I'm voting for McCain....

ccodiane

ccodiane

New Member
It's not an ad hominem attack if it's true and is substantive to the argument.......the proof is in the posting, Lay.
 
Leilani Garden

Leilani Garden

Well-Known Member
ccodiane said:
"fuck off you stupid liberal."

Italics or no, that is the question....
Click to expand...
Eh, you're all smoke with no substance. You don't read posts. You simply peck through enough to figure out if someone agrees with your vitriol, and if not, you resort to absurd statements that hardly constitute logical discourse.

By the way . . . "fuck off you stupid liberal" is not a question, as you have asserted here. It's an imperative sentence. You stupid, uneducated fascist. :twisted:
 
Leilani Garden

Leilani Garden

Well-Known Member
ccodiane said:
It's not an ad hominem attack if it's true and is substantive to the argument.......the proof is in the posting, Lay.
Click to expand...
Yes, it is an ad hominem attack. It is not "substantive" to the argument, and there is no proof in "fuck off you stupid liberal." Proof of what? Your hatred and anger? If you knew what ad hominem meant, and how it came to be a term relevant to argumentation, you'd understand this. But I have real doubts about your comprehension of the term.
 
ViRedd

ViRedd

New Member
And yet, leilani makes no mention of all the popular, fascistic programs/laws and regulations fostered by progressives that I mentioned in my last post. Why?

By the way leilani, you made a good post above.

Vi
 
ccodiane

ccodiane

New Member
"fuck off you stupid liberal" is not a question, as you have asserted here.

I'm not "asserting" it be a question. I know it to be fact. The liberal part. Stupid is derived directly from that observation.
 
ccodiane

ccodiane

New Member
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica][/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]
http://constitutionalistnc.tripod.com/hitler-leftist/index.html




Hitler was a Socialist[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Hitler's Anti-Tobacco Campaign[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Hitler's Animal Rights Campaign[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Hitler's Persecution of the Christian Churches[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Nazi Gun Control[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Hitler Pro-Abortion[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Hitler's Leftist Economic Policies[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Homosexuality in the Nazi Party[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Hitler's Euthanasia Initiative[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Fascism is Leftist[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Nazism and Education[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Some Nazi Posters[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Kangas Myths[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Antisemitism backgrounder[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]About John J. Ray[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Contact Us[/FONT]
 
Leilani Garden

Leilani Garden

Well-Known Member
ViRedd said:
And yet, leilani makes no mention of all the popular, fascistic programs/laws and regulations fostered by progressives that I mentioned in my last post. Why?

By the way leilani, you made a good post above.

Vi
Click to expand...

Your post is more relevant, definitely. And it takes more time to construct a reply to so many different points brought up in a single post. I got sidetracked with the hysterical posts made by ccdiane and wanted to point out that his/her vitriolic attacks are not relevant. Sorry about that.

What you are describing, with regard to laws about trans-fats, plastic bags, and most of the other stuff you brought up, would fall into dictatorship. Fascism is a type of dictatorship, but there are others. And it's certainly possible for the pendulum to swing the other way, away from fascism on the far right, to communism on the far left.

That's why I prefer moderates. My own personal views are very liberal, I'll admit, and for that reason, I wouldn't want a whole government, all three branches, that is, walking down the same path that I do--liberalism. Sure, I want everything my way. (At least I admit it.) But if all three branches were of the same mindset, we'd start swinging way too far to the left and possibly experience a leftist dictatorship.

I think the point might be that you are talking about dictatorship in general, and I was referring to a fascist type of dictatorship. Both are dangerous.
 
Last edited:
ccodiane

ccodiane

New Member
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]The pink triangle, symbol of the "gay rights" movement, is familiar to many Americans. As the badge used by the Nazis to designate homosexuals in the concentration camps, the pink triangle perfectly expresses the message of "gay rights." That message is that homosexuals are currently and historically victims of irrational prejudice and that those who oppose homosexuality are hateful bigots. This all-important victim status engenders sympathy for the homosexual "cause" among well-meaning heterosexuals. Thus, millions of otherwise rational Americans support a movement whose sole unifying characteristic is a sexual lifestyle they personally find repugnant.


http://constitutionalistnc.tripod.com/hitler-leftist/id12.html
[/FONT]
 
Leilani Garden

Leilani Garden

Well-Known Member
I don't necessarily agree with all of the new laws that you've touched upon, either. Banning smoking in public establishments, for example. I definitely get it that people who don't smoke shouldn't have to be exposed to it. But what about the rights of the private owner of, say, a restaurant? People have the option of entering any given establishment, so if it's one that allows smoking, they're free to go elsewhere. THis issue is a tough one, from a practical point, but I really do agree that the rights of private owners are encroached upon.

