How to talk Republican
Rich Hutnik
Remember, to snarl the world "Liberal" in response to anything you
disagree with.
- Rich
Patriot Games
But you don't want to be stereotyped as one-dimensional.
So about half the time you snarl the word "Liberal" and the other half
the time you SPIT IT OUT, like "librl!"
By the way, this worked so well that the Liberals are SOOO humiliated
and frightened that they stopped calling themselves Liberals!
Bwahahahahahahahhaha!!!
Rich Hutnik
> On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 08:55:42 -0700 (PDT), Rich Hutnik
>
> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXk4P12p1tU&feature=related
> >Remember, to snarl the world "Liberal" in response to anything you
> >disagree with.
>
> But you don't want to be stereotyped as one-dimensional.
>
> So about half the time you snarl the word "Liberal" and the other half
> the time you SPIT IT OUT, like "librl!"
>
> By the way, this worked so well that the Liberals are SOOO humiliated
> and frightened that they stopped calling themselves Liberals!
>
> Bwahahahahahahahhaha!!!
I am actually a centrist-libertarian, with paleo-conservative leanings
(in other words the opposite of a Neocon). What is in that video,
however, fits you exactly.
- Rich
geno4321
"Patriot Games" <Pat...@America.Com> wrote in message
news:0bdi541dp1ascuipm...@4ax.com...
Patriot Games
In other words you're a traditional DEMOCRAT who doesn't like paying
high taxes...
So-called "neocons" and the GOP screwed themselves when we let your
sleazy weasely kind in. Just because you don't like high taxes
doesn't make you GOP material.
This is how the GOP ended up with LIBERALS like McCain, Guillani, etc.
The Democrats won't have because you're not Left enough for them and
the GOP doesn't want you because you're really a LIBERAL.
Maybe you should start your own party?
The party symbol could be a pair of soiled panties.
The party theme song could be the sound of thumb-sucking.
Patriot Games
wrote:
You call yourselves anything that sounds manly because sounding manly
is as close to manliness as you'll ever get....
You're really just thumb-suckers and bedwetters hiding behind Liberal
Democrats.
Rich Hutnik
> On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 13:33:06 -0700 (PDT), Rich Hutnik
> >I am actually a centrist-libertarian, with paleo-conservative leanings
> >(in other words the opposite of a Neocon).
>
> In other words you're a traditional DEMOCRAT who doesn't like paying
> high taxes...
No, I am in individual who has no faith in government to accomplish
anything. Therefore, I was smaller government. I consider larger
government a symptom of greater problems going on actually, which is a
bit different than believing government size alone is the problem.
Actually, not wanting to pay higher taxes is a GOP thing. Outside of
the "war on terror", reducing taxes is the only think they bring up.
Well, it has been reduced to "not raising taxes" now, because the of
the runaway government spending. And on that note, I believe in
balanced budgets, without excuses made by it being a war, and not a
pseudo-war (like on poverty and drugs, aka "terror" this time).
> So-called "neocons" and the GOP screwed themselves when we let your
> sleazy weasely kind in. Just because you don't like high taxes
> doesn't make you GOP material.
>
> This is how the GOP ended up with LIBERALS like McCain, Guillani, etc.
Wow, we agree to something there.
> The Democrats won't have because you're not Left enough for them and
> the GOP doesn't want you because you're really a LIBERAL.
>
> Maybe you should start your own party?
>
> The party symbol could be a pair of soiled panties.
>
> The party theme song could be the sound of thumb-sucking.
It is this kind of talk, as I pointed to in the initial post, that
does NOTHING to end up advancing political discourse. You seriously
need a new hobby, like going duck hunting with Huckabee, shooting all
ducks that won't support him. I know it is a next to impossible task,
particularly with you, who believes the Ann Coulter school of
political discourse is the only thing to understand. By making
liberal a kryptonite term, and not just one that represents a
different view you can argue is wrong, you end up killing political
discussion. Of course, if you want to be a lemming partisan foot
soldier, that is great. But for the state of America, and the
political landscape, it isn't.
- Rich
Patriot Games
<richar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Jun 19, 10:54 am, Patriot Games <Patr...@America.Com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 13:33:06 -0700 (PDT), Rich Hutnik
>> >I am actually a centrist-libertarian, with paleo-conservative leanings
>> >(in other words the opposite of a Neocon).
>> In other words you're a traditional DEMOCRAT who doesn't like paying
>> high taxes...
>No, I am in individual who has no faith in government to accomplish
>anything. Therefore, I was smaller government. I consider larger
>government a symptom of greater problems going on actually, which is a
>bit different than believing government size alone is the problem.
Smaller gov't is pretty much always better.
>Actually, not wanting to pay higher taxes is a GOP thing. Outside of
>the "war on terror", reducing taxes is the only think they bring up.
>Well, it has been reduced to "not raising taxes" now, because the of
>the runaway government spending. And on that note, I believe in
>balanced budgets, without excuses made by it being a war, and not a
>pseudo-war (like on poverty and drugs, aka "terror" this time).
Smaller Federal gov't leads to lower Federal taxes.
Lower Federal taxes leads to higher state taxes.
