The UNTHINKABLE -- "Chat session - with Jim Robinson (FR)" -- at Liberty Post?

LP | March 18th, 2004 | Jim Robinson

[MEG33]

I can't wait to see it happen.Her accusations are constant and never ending.I would call it obsessive behavior.

[ST.LOUIE1]

I can't wait to see it happen.Her accusations are constant and never ending.
I would call it obsessive behavior.

Sounds about right. : )

Hi, Megsy!! : )

[Texasforever]

Well the only thing I learned over my 2 nights there is that the bikerbar is all some of them have to feel some sense of importance. I had fun the first night but the second night I was there was just sad. I have no further interest in what they do over there.

[Sloth]

There's a fine line between honest criticism and campaigning for the other guy. Mocking President Bush, or calling him a "liar", "traitor", and "socialist" falls into the latter category.

'Liar' is unsupportable, and 'traitor' is silly, inflated hyperbole. But the word 'socialist' has a fairly straightforward definition, and I'd be hard-pressed to explain why it would fail to describe the policies of President Bush (and many other Republicans).

[Neets]

What is really sad, is the comments on the JR thread over there.

900+ posts, most of which talk about how they don't care what Jim has to say, as they continue to go on railing and flailing about, describing why they were unjustly banned.

That in itself, says alot about them.

[onyx]

We're talking past each other, which isn't surprising given our brief history.

I am merely addressing the presdential election this year. The democrats have unrelentingly bashed Bush and I am not about to entertain further bashing from fellow Republicans.

Criticisms of his policies are acceptable if they're simultaneously laid side by side with his opponent's.

Immigration is a sore point. I hate Bush's idea and I hate the democrats idea. Fortunately, the immigration "proposal' is said to be dead in the House.

I want to see POTUS reelected and in a landslide with long coattails.

[onyx]

Yep, Jim is taking a beating on that thread, but he held his own and methodically answered poster by poster til he wore out and the hour drew long.

I am glad I went there and I have nothing bad to say about LP or about the folks who engaged with me. I told them I would not bash them first, and I won't. A number of them I liked from here. I was treated fairly.

I wish the bashing would stop. I'll do everything I can to stop it.

[tpaine]

Well the only thing I learned over my 2 nights there is that the bikerbar is all some of them have to feel some sense of importance. I had fun the first night but the second night I was there was just sad.
I have no further interest in what they do over there.
83 -tex-

______________________________________


Two bits that within two weeks you will again be making snide comments about the BB, or someone posting there, that belies your 'no interest' claim.

And, from the honest message you left me at my RKBA thread on your return, -- I'd also bet that you did learn something. -- That you can't fool all of the people all of the time.

It is time we start debating issues again.. ALL of us..

[dbwz]

Criticism is appropriate whenever events dictate. By providing timely feedback, conservatives help the Administration/Congress change behavior in real-time and avoid potential mis-steps.

Exactly. I can't understand why this aspect is missing from so many arguments on this forum. People should be learning how to take a more active role in their government.

[Texasforever]

That you can't fool all of the people all of the time.

Tpaaine I really do mean that I am sick of the flaming, especially by me, however in your case I am going to have to really get some practice in because you make it very difficult to keep me from ripping your head off. Verbally of course.

[Trinity_Tx]

The words "conservative" and "libertarian" have equally "straightforward" definitions. And various policies of Bush fall under them too.

Reagan had "socialist" policies. And the majority of Americans - including voters - are in favor of "socialist" policies.

So when people use the word as a hammer, associating the policy and thus the entire person/party with regimes we all hold in contempt, it not only desensitizes people to the evils of it, is also a cheating tactic of debate.
It is intellectually lazy to pigeonhole people and parties with shocking labels rather than debate the actual - and individual - policy on its merits. Sometimes the policy is simply meant to keep us in power long enough to effect overall change.

The fact that needs to be faced is that we are where we are. And it will take a lot more pragmatism than idealistic chest-beating and stomping of feet to get us back closer to where we need to be.

It takes votes.

A man standing on the principles of "true conservatism" could not get elected today. We need to give men like Bush a Mandate, so they have the power to enact policies that can eventually show the wonderers how much better their lives are without big gov't.

