Comments Posted By busboy33
Displaying 221 To 230 Of 657 Comments
MY PROBLEM WITH 'FALSE' EQUIVALENCE
@Jackson1234:
As happy as I am to take a compliment (he likes me! He really likes me!) I think you mean FunnyMan. I'm pretty sure I didn't comment about the mindset of The Black Americans and their opinions on conspiracies or any other issue.
Comment Posted By busboy33 On 10.09.2009 @ 04:43
WOULD SOMEONE ON THE LEFT PLEASE EXPLAIN THIS TO ME?
"It’s ok for Van Jones to be a Truther nut because 35% of the Democratic party are Truther nuts? Holy Jesus, save me from the logic of liberals."
I'm not defending Van Jones . . . but as a Republican, how can you make the above statement without laughing at yourself?
The fact that Olbermann and Hamsher, two extreme voices, take up this position makes it the opinion of "liberals"? So its fair to say Beck and Limbaugh are the voice of "Conservatives", right?
You couch your post with "yeah, both barties have nuts . . . but boy those Liberals are insane". Gosh, how even-handed of you.
You made it a point how important it was to get Van Jones out of power (all of the awesome power that he had as, what, the "Green Czar"?) because of his nutniess. But Republican government officials who are birthers/truthers/tenthers/SocialistTakeovers . . . well, they're wrong and that's sad, but anyway, how 'bout them liberals? They sure are crazy. Crazy, crazy Liberals. There's parts of the Republican Party that are crazy, but Liberals are nuts thru and thru.
Overgeneralization makes your reasoned opinions partisan hackery, and you know it. It diminishes your voice, in the same way it diminishes Olberman and Hamsher (who attack "Liberals" in the same vein, if not more stringently, as you do Conservative whack-a-doodles).
Both of them are partisan. Hamsher makes absolutely no bones about it. Olberman tries to straddle the partisan fence and generally fails. You're better than them, or at least have the potential to be.
Comment Posted By busboy33 On 7.09.2009 @ 13:54
HOLY CHRIST! WHERE HAS JOE KLEIN BEEN THE LAST 8 YEARS?
If I disagree with anything here, its the term "vast majority".
No question that there were lots and lots of people that raised those allegations against Bush, but do you really think that the precentage of whackjobs/Dems was equal to the current whackjobs/Repubs?
I know you really, really, want the current crop of whackadoodles to represent a minor sliver of the Reds . . . but it sure doesn't seem or look like that. The fact that there are reasonable Republicans doesn't make them the driving voice of Redland
Comment Posted By busboy33 On 4.09.2009 @ 18:00
@Jackson:
What was Hannity right about? That disreputable in the Obama Administration demonstrate that Obama himself is disreputable?
Are you SURE that's the standard of proof you want to apply to administrations? If that's the yardstick, fine. How many Bush administration personnel were implicated/convicted in Abramoff (or just general bribery and criminal behavior), or or being incompetent idealogues (Goodling), etc., et. al.? Lets's use your yardstick . . . what can we "conclude" about the administration?
Trying to condemn by association will not got well for your position, methinks.
Comment Posted By busboy33 On 6.09.2009 @ 17:51
IT'S GOOD TO BE A 'DOMESTIC TERRORIST'
Ellie:
The President said "all who oppose my socialist healthcare plan are domestic terrorists"?
Really?
Are you SURE you're not being just a little bit hysterical? And by "a little bit hysterical", I mean "out of your damned mind"?
Now prove how deeply you follow in the footsteps of those great people . . . make sure to slink away and refuse to defend your nonsense. It's what Washington would do.
Comment Posted By busboy33 On 4.09.2009 @ 00:03
@Moltenorb:
"*lists of accolades for Stosel and Moyers*"
Yeah . . . but all those awards are liberal awards. They must be, since they were given to liberals, and as Travis pointed out they must, by definition, possess no skill, intelligence, or merit. Therefore, the awards are inherently worthless as well. Even better, the collection of worthless liberal awards (which are worthless because they were given to liberals) just prove how worthless and liberal Stossel and Moyers are. It's like a perpetual motion engine!!
Once you start with the assumption that anybody who doesn't agree with Travis is false and worthless, you'll recognize how flawed your evidence of respectability really is.
Comment Posted By busboy33 On 2.09.2009 @ 22:57
Travis is right. If an opinion, idea, or explanation comes from somebody I dislike I should automatically ignore it. It can't have any potential merit . . . they wear the wrong lapel pin.
Whew! I almost was faced with alternate views. Thanks Travis. You saved me from having to think.
Comment Posted By busboy33 On 2.09.2009 @ 20:02
THE FORMERLY CONSERVATIVE BLOG KNOWN AS REDSTATE
"Me: 'Conservative' not 'Republican'”
Well, there's yer problem right there, mister. Seems you got your philosophy switched with your club. Clubs don't run too good if all the pieces keep acting indepentently. That's just gonna keep jamming up the works.
I'll call my supervisor . . . a complete thinking drainage is gonna take all afternoon. You got homeowners insurance? Check yer policy -- I gots ta get some special tools from the shop, so it'll be a minute.
Ya may want to get that cat out of here too . . . some caustic chemicals are really gonna ruffle her fur.
. . . one of us, one of us, one of us . . .
Comment Posted By busboy33 On 1.09.2009 @ 15:27
ANGRY IDEOLOGUES vs. THE STATISTS
"How do you reconcile a national debt of 17 Trillion dollars (or lots more!)in 2019 from this administration, with common sense?"
I don't. Deficit spending sucks, pure and simple.
But we've been doing it for at least a decade now. I don't see a difference between Republican deficit spending and Democratic deficit spending. I