Plastic bags? Well, they're made from petroleum, and there are heavy duty concerns about that right now, correct? For that reason alone, I support it. But I do see your concerns. I just don't see forcing merchants to find other materials to package consumer items in as a huge affront to personal rights.

Trans-fats? Well, dang, they do taste good, don't they!? But when we consider that we're all helping to finance health costs, no matter how it is sliced, then we run into hairier arguments. I don't have much of an opinion on whether or not a city, or a county, or a state, or whatever, should be allowed to say people can't eat what they want. I just don't know. I do know that I don't eat that trash.

Those are harder questions, for sure, but I don't see them as forcing hardships that can lead to a dictatorship on the people. The tobacco in private establishments is more problematic, in my opinion, as far as talking about whether something encroaches on personal rights.
 
ccodiane

ccodiane

New Member
Leilani Garden said:
It's not COULD it be that; that IS what fascism is--strong, central government controlled by corporations, the central government basically merging with corporate interests. This administration is not a perfect example of it.

Regarding the notion a few posts back about liberals and universities? That's not news, that universities are places where one will find a lot of folks with liberal views. There are a lot of reasons for that, one of which is that those who dedicate their lives to scholarly work don't expect to earn huge amounts of money. Most university professors do not make much compared to those working in the private sector. In other words, they teach and research because that's how they want to spend their lives. Our system of education is based upon the ancient Greek system; hence the words "university" (coming from UNIVERSAL) and "liberal arts" (meaning education that is not strictly focused on trades, etc, and includes general education, such as natural sciences, humanities, and so on). It's also not news that those who embrace fascism, whether they recognize it as such or not, are opposed to liberal arts in general and make disparaging remarks about intellectualism, universities, arts, and so on. That's one of the symptoms of fascism.

It's pointless trying to explain this to those who call using ad hominem attacks "arguments" (as the person who called me names). You can't construct an argument around name calling. You construct an argument around making a statement, backing it up with credible sources or some other source of evidence, and then drawing conclusions. Resorting to "fuck off liberal" doesn't cut it. And that brings up the fallacy of arguing with the illogical--it's not possible. Why bother? You can't win when someone's response will just be "fuck off you stupid liberal." Where's the substance?

Regarding fascism, Mussolini, Hitler, and the post back there about US support for these regimes. Yes, that did happen. It did not last, however, did it? (But there are so many reasons for the US's involvement in WW2.) And it's also true that the United States had an "outbreak" of fascism after WW2. We've got another outbreak now. It does not change what the historical facts are about fascism, however. It just means that this time, it's us. Look at the rampant nationalism. Look at the disdain for universities. Look at the attacks on gays. Look at the merging of corporate and government interests. Look at the promotion of a national religion. That's where the symptoms are. (And yes, it's true that Wilson was quite a racist. So what?)

Back to that marriage issue, and that certain someone's insistence that failing marriages are the fault of all the selfish liberals who have no regard for the needs of children and so on. Interestingly enough, the rates of divorce are higher in the so-called red states (generally speaking), where you'll find so many more conservatives per capita. Those states have higher rates of divorce, so it kind of blows out the bottom of your allegations that liberals are responsible for high divorce rates.
Click to expand...

.........................you said it, not me.
 
machetekills

machetekills

Active Member
they are trying to control the world. open your eyes dumbasses lol. be friends? you cant really be friends with people who dont agree at all with what your saying
 
Leilani Garden

Leilani Garden

Well-Known Member
ccodiane said:
My own personal views are very liberal

Sure, I want everything my way.



Wow, I'm poignant.
Click to expand...
You're just being silly now. Read in context. Did you miss that year of elementary education? Context, darling, context.

I was admitting my own "shortcomings" and owning up to wanting things to be my way. Is there really anyone who can say differently with any truth? I don't think so.

You're not intimidating at all. You're boring. And uninformed.
 
machetekills

machetekills

Active Member
McCain has the right idea right now. he wants to stay in iraq indefinit. thats truly the only way it would work. if obama pulls the troops out now he just left a dismantled nation to fend for itself. but as far as everything has gone we have to stay there and clean up the mess we made. WE made not bush.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top