Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-burne ... 82814.html

Ran across this article from Jan '08, pre-election. Succinct, to the point....and correct.

*****************

"While all Americans cherish the triumphant individual myth, we often disagree on crucial elements of the narrative. One point of contention is the eligibility rules. Historically, liberals have supported a more inclusive definition of who the narrative applies to; for example, progressives argue that everyone should be eligible to run for President: male or female, black or white, gay or straight, believer or atheist, able-bodied or physically challenged. Conservatives contend the position should be reserved for white, male, straight, able-bodied Christians, and apply similar restrictions to other positions of power.


Another point of contention concerns the starting line for each of our lives. Liberals believe in the notion of a level playing field. They contend that every American deserves the right to unfettered opportunity and, therefore, it is unfair to provide some children with advantages that others do not have; for example, progressives believe every child has the right to a quality education. In contrast, conservative thinking is heavily influenced by economic Calvinism, particularly the notion that poverty is an indication God does not look with favor upon an individual: if a poor child is served by mediocre public schools and has inadequate healthcare, conservatives argue that's what God intended.



Liberal and conservative values and policies stem from their interpretation of the triumphant individual myth. Progressives defend the notion of elemental human rights, the idea of a strong social safety net - food, housing, medical care, and education. Conservatives emphasize property rights and the necessity of the rich and powerful to operate without interference.

On issue after issue, liberals and conservatives see things in a radically different light: The environment? Progressive see they have a responsibility to sustain a healthy environment for future generations - it's an extension of the notion of the common good. Conservatives see the environment as free resources to be used to maximize individual advantage. We perceive differently, because we have different core beliefs."





As I said, nailed it.

Of all the posts you have made that one is more full of shit, I don't even know what to say.

Since Z is gone: Liberals believe that the government should reload their bong in addition to paying their rent for them.

bobbythekidd wrote:Of all the posts you have made that one is more full of poop, I don't even know what to say.

Mostly, Bobby, because you can't say anything to refute it. The guy is dead on and it injures you to have it held up before your eyes. Again.

First off it's Bob dammit! The article lost it's credibility in the first sentence. Why does the author think there is no such thing as a triumphant individual?

bobbythekidd wrote:First off it's Bob dammit! The article lost it's credibility in the first sentence. Why does the author think there is no such thing as a triumphant individual?

Read on, Bob.

It's from a decidedly liberal outlet, but it's still dead on.

It can't be dead on. I am a conservative and I am an atheist. It's bunk.

bobbythekidd wrote:It can't be dead on. I am a conservative and I am an atheist. It's bunk.

It's also very general, Bobby. Take from it what you wish.

It's B......











Fuck it.

BTK, the Bullshitter in Chief has spoken...there is no arguing...

You had to know it was a piece of crap because (1) Cap said it hit the nail on the head and (2) it was in the Huffington Post...

Case Closed...there's no arguing it....

You know better...I know better...but we're wrong because Cap is always right....err, I mean correct...

Col Hogan wrote:BTK, the Bullshitter in Chief has spoken...there is no arguing...

You had to know it was a piece of crap because (1) Cap said it hit the nail on the head and (2) it was in the Huffington Post...

Case Closed...there's no arguing it....

You know better...I know better...but we're wrong because Cap is always right....err, I mean correct...

You get emotional, you lose, Col.

Cap'n Cat wrote:

Col Hogan wrote:BTK, the Bullshitter in Chief has spoken...there is no arguing...

You had to know it was a piece of crap because (1) Cap said it hit the nail on the head and (2) it was in the Huffington Post...

Case Closed...there's no arguing it....

You know better...I know better...but we're wrong because Cap is always right....err, I mean correct...

You get emotional, you lose, Col.

Emotional...I'm laughing my ass off from your original post...

You believe that crap...you lose...

Col Hogan wrote:

Cap'n Cat wrote:

You get emotional, you lose, Col.

Emotional...I'm laughing my ass off from your original post...

You believe that crap...you lose...

I know it hurts, Col, this daily barrage of Conk shortfalls, but try to maintain some dignity, eh?

Cap'n Cat wrote:

Col Hogan wrote:
Emotional...I'm laughing my ass off from your original post...

You believe that crap...you lose...

I know it hurts, Col, this daily barrage of Conk shortfalls, but try to maintain some dignity, eh?

I lost my dignity years ago when Bush and Rush and the merry band of Neo-Cons hijacked the conservative movement...

Col Hogan wrote:I lost my dignity years ago when Bush and Rush and the merry band of Neo-Cons hijacked the conservative movement...

I hope that was the last vote I will ever regret casting.

Cap'n Cat wrote:

bobbythekidd wrote:It can't be dead on. I am a conservative and I am an atheist. It's bunk.

It's also very general, Bobby. Take from it what you wish.

Here is what I've observed about the parties from working with a bluegrass band at political events over the years:

Republicans: Easy to deal with on the business end.-- they only want to know how much for how long and they don't care what or if you play as long as they can use your mics to make never-ending speeches. May or may not feed you.

Democrats: Want to know "what can you give us?" Always feed you, like the music, usually clap in the right place.

Greens: Don't have any money, always have a good pot-luck meal and da kine bud. Love bluegrass, know the words to many standards, keep partying after the event, many earth muffins dancing braless.

I bet I can create strawman arguments as well as this guy, let me give it a try.

Liberals are elitists. They think the common man is stupid and incapable of making decisions for himself - decisions about retirement, his own life and health. Rather than allow the economy to be run by the creativity and ingenuity of common folk, they want for a government made up of social activists and lawyers from the collectivist socialist good-ole-boy network to run everything. They fear people who are convinced they can live without big government as it threatens their power to control society and its wealth. They don't want people to be able to puruse their own happiness but want everyone to be equally miserable. They have fostered victim mentalities in every possible subset of the non-hetero-white male population to get them to beg the government for more social engineering. They use their control over the media and public schools to indoctrinate people into beleiving that they need them.

houndawg wrote:

Cap'n Cat wrote:

It's also very general, Bobby. Take from it what you wish.

