Comments Posted By anon
Displaying 1 To 10 Of 61 Comments

THE ETHICS OF 'WALKING AWAY' FROM YOUR MORTGAGE

We are a nation that no longer casts an eye of shame on those who "walk away" from their spouses and their children. Walking away from a mortgage? Good luck finding many that will call that a moral or ethical dilemma. Morals and ethics are a fabrication of those loony right wingers you're always ranting about, and they really get in the way of infantilizing the electorate. It's not our fault, dammit, and Daddy Government's gonna make it all better real soon.

Comment Posted By Anon On 4.02.2010 @ 16:35

HOW DUMB ARE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE?

Klein and his ilk have been telling the American people what to think for 50 years via the MSM. They had a good run, and they liked it. Now the unwashed masses have ready access to limitless points of view. Some, undoubtedly, will rely only on their respective echo chambers for information, but more and more people are taking in information from all angles and giving it a good old fashioned gut check, unfiltered through the democrat lenses of Uncle Walter Cronkite, perky Katie Couric, or intelligent Joe Klein -- democrats all. Klein doesn't lament that Americans aren't smart. Oh no, his real sorrow is that they are thinking for themselves, finally, and that has never been good for failed ideologies.

Comment Posted By Anon On 25.01.2010 @ 14:05

IN FOR A PENNY, IN FOR A POUND: MORE EYOREISM ON BROWN

I see some in the dem party and the media today are talking about the "far left" wing of the democrat party having too much control of the agenda, thus costing them this seat in Massachusetts. I don't know that I've ever heard a "mainstream" media person, or for that matter a democrat, use the phrase "far left." For that fact alone, this election is a victory for the moderate, center-right politics you seem to desire. For so long, the far left has been sold to us as "mainstream" -- the Cindy Sheehans, Code Pink, George Soros, MSNBC, etc. Of course they were never "mainstream," and I think often the center-right looked positively fascistic when compared to the "moderate mainstream," as the far left was sold to us. But now I think many in the democrat party understand that they have a fringe of their own to deal with, and it is on the verge of destroying their party.

So you, and others, have railed against the "far right," perhaps justifiably at times. And now we have an acknowledged "far left" to mirror the right side's excesses (though, unfortunately, they are installed as the President, Speaker of the U.S. House, and Senate Majority Leader). America, it seems, doesn't like her politicians to engage in ideological excess at either end of the spectrum. It seems, with this election, that the right side of the aisle is perhaps learning that they will correct course, or, as happened in '06 and '08, the course will be corrected for them by the glorious American people. Now what of the left, and more importantly, the far left? It's curious that this election has left you wondering what the right will do. I'm wondering what the far left will do. Glass half full, I guess.

Comment Posted By Anon On 20.01.2010 @ 17:14

WHY CONSERVATISM IS DISCONNECTED FROM REALITY

Exxon and Aetna provide jobs, goods, services, and tax income to the public coffers. Bank of America, with its billions in bailout money, is now part of that altruistic government you seem so enamored of, so, gosh, I certainly hope you find them with your "best interests" in mind…or was that a bad investment?

What do Pelosi, Reid, and Obama provide? Thanks, though, for a good laugh. The political class "looking out for my interests." That's rich.

Comment Posted By Anon On 12.01.2010 @ 20:11

"Government solutions," huh? With today's political class? Surely, you jest.

Comment Posted By Anon On 12.01.2010 @ 18:32

BOOBS, BIRTHERS, AND BIRCHERS

Oh, please. The Birch Society is one of 100 "co-sponsors" of C-pac, meaning they gave a little money and will have a little booth there. Every civic event of this nature has its nutball booths, including every municipal street fair I've ever attended, yet no one says "Oh my God, Cleveland's gone commie because the American Communist Party had a booth at their Autumn Days streetfest!" Give me a break. You're engaging in the very hysteria and hyperbole that your posting is meant to criticize. No one is "embracing the John Birch Society," as you say. I've read you for a long time. Sometimes I agree. Sometimes I don't. But you've always been rational -- until now. If you actually believe what you've written here, that the conservative movement has been taken over by "birthers" and other "paranoids" from the far right, you should by all means leave and join those reasoned, rational folks on the left. I count myself on the far right, and I've never met a birther and have barely heard of JBS. You should get out more often and meet some conservatives, rather than reading about them on the internet.

