[Mr 5 0]

Originally posted by 84_GT350 :

What gives Mr 5 0? I thought you'd made your point and were giving up on this thread.

Snakeman, to whom my last post was addressed (that's not you, is it?) simply annoyed me with his nonsensical outburst against Governor-elect Schwarzenegger and President Bush. It remains my option to post what and when I choose here, as it is yours

You know...I've got a lot of respect for you what with starting this site (I cut my teeth on Mustangs with a lot of help from you and others on this site years ago) which is why I've tried to be as polite and respectable as possible. Apparently you haven't seen fit to return the favor. Apparently you just don't get it.

Oh, I 'get it' alright. Both you and Snake have a mindless hatred for Republican office holders that you can't help venting. Yeah, I 'get it' very clearly. As for your 'respect': I do appreciate that but it has no bearing on what I post to anyone. My last post - again, directed at Snakeman - reflected his rather nasty little attack on Arnold Schwarzenegger and President Bush. I responded in kind, as I always do. You previously posted fairly calm messages to me and I replied in the same manner. Post nasty diatribles and you'll receive the same tone from me. Reaping and sowing I believe it's called. That's bibical.

All you've done is revert to meaningless sanctimony and typical rhetoric about "flaming liberals" that I hear everyday watching TV. Guess what...some of us don't like prayer in schools or presidents who get elected solely based on their last name.

All I've seen from you is calling a wildly successful actor with a degree in Economics and the holder of a huge fortune made in business as well as blockbuster movies - 'a moron' and you insinuate that he ran for Governor just to stoke his ego - which is nonsense, in my opinion, which is what all our exchanges amount to, for the most part. Guess what? Many Americans do want prayer in schools and think your dismissal of a successful president like George W. Bush is based on nothing but silly criticisms like his pronounciation of 'nuclear' and the fact that his father was once president, as if this enabled the elder Bush to negate Americans votes to somehow sneak his son into winning the presidency. Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds? . You willfully ignore President Bush's successes in favor of issuing petty insults and you seem to actually believe this equates to rational argument when it's simply childish name-calling.

Yes, a president should among other things speak with poise and meaning because, among other things, it's a sign of intelligence.

Yeah, Bill Clinton's Arkansas drawl and 'Aw, Shucks' mannerisms really impressed people no end. Not. Do you not yet see how foolish this superficial nit-picking sounds - and how useless it really is?

I like how you pointed out the electoral college. If not for that we'd have the lesser of two j@ck@sses seeing as how Bush didn't win the popular vote.

The Electoral vote determines the winner and by the way, Bill Clinton never won the popular vote, either, and liberals never complained one bit. Your low opinion of Bush and Gore is yours to hold but don't be so shocked and annoyed when others - like me - challenge you on it. That's how adults interact when they have political opinions so you had better get used to it if you want to go around bashing politicians based on little more than superficial nonsense like their accents.

Just because a person may lean more toward the "liberal" side (if you'd payed attention in Poli-Sci class you'd know the entire American political system is classically liberal) does NOT make them a "flaming liberal". So why all the hate?

'Hate'? Nice try at projection but I wasn't the one who called Governor-elect Schwartzenegger a 'moron' and spews contempt for the president...that would be: bi]you[/b], Kansas. Want to try again? You did get one thing half-right. The political system in the United States is 'classically' liberal, but that has zero, nada, no relation to the political liberalism we're discussing here, of the current Democrat variety which borders on and often embraces socialism. I suggest you be more cautious about attempting to lecture those you don't know about politics as they may know a whole lot more about it than you've leared in that Poli-Sci class you slept through, based on what you've posted here.

Seems to me you feel so wary or insecure about the validity of your own beliefs and ideas that you feel the need to ridicule anyone who's opinions differ from your own.

Ooooh, I love it when liberals try to play the psychoanalysis card. It's so cute. Unfortunately, ridicule is what Snakeman's opinions deserve and that's what they got. You want a serious, factual discussion? I gave you that, earlier, despite your silly name-calling, because I was trying to show you something, which you ignored and then boastfully and stubborly refused to concede that Arnold Schwartzenegger might be a better man than you gave him credit for. You want to post stupid name-calling attacks on Republicans you don't like: you get ridicule. Do you still not understand how this works, yet? Pity.

You said yourself that you'd like to see certain things happen just "to see leftists and die-hard athiests squirm". Why?

Are you sure you're really a college student or are you just faking it here? Do you not understand hyperbole. If you don't, look it up. New at political discussions on the internet, perhaps? You really need to learn how to determine and separate a rather clear overstatement meant in jest to a serious remark. Really.

You wanna talk arrogance? This country is NOT based on Judeo-Christian beliefs. People of every religion and faith live here and I can't believe you'd be so arrogant to disregard them just because you don't agree with them.

