. All the Property that is necessary to a Man for the
Conservation of the Individual & the Propagation of the Species, is
his natural Right which none can justly deprive him of: But all
Property of the Publick, who by their Laws have created it, and who
may therefore by other Laws dispose of it, whenever the Welfare of the
Publick shall demand such Disposition. He that does not like civil
Society on these Terms, let him retire & live among Savages.—He can
have no right to the Benefits of Society who will not pay his Club
towards the Support of it. "
Letter to Robert Morris, 25 Dec, 1783.
Dr. Barry Worthington
Richard Steel
Apr 10, 2012, 10:58:46 AM4/10/12
to
their taxes. So do I. So does Rush Limbaugh. As President Ronald
Reagan once said "I'm proud to pay my taxes. The thing is, I'd be
just as proud to pay half as much." But the idea that Ben Franklin
supported socialism is nonsense.
BTW, Ben had a piece of advice just for you:
"A learned blockhead is a greater blockhead than an ignorant one."
Benjamin Franklin
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Richard Steel
Apr 10, 2012, 3:21:18 PM4/10/12
to
On Apr 10, 11:34 am, Yoorg...@Jurgis.net wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Apr 2012 07:58:46 -0700 (PDT), Richard Steel
> because he had to pay taxes, right?
No, Franklin rebelled against the Crown because of Taxation Without
Representation. Really, should have learned that in the fifth grade.
> MOF, I don't recall any "founder" saying that taxation was immoral or
> illegal.
Who said otherwise?
> Raygun also asked a large crown if they thought the wealthy should pay
> more---resounding "yes"
A gun talked to a crown? Sorry, just to silly to respond to.
> As for the word "socialism"---you've misguidedly said that Nazis were
> "socialists" and we know that's bullshit
We don't all know that. Certainly Hitler and his posse knew they were
socialists.
> Socialism is nothing more than a word used to infer something that is
> not.
I'm going to post the above quote separately....it's that stupid.
> On Tue, 10 Apr 2012 07:58:46 -0700 (PDT), Richard Steel
>
> <rsteel2...@aol.com> wrote:
> >Yes, Ben Franklin felt Americans had/have a moral obligation to pay
> >their taxes. So do I. So does Rush Limbaugh. As President Ronald
> >Reagan once said "I'm proud to pay my taxes. The thing is, I'd be
> >just as proud to pay half as much." But the idea that Ben Franklin
> >supported socialism is nonsense.
> So---Franklin, being a "founder" didn't rebel against the Crown
> <rsteel2...@aol.com> wrote:
> >Yes, Ben Franklin felt Americans had/have a moral obligation to pay
> >their taxes. So do I. So does Rush Limbaugh. As President Ronald
> >Reagan once said "I'm proud to pay my taxes. The thing is, I'd be
> >just as proud to pay half as much." But the idea that Ben Franklin
> >supported socialism is nonsense.
> because he had to pay taxes, right?
No, Franklin rebelled against the Crown because of Taxation Without
Representation. Really, should have learned that in the fifth grade.
> MOF, I don't recall any "founder" saying that taxation was immoral or
> illegal.
Who said otherwise?
> Raygun also asked a large crown if they thought the wealthy should pay
> more---resounding "yes"
A gun talked to a crown? Sorry, just to silly to respond to.
> As for the word "socialism"---you've misguidedly said that Nazis were
> "socialists" and we know that's bullshit
We don't all know that. Certainly Hitler and his posse knew they were
socialists.
> Socialism is nothing more than a word used to infer something that is
> not.
I'm going to post the above quote separately....it's that stupid.
trainguard
Apr 10, 2012, 8:01:41 PM4/10/12
to
learn something.
Dr. Barry Worthington
>
> BTW, Ben had a piece of advice just for you:
>
> "A learned blockhead is a greater blockhead than an ignorant one."
>
> - Show quoted text -
Richard Steel
Apr 10, 2012, 8:51:21 PM4/10/12
to
including this preceding paragraph?
"The Remissness of our People in Paying Taxes is highly blameable; the
Unwillingness to pay them is still more so. I see, in some Resolutions
of Town Meetings, a Remonstrance against giving Congress a Power to
take, as they call it, the People's Money out of their Pockets, tho'
only to pay the Interest and Principal of Debts duly contracted. They
seem to mistake the Point. Money, justly due from the People, is their
Creditors' Money, and no longer the Money of the People, who, if they
withold it, should be compell'd to pay by some Law."
Franklin was talking about honestly owed taxes, and his contempt for
tax cheats.
Again, don't mess with me when it comes to Ben Franklin.
BTW, Ben had a piece of advice just for you:
Benjamin Franklin
trainguard
Apr 11, 2012, 3:19:02 AM4/11/12
to
construct....but that concept goes right over your tiny pointed
head....
You must remember that (by this time) he was living amongst (and
influenced by) French philosophes....
Out of your league, Richard, out of your league again....
Dr. Barry Worthington
>
> Again, don't mess with me when it comes to Ben Franklin.
>
> BTW, Ben had a piece of advice just for you:
>
> "Who is wise? He that learns from everyone."
Richard Steel
Apr 11, 2012, 9:43:45 AM4/11/12
to
preamble that you deleted to twist Franklin's words.
> You must remember that (by this time) he was living amongst (and
> influenced by) French philosophes....
> Out of your league, Richard, out of your league again....
trainguard
Apr 11, 2012, 10:05:31 AM4/11/12
to
"Hence the Public has the Right of Regulating Descents & all other
All the Property that is necessary to a Man for Conservation of the
Individual & the Propagation of the Species, is his natural Right
which none can justly deprive him of: But all Property of the Publick,
who by their Laws have created it, and who may therefore by other Laws
dispose of it, whenever the Welfare of the Publick shall demand such
Disposition."
It couldn't be plainer!
which none can justly deprive him of: But all Property of the Publick,
who by their Laws have created it, and who may therefore by other Laws
dispose of it, whenever the Welfare of the Publick shall demand such
Disposition."
>
> > You must remember that (by this time) he was living amongst (and
> > influenced by) French philosophes....
>
> He didn't abandon everything he fought for his entire life.
>
> > Out of your league, Richard, out of your league again....
>
> So you keep telling yourself.
Dr. Barry Worthington
Richard Steel
Apr 11, 2012, 10:33:22 AM4/11/12
to
"The Remissness of our People in Paying Taxes is highly blameable; the
Unwillingness to pay them is still more so. I see, in some Resolutions
of Town Meetings, a Remonstrance against giving Congress a Power to
take, as they call it, the People's Money out of their Pockets, tho'
only to pay the Interest and Principal of Debts duly contracted. They
seem to mistake the Point. Money, justly due from the People, is their
Creditors' Money, and no longer the Money of the People, who, if they
withold it, should be compell'd to pay by some Law."
> > > You must remember that (by this time) he was living amongst (and
> > > influenced by) French philosophes....
> > He didn't abandon everything he fought for his entire life.
> But he did change his opinions!
opinion.
> > > Out of your league, Richard, out of your league again....
> > So you keep telling yourself.
> Because it's true!
trainguard
Apr 11, 2012, 11:15:53 AM4/11/12
to
for survival as a social construct, defined by society and its laws.
What don't you understand by "....and even of limiting the Quantity &
the Uses?"
>
> > > > You must remember that (by this time) he was living amongst (and
> > > > influenced by) French philosophes....
> > > He didn't abandon everything he fought for his entire life.
> > But he did change his opinions!
>
> So you cliam. Of course, you had to edit the quote to get to that
> opinion.
fact that you don't seem to understand it is not my problem.
>
> > > > Out of your league, Richard, out of your league again....
> > > So you keep telling yourself.
> > Because it's true!
>
> You believe many obvious lies to be true.
Richard Steel
Apr 11, 2012, 11:23:50 AM4/11/12
to
> > > > One usually needs a 15 year old spoiled daughter of a rich man to hear
> > > > come backs THAT snappy.
> > > Well...it's what you deserve....be grateful that I bother to comment
> > > at all....
> > Yeah, that's the sort of comment I expect from spoiled 14 year old
> > girls.
> You appear to be an expert on young girls. One wonders why. (I too can
> insinuate...just like you!)
degenerate sex was all yours.
> > > Actually, it's a comment upon your mental processes (or lack of
> > > them).....but you are too stupid to realise that.
> > Yes, yes, Barry. I'm stupid, Dr. Hanson is stupid, Dennis Prager is
> > stupid. Everyone who holds an opinion you don't like is stupid.
> I speak as I find, Richard.
> > > > Victor Davis Hanson writes for the widely respected National Review,
> > > Respected?
> > Extremely. It’s been in print for over a half century. Its web page
> > is the standard “go to” for intelligent people who want a clear view
> > of what’s going on in the world.
> It's comparatively unknown outside America, and I doubt that many
> Americans take much notice of it. It doesn't have the pedigree of the
> Spectator in Britain.
seriously doubt that. If true, how sad for your country.
> > > > therefore the rest of his body of work is tainted and suspect.
> > > If he demeans himself to write crap for morons, what does he expect?
> > But he doesn't write "crap for morons". He writes brilliant articles
> > in respected publicans for a literate audience.
> Not on the basis of the 'piece' that you cited......
> > > Gore
> > > > Vidal writes soft-core porn,
> > > Insightful essays a lot of the time.....and some interesting
> > > historical novels.
> > And soft core porn.
> So what!
> 'Myra' was intended as satire, by the way.
> > > >that is a sign of....gee, what is it a
> > > > sign of? That he’s a free spirit? Open minded? Just what do you
> > > > tell yourself to justify such rubbish? More important .... when will
> > > > you live by the standards that you demand of others?
> > > That you've never read him? That you know nothing about him?
> > Of course I've read him. Hell, I belonged to his blog for a year or
> > so.
> You are fantasising again......
And what the Hell is “ fantasising”?
> > > > No, you know how to regurgitate tired clichés from the 70s. And you
> > > > have mastered the sneer - another skill set you have in common with
> > > > spoiled 15 year old girls.
> > > You really have to read postings! it helps!
> > You really must learn how to put together an argument which consists
> > of something other than a childish insult.
> But that's what you do, Richard!
> > > > > >While the latter writes clearly, you prefer terms which
> > > > > > hide your meaning, and are easily confused.
> > > > > What do you not understand about 'classical (or Gladstonian)
> > > > > liberalism' or 'neoliberalism? Are you that ignorant?
>
> > > > (sigh) Barry....Barry....Barry.....I AM a Classic Liberal. The
> > > > current home of the Classic Liberal is the Conservative Movement.
> > > Which is why there are no conservatives any more! I do wish you would
> > > realise this!
> > Be happy, Barry....you finally made me laugh out loud. There's no
> > conservatives? Really? And there are no Conservatives because BARRY
> > says so?
> No. Because of people like you!
Cranky Old Socialists club. When dealing with people who aren't 100%
on your side? Eh, not so much.
Here's the painful reality: If your definition of "conservatism" is
so restrictive that it exclude everybody who considers themselves a
member of that cause....it's likely a terrible interpretation. It
boils down to either billions of people are wrong, or Barry's
definition is silly.
That's not to say there hasn't been cases of One Man With a Dream
Being Right While the Rest of the World is Wrong is impossible. It
has happened before in history. But as Carl Sagan said said,
"extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence." Far from being
"extraordinary", your definition has been vague, meandering, and
depends heavily on your ability to bully conservatives.
Dennis Prager is correct - you don't understand conservatives, or
Conservatism.
> > > > Rush Limbaugh is a Classic Liberal. So was Ben Franklin. Ultimately,
> > > > the battle comes down to individual liberty vs. collectivism. I
> > > > believe in freedom. You believe in bowing your head to Kings.
> > > How dare you mention Franklin and Limbaugh in the same breath! Wash
> > > your mouth out!
> > Somewhere, Ben Franklin looks down at Rush Limbaugh pissing off
> > stuffed shirts like yourself, slaps John Adams on the shoulder, and
> > shouts "the American Dream is still alive." Ben cheers Rush on as The
> > Captain (aka Rush Limbaugh) takes on the President of the United
> > States....and wins.
> Did that pleasure you?
usually the case with your "quips," the actual effect is more than a
little greasy. Sort of like the 65 year old pervert in the park
taking to 14 year old girls about “free love.”
> > May I remind you that Ben Franklin, like Rush Limbaugh, liberally
> > mixed politics which Earthy humor? And that Franklin told truth to
> > power.
> Franklin was intelligent, though!
then, they were as thin skinned as yourself.
> And had principles......<
Literally, the first statement made to the Republicans after Obama
took office was “you have to stop listenin’ to Rush Limbaugh.” Rush
has taken on Presidents, had his liberty and property threatened, and
yet he hasn’t backed down an inch.
Again, Ben Franklin smiles.
> > Don't take me on when it comes to Ben Franklin...I've read every work
> > on the man I can get my hands on.
> Your reading doesn't seem to have any effect upon your mind or mental
> state...
disagree with is a form of mental illness. A technique popular with
fascists around the world.
> > > > Is this an example of British Humor that is so ironic that it has
> > > > stopped making sense? Mr. Podhoretz has been a special assistant to
> > > > a US Cabinet member. He has been a speech writer for two US
> > > > Presidents....and yet he’s a “political illiterate” because his views
> > > > conflict with your moldy 70s socialist clichés?
> > > He's a political illiterate.
> > And what life experiences gives you the power to make such a judgment?
> My sixty-odd years upn this earth, my education, and my interest in
> politics on both side s of the Atlantic....
rapping outranks decades of actually effecting the politics of the
world?
Mr. Podhoretz had Presidents of the United States take notes when he
spoke. You gave consumer tips for overseas sex tours.
> > > > > > Podhoretz was also a consultant for the popular television series "The
> > > > > > West Wing".
> > > > > Woopee do!
> > > > Actually, yes....in and of itself that is a big deal. To be a
> > > > consultant to a long running, critically acclaimed and wildly popular
> > > > political television series (while holding views where are
> > > > diametrically opposite of the Producers) is an accomplishment of which
> > > > a man can justly be proud. Add that to have written for two US
> > > > Presidents, assistant to a US Cabinate Member, writer for Time
> > > > Magazine, National Review, USNWR, FOX News, CNN....and Mr. Podhoretz
> > > > has a career that lessor men can only grumble about bitterly.
> > > Do you thing that anyone seriously gives a shit?
> > A lot more than anyone cares about your Ph.D.
> That little fact really annoys you, doesn't it?
beginning for a 20 something - an accomplishment any young person can
be justly proud. But, at one point, you actually have to do something
with the honor....otherwise, it just becomes another piece of paper.
> > > > > > Your proudest achievements seem to be limited to the ability to spell
> > > > > > the words "wanker," "nutter" and "toss".
> > > > > My proudest achievement (if we are talking seriously) is what I can
> > > > > put in front of my name!
> > > > That’s it? Done nothing of note since your college days? That’s the
> > > > high water mark of your life?
> > > I didn't say that! But a lot of things currently flow from it....
> > Please, tell me what nationally known publications you've been
> > published in. The New York Times? The London Times? CNN?
> > Please, awe me with your accomplishments.
> Actually, I have been published in British newspapers, including a
> national one.....
out on any given afternoon.
> > > > Why is your Ph.D enough for a lifetime, but Dr. Hanson’s easily
> > > > brushed aside? Why is your academic achievement awe inspiring, while
> > > > Hanson’s portfolio of far greater honors sneered upon?
> > > Well, I don't write shit like he does!
> > Yes, you DO write shit. NO, Dr. Hanson doesn't.
> That's your opinion of course. And I have mine! So there!
> > "My father and his mates once stumbled upon someone like you. It was
> > in
> > Italy, in a farmyard. The man's belly had burst open and was now full
> > of maggots and flies buzzed around the corpse. The head was so black
> > and swollen that the features were unrecognisable. The uniform was
> > stained, but still sported SS Runes on it. One of the local peasants
> > said that a group of SS had rounded up hostages from the village and
> > shot them. This one strayed too far, and the old farmer protected his
> > daughter and grandchildren by killing him with a shotgun."
> Why is that 'shit'?
2. It’s a thinly veiled death threat.
> > > > > > > > I have argued this point for many years. In my book to be published
> > > > > > > > later this month (Still the Best Hope: Why the World Needs American
> > > > > > > > Values to Triumph),
> > > > > > > At this point, countless readers start to switch off....
> > > > > > And by "countless readers", you mean...you.
> > > > > Nope! (As you quaint colonials say!)
> > > > America is not a colony. I suggest that you get over yourself.
> > > It still is, in many ways. You just don't realise it.
> > How many decades will it be until England is a colony to Mecca?
> Nutter!
> > > > > I mean most sensible
> > > > > people...well, those who don't have you in their kill files...
> > > > I value truth and clarity over congeniality. One measure of a man is
> > > > the caliber of people he pisses off. Leftist hysterics only serve to
> > > > convince me that I’m on the right path.
> > > Truth????????
> > Truth...it's a Conservative Thing...you wouldn't
> "What is truth?" (Pontius Pilate, attributed.)>
You’re using the guy who sentenced Jesus Christ to death as a
respected source?
> > > > > > >I argue that the Left is a victim of its own
> > > > > > > brainwashing. How could they not be? All they hear, see, and read from
> > > > > > > childhood on, from elementary school through graduate school, on TV
> > > > > > > and in the movies, are leftist ideas.
> > > > > > Which are what, exactly?
> > > > > Ah, a fair question. Good for you, Barry, well done.
> > > > Oh, I know already! But what do you (and people like you) actually
> > > > think that they are?
> > > The Modern Left's beliefs boils down to self-congratulation as a basis
> > > for social policy. The Left is controlled by those who insist they
> > > alone know what’s good for society - and that “goodness” must be
> > > attained by expanded government action.
> > And you really believe that?
> Our exchanges was done much to reinforce and cement that view of the
> Left.
> Now, go ahead and call me stupid again....it's all you have left.
I have my education, Richard. You have your ignorance....and
stupidity.
"A learned blockhead is a greater blockhead than an ignorant one."
Benjamin Franklin
Benjamin Franklin
> > > > > The core assumption of the Left is that the overwhelming majority of
> > > > > people have no idea how to handle their lives.
> > > > Nope!
> > > If not, then why do Leftists demand ever larger, massively intrusive,
> > > government?
> > Why do people like you do the same?
>> We don't.
> Although it isn't Pantomine season......"oh yes you do!">
You have an entire season for pantomine?
> > > > > people have no idea how to handle their lives.
> > > > Nope!
> > > If not, then why do Leftists demand ever larger, massively intrusive,
> > > government?
> > Why do people like you do the same?
>> We don't.
> Although it isn't Pantomine season......"oh yes you do!">
> > > > >Oh, sure, they can
> > > > > handle the small stuff like managing to get to work and so on - but
> > > > > just take a look at how they spend their free time. Instead of
> > > > > reading the classics and bettering themselves, they fret of "The
> > > > > Hunger Games" or getting on Level Nine while playing "Call of Duty:
> > > > > Modern Warfare 3" They eat utter rubbish and their lives are
> > > > > completely out of control.
> > > > That sounds like you, Richard....
> > > (sigh) Barry, Barry, Barry....that's a fantasy you've created - it’s
> > > not reality. It's based on literally nothing other than the need to
> > > satisfy your ego. We’ve never actually met - because you’re terrified
> > > that doing so would destroy a cherished illusion.
> > You are a fantasist....
>> I was willing to meet in the flesh. You ran away from the prospect.
