I do not believe that you happened to ran into me on another thread to bring up a post that was more than 12 hours old within 2 minutes of you leaving this thread. Stop being deceitful. You clicked on my forums to read my other posts to see if I was a troll. I can accept that, but before you call me a troll, yet again, why don't you read all twenty five hundred of my posts here. I'm no troll. And I resent it being thrown around. Baseless accusations like that poison this forum, even more so after you have checked it out and already know it to be false. And you should really reconsider your troll accusation when Jim Robinson's position is much, much closer to my own than yours. See his post #124. Or is Jim a troll on his own site too?
For the benefit of all here, here is my post that Don Joe found just really spooky-creepy-strange
"Please don't reply to me in the future. I do not enjoy talking to you. Undoubtedly you looked at my posts to determine if I was a troll because I disagreed with you about something else. Be satisfied that I am not and leave it at that."
That is from this thread
About your earlier claim to be done with me...please. That is what you already promised and I already asked for. But you insisted on writing yet another snide little nasty gram and yet again call me a troll. You're done with me, I'm done with you. Please don't bother replying.
Now, I know you aren't actually going to rationally think about this, but for the benefit of others, I had a very enlightening discussion as to the difference between 'realpolitik' and 'real politik' with one of my political science professors. They carry fairly different connotations, and I was definitely using it in the connotations of 'real politik' as opposed to 'realpolitik' And no, you're not going to find a fairly subtle two word phrase in your dictionary. Here is how he described some of the differences.
The one word 'realpolitik' retains its original Bismarckian meaning, in that there are no principles that are inviolable, and those principles will be compromised even for small gains in terms of national 'interest'. In other words, there are essentially no principles at all, only interests. The phrase 'real politik' is a somewhat watered down version of the concept. In it there are principles, some of which are inviolable and others which might be compromised on. And those principles are compromised only for significant or major gains, not for minor ones. In other words, you live by your principles as much as you can, but you are not so stubborn that you don't make a compromise that is in your overall best interest.
Furthermore, 'realpolitik' has no meaning in a domestic political sense, such as we're using it here and in my class. Political parties don't have real 'interests' completely separate from principles the way nation states in the international arena do. The complete subordination of principles to interests has no meaning to a political party whose interests are its principles. However, the phrase 'real politik' does retain a meaning as a domestic political concept. In it, you can make small compromises on some principles, in order to make bigger advances on other more important principles.
I have already laid out a case of the democrats kicking our real politik butt...the senate confirmation hearings 'deal'. Another example is GWB's tax cut. One of the D's long standing goals is to reduce the absolute number of tax payers on the tax rolls. They do this because people who don't pay income taxes vote overwhelmingly D, and people who do pay vote overwhelmingly R. Those not paying the bill are very generous with OPM, and those footing the bill are a little more tight fisted. Their goal is to get so many non-taxpayers that they can vote in their socialist agenda with popular support...because all those people aren't paying for it.
GWB's tax cut pushed a significant percentage of the population from the tax rolls into the ranks of the non-tax payers. In justifying or defending the tax cuts, we often present the case that the wealthy pay an even greater portion of taxes than before. That is exactly what those pushing a socialist agenda wanted. I am not saying they secretly wanted tax cuts, but when the cuts were being shoved down their throats, they made sure to get something significant of real lasting value out of it....they built their constituency of moochers.
I am not a total adherent to real politik, I consider myself a man of principle and find it very distasteful to compromise them. That said, the Democrats playing real politik, and Republicans not, is one of the primary reasons this nation has been steadily sliding left since the 1960s. Hillary and her ilk have no qualms about hiding her socialist agenda in order to advance it one small step at a time. And one small step at a time, they've eaten us alive. There is value in considering this perspective. Even if it means not immediately having a conniption fit when someone mentions the word reparations.
I have not come out firmly in favor of Keyes' proposal. But I have tried to have a real discussion about whether and how we could possibly use this new perspective on it to advance our agenda. I have no doubt that is what Keyes is trying to do. And I certainly have never considered reparations in that light before. Maybe we could make something of this proposal, maybe not. However, emotional hysterics and cries of treason and troll prevented that conversation from ever taking place, to the detriment of all of us and our ideals.
I do not believe that you happened to ran into me on another thread to bring up a post that was more than 12 hours old within 2 minutes of you leaving this thread. Stop being deceitful. You clicked on my forums to read my other posts to see if I was a troll. I can accept that,
I did not follow you anywhere, and the administration can verify that, and has my invitation to do exactly that. You are starting to sound like a delusional paranoid.
This is a forum. People click on all sorts of threads. I never clicked on your posts, I never looked for your posts, I clicked that thread from the main forum page, and the Admin Moderator is hereby INVITED to check the server logs to verify this fact.
I stumbled upon your post in that thread. Big f'n whoop. I stumbled upon LOTS of posters in that thread. I must have left a dozen or more posts in that thread, to nearly as many posters. Thankfully, none of THEM are paranoid loons, accusing me of stalking THEM out, and finding them in that thread.
Only you, my creepy friend, only you.
And, only you have tried to get me to divulge my RL wherabouts too.
You are creepiness defined, pal.
Seek help.