Searching123 is annoyed that he has been characterized as a liberal. He wrote and posted:
"I have never been a "radical" nor have I been much of a "liberal". I have always described myself as a libertarian populist. In the 1960's I voted for Presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson but subsequently voted for every Republican who ran for U.S. President for the next 40 years."
But it turns out that he didn't really vote for Presidents Kennedy or Johnson since he wasn't old enough to do so at the time. Assuming the first two sentences are true, unlike the third, Searching123 has always described himself as a "libertarian populist", not a "liberal" although he has also written that he was "idealistic" and does "want to correct social injustices", and "subscrib(es) to catholic social justice values"
One of the most important criteria for distinguishing rational from irrational people is their ability to make careful and intelligent distinctions.
You, obviously, do not have that capacity.
For virtually this entire thread, you have been obsessed with an irrelevant mistake which I made regarding a date from 50 years ago. That date has nothing to do with the subject matter of this thread. The only reason it was even introduced into this discussion is because I was attempting to respond to your use of false statements from Metapedia which purport to accurately characterize my political beliefs and values.
You now want to pretend that bringing attention to your irrational fixation upon an irrelevant date is somehow an “insult” to you and, furthermore, represents the single most important matter to be gleaned from the discussion in this thread.
Infinitely more significant and important is the still-unanswered question of why YOU chose to quote from and believe comments made about me in Metapedia’s article instead of relying upon any other source of information.
Also unanswered is why you decided to post snide statements and insinuations about me such as:
* describing me as a “leftist lover” (#82)
* suggesting that I follow “Marxist” ideas (#82)
* making the preposterous claim that “hearing others denounce leftist ideas must grate on you” (#86)
* Falsely claiming that “It seems like the material I quoted from Metapedia is very similar to your own writings. Just about every element of the text appears in other writings which appear to be yours as well..” (#92)
* claiming (falsely) that I am a “member of Metapedia” (#97)
* falsely claiming that “(you)write a lot of fiction about yourself, and are unwilling, or perhaps unable to answer simple questions” (#114)
* claiming that I am “annoyed” that I have “been characterized as a liberal” (#128)
What “annoys” me is charlatans like yourself who rely upon Jew-hating websites for their information.
Unlike yourself, I do not care if someone is liberal or conservative. Honorable men and women of all political persuasions can make valuable contributions to our national discourse and they should be able to do so without being demonized or libeled by snide insinuations and false statements or by use of language calculated to evoke fear, suspicion, contempt or revulsion.
Lastly, for emphasis, the dispute between us has never been about a precise date from the 1960’s.
Our dispute derives from your inability to focus upon what really matters. Insofar as you had any legitimate concerns or questions regarding my background or about my political beliefs and values, there are numerous published comments of mine from the early 1960’s forward which clearly reveal my beliefs and values.
There is nothing particularly “liberal” or “left-wing” about believing in catholic social justice precepts (which, incidentally, are shared by most religions) or about wanting to “correct social injustices”. Many of history’s most conservative politicians, political figures, and religious scholars and clergymen have written about such matters for centuries. So peddle your intolerance and ignorance somewhere else — or — go back to reading Metapedia (your preferred source of information).