Journalists dole out cash to politicians (quietly)

[Mass_SkinsFan]

I hear you on the Republicans vs Conservatives view. However, at this point Democrats actually have more in common with Conservatives then Republicans do.

Horsecrap!!! The party interested in Gun Control, Surrender, Illegal Immigration and Social Welfare has absolutely NOTHING in common with Conservatism (at least as I define the term). The Reublicans are only marginally better, scoring maybe a 15-20 out of 100 on my Conservatism scale compared to the 0-5 the Democrats score.

[Henry]

Seriously guys, has anyone here NOT heard MSF's rantings about 100 times before? Is there anything about his opinions we haven't explored and questioned dozens of times?

The guy has his own unique, angry, disturbing view of the world. We know this. It's WELL covered territory. Could we talk about the topic of the thread for a change?

[Bang]

You're right...because we know they all became Democrats in the last 3 or 4 years. Before that they were totally neutral. Except when they voted 90% for Bill Clinton. And Michael Dukakis. And Walter Mondale.

Hey, great examples there.

Dukakis was soundly defeated and Mondale suffered the biggest loss in the HISTORY of presidential elections.

In fact, since Mondale got trounced 23 years ago there have been three Republican presidents and one Democrat. Furthermore, in the last 40 years, Republican presidents have served 7 terms of office and Democrats have served 3.

Oh man, that bias sure is workin' some powerful overtime! Let me know when it actually swings people's votes and opinions, OK?

You may as well stand in a tornado and complain that a fart stinks for all the sense that post made.

~Bang

[alexey]

Horsecrap!!! The party interested in Gun Control, Surrender, Illegal Immigration and Social Welfare has absolutely NOTHING in common with Conservatism (at least as I define the term). The Reublicans are only marginally better, scoring maybe a 15-20 out of 100 on my Conservatism scale compared to the 0-5 the Democrats score.

Yes it all works out if Democrats (as you define the term) and Republicans (as you define the term) have the relationship you describe with Conservatism (as you define the term).

Is Brian Schweitzer a Democrat?

[SUSkinsFan]

Liberals are exactly the same in that they're WRONG. There are a whole lot of different belief systems and shades of grey to the Democrat agenda, but that doesn't make any of them correct. Some of them may be less dramatically WRONG than others, but they're all still WRONG. Hopefully that will help you make see the distinction I'm trying to explain.

I don't debate things. Largely because I'm not going to waste my time trying to change anybody's mind and mine is never going to get changed on anything.

The Republican Party's compass points to Hell just as readily as the Democrat's does. It's CONSERVATISM, not Republicanism that is the great moral compass of society that can do no wrong. Just as LIBERALISM is the shortest path to hell. Unfortunately, like many others you've wrongly made a connection between the Republican Party and Conservative that isn't there. At least is hasn't been in most of my lifetime.

So tell me, what makes every liberal belief so wrong. Every single ideology has good points and bad points. What you see as good about conservatism, I see as bad, and vice-versa for you and liberalism. Both ideologies have their benefits and drawbacks. No one belief is perfect and I'm willing to admit that.

Also, you can't say that all people that disagree with you are wrong. I don't like mushrooms but I don't say people shouldn't eat them, just like I don't say people shouldn't be conservative.

[chomerics]

Yes he is wasting his time debating ANYTHING with me. I've been over that in the past. Oh, and most mentally challenged children I've met in my life have a better handle on the differences between Right and Wrong than most liberals I've ever met, so I'll take the comment as a compliment.

And I have never seen anyone in such dire need of a blow job in my life. . .(yes taken from a movie, but fitting)

Maybe if you were getting some Mass, you would not have all of your sexual frustration come out as hate. . .but hey, why point out the obvious?

[Mass_SkinsFan]

Is Brian Schweitzer a Democrat?

I had to look him up, since I'd never heard of him before. He's a registered Democrat and I'd consider him a Liberal by the small amount I've read about him. Though it does sound like he could have run as a Republican just as easily with policies.

[AJ_Skins]

Hey, great examples there.

Dukakis was soundly defeated and Mondale suffered the biggest loss in the HISTORY of presidential elections.

In fact, since Mondale got trounced 23 years ago there have been three Republican presidents and one Democrat. Furthermore, in the last 40 years, Republican presidents have served 7 terms of office and Democrats have served 3.