Let them be the frogs in our to-be-boiled water for a change. even tho it takes patience on our side while the water is still in the warm stage.

Meanwhile, doing and saying things that put your worst enemies, like Kerry, in power - where they create dependence upon themselves by the weak in this country, sealing their positions - is simply counterproductive to your goal of reducing the socialisic influence.
It's pure logic and strategy.

[Texasforever]

But the word 'socialist' has a fairly straightforward definition,

Yes it does have a very precise definition and I wish more would learn it before they use it. You can call Bush a big spender and there is some validity to it but every president left office with a government bigger than he found it. Trying to call Bush a socialist waters down the actual meaning of a precise term as much as equating conservatives to Nazis by the left.

[sauropod]

The appropriate answer is a hard-line conservative stance.

[tpaine]

Well the only thing I learned over my 2 nights there is that the bikerbar is all some of them have to feel some sense of importance. I had fun the first night but the second night I was there was just sad.
I have no further interest in what they do over there.
83 -tex-


______________________________________



Two bits that within two weeks you will again be making snide comments about the BB, or someone posting there, that belies your 'no interest' claim.

And, from the honest message you left me at my RKBA thread on your return, -- I'd also bet that you did learn something. -- That you can't fool all of the people all of the time.

It is time we start debating issues again.. ALL of us..
88 tpaine

______________________________________


Tpaaine I really do mean that I am sick of the flaming, especially by me, however in your case I am going to have to really get some practice in because you make it very difficult to keep me from ripping your head off. Verbally of course.
90 -tex-

_____________________________________


Texbaby, at some point you really do need to learn to distinguish between pointed comments & "flames".

You are getting as thin skinned as some of the old gals around here..

[Texasforever]

You are getting as thin skinned as some of the old gals around here..

Whatever you say.

[tpaine]

Sloth: But the word 'socialist' has a fairly straightforward definition,

Yes it does have a very precise definition and I wish more would learn it before they use it.

tpaine here.. Nice point tex.

You can call Bush a big spender and there is some validity to it but every president left office with a government bigger than he found it.

But your next line here sort of ruins your 'socialist' point, because big spending is not neccessarly socialism. We arguably spend biggest on war.

Trying to call Bush a socialist waters down the actual meaning of a precise term as much as equating conservatives to Nazis by the left.

Those on the left often equate ultraconservatism to facism, which is a form of authoritarian socialism. So what's your point in that statement?

-- I did the critique of your post above to illustrate what I meant about pointed comments.. You will see it as yet another attempt to "flame" you, no doubt.
Get help.

[Texasforever]

Those on the left often equate ultraconservatism to facism, which is a form of authoritarian socialism. So what's your point in that statement

What my point was is that words have meaning. Socialism is an economic system that has no relation to capitalism as America practices it. Fascism and Communism are both political forms of government that use a socialistic economic system to keep the masses on an equally dependent level.

[tpaine]

Those on the left often equate ultra-conservatism to fascism, which is a form of authoritarian socialism. So what's your point in that statement?

What my point was is that words have meaning.

Of course they do.

Socialism is an economic system that has no relation to capitalism as America practices it.

'American' capitalism is highly socialistic. We over-regulate every aspect of business.. Ask Martha.

Fascism and Communism are both political forms of government that use a socialistic economic system to keep the masses on an equally dependent level.

Again, you make a point not at issue, in an effort to infer that I might disagree? - Odd remark. -- And of course my making that observation will be seen, by you, as a flame, - right?

[ShadowDancer]

To me, this is beginning to look like that there is a genuine dislike on this site for those who characterize themselves as conservative Republicans

Howlin, there has never been a genuine dislike for conservative Republicans here until Bush started doing exactly opposite of what you and I and Dane and OWK and everyone else expected of him. Has he screwed up everything? No. Has he screwed up enough that a lot of us are ticked off about it and say so? Damn right.

Where the dislike comes in is when people who would have literally crucified Clinton over such things, bend over backwards to justify Bush doing them. It's an insult to any thinking persons' intelligence when that's done. Why don't you see that?

[Texasforever]

Just clarifying terms of the debate with the original poster. Now, that we have the words defined what is that you want to add other than the obvious point that business is over regulated a point I readily concede?