I don't think there is any need for you to mention that you want to throw drug users in jail, but there it is...regardless of what I think is or is not needed.
Maybe you can have something to complain about when I compare drug users to Charles Manson and his Family.
JT, is Rep. Michael Paymar in your district? I hope not. He lived for a while in Duluth. Minus the time he spent in Canada dodging the draft during the Vietnam war. He's a liberal's hero.
That wasn't the supposed context that was in the study. If it was then it's trivial. Hitler belived in a socialistic system so I guess then we could compare him to liberals then ? Of course not. Yet a supposed study compares the two without looking at that ?
Hitler wanted to become something Germany had never really been which was a superpower. Powerful ? They were to an extnet but lost most of it after WW2 and were humilited after WW1 mainly by the French. He didn't want the past he wanted to start something that had never been done before the master race if you will. Thankfully it failed.
The term Nazi is thrown around so much by both sides that people have forgotten what they were really about. It's similar to comparing someone's political beliefs to the Manson family. With discourse like that it's hard to have a civilized conversation.
You want to start basing conversations on what others say Rick or engage the poster ? Or perhaps you'd like to be lumped in with the Dennis' and the Ramsey Clark's and Michael Moore's of the left. And we can trade quotes from the different factions without having an actual debate.
If not I'd be more than happy to have a conversation about these folks. You want to talk inflamitory rhetoric? Let's have a contest. I've seen more hateful bile spewed by the party that claims to be oh so tolerant of others views. They do, as long as you agree with them.
"Oh, you're one of the sodomites," Savage said. "You should only get AIDS and die, you pig. How's that? Why don't you see if you can sue me, you pig. You got nothing better than to put me down, you piece of garbage. You have got nothing to do today, go eat a sausage and choke on it."
The second radio talk show host to want to be a governor.
Well there's solid proof. He's doing a run for Governor schtick. So what ? Like he stands a snowballs chance in hell of getting elected in that loony bin of a state. Maybe he'd run if he was still on MSNBC too ?, Yea, that's it, he knew there'd be a recall for sure so he staged his own firing and loss of millions in revenue. Solid plan no doubt.
You might want to look around at some of the crackpots you have in your party before you launch ordinance.
You may rip on talk radio all you like, at least we're not the party of "Springer" LOL How fitting he's a Dem. Jerry Jerry Jerry........
JT, is Rep. Michael Paymar in your district? I hope not. He lived for a while in Duluth. Minus the time he spent in Canada dodging the draft during the Vietnam war. He's a liberal's hero.
Nope, he's not in my district.
My guy isn't much better. This is the fruit-loop from my district:
What's interesting is, I actually voted for him. The guy that ran against him ran on the Republican ticket (Gary Wayne DeYoung), was even nuttier. He didn't even get the MNGOP endorsement even though he was the only Republican running in the district.
Hitler belived in a socialistic system so I guess then we could compare him to liberals then ? Of course not. Yet a supposed study compares the two without looking at that ?
The study didn't mention any of the people in the press release. This was done in a follow up by one of the authors.
Odd that he mentions the late Sen. Strom Thurmond, but not Robert Byrd who was a "Kleagle" for the KKK. Byrd was chastised for using the phrase "white nigger" twice on national TV, filibustered the 1964 Civil Rights Act which was supported by a majority of Republicans for more than 14 hours and vowed never to fight "with a Negro by my side. Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds." However, Strom Thurmond was the example used by this author as some sort of proof of racial hatred by Republicans.
The term Nazi is thrown around so much by both sides that people have forgotten what they were really about.
How true this is. It isn't even taught in the schools anymore.
Nazism was fashioned after the socialism of Lenin. The red banner that was their flag was taken from the flag of socialism. They talked constantly of a proletarian revolution that would destroy the bourgeois class. Hitler and all his top lieutenants hated everything about the old Europe, including small states, the monarchs, the Church, the aristocracy, peace, and the free economy of the 19th century. To claim that "they preached a return to an idealized past" is ridiculous.
The Nazis were health fanatics who banned cigarette smoking, promoted vegetarianism and organic gardening, engaged in abortion and euthanasia, frowned on all capitalist excess, and even promoted animal rights. They were environmentalists who locked up land from development to promote paganism. They introduced socialized medicine and government-mandated vacations at government spas, imposed handgun control, and expanded unemployment insurance and Social Security. The Nazi government imagined itself as the employer of every citizen, the planner of every production decision, and the redistributor of every accumulated pocket of wealth in society.
The term "Nazi" itself is short for the National Socialist German Workers Party.