>> Who's afraid of reality?
> I don't meet people with a mind like yours....even after washing my
> hands....
Conservatives don’t exist. It’s called “willful ignorance”. And
cowardice.
> > > > > Most people are children to need a firm hand to allow them to reach
> > > > > their true potential. That why the Best and the Brightest need to run
> > > > > the world. Take decisions out of the hand of the childish masses, and
> > > > > allow the cool logic of the educated to run the world fairly.
> > > > That sounds like Plato....and Hobbes.....
> > > I’m not talking about the roots of modern thought, but where Liberals
> > > and Conservatives find themselves today.
> > And how would you know?
>> Because I'm a conservative, and I talk to a lot of liberals.
> You think that you are a conservative. But like the rest of your ilk,
> when people say that you are not, you then claim that 'liberals' don't
> understand you and can't talk to you!
Conservatives. Why should I respect such a silly interpretation of
the word?
> > > > > Yes, conservatives understand how the Left thinks.
> > > > Neo-Platonism is not part of socialism....
> > > Again, I’m not talking about the 3rd Century. Talking about today.
> > You think that these ideas come out of thin air?
> You don't understand that the terms are constantly being redefined?
> You probably don't.
> You redefine terms so that they become meaningless...
> > > >....and there are no Philosopher
> > > > Kings...
> > > But we're not talking about "kings" - we're talking about "The Best
> > > and the Brightest" - the visions of the anointed. Instead of formal
> > > Royalty, today’s “kings” are faceless bureaucrats who make life and
> > > death decisions without a shred of accountability.
> > Philosopher Kings all right......
>> Except they're not philosophers, nor are they literal kings. They are
>> faceless people with much power, and virtually no responsibility.
> Went right over your head....>
> > > > (Shall we adjourn while you start searching Wikipedia?)
> > > You seem to feel that reading Wikipedia is some sort of weakness.
> > It seems to be your friend.....
> While Wikipedia t seems to be your hated enemy. Gee, just because it
> took away your one trick?
?????????????????
quickly. The sort of skill that was impressive in the 70s. In the
19th Century, the ability to add rows of numbers quickly assured the
holder of that skill a comfortable, white collar, profession. Then
they invented the adding machine. I suppose those fellows hated that
machine as much as you hate Wikipedia, and for much the same reason.
> > > Had
> > > you done that, you wouldn't have shown yourself to be nearly the
> > > horse's ass you did when talking Dr. Hanson, or Dennis Prager.
> > > Is it your assumption that your gray matter is a library which holds
> > > all known knowledge?
> > No, but I do know about the subjects and threads that I post to....>
> You might have back in the 70s.
> Oh, I'm pretty much aware.
Davis Hanson, Dennis Prager and John Podhoretz are to current
political commentary. Again and again you had egg on your face when
shown how little you knew about these men. You could have done a
quick search, but refused to.
That is the sin of pride, my friend.
> > and
> > most of the time I do it 'from the top of my head'.
> You mean you didn't have to look up how to accuse anyone you disagree
> with of being stupid?
> Not usually.>
> > > > O.K. Here goes! The basic tenet of conservatism is that human nature
> > > > is fixed and immutable.
> > > Whereas Leftists insist their political beliefs trump a billion years
> > > of evolution. The plan is to have humans conform to their ideas,
> > > rather than design systems which take human nature into account. And
> > > when the Left’s badly thought out plans fall apart, the blame is
> > > firmly based on “not enough time or resources.”
> > Q.E.D. I think!
>> You haven't thought since the 70s.
> You just agreed with my definition! That's why I said Q.E.D.!
> And you still can't see it!
I was talking about Leftists, not Conservatives. There was no
agreement.
> > > > The secular version of the doctrine of
> > > > original sin. Consequently, the selfishness and destructive tendencies
> > > > of the human personality have to be kept in check by some form of
> > > > authority.
> > > Eeeeeeee.....no. We believe in self control - core values,
> > > responsibility, family, peer pressure, honor.
> > I actually say that, you blithering idiot!
> > Not above, you didn't. Hardly my fault that you contradict
> > yourself.
> I said it in the definition!
Conservatives demand these values be forced on people. With
noticeable exception, we don’t.
> > >A belief in a God who
> > > judges one at life’s end doesn’t hurt either. The police and courts
> > > are a last resort....not the first.
> > > > That is the Hobbesian view of society, in which we
> > > > surrender part of our liberty to a form of authority that guarantees
> > > > some kind of order.
> > > And what society doesn’t agree with that?
> > Yours?
> Nope.
> > Wall Street?
>> I'll take Wall Streets excesses over a socialist society any day of
>> the week.
> That's because you are a fool.
nations.
> > > >That alone guarantees any form of civilised
> > > > existence, otherwise the alternative is the "state of nature" in which
> > > > the life of man is 'solitary, nasty, brutish, and short." Now, most
> > > > conservatives have thought that such authority is derived from certain
> > > > institutions in society. These are the family, the institution of
> > > > property, the church (or something having a similar moral authority)
> > > > and the government.
> > > What you keep missing is that all of the conservative institutions are
> > > voluntary. One joins a church of their own free will.
> > One is socialised by it....
>> Voluntarily.
> Not voluntarily...one is born into a social situation...as the old
> hymn has it:-
> Can a child presume to choose,
> Where and how to live?
Not - in - America.
> > >Children not
> > > happy with their family can bolt when they turn 18. The Right
> > > believes in choice....you guys believe in faceless bureaucrats making
> > > choices for you.
> (crickets)
> > > > These institutions are interlocked, and form an
> > > > organic whole.
> > > Nope. They work as checks against each other. The Church doesn’t ask
> > > for or receive permission from the government to make sure what they
> > > believe jive with official state positions. If a family isn’t happy
> > > with a direction their church is going, they’re more than free to quit
> > > and join another church. Conservatism is bottom up - starting with
> > > the individual. The Left is top down, starting with Kings and working
> > > their way down to peasants for whom they hold contempt.
> > You don't actually understand traditional conservatism. do you?
> Whatever terms you use - liberal, socialist, communist, royalist,
> Progressive.....the neverending battle comes down to freedom vs.
> authority.
> And traditional conservatism errs on the side of authority....didn't
> you know that? "Liberty is not licence!"
Limbaugh and Ben Franklin.
You and your ilk are the Classic Conservatives. You believe in
Authority, and kings of all stripes.
> > > > They are often thought of as a hierarchy, functioning
> > > > like organs in a human body, each having its own function, but co-
> > > > operating to allow the body to grow.
> > > Nope. That’s a Leftist belief. We believe in the Individual.
> > Traditional conservatives do not!
> AGAIN, I'm a Classic Liberal.
> Then you are not a conservative! How many times must I say that?>
true. Classic Liberals believed in small government, low taxes, few
regulations.
>Like Rush Limbaugh, Ben Franklin, Glenn
> Beck and Winston Church.
Wiston Churchill is hard to define. He believed, like Randolph, his
father, in Tory Democracy. He was essentially a Disraelian
conservative, and returned to that in later life. He supported the
idea of the Welfare state.
> > > >This Aristotelian organic view of
> > > > society is sometimes (not always) extended to include race and culture
> > > > as an overarching institution socialising the individual, and through
> > > > which the individual receives their language and values.
> > > Again, I’m not talking about Aristotle. I’m talking about what you
> > > consider a conservative to be ...today.
> > The fact that you don't see this organic trend around you is your
> > problem. It comes up frequently disguised as 'multi-culturalism.....
> > “Multi-culturalism"? You're trying to hang MC around the necks of
> conservatives?
> Yes! >
Conservative? Jesse Jackson?
> > Are you nuts?
> No! >
You might want to reconsider the “nuts” option. The alternate
explanations are much uglier.
> > > > Now, the
> > > > entire point of conservatism is to 'conserve' or protect these
> > > > institutions.
> > > Nonsense. We challenge corrupt institutions constantly.
> > Your mind seems to function on a very basic level, with little
> > capacity for abstract thought.
Freudian slip there!
> > works on an incredibly sophisticated level, which came bundled
> > with a finely tuned Bullshit Detector.
> (Smirk!!!!)
> > > > Change will always occur, but change must be managed in
> > > > such a way that it does not subvert these safeguards of the social
> > > > order.
> > > Again, you are describing the Leftist’s world view....that there’s
> > > someone huge in charge of everything. Conservatives belive in the
> > > Individual, and freedom. The Left believes in some version of the
> > > King.
> > > But you are not a conservative!
> > I'm certainly what we call conservatives today.
> That may be. But people who call themselves conservatives usually are
not (especially in America).
means just what I choose it to mean - neither more or less."
"The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so
many different things."
"The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master - that's
all."
Lewis Carroll
In the comic strip “Dilbert”, the lead character had a dog named
“Dogbert”. At one point, he introduced an evil cat without a name.
Scott Adams received 10,000 unsolicited letters, insisting that the
cat’s name was “Catbert”. Scott later explained that “when 10,000
people believe the charcter’s name is “Catbert”....that character’s
name is “Catbert.”
> > > > That, Richard, is what conservatism is!
> > > If that’s what you believe, then Dennis Prager has been proven
> > > correct. You don’t understand modern conservatism.
> > Correction. He doesn't. (Or pretends not to, to write for a particular
> > audience. I don't know which is worse.)
> >Here’s the Occam’s Razor option: Prager knows exactly what he’s
> >talking about, believes every word, and you’re not man enough to admit
> >it.
> Man enough? Oh dear! Something lurking deep in the woodshed?
thought is to imply sleazy, annomous, homosexual coupling on a sex
tour. I used the word to imply honor.
> > > > > Norm Chomsky, Al Frankin, Andrew Sullivan, David Corn, Robert Riech
> > > > > are are among the guests he's had his show.
> > > > Then why doesn't he say so?
> > > Because informed people already know that. Certainly his readers do.
> > Has he got any?
> Millions. He also has about seven million listeners daily. Oh, and
> he's written and had published a couple of dozen books.
(Yawn!)
Prager’s record....why ask the question?
> But Dennis Prager doesn’t write garbage. He’s headed interfaith
> dialogues at the Vatican. He’s lectured the Russians about the future
> of Russian. He’s written books on the history of the Jews.
> You scribble rubbish such as the “...study one aspect of sex tourism
> as part of my other tourism research topics (which include the role of
> tourism in post-communist transition in Europe, issues relating to
> heritage tourism, 'serious leisure', and transport and tourism). There
> are several academics who study the purely commercial side of sex
> tourism. My interest is the swinging sub-culture, as an extension of
> the 'serious leisure' concept, and its creation of 'embodied space'.”
> And why is that rubbish, Richard? Be specific!
The academic study of sex tours is rubbish because it attempts to add
dignity to that which is unworthy of respect. Your stated objective
is to show that sex tours are healthy, because they generate income.
Yes, yes, such nonsense is SOP in today’s academic world. So are
scholarly articles on Spider-Man, strippers, and “The Brady Bunch”.
Future historians will remember the 20th and beginning of the 21st
Centuries as “The Time When Academics Went Mad.”
> > > > I think that most people who know anything about the Korean War would
> > > > be aware of his 'Hidden History'!
> > > My father hasn't. He is a Marine who served in the Korean war.
> > And your point is?
> That your insistence that “ most people who know anything about the
> Korean War would be aware of his 'Hidden History" is clearly nonsense.
> With respect to your father, I was referring to people who made an
> academic or historical study of the war.
exactly phrase was “most people who know anything about the Korean
War....” BTW, last week, Dad celebrated his 90th Birthday with 9
rounds of golf.
> > > > > > How much more of this garbage is there?
> > > > > And that's an argument that you present to prove that you're open
> > > > > minded and understand the conservative mind?
> > > > I don't suffer fools gladly, Richard!
> > > How do you live with yourself? Oh, right - you're heavily invested in
> > > delusion.
> > I don't suffer fools gladly!.
>> As I wrote, you're heavily invested in delusion.
> I don't suffer fools gladly.
> > > > > Please tell me - what is TRUE conservatism, in your mind.
> > > > Just did it, Richard!
> > > And I tore your arguments into itsy, bitsy, pieces.
> > No you didn't. You don't understand most of what I wrote!
> You really need to get over the idea that what you write is deep and
> profound. It's not. What you're posting is tired, boring, weak
> arguments that might have gotten you laid in the 70s, but today just
> doesn't stand the test of time.
> How would you know? You clearly don't understand most of my points.
water you post is profound.
> > > > > > > They are certain that conservatives are sexist, intolerant,
> > > > > > > xenophobic, homophobic, Islamophobic, racist, and bigoted, not to
> > > > > > > mention anti-intellectual and anti-science.
> > > > > > Correction. The current American 'right are.....but they are not
> > > > > > conservatives!
> > > > > Please tell me what you consider to be a true conservative.
> > > > Already did that!
> > > Tell you what - give me an example of who you consider a “true
> > > conservative" who's living today.
> > In America? That would be difficult.....
> If your definition of a “true conservative" is so obscure that you
> can't name a single example in a population of a third of a
> billion....it's time for you to acknowledge that your definition is
> worthless.
> Perhaps it's a comment on the state of the American 'right'!
the American Right proves that you’re simply out of your depth on this
subject.
Message has been deleted
trainguard
Apr 11, 2012, 1:12:19 PM4/11/12
to
On Apr 11, 4:23 pm, Richard Steel <rsteel2...@aol.com> wrote:
> > > > > One usually needs a 15 year old spoiled daughter of a rich man to hear
> > > > > come backs THAT snappy.
> > > > Well...it's what you deserve....be grateful that I bother to comment
> > > > at all....
> > > Yeah, that's the sort of comment I expect from spoiled 14 year old
> > > girls.
> > You appear to be an expert on young girls. One wonders why. (I too can
> > insinuate...just like you!)
>
> Actually, I simply wrote that you were acting childishly. The leap to
> degenerate sex was all yours.
Well, the reference about insinuation was to you and your rather
> > > > > One usually needs a 15 year old spoiled daughter of a rich man to hear
> > > > > come backs THAT snappy.
> > > > Well...it's what you deserve....be grateful that I bother to comment
> > > > at all....
> > > Yeah, that's the sort of comment I expect from spoiled 14 year old
> > > girls.
> > You appear to be an expert on young girls. One wonders why. (I too can
> > insinuate...just like you!)
>
> Actually, I simply wrote that you were acting childishly. The leap to
> degenerate sex was all yours.
disgusting mind. Just to remind our readers (if there are any!).....
>
> > > > Actually, it's a comment upon your mental processes (or lack of
> > > > them).....but you are too stupid to realise that.
> > > Yes, yes, Barry. I'm stupid, Dr. Hanson is stupid, Dennis Prager is
> > > stupid. Everyone who holds an opinion you don't like is stupid.
> > I speak as I find, Richard.
>
> I believe it's called a lack of impulse control.
actually, are stuck for something to say, since you can't argue) you
resort to obscene insults.
>
> > > > > Victor Davis Hanson writes for the widely respected National Review,
> > > > Respected?
> > > Extremely. It’s been in print for over a half century. Its web page
> > > is the standard “go to” for intelligent people who want a clear view
> > > of what’s going on in the world.
> > It's comparatively unknown outside America, and I doubt that many
> > Americans take much notice of it. It doesn't have the pedigree of the
> > Spectator in Britain.
>
> They've never heard of the works of William F. Buckley in England? I
> seriously doubt that. If true, how sad for your country.
Ferdinand Mount, but there isn't really a great conservative thinker.
Buckley's attempt to take on board Gladstonian liberalism was a grave
error, although he did slap down Rand and her followers.
>
> > > > > therefore the rest of his body of work is tainted and suspect.
> > > > If he demeans himself to write crap for morons, what does he expect?
> > > But he doesn't write "crap for morons". He writes brilliant articles
> > > in respected publicans for a literate audience.
> > Not on the basis of the 'piece' that you cited......
>
> Yes, on the basis of that article.
>
> > > > Gore
> > > > > Vidal writes soft-core porn,
> > > > Insightful essays a lot of the time.....and some interesting
> > > > historical novels.
> > > And soft core porn.
> > So what!
>
> How how about living by the same standards that you demand of others?
>
> > 'Myra' was intended as satire, by the way.
>
> And just were does a road lined with good intentions lead?
> > > > >that is a sign of....gee, what is it a
> > > > > sign of? That he’s a free spirit? Open minded? Just what do you
> > > > > tell yourself to justify such rubbish? More important .... when will
> > > > > you live by the standards that you demand of others?
> > > > That you've never read him? That you know nothing about him?
> > > Of course I've read him. Hell, I belonged to his blog for a year or
> > > so.
> > You are fantasising again......
>
> No, Gore Vidal put out a blog for a year or so. I belonged to it.
> And what the Hell is “ fantasising”?
>
> > > > > No, you know how to regurgitate tired clichés from the 70s. And you
> > > > > have mastered the sneer - another skill set you have in common with
> > > > > spoiled 15 year old girls.
> > > > You really have to read postings! it helps!
> > > You really must learn how to put together an argument which consists
> > > of something other than a childish insult.
> > But that's what you do, Richard!
>
> Yeah, childish insults like that.
>
> > > > > > >While the latter writes clearly, you prefer terms which
> > > > > > > hide your meaning, and are easily confused.
> > > > > > What do you not understand about 'classical (or Gladstonian)
> > > > > > liberalism' or 'neoliberalism? Are you that ignorant?
>
> > > > > (sigh) Barry....Barry....Barry.....I AM a Classic Liberal. The
> > > > > current home of the Classic Liberal is the Conservative Movement.
> > > > Which is why there are no conservatives any more! I do wish you would
> > > > realise this!
> > > Be happy, Barry....you finally made me laugh out loud. There's no
> > > conservatives? Really? And there are no Conservatives because BARRY
> > > says so?
> > No. Because of people like you!
>
> That's the sort of statement which wows 'em when hanging around the
> Cranky Old Socialists club. When dealing with people who aren't 100%
> on your side? Eh, not so much.
>
> Here's the painful reality: If your definition of "conservatism" is
> so restrictive that it exclude everybody who considers themselves a
> member of that cause....it's likely a terrible interpretation. It
> boils down to either billions of people are wrong, or Barry's
> definition is silly.
>
> That's not to say there hasn't been cases of One Man With a Dream
> Being Right While the Rest of the World is Wrong is impossible. It
> has happened before in history. But as Carl Sagan said
>said,
> "extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence." Far from being
> "extraordinary", your definition has been vague, meandering, and
> depends heavily on your ability to bully conservatives.
>
> Dennis Prager is correct - you don't understand conservatives, or
> Conservatism.
lecture at a university, that is (more or less) the definition that
you would get.
>
> > > > > Rush Limbaugh is a Classic Liberal. So was Ben Franklin. Ultimately,
> > > > > the battle comes down to individual liberty vs. collectivism. I
> > > > > believe in freedom. You believe in bowing your head to Kings.
> > > > How dare you mention Franklin and Limbaugh in the same breath! Wash
> > > > your mouth out!
> > > Somewhere, Ben Franklin looks down at Rush Limbaugh pissing off
> > > stuffed shirts like yourself, slaps John Adams on the shoulder, and
> > > shouts "the American Dream is still alive." Ben cheers Rush on as The
> > > Captain (aka Rush Limbaugh) takes on the President of the United
> > > States....and wins.
> > Did that pleasure you?
>
> I understand that you're desperately trying to sound witty - but as is
> usually the case with your "quips," the actual effect is more than a
> little greasy.