Get a clue. Contrary to what some Professor may have told you and you swallowed whole because you liked what he said: the United States was founded by serious, religious men who used Christian principles and respected and admired the Judeo-Christian heritage that the folks on the Mayflower brought with them in 1620 and that ran through America in 1776 and has continued to do so up until today. We are not a secular country, despite what secularists want. We are a nation of many religions, granted, but we are not secular. Government is secular but even then, government acknowledges the wealth of religious faith that underlies the miracle of freedom and democracy that is America.

But then again that feeds into my other point. Myself, I'm agnostic...NOT atheist. I'm not arrogant enough to claim to know who or what god is and those who DO claim that or that they know "what god wants" should be ashamed of themselves.

No one asked about your 'religious' beliefs here but since you saw fit to inject them: that 'unknowable God' stuff may make you feel better about rejecting religion so you can do as you please without any guilt and I understsnd that but you apparently have no clue whatsoever as to what Christianity is truly about. Your agnosticism is yours to cling to but your ignorant attempts to dismiss Christianity are not appreciated and show little tolerance for others. I tolerate all religions as well as atheists and agnostics but I do not accept what they choose to believe. They feel the same about my religion, of course. No problem, but the bashing of Christianity in America is getting too obvious to ignore and I will oppose that when I see it, especially when done by those who preach 'tolerance' for every other perversion known while bashing Christianity, one of the best forces on earth for the betterment of people.

Clinton was a total douche and I love how people dredge him up every time there's a democrat-republican debate, like he's a good example.

Really? I've never heard a Democrat say a bad word about Bill Clinton. He is held by many Democrats to be the finest president in the last-half of the 20th century. Clinton is often favorably compared to Bush for his oh-so-impressive speaking abilities and of course, the great economy 'he' made possible in the 1990's....a cherished Democrat myth. You apparently don't get out much in political circles and seem to have little understanding of the things on which you try to convince us you actually know something about.

Here's a crash course in politics: EVERYONE LIES ABOUT EVERYONE ELSE. It's not a party thing. You use words like "us" which to me says you feel you represent an entire party or school of thought. Trust me, I know some die-hard republicans who would be embarrassed by your diatribe.

You're becomeing ridiculous now. Trust me, Kansas, die-hard liberals would think you were doing just fine with your mindless name-calling and inane statements here. You're coming right out of the Democrat playbook only you delude yourself that you're some kind of rugged political independent. Not a chance. As for me: I'm a conservative Christian and I vote Republican. Not ashamed to be partisan one bit and I do not apologize for it. We need partisans on both sides but hiding behind the 'independent' tree is just being too wishy-washy to take a real stand, politically, while pretending you're an independent thinker. I don't see any of that in your posts, just witless Republican-bashing and name-calling to elected officials, proving nothing but your lack of substance on the issues.

Yes, America is pulling back from the left but that's because they're scared and many to the right have a "if I can't understand it then it's gotta die" attitude (notice I said many, not all). When people are frightened they'll turn wherever they can for a feeling of comfort. Why these people think the right will give them comfort is beyond me...like wars with anyone anytime anywhere will make us that much safer. But there you have it.

Yeah, and there you have the empty liberal version of what the war on terror is about. You are so far wrong that it's rather sad, actually. Here's a 'crash course' in political and foreign policy reality for YOU: America is under an unrelenting attack from radical Islamists and it did not begin and end on 9/11/01. The current administration is doing everything in their power to halt the spread of terrorism to America by cutting it off at it's knees in the middle east, where it florishes and grows. Liberals think this is a bad thing, apparently, and do nothing but attack the president and whine about the war in Iraq. The majority of Americans, despite the 24/7 trumpeting of the liberal media that attack Bush, see the war on terror as necessary and vital to our security and way of life. No one wants another 9/11. That the Bush administration is fighting terrorism on many fronts in many ways is clear and that is what is turning Americans away from the always-negative, weak-on-defense Democrats that want to defer our national security to the United Nations and have the approval of France before making a move against our enemies. That foolish attitude and the constant attacks on Bush trun normal people off and probably ensure a Bush re-election in 2004.

Basically I think everything you've said is incredibly biased and pompous and that you need to open your mind a little more to other possibilities. I know it's scary...but there's a good chance you aren't right.

Well, basically, I think you have only the smallest understanding of the way America was founded and the political system works. You spout the liberal line very well, then believe you're independent because - what - you didn't like Clinton? It's not personalities that matter, it's policy and ideology, of which you show little grasp. It may surprise you but I've read all the Democrat/liberal positions many times and seen them debated and have debated the issues myself, more often than I like to. You see, I educate myself on the issues, the history and ideology behind the issue. You call people 'morons'. Big difference and one that is clearly and painfully obvious. I suggest you either become educated on what you're posting about or quit now while you're ahead as this is going downhill real fast.

A friendly hint: Compared to Unit 5301, I'm a loveable teddybear. He's very sharp - and very cynical - and never gives an inch so I wouldn't advise even trying to debate him with the meager rhetorical weapons you possess.