To compare Hitler and Nazism to the "right wing" would be laughable if it were not so much hate speech which the left claims to be against.
If Nazi comparisons are out of line for one side, they should be out of line by the other side, too, Right, Dan? No one here are Nazis, and the authors did not say Reagan was a Nazi. No Nazis, no Nazis.
Truth be told, I find that Nazi connection hardly interesting, when compared all the things that were mentioned in the news release. Though nothing was surprising to me, the study (without reading it, I admit) seems to bring in all the elements of conservative thought. That, to me is much more interesting.
Maybe the Nazi angle was just done to attract attention. On that count, it was highly successful.
Eleven of the 12 Democrats in the state Senate left for Albuquerque, N.M., as a first special session called by the governor to address redistricting drew to a close and he called a second special session, which began Monday afternoon. The second session could last up to 30 days.
They're at it again. It's gerrymandering when Republicans are in charge. It's simple redistricting when it's Democrats.
What the Democrats of Texas fail to tell you is, the state is 60% registered Republicans, but the districting is in such a way that Democrats have an advantage and don't want to change that.
Muskwa, you live in TX correct? Can you provide any insight?
Let em keep it up. The state will go %70 to 25% R's, fine with me. In fact I hope the Grahms, Kerry, Kuchnich and Dean keep on talking and following the path their on.
Two years ago the legislature couldn't agree on redistricting so a judge did it for them. The governor and the Republicans want to try again in the legislature because it's their job to do it, not a judge's.
The dems are in the minority for the first time in 130 years and they don't know how to handle it. They have yet to learn how to work within the system, the way the repubs have had to do.
Perhaps it wouldn't be if the Dems their could behave like adults and do their job, which is to vote on proposed legislation. Great precedent though. Don't have a majority and things don't go your way ? Simply turn tail and run instead of your job.
The dems are in the minority for the first time in 130 years and they don't know how to handle it. They have yet to learn how to work within the system, the way the repubs have had to do.
A new analysis by a prominent political scientist suggests that of all the states that voted for Al Gore in 2000, Minnesota is the most likely to go for Bush next year.
Minnesota wasn't the closest state in the nation three years ago, but it tipped Republican last year, which tilts the scales for next year's presidential race, according to an analysis to be released today by Larry Sabato, director of the University of Virginia's Center for Politics.
Last year, Minnesota elected a Republican governor and U.S. senator, and the GOP picked up congressional and legislative seats. That may signal a change for a state that has voted Democratic in 10 of the past 11 presidential elections.
Yes but sometimes it takes a very long time. For instance, the liberal FDR was elected in 1932 and we didn't get a real conservative until 1980. Enjoy libs!
"A successful talk radio host is a self-conscious parody of outraged infallibility. He's a master of annoyed-to-peeved-to-angry theatricality. (He can dial it up or down). He thinks you should be angry, too. If you are, you'll spend more time listening to him.
"But most of all he's always right, hence there's little patience for "respectful" debate. Debate implies nuance. Nuance is boring radio. You want a steady audience? Stick to: "I'm right. Call in and tell me so. Otherwise shut your gaping pie-hole."
A notable exception to this is Michael Medved. He will actually take calls from people who disagree with him. And he'll be respectfully engaging.
In domestic policy the President pursued a middle course, continuing most of the New Deal and Fair Deal programs, emphasizing a balanced budget. As desegregation of schools began, he sent troops into Little Rock, Arkansas, to assure compliance with the orders of a Federal court; he also ordered the complete desegregation of the Armed Forces. "There must be no second class citizens in this country," he wrote.
Conservative Republicans wanted him to reverse Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal programs and return to a less active government. He disappointed them. He continued most of the New Deal programs, such as Social Security. In fact, he greatly expanded Social Security in 1954 to include about 7 million self-employed farmers and added a provision for federal disability insurance. His public works programs were bigger than Roosevelt’s had been. They included the St. Lawrence Seaway (1954) and the Interstate Highway System (1956), the largest construction project in history. He also encouraged the building of nuclear power plants and government-sponsored research into other peaceful uses for nuclear energy.
The conservatives’ biggest fight with Eisenhower, however, concerned Senator Joseph R. McCarthy of Wisconsin, who made a career of exposing alleged Communists and Communist sympathizers in government. McCarthy demanded access to government files that he said would prove that Communists in the State Department were shaping American foreign policy to benefit the Soviets. Eisenhower refused, insisting that his administration had found and dismissed all the Communists.
If that is the best you can do to try to turn IKE into a Leftist...?