Higher state taxes leads to citizens voting with their feet.
If citizens really DID vote with their feet AND Feds NEVER sent a dime
to States and Cities we would see the kind of CHANGE we actually need.
>> So-called "neocons" and the GOP screwed themselves when we let your
>> sleazy weasely kind in. Just because you don't like high taxes
>> doesn't make you GOP material.
>> This is how the GOP ended up with LIBERALS like McCain, Guillani, etc.
>Wow, we agree to something there.
McCain may or may not have been an actual Independent. But today he
is essentially a classic Democrat. Guillani is an ADMITTED Democrat.
He flat stated he switched parties ONLY because of high taxes.
>> The Democrats won't have because you're not Left enough for them and
>> the GOP doesn't want you because you're really a LIBERAL.
>> Maybe you should start your own party?
>> The party symbol could be a pair of soiled panties.
>> The party theme song could be the sound of thumb-sucking.
>It is this kind of talk, as I pointed to in the initial post, that
>does NOTHING to end up advancing political discourse. You seriously
>need a new hobby, like going duck hunting with Huckabee, shooting all
>ducks that won't support him. I know it is a next to impossible task,
>particularly with you, who believes the Ann Coulter school of
>political discourse is the only thing to understand.
I have NO faith in the notion of "advancing political discourse."
Maybe if I was talking to children who might learn but adults are
beyond that. I've NEVER seen ANYONE change their political opinions
from Liberal to Conservative. Of course, this is not hard to figure
out. To be Conservative one must be responsible, self-responsible.
And once a Liberal gets a taste of being taken care of they
immediately support the idea of taxing others so they can be taken
care of....
>By making
>liberal a kryptonite term, and not just one that represents a
>different view you can argue is wrong, you end up killing political
>discussion.
Yep, that's pretty much true.
>Of course, if you want to be a lemming partisan foot
>soldier, that is great. But for the state of America, and the
>political landscape, it isn't.
The problem with political discussion is it usually ends up requiring
a compromise. The problem with compromise is it allows someone who
LOST to lose less than they should have and forces the side who WON to
not win everything they are entitled to.
The "state of America" is truly pathetic. Discussion isn't going to
fix it. As the Baby Boomer generation dies off over the next 20-25
years the minority groups that currently made Obama the Democrat
Nominee for President of the United States will become the dominate
groups in America. This is inevitable. And with them we get complete
Socialism, and all the other wonderful stuff associated with anarchy.
If you think discussion can fix that then you have a lot more faith
than you let on.... ;)
Rich Hutnik
> The problem with political discussion is it usually ends up requiring
> a compromise. The problem with compromise is it allows someone who
> LOST to lose less than they should have and forces the side who WON to
> not win everything they are entitled to.
>
> The "state of America" is truly pathetic. Discussion isn't going to
> fix it. As the Baby Boomer generation dies off over the next 20-25
> years the minority groups that currently made Obama the Democrat
> Nominee for President of the United States will become the dominate
> groups in America. This is inevitable. And with them we get complete
> Socialism, and all the other wonderful stuff associated with anarchy.
>
> If you think discussion can fix that then you have a lot more faith
> than you let on.... ;)
I am getting an increasing feeling that usenet is a large waste of
time. As a displaced IT worker, I have time on my hands (thank you
outsourcing), so I have time. You think you go and get a Masters
degree in computers it would account for something. Try a large waste
of time, that is what it is.
What I do hope, even if there isn't answers, at least the discussion
can go above namecalling and insulting, to a place where facts and
consequences of political discussion come about. If you attack,
attack with facts. It is this type of discourse that had myself shift
from moderate early to more libertarian and paleo-conservative. I
found out my actually issues with President Bush were primarily from a
libertarian and paleo-conservative side of things. Reading Hayek and
Buchanan enabled this. I do know that screaming "liberal = evil"
didn't. Neither does "But Clinton...". So, as can be seen here,
things aren't as simple as they can be made out to be on here. No, I
don't come from a "less taxes" background, but more "smaller
government" and fiscal sanity. The wreckless government spending is
wrecking the dollar. And GOP showed it can spend as much as a drunken
sailor as the Democrats (Bridge to Nowhere), but they fail to balance
the budget.
Anyhow, I may end up dropping off here soon. I am looking to get a
non-profit formed, and my being excessively political on here doesn't
account on here.
- Rich
Patriot Games
<richar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Jun 19, 6:17 pm, Patriot Games <Patr...@America.Com> wrote:
>> The problem with political discussion is it usually ends up requiring
>> a compromise. The problem with compromise is it allows someone who
>> LOST to lose less than they should have and forces the side who WON to
>> not win everything they are entitled to.
>> The "state of America" is truly pathetic. Discussion isn't going to
>> fix it. As the Baby Boomer generation dies off over the next 20-25
>> years the minority groups that currently made Obama the Democrat
>> Nominee for President of the United States will become the dominate
>> groups in America. This is inevitable. And with them we get complete
>> Socialism, and all the other wonderful stuff associated with anarchy.
>> If you think discussion can fix that then you have a lot more faith
>> than you let on.... ;)
>I am getting an increasing feeling that usenet is a large waste of
>time.