Oh man, that bias sure is workin' some powerful overtime! Let me know when it actually swings people's votes and opinions, OK?

You may as well stand in a tornado and complain that a fart stinks for all the sense that post made.

~Bang

You don't get to change your point retroactively. You didn't say the media wasn't influencing people, you said they had all changed and become Democrats in the last few years because Bush is the devil. They are and have been Democrats, in these proportions, for a long time.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

So tell me, what makes every liberal belief so wrong. Every single ideology has good points and bad points. What you see as good about conservatism, I see as bad, and vice-versa for you and liberalism. Both ideologies have their benefits and drawbacks. No one belief is perfect and I'm willing to admit that.

The entire concept behind Liberalism is what poisons the beliefs that stem from it, so far as I'm concerned. I would suggest that maybe you're really not as completely invested in your belief system as you think if you're willing to change it, or admit it isn't 100% correct.

Also, you can't say that all people that disagree with you are wrong. I don't like mushrooms but I don't say people shouldn't eat them, just like I don't say people shouldn't be conservative.

I would suggest the issue is your inability or unwillingness to put your foot down and say something along the lines of "Mushrooms are BAD." and follow through with that. I don't say people can't disagree with me. I'm just not going to pat them on the back and tell them they're Right or Good for disagreeing with me. I'm also going to attempt to minimize my involvement with them.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

And I have never seen anyone in such dire need of a blow job in my life. . .(yes taken from a movie, but fitting)

You've also never seen anyone less likely to ever get one (as you already know.), chom. We've discussed that previously.

Maybe if you were getting some Mass, you would not have all of your sexual frustration come out as hate. . .but hey, why point out the obvious?

The feelings existed long before puberty ever set in, so I don't think that would be any "help" in reducing the hatred, anger, disgust, and frustration that makes up the vast majority of my life.

[Bang]

You don't get to change your point retroactively. You didn't say the media wasn't influencing people, you said they had all changed and become Democrats in the last few years because Bush is the devil. They are and have been Democrats, in these proportions, for a long time.

Actually, i never said anyone had changed sides. And I'm also smart enough to know that I must choose words carefully around here because there is always someone waiting to twist them up. Like this latest post of yours.

I simply asked why you guys are so damn shocked and outraged that people are sick of this 'leadership' we've enjoyed over the last few years.

I asked why, after seeing the republican party ignore and re-interpret the Constitution to suit their desires you guys are amazed that there is a bias against you. You cry "FOUL" while ignoring all of the cries of FOUL that have been voiced over the last several years. In fact, the republican party has gone on a crusade over the last 6 yrs to label anyone who doesn't agree with them and support them as "Un-American".

You poor victim.

Now, how about to my question?

As you say, this bias has existed for years and years and years. And yet when it comes to the presidency and the policies this nation has followed during the majority of my lifetime, the Republicans have dominated.

Why is that?

Is it perhaps because all of this whining about bias doesn't hold water because it hasn't influenced anything?

You wear blinders. You toe the line. You parrot the points and you wave your sword in the name of republican righteousness at anyone who dares question their almighty wisdom.

Whoopie.

~Bang

[Larry]

What I'm saying is that at least the Republicans are smart enough to say what they know people want to hear on the campaign trail. Whereas the Democrats seem to constantly run on the "America SUCKS and always has. Let's become China" campaign concept.

When you come up with the post where I've advocated doing either of those things, I've got a $1000 money order I'll over-night to you. Get some level of clue before you put words in people's mouths.

[SUSkinsFan]

The entire concept behind Liberalism is what poisons the beliefs that stem from it, so far as I'm concerned. I would suggest that maybe you're really not as completely invested in your belief system as you think if you're willing to change it, or admit it isn't 100% correct.

I would suggest the issue is your inability or unwillingness to put your foot down and say something along the lines of "Mushrooms are BAD." and follow through with that. I don't say people can't disagree with me. I'm just not going to pat them on the back and tell them they're Right or Good for disagreeing with me. I'm also going to attempt to minimize my involvement with them.

Just because something isn't right for me doesn't mean it isn't right for someone else. I do think Mushrooms are bad, but am I going to go around condemning all mushroom eaters? No.