Here is what I've observed about the parties from working with a bluegrass band at political events over the years:

Republicans: Easy to deal with on the business end.-- they only want to know how much for how long and they don't care what or if you play as long as they can use your mics to make never-ending speeches. May or may not feed you.

Democrats: Want to know "what can you give us?" Always feed you, like the music, usually clap in the right place.

Greens: Don't have any money, always have a good pot-luck meal and da kine bud. Love bluegrass, know the words to many standards, keep partying after the event, many earth muffins dancing braless.

Now there's an insider perspective you'd only get on CS!

Pwns wrote:I bet I can create strawman arguments as well as this guy, let me give it a try.

Liberals are elitists. They think the common man is stupid and incapable of making decisions for himself - decisions about retirement, his own life and health. Rather than allow the economy to be run by the creativity and ingenuity of common folk, they want for a government made up of social activists and lawyers from the collectivist socialist good-ole-boy network to run everything. They fear people who are convinced they can live without big government as it threatens their power to control society and its wealth. They don't want people to be able to puruse their own happiness but want everyone to be equally miserable. They have fostered victim mentalities in every possible subset of the non-hetero-white male population to get them to beg the government for more social engineering. They use their control over the media and public schools to indoctrinate people into beleiving that they need them.

Funny. I just heard Rush Limabugh say the very same thing yesterday!

Cap'n Cat wrote:

Pwns wrote:I bet I can create strawman arguments as well as this guy, let me give it a try.

Liberals are elitists. They think the common man is stupid and incapable of making decisions for himself - decisions about retirement, his own life and health. Rather than allow the economy to be run by the creativity and ingenuity of common folk, they want for a government made up of social activists and lawyers from the collectivist socialist good-ole-boy network to run everything. They fear people who are convinced they can live without big government as it threatens their power to control society and its wealth. They don't want people to be able to puruse their own happiness but want everyone to be equally miserable. They have fostered victim mentalities in every possible subset of the non-hetero-white male population to get them to beg the government for more social engineering. They use their control over the media and public schools to indoctrinate people into beleiving that they need them.

Funny. I just heard Rush Limabugh say the very same thing yesterday!

Cap'n, I believe that Pwns was trying to demonstrate that he could come up with a negative stereotype of liberals that was just as valid as the Huffington Post's negative stereotype of conservatives. While Pwns stereotype might not be indicative of all liberals he did successfully exaggerate some of the most common negative perceptions of liberals just as well as the Huffington Post did for conservatives.

Case in point, I am a fiscal conservative and capitalist yet I believe:
- that everyone should be able to run for President
- that everyone should have access to a quality education (America is the land of opportunity and that opportunity starts with a good education, what anyone does with that opportunity is up to them).
- in the triumphment individual; who pulls him or herself up by their bootstraps. A safety net should be temporary (except in cases of a condition that makes full self sufficiency extremely unlikely) to help people overcome setbacks and get back on their feet. Generational welfare (individual or corporate is not a good thing).
- that the government has a role in protecting the environment. Corporations tend to be short-term profit focused and don't always act in a manner that is best for current or future generations.

The Huffington Post description was meant to feed the appetites of those that have drank the blue kool-aid and aren't able to open up their minds and see that everything isn't so cut and dried. This isn't any different than Rush feeding the appetites of those that have drank the red kool-aid.

Cap'n Cat wrote:

bobbythekidd wrote:Of all the posts you have made that one is more full of poop, I don't even know what to say.

Mostly, Bobby, because you can't say anything to refute it. The guy is dead on and it injures you to have it held up before your eyes. Again.

I think it is more that Bobby doesn't need to say anything to refute it. I think the guy wrote this about 1890

I am white, and conservative and think that Bobby Jingul would make a great president. I also lobbied for JC Watts to run years back. How does this fit your cookie cutter view of conservatives?

Col Hogan wrote:BTK, the Bullshitter in Chief has spoken...there is no arguing...

You had to know it was a piece of crap because (1) Cap said it hit the nail on the head and (2) it was in the Huffington Post...

Case Closed...there's no arguing it....

You know better...I know better...but we're wrong because Cap is always right....err, I mean correct...

Gotta agree with Colonel on this one......

CSUBUCDAD wrote:I am white, and conservative and think that Bobby Jingul would make a great president. I also lobbied for JC Watts to run years back. How does this fit your cookie cutter view of conservatives?

BUCDADDY, you need to really research JC, he was a wolf in sheep's clothing, the Repubs were not even going to support him going any further with his career. As for JINDAL, he came off as such a dweeb the last time they propped him up there to speak he is toast as well. The Repubs keep trying to come up with their own Obama, and their own Hillary Clinton then we truly are down to a one party system right now.

Wedgebuster wrote:

CSUBUCDAD wrote:I am white, and conservative and think that Bobby Jingul would make a great president. I also lobbied for JC Watts to run years back. How does this fit your cookie cutter view of conservatives?

BUCDADDY, you need to really research JC, he was a wolf in sheep's clothing, the Repubs were not even going to support him going any further with his career. As for JINDAL, he came off as such a dweeb the last time they propped him up there to speak he is toast as well. The Repubs keep trying to come up with their own Obama, and their own Hillary Clinton then we truly are down to a one party system right now.

It would be inaccurate to characterize either J.C. Watts of Bobby Jindal as lightweights. They each established distinguished careers as popular public figures and earned substantial conservative credentials long before Obama came on the scene.