What's "Liberal" and "Liberalism"?

[Electrophil]

Originally Posted by TheRightWingSVX

Just give it a listen tonight, see what ya think. If you don't like then thats ok, but give it at least one time before you go saying that. He is Independent, and if you want to hear someone get mad at Bush then listen tonight.

If he gets mad at Bush, I'll listen. I'll listen to anyone that's mad at Bush.

[TheRightWingSVX]

I knew you would like that It is tough sometimes for a Republican like me to listen to him because of how critical he is of Bush and the Republicans, but he is just telling it how it is. I think you really will enjoy it because you do sound more moderate than liberal and I think you will find you aggree with most of what he says.

Originally Posted by Tigershark

Here's one for the other side:

Darn.... I'm not eligible... again... I always miss out on those free handouts no matter what country I'm in.... must be the blue eyes and blond hair, or just maybe always being able to figure out some kind of productive work to do, even if it is just educating folks on ... err... grammar! yeah... that's it....

Originally Posted by TheRightWingSVX

I knew you would like that It is tough sometimes for a Republican like me to listen to him because of how critical he is of Bush and the Republicans, but he is just telling it how it is. I think you really will enjoy it because you do sound more moderate than liberal and I think you will find you aggree with most of what he says.

Gosh, you have almost convinced me to give him another chance. I got turned off by his crude remarks quite a while ago, and haven't paid much attention to him these last few years.

I'll pass tonight, though... getting sleepy and it's 1:20 am already. Time for this ole gal to head for some snoozing soon. Just one more cup of tea, perhaps a few more posts, and then I'll be off.

/rant

OK.... I'm starting to get a little fed up here.

I went and took a look at that website: www.michaelsavage.com and found a collection of various article links that took me to other news web sites. That, plus ads for his books and merchandise seems to be the sum total of what's there. The guy has a radio show and doesn't bother to have a single clip of his show, nor does he link to any internet broadcast! I give it an "F"

On Savage's web site, I actually read the book advertisement for "Savage Nation". It states there "He is the founder and director of the Paul Revere Society...". Oh, really? Ok... let's go to http://www.paulreveresociety.com/ and see what's there. Huh? Nothing. A totally blank web page. Well, they sure got lots to say, eh? But wait... I can go to http://www.paulreveresociety.com/Merchandise.html and actually buy either a one-year $40 or two-year $70 gift sponsorship to the Paul Revere Society. At least I'm told that all contributions and donations are tax deductible. Wow! Isn't that nice.... Another "F" grade from me.

I'm still looking for any original content from Savage. So I him and get a whole pile of garbage statements like... naw... forget it. I started listing a few, and my list got way too long far too quickly so I've deleted them. Suffice to say that he believes the vote should be taken away from anybody who doesn't agree with him, and all women. That's enough to put me off right there. Haven't found a single statement that I CAN agree with. Geez... I've found myself nodding in agreement with Buchanan and Limbaugh a few times over the years, but with Savage? Nope, nada. Grade "F"

I suppose hatemongering is ok if you're only in it for the money. Free speech and all that. But don't bother saying you're compassionate when your own words contradict you on a regular basis. He's no more compassionate than a butcher grinding beef. And unfortunately that's all he produces - ground pap for the masses with little evidence of any skill or intellect.

He's a good salesman. I'll give him that much credit.


/end rant

[TheRightWingSVX]

Interesting...Well this is why you have not seen me post much on this forum. I have got a lot of useful info for my car, but threads like this are just uneducated squabbles that aren't grounded in anything resembling truth. I have better things to do with my time, lol. To think I though that you guys where more moderate than liberal, HA! I almost fooled myself.

Originally Posted by TheRightWingSVX

Interesting...Well this is why you have not seen me post much on this forum. I have got a lot of useful info for my car, but threads like this are just uneducated squabbles that aren't grounded in anything resembling truth. I have better things to do with my time, lol. To think I though that you guys where more moderate than liberal, HA! I almost fooled myself.

Ummm.... say again? What "uneducated squabble" are you referring to? Care to point out any errors and back them up with some facts or links? If something I've written isn't "grounded in anything resembling truth" then by all means correct it!

It is very easy to say or write "You're wrong and I'm right". But where's the rest of the details? Why do you think this way and not that way? That is what makes a discussion interesting.

I backed up my view... how about a little backup on yours?

Hey.... I'm agreeing with Pat Buchanan again!

Read his article in "Human Events" and see what you think


The Bush-Malaise
by Patrick J. Buchanan
Posted Apr 04, 2006

Again the line of "Hamlet" comes to mind: "When sorrows come, they come not single spies, but in battalions."

Three months after elections for a parliament that was to give Iraq a democratic government of national unity, the Shia cannot get their act together. Pressure from the U.S. ambassador to get off the dime produced denunciations of U.S. interference. That brought British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw and Condi Rice to Baghdad to instruct the Iraqis that Allied patience is wearing thin.

But what can the Americans and British do if the Iraqis dither and squabble? To threaten a pullout of troops hardly seems credible. That would risk a collapse of politics and the escalation of sectarian savagery into civil war, turning strategic blunder into a geostrategic debacle.

Bush and the neocons hit the tar baby when they took the Cakewalk Road. The neocons are now doing their Houdini thing. The invasion we supported was a triumph, they say, but we bear no responsibility for the foul-ups that followed. Rumsfeld did that. Now the neocons are moving on to their new class project, U.S. airstrikes on Iran.

While U.S. casualties have fallen, sectarian atrocities continue. No one seems to have an idea how we can extricate ourselves without risking a worse disaster. As for "winning," not even John McCain is still calling for more troops.


more