> Sort of like the 65 year old pervert in the park
> taking to 14 year old girls about “free love.”
>
> > > May I remind you that Ben Franklin, like Rush Limbaugh, liberally
> > > mixed politics which Earthy humor? And that Franklin told truth to
> > > power.
> > Franklin was intelligent, though!
>
> I suspect that the target of Franklin's barbs would disagree. Back
> then, they were as thin skinned as yourself.
>
> > And had principles......<
>
> Literally, the first statement made to the Republicans after Obama
> took office was “you have to stop listenin’ to Rush Limbaugh.” Rush
> has taken on Presidents, had his liberty and property threatened, and
> yet he hasn’t backed down an inch.
>
> Again, Ben Franklin smiles.
>
> > > Don't take me on when it comes to Ben Franklin...I've read every work
> > > on the man I can get my hands on.
> > Your reading doesn't seem to have any effect upon your mind or mental
> > state...
>
> Oh, dear, dear, dear. We're back to the idea that holding ideas you
> disagree with is a form of mental illness. A technique popular with
> fascists around the world.
I speak as I find, Richard.
>
>
> > > > > Is this an example of British Humor that is so ironic that it has
> > > > > stopped making sense? Mr. Podhoretz has been a special assistant to
> > > > > a US Cabinet member. He has been a speech writer for two US
> > > > > Presidents....and yet he’s a “political illiterate” because his views
> > > > > conflict with your moldy 70s socialist clichés?
> > > > He's a political illiterate.
> > > And what life experiences gives you the power to make such a judgment?
> > My sixty-odd years upn this earth, my education, and my interest in
> > politics on both side s of the Atlantic....
>
> Decades wasted hanging around student lounges and teacher's lounges
> rapping outranks decades of actually effecting the politics of the
> world?
Well, I was a political activist when I was younger. I was a member of
> > > > > stopped making sense? Mr. Podhoretz has been a special assistant to
> > > > > a US Cabinet member. He has been a speech writer for two US
> > > > > Presidents....and yet he’s a “political illiterate” because his views
> > > > > conflict with your moldy 70s socialist clichés?
> > > > He's a political illiterate.
> > > And what life experiences gives you the power to make such a judgment?
> > My sixty-odd years upn this earth, my education, and my interest in
> > politics on both side s of the Atlantic....
>
> Decades wasted hanging around student lounges and teacher's lounges
> rapping outranks decades of actually effecting the politics of the
> world?
a trade union. And I still take part in a host of voluntary
activities...and some of the projects have borne fruit....
>
> Mr. Podhoretz had Presidents of the United States take notes when he
> spoke. You gave consumer tips for overseas sex tours.
when cornered...
Thanks! I was waiting for that..........
> > > A lot more than anyone cares about your Ph.D.
> > That little fact really annoys you, doesn't it?
>
> Oh, gosh no. Mazel tov. I never denied that a Ph.D an excellent
> beginning for a 20 something - an accomplishment any young person can
> be justly proud. But, at one point, you actually have to do something
> with the honor....otherwise, it just becomes another piece of paper.
> > > Please, awe me with your accomplishments.
> > Actually, I have been published in British newspapers, including a
> > national one.....
>
> Your post Ph.D accomplishments equal what Dennis Prager casually whips
> out on any given afternoon.
>
> > > > > Why is your Ph.D enough for a lifetime, but Dr. Hanson’s easily
> > > > > brushed aside? Why is your academic achievement awe inspiring, while
> > > > > Hanson’s portfolio of far greater honors sneered upon?
> > > > Well, I don't write shit like he does!
> > > Yes, you DO write shit. NO, Dr. Hanson doesn't.
> > That's your opinion of course. And I have mine! So there!
>
> Did you stamp your little feet when you wrote “so there?"
>
> > > "My father and his mates once stumbled upon someone like you. It was
> > > in
> > > Italy, in a farmyard. The man's belly had burst open and was now full
> > > of maggots and flies buzzed around the corpse. The head was so black
> > > and swollen that the features were unrecognisable. The uniform was
> > > stained, but still sported SS Runes on it. One of the local peasants
> > > said that a group of SS had rounded up hostages from the village and
> > > shot them. This one strayed too far, and the old farmer protected his
> > > daughter and grandchildren by killing him with a shotgun."
> > Why is that 'shit'?
>
> 1. It’s torture porn.
> 2. It’s a thinly veiled death threat.
way, he makes the threats...but he has a screw loose.....Why do you
take him so seriously?
> > > How many decades will it be until England is a colony to Mecca?
> > Nutter!
>
(The Telegraph? Snicker!!!!!)
>
> > > > > > I mean most sensible
> > > > > > people...well, those who don't have you in their kill files...
> > > > > I value truth and clarity over congeniality. One measure of a man is
> > > > > the caliber of people he pisses off. Leftist hysterics only serve to
> > > > > convince me that I’m on the right path.
> > > > Truth????????
> > > Truth...it's a Conservative Thing...you wouldn't
> > "What is truth?" (Pontius Pilate, attributed.)>
>
> You’re using the guy who sentenced Jesus Christ to death as a
> respected source?
> > > And you really believe that?
> > Our exchanges was done much to reinforce and cement that view of the
> > Left.
> > Now, go ahead and call me stupid again....it's all you have left.
>
> I have my education, Richard. You have your ignorance....and
> stupidity.
>
> "A learned blockhead is a greater blockhead than an ignorant one."
> Benjamin Franklin
> > Although it isn't Pantomine season......"oh yes you do!">
>
> You have an entire season for pantomine?
> > I don't meet people with a mind like yours....even after washing my
> > hands....
>
> Which explains how you’ve managed to convince yourself that
> Conservatives don’t exist. It’s called “willful ignorance”. And
> cowardice.
> > You think that you are a conservative. But like the rest of your ilk,
> > when people say that you are not, you then claim that 'liberals' don't
> > understand you and can't talk to you!
>
> Again, your definition excludes over a hundred million American
> Conservatives. Why should I respect such a silly interpretation of
> the word?
> > You redefine terms so that they become meaningless...
>
> It’s called the Living Language. Deal with it.
> > Went right over your head....>
>
> Nope.
>
> > > > > (Shall we adjourn while you start searching Wikipedia?)
> > > > You seem to feel that reading Wikipedia is some sort of weakness.
> > > It seems to be your friend.....
> > While Wikipedia t seems to be your hated enemy. Gee, just because it
> > took away your one trick?
>
> ?????????????????
>
> Your “one trick” is the ability to dredge facts from your memory
> quickly. The sort of skill that was impressive in the 70s.
> In the
> 19th Century, the ability to add rows of numbers quickly assured the
> holder of that skill a comfortable, white collar, profession. Then
> they invented the adding machine. I suppose those fellows hated that
> machine as much as you hate Wikipedia, and for much the same reason.
>
> > > > Had
> > > > you done that, you wouldn't have shown yourself to be nearly the
> > > > horse's ass you did when talking Dr. Hanson, or Dennis Prager.
> > > > Is it your assumption that your gray matter is a library which holds
> > > > all known knowledge?
> > > No, but I do know about the subjects and threads that I post to....>
> > You might have back in the 70s.
> > Oh, I'm pretty much aware.
>
> Clearly, you’re not. You were utterly unaware of how important Victor
> Davis Hanson, Dennis Prager and John Podhoretz are to current
> political commentary.
>Again and again you had egg on your face when
> shown how little you knew about these men. You could have done a
> quick search, but refused to.
be rubbish.
>
> That is the sin of pride, my friend.
>
> > > and
> > > most of the time I do it 'from the top of my head'.
> > You mean you didn't have to look up how to accuse anyone you disagree
> > with of being stupid?
> > Not usually.>
>
> And you’re proud of your lack of prep-time to hurl childish insults?
> > > Q.E.D. I think!
> >> You haven't thought since the 70s.
> > You just agreed with my definition! That's why I said Q.E.D.!
> > And you still can't see it!
>
> Let me explain it for slow Barry.
>
> I was talking about Leftists, not Conservatives. There was no
> agreement.
nature! Which is a definition of conservatism! QED! Are you stupid or
what?
>
> > > > > The secular version of the doctrine of
> > > > > original sin. Consequently, the selfishness and destructive tendencies
> > > > > of the human personality have to be kept in check by some form of
> > > > > authority.
> > > > Eeeeeeee.....no. We believe in self control - core values,
> > > > responsibility, family, peer pressure, honor.
> > > I actually say that, you blithering idiot!
> > > Not above, you didn't. Hardly my fault that you contradict
> > > yourself.
> > I said it in the definition!
>
> Nope. You talked endlessly about authority - strongly implying that
> Conservatives demand these values be forced on people. With
> noticeable exception, we don’t.
society!
Look! Just give it up!
>
> > > >A belief in a God who
> > > > judges one at life’s end doesn’t hurt either. The police and courts
> > > > are a last resort....not the first.
> > > > > That is the Hobbesian view of society, in which we
> > > > > surrender part of our liberty to a form of authority that guarantees
> > > > > some kind of order.
> > > > And what society doesn’t agree with that?
> > > Yours?
> > Nope.
> > > Wall Street?
> >> I'll take Wall Streets excesses over a socialist society any day of
> >> the week.
> > That's because you are a fool.
>
> That’s because I have family members who’ve escaped from Socialist
> nations.
though.
>
> > > > >That alone guarantees any form of civilised
> > > > > existence, otherwise the alternative is the "state of nature" in which
> > > > > the life of man is 'solitary, nasty, brutish, and short." Now, most
> > > > > conservatives have thought that such authority is derived from certain
> > > > > institutions in society. These are the family, the institution of
> > > > > property, the church (or something having a similar moral authority)
> > > > > and the government.
> > > > What you keep missing is that all of the conservative institutions are
> > > > voluntary. One joins a church of their own free will.
> > > One is socialised by it....
> >> Voluntarily.
> > Not voluntarily...one is born into a social situation...as the old
> > hymn has it:-
> > Can a child presume to choose,
> > Where and how to live?
>
> Maybe that’s how you guys do things in England.
>
> Not - in - America.
> > AGAIN, I'm a Classic Liberal.
> > Then you are not a conservative! How many times must I say that?>
>
> You can scream it until your eyeballs fall out. Doesn’t make it
> true. Classic Liberals believed in small government, low taxes, few
> regulations.
>
> >Like Rush Limbaugh, Ben Franklin, Glenn
>
> > Beck and Winston Church.
>
> father, in Tory Democracy. He was essentially a Disraelian
> conservative, and returned to that in later life. He supported the
> idea of the Welfare state.
No comment?
> conservative, and returned to that in later life. He supported the
> idea of the Welfare state.
> > > “Multi-culturalism"? You're trying to hang MC around the necks of
> > conservatives?
> > Yes! >
>
> Stranger and stranger. So you view President Obama as a
> Conservative? Jesse Jackson?
idiot!!!!!!!!!!
snark was a boojum!
>
> In the comic strip “Dilbert”, the lead character had a dog named
> “Dogbert”. At one point, he introduced an evil cat without a name.
> Scott Adams received 10,000 unsolicited letters, insisting that the
> cat’s name was “Catbert”. Scott later explained that “when 10,000
> people believe the charcter’s name is “Catbert”....that character’s
> name is “Catbert.”
>
> > > > > That, Richard, is what conservatism is!
> > > > If that’s what you believe, then Dennis Prager has been proven
> > > > correct. You don’t understand modern conservatism.
> > > Correction. He doesn't. (Or pretends not to, to write for a particular
> > > audience. I don't know which is worse.)
> > >Here’s the Occam’s Razor option: Prager knows exactly what he’s
> > >talking about, believes every word, and you’re not man enough to admit
> > >it.
> > Man enough? Oh dear! Something lurking deep in the woodshed?
>
> It’s quite telling that when you hear the word “man,” your first
> thought is to imply sleazy, annomous, homosexual coupling on a sex
> tour. I used the word to imply honor.
macho part of that sewerage infested mind of yours....
researcher was to be strictly neutral. That's what you do.
But you don't know anything about academic research, do you?
>
> > > > > I think that most people who know anything about the Korean War would
> > > > > be aware of his 'Hidden History'!
> > > > My father hasn't. He is a Marine who served in the Korean war.
> > > And your point is?
> > That your insistence that “ most people who know anything about the
> > Korean War would be aware of his 'Hidden History" is clearly nonsense.
> > With respect to your father, I was referring to people who made an
> > academic or historical study of the war.
>
> That may be what you meant, but it wasn’t what you wrote. Your
> exactly phrase was “most people who know anything about the Korean
> War....” BTW, last week, Dad celebrated his 90th Birthday with 9
> rounds of golf.
phrase intended!
Dr. Barry Worthington
lsrlts
Apr 11, 2012, 1:59:17 PM4/11/12
to
On 4/11/2012 10:12 AM, trainguard wrote:
>> Actually, I simply wrote that you were acting childishly. The leap to
>> degenerate sex was all yours.
>
> Well, the reference about insinuation was to you and your rather
> disgusting mind. Just to remind our readers (if there are any!).....
>
Come now,"doctor" most here recall your disgusting references to
>> Actually, I simply wrote that you were acting childishly. The leap to
>> degenerate sex was all yours.
>
> Well, the reference about insinuation was to you and your rather
> disgusting mind. Just to remind our readers (if there are any!).....
>
"machine lubricant sex acts" and the equally gross "deli-sex".
trainguard
Apr 11, 2012, 2:52:29 PM4/11/12
to
on cue! Draw your own conclusions....
Dr. Barry Worthington
lsrlts
Apr 11, 2012, 3:07:35 PM4/11/12
to
quite clear.
trainguard
Apr 11, 2012, 3:12:32 PM4/11/12
to
lsrlts
Apr 11, 2012, 6:17:26 PM4/11/12
to
trainguard
Apr 12, 2012, 7:19:24 AM4/12/12
to
roll them up very tightly, and shove them up your arse as far as they
will go. That might plug the shit flow that we have to put up
with......
Kurt Nicklas
Apr 12, 2012, 7:30:10 AM4/12/12
to
On Apr 12, 7:19 am, trainguard <barry_worthing...@sky.com> wrote:
> On Apr 11, 11:17 pm, lsrlts <dd...@gnail.invalid> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 4/11/2012 12:12 PM, trainguard wrote:
>
> > > On Apr 11, 8:07 pm, lsrlts<dd...@gnail.invalid> wrote:
> > >> On 4/11/2012 11:52 AM, trainguard wrote:
>
> > >>> On Apr 11, 6:59 pm, lsrlts<dd...@gnail.invalid> wrote:
> > >>>> On 4/11/2012 10:12 AM, trainguard wrote:
>
> > >>>>>> Actually, I simply wrote that you were acting childishly. The leap to
> > >>>>>> degenerate sex was all yours.
>
> > >>>>> Well, the reference about insinuation was to you and your rather
> > >>>>> disgusting mind. Just to remind our readers (if there are any!).....
>
> > >>>> Come now,"doctor" most here recall your disgusting references to
> > >>>> "machine lubricant sex acts" and the equally gross "deli-sex".
>
> > >>> And as Richard crawls back under his stone, Spammy Shitstain appears
> > >>> on cue! Draw your own conclusions....
>
> > >>> Dr. Barry Worthington
>
> > >> The conclusions regarding your repeatedly gross entreaties here are
> > >> quite clear.
>
> > > "Oh Spammy, where you going to run to.....?"
>
> > > Dr. Barry Worthington
>
> > Oh "doctor" where will you ever go0 to avoid your crude sexual references?
>
> How about you print them all off (though I doubt if you can find any),
Here's one of my all time favorites:
> On Apr 11, 11:17 pm, lsrlts <dd...@gnail.invalid> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 4/11/2012 12:12 PM, trainguard wrote:
>
> > > On Apr 11, 8:07 pm, lsrlts<dd...@gnail.invalid> wrote:
> > >> On 4/11/2012 11:52 AM, trainguard wrote:
>
> > >>> On Apr 11, 6:59 pm, lsrlts<dd...@gnail.invalid> wrote:
> > >>>> On 4/11/2012 10:12 AM, trainguard wrote:
>
> > >>>>>> Actually, I simply wrote that you were acting childishly. The leap to
> > >>>>>> degenerate sex was all yours.
>
> > >>>>> Well, the reference about insinuation was to you and your rather
> > >>>>> disgusting mind. Just to remind our readers (if there are any!).....
>
> > >>>> Come now,"doctor" most here recall your disgusting references to
> > >>>> "machine lubricant sex acts" and the equally gross "deli-sex".
>
> > >>> And as Richard crawls back under his stone, Spammy Shitstain appears
> > >>> on cue! Draw your own conclusions....
>
> > >>> Dr. Barry Worthington
>
> > >> The conclusions regarding your repeatedly gross entreaties here are
> > >> quite clear.
>
> > > "Oh Spammy, where you going to run to.....?"
>
> > > Dr. Barry Worthington
>
> > Oh "doctor" where will you ever go0 to avoid your crude sexual references?
>
> How about you print them all off (though I doubt if you can find any),
"My interest is the swinging sub-culture, as an extension of
the 'serious leisure' concept, and its creation of 'embodied space'."
> roll them up very tightly, and shove them up your arse as far as they
> will go. That might plug the shit flow that we have to put up
> with......
sexual
preferences any reference to the "bum"(as you limeys put it) must
qualify.
Steve
Apr 12, 2012, 8:00:44 AM4/12/12
to
trainguard
Apr 12, 2012, 11:47:30 AM4/12/12
to
shitbag.......
lsrlts
Apr 12, 2012, 11:48:47 AM4/12/12
to
On 4/12/2012 4:19 AM, trainguard wrote:
> On Apr 11, 11:17 pm, lsrlts<dd...@gnail.invalid> wrote:
>> On 4/11/2012 12:12 PM, trainguard wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Apr 11, 8:07 pm, lsrlts<dd...@gnail.invalid> wrote:
>>>> On 4/11/2012 11:52 AM, trainguard wrote:
>>
>>>>> On Apr 11, 6:59 pm, lsrlts<dd...@gnail.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>> On 4/11/2012 10:12 AM, trainguard wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>> Actually, I simply wrote that you were acting childishly. The leap to
>>>>>>>> degenerate sex was all yours.
>>
>>>>>>> Well, the reference about insinuation was to you and your rather
>>>>>>> disgusting mind. Just to remind our readers (if there are any!).....
>>
>>>>>> Come now,"doctor" most here recall your disgusting references to
>>>>>> "machine lubricant sex acts" and the equally gross "deli-sex".
>>
>>>>> And as Richard crawls back under his stone, Spammy Shitstain appears
>>>>> on cue! Draw your own conclusions....
>>
>>>>> Dr. Barry Worthington
>>
>>>> The conclusions regarding your repeatedly gross entreaties here are
>>>> quite clear.
>>
>>> "Oh Spammy, where you going to run to.....?"
>>
>>> Dr. Barry Worthington
>>
>> Oh "doctor" where will you ever go0 to avoid your crude sexual references?
>
> How about you print them all off (though I doubt if you can find any),
> roll them up very tightly, and shove them up your arse as
Dear oh dear, "doctor"...your mind is never far from the old poop chute,
> On Apr 11, 11:17 pm, lsrlts<dd...@gnail.invalid> wrote:
>> On 4/11/2012 12:12 PM, trainguard wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Apr 11, 8:07 pm, lsrlts<dd...@gnail.invalid> wrote:
>>>> On 4/11/2012 11:52 AM, trainguard wrote:
>>
>>>>> On Apr 11, 6:59 pm, lsrlts<dd...@gnail.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>> On 4/11/2012 10:12 AM, trainguard wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>> Actually, I simply wrote that you were acting childishly. The leap to
>>>>>>>> degenerate sex was all yours.