I didn't do such a thing. This is just another example of you ignoring historical facts because they do not fit into your obviously warped world view. Ike was a moderate to liberal republican. He was not a conservative.
Suppose I were to tell you that, despite the fact that blacks are just 11 percent of the American population, more than half the men fined for misconduct while playing professional basketball are black -- and concluded that this shows the NBA to be racist. What would your reaction be?
and when you you shown the least concern for other people's feelings, bodine?
I am not one that proclaims that people should be sensitive to others feelings. I was only showing the hypocrisy of the liberal.
I don't think there is any need for you to mention that you want to throw drug users in jail, but there it is...regardless of what I think is or is not needed.
Maybe you can have something to complain about when I compare drug users to Charles Manson and his Family.
JT, is Rep. Michael Paymar in your district? I hope not. He lived for a while in Duluth. Minus the time he spent in Canada dodging the draft during the Vietnam war. He's a liberal's hero.
and yet...
if I recall, you have already pretty much done that.
of course Manson was also big on espousing "family" values....just like Republicans
crabgrass 7/28/03 2:22pm
That wasn't the supposed context that was in the study. If it was then it's trivial. Hitler belived in a socialistic system so I guess then we could compare him to liberals then ? Of course not. Yet a supposed study compares the two without looking at that ?
Hitler wanted to become something Germany had never really been which was a superpower. Powerful ? They were to an extnet but lost most of it after WW2 and were humilited after WW1 mainly by the French. He didn't want the past he wanted to start something that had never been done before the master race if you will. Thankfully it failed.
The term Nazi is thrown around so much by both sides that people have forgotten what they were really about. It's similar to comparing someone's political beliefs to the Manson family. With discourse like that it's hard to have a civilized conversation.
"With discourse like that it's hard to have a civilized conversation."
Memo to: Ann Coulter.
You want to start basing conversations on what others say Rick or engage the poster ? Or perhaps you'd like to be lumped in with the Dennis' and the Ramsey Clark's and Michael Moore's of the left. And we can trade quotes from the different factions without having an actual debate.
If not I'd be more than happy to have a conversation about these folks. You want to talk inflamitory rhetoric? Let's have a contest. I've seen more hateful bile spewed by the party that claims to be oh so tolerant of others views. They do, as long as you agree with them.
"I've seen more hateful bile spewed by the party that claims to be oh so tolerant of others views."
Evidently you weren't around 1992-2000.
Too bad. You missed a show.
People laughed when I said Michael Savage orchestrated his firing at MSNBC
Here's your man, conservatives.
"Oh, you're one of the sodomites," Savage said. "You should only get AIDS and die, you pig. How's that? Why don't you see if you can sue me, you pig. You got nothing better than to put me down, you piece of garbage. You have got nothing to do today, go eat a sausage and choke on it."
The second radio talk show host to want to be a governor.
He makes Jesse Ventura look like Tony Blair.
Well there's solid proof. He's doing a run for Governor schtick. So what ? Like he stands a snowballs chance in hell of getting elected in that loony bin of a state. Maybe he'd run if he was still on MSNBC too ?, Yea, that's it, he knew there'd be a recall for sure so he staged his own firing and loss of millions in revenue. Solid plan no doubt.
You might want to look around at some of the crackpots you have in your party before you launch ordinance.
You may rip on talk radio all you like, at least we're not the party of "Springer" LOL How fitting he's a Dem. Jerry Jerry Jerry........
If Savage steps into the race, I'll have more respect for him.
I respect Springer more than ANY of those radio talkers.
He'll lose, but at least he'll step into the arena and take the hits.
Those radio talk show hosts hurl bullets from their cushy berths with no consequence.
enough said.
I doubt it he'll get votes simply because of his show and people will think it's funny. It is, in a very sad way.
But being the big booster you are I'm sure you'll keep tuning into the show everyday ;)
JT, is Rep. Michael Paymar in your district? I hope not. He lived for a while in Duluth. Minus the time he spent in Canada dodging the draft during the Vietnam war. He's a liberal's hero.
Nope, he's not in my district.
My guy isn't much better. This is the fruit-loop from my district:
http://ww3.house.leg.state.mn.us/members/members.asp?district=65A
What's interesting is, I actually voted for him. The guy that ran against him ran on the Republican ticket (Gary Wayne DeYoung), was even nuttier. He didn't even get the MNGOP endorsement even though he was the only Republican running in the district.
So, what's up with St. Paul, there JT?
So, what's up with St. Paul, there JT?
I dunno. I'm guessing no Republican in his/her right mind would run for state office. They can't afford the pay cut.