Comment Posted By Anon On 23.12.2009 @ 19:46

PALIN MAINSTREAMS THE BIRTHERS

"Palin generally says whatever pops into her little head."

As in her "pretty" little head? As in she's a little woman and therefore should not be taken seriously? It would be such a treat if you liberals could surprise me and refrain from immediately becoming what you say you despise when criticizing a conservative. I won't hold my breath. I've grown accustomed to the liberal double standard -- and its twin, liberal hypocrisy.

Comment Posted By Anon On 5.12.2009 @ 18:22

MY CONSERVATIVE APOSTASY AND WHY I DON'T GIVE A F**K WHAT YOU THINK

michael reynolds:

There are more of us, I think, than you liberals want to admit, and we aren't feeling particularly purged. Nor do we have "overlords." That's what makes us conservative, or libertarian. It's the independence, you see. The intolerant religious right purist makes a nice, scary caricature, I know, but it's just that: a cartoon character bogeyman the now-neutered MSM trots out at election time. Many social cons stayed home in 2008 -- and of course have come to regret it mightily. They won't do that again. They can't wait to vote in 2010 and again in 2012, and the modern democrat party just does not offer even a moderate anything to support. It's easy for those of us who follow politics on the internet to imagine that some great conflict is afoot in the conservative arena, but in real life, conservatives, libertarians, conservative democrats, independents, and, increasingly, moderate democrats are all moving toward a perfect storm of agreement: the current regime must go. They will come together to purge Obama, Pelosi, and Reid, all of whom are proven -- rather than hypothetical, campaign-induced, media-driven -- examples of extremism and intolerance.

Comment Posted By Anon On 3.12.2009 @ 18:09

michael reynolds:

no, yes, yes, no, no.

Comment Posted By Anon On 3.12.2009 @ 16:15

In my little corner of the world, what I hear from conservatives is a desire not to have a leftist-lite brand of politics under the banner of "Republicanism." If there are going to be two parties, they simply must look different from one another. The candidacy of Dede Scozzafava in New York was a travesty, not because she didn't adhere to a purist conservative ideology, but because she differed so little from a purist liberal ideology. She offered conservatives not a single reason to support her candidacy. The Republican Party of the past 10 years or so has been little more than a slightly lower taxing big government democrat party. I think as candidates emerge who seem genuinely different on some big issues -- the size of government's reach, taxes, public vs. private health care, etc., the "purist" movement will fall away and voters will be able to say, "OK, he or she is different from him or her, so I have a choice to make." The purist tendencies, I believe, are simply an unfocused plea for something else, something other than the status quo that has been operating for so many years now.

I just really think you and others are wrong to assume the Republican Party is on a collision course with itself over ideological purity, and quoting Rush Limbaugh doesn't help make your case. That's just silly. Conservative voters know what they want, whether Limbaugh says it or not. Candidates won't have to be pure; they'll just have to offer something different than the predictable elite liberalism of the guy who currently holds the seat. When candidates emerge who reject the status quo in Washington, who support free speech and free enterprise, who have the courage to do such things as reject the elites' scam that is "global warming" and its massive taxation schemes, and who articulate a heartfelt belief in American exceptionalism, conservatives will back such people, despite their "scores" on an ideological purity test. Democrats and the media know this, which is why they are so invested in this "conservative civil war." It isn't going to turn out as they hope. Watch and see.

Comment Posted By Anon On 3.12.2009 @ 15:03


 


Next page »


Pages (7) : [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7


«« Back To Stats Page