>>
>>>>>>> Well, the reference about insinuation was to you and your rather
>>>>>>> disgusting mind. Just to remind our readers (if there are any!).....
>>
>>>>>> Come now,"doctor" most here recall your disgusting references to
>>>>>> "machine lubricant sex acts" and the equally gross "deli-sex".
>>
>>>>> And as Richard crawls back under his stone, Spammy Shitstain appears
>>>>> on cue! Draw your own conclusions....
>>
>>>>> Dr. Barry Worthington
>>
>>>> The conclusions regarding your repeatedly gross entreaties here are
>>>> quite clear.
>>
>>> "Oh Spammy, where you going to run to.....?"
>>
>>> Dr. Barry Worthington
>>
>> Oh "doctor" where will you ever go0 to avoid your crude sexual references?
>
> How about you print them all off (though I doubt if you can find any),
> roll them up very tightly, and shove them up your arse as
now is it?
lsrlts
Apr 12, 2012, 11:51:23 AM4/12/12
to
Richard Steel
Apr 12, 2012, 11:58:43 AM4/12/12
to
An evil minded shitbag. and someone who lost their marbles some time
ago....the company that you do keep!
.............................
No-one asked you!
Stick your nose somewhere else before it is bitten off.....
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/browse_frm/thread/ba2c286fc669a55e?scoring=d&
..........................................
But it's none of your business you stupid shitbag!
Give it time, Steve. People like you usually come to a rather sticky
end.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/browse_frm/thread/ba2c286fc669a55e?scoring=d&
..........................................................
(Victor Davis Hanson writes) right-wing American shit!
https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!topic/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/1k99CWoP0zY
....................................
Steve does not realise that it is necessary to produce an original
piece of research work in the form of a thesis, something that adds to
the total sum of human knowledge, in order to obtain a Doctorate. This
is because he is not only very ignorant, but actually as thick as pig
shit....
.........................................
How about you print them all off (though I doubt if you can find any),
roll them up very tightly, and shove them up your arse as far as they
will go. That might plug the shit flow that we have to put up
with...... “
will go. That might plug the shit flow that we have to put up
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/browse_frm/thread/5b1c61e7c016af00?scoring=d&
.......................
...the offensive little shitbag pops out of his box when cornered...
...................................
“What do you think I did with it you stupid bugger!”
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/browse_frm/thread/5b1c61e7c016af00?scoring=d&
lsrlts
Apr 12, 2012, 12:07:44 PM4/12/12
to
Steve
Apr 12, 2012, 12:15:09 PM4/12/12
to
preferences...
trainguard
Apr 12, 2012, 12:16:50 PM4/12/12
to
Dr. Barry Worthington
Kurt Nicklas
Apr 12, 2012, 5:28:30 PM4/12/12
to
On Apr 12, 11:44 am, trainguard <barry_worthing...@sky.com> wrote:
> Actually, the comment is not sexual. It's about shit
Actually, given the context that it's in one of your posts
it *is* sexual.
> , someting that
> you know all about,
And yet I didn't use the word - you did, Harry.
> as you produce it in large quantities.
And yet the word was in YOUR post, not mine.
---
Hey, I'll be headed to Russia next week for 2 weeks, Huckleberry.
Moscow, Vladimir and 2 days in Nizhnyj Novgorod.
Too bad I'm not going to Kaliningrad cause I could go
straight over the border into Poland from there, right?
<snickers>
-----------------------------
"Poland does not share a border with Russia either, since the
Kaliningrad Oblast is an enclave, and not part of mainland Russia."
........ "Dr" Barry Worthington,5/12/11 (And would he say Alaska
is not part of the USA?)
Actually, given the context that it's in one of your posts
it *is* sexual.
> , someting that
> you know all about,
And yet I didn't use the word - you did, Harry.
> as you produce it in large quantities.
And yet the word was in YOUR post, not mine.
---
Hey, I'll be headed to Russia next week for 2 weeks, Huckleberry.
Moscow, Vladimir and 2 days in Nizhnyj Novgorod.
Too bad I'm not going to Kaliningrad cause I could go
straight over the border into Poland from there, right?
<snickers>
-----------------------------
"Poland does not share a border with Russia either, since the
Kaliningrad Oblast is an enclave, and not part of mainland Russia."
........ "Dr" Barry Worthington,5/12/11 (And would he say Alaska
is not part of the USA?)
trainguard
Apr 12, 2012, 6:11:00 PM4/12/12
to
turns you on (I believe it's called coprophilia), we don't really wish
to know.....
>
> > , someting that
> > you know all about,
>
> And yet I didn't use the word - you did, Harry.
boring....
>
> > as you produce it in large quantities.
>
> And yet the word was in YOUR post, not mine.
>
> ---
>
> Hey, I'll be headed to Russia next week for 2 weeks, Huckleberry.
> Moscow, Vladimir and 2 days in Nizhnyj Novgorod.
>
> Too bad I'm not going to Kaliningrad cause I could go
> straight over the border into Poland from there, right?
>
> <snickers>
from Gdansk, via Braniewo/Mamanova. But I wasn't in Russia proper. To
leave the enclave, I had to cross the border into Lithuania. (I chose
the bus route along the Kurischer Nehring to Nida/Klaipeda.) You see,
to visit Kaliningrad, as part of your intinerary, you would have to
exit Russia!
> -----------------------------
> "Poland does not share a border with Russia either, since the
> Kaliningrad Oblast is an enclave, and not part of mainland Russia."
> ........ "Dr" Barry Worthington,5/12/11 (And would he say Alaska
> is not part of the USA?)
across the Bering Strait is still only a proposal.
Kurt....you are still a tosser!
Dr, Barry Worthington
Kurt Nicklas
Apr 12, 2012, 6:19:01 PM4/12/12
to
Poor little you.
>
> > Too bad I'm not going to Kaliningrad cause I could go
> > straight over the border into Poland from there, right?
>
> > <snickers>
>
> Well, yes and no. When I visited, two years ago, I travelled by train
> from Gdansk, via Braniewo/Mamanova. But I wasn't in Russia proper.
> To
> leave the enclave, I had to cross the border into Lithuania. (I chose
> the bus route along the Kurischer Nehring to Nida/Klaipeda.) You see,
> to visit Kaliningrad, as part of your intinerary, you would have to
> exit Russia!
Kaliningrad
oblast?
You're a rock, Huckleberry.
>
> > -----------------------------
> > "Poland does not share a border with Russia either, since the
> > Kaliningrad Oblast is an enclave, and not part of mainland Russia."
> > ........ "Dr" Barry Worthington,5/12/11 (And would he say Alaska
> > is not part of the USA?)
>
> What border can you cross from Alaska to Russia? The railway tunnel
> across the Bering Strait is still only a proposal.
Russia
because it is an "enclave". Alaska is also an "enclave" so you must
believe
Alaska is not part of the US.
I swear - I have to spoon-feed you *everything.
<snickers>
Message has been deleted
Kurt Nicklas
Apr 12, 2012, 6:35:36 PM4/12/12
to
On Apr 12, 6:32 pm, Yoorg...@Jurgis.net wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Apr 2012 15:19:01 -0700 (PDT), Kurt Nicklas
There's very little that you do know, Gare. And most of that you need
to lie about.
> How else would you have asked your Moscow Subway wife for prices.
Yeah, as they say in Russian, "Chelovek, kotorij nichego ne znaet
vsigda obmanivaet".
<snickers>
Now, when are you going to tell us who made you stop posting my
address?
Hmmmmm?
> On Thu, 12 Apr 2012 15:19:01 -0700 (PDT), Kurt Nicklas
>
> <kurtnick...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >See and understand far more than you would. I speak Russian, you know.
>
> We know
> <kurtnick...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >See and understand far more than you would. I speak Russian, you know.
>
There's very little that you do know, Gare. And most of that you need
to lie about.
> How else would you have asked your Moscow Subway wife for prices.
Yeah, as they say in Russian, "Chelovek, kotorij nichego ne znaet
vsigda obmanivaet".
<snickers>
Now, when are you going to tell us who made you stop posting my
address?
Hmmmmm?
Kurt Nicklas
Apr 12, 2012, 6:42:52 PM4/12/12
to
On Apr 12, 6:31 pm, Yoorg...@Jurgis.net wrote:
> How did I get yer phone number from the Elon, NC exchange, pudgyboy?
Prove you had my phone number or that it showed up on your caller id,
Gare.
You can't do that and it's driving you bats.
Of course, if you're looking for the area code it's easily found on
the internet.
If you weren't so STUPID you would know that.
On the other hand, I can *prove* you published my address. In fact,
you've
ADMITTED that you did it.
> Or because you were drunk when you made them---you forgot caller ID?
Prove I've ever called you. Can you hear me laughing at you?
Time for you to run away from your lies yet?
> How did I get yer phone number from the Elon, NC exchange, pudgyboy?
Prove you had my phone number or that it showed up on your caller id,
Gare.
You can't do that and it's driving you bats.
Of course, if you're looking for the area code it's easily found on
the internet.
If you weren't so STUPID you would know that.
On the other hand, I can *prove* you published my address. In fact,
you've
ADMITTED that you did it.
> Or because you were drunk when you made them---you forgot caller ID?
Prove I've ever called you. Can you hear me laughing at you?
Time for you to run away from your lies yet?
Message has been deleted
Kurt Nicklas
Apr 13, 2012, 12:59:21 AM4/13/12
to
On Apr 12, 11:46 pm, Yoorg...@Jurgis.net wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Apr 2012 15:35:36 -0700 (PDT), Kurt Nicklas
> Elon, NC and then leave here when you were so badly shamed?
Didn't make a one.
And you have no proof that I did.
All you can do is make unprovable claims.
I, on the other hand, have proof you posted my address
In fact, you've admitted it.
Now, tell us who it was that made you stop.
Can you hear us laughing at you, Gare?
> On Thu, 12 Apr 2012 15:35:36 -0700 (PDT), Kurt Nicklas
>
> <kurtnick...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> We know
>
> >There's very little that you do know, Gare. And most of that you need
> >to lie about.
>
> Ah, so now you didn't make dozens of crank, hang-up, phone-calls from
> <kurtnick...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> We know
>
> >There's very little that you do know, Gare. And most of that you need
> >to lie about.
>
> Elon, NC and then leave here when you were so badly shamed?
Didn't make a one.
And you have no proof that I did.
All you can do is make unprovable claims.
I, on the other hand, have proof you posted my address
In fact, you've admitted it.
Now, tell us who it was that made you stop.
Can you hear us laughing at you, Gare?
Kurt Nicklas
Apr 13, 2012, 1:00:54 AM4/13/12
to
On Apr 12, 8:51 pm, lsrlts <dd...@gnail.invalid> wrote:
> I call this checkmate, you have him in the box.
Gary's my pet. Has been for decades.
I feed him just enough to keep him coming back.
Gary's my pet. Has been for decades.
I feed him just enough to keep him coming back.
lsrlts
Apr 13, 2012, 1:03:46 AM4/13/12
to
Richard Steel
Apr 13, 2012, 1:40:10 AM4/13/12
to
> > > > Yeah, that's the sort of comment I expect from spoiled 14 year old
> > > > girls.
> > > You appear to be an expert on young girls. One wonders why. (I too can
> > > insinuate...just like you!)
> > Actually, I simply wrote that you were acting childishly. The leap to
> > degenerate sex was all yours.
> Well, the reference about insinuation was to you and your rather
> disgusting mind.
You're the one who turned the comment on your childish behavior into a
crude sexual attack, not me.
> > > > > Actually, it's a comment upon your mental processes (or lack of
> > > > > them).....but you are too stupid to realise that.
> > > > Yes, yes, Barry. I'm stupid, Dr. Hanson is stupid, Dennis Prager is
> > > > stupid. Everyone who holds an opinion you don't like is stupid.
> > > I speak as I find, Richard.
> > I believe it's called a lack of impulse control.
> You have no self control. When you are losing an argument (well,
> actually, are stuck for something to say, since you can't argue) you
> resort to obscene insults.
"And now a message from our resident shitbag... "
Barry
"Are you going to live with (Steve) in his fabulous Florida 'gated
condo'?"
Barry
"An evil minded shitbag. and someone who lost their marbles some time
ago....the company that you do keep!"
Barry
"No-one asked you!
"Stick your nose somewhere else before it is bitten off....."
Barry
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/browse_frm/thread/ba2c286fc669a55e?scoring=d&
"But it's none of your business you stupid shitbag!
"Give it time, Steve. People like you usually come to a rather sticky
end."
Barry
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/browse_frm/thread/ba2c286fc669a55e?scoring=d&
("Victor Davis Hanson writes) right-wing American shit!"
Barry
https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!topic/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/1k99CWoP0zY
"Steve does not realise that it is necessary to produce an original
piece of research work in the form of a thesis, something that adds to
the total sum of human knowledge, in order to obtain a Doctorate. This
is because he is not only very ignorant, but actually as thick as pig
shit.... "
Barry
> > > > > > Victor Davis Hanson writes for the widely respected National Review,
> > > > > Respected?
> > > > Extremely. It’s been in print for over a half century. Its web page
> > > > is the standard “go to” for intelligent people who want a clear view
> > > > of what’s going on in the world.
> > > It's comparatively unknown outside America, and I doubt that many
> > > Americans take much notice of it. It doesn't have the pedigree of the
> > > Spectator in Britain.
> > They've never heard of the works of William F. Buckley in England? I
> > seriously doubt that. If true, how sad for your country.
> Yes, but he isn't widely known.
And how do you know that? You don't communicate with Conservatives.
> > > > > > therefore the rest of his body of work is tainted and suspect.
> > > > > If he demeans himself to write crap for morons, what does he expect?
> > > > But he doesn't write "crap for morons". He writes brilliant articles
> > > > in respected publicans for a literate audience.
> > > Not on the basis of the 'piece' that you cited......
>
> > Yes, on the basis of that article.
> Well, that says more about you than it does me!
It says that I'm well read, while you're a scared child who runs away
from well reasoned arguments to which you have no real answer. I'm
not afraid to read the New York Times. I don't believe Leftist are
evil, or stupid. I believe they're wrong.
> > > > > Gore
> > > > > > Vidal writes soft-core porn,
> > > > > Insightful essays a lot of the time.....and some interesting
> > > > > historical novels.
> > > > And soft core porn.
> > > So what!
> > How how about living by the same standards that you demand of others?
> What standards?
Admittedly, finding your "standards" is something of a Herculean
task. In this instance, I'm pointing out how you insisted that Dr.
Hanson's work was tainted by his association with the widely respected
National Review, while you have no problem whatsoever with Mr. Gore's
love of porno.
> > > 'Myra' was intended as satire, by the way.
> > And just were does a road lined with good intentions lead?
> In Defoe's case, to the pillory...where he was pelted with flowers....
But, of course, Defoe didn't write pornography, did he?
> > > > > >that is a sign of....gee, what is it a
> > > > > > sign of? That he’s a free spirit? Open minded? Just what do you
> > > > > > tell yourself to justify such rubbish? More important .... when will
> > > > > > you live by the standards that you demand of others?
> > > > > That you've never read him? That you know nothing about him?
> > > > Of course I've read him. Hell, I belonged to his blog for a year or
> > > > so.
> > > You are fantasising again......
> > No, Gore Vidal put out a blog for a year or so. I belonged to it.
> > And what the Hell is “ fantasising”?
> What you have just stated....
You believe that Gore Vidal's blog was a fantasy?
> > > > > > No, you know how to regurgitate tired clichés from the 70s. And you
> > > > > > have mastered the sneer - another skill set you have in common with
> > > > > > spoiled 15 year old girls.
> > > > > You really have to read postings! it helps!
> > > > You really must learn how to put together an argument which consists
> > > > of something other than a childish insult.
> > > But that's what you do, Richard!
> > Yeah, childish insults like that.
> Well, that is what you do!
"And now a message from our resident shitbag... "
Barry
"Are you going to live with (Steve) in his fabulous Florida 'gated
condo'?"
Barry
"An evil minded shitbag. and someone who lost their marbles some time
ago....the company that you do keep!"
Barry
"No-one asked you!
"Stick your nose somewhere else before it is bitten off....."
Barry
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/browse_frm/thread/ba2c286fc669a55e?scoring=d&
"But it's none of your business you stupid shitbag!
"Give it time, Steve. People like you usually come to a rather sticky
end."
Barry
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/browse_frm/thread/ba2c286fc669a55e?scoring=d&
("Victor Davis Hanson writes) right-wing American shit!"
Barry
https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!topic/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/1k99CWoP0zY
"Steve does not realise that it is necessary to produce an original
piece of research work in the form of a thesis, something that adds to
the total sum of human knowledge, in order to obtain a Doctorate. This
is because he is not only very ignorant, but actually as thick as pig
shit.... "
Barry
>Black is not white!>
And vulgar attacks that you regularly indulge are exactly that.
> > > > > > > >While the latter writes clearly, you prefer terms which
> > > > > > > > hide your meaning, and are easily confused.
> > > > > > > What do you not understand about 'classical (or Gladstonian)
> > > > > > > liberalism' or 'neoliberalism? Are you that ignorant?
>
> > > > > > (sigh) Barry....Barry....Barry.....I AM a Classic Liberal. The
> > > > > > current home of the Classic Liberal is the Conservative Movement.
> > > > > Which is why there are no conservatives any more! I do wish you would
> > > > > realise this!
> > > > Be happy, Barry....you finally made me laugh out loud. There's no
> > > > conservatives? Really? And there are no Conservatives because BARRY
> > > > says so?
> > > No. Because of people like you!
> > That's the sort of statement which wows 'em when hanging around the
> > Cranky Old Socialists club. When dealing with people who aren't 100%
> > on your side? Eh, not so much.
> What are you dribbling about?
I'm saying that when you limit your contact with only people who agree
with you, your opinions tend to become silly.
> > Here's the painful reality: If your definition of "conservatism" is
> > so restrictive that it exclude everybody who considers themselves a
> > member of that cause....it's likely a terrible interpretation. It
> > boils down to either billions of people are wrong, or Barry's
> > definition is silly.
> What cause?
Conservatism.
> > That's not to say there hasn't been cases of One Man With a Dream
> > Being Right While the Rest of the World is Wrong is impossible. It
> > has happened before in history. But as Carl Sagan said
> As if you have ever read him?
Read him for decades.
> >said,
> > "extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence." Far from being
> > "extraordinary", your definition has been vague, meandering, and
> > depends heavily on your ability to bully conservatives.
> > Dennis Prager is correct - you don't understand conservatives, or
> > Conservatism.
> Well, if you or Mr. Prager attended a history or political theory
> lecture at a university, that is (more or less) the definition that
> you would get.
Not if you would get if you attended one of Mr. Prager's lectures at
Stanford or Columbia University - (both Universities have Dennis as
"Fellows".) Or the literally hundreds of Universities and colleges
which have invited the scholar to lecture.
http://www.prageruniversity.com/Political-Science/The-bigger-the-Government-the-smaller-the-citizen.html
> > > > > > Rush Limbaugh is a Classic Liberal. So was Ben Franklin. Ultimately,
> > > > > > the battle comes down to individual liberty vs. collectivism. I
> > > > > > believe in freedom. You believe in bowing your head to Kings.