:-)
Hitler belived in a socialistic system so I guess then we could compare him to liberals then ? Of course not. Yet a supposed study compares the two without looking at that ?
The study didn't mention any of the people in the press release. This was done in a follow up by one of the authors.
Odd that he mentions the late Sen. Strom Thurmond, but not Robert Byrd who was a "Kleagle" for the KKK. Byrd was chastised for using the phrase "white nigger" twice on national TV, filibustered the 1964 Civil Rights Act which was supported by a majority of Republicans for more than 14 hours and vowed never to fight "with a Negro by my side. Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds." However, Strom Thurmond was the example used by this author as some sort of proof of racial hatred by Republicans.
The term Nazi is thrown around so much by both sides that people have forgotten what they were really about.
How true this is. It isn't even taught in the schools anymore.
Nazism was fashioned after the socialism of Lenin. The red banner that was their flag was taken from the flag of socialism. They talked constantly of a proletarian revolution that would destroy the bourgeois class. Hitler and all his top lieutenants hated everything about the old Europe, including small states, the monarchs, the Church, the aristocracy, peace, and the free economy of the 19th century. To claim that "they preached a return to an idealized past" is ridiculous.
The Nazis were health fanatics who banned cigarette smoking, promoted vegetarianism and organic gardening, engaged in abortion and euthanasia, frowned on all capitalist excess, and even promoted animal rights. They were environmentalists who locked up land from development to promote paganism. They introduced socialized medicine and government-mandated vacations at government spas, imposed handgun control, and expanded unemployment insurance and Social Security. The Nazi government imagined itself as the employer of every citizen, the planner of every production decision, and the redistributor of every accumulated pocket of wealth in society.
The term "Nazi" itself is short for the National Socialist German Workers Party.
To compare Hitler and Nazism to the "right wing" would be laughable if it were not so much hate speech which the left claims to be against.
If Nazi comparisons are out of line for one side, they should be out of line by the other side, too, Right, Dan? No one here are Nazis, and the authors did not say Reagan was a Nazi. No Nazis, no Nazis.
Truth be told, I find that Nazi connection hardly interesting, when compared all the things that were mentioned in the news release. Though nothing was surprising to me, the study (without reading it, I admit) seems to bring in all the elements of conservative thought. That, to me is much more interesting.
Maybe the Nazi angle was just done to attract attention. On that count, it was highly successful.
The whole "study" was ignorant and biased.
Lets just leave it at that.
Texas Senators Take Page From House Playbook, Bolt
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,93118,00.html
Eleven of the 12 Democrats in the state Senate left for Albuquerque, N.M., as a first special session called by the governor to address redistricting drew to a close and he called a second special session, which began Monday afternoon. The second session could last up to 30 days.
They're at it again. It's gerrymandering when Republicans are in charge. It's simple redistricting when it's Democrats.
What the Democrats of Texas fail to tell you is, the state is 60% registered Republicans, but the districting is in such a way that Democrats have an advantage and don't want to change that.
Muskwa, you live in TX correct? Can you provide any insight?
Let em keep it up. The state will go %70 to 25% R's, fine with me. In fact I hope the Grahms, Kerry, Kuchnich and Dean keep on talking and following the path their on.
It's also seven years before the state should be able to redistrict, gerrymander. Whatever you want to call it.
But Republicans didn't like the outcome of the last one, right? So now they want to do it again.
Ride for the border you Democrat Desporados!!!
Viva Tejas!!!
Two years ago the legislature couldn't agree on redistricting so a judge did it for them. The governor and the Republicans want to try again in the legislature because it's their job to do it, not a judge's.
The dems are in the minority for the first time in 130 years and they don't know how to handle it. They have yet to learn how to work within the system, the way the repubs have had to do.
They can redistrict every 10 years (not every two years) like other states.
Well then the Democrats should have done the right thing, and agreed to districts that actually represented the makeup of the population.
I lived in Florida for a year and a half. I thought politics was mean there.
Texas must be at least the equal.
Perhaps it wouldn't be if the Dems their could behave like adults and do their job, which is to vote on proposed legislation. Great precedent though. Don't have a majority and things don't go your way ? Simply turn tail and run instead of your job.
It's the same way everywhere Muskwa.
Here's an article from the local paper for all the lefties to learn from: "Democrats losing clout, poll finds"
http://www.twincities.com/mld/pioneerpress/news/nation/6405846.htm
I haven't learned anything, CSC. Tell me something I didn't know.
It's a damn shame, I know that.
You sound a little irritated Rick.