Like I said before, no belief system is 100% correct, there are benefits to both systems, but I think there are more benefits to liberalism. I'm not going to be unyielding and say that every single aspect of liberalism is right, just like every single aspect of conservatism isn't right.

And being able to admit that is a good thing. It means I am willing to compromise and see both sides of an issue, you aren't. There is nothing wrong with compromising and admitting that you aren't right all the time.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

Just because something isn't right for me doesn't mean it isn't right for someone else. I do think Mushrooms are bad, but am I going to go around condemning all mushroom eaters? No.

In the case of mushrooms you're probably right. However there are a very large number of things (and they tend to be the most important things out there) like politics and philosophy where the same arguement would be absolutely 100% WRONG.

Like I said before, no belief system is 100% correct, there are benefits to both systems, but I think there are more benefits to liberalism. I'm not going to be unyielding and say that every single aspect of liberalism is right, just like every single aspect of conservatism isn't right.

We'll have to disagree then. I do not find any redeeming value to any part of Liberalism. I never will.

And being able to admit that is a good thing. It means I am willing to compromise and see both sides of an issue, you aren't. There is nothing wrong with compromising and admitting that you aren't right all the time.

Again, we'll have to diagree. To me the willingness to compromise tells me an individual never really believed in the position they originally held to begin with.

[Bang]

To me the willingness to compromise tells me an individual never really believed in the position they originally held to begin with.

I know a lot of folks can't stand MSF, but this statement right here tells you all you need to know to get a little respect for where he's coming from.

You may not agree with the guy, you may vehemently disagree in fact, but he damn sure believes what he says and isn't going to budge an inch in his conviction.

I watch these discussions and I see people get all bent, yell at him, attempt to compromise with him, cajole him, insult him, and he never changes a single inch. Ever.

Arguing with him is simply futile because what he believes is inherently part of him, and I'd wager it's not influenced by ANY outside source at all.

You've got to respect absolutes when they're legit.

just my :2cents:

~Bang

[DCsportsfan53]

I know a lot of folks can't stand MSF, but this statement right here tells you all you need to know to get a little respect for where he's coming from.

You may not agree with the guy, you may vehemently disagree in fact, but he damn sure believes what he says and isn't going to budge an inch in his conviction.

I watch these discussions and I see people get all bent, yell at him, attempt to compromise with him, cajole him, insult him, and he never changes a single inch. Ever.

Arguing with him is simply futile because what he believes is inherently part of him, and I'd wager it's not influenced by ANY outside source at all.

You've got to respect absolutes when they're legit.

just my :2cents:

~Bang

Reminds me of the man in office right now. I don't know bang, to me that just says he's not willing to deal in reality. Much like the man that mindset reminds me of. :2cents:

[AJ_Skins]

Actually, i never said anyone had changed sides. And I'm also smart enough to know that I must choose words carefully around here because there is always someone waiting to twist them up. Like this latest post of yours.

I simply asked why you guys are so damn shocked and outraged that people are sick of this 'leadership' we've enjoyed over the last few years.

I asked why, after seeing the republican party ignore and re-interpret the Constitution to suit their desires you guys are amazed that there is a bias against you. You cry "FOUL" while ignoring all of the cries of FOUL that have been voiced over the last several years. In fact, the republican party has gone on a crusade over the last 6 yrs to label anyone who doesn't agree with them and support them as "Un-American".

You poor victim.

Now, how about to my question?

As you say, this bias has existed for years and years and years. And yet when it comes to the presidency and the policies this nation has followed during the majority of my lifetime, the Republicans have dominated.

Why is that?

Is it perhaps because all of this whining about bias doesn't hold water because it hasn't influenced anything?

You wear blinders. You toe the line. You parrot the points and you wave your sword in the name of republican righteousness at anyone who dares question their almighty wisdom.

Whoopie.

~Bang

I think if you go back and look at your post, you'll see that you did make that claim.

Nevertheless, for what it's worth, I'm not so much in favor of Republicans as I am opposed to the left. In particular, rich, white liberals.

I also believe in free speech, and I have a problem propaganda and brainwashing. Sorry if I voice it.

[chomerics]

I'm not so much in favor of Republicans as I am opposed to the left. In particular, rich, white liberals.

:doh:

I also believe in free speech, and I have a problem propaganda and brainwashing. Sorry if I voice it.

yes, unfortunately AJ, you do voice it. . .the ironic thing is that you have a problem with yourself and don't realize it

[PeterMP]

Mass quotes

He didn't advocate it. At best, he insinutated that the Democrats advocate it.

[alexey]

I know a lot of folks can't stand MSF, but this statement right here tells you all you need to know to get a little respect for where he's coming from.

You may not agree with the guy, you may vehemently disagree in fact, but he damn sure believes what he says and isn't going to budge an inch in his conviction.

I watch these discussions and I see people get all bent, yell at him, attempt to compromise with him, cajole him, insult him, and he never changes a single inch. Ever.

Arguing with him is simply futile because what he believes is inherently part of him, and I'd wager it's not influenced by ANY outside source at all.

You've got to respect absolutes when they're legit.

just my :2cents:

~Bang

His position is crafted specifically to operate in absolutes and to avoid meaningful discourse. It is very consistent in terms of underlying emotions. Emotion is the force driving towards absolutes here. One has to be very careful when dealing with absolutes. Emotions tend to find comfort in absolutes. The mind likes to hijack absolutes.

An absolute that parades very simple human biases, such as seing "them" as a homogeneous group, does not suggest the same backbone as an absolute that displays careful thinking and consideration, such as "We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal"

Having said that I do enjoy discussing things with MSF, and I do think his position is usually consistent and refreshing.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

Reminds me of the man in office right now. I don't know bang, to me that just says he's not willing to deal in reality. Much like the man that mindset reminds me of. :2cents:

To be honest, this is really just a re-phrasing of the compromise arguement, DC. I generally hear this point from people and in regards to people who don't have the intestinal fortitude to carry through on what they claim be believe. Our current President IS a good example of that, but I have a better one....

In the fall of 1990 I worked for the campaign of Independent Gubenatorial Candidate Lowell Weicker in Connecticut. He ran on basically a single issue, his opposition to the potential for a state income tax in Connecticut. He got elected by a decent majority. About 2 months later he came out with the "Well, now that I'm here and I've look at the REALITY of the FACTS of the situation, we are going to have to implement this income tax plan, despite what I said during the campaign." It would seem that he'd lost the guts to do the cutting and reworking he'd talked about in the campaign because implementing the tax was easier. That tells me he never really intended to do the hard things necessary to avoid implementing the tax, therefore he never really believed his pledge to begin with in my mind.

[DCsportsfan53]

To be honest, this is really just a re-phrasing of the compromise arguement, DC. I generally hear this point from people and in regards to people who don't have the intestinal fortitude to carry through on what they claim be believe. Our current President IS a good example of that, but I have a better one....

In the fall of 1990 I worked for the campaign of Independent Gubenatorial Candidate Lowell Weicker in Connecticut. He ran on basically a single issue, his opposition to the potential for a state income tax in Connecticut. He got elected by a decent majority. About 2 months later he came out with the "Well, now that I'm here and I've look at the REALITY of the FACTS of the situation, we are going to have to implement this income tax plan, despite what I said during the campaign." It would seem that he'd lost the guts to do the cutting and reworking he'd talked about in the campaign because implementing the tax was easier. That tells me he never really intended to do the hard things necessary to avoid implementing the tax, therefore he never really believed his pledge to begin with in my mind.

I would agree with you on the example you gave, that's just dishonesty. It's just that at some point, sticking to your guns no matter what, no matter the new evidence or considerations, can be foolish, imo. Humans continue to learn and grow throughout their lives. It seems to me that if you're never willing to question or reconsider opinions you're robbing yourself of that growth potential.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

I would agree with you on the example you gave, that's just dishonesty.

What REALLY pissed me off is that I looked him in the eyes at one of the campaign events and asked him personally if he was really, truly committed to do whatever was necessary to avoid installing the new income tax and his response really made me believe that he was committed to it.

It's just that at some point, sticking to your guns no matter what, no matter the new evidence or considerations, can be foolish, imo. Humans continue to learn and grow throughout their lives. It seems to me that if you're never willing to question or reconsider opinions you're robbing yourself of that growth potential.

I've never really been interested in "growth". I think we may have discussed this previously. I am what I am. That's all I'm ever going to be. I don't see a need to change or have any desire to; not that I really think I could even if I wanted to.