> > > > > How dare you mention Franklin and Limbaugh in the same breath! Wash
> > > > > your mouth out!
> > > > Somewhere, Ben Franklin looks down at Rush Limbaugh pissing off
> > > > stuffed shirts like yourself, slaps John Adams on the shoulder, and
> > > > shouts "the American Dream is still alive." Ben cheers Rush on as The
> > > > Captain (aka Rush Limbaugh) takes on the President of the United
> > > > States....and wins.
> > > Did that pleasure you?
> > I understand that you're desperately trying to sound witty - but as is
> > usually the case with your "quips," the actual effect is more than a
> > little greasy.
> Suits you sir!!!
Yet another one of your pointless, One Size Fits All insults.
> > Sort of like the 65 year old pervert in the park
> > taking to 14 year old girls about “free love.”
> Do a lot of that kind of thing?
I don’t do that kind of thing at all. You, OTOH, have literally made
a “science” of paying for sex.
> > > > May I remind you that Ben Franklin, like Rush Limbaugh, liberally
> > > > mixed politics which Earthy humor? And that Franklin told truth to
> > > > power.
> > > Franklin was intelligent, though!
> > I suspect that the target of Franklin's barbs would disagree. Back
> > then, they were as thin skinned as yourself.
> > > And had principles......<
> > Literally, the first statement made to the Republicans after Obama
> > took office was “you have to stop listenin’ to Rush Limbaugh.” Rush
> > has taken on Presidents, had his liberty and property threatened, and
> > yet he hasn’t backed down an inch.
> > Again, Ben Franklin smiles.
> At you? I wouldn't be surprised!
....while Ben rolls his eyes over your prissy temper tantrums.
> > > > Don't take me on when it comes to Ben Franklin...I've read every work
> > > > on the man I can get my hands on.
> > > Your reading doesn't seem to have any effect upon your mind or mental
> > > state...
> > Oh, dear, dear, dear. We're back to the idea that holding ideas you
> > disagree with is a form of mental illness. A technique popular with
> > fascists around the world.
> I speak as I find, Richard.
Doesn’t really change the fact that the tactic is self-serving at
best, and fascist at worse, does it?
> > > > > > Is this an example of British Humor that is so ironic that it has
> > > > > > stopped making sense? Mr. Podhoretz has been a special assistant to
> > > > > > a US Cabinet member. He has been a speech writer for two US
> > > > > > Presidents....and yet he’s a “political illiterate” because his views
> > > > > > conflict with your moldy 70s socialist clichés?
> > > > > He's a political illiterate.
> > > > And what life experiences gives you the power to make such a judgment?
> > > My sixty-odd years upn this earth, my education, and my interest in
> > > politics on both side s of the Atlantic....
> > Decades wasted hanging around student lounges and teacher's lounges
> > rapping outranks decades of actually effecting the politics of the
> > world?
> Well, I was a political activist when I was younger.
When Mr. Podhoretz was younger, he wrote speeches for the President
of the United States.
> I was a member of
> a trade union.
Podhoretz was the Assistant to an US Cabinet member.
> And I still take part in a host of voluntary
> activities...and some of the projects have borne fruit....
Whereas Mr. Podhoretz steers world politics.
> > Mr. Podhoretz had Presidents of the United States take notes when he
> > spoke. You gave consumer tips for overseas sex tours.
> No I didn't! See...the offensive little shitbag pops out of his box
> when cornered...
> Thanks! I was waiting for that..........
Thats what you look forward to? Blessed are those who are easily
pleased, I guess.
> > > > A lot more than anyone cares about your Ph.D.
> > > That little fact really annoys you, doesn't it?
> > Oh, gosh no. Mazel tov. I never denied that a Ph.D an excellent
> > beginning for a 20 something - an accomplishment any young person can
> > be justly proud. But, at one point, you actually have to do something
> > with the honor....otherwise, it just becomes another piece of paper.
> What do you think I did with it you stupid bugger!
Certainly nothing meaningful.
> > > > Please, awe me with your accomplishments.
> > > Actually, I have been published in British newspapers, including a
> > > national one.....
> > Your post Ph.D accomplishments equal what Dennis Prager casually whips
> > out on any given afternoon.
> Is Mr. Prager paying you by the line?
No, pointing out hypocrisies of pompous asses, such as yourself, is
its own reward.
If you give me your attention, I will tell you what I am:
I'm a genuine philanthropist — all other kinds are sham.
Each little fault of temper and each social defect
In my erring fellow-creatures, I endeavour to correct.
To all their little weaknesses I open people's eyes;
And little plans to snub the self-sufficient I devise;
I love my fellow creatures — I do all the good I can —
Yet ev'rybody says I'm such a disagreeable man!
And I can't think why!
To compliments inflated I've a withering reply;
And vanity I always do my best to mortify;
A charitable action I can skillfully dissect;
And interested motives I'm delighted to detect;
I know ev'rybody's income and what ev'rybody earns;
And I carefully compare it with the income-tax returns;
But to benefit humanity however much I plan,
Yet ev'rybody says I'm such a disagreeable man!
And I can't think why!
I'm sure I'm no ascetic; I'm as pleasant as can be;
You'll always find me ready with a crushing repartee,
I've an irritating chuckle, I've a celebrated sneer,
I've an entertaining snigger, I've a fascinating leer.
To ev'rybody's prejudice I know a thing or two;
I can tell a woman's age in half a minute — and I do.
But although I try to make myself as pleasant as I can,
Yet ev'rybody says I'm such a disagreeable man!
And I can't think why!
> > > > "My father and his mates once stumbled upon someone like you. It was
> > > > in
> > > > Italy, in a farmyard. The man's belly had burst open and was now full
> > > > of maggots and flies buzzed around the corpse. The head was so black
> > > > and swollen that the features were unrecognisable. The uniform was
> > > > stained, but still sported SS Runes on it. One of the local peasants
> > > > said that a group of SS had rounded up hostages from the village and
> > > > shot them. This one strayed too far, and the old farmer protected his
> > > > daughter and grandchildren by killing him with a shotgun."
> > > Why is that 'shit'?
> > 1. It’s torture porn.
> > 2. It’s a thinly veiled death threat.
> Neither.
Both.
> It was an attempt to make the poster face reality..... >
By threatening to have goons kill him if he didn’t stop disagreeing
with you?
> By the
> way, he makes the threats...>
Noooooooooo - in the quote, YOU made the threat.
> but he has a screw loose.....>
Why is he crazy for making death threats....but you’re not?
> Why do you
> take him so seriously?
He’s not the one who claims to be a distinguished academic...you are.
> > > > How many decades will it be until England is a colony to Mecca?
> > > Nutter!
> >http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1577928/Archbishop-Williams-sp...
> (The Telegraph? Snicker!!!!!)
Articles on sex tours. Ewwwwggghhhhhh.
> > > > > > > I mean most sensible
> > > > > > > people...well, those who don't have you in their kill files...
> > > > > > I value truth and clarity over congeniality. One measure of a man is
> > > > > > the caliber of people he pisses off. Leftist hysterics only serve to
> > > > > > convince me that I’m on the right path.
> > > > > Truth????????
> > > > Truth...it's a Conservative Thing...you wouldn't
> > > "What is truth?" (Pontius Pilate, attributed.)>
> > You’re using the guy who sentenced Jesus Christ to death as a
> > respected source?
> Oh dear! You are so....literal....and very banal........
How dare I comment on what you actually wrote.
> > > > And you really believe that?
> > > Our exchanges was done much to reinforce and cement that view of the
> > > Left.
> > > Now, go ahead and call me stupid again....it's all you have left.
> > I have my education, Richard. You have your ignorance....and
> > stupidity.
> > "A learned blockhead is a greater blockhead than an ignorant one."
> > Benjamin Franklin
> Well, he didn't meet you, did he?
He did meet your ilk, however. He launched a war, and defeated your
kind.
> > > I don't meet people with a mind like yours....even after washing my
> > > hands....
> > Which explains how you’ve managed to convince yourself that
> > Conservatives don’t exist. It’s called “willful ignorance”. And
> > cowardice.
> It's called 'being educated'.
Limiting your conversations who a narrow band of like minded ninnies
is what passes with you for “being educated”?
> > > You think that you are a conservative. But like the rest of your ilk,
> > > when people say that you are not, you then claim that 'liberals' don't
> > > understand you and can't talk to you!
> > Again, your definition excludes over a hundred million American
> > Conservatives. Why should I respect such a silly interpretation of
> > the word?
> That is their problem, Richard.
No, your disapprove doesn't register at all.
> > > You redefine terms so that they become meaningless...
> > It’s called the Living Language. Deal with it.
> I prefer to call it 'ignorance'.
So you want to be a bitter old man furious that the world doesn't
conform to your view....go right ahead.
> > > Went right over your head....>
>
> > Nope.
>
> > > > > > (Shall we adjourn while you start searching Wikipedia?)
> > > > > You seem to feel that reading Wikipedia is some sort of weakness.
> > > > It seems to be your friend.....
> > > While Wikipedia t seems to be your hated enemy. Gee, just because it
> > > took away your one trick?
> > ?????????????????
> > Your “one trick” is the ability to dredge facts from your memory
> > quickly. The sort of skill that was impressive in the 70s.
> God, you are weird!
Not at all. It’s a very common reaction for people who’s limited
skills were left in the dust.
> > In the
> > 19th Century, the ability to add rows of numbers quickly assured the
> > holder of that skill a comfortable, white collar, profession. Then
> > they invented the adding machine. I suppose those fellows hated that
> > machine as much as you hate Wikipedia, and for much the same reason.
> Actually, I'm a Wikipedia contributor...........
So, Wikipedia is horrible when people use it, but wonderful when you
use it.;
> > > > > Had
> > > > > you done that, you wouldn't have shown yourself to be nearly the
> > > > > horse's ass you did when talking Dr. Hanson, or Dennis Prager.
> > > > > Is it your assumption that your gray matter is a library which holds
> > > > > all known knowledge?
> > > > No, but I do know about the subjects and threads that I post to....>
> > > You might have back in the 70s.
> > > Oh, I'm pretty much aware.
> > Clearly, you’re not. You were utterly unaware of how important Victor
> > Davis Hanson, Dennis Prager and John Podhoretz are to current
> > political commentary.
> If that's true....
It’s quite true.
> God help you!
He does all the time.
> >Again and again you had egg on your face when
> > shown how little you knew about these men. You could have done a
> > quick search, but refused to.
> Why would that change my opinion about what they wrote?>
Because what you wrote about them was objectively wrong. I’m not
talking about opinions about their prose, but facts about the honors
they’ve earned. You were wrong. And when the errors were pointed
out, you responded with “yawn”.
> > That is the sin of pride, my friend.
> Or perhaps the Emperor has no clothes?
Are you feeling a bit drafty?
> > > > and
> > > > most of the time I do it 'from the top of my head'.
> > > You mean you didn't have to look up how to accuse anyone you disagree
> > > with of being stupid?
> > > Not usually.>
> > And you’re proud of your lack of prep-time to hurl childish insults?
> Not when I can annoy you!
Oh, gosh no. I love watching that self defined “academic" reduce
himself to a spoiled child.
> > > > Q.E.D. I think!
> > >> You haven't thought since the 70s.
> > > You just agreed with my definition! That's why I said Q.E.D.!
> > > And you still can't see it!
>
> > Let me explain it for slow Barry.
>
> > I was talking about Leftists, not Conservatives. There was no
> > agreement.
> But what you were saying was that 'leftists' cannot overcome human
> nature!
But Leftists BELIEVE they CAN change human nature - I myth that I
reject. Of course they can’t...but they think they can. And when
their lovely theirs simply don’t work, they have a very ugly habit of
simply declaring victory, and insulting those who were proven correct.
> Which is a definition of conservatism! QED!
Again, that’s not what I wrote.
> Are you stupid or
> what?
Another defining characteristic of the modern Leftist - the delusional
insistance that they hold a monopoly on wisdom and learning.
> > > > > > The secular version of the doctrine of
> > > > > > original sin. Consequently, the selfishness and destructive tendencies
> > > > > > of the human personality have to be kept in check by some form of
> > > > > > authority.
> > > > > Eeeeeeee.....no. We believe in self control - core values,
> > > > > responsibility, family, peer pressure, honor.
> > > > I actually say that, you blithering idiot!
> > > > Not above, you didn't. Hardly my fault that you contradict
> > > > yourself.
> > > I said it in the definition!
> > Nope. You talked endlessly about authority - strongly implying that
> > Conservatives demand these values be forced on people. With
> > noticeable exception, we don’t.
> I talked about authority enshrined in the socialising institutions of
> society!
And I countered that Conservatives don't believe in authority running
their lives. The Left does.
> Look! Just give it up!
Nope.
> > > > >A belief in a God who
> > > > > judges one at life’s end doesn’t hurt either. The police and courts
> > > > > are a last resort....not the first.
> > > > > > That is the Hobbesian view of society, in which we
> > > > > > surrender part of our liberty to a form of authority that guarantees
> > > > > > some kind of order.
> > > > > And what society doesn’t agree with that?
> > > > Yours?
> > > Nope.
> > > > Wall Street?
> > >> I'll take Wall Streets excesses over a socialist society any day of
> > >> the week.
> > > That's because you are a fool.
>
> > That’s because I have family members who’ve escaped from Socialist
> > nations.
> Ah yes! We've had this before. Nothing to do with this argument,
> though.
First hand, source material, has nothing to do with the argument? Ah,
there’s the endless curiosity of the modern “academic.”
> > > > > >That alone guarantees any form of civilised
> > > > > > existence, otherwise the alternative is the "state of nature" in which
> > > > > > the life of man is 'solitary, nasty, brutish, and short." Now, most
> > > > > > conservatives have thought that such authority is derived from certain
> > > > > > institutions in society. These are the family, the institution of
> > > > > > property, the church (or something having a similar moral authority)
> > > > > > and the government.
> > > > > What you keep missing is that all of the conservative institutions are
> > > > > voluntary. One joins a church of their own free will.
> > > > One is socialised by it....
> > >> Voluntarily.
> > > Not voluntarily...one is born into a social situation...as the old
> > > hymn has it:-
> > > Can a child presume to choose,
> > > Where and how to live?
> > Maybe that’s how you guys do things in England.
> > Not - in - America.
> Sorry, but you are a nutter!
Maybe they have Dukes and Earls who’s families have been wealthy for
dozens of centuries exploiting the peasnts and running the
country....but in America, we have freedom.
> > > AGAIN, I'm a Classic Liberal.
> > > Then you are not a conservative! How many times must I say that?>
>
> > You can scream it until your eyeballs fall out. Doesn’t make it
> > true. Classic Liberals believed in small government, low taxes, few
> > regulations.
> Nothing to do with traditional conservatism!
Which is why I'm a Classic Liberal, and a Modern Conservative. If
your definition of Traditional Conservatism is utterly divorced from
what contemporary conservatives believe... then it is a worthless
definition.
> > > > “Multi-culturalism"? You're trying to hang MC around the necks of
> > > conservatives?
> > > Yes! >
> > Stranger and stranger. So you view President Obama as a
> > Conservative? Jesse Jackson?
> Conservatives tend to be opponents of multi-culturalism you blithering
> idiot!!!!!!!!!!
But you wrote that Multi-culturalism was a conservative trait. No you
say it isn't.
> > > > Are you nuts?
> > > No! >
> > You might want to reconsider the “nuts” option. The alternate
> > explanations are much uglier.
> > > > > > Now, the
> > > > > > entire point of conservatism is to 'conserve' or protect these
> > > > > > institutions.
> > > > > Nonsense. We challenge corrupt institutions constantly.
> > > > Your mind seems to function on a very basic level, with little
> > > > capacity for abstract thought.
> > > > My mind
> > Freudian slip there!
You’re the last one who actually believes what Freud wrote.
> > > > works on an incredibly sophisticated level, which came bundled
> > > > with a finely tuned Bullshit Detector.
> > > (Smirk!!!!)
> > Ding ding ding ding ding ding ding ding. Warning, warning bullshit.
> > > > > > Change will always occur, but change must be managed in
> > > > > > such a way that it does not subvert these safeguards of the social
> > > > > > order.
> > > > > Again, you are describing the Leftist’s world view....that there’s
> > > > > someone huge in charge of everything. Conservatives belive in the
> > > > > Individual, and freedom. The Left believes in some version of the
> > > > > King.
> > > > > But you are not a conservative!
> > > > I'm certainly what we call conservatives today.
> > > That may be. But people who call themselves conservatives usually are
>
> > not (especially in America).
>
> > "When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone. "It
> > means just what I choose it to mean - neither more or less."
> > "The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so
> > many different things."
> > "The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master - that's
> > all."
> > Lewis Carroll
> Yes...I've quoted that! But I gave a detailed definition, you see! The
> snark was a boojum!
I don't question that you gave a definition - I'm content to point out
that your definition has nothing to do with reality.
> > In the comic strip “Dilbert”, the lead character had a dog named
> > “Dogbert”. At one point, the cartoonist introduced an evil, unnamed, feline.
> > Scott Adams received 10,000 unsolicited letters, insisting that the
> > cat’s name was “Catbert”. Scott later explained that “when 10,000
> > people believe the character’s name is ‘Catbert’....that character’s
> > name is ‘Catbert’.”
> > > > > > That, Richard, is what conservatism is!
> > > > > If that’s what you believe, then Dennis Prager has been proven
> > > > > correct. You don’t understand modern conservatism.
> > > > Correction. He doesn't. (Or pretends not to, to write for a particular
> > > > audience. I don't know which is worse.)
> > > >Here’s the Occam’s Razor option: Prager knows exactly what he’s
> > > >talking about, believes every word, and you’re not man enough to admit
> > > >it.
> > > Man enough? Oh dear! Something lurking deep in the woodshed?
>
> > It’s quite telling that when you hear the word “man,” your first
> > thought is to imply sleazy, annomous, homosexual coupling on a sex
> > tour. I used the word to imply honor.
> Oh! And as you have no honour,>
I have quite a bit of honor, thank you very much.
> I associate it with a nasty little
> macho part of that sewerage infested mind of yours....
QUOTE OF BARRY WORTHINGTON:
An evil minded shitbag. and someone who lost their marbles some time
ago....the company that you do keep!
.............................
No-one asked you!
Stick your nose somewhere else before it is bitten off.....
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/browse_frm/thread/ba2c286fc669a55e?scoring=d&
..........................................
But it's none of your business you stupid shitbag!
Give it time, Steve. People like you usually come to a rather sticky
end.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/browse_frm/thread/ba2c286fc669a55e?scoring=d&
..........................................................
(Victor Davis Hanson writes) right-wing American shit!
https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!topic/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/1k99CWoP0zY
....................................
Steve does not realise that it is necessary to produce an original
piece of research work in the form of a thesis, something that adds to
the total sum of human knowledge, in order to obtain a Doctorate. This
is because he is not only very ignorant, but actually as thick as pig
shit....
.........................................
“Arses, Steve. An ass is a useful animal.....as opposed to a worthless
shitbag....... “
> > > > > > > Norm Chomsky, Al Frankin, Andrew Sullivan, David Corn, Robert Riech
> > > > > > > are are among the guests he's had his show.
> > > > > > Then why doesn't he say so?
> > > > > Because informed people already know that. Certainly his readers do.
> > > > Has he got any?
> > > Millions. He also has about seven million listeners daily. Oh, and
> > > he's written and had published a couple of dozen books.
> > (Yawn!)
