“Gaius Gracchus proposed a grain law. The people were delighted with it because it provided an abundance of food without work. The good men, however, fought against it because they thought the masses would be attracted away from hard work and toward idleness, and they saw that the state treasury would be exhausted.”
– Marcus Tullius Cicero
“Politicians get up and promise you all sorts of free stuff. They say, I’ll give you more and more stuff, and you won’t have to pay for it…My own view is that we have to tell people the truth, and we’re going to have to demand sacrifice of the American people. The idea of borrowing a trillion dollars more than we take in [each year] is not just bad economics, it’s immoral. I’m not going to do it, and I’m not going to promise what can’t be delivered.” – Mitt Romney
“We had a chance, in 2012, to elect as president a man who built his entire career and fortune on turning around financially troubled enterprises. But the voters rejected him because Obama claimed he was going to give women cancer and outlaw tampons. That is when I knew our country was f—ed.”
– V the K
It would have helped if Mitt hadn’t spent much of his political career doing the same giving of free stuff (or mandating people buy stuff they may have not wanted or needed … can anyone say Romneycare?)
Thanks for the tip Jeff.
Panem et circenses, or in today’s world, EBT and television.
“the sound of liberty will die to thunderous applause and cheering crowds… freedom not even fought for, simply forgotten.” ….could this be the fate of our liberty?
V, you’re welcome! Thank -you-.
JPK, agree. Romney did tell the truth more than Obama did…but not enough. He should have repudiated Romneycare – and might have won, if he had.
JP Kalishek, remember that Romney vetoed many of the giveaway provisions of the Massachusetts law and was overruled by the Legislature. A fact overlooked by the Media during the Presidential campaign.
Juan, it appears that is indeed the fate of this country. The more I think about it, the more I realize that the generation that fought for liberty is the one that truly understands the importance of it. The memory starts fading through generations. Much of the current generation takes it for granted — and is therefore willing to trade it for secuirty and comforts. Unless the pendulum swings far to the left and the country starts to feel the pain of oppression (by the government in whose hands they gladly put so much power), liberty won’t become valuable again. And that may take centuries — for people can become accustomed to gradual servitude. It will probably be death by thousand cuts.
[i]Romney vetoed many of the giveaway provisions of the Massachusetts law and was overruled by the Legislature. A fact overlooked by the Media during the Presidential campaign.[/i]
Not just the MFM, the Romney campaign did not make that point much either.
But I wonder, even if Mitt Romney had run a more competent campaign, would it have mattered? His comment about the 47% that was so pilloried by the left was essentially correct. The Free Sh-t Army decides elections now. And the Democrat Value Proposition (“We’ll take money away from people you don’t like and buy you things with it.”) is, apparently, what a sizable faction of the electorate wants.
Mitt Romney did not, from my perspective, run an effective campaign. The completely false “war on women” shouted by the liberals is the biggest reason. The Romney campaign barely did anything to gear messages toward young adults, like me, to combat the blatant falsehoods of the supposed “war”. Something that seemed to take over my campus for weeks was the stupid “legitimate rape” comment made by Todd Akin. I was taking a human sexuality course at the time, so that stupid comment was brought up many times in the weeks leading up to the campaign. At the same time, I saw hardly any message from Romney that fought against this claim and distanced Akin from Romney. To me it seemed that Romney was more concerned about shaking the attacks off and moving on. There was no direct engagement of the attacks that could have repelled the attacks with showing how stupid they actually were.
It amazed me how many of my fellow student believed the lies. Last academic year I was resident assistant, so on election night I was gathered with a few dozen residents, mostly freshmen, around the large TV in the main lobby of our residence hall. Shortly after CNN announced that Obama had won reelection I saw a female student lean toward another student and say “Now we don’t have to stock up on tampons!” That was the moment when I really started losing my faith in my fellow Americans, as well as my own generation. I do not strongly identify with the Millennial generation, but as I Millennial I certainly defend my generation from criticism. However, the stupid things that my fellow Millennials actually believe is really making me lose confidence in my generation, and the future of the United States.
The liberals know exactly the right way to win with my generation, and that is to appeal to our emotions and our victimized feeling of having poor future prospects. The liberals are great with sensationalizing any stupid comment made by Republicans and conservatives, and know exactly the power of viral videos and bloggers. All that needs to be done is appeal to the emotions of a few liberal bloggers, and social media will take care of the rest. Liberals know that when emotion is involved all logic can be thrown out the window, because emotion is a more powerful rhetorical force. This goes for any issue on the liberal agenda.