Dubya could win Minnesota in '04.
http://www.twincities.com/mld/pioneerpress/news/politics/6413568.htm
A new analysis by a prominent political scientist suggests that of all the states that voted for Al Gore in 2000, Minnesota is the most likely to go for Bush next year.
Minnesota wasn't the closest state in the nation three years ago, but it tipped Republican last year, which tilts the scales for next year's presidential race, according to an analysis to be released today by Larry Sabato, director of the University of Virginia's Center for Politics.
Last year, Minnesota elected a Republican governor and U.S. senator, and the GOP picked up congressional and legislative seats. That may signal a change for a state that has voted Democratic in 10 of the past 11 presidential elections.
That's a damn shame.
The pendulum ALWAYS swings back.
Yes but sometimes it takes a very long time. For instance, the liberal FDR was elected in 1932 and we didn't get a real conservative until 1980. Enjoy libs!
Talk Radio 101: Brian Lambert
"A successful talk radio host is a self-conscious parody of outraged infallibility. He's a master of annoyed-to-peeved-to-angry theatricality. (He can dial it up or down). He thinks you should be angry, too. If you are, you'll spend more time listening to him.
"But most of all he's always right, hence there's little patience for "respectful" debate. Debate implies nuance. Nuance is boring radio. You want a steady audience? Stick to: "I'm right. Call in and tell me so. Otherwise shut your gaping pie-hole."
A notable exception to this is Michael Medved. He will actually take calls from people who disagree with him. And he'll be respectfully engaging.
Brian Lambert: a man that doesn't know what he is writing about.
I don't get to listen much anymore, but wasn't Wodele on the AM 1500 morning show?
Lambert is an idiot if he's talking about that show. It's never been the sort of in your face, angry, shut your pie hole type of show he's describing.
Wodele said he wasn't angry and confrontational enough. That's why they canned him.
They're bringing in that Bob Davis guy. He can fill the bill.
Have you ever listened to the AM 1500 morning show, Rick?
He must be a real bump on a log if they consider the other guys on that show as angry and confrontational.
Apparently Bill Moyers didn't think Ike and the Republicans were conservative. http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=14532
Consider this, fold:
In domestic policy the President pursued a middle course, continuing most of the New Deal and Fair Deal programs, emphasizing a balanced budget. As desegregation of schools began, he sent troops into Little Rock, Arkansas, to assure compliance with the orders of a Federal court; he also ordered the complete desegregation of the Armed Forces. "There must be no second class citizens in this country," he wrote.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/history/presidents/de34.html
And consider this:
Conservative Republicans wanted him to reverse Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal programs and return to a less active government. He disappointed them. He continued most of the New Deal programs, such as Social Security. In fact, he greatly expanded Social Security in 1954 to include about 7 million self-employed farmers and added a provision for federal disability insurance. His public works programs were bigger than Roosevelt’s had been. They included the St. Lawrence Seaway (1954) and the Interstate Highway System (1956), the largest construction project in history. He also encouraged the building of nuclear power plants and government-sponsored research into other peaceful uses for nuclear energy.
The conservatives’ biggest fight with Eisenhower, however, concerned Senator Joseph R. McCarthy of Wisconsin, who made a career of exposing alleged Communists and Communist sympathizers in government. McCarthy demanded access to government files that he said would prove that Communists in the State Department were shaping American foreign policy to benefit the Soviets. Eisenhower refused, insisting that his administration had found and dismissed all the Communists.
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/refpages/RefArticle.aspx?refid=761554032&pn=2
fold: why must you insist on proving over and over your ignorance of so many things?
If that is the best you can do to try to turn IKE into a Leftist...?
I didn't do such a thing. This is just another example of you ignoring historical facts because they do not fit into your obviously warped world view. Ike was a moderate to liberal republican. He was not a conservative.
Come on, fold, deal with the facts. You can do it. We know you can. The first steps are always the hardest.
This link is for JT: http://www.chicagocircle.com/links/my_schedule.html
Suppose I were to tell you that, despite the fact that blacks are just 11 percent of the American population, more than half the men fined for misconduct while playing professional basketball are black -- and concluded that this shows the NBA to be racist. What would your reaction be?
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/ts20030731.shtml
how many blacks in the front office?
how many dopers in the front office?
lots...same as everywhere else.
BTW, Budweiser is the official drugof the NBA
That's because they don't name it themselves, Bill, but the media has been carrying it on since the '60s.
Man... the war against the police?
yeah... theres one going on everyday... but you'd have to open your eyes to see it, ninja.. just like I keep saying.