> > You asked a question, I answered it honestly. If you’re bored by
> > Prager’s record....why ask the question?
(CRICKETS)
> > > But Dennis Prager doesn’t write garbage. He’s headed interfaith
> > > dialogues at the Vatican. He’s lectured the Russians about the future
> > > of Russian. He’s written books on the history of the Jews.
> > > You scribble rubbish such as the “...study one aspect of sex tourism
> > > as part of my other tourism research topics (which include the role of
> > > tourism in post-communist transition in Europe, issues relating to
> > > heritage tourism, 'serious leisure', and transport and tourism). There
> > > are several academics who study the purely commercial side of sex
> > > tourism. My interest is the swinging sub-culture, as an extension of
> > > the 'serious leisure' concept, and its creation of 'embodied space'.”
> > > And why is that rubbish, Richard? Be specific!
> > I must remember to throw that line back in your face.
> > The academic study of sex tours is rubbish because it attempts to add
> > dignity to that which is unworthy of respect. Your stated objective
> > is to show that sex tours are healthy, because they generate income.
> > Yes, yes, such nonsense is SOP in today’s academic world. So are
> > scholarly articles on Spider-Man, strippers, and “The Brady Bunch”.
> > Future historians will remember the 20th and beginning of the 21st
> > Centuries as “The Time When Academics Went Mad.”
> Did you think up that all on your own? >
Did you think up “academic articles” about sex tours all by yourself?
> By the way, my attitude as a
> researcher was to be strictly neutral. That's what you do.
But you're not neutral. You're the opposite of neutral. You're
wildly partisan, and dismiss pretty much anyone who disagrees with you
as a “nutter", a “wanker" and a “shitbag".
Your refusal to acknowledge that there are intelligent, thoughtful,
conservatives is the reason you're an intellectual cripple.
> > > > > > I think that most people who know anything about the Korean War would
> > > > > > be aware of his 'Hidden History'!
> > > > > My father hasn't. He is a Marine who served in the Korean war.
> > > > And your point is?
> > > That your insistence that “ most people who know anything about the
> > > Korean War would be aware of his 'Hidden History" is clearly nonsense.
> > > With respect to your father, I was referring to people who made an
> > > academic or historical study of the war.
> > That may be what you meant, but it wasn’t what you wrote. Your
> > exactly phrase was “most people who know anything about the Korean
> > War....” BTW, last week, Dad celebrated his 90th Birthday with 9
> > rounds of golf.
> Please don't use him to make a cheap point! You knew very well what my
> phrase intended!
Which one of the other two million Americans who served in that war
who’s never heard of the book you point to would you prefer I use?
> > > > girls.
> > > You appear to be an expert on young girls. One wonders why. (I too can
> > > insinuate...just like you!)
> > Actually, I simply wrote that you were acting childishly. The leap to
> > degenerate sex was all yours.
> Well, the reference about insinuation was to you and your rather
> disgusting mind.
crude sexual attack, not me.
> > > > > Actually, it's a comment upon your mental processes (or lack of
> > > > > them).....but you are too stupid to realise that.
> > > > Yes, yes, Barry. I'm stupid, Dr. Hanson is stupid, Dennis Prager is
> > > > stupid. Everyone who holds an opinion you don't like is stupid.
> > > I speak as I find, Richard.
> > I believe it's called a lack of impulse control.
> You have no self control. When you are losing an argument (well,
> actually, are stuck for something to say, since you can't argue) you
> resort to obscene insults.
"And now a message from our resident shitbag... "
Barry
"Are you going to live with (Steve) in his fabulous Florida 'gated
condo'?"
Barry
"An evil minded shitbag. and someone who lost their marbles some time
ago....the company that you do keep!"
"No-one asked you!
"Stick your nose somewhere else before it is bitten off....."
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/browse_frm/thread/ba2c286fc669a55e?scoring=d&
"But it's none of your business you stupid shitbag!
"Give it time, Steve. People like you usually come to a rather sticky
end."
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/browse_frm/thread/ba2c286fc669a55e?scoring=d&
("Victor Davis Hanson writes) right-wing American shit!"
Barry
https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!topic/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/1k99CWoP0zY
"Steve does not realise that it is necessary to produce an original
piece of research work in the form of a thesis, something that adds to
the total sum of human knowledge, in order to obtain a Doctorate. This
is because he is not only very ignorant, but actually as thick as pig
shit.... "
> > > > > > Victor Davis Hanson writes for the widely respected National Review,
> > > > > Respected?
> > > > Extremely. It’s been in print for over a half century. Its web page
> > > > is the standard “go to” for intelligent people who want a clear view
> > > > of what’s going on in the world.
> > > It's comparatively unknown outside America, and I doubt that many
> > > Americans take much notice of it. It doesn't have the pedigree of the
> > > Spectator in Britain.
> > They've never heard of the works of William F. Buckley in England? I
> > seriously doubt that. If true, how sad for your country.
> Yes, but he isn't widely known.
And how do you know that? You don't communicate with Conservatives.
> > > > > > therefore the rest of his body of work is tainted and suspect.
> > > > > If he demeans himself to write crap for morons, what does he expect?
> > > > But he doesn't write "crap for morons". He writes brilliant articles
> > > > in respected publicans for a literate audience.
> > > Not on the basis of the 'piece' that you cited......
>
> > Yes, on the basis of that article.
> Well, that says more about you than it does me!
It says that I'm well read, while you're a scared child who runs away
from well reasoned arguments to which you have no real answer. I'm
not afraid to read the New York Times. I don't believe Leftist are
evil, or stupid. I believe they're wrong.
> > > > > Gore
> > > > > > Vidal writes soft-core porn,
> > > > > Insightful essays a lot of the time.....and some interesting
> > > > > historical novels.
> > > > And soft core porn.
> > > So what!
> > How how about living by the same standards that you demand of others?
> What standards?
Admittedly, finding your "standards" is something of a Herculean
task. In this instance, I'm pointing out how you insisted that Dr.
Hanson's work was tainted by his association with the widely respected
National Review, while you have no problem whatsoever with Mr. Gore's
love of porno.
> > > 'Myra' was intended as satire, by the way.
> > And just were does a road lined with good intentions lead?
> In Defoe's case, to the pillory...where he was pelted with flowers....
But, of course, Defoe didn't write pornography, did he?
> > > > > >that is a sign of....gee, what is it a
> > > > > > sign of? That he’s a free spirit? Open minded? Just what do you
> > > > > > tell yourself to justify such rubbish? More important .... when will
> > > > > > you live by the standards that you demand of others?
> > > > > That you've never read him? That you know nothing about him?
> > > > Of course I've read him. Hell, I belonged to his blog for a year or
> > > > so.
> > > You are fantasising again......
> > No, Gore Vidal put out a blog for a year or so. I belonged to it.
> > And what the Hell is “ fantasising”?
> What you have just stated....
You believe that Gore Vidal's blog was a fantasy?
> > > > > > No, you know how to regurgitate tired clichés from the 70s. And you
> > > > > > have mastered the sneer - another skill set you have in common with
> > > > > > spoiled 15 year old girls.
> > > > > You really have to read postings! it helps!
> > > > You really must learn how to put together an argument which consists
> > > > of something other than a childish insult.
> > > But that's what you do, Richard!
> > Yeah, childish insults like that.
> Well, that is what you do!
"And now a message from our resident shitbag... "
Barry
"Are you going to live with (Steve) in his fabulous Florida 'gated
condo'?"
Barry
"An evil minded shitbag. and someone who lost their marbles some time
ago....the company that you do keep!"
"No-one asked you!
"Stick your nose somewhere else before it is bitten off....."
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/browse_frm/thread/ba2c286fc669a55e?scoring=d&
"But it's none of your business you stupid shitbag!
"Give it time, Steve. People like you usually come to a rather sticky
end."
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/browse_frm/thread/ba2c286fc669a55e?scoring=d&
("Victor Davis Hanson writes) right-wing American shit!"
Barry
https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!topic/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/1k99CWoP0zY
"Steve does not realise that it is necessary to produce an original
piece of research work in the form of a thesis, something that adds to
the total sum of human knowledge, in order to obtain a Doctorate. This
is because he is not only very ignorant, but actually as thick as pig
shit.... "
>Black is not white!>
And vulgar attacks that you regularly indulge are exactly that.
> > > > > > > >While the latter writes clearly, you prefer terms which
> > > > > > > > hide your meaning, and are easily confused.
> > > > > > > What do you not understand about 'classical (or Gladstonian)
> > > > > > > liberalism' or 'neoliberalism? Are you that ignorant?
>
> > > > > > (sigh) Barry....Barry....Barry.....I AM a Classic Liberal. The
> > > > > > current home of the Classic Liberal is the Conservative Movement.
> > > > > Which is why there are no conservatives any more! I do wish you would
> > > > > realise this!
> > > > Be happy, Barry....you finally made me laugh out loud. There's no
> > > > conservatives? Really? And there are no Conservatives because BARRY
> > > > says so?
> > > No. Because of people like you!
> > That's the sort of statement which wows 'em when hanging around the
> > Cranky Old Socialists club. When dealing with people who aren't 100%
> > on your side? Eh, not so much.
> What are you dribbling about?
I'm saying that when you limit your contact with only people who agree
with you, your opinions tend to become silly.
> > Here's the painful reality: If your definition of "conservatism" is
> > so restrictive that it exclude everybody who considers themselves a
> > member of that cause....it's likely a terrible interpretation. It
> > boils down to either billions of people are wrong, or Barry's
> > definition is silly.
> What cause?
Conservatism.
> > That's not to say there hasn't been cases of One Man With a Dream
> > Being Right While the Rest of the World is Wrong is impossible. It
> > has happened before in history. But as Carl Sagan said
> As if you have ever read him?
Read him for decades.
> >said,
> > "extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence." Far from being
> > "extraordinary", your definition has been vague, meandering, and
> > depends heavily on your ability to bully conservatives.
> > Dennis Prager is correct - you don't understand conservatives, or
> > Conservatism.
> Well, if you or Mr. Prager attended a history or political theory
> lecture at a university, that is (more or less) the definition that
> you would get.
Not if you would get if you attended one of Mr. Prager's lectures at
Stanford or Columbia University - (both Universities have Dennis as
"Fellows".) Or the literally hundreds of Universities and colleges
which have invited the scholar to lecture.
http://www.prageruniversity.com/Political-Science/The-bigger-the-Government-the-smaller-the-citizen.html
> > > > > > Rush Limbaugh is a Classic Liberal. So was Ben Franklin. Ultimately,
> > > > > > the battle comes down to individual liberty vs. collectivism. I
> > > > > > believe in freedom. You believe in bowing your head to Kings.
> > > > > How dare you mention Franklin and Limbaugh in the same breath! Wash
> > > > > your mouth out!
> > > > Somewhere, Ben Franklin looks down at Rush Limbaugh pissing off
> > > > stuffed shirts like yourself, slaps John Adams on the shoulder, and
> > > > shouts "the American Dream is still alive." Ben cheers Rush on as The
> > > > Captain (aka Rush Limbaugh) takes on the President of the United
> > > > States....and wins.
> > > Did that pleasure you?
> > I understand that you're desperately trying to sound witty - but as is
> > usually the case with your "quips," the actual effect is more than a
> > little greasy.
> Suits you sir!!!
Yet another one of your pointless, One Size Fits All insults.
> > Sort of like the 65 year old pervert in the park
> > taking to 14 year old girls about “free love.”
> Do a lot of that kind of thing?
I don’t do that kind of thing at all. You, OTOH, have literally made
a “science” of paying for sex.
> > > > May I remind you that Ben Franklin, like Rush Limbaugh, liberally
> > > > mixed politics which Earthy humor? And that Franklin told truth to
> > > > power.
> > > Franklin was intelligent, though!
> > I suspect that the target of Franklin's barbs would disagree. Back
> > then, they were as thin skinned as yourself.
> > > And had principles......<
> > Literally, the first statement made to the Republicans after Obama
> > took office was “you have to stop listenin’ to Rush Limbaugh.” Rush
> > has taken on Presidents, had his liberty and property threatened, and
> > yet he hasn’t backed down an inch.
> > Again, Ben Franklin smiles.
> At you? I wouldn't be surprised!
....while Ben rolls his eyes over your prissy temper tantrums.
> > > > Don't take me on when it comes to Ben Franklin...I've read every work
> > > > on the man I can get my hands on.
> > > Your reading doesn't seem to have any effect upon your mind or mental
> > > state...
> > Oh, dear, dear, dear. We're back to the idea that holding ideas you
> > disagree with is a form of mental illness. A technique popular with
> > fascists around the world.
> I speak as I find, Richard.
Doesn’t really change the fact that the tactic is self-serving at
best, and fascist at worse, does it?
> > > > > > Is this an example of British Humor that is so ironic that it has
> > > > > > stopped making sense? Mr. Podhoretz has been a special assistant to
> > > > > > a US Cabinet member. He has been a speech writer for two US
> > > > > > Presidents....and yet he’s a “political illiterate” because his views
> > > > > > conflict with your moldy 70s socialist clichés?
> > > > > He's a political illiterate.
> > > > And what life experiences gives you the power to make such a judgment?
> > > My sixty-odd years upn this earth, my education, and my interest in
> > > politics on both side s of the Atlantic....
> > Decades wasted hanging around student lounges and teacher's lounges
> > rapping outranks decades of actually effecting the politics of the
> > world?
> Well, I was a political activist when I was younger.
When Mr. Podhoretz was younger, he wrote speeches for the President
of the United States.
> I was a member of
> a trade union.
Podhoretz was the Assistant to an US Cabinet member.
> And I still take part in a host of voluntary
> activities...and some of the projects have borne fruit....
Whereas Mr. Podhoretz steers world politics.
> > Mr. Podhoretz had Presidents of the United States take notes when he
> > spoke. You gave consumer tips for overseas sex tours.
> No I didn't! See...the offensive little shitbag pops out of his box
> when cornered...
> Thanks! I was waiting for that..........
Thats what you look forward to? Blessed are those who are easily
pleased, I guess.
> > > > A lot more than anyone cares about your Ph.D.
> > > That little fact really annoys you, doesn't it?
> > Oh, gosh no. Mazel tov. I never denied that a Ph.D an excellent
> > beginning for a 20 something - an accomplishment any young person can
> > be justly proud. But, at one point, you actually have to do something
> > with the honor....otherwise, it just becomes another piece of paper.
> What do you think I did with it you stupid bugger!
> > > > Please, awe me with your accomplishments.
> > > Actually, I have been published in British newspapers, including a
> > > national one.....
> > Your post Ph.D accomplishments equal what Dennis Prager casually whips
> > out on any given afternoon.
> Is Mr. Prager paying you by the line?
No, pointing out hypocrisies of pompous asses, such as yourself, is
its own reward.
If you give me your attention, I will tell you what I am:
I'm a genuine philanthropist — all other kinds are sham.
Each little fault of temper and each social defect
In my erring fellow-creatures, I endeavour to correct.
To all their little weaknesses I open people's eyes;
And little plans to snub the self-sufficient I devise;
I love my fellow creatures — I do all the good I can —
Yet ev'rybody says I'm such a disagreeable man!
And I can't think why!
To compliments inflated I've a withering reply;
And vanity I always do my best to mortify;
A charitable action I can skillfully dissect;
And interested motives I'm delighted to detect;
I know ev'rybody's income and what ev'rybody earns;
And I carefully compare it with the income-tax returns;
But to benefit humanity however much I plan,
Yet ev'rybody says I'm such a disagreeable man!
And I can't think why!
I'm sure I'm no ascetic; I'm as pleasant as can be;
You'll always find me ready with a crushing repartee,
I've an irritating chuckle, I've a celebrated sneer,
I've an entertaining snigger, I've a fascinating leer.
To ev'rybody's prejudice I know a thing or two;
I can tell a woman's age in half a minute — and I do.
But although I try to make myself as pleasant as I can,
Yet ev'rybody says I'm such a disagreeable man!
And I can't think why!
> > > > "My father and his mates once stumbled upon someone like you. It was
> > > > in
> > > > Italy, in a farmyard. The man's belly had burst open and was now full
> > > > of maggots and flies buzzed around the corpse. The head was so black
> > > > and swollen that the features were unrecognisable. The uniform was
> > > > stained, but still sported SS Runes on it. One of the local peasants
> > > > said that a group of SS had rounded up hostages from the village and
> > > > shot them. This one strayed too far, and the old farmer protected his
> > > > daughter and grandchildren by killing him with a shotgun."
> > > Why is that 'shit'?
> > 1. It’s torture porn.
> > 2. It’s a thinly veiled death threat.
> Neither.
Both.
> It was an attempt to make the poster face reality..... >
By threatening to have goons kill him if he didn’t stop disagreeing
with you?
> By the
> way, he makes the threats...>
Noooooooooo - in the quote, YOU made the threat.
> but he has a screw loose.....>
Why is he crazy for making death threats....but you’re not?
> Why do you
> take him so seriously?
He’s not the one who claims to be a distinguished academic...you are.
> > > > How many decades will it be until England is a colony to Mecca?
> > > Nutter!
> >http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1577928/Archbishop-Williams-sp...
> (The Telegraph? Snicker!!!!!)
Articles on sex tours. Ewwwwggghhhhhh.
> > > > > > > I mean most sensible
> > > > > > > people...well, those who don't have you in their kill files...
> > > > > > I value truth and clarity over congeniality. One measure of a man is
> > > > > > the caliber of people he pisses off. Leftist hysterics only serve to
> > > > > > convince me that I’m on the right path.
> > > > > Truth????????
> > > > Truth...it's a Conservative Thing...you wouldn't
> > > "What is truth?" (Pontius Pilate, attributed.)>
> > You’re using the guy who sentenced Jesus Christ to death as a
> > respected source?
> Oh dear! You are so....literal....and very banal........
How dare I comment on what you actually wrote.
> > > > And you really believe that?
> > > Our exchanges was done much to reinforce and cement that view of the
> > > Left.
> > > Now, go ahead and call me stupid again....it's all you have left.
> > I have my education, Richard. You have your ignorance....and
> > stupidity.
> > "A learned blockhead is a greater blockhead than an ignorant one."
> > Benjamin Franklin
> Well, he didn't meet you, did he?
He did meet your ilk, however. He launched a war, and defeated your
kind.
> > > I don't meet people with a mind like yours....even after washing my
> > > hands....
> > Which explains how you’ve managed to convince yourself that
> > Conservatives don’t exist. It’s called “willful ignorance”. And
> > cowardice.
> It's called 'being educated'.
Limiting your conversations who a narrow band of like minded ninnies
is what passes with you for “being educated”?
> > > You think that you are a conservative. But like the rest of your ilk,
> > > when people say that you are not, you then claim that 'liberals' don't
> > > understand you and can't talk to you!
> > Again, your definition excludes over a hundred million American
> > Conservatives. Why should I respect such a silly interpretation of
> > the word?
> That is their problem, Richard.
No, your disapprove doesn't register at all.
> > > You redefine terms so that they become meaningless...
> > It’s called the Living Language. Deal with it.
> I prefer to call it 'ignorance'.
So you want to be a bitter old man furious that the world doesn't
conform to your view....go right ahead.
> > > Went right over your head....>
>
> > Nope.
>
> > > > > > (Shall we adjourn while you start searching Wikipedia?)
> > > > > You seem to feel that reading Wikipedia is some sort of weakness.
> > > > It seems to be your friend.....