Low job prospects and student loan debt is the big issue in terms of the “victimization” of my generation. Regardless of how unreasonable it may be for people to argue about the student loan debt they have, when they freely accepted loans, it certainly seems nice to have people fighting for the possibility of debt forgiveness. The Millennials believe that they have been prevented from pursuing the American Dream that they so rightly were told they would have. I find myself occasionally getting caught in this feeling. We were told to go to college because that is how you get a good job, so we went to college. Now what? Our degrees are worthless due to the fact that we don’t have practical experience, or our degrees are not in demand (I am one of the few Millennials who seems to know what crowding out is). We did as we were told, but now that doesn’t seem good enough. This may not be the right way to think of this situation, but this is the way most Millennials view their current situation, and think they are victims of current society. That is why the liberals are so effective, because they appeal to this emotion and victimization. It is much more appealing to hear someone say “let’s take care of you,” than it is to hear “Work Harder!” Millennials already think they have worked harder. Even I, as a conservative/libertarian, think “let’s take care of you” is more pleasing to the ears. The Free S**t Army will continue to succeed as long as the only message opposing them is “Work Harder!” Republicans need to rephrase their message, and actually grow teeth.
That is my rant. That is my tirade. That is why I think Romeny’s campaign was terrible. That is also why the I think the Republicans will not be winning elections any time soon.
B. Long. The Republicans will continue to lose as long as they keep listening to their consultants, their big donors, and their “friends” in the MFM and ignoring the people they are supposed to represent.
I give the Democrats credit; their base wants more free sh-t from the Government and they want their “enemies” punished. And the Democrats make sure they get plenty of both. The Republican base gets nothing but continual betrayal.
That’s right. The Left offers poison as food, poison as antidote. Their policies cause problems and victimization – that, they claim, only another, larger dose of their policies will fix.
It’s a racket that relies on lies. The young have some excuse, in being both mis-educated and inexperienced. But older Americans who still believe in leftism are either profiting from it personally, or *enjoy* being lied to (or both).
It will ended by good people continuously telling the truth – before, during and after the left-wing system’s inevitable crash.
Juan,
Mitt was great at giving away to certain groups in the form of Crony Capitalism (iirc he once defended Kelo and like land grabs) and the thing about Romneycare isn’t as much the giveaways, it is the “Buy this or else” and it doing exactly what the realists said it was going to do. Then his weaseling on it afterwards.
ILC,
Well, it is really really hard to out lie someone like 0bama.
The quote from Cicero would be appropriate for today, but fails miserably once you learn the whole story of Roman society at that time. Those “good men” that Cicero spoke of were of the patrician elite who never passed up an opportunity to screw over the plebeians Gracchus was trying to help. From taking their small farmlands by hook or by crook, rampant slavery that took many of the jobs these poor could do, imposing awful penalties for default (which the extreme usury they employed almost guaranteed), to rendering their voting rights to be practically non-existent, etc. Gracchus nor any of the Romans had any concept of freedom as we conceive it to be today, and forget about capitalism. Rome was an oligarchy, as ruthlessly exploitative of the masses as the worst communist system under the apparatchiks and the wealthy elite freely engaged in practices that would make our 19th century Robber Barons blush. While Gracchus’ proposal sounds communistic, don’t forget that there wasn’t much of an opportunity for work nor were there any social programs at all in place. If anything, this was the beginning of the “breads and circuses” to buy them off and alleviate their misery the only way they knew how. A better idea of course would have been to change the conditions which put them into such misery and allow them to freely work for themselves, but this was way before modern economic theories.
John, all that shows that Rome was no ideal, no utopia. And yet the point remains: bankrupting the society to pay your ‘free stuff army’ is a bad idea, in any time, place, system or culture.
I wonder if there was a senator in fifth century Rome advocating to give the Vandals Amnesty, citizenship, and health care. Perhaps his name was Macainus Senilitus.
A little lapse of memory like that is nothing for the media to worry about, they care about big lies, like when Romney claimed that he saw a story about Fiat thinking of moving all Jeep production to China. This was not a lie because Romney didn’t see such a story, he may or may not have done so but that was never questioned. Nor was it a lie because there were no such stories, there were several stories saying that at the time. Nor was it a lie because Fiat wasn’t thinking about moving all jeep production the China because Chrysler had made a public announcement that it was considering doing just that. No, it was the biggest lie of 2012 because the uproar from the Romney statement caused the president of Fiat to announce that a decision had been made and that Jeep production wasn’t going to be moved to China, and if it was it would not be all only some, and that would be new production instead of moved production, and Fiat will make even more Jeeps in the US, promise.