It IS a waste of time, I don't think anybody can argue that. How big
a timewaster it is depends on the person...
>As a displaced IT worker, I have time on my hands (thank you
>outsourcing), so I have time. You think you go and get a Masters
>degree in computers it would account for something. Try a large waste
>of time, that is what it is.
Colleges and universities are in the business of making money.
IT has almost gone full circle. Years ago I needed to automate
several businesses of mine. This was before PCs existed. So I found
an allegedly reputable consulting group. Nearly a year and $250,000
later I had a specially modified room full of electronic shit that
nobody could figure out, that rarely worked for more than a week
without repair.
So I found an allegedly reputable consulting group. Nearly another
year and nearly $500,000 later I had an even bigger specially modified
room full of even bigger electronic shit that needed its own staff and
still nobody could figure it out, and that rarely worked for more than
a couple of weeks without repair.
Then I wised up. Somebody was making lots of money and it wasn't me.
I went back to the first allegedly reputable consulting group and
BOUGHT THAT COMPANY. Then I FIRED half the staff, then I HIRED half
the staff from the other allegedly reputable consulting group.
Over the next 15 years we went from:
1) Nothing existed. "Application software" almost didn't exist at all
and the term "application software" had not yet been coined. PCs
didn't exist and weren't even being discussed. Any two computers
talking with each other was considered a bad joke. 300 baud modems
were not yet available.
To: Retards can buy a massive computer at Wal-Mart for $300, learn
anything they want from the Bald Video Professor, and buy and
customize their own software for virtually any business they can
imagine.
At one time I had a machine the size of a fucking washing machine. It
was a disk drive. It stored 10 megabytes. I now have this little
thing the size of a credit card that stores 39,900% more stuff (none
of which is actually useful).
I never sold that company but I eventually absorbed and disbanded it.
When you can buy a new toaster at Wal-Mart for $8 you don't fix the
one you have. In fact, when my toaster gets full of crumbs I toss it.
That's IT. IT has shrunk to almost nothing.
What should have been obvious to everybody was how Microsoft Vista was
received. It was largely ignored. And mainly because most consumers
had no issues with what they had. Demand has been 99% satisfied, that
means Supply (of IT stuff and IT people) has to shrink 99%....
>What I do hope, even if there isn't answers, at least the discussion
>can go above namecalling and insulting, to a place where facts and
>consequences of political discussion come about.
Be patient... Not everybody here is a fool.
>The wreckless government spending is
>wrecking the dollar. And GOP showed it can spend as much as a drunken
>sailor as the Democrats (Bridge to Nowhere), but they fail to balance
>the budget.
They had good intentions then 9/11 happenned. Once you open the gates
to spend borrowed money its hard to close them.
Rich Hutnik
> IT has almost gone full circle.
Went full circle and is now in India for a large degree.
> Over the next 15 years we went from:
>
> 1) Nothing existed. "Application software" almost didn't exist at all
> and the term "application software" had not yet been coined. PCs
> didn't exist and weren't even being discussed. Any two computers
> talking with each other was considered a bad joke. 300 baud modems
> were not yet available.
Ahh good old 300 baud.
> That's IT. IT has shrunk to almost nothing.
IT is at a place where people should be trained like plumbers and the
stuff be taken out of colleges.
> What should have been obvious to everybody was how Microsoft Vista was
> received. It was largely ignored. And mainly because most consumers
> had no issues with what they had. Demand has been 99% satisfied, that
> means Supply (of IT stuff and IT people) has to shrink 99%....
In a given niche I can agree. IT has hit the web and so on.
> >What I do hope, even if there isn't answers, at least the discussion
> >can go above namecalling and insulting, to a place where facts and
> >consequences of political discussion come about.
>
> Be patient... Not everybody here is a fool.
I am best to wrap up things I think. It is hitting a place of
diminishing returns. Not even sure what I need to be patient for.
There is a time when you ask people to judge President Bush (Dubya) by
consistent merits, and get consistency, but that is pointless here.
> >The wreckless government spending is
> >wrecking the dollar. And GOP showed it can spend as much as a drunken
> >sailor as the Democrats (Bridge to Nowhere), but they fail to balance
> >the budget.
>
> They had good intentions then 9/11 happenned. Once you open the gates
> to spend borrowed money its hard to close them.
The problem with the "Bridge to Nowherre" is that it is post 9/11.
The problem with the GOP is that it has been lulled into a false sense
of security over deficits. They don't believe they matter more. The
moment you hear the Democrats are the ones discussing deficits, you
have lost the core.
Anyhow, I may drop here soon (do other things besides post here). So,
just consider this a wrap up message. I am not even going to get into
that religious discussion with you in another thread. I do say
judgment is in the Bible for nations, and leave it at that (that could
also be America). You can disagree, and I will call it that. I feel
it is likely to end the discussion with this thread, because at least
it is a civil way to have things end here. A far cry from the usual
screaming on here.
I will say, when I am looking at the chance of being involved with the
promotion of a chess tournament that may have over 10,000 players at
it, that is a bit more important screaming about Bush, the congress or
whatever.
- Rich