> > > While Wikipedia t seems to be your hated enemy. Gee, just because it
> > > took away your one trick?
> > ?????????????????
> > Your “one trick” is the ability to dredge facts from your memory
> > quickly. The sort of skill that was impressive in the 70s.
> God, you are weird!
Not at all. It’s a very common reaction for people who’s limited
skills were left in the dust.
> > In the
> > 19th Century, the ability to add rows of numbers quickly assured the
> > holder of that skill a comfortable, white collar, profession. Then
> > they invented the adding machine. I suppose those fellows hated that
> > machine as much as you hate Wikipedia, and for much the same reason.
> Actually, I'm a Wikipedia contributor...........
So, Wikipedia is horrible when people use it, but wonderful when you
use it.;
> > > > > Had
> > > > > you done that, you wouldn't have shown yourself to be nearly the
> > > > > horse's ass you did when talking Dr. Hanson, or Dennis Prager.
> > > > > Is it your assumption that your gray matter is a library which holds
> > > > > all known knowledge?
> > > > No, but I do know about the subjects and threads that I post to....>
> > > You might have back in the 70s.
> > > Oh, I'm pretty much aware.
> > Clearly, you’re not. You were utterly unaware of how important Victor
> > Davis Hanson, Dennis Prager and John Podhoretz are to current
> > political commentary.
> If that's true....
It’s quite true.
> God help you!
He does all the time.
> >Again and again you had egg on your face when
> > shown how little you knew about these men. You could have done a
> > quick search, but refused to.
> Why would that change my opinion about what they wrote?>
Because what you wrote about them was objectively wrong. I’m not
talking about opinions about their prose, but facts about the honors
they’ve earned. You were wrong. And when the errors were pointed
out, you responded with “yawn”.
> > That is the sin of pride, my friend.
> Or perhaps the Emperor has no clothes?
Are you feeling a bit drafty?
> > > > and
> > > > most of the time I do it 'from the top of my head'.
> > > You mean you didn't have to look up how to accuse anyone you disagree
> > > with of being stupid?
> > > Not usually.>
> > And you’re proud of your lack of prep-time to hurl childish insults?
> Not when I can annoy you!
Oh, gosh no. I love watching that self defined “academic" reduce
himself to a spoiled child.
> > > > Q.E.D. I think!
> > >> You haven't thought since the 70s.
> > > You just agreed with my definition! That's why I said Q.E.D.!
> > > And you still can't see it!
>
> > Let me explain it for slow Barry.
>
> > I was talking about Leftists, not Conservatives. There was no
> > agreement.
> But what you were saying was that 'leftists' cannot overcome human
> nature!
But Leftists BELIEVE they CAN change human nature - I myth that I
reject. Of course they can’t...but they think they can. And when
their lovely theirs simply don’t work, they have a very ugly habit of
simply declaring victory, and insulting those who were proven correct.
> Which is a definition of conservatism! QED!
Again, that’s not what I wrote.
> Are you stupid or
> what?
Another defining characteristic of the modern Leftist - the delusional
insistance that they hold a monopoly on wisdom and learning.
> > > > > > The secular version of the doctrine of
> > > > > > original sin. Consequently, the selfishness and destructive tendencies
> > > > > > of the human personality have to be kept in check by some form of
> > > > > > authority.
> > > > > Eeeeeeee.....no. We believe in self control - core values,
> > > > > responsibility, family, peer pressure, honor.
> > > > I actually say that, you blithering idiot!
> > > > Not above, you didn't. Hardly my fault that you contradict
> > > > yourself.
> > > I said it in the definition!
> > Nope. You talked endlessly about authority - strongly implying that
> > Conservatives demand these values be forced on people. With
> > noticeable exception, we don’t.
> I talked about authority enshrined in the socialising institutions of
> society!
And I countered that Conservatives don't believe in authority running
their lives. The Left does.
> Look! Just give it up!
Nope.
> > > > >A belief in a God who
> > > > > judges one at life’s end doesn’t hurt either. The police and courts
> > > > > are a last resort....not the first.
> > > > > > That is the Hobbesian view of society, in which we
> > > > > > surrender part of our liberty to a form of authority that guarantees
> > > > > > some kind of order.
> > > > > And what society doesn’t agree with that?
> > > > Yours?
> > > Nope.
> > > > Wall Street?
> > >> I'll take Wall Streets excesses over a socialist society any day of
> > >> the week.
> > > That's because you are a fool.
>
> > That’s because I have family members who’ve escaped from Socialist
> > nations.
> Ah yes! We've had this before. Nothing to do with this argument,
> though.
First hand, source material, has nothing to do with the argument? Ah,
there’s the endless curiosity of the modern “academic.”
> > > > > >That alone guarantees any form of civilised
> > > > > > existence, otherwise the alternative is the "state of nature" in which
> > > > > > the life of man is 'solitary, nasty, brutish, and short." Now, most
> > > > > > conservatives have thought that such authority is derived from certain
> > > > > > institutions in society. These are the family, the institution of
> > > > > > property, the church (or something having a similar moral authority)
> > > > > > and the government.
> > > > > What you keep missing is that all of the conservative institutions are
> > > > > voluntary. One joins a church of their own free will.
> > > > One is socialised by it....
> > >> Voluntarily.
> > > Not voluntarily...one is born into a social situation...as the old
> > > hymn has it:-
> > > Can a child presume to choose,
> > > Where and how to live?
> > Maybe that’s how you guys do things in England.
> > Not - in - America.
> Sorry, but you are a nutter!
Maybe they have Dukes and Earls who’s families have been wealthy for
dozens of centuries exploiting the peasnts and running the
country....but in America, we have freedom.
> > > AGAIN, I'm a Classic Liberal.
> > > Then you are not a conservative! How many times must I say that?>
>
> > You can scream it until your eyeballs fall out. Doesn’t make it
> > true. Classic Liberals believed in small government, low taxes, few
> > regulations.
> Nothing to do with traditional conservatism!
Which is why I'm a Classic Liberal, and a Modern Conservative. If
your definition of Traditional Conservatism is utterly divorced from
what contemporary conservatives believe... then it is a worthless
definition.
> > > > “Multi-culturalism"? You're trying to hang MC around the necks of
> > > conservatives?
> > > Yes! >
> > Stranger and stranger. So you view President Obama as a
> > Conservative? Jesse Jackson?
> Conservatives tend to be opponents of multi-culturalism you blithering
> idiot!!!!!!!!!!
But you wrote that Multi-culturalism was a conservative trait. No you
say it isn't.
> > > > Are you nuts?
> > > No! >
> > You might want to reconsider the “nuts” option. The alternate
> > explanations are much uglier.
> > > > > > Now, the
> > > > > > entire point of conservatism is to 'conserve' or protect these
> > > > > > institutions.
> > > > > Nonsense. We challenge corrupt institutions constantly.
> > > > Your mind seems to function on a very basic level, with little
> > > > capacity for abstract thought.
> > > > My mind
> > Freudian slip there!
You’re the last one who actually believes what Freud wrote.
> > > > works on an incredibly sophisticated level, which came bundled
> > > > with a finely tuned Bullshit Detector.
> > > (Smirk!!!!)
> > Ding ding ding ding ding ding ding ding. Warning, warning bullshit.
> > > > > > Change will always occur, but change must be managed in
> > > > > > such a way that it does not subvert these safeguards of the social
> > > > > > order.
> > > > > Again, you are describing the Leftist’s world view....that there’s
> > > > > someone huge in charge of everything. Conservatives belive in the
> > > > > Individual, and freedom. The Left believes in some version of the
> > > > > King.
> > > > > But you are not a conservative!
> > > > I'm certainly what we call conservatives today.
> > > That may be. But people who call themselves conservatives usually are
>
> > not (especially in America).
>
> > "When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone. "It
> > means just what I choose it to mean - neither more or less."
> > "The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so
> > many different things."
> > "The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master - that's
> > all."
> > Lewis Carroll
> Yes...I've quoted that! But I gave a detailed definition, you see! The
> snark was a boojum!
I don't question that you gave a definition - I'm content to point out
that your definition has nothing to do with reality.
> > In the comic strip “Dilbert”, the lead character had a dog named
> > “Dogbert”. At one point, the cartoonist introduced an evil, unnamed, feline.
> > Scott Adams received 10,000 unsolicited letters, insisting that the
> > cat’s name was “Catbert”. Scott later explained that “when 10,000
> > people believe the character’s name is ‘Catbert’....that character’s
> > name is ‘Catbert’.”
> > > > > > That, Richard, is what conservatism is!
> > > > > If that’s what you believe, then Dennis Prager has been proven
> > > > > correct. You don’t understand modern conservatism.
> > > > Correction. He doesn't. (Or pretends not to, to write for a particular
> > > > audience. I don't know which is worse.)
> > > >Here’s the Occam’s Razor option: Prager knows exactly what he’s
> > > >talking about, believes every word, and you’re not man enough to admit
> > > >it.
> > > Man enough? Oh dear! Something lurking deep in the woodshed?
>
> > It’s quite telling that when you hear the word “man,” your first
> > thought is to imply sleazy, annomous, homosexual coupling on a sex
> > tour. I used the word to imply honor.
> Oh! And as you have no honour,>
I have quite a bit of honor, thank you very much.
> I associate it with a nasty little
> macho part of that sewerage infested mind of yours....
QUOTE OF BARRY WORTHINGTON:
An evil minded shitbag. and someone who lost their marbles some time
ago....the company that you do keep!
.............................
No-one asked you!
Stick your nose somewhere else before it is bitten off.....
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/browse_frm/thread/ba2c286fc669a55e?scoring=d&
..........................................
But it's none of your business you stupid shitbag!
Give it time, Steve. People like you usually come to a rather sticky
end.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/browse_frm/thread/ba2c286fc669a55e?scoring=d&
..........................................................
(Victor Davis Hanson writes) right-wing American shit!
https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!topic/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/1k99CWoP0zY
....................................
Steve does not realise that it is necessary to produce an original
piece of research work in the form of a thesis, something that adds to
the total sum of human knowledge, in order to obtain a Doctorate. This
is because he is not only very ignorant, but actually as thick as pig
shit....
.........................................
How about you print them all off (though I doubt if you can find any),
roll them up very tightly, and shove them up your arse as far as they
will go. That might plug the shit flow that we have to put up
will go. That might plug the shit flow that we have to put up
with...... “
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/browse_frm/thread/5b1c61e7c016af00?scoring=d&
.......................
...the offensive little shitbag pops out of his box when cornered...
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/browse_frm/thread/5b1c61e7c016af00?scoring=d&
...................................
“What do you think I did with it you stupid bugger!”
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/browse_frm/thread/5b1c61e7c016af00?scoring=d&
.......................
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/browse_frm/thread/5b1c61e7c016af00?scoring=d&
.......................
...the offensive little shitbag pops out of his box when cornered...
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/browse_frm/thread/5b1c61e7c016af00?scoring=d&
...................................
“What do you think I did with it you stupid bugger!”
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/browse_frm/thread/5b1c61e7c016af00?scoring=d&
“Arses, Steve. An ass is a useful animal.....as opposed to a worthless
shitbag....... “
> > > > > > > Norm Chomsky, Al Frankin, Andrew Sullivan, David Corn, Robert Riech
> > > > > > > are are among the guests he's had his show.
> > > > > > Then why doesn't he say so?
> > > > > Because informed people already know that. Certainly his readers do.
> > > > Has he got any?
> > > Millions. He also has about seven million listeners daily. Oh, and
> > > he's written and had published a couple of dozen books.
> > (Yawn!)
> > You asked a question, I answered it honestly. If you’re bored by
> > Prager’s record....why ask the question?
(CRICKETS)
> > > But Dennis Prager doesn’t write garbage. He’s headed interfaith
> > > dialogues at the Vatican. He’s lectured the Russians about the future
> > > of Russian. He’s written books on the history of the Jews.
> > > You scribble rubbish such as the “...study one aspect of sex tourism
> > > as part of my other tourism research topics (which include the role of
> > > tourism in post-communist transition in Europe, issues relating to
> > > heritage tourism, 'serious leisure', and transport and tourism). There
> > > are several academics who study the purely commercial side of sex
> > > tourism. My interest is the swinging sub-culture, as an extension of
> > > the 'serious leisure' concept, and its creation of 'embodied space'.”
> > > And why is that rubbish, Richard? Be specific!
> > I must remember to throw that line back in your face.
> > The academic study of sex tours is rubbish because it attempts to add
> > dignity to that which is unworthy of respect. Your stated objective
> > is to show that sex tours are healthy, because they generate income.
> > Yes, yes, such nonsense is SOP in today’s academic world. So are
> > scholarly articles on Spider-Man, strippers, and “The Brady Bunch”.
> > Future historians will remember the 20th and beginning of the 21st
> > Centuries as “The Time When Academics Went Mad.”
> Did you think up that all on your own? >
Did you think up “academic articles” about sex tours all by yourself?
> By the way, my attitude as a
> researcher was to be strictly neutral. That's what you do.
But you're not neutral. You're the opposite of neutral. You're
wildly partisan, and dismiss pretty much anyone who disagrees with you
as a “nutter", a “wanker" and a “shitbag".
Your refusal to acknowledge that there are intelligent, thoughtful,
conservatives is the reason you're an intellectual cripple.
> > > > > > I think that most people who know anything about the Korean War would
> > > > > > be aware of his 'Hidden History'!
> > > > > My father hasn't. He is a Marine who served in the Korean war.
> > > > And your point is?
> > > That your insistence that “ most people who know anything about the
> > > Korean War would be aware of his 'Hidden History" is clearly nonsense.
> > > With respect to your father, I was referring to people who made an
> > > academic or historical study of the war.
> > That may be what you meant, but it wasn’t what you wrote. Your
> > exactly phrase was “most people who know anything about the Korean
> > War....” BTW, last week, Dad celebrated his 90th Birthday with 9
> > rounds of golf.
> Please don't use him to make a cheap point! You knew very well what my
> phrase intended!
Which one of the other two million Americans who served in that war
who’s never heard of the book you point to would you prefer I use?
Kurt Nicklas
Apr 13, 2012, 2:00:58 AM4/13/12
to
hustles along for more.
After so many years of this I think he'd starve here without my help.
trainguard
Apr 13, 2012, 3:37:54 AM4/13/12
to
On Apr 13, 6:40 am, Richard Steel <rsteel2...@aol.com> wrote:
> > > > > Yeah, that's the sort of comment I expect from spoiled 14 year old
> > > > > girls.
> > > > You appear to be an expert on young girls. One wonders why. (I too can
> > > > insinuate...just like you!)
> > > Actually, I simply wrote that you were acting childishly. The leap to
> > > degenerate sex was all yours.
> > Well, the reference about insinuation was to you and your rather
> > disgusting mind.
>
> You're the one who turned the comment on your childish behavior into a
> crude sexual attack, not me.
Sauce for the goose......how do you like it Richard?
> > > > > Yeah, that's the sort of comment I expect from spoiled 14 year old
> > > > > girls.
> > > > You appear to be an expert on young girls. One wonders why. (I too can
> > > > insinuate...just like you!)
> > > Actually, I simply wrote that you were acting childishly. The leap to
> > > degenerate sex was all yours.
> > Well, the reference about insinuation was to you and your rather
> > disgusting mind.
>
> You're the one who turned the comment on your childish behavior into a
> crude sexual attack, not me.
>
> > > > > > Actually, it's a comment upon your mental processes (or lack of
> > > > > > them).....but you are too stupid to realise that.
> > > > > Yes, yes, Barry. I'm stupid, Dr. Hanson is stupid, Dennis Prager is
> > > > > stupid. Everyone who holds an opinion you don't like is stupid.
> > > > I speak as I find, Richard.
> > > I believe it's called a lack of impulse control.
> > You have no self control. When you are losing an argument (well,
> > actually, are stuck for something to say, since you can't argue) you
> > resort to obscene insults.
>
> "And now a message from our resident shitbag... "
> Barry
>
> "Are you going to live with (Steve) in his fabulous Florida 'gated
> condo'?"
> Barry
>
> "An evil minded shitbag. and someone who lost their marbles some time
> ago....the company that you do keep!"
> Barry
>
> "No-one asked you!
>
> "Stick your nose somewhere else before it is bitten off....."
> Barry
>
>
> "But it's none of your business you stupid shitbag!
>
> "Give it time, Steve. People like you usually come to a rather sticky
> end."
> Barry
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/browse_frm/threa...
> "But it's none of your business you stupid shitbag!
>
> "Give it time, Steve. People like you usually come to a rather sticky
> end."
> Barry
>
Ah....are you and Steve one and the same? Who'd have thought it?
>
> ("Victor Davis Hanson writes) right-wing American shit!"
> Barry
>
>
> "Steve does not realise that it is necessary to produce an original
> piece of research work in the form of a thesis, something that adds to
> the total sum of human knowledge, in order to obtain a Doctorate. This
> is because he is not only very ignorant, but actually as thick as pig
> shit.... "
> Barry
both are accurate statements based on the material posted at the
> "Steve does not realise that it is necessary to produce an original
> piece of research work in the form of a thesis, something that adds to
> the total sum of human knowledge, in order to obtain a Doctorate. This
> is because he is not only very ignorant, but actually as thick as pig
> shit.... "
> Barry
time.....
>
> > > > > > > Victor Davis Hanson writes for the widely respected National Review,
> > > > > > Respected?
> > > > > Extremely. It’s been in print for over a half century. Its web page
> > > > > is the standard “go to” for intelligent people who want a clear view
> > > > > of what’s going on in the world.
> > > > It's comparatively unknown outside America, and I doubt that many
> > > > Americans take much notice of it. It doesn't have the pedigree of the
> > > > Spectator in Britain.
> > > They've never heard of the works of William F. Buckley in England? I
> > > seriously doubt that. If true, how sad for your country.
> > Yes, but he isn't widely known.
>
> And how do you know that? You don't communicate with Conservatives.
people like you!
>
> > > > > > > therefore the rest of his body of work is tainted and suspect.
> > > > > > If he demeans himself to write crap for morons, what does he expect?
> > > > > But he doesn't write "crap for morons". He writes brilliant articles
> > > > > in respected publicans for a literate audience.
> > > > Not on the basis of the 'piece' that you cited......
>
> > > Yes, on the basis of that article.
> > Well, that says more about you than it does me!
>
> It says that I'm well read,
>while you're a scared child who runs away
> from well reasoned arguments to which you have no real answer.
>I'm
> not afraid to read the New York Times. I don't believe Leftist are
> evil, or stupid. I believe they're wrong.
>
> > > > > > Gore
> > > > > > > Vidal writes soft-core porn,
> > > > > > Insightful essays a lot of the time.....and some interesting
> > > > > > historical novels.
> > > > > And soft core porn.
> > > > So what!
> > > How how about living by the same standards that you demand of others?
> > What standards?
>
> Admittedly, finding your "standards" is something of a Herculean
> task. In this instance, I'm pointing out how you insisted that Dr.
> Hanson's work was tainted by his association with the widely respected
> National Review, while you have no problem whatsoever with Mr. Gore's
> love of porno.
make a distinction between that and his academic productions, about
which I do not comment. As for Mr. Vidal, I doubt that 'porno'
features much in his life....
I have to point these things out to demonstrate your stupidity.
>
> > > > 'Myra' was intended as satire, by the way.
> > > And just were does a road lined with good intentions lead?
> > In Defoe's case, to the pillory...where he was pelted with flowers....