Oh, in case you missed it, purely by coincidence, the very Jeep factory where Romney uttered the biggest lie of 2012 laid off 500 workers last month and strangely enough a month before that finalized their deal to make Jeeps in China. But Romney lied. And that’s the sort of lie the press spares no effort in covering.
Why Tea Party Folks are destined to lose general elections:
“The Free Sh-t Army decides elections now.”
Look at the states like Mississippi, the Dakata’s, West Virginia, Alaska and others. Most of the top “welfare” states voted for Romney. Now I don’t buy into the leftie meme that says “the top welfare recipient states are republican states” like this one:
http://www.businessinsider.com/red-states-are-welfare-queens-2011-8
and this one has a break down of the “taker” states:
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_reckoning/2012/10/25/blue_state_red_face_guess_who_benefits_more_from_your_taxes.html
Those articles miss some legitimate nuance like this:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/09/m-the_myth_of_red_state_welfare.html
But when you look at 2012, its clear, the states the get the most in general, didn’t vote for Obama. So you are going to have to rethink your “taker” ideas.
Its not accurate and it will lead you to false conclusions.
littlelettermike has found lot of “welfare” in what the demonizingrats once called “New Federalism.”
To be sure, money from the Feds which pours into a state is a form of welfare. And, to be sure, many states have more federal money coming in that dollars going from the state to the Feds. That is how Progressives set it up with all their farm subsidies, Indian reservation relief programs, electrification programs, massive federal government installations and the like.
Every single one of these programs needs to be properly assessed for its efficiency, necessity and relevance. Taking one example, the Indian reservation system is largely a national shame and they have soaked up all manner of tax money for what is essentially a poverty stroked ghetto system.
The “takers” are generally the people who have adapted to life on the dole and are trapped in the vicious formula of having to go from security on small monthly income to great insecurity for earning a “tad” more. That cripples spirit and individualism.
littlelettermike is cutting and pasting what most supports the case he wants to make. He did not bother with the corporate welfare which the state governments get into in order to attract good paying jobs which will help change the dynamic. He didn’t go there because he sees corporations as takers who cheat the little guy and blah, blah, blah.
In short, the little simpleton is making things too simple.
The TEA Party people are not in favor of abolishing all forms of “welfare” or even any form, for that matter. The TEA Party is calling for us to bolster our house of cards structure and then clean house of duplicative, inefficient, dead end programs. Then the programs need to be properly balanced in funding and growth and stabilized for the future.
Every time Social Security comes up for review and reorganization, the demonizingrats scream about killing granny and scare monger and go ballistic. This is because they do not dare give up any of their paid voters who might give up welfare for becoming a tax payer. Tax payers tend to see government as a fat sow. “Takers” tend to see government as a necessary tit.
One must also remember, heliotrope, that the Obama talking points articles littlewhoremike quoted count military spending, i.e. soldier pay for work, as “welfare”.
A second thing littlewhoremike’s propaganda does is conflate payments made to government contractors who are providing goods, services, and jobs with the handouts, food stamps, and Obamaphones that littlewhoremike so desperately whores his vote for — while also not counting the corporate income taxes those companies pay.
And littlewhoremike is apparently unable to question why, for example, his Barack Obama for whom he voted twice is screaming that only red states are on welfare when in fact Obama Party-controlled California has the lion’s share of welfare cases.
We should expect more of these malicious lies and slanders of people who voted against Obama in the next few months as people like littlewhoremike try desperately to divert and deflect from the utter failure of their “pragmatic, good governance” trophy of Obamacare. This is typical, for takers and moochers like littlewhoremike and his Barack Obama are mentally and morally incapable of admitting their own failures and instead have to scream and namecall and finger point to force responsible, intelligent adults to clean up their messes.
Romney would have been better on the economy. But on every other major issue he would have been as bad or worse than Obama. IMHO
Mike @16: here’s a nice refutation of your “Red States are the real Welfare Queens” quackery. http://preview.tinyurl.com/lfl3mms
It’s BS because states don’t vote, people do and the parasite class votes overwhelmingly for Obama, and, yes, there are parasites in red states, too.
