Is America a nation at risk?

[Aliantha]

UG, do you not realize that it was the liberal elements in the minds of the founding fathers that made your constitution what it is? America is meant to be the land of the free, and yet you're trying to condemn those who'd think differently to you. How is that freedom?

You can't have your republic if everyone thinks the same. Then it's just another form of socialism, and not a very attractive one at that.


eta: I know this makes no difference to your way of thinking, but not all people from the left are raving lunatics and nor are all conservatives.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Oh, I've noticed that. But the ones that are stink up the whole operation and bring the very word "liberal" into disrepute -- first by their illiberal thinking, and then by the "you wanna fix what problem by doing what?" phenomenon -- those are the lunatics and the less-lunatic but bereft of wisdom.

Liberal was once an honorable condition. Regrettably, in our Republic it's gotten hijacked by the hard Left, and that's doing real damage. Nothing that can't be repaired, but we do need to discourage the Left from interfering.

There are some ideas that are so bad they can only be held by left-wing intellectuals.

Rightwingers manage to steer clear of such things. That's why I think the weight of the brainpower is over on the right, nearish to the center. The too-far-Right is both off the deep end and colliding with the Left coming around the other way.

[Shawnee123]

And Shawnee isn't managing a rebuttal. She's locking horns with a mind here, and I don't think she's used to the idea yet. She's not coping.

I'll rebut your face.

Seriously, what in the hell am I supposed to be rebutting?

Keep calling me stupid, UG. It makes no difference to me. That is the difference between you and me: I may not agree with your beliefs but I believe in your right to have them. I don't think you a lesser person because somewhere along the line someone filled your head with mush.

Now get off my ass, and respond to the people who are better equipped to play your little tit for tat game. I honestly don't have the time nor the energy, nor even the gumption, to bring myself to care that much.

Ho hum.

[Griff]

Originally Posted by Shawnee123

I'll rebut your face.

Seriously, you're arguing with someone who wouldn't recognize right wing authoritarianism if it locked him in a cattle car and sent him to Auschwitz. Arguing is pointless.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Originally Posted by Griff

Seriously, you're arguing with someone who wouldn't recognize right wing authoritarianism if it locked him in a cattle car and sent him to Auschwitz. Arguing is pointless.

Griff, this is the biggest flub I've seen you make. Don't forget that Radar (he's gone dark lately, it seems, having been shown that Obama was not indeed the "more libertarian candidate" he thought he was voting for) notwithstanding, I am a libertarian.

If by "right wing authoritarianism" you mean "Bush at war," your argument will have more holes than a badminton net. And now that the GWOT is being conducted in pretty much the same way by the Democratic Administration, the idea fails at the nonce. Sinks without a trace.

Arguing from bad initial premises -- that is what's pointless. At least if your goal is to persuade someone of the quality of your thinking.

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

...And now that the GWOT is being conducted in pretty much the same way by the Democratic Administration, the idea fails at the nonce. Sinks without a trace.

Arguing from bad initial premises -- that is what's pointless. At least if your goal is to persuade someone of the quality of your thinking.

UG...while there certainly are some continuations of the Bush/Neo-con approach to terrorism, more than I would like, there are also significant differences:

Ending the highly questionable (in terms of legality and effectiveness) policy of enhanced interrogation (ie torture) of detainees

A restoration of basic rights for detainees as proposed in the (preliminary) recommendation of Obama's Detention Policy Task Force including prohibiting the admission of statements obtained through cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment; providing detainees greater latitude in the choice of counsel; affording basic protections for those defendants who refuse to testify; reforming the use of hearsay by putting the burden on the party trying to use the statement...

The shutting down of CIA black prisons and the limiting extraordinary rendition (now prohibited to countries that torture their own citizens)

On the domestic front, ending the Bush administration program to expand the use of spy satellites by state/local law enforcement agencies.

And most importantly....restoring diplomacy and dialogue to gain the support of allies and engage adversaries rather than bullying, belligerency and unilateralism, resulting in the restoration of the US image among those allies and adversaries.

IMO, your characterization of those who disagree with your neo-con BS as weak-minded "pacifists" rather than having a respect for the rule of law, is another feeble attempt to justify a failed policy.

[Aliantha]

I'm actually really curious as to how one goes about rebutting someone's face. lol

[Griff]

Well, first you remove the asshat...

[ZenGum]

Haggis in the office!

[Shawnee123]

'Rebut your face' just sounded so Flintonian!

[Clodfobble]

He's going to rebut-fuck you in the mouth!

[glatt]

There we go. That's Flint.

[Shawnee123]

Perfect!

[Flint]

Ha. Remember when Homer Simpson presented his rebuttal?

[Urbane Guerrilla]

What to rebut? Well, this tells me you're not thinking. I wonder what would happen if you actually concentrated? You ever wondered?

Anyway, post #22, per you:

Humanity, as usual.

You seem to contend I'm something inhuman. I call bullshit.

The reason you "don't have the gumption" is because you don't have the winning ideas, Shawnee. I do. Few of them are mine -- except in the sense that I sought them out and found them. I'm a beneficiary of some really wise people, and that's a pretty good way to make a life, I think.