>
> But, of course, Defoe didn't write pornography, did he?
> > > > > > >that is a sign of....gee, what is it a
> > > > > > > sign of? That he’s a free spirit? Open minded? Just what do you
> > > > > > > tell yourself to justify such rubbish? More important .... when will
> > > > > > > you live by the standards that you demand of others?
> > > > > > That you've never read him? That you know nothing about him?
> > > > > Of course I've read him. Hell, I belonged to his blog for a year or
> > > > > so.
> > > > You are fantasising again......
> > > No, Gore Vidal put out a blog for a year or so. I belonged to it.
> > > And what the Hell is “ fantasising”?
> > What you have just stated....
>
> You believe that Gore Vidal's blog was a fantasy?
>
> > > > > > > No, you know how to regurgitate tired clichés from the 70s. And you
> > > > > > > have mastered the sneer - another skill set you have in common with
> > > > > > > spoiled 15 year old girls.
> > > > > > You really have to read postings! it helps!
> > > > > You really must learn how to put together an argument which consists
> > > > > of something other than a childish insult.
> > > > But that's what you do, Richard!
> > > Yeah, childish insults like that.
> > Well, that is what you do!
>
> "And now a message from our resident shitbag... "
> Barry
>
> "Are you going to live with (Steve) in his fabulous Florida 'gated
> condo'?"
> Barry
>
> "An evil minded shitbag. and someone who lost their marbles some time
> ago....the company that you do keep!"
> Barry
>
> "No-one asked you!
>
> "Stick your nose somewhere else before it is bitten off....."
> Barry
>
>
> "But it's none of your business you stupid shitbag!
>
> "Give it time, Steve. People like you usually come to a rather sticky
> end."
> Barry
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/browse_frm/threa...
> "But it's none of your business you stupid shitbag!
>
> "Give it time, Steve. People like you usually come to a rather sticky
> end."
> Barry
>
>
> ("Victor Davis Hanson writes) right-wing American shit!"
> Barry
>
> https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!topic/alt.fan.rush-limba...
> ("Victor Davis Hanson writes) right-wing American shit!"
> Barry
>
>
> "Steve does not realise that it is necessary to produce an original
> piece of research work in the form of a thesis, something that adds to
> the total sum of human knowledge, in order to obtain a Doctorate. This
> is because he is not only very ignorant, but actually as thick as pig
> shit.... "
> Barry
>
> >Black is not white!>
>
> And vulgar attacks that you regularly indulge are exactly that.
You've said all this in another posting!
> "Steve does not realise that it is necessary to produce an original
> piece of research work in the form of a thesis, something that adds to
> the total sum of human knowledge, in order to obtain a Doctorate. This
> is because he is not only very ignorant, but actually as thick as pig
> shit.... "
> Barry
>
> >Black is not white!>
>
> And vulgar attacks that you regularly indulge are exactly that.
> > > > > > > > >While the latter writes clearly, you prefer terms which
> > > > > > > > > hide your meaning, and are easily confused.
> > > > > > > > What do you not understand about 'classical (or Gladstonian)
> > > > > > > > liberalism' or 'neoliberalism? Are you that ignorant?
>
> > > > > > > (sigh) Barry....Barry....Barry.....I AM a Classic Liberal. The
> > > > > > > current home of the Classic Liberal is the Conservative Movement.
> > > > > > Which is why there are no conservatives any more! I do wish you would
> > > > > > realise this!
> > > > > Be happy, Barry....you finally made me laugh out loud. There's no
> > > > > conservatives? Really? And there are no Conservatives because BARRY
> > > > > says so?
> > > > No. Because of people like you!
> > > That's the sort of statement which wows 'em when hanging around the
> > > Cranky Old Socialists club. When dealing with people who aren't 100%
> > > on your side? Eh, not so much.
> > What are you dribbling about?
>
> I'm saying that when you limit your contact with only people who agree
> with you, your opinions tend to become silly.
>
> > > Here's the painful reality: If your definition of "conservatism" is
> > > so restrictive that it exclude everybody who considers themselves a
> > > member of that cause....it's likely a terrible interpretation. It
> > > boils down to either billions of people are wrong, or Barry's
> > > definition is silly.
> > What cause?
>
> Conservatism.
>
> > > That's not to say there hasn't been cases of One Man With a Dream
> > > Being Right While the Rest of the World is Wrong is impossible. It
> > > has happened before in history. But as Carl Sagan said
> > As if you have ever read him?
>
> Read him for decades.
>
> > >said,
> > > "extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence." Far from being
> > > "extraordinary", your definition has been vague, meandering, and
> > > depends heavily on your ability to bully conservatives.
> > > Dennis Prager is correct - you don't understand conservatives, or
> > > Conservatism.
> > Well, if you or Mr. Prager attended a history or political theory
> > lecture at a university, that is (more or less) the definition that
> > you would get.
>
> Not if you would get if you attended one of Mr. Prager's lectures at
> Stanford or Columbia University - (both Universities have Dennis as
> "Fellows".)
>Or the literally hundreds of Universities and colleges
> which have invited the scholar to lecture.
> http://www.prageruniversity.com/Political-Science/The-bigger-the-Gove...
That's his own 'on-line university'. I am not aware that he lectures
(or has ever lectured) in political thoery at a reputable university
anywhere.
Dr. Barry Worthington
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Kurt Nicklas
Apr 13, 2012, 7:33:29 AM4/13/12
to
On Apr 13, 3:11=A0am, trainguard <barry_worthing...@sky.com> wrote:
> On Apr 12, 11:19=A0pm, Kurt Nicklas <kurtnick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 12, 6:11=A0pm, trainguard <barry_worthing...@sky.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Apr 12, 10:28=A0pm, Kurt Nicklas <kurtnick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Apr 12, 11:44=A0am, trainguard <barry_worthing...@sky.com> wrote=
:
>
> > > > > On Apr 12, 12:30=A0pm, Kurt Nicklas <kurtnick...@gmail.com> wrote=
:
>
> > > > > > On Apr 12, 7:19=A0am, trainguard <barry_worthing...@sky.com> wr=
ote:
shly. =A0The leap to
your rather
> > > > > > > > >>>>> disgusting mind. Just to remind our readers (if there=
are any!).....
>
> > > > > > > > >>>> Come now,"doctor" most here recall your disgusting ref=
erences to
> > > > > > > > >>>> "machine lubricant sex acts" and the equally gross "de=
li-sex".
>
> > > > > > > > >>> And as Richard crawls back under his stone, Spammy Shit=
ual references?
>
> > > > > > > How about you print them all off (though I doubt if you can f=
wn
> > > > > > sexual
> > > > > > preferences any reference to the "bum"(as you limeys put it) mu=
> learn something.
Oh, but I do, Huckleberry. Friends and family. Pity you can't do that
when you go abroad,
isn't it?
> > Poor little you.
>
> > > > Too bad I'm not going to Kaliningrad cause I could go
> > > > straight over the border into Poland from there, right?
>
> > > > <snickers>
>
> > > Well, yes and no. When I visited, two years ago, I travelled by train
> > > from Gdansk, via Braniewo/Mamanova. But I wasn't in Russia proper.
>
> > You were in Russia proper, Huckleberry.
>
> No I wasn't! I was in an enclave of Russia.
Yea, it was Russia and you had to present a visa for Russia.
You're actually pretty stupid for pursuing this, you know. You were
wrong
in your original claim but you can't admit it.
>
>
> > > To
> > > leave the enclave, I had to cross the border into Lithuania. (I chose
> > > the bus route along the Kurischer Nehring to Nida/Klaipeda.) You see,
> > > to visit Kaliningrad, as part of your intinerary, you would have to
> > > exit Russia!
>
> > So you're claiming you didn't need a Russian visa to enter the
> > Kaliningrad
> > oblast?
>
> No. Why would you think that? I was saying that to visit it as part of
> your proposed itinerary, you would have to leave Russia.
And yet here you are still. Remarkable!
> > > > -----------------------------
> > > > "Poland does not share a border with Russia either, since the
> > > > Kaliningrad Oblast is an enclave, and not part of mainland Russia."
> > > > ........ "Dr" Barry Worthington,5/12/11 (And would he say Alaska
> > > > is not part of the USA?)
>
> > > What border can you cross from Alaska to Russia? The railway tunnel
> > > across the Bering Strait is still only a proposal.
>
> > You are dense, aren't you? You claim that Kaliningrad is not part of
> > Russia
> > because it is an "enclave".
>
> Not part of mainland Russia, you idiot!
So? The word 'enclave' isn't part of your quote. Do I need
to remind you of your claim, Huckleberry?
> >Alaska is also an "enclave" so you must
> > believe
> > Alaska is not part of the US.
>
> It does not satisfy the geographical definition of a 'enclave' and
> does not share a land border with Russia!
It certainly IS an enclave as much as is Kaliningrad. But it's still
part of the US just as Kaliningrad is part of Russia.
>
>
> > I swear - I have to spoon-feed you *everything.
>
> That assumes that your information is correct. It isn't.
It is but the fact that it damages your fragile ego is more
important for you. That's why you're still here trying to make a silk
purse out of a sow's ear, Huckleberry.
> Now stop wasting my time!
Don't like my posts then run away again.
Go ahead. Do it.
> On Apr 12, 11:19=A0pm, Kurt Nicklas <kurtnick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 12, 6:11=A0pm, trainguard <barry_worthing...@sky.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Apr 12, 10:28=A0pm, Kurt Nicklas <kurtnick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Apr 12, 11:44=A0am, trainguard <barry_worthing...@sky.com> wrote=
:
>
> > > > > On Apr 12, 12:30=A0pm, Kurt Nicklas <kurtnick...@gmail.com> wrote=
:
>
> > > > > > On Apr 12, 7:19=A0am, trainguard <barry_worthing...@sky.com> wr=
ote:
>
> > > > > > > On Apr 11, 11:17=A0pm, lsrlts <dd...@gnail.invalid> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > On 4/11/2012 12:12 PM, trainguard wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > On Apr 11, 8:07 pm, lsrlts<dd...@gnail.invalid> =A0wrote:
> > > > > > > On Apr 11, 11:17=A0pm, lsrlts <dd...@gnail.invalid> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > On 4/11/2012 12:12 PM, trainguard wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > >> On 4/11/2012 11:52 AM, trainguard wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > >>> On Apr 11, 6:59 pm, lsrlts<dd...@gnail.invalid> =A0 =A0=
>
wrote:
> > > > > > > > >>>> On 4/11/2012 10:12 AM, trainguard wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> Actually, I simply wrote that you were acting childi=
> > > > > > > > >>>> On 4/11/2012 10:12 AM, trainguard wrote:
>
shly. =A0The leap to
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> degenerate sex was all yours.
>
> > > > > > > > >>>>> Well, the reference about insinuation was to you and =
>
your rather
> > > > > > > > >>>>> disgusting mind. Just to remind our readers (if there=
are any!).....
>
> > > > > > > > >>>> Come now,"doctor" most here recall your disgusting ref=
erences to
> > > > > > > > >>>> "machine lubricant sex acts" and the equally gross "de=
li-sex".
>
> > > > > > > > >>> And as Richard crawls back under his stone, Spammy Shit=
stain appears
> > > > > > > > >>> on cue! Draw your own conclusions....
>
> > > > > > > > >>> Dr. Barry Worthington
>
> > > > > > > > >> The conclusions regarding your repeatedly gross entreati=
> > > > > > > > >>> on cue! Draw your own conclusions....
>
> > > > > > > > >>> Dr. Barry Worthington
>
es here are
> > > > > > > > >> quite clear.
>
> > > > > > > > > "Oh Spammy, where you going to run to.....?"
>
> > > > > > > > > Dr. Barry Worthington
>
> > > > > > > > Oh "doctor" where will you ever go0 to avoid your crude sex=
> > > > > > > > >> quite clear.
>
> > > > > > > > > "Oh Spammy, where you going to run to.....?"
>
> > > > > > > > > Dr. Barry Worthington
>
ual references?
>
> > > > > > > How about you print them all off (though I doubt if you can f=
ind any),
>
> > > > > > Here's one of my all time favorites:
>
> > > > > > "My interest is the swinging sub-culture, as an extension of
> > > > > > the 'serious leisure' concept, and its creation of 'embodied sp=
>
> > > > > > Here's one of my all time favorites:
>
> > > > > > "My interest is the swinging sub-culture, as an extension of
ace'."
> > > > > > ............"Dr" Barry Worthington,6/7/07
>
> > > > > > > roll them up very tightly, and shove them up your arse as far=
> > > > > > ............"Dr" Barry Worthington,6/7/07
>
as they
> > > > > > > will go. That might plug the shit flow that we have to put up
> > > > > > > with......
>
> > > > > > Speaking of sexual references, I'd say that given your well-kno=
> > > > > > > will go. That might plug the shit flow that we have to put up
> > > > > > > with......
>
wn
> > > > > > sexual
> > > > > > preferences any reference to the "bum"(as you limeys put it) mu=
st
> > > > > > qualify.
>
> > > > > Actually, the comment is not sexual. It's about shit
>
> > > > Actually, given the context that it's in one of your posts
> > > > it *is* sexual.
>
> > > Everyone can see what the comment is about......shit! If shit really
> > > turns you on (I believe it's called coprophilia), we don't really wis=
> > > > > > qualify.
>
> > > > > Actually, the comment is not sexual. It's about shit
>
> > > > Actually, given the context that it's in one of your posts
> > > > it *is* sexual.
>
> > > Everyone can see what the comment is about......shit! If shit really
h
> > > to know.....
>
> > > > > , someting that
> > > > > you know all about,
>
> > > > And yet I didn't use the word - you did, Harry.
>
> > > Look Kurt, you arentr funny...............you are rather tedious and
> > > boring....
>
> > > > > as you produce it in large quantities.
>
> > > > And yet the word was in YOUR post, not mine.
>
> > > > ---
>
> > > > Hey, I'll be headed to Russia next week for 2 weeks, Huckleberry.
> > > > Moscow, Vladimir and 2 days in Nizhnyj Novgorod.
>
> > > And will you actually see anything while you are there?
>
> > See and understand far more than you would. I speak Russian, you know.
>
> Do you? Pity that you don't talk to the people you meet. You might
> > > to know.....
>
> > > > > , someting that
> > > > > you know all about,
>
> > > > And yet I didn't use the word - you did, Harry.
>
> > > Look Kurt, you arentr funny...............you are rather tedious and
> > > boring....
>
> > > > > as you produce it in large quantities.
>
> > > > And yet the word was in YOUR post, not mine.
>
> > > > ---
>
> > > > Hey, I'll be headed to Russia next week for 2 weeks, Huckleberry.
> > > > Moscow, Vladimir and 2 days in Nizhnyj Novgorod.
>
> > > And will you actually see anything while you are there?
>
> > See and understand far more than you would. I speak Russian, you know.
>
> learn something.
Oh, but I do, Huckleberry. Friends and family. Pity you can't do that
when you go abroad,
isn't it?
> > Poor little you.
>
> > > > Too bad I'm not going to Kaliningrad cause I could go
> > > > straight over the border into Poland from there, right?
>
> > > > <snickers>
>
> > > Well, yes and no. When I visited, two years ago, I travelled by train
> > > from Gdansk, via Braniewo/Mamanova. But I wasn't in Russia proper.
>
> > You were in Russia proper, Huckleberry.
>
Yea, it was Russia and you had to present a visa for Russia.
You're actually pretty stupid for pursuing this, you know. You were
wrong
in your original claim but you can't admit it.
>
>
> > > To
> > > leave the enclave, I had to cross the border into Lithuania. (I chose
> > > the bus route along the Kurischer Nehring to Nida/Klaipeda.) You see,
> > > to visit Kaliningrad, as part of your intinerary, you would have to
> > > exit Russia!
>
> > So you're claiming you didn't need a Russian visa to enter the
> > Kaliningrad
> > oblast?
>
> your proposed itinerary, you would have to leave Russia.
>
> > You're a rock, Huckleberry.
>
> And you are still a tosser!
> > You're a rock, Huckleberry.
>
And yet here you are still. Remarkable!
> > > > -----------------------------
> > > > "Poland does not share a border with Russia either, since the
> > > > Kaliningrad Oblast is an enclave, and not part of mainland Russia."
> > > > ........ "Dr" Barry Worthington,5/12/11 (And would he say Alaska
> > > > is not part of the USA?)
>
> > > What border can you cross from Alaska to Russia? The railway tunnel
> > > across the Bering Strait is still only a proposal.
>
> > You are dense, aren't you? You claim that Kaliningrad is not part of
> > Russia
> > because it is an "enclave".
>
So? The word 'enclave' isn't part of your quote. Do I need
to remind you of your claim, Huckleberry?
> >Alaska is also an "enclave" so you must
> > believe
> > Alaska is not part of the US.
>
> does not share a land border with Russia!
It certainly IS an enclave as much as is Kaliningrad. But it's still
part of the US just as Kaliningrad is part of Russia.
>
>
> > I swear - I have to spoon-feed you *everything.
>
It is but the fact that it damages your fragile ego is more
important for you. That's why you're still here trying to make a silk
purse out of a sow's ear, Huckleberry.
> Now stop wasting my time!
Don't like my posts then run away again.
Go ahead. Do it.
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
lsrlts
Apr 13, 2012, 11:50:09 AM4/13/12
to
trainguard
Apr 13, 2012, 2:40:11 PM4/13/12
to
On Apr 13, 4:13 pm, Yoorg...@Jurgis.net wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Apr 2012 23:00:58 -0700 (PDT), Kurt Nicklas
>
> Used to think chris mortonloon was a moron---and now your only friends
> around here make him look intellectual
Perhaps the fantasist 'circle jerk' at Steve's fabulous 'gated condo'
has broken up?
Dr. Barry Worthington
> On Thu, 12 Apr 2012 23:00:58 -0700 (PDT), Kurt Nicklas
>
> <kurtnick...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Apr 13, 1:03 am, lsrlts <dd...@gnail.invalid> wrote:
> >After so many years of this I think he'd starve here without my help.
>
> And here you are--with shitzcreek
> <kurtnick...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Apr 13, 1:03 am, lsrlts <dd...@gnail.invalid> wrote:
> >After so many years of this I think he'd starve here without my help.
>
>
> Used to think chris mortonloon was a moron---and now your only friends
> around here make him look intellectual
Perhaps the fantasist 'circle jerk' at Steve's fabulous 'gated condo'
has broken up?
Dr. Barry Worthington
lsrlts
Apr 13, 2012, 2:46:21 PM4/13/12
to
trainguard
Apr 13, 2012, 3:05:35 PM4/13/12
to
"Oh Spammy, where you going to run to?"
Dr. Barry Worthington
lsrlts
Apr 13, 2012, 3:18:23 PM4/13/12
to
And why are you so kinky?
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
lsrlts
Apr 13, 2012, 3:26:55 PM4/13/12
to
On 4/13/2012 12:23 PM, Yoor...@Jurgis.net wrote:
No, it was your threats to detonate it, iirc...
> On Fri, 13 Apr 2012 08:50:09 -0700, lsrlts<dd...@gnail.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>>> After so many years of this I think he'd starve here without my help.
>>
>>
>> And then there's the Mt. Rushmore fiasco!
>
> Better check who got the better of whom over Harris
> wrote:
>
>>> After so many years of this I think he'd starve here without my help.
>>
>>
>> And then there's the Mt. Rushmore fiasco!
>
No, it was your threats to detonate it, iirc...
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages