I did and partook in them. I didn't thread crap, though.
Thing is when haveing discussions with people of the opposing viewpoint, you let some inevitable things slide, because discourse.Except that with posters like thejeff, bignorsewolf, and now, apparently, you Kryzbyn, Paizo is not conservative friendly. At. All. The staff is not conservative friendly, and neither are the majority of the posters.
There are facets of conservatism and the Republican party that deserve ridicule.
Most of it has to do with attitudes regarding a person's personal life.For example:
We want government out of our lives, but heaven forbid anyone live a different lifestyle, then all of a sudden we need government to pass laws to make their lives hell. Kind of hipocritical, no?
Kind of hypocritical? No. Ridiculously hypocritical? Yes indeed. Every now and then you hear a Republican making interesting points on fiscal policy... then they start talking about social policy and it makes you want to bite a tree in half. Every now and then you hear a Democrat making interesting points on social policy... then they start talking about fiscal policy and it makes you want to bite a tree in half.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If I ever meet a Libertarian who has anything nice to say about Democrats, or progressives of any stripe, I'd probably explode from the surprise. None I'd ever talk to would own up to any regulation they'd support. And I've pretty much had it up to here with the Ayn Rand worship of the group.Except that with posters like thejeff, bignorsewolf, and now, apparently, you Kryzbyn, Paizo is not conservative friendly. At. All. The staff is not conservative friendly, and neither are the majority of the posters.I did and partook in them. I didn't thread crap, though.
Thing is when haveing discussions with people of the opposing viewpoint, you let some inevitable things slide, because discourse.With posters like Simon Legrande and Brox RedGloves, Pazio is not liberal friendly. :)
I haven't noticed a strong bias from the staff, other then in LGBTQ issues, perhaps because several of the staff fall in that category. I'm not sure I've ever seen staff take a position on health care, foreign policy, gun rights, elections or most other hot button political issues. The most common attitude is closer to "Will you guys shut up! Or at least keep it down so we can go back to moderating the alignment threads."
That said, there are plenty of libertarian types hanging around who aren't exactly Democrat supporters. Along with a bunch of "A pox on both houses" types.
Trust me, not all of them are into Rand worship. I've known just as many Libertarians to deride those who do worship Rand. Rand followers are Objectivists, Objectivists are not necessarily Libertarians and vice versa. Someone mentioned Penn Jillette, I would also mention John Stossel as two who I think have excellent things to say.
i would consider myself not really affiliated with either party, but since i am pro-gun, and pro-military, I find myself labeled as a Republican, Conservative, Gun-toting hack. Oh well. I mean I did vote mostly Republican/Independant in this particular vote, due to the fact that I want the bills passed by the House to finally not get blocked by the Senate and get to the POTUS,and watch to see what Obama does, besides stutter without his binky, I mean, teleprompter.
I agree with some of what Ayn Rand said/wrote, disagree with others. Same thing with Stossel, Penn, Judge Andrew Napolitano, and the folks at Reason.
I'm with you. The only thing I've read by Rand was Atlas Shrugged, but that was enough to get the sense of her ideals. There are some few things of interest among the crazy. I'm usually about 90-95% with Stossel and Jillette, and about 70-75% with the folks at Reason (the Judge has a tendency to go a bit overboard for me). Every now and then I pick up something surprising at Foxnews.com and CNN.com, but not that often.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
"I voted for Obama in 2008!" is rapidly becoming the "Some of my best friends are gay!" of party identity politics.
Well, it's certainly better than "I voted for Bush II and have been overcompensating for it ever since by telling everybody that doesn't agree with me that they don't understand how the political process works!"
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If it wasn't for that darn government interfering in the free market the cost of cancer treatment would drop to where most people could afford it, because that's how markets work. The few people poor enough not to be able to could get one of those cans in diners to help out or offer to swap some chickens or something.
Insurance companies have far more to do with health care pricing than the government.
Free markets don't work when its "Pay us $X or die". Free markets are great for items with a lot of suppliers and many customers. When only a few companies control life saving drugs, they can collude on pricing and the rich will pay and the poor will die. The American dream in action.
For all intents and purposes, the Obama Presidency ended last night.
Its been over for about 6 years at least. This is the fight to control the philibuster
The only real question is how long the Affordable Healthcare Act will survive it.
Indefinitely. For a variety of reasons.
1) The republicans can't override a philibuster
2) The republicans can't override a veto
3) The affordable care act is a republican plan. They don't actually want it to end, they just wanted something to differentiate themselves from obama and run on. The AFC is functionally a regressive tax: the kind republicans and their corporate overlords like.
i would consider myself not really affiliated with either party, but since i am pro-gun, and pro-military, I find myself labeled as a Republican, Conservative, Gun-toting hack. Oh well. I mean I did vote mostly Republican/Independant in this particular vote, due to the fact that I want the bills passed by the House to finally not get blocked by the Senate and get to the POTUS,and watch to see what Obama does, besides stutter without his binky, I mean, teleprompter.It's always amusing when someone cites his Independent credentials and then throws out a right-wing slur.
Amuse away, sir. I've seen alot of POTUS's speeches on the BBC, and when he 'freestyles" without the prompter, my Liberal friends say they cringe. SO it is what it is.
I never understood why the Republicans would send a bill from the House to the Senate, it would get rejected, and then the Dems would complain that the Repubs aren't sending anything to the Senate,so it's their fault. I never understood that.
I've been vilified for legally owning a firearm by one party for so long, that when said party says that Climate change is "the greatest threat to us, greater than terrorism", i have to kind of question their rationality. SO I guess if i'm going to be constantly labeled as a right-wing Conservative because I own several firearms, then I figured, kinda like in the MB's, you can list your points, and someone will play the old "Washington two-step" and flip them on you, I may as well vote Republican this time so I can actually see these bills go all the way through and see how our POTUS deals with them, or if he just uses, as he so eloquently put it "his phone and his pen". my fellow Independant/Libertarian friends loved that thinly veiled threat.
i would consider myself not really affiliated with either party, but since i am pro-gun, and pro-military,
I'm curious. Exactly how is the party that voted to give better education benefits to veterans and to keep them from being shot the anti military party?
i would consider myself not really affiliated with either party, but since i am pro-gun, and pro-military,I'm curious. Exactly how is the party that voted to give better education benefits to veterans and to keep them from being shot the anti military party?
The Independant party did that? Hm.
You're obviously drinking the Liberal kool-aid, great for you. You're going to see it one way, the Republicans will see it another way (lost military jobs, Dems wanting to up the minimum wage while active combat troops make less than min wage, whatever else the yammer about), and the independant/Libertarians will see it another way. You're not going to have a sudden epiphany, even if facts showed you to be incorrect, so debating your "point" is as fruitful as going all-in with a Sicilian when death is on the line, so forgive me if I refrain and acquiesce to your obviously superior intellect. Hope you have a big glass.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
You're obviously drinking the Liberal kool-aid, great for you. You're going to see it one way, the Republicans will see it another way (lost military jobs, Dems wanting to up the minimum wage while active combat troops make less than min wage, whatever else the yammer about), and the independant/Libertarians will see it another way. You're not going to have a sudden epiphany, even if facts showed you to be incorrect, so debating your "point" is as fruitful as going all-in with a Sicilian when death is on the line, so forgive me if I refrain and acquiesce to your obviously superior intellect. Hope you have a big glass.
Have you tried using something besides personal insults?
mmmmmm.. Lidocaine powder.
Have you tried using something besides personal insults?
You're obviously drinking the Liberal kool-aid, great for you. You're going to see it one way, the Republicans will see it another way (lost military jobs, Dems wanting to up the minimum wage while active combat troops make less than min wage, whatever else the yammer about), and the independant/Libertarians will see it another way. You're not going to have a sudden epiphany, even if facts showed you to be incorrect, so debating your "point" is as fruitful as going all-in with a Sicilian when death is on the line, so forgive me if I refrain and acquiesce to your obviously superior intellect. Hope you have a big glass.
????? Are you liberal? If so, then I was stating fact,since if you're a believer of a certain ideology's agende, then one is known as "drinking the kool-aid", correct? if not then apologies. #2: Each affiliated person sees it their own way, and having a discussion with them is not going to change their ideology, as one person's stated fact can be supposedly biased by the source and therefore supposedly irrelevant, so it's fruitless to do so. Yet another fact. #3: Complimenting your intellect? My bad. Guess I shouldn't have done that. The Sicilian thing is actually funny, but if you dont think so, my bad.
I never understood why the Republicans would send a bill from the House to the Senate, it would get rejected, and then the Dems would complain that the Repubs aren't sending anything to the Senate,so it's their fault. I never understood that.
.
It's part of the game that's played.... like the 60 bills the House passed to "end" Obamacare knowing they'd go no further.
The House Republicans would pass odious bills that they knew that either the Senate Democrats would block or Obama would refuse to sign and then pin the blame for inaction on the other party.
But then isn't that exactly what the Democrats are doing in reverse?
Gotta love politics. It's all about perspective and which side of the pit, i mean, aisle, you're on.
????? Are you liberal?
By your definition probably.
If so, then I was stating fact,since if you're a believer of a certain ideology's agenda, then one is known as "drinking the kool-aid", correct?
Uhm. No. To continue your theme, i don't think "drinking the cool aid" means what you think it means.
Drinking the kool aid is accusing me of having slavish, unthinking and dagerously unquestioning devotion to a cause. That you think this is synonomous with liberal is more than slightly problematic and insulting.
That this sort of insult is the only argument anyone seems to bother to give against being a liberal is very telling.
Each affiliated person sees it their own way, and having a discussion with them is not going to change their ideology, as one person's stated fact can be supposedly biased by the source and therefore supposedly irrelevant, so it's fruitless to do so.
Don't knock it till you try it.
So which of my facts was incorrect: that democrats tried to vote in a substantial increase in GI educational benefits or that they were trying to get our troops out of the places where they were being shot at?
Yet another fact. #3: Complimenting your intellect? My bad. Guess I shouldn't have done that.
Your sarcasm is clear even on the internet.
The Sicilian thing is actually funny, but if you dont think so, my bad.
I love a good princess bride reference but that was a little ham fisted. D+
We should go back to talking about naked dingos.
Things like "interfering with their lives" by making the boss pay them more. Like "interfering with their lives" by letting them get healthcare. Like "interfering with their lives" by keeping their boss from firing them when he finds out their gay. Like "interfering with their lives" but not letting the company up the road poison their water.
It's not about "too much" or "not enough". It's about "in ways which make things better".
Which is also making us pay more for stuff,making them pay for other people's health care, the gay part i agree with as long as they cannot play the victim card to not get fired for real cause. Also with government, give them a little power over you and they will take a lot more. Some of us just want the lines or power and control a bit different than you
I never understood why the Republicans would send a bill from the House to the Senate, it would get rejected, and then the Dems would complain that the Repubs aren't sending anything to the Senate,so it's their fault. I never understood that.
.
It's part of the game that's played.... like the 60 bills the House passed to "end" Obamacare knowing they'd go no further.
The House Republicans would pass odious bills that they knew that either the Senate Democrats would block or Obama would refuse to sign and then pin the blame for inaction on the other party.
But then isn't that exactly what the Democrats are doing in reverse?
Gotta love politics. It's all about perspective and which side of the pit, i mean, aisle, you're on.
While False Equivalency is a popular position to take... it's still false.
No it isn't.... because the Senate is not a place where bills originate, that's the House, and the Democrats do not have the votes to pass a bill in the House. The Senate is by constitutional desig,n the place where bills go to die.
Ok, so the Dems have never held the House and done the same to them? I'm just asking because you brought up the False Equivalency thing.
I'm well aware of what 'drinking the kool-aid is', sir.
thanks for the assist Shadow. lol
PILE ON!
And a D+ for a Princess Bride comment? tough crowd.......
i would consider myself not really affiliated with either party, but since i am pro-gun, and pro-military,I'm curious. Exactly how is the party that voted to give better education benefits to veterans and to keep them from being shot the anti military party?
Because young anti war liberals are he ones that insult and belittle soldiers the most. Democrats are often the ones that want to reduce military spending, that is not good for the men in that industry. Sure they do some good but also enough bad. same with republicans not wanting to increase the pay and benefits though
As someone who is on the border between Conservative and Libertarian, I voted in a way that most here would disagree. (I even voted Libertarian Party on some state and local races)
There were two ballot initiatives: One for increasing registration fees to run for office (voted against), and one for repealing a 70/30 law (restaurants' revenue must be at least 70% non-alcoholic) (voted for)
Based on those ballot measures, you and I live in the same city.
I voted the same way on the ballot measures. The 70/30 law will be repealed, but the candidate registration fee is going into effect. You can get around it with a voter petition, but I haven't seen how many signatures you need to waive the fee.
i would consider myself not really affiliated with either party, but since i am pro-gun, and pro-military,I'm curious. Exactly how is the party that voted to give better education benefits to veterans and to keep them from being shot the anti military party?The Independant party did that? Hm.
You're obviously drinking the Liberal kool-aid, great for you. You're going to see it one way, the Republicans will see it another way (lost military jobs, Dems wanting to up the minimum wage while active combat troops make less than min wage, whatever else the yammer about), and the independant/Libertarians will see it another way. You're not going to have a sudden epiphany, even if facts showed you to be incorrect, so debating your "point" is as fruitful as going all-in with a Sicilian when death is on the line, so forgive me if I refrain and acquiesce to your obviously superior intellect. Hope you have a big glass.
Republicans are so good for the military they've routinely blocked legislation funding veterans benefits. They've done it numerous times over the past 6 years, because they're obstructionist a%~@$+&s.
If you deny it, I will unload a flurry of articles and vote counts that prove you're wrong.
You know, with facts.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Like facts have ever changed the mind of a republican.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Like facts have ever changed the mind of a republican.
or democrat
[Because young anti war liberals are he ones that insult and belittle soldiers the most. Democrats are often the ones that want to reduce military spending, that is not good for the men in that industry. Sure they do some good but also enough bad. same with republicans not wanting to increase the pay and benefits thoughThis isn't the 60's, The Anti-Vietnam protests ended most likely before you were born. We don't have flower power children (many of which whom grew up to be conservative Republicans) shouting baby-killer epithets as a matter of routine.
When it comes to reductions in military spending that Democrats go for it's mainly in the area of big ticket weapon systems, (like do we really need ANOTHER set of billion dollar fighters?) Republicans on the other hand are the ones that tend to after veteran personal benefits. The type of cuts are different.
Tell that to many that i know to come back from iraq to be insulted and threatened by the occupy groups and their ilk
Like facts have ever changed the mind of a republican.or democrat
So if I've ever changed my mind on something, that would mean you're wrong?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Like facts have ever changed the mind of a republican.or democrat
Ha! You really zinged me with that comeback.
Or i could talk to several of my veteran friends, who are die-hard liberals. They have quite a bit to say about republicans cutting benefits for the wounded or traumatized.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Like facts have ever changed the mind of a republican.
Lets try to keep this away from the actions of groups.
So if I've ever changed my mind on something, that would mean you're wrong?Like facts have ever changed the mind of a republican.or democrat
Only as wrong as the one that made the first coment
Or i could talk to several of my veteran friends, who are die-hard liberals. They have quite a bit to say about republicans cutting benefits for the wounded or traumatized.
/raises hand
Ugh.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Tell that to many that i know to come back from iraq to be insulted and threatened by the occupy groups and their ilk
Really? I mean, you personally know many soldiers who were threatened and insulted? I have never heard of anything like that happening. In fact, in NYC, Occupy seemed to get along with service folks just fine.
This is what soldier/occupy interactions looked like in my nearest occupy.
Never said all are bad, just said they are the group most likely to hate on the military
Never said all are bad, just said they are the group most likely to hate on the military
I think the people that put them in harms way for Halliburtons bottom line, didn't bother to fund armor for the vehilces and sent them into combat with "the army we have", sent them back for multiple tours, and then cut the funding for that replacement leg they need have a lot more of a hate on for the military than a small group of occupy people that don't realize that they're victims of the forces their movement is fighting against as well as its implementation.
I hope nobody is either implying or outright saying that military adventurism is not a bipartisan thing. Because that would be crazy.