@ILC: In general I would agree with that, but this wouldn’t have applied to Rome during Cicero’s time. There was plenty of ill-gotten wealth to spend on public works and the grain dole. The smartest option of course, especially for the longevity of the Republic and simmering down of the patrician-plebeian conflict, would have been to implement a temporary grain dole combined with fixes to the enormous problems that brought about the idea in the first place. That unfortunately wasn’t done, and while they lost what liberty they had (as they conceived this to be) as a result their standard of living did oddly enough improve greatly under the principate (especially in the provinces). Different time with only the most primitive of systems of the kind we would identify today.
@VtheK: This has an unfortunate ring of truth today, but isn’t very applicable to Rome in the 4th-5th centuries. It was actually xenophobia combined with a number of other factors (such as a loss of their martial spirit among the general populace) that brought about the collapse in the West. Hindsight being 20/20 given their sorry state at that time it probably would have better for them to have cut a deal with a few of the Germanic tribes by bringing them in to the Empire fully. Many of them actually wanted just that as well as land to settle (which as in ample supply given the falling Roman population). Some new blood like this may have stayed off the collapse for much longer. They already composed much of the Western armies anyways as auxiliaries (rather stupid of the Romans if you think about it).
Actually the states used to vote for their Senators until Progressives snuck in the 17th Amendment.
# 17 “The TEA Party is calling for us to bolster our house of cards structure and then clean house of duplicative, inefficient, dead end programs.”
If it was presented this way, you might get more support. But poor tactics, poor spokespeople and never articulating this as clearly as you just did muddle any positive tea party message. For example, having people rail against Obama being a Muslim, flying a confederate flag at Tea Party rallies just won’t cut. Furthermore using words like “parasite class” to portray women, farmers, defense workers, working poor is just too broad of a brush – and not accurate.
#18 – We all get it. You like to call people names. However, Please come up with something more clever and witty. Its tiresome to read vulgarity like the word “whore” over and over. – And frankly it reflects poorly on your character. I like to think that perhaps you are a better human being than you show online, so please respect my request.
#20 – I don’t think you read my post at all. As a rebuttal, you posted the EXACT same post as I did when I said “Those articles miss some legitimate nuance like this”
Furthermore, the link that WE BOTH SHARED doesn’t refute that in general, states that voted for Romney are net “taker” states. And it flies directly in the face of V’s assertion of ““The Free Sh-t Army decides elections now.”
That is just not true. And if that is Tea Party’s take away from the 2012 election, more election losses are going to happen unless the tea party sits down, shuts up and let “RINO’s” try to actually reverse the damage the Tea Party has wrought.
littlelettermike:
How many TEA Party gatherings featured a Confederate flag? How many TEA Party messages went after Obama as a Muslim or called people parasites?
The entire Breitbart national presence was built upon his $100,000 offer for any video taken at the capitol that could show proof of any of the various charges of racism taking place.
Then, the MSM found a guy at a TEA Party gathering carrying a weapon. But, they had to doctor the video to keep the viewers from knowing he was black.
The Obamaphone woman does not represent the face of welfare in this country. But you Alinsky people will repeat the lie about the character of the everyday TEA Party person as an ignorant bigot, because you do not dare assess the concerns of those who want to root out the cause of the pain of national economic crisis and malaise. If your people had any interest or concern in doing that, they would reach across the aisle and ask for help in structuring sound fiscal policy.
As a more general point about the Left, that nails it.
At any time, lefties could stop choosing to revel in the ‘imagined worst’ of the Tea Party, and instead, choose to work with conservatives on the budget & entitlement reforms that America so obviously needs.
But they don’t. Vampires will eat garlic at church, first.
Helio
http://www.salon.com/2013/10/13/d_c_protestors_wave_confederate_flag_tell_obama_to_put_the_quran_down/
These people should GO AWAY!
All they do is ensure the dems take back the house in 2014
Helio:
“The Obamaphone woman does not represent the face of welfare in this country. But you Alinsky people will repeat the lie about the character of the everyday TEA Party person as an ignorant bigot”
I would never say that about every day tea party folks because I know its not true. But it is a part of the group that needs to be gone and never come back. – Just like the “welfare cheaters” who also should be gone and never come back. – except in the case of welfare cheaters they should be in jail for treason…but thats just me….
However, like it or not, tea party folks have a perception problem and not because of the media, liberal lies, or anything else. Its because of the actions of radicals who derail the tea party folks into buffoonery
All they do is ensure the dems take back the house in 2014
Which is what you want, of course, because Democrats are all about “pragmatism” and “good governance.” (Your words) And people who want to restrain spending and operate within the Constitution are “radical” and “extremist.” (Your words)
Also, with Democrats in control of the House, the man you voted for for President can enact the agenda that you voted for him to enact.
V – if republicans where in charge the sequester success would’ve never happen.
In fact i am sure all the defense cuts and tax increases would be rolled back. With maybe some band-aid “for face” entitlement cuts – but not much. No way would Republicans in power cut things to level they promised. Wouldn’t happen. Those programs are too damn popular.
In my opinion, Obama has been very willing to cut spending if it meant getting a deal done. If republicans would work within the framework that they only control 1 out of 3, we could get even more real cuts – but tax increases might have to be accepted too.
But so what? Any tax increase will be low hanging fruit for future administrations and if it means lower spending, great!
But drawing false lines in the sand and then watching the Dems beat the GOP to a pulp, while radicals like Cruz fill their coffers is the exact last thing any conservative needs. A pragmatic approach here would get a lot more and be better for the future.
The notion that Obama is any kind of budget-cutter is just foolishness. Apart from the military, nothing has been cut under his regime, and the budgets for the left’s favored buraucracies… HHS, EPA, IRS… have never been higher. Then there’s Obamacare… 3,000,000,000,000 in additional Federal spending over then next ten years; beginning with 634,000,000 spent on a website that doesn’t work.
Not to mention how Obama undid the welfare reform of the 1990’s with waivers, has submitted budgets with spending levels so high even Dick Durbin couldn’t support them, and has fought tooth and claw against any attempt to reform entitlements or rein in spending.
The only people serious about spending restraint, entitlement reform, and real budget cutting are the Tea Partiers. Everybody else just wants to play the same old game of pretending to “compromise” while spending goes up, Government expands, and crony corporatists get richer.
Exit question: Which number is larger:
1. The lowest deficit of the Obama Presidency.
2. Every deficit run by every other president in American history?
Wow. mike seriously thinks that major tax increases won’t wreck the economy, lowering the amount of revenue collected.
And once again, his tone (or emotion) delights in the thought of Obama getting his way, ignoring the fact that the only reason we’ve had any budgets cuts/control at all is because of the Tea Party.
ILC, while I would really like to see major tax reform with a top rate of no more than 25%, no more than two tiers of tax, the elimination of all the deductions carved out for cronies and special interests, 0% tax on capital gains, the elimination of the EITC… we know that none of that will happen under this regime. But I also don’t sweat that higher income people got a tax increase. Most of them voted for Obama, so screw ’em.
At this point in history, I think regulations are a bigger drag on the economy than taxes. And there has been a regulatory explosion under Obama that is, in my mind, for more damaging to the economy than his tax policy.
Ilc
Obviously Obamas cuts would not have happened without the tea party in the house. It’s a great thing they did when they negotiated and got real cuts through the give/take process. But right or wrong the spending cuts are part of Obamas legacy like Welfare reform iis for Clinton. That’s the way the presidency works…
So, littlelettermike gives credit to his God-King for “cuts” Obama neither wanted, supported, and has fought tooth-and-nail to undo.
Delusion.
Not at all. Indeed, it’s what your “pals” do all the time.
And does it reflect badly on THEIR character? Oh, no, no, no:
That would also be the same Obama whose Barack Obama Party is fundraising using images of burning crosses to claim all Tea Partiers are ignorant racist bigots.
So what we see here, littlewhoremike, is that you presume to apply a standard of behavior to others that you do not follow and that you don’t demand that those who meet your whore demands for more welfare follow.
Which makes this particularly funny:
Of course you do, littlewhoremike.
You depend on people being “better” — being kind, generous, tolerant, and allowing you to have your way.
While you and your fellow looters and moochers spit on them, steal from them, abuse their generosity, and mock the very faith and morals that you exploit.
Hilariously, you insist that it is wrong and unseemly and immoral for conservatives to defend themselves even as you cheer madly for a man who ordered his violent followers to “punch back twice as hard”.
The reason is simple. A disarmed person is easier to rob. Looters, moochers, and parasites like you are lazy by nature, and depend on people who ARE better, as I am, choosing to disarm themselves and not fight back.
That is no longer the case. Your views, littlewhoremike, are immoral. You are advocating nothing less than outright theft, and worse, you are perverting the very structure of government to empower it. Those who speak up against your theft are demonized by your Barack Obama and Barack Obama Party as KKK racists and bigots, terrorists with bombs strapped to their chests who want to murder their countrymen — all of which are outright lies and slander, spewed by your Barack Obama and your Barack Obama Party.
You invoke moral standards that you yourself have no intention of following. And being outside the law, you are not protected by it.
You are a pathetic, lazy moocher, a grifter and a bigot who whores his vote and stiffs his principles, a parasite who demands that others feed him, all so you can please some idiot leftist “pals” and the racist Barack Obama.
And that’s being nice.
NDT –
I don’t care that you employ the use of name calling. Thats fine. Maybe you think it makes you internet famous or something so you keep doing it. Good For You!
You can call me “pathetic” “moocher” & other such names name all day long…as my g-ma used to say “sticks ‘n stones”
I am just respectfully asking you to refrain from using the word “whore.” I find it vulgar. Though clearly you find me a disgusting person- which is your right, I see no reason for you to continue with vulgarity when the English language is full of other words you could employee.
V – I do not give “credit” for Obama cutting spending. Just like you shouldn’t give “credit” for the Tea Party for cutting defense spending.
But it happened under legislation that came from negotiations from both sides during a session of give and take. Neither side wanted it, but damn it I am glad it happened!
emplyee? ha ha
Oh no, no, no, littlewhoremike; “whore” is a term fully endorsed, supported and used by your Barack Obama and your Barack Obama Party for whom you voted and who you praise, as well as the Barack Obama media — without one word from you about its vulgarity, being a sign of low character, demands for public repudiation, etc.
So if those you deem our moral betters like Barack Obama, the Barack Obama Party, and the Barack Obama media are using it, what could possibly be wrong with it?
Which leads us to this.
Oh, but you do care, littlewhoremike.
That’s why your liberal “pals” call you “Ayn Rand” and “Tony Perkins”.
That’s why your Obama Party screams that you want to starve children, murder the elderly, and rape women if you even so much as breathe a word about entitlement reform.
That’s why your Barack Obama says that anyone who criticizes him or opposes anything he does is a racist KKK cross-burning bigot who wants to put black people in chains.
They all do it for the same reason: they know it hurts enough that you will shut up and knuckle under.
They also do it because they know that human beings have a tremendous capability to rationalize even the most irrational of decisions as being somehow rational.
Your “liberal pals” know you’re a whore who will sell your self-respect in exchange for them being your “pals”. The Obama Party knows you’re a whore who will sell your votes in exchange for stealing money from other people as long as you can call it “compassion”.
And Barack Obama knows you’re a whore who will give up anything and everything, including your principles and freedom, to be able to call OTHER people racists.
The Achilles heel of conservativism in the past few years is that we’ve treated you and your fellow Obama supporters as something other than a whore. We’ve had the notion that you actually are willing to stand your ground, stick up for what you believe in, work for success, and be respected for what you do.
Instead we find out that you’ll sell everything, including your dignity and freedom, to be liked by namecallers, deemed “compassionate” by highway robbers, and “tolerant” by a vicious racist.
So not only are you a whore….you’re a CHEAP whore.
Thanks for explaining that context. I must point out that the GayPatriot blog does not endorse it. Well, maybe on some public figures. But not on fellow commenters whom, at the end of the day, you know little about.
You’ve expressed your political point. Now cool it with the names.
By focusing on the word “whore,” littlelettermike avoids addressing the substantive criticisms in NDT’s post.
And, without regard to any questions about mike, I have to admit that this:
…is true of more than a few so-called libertarians, moderates, or Obama-supporting conservatives, whom I’ve observed.
“avoids addressing the substantive criticisms in NDT’s post”
Which post are you referring to?
To be frank I find it difficult to fully read his/her posts, because anything of substance he/she might have gets lost in the vulgarity and insults.
Perhaps I don’t have the intelligence/patience to find the gold intermixed in the pile of abuse and logical fallacies- This very well might be my failing. But as the one of the Greats says: “Po-tweet”
Oh, not at all, as you yourself admit.
And as I’ve pointed out already, you have no problem gleaning the brilliance and wisdom of Barack Obama and the Barack Obama Party despite their calling Tea Partiers ignorant racist bigots and referring to Republicans and others as whores.
So it’s clearly not a problem of losing things in the vulgarity and insults; it’s simply the fact that, as I pointed out above, you simply have no principles or self-respect that can’t be bought. If I were a welfare pusher who advocated taking money from others and giving it to you so you didn’t have to work and if I said you should call anyone who disagrees with you a racist, you’d have zero trouble discerning all sorts of wisdom in my statements, just as you do with your namecalling and vulgar liberal “pals” and your Barack Obama and Barack Obama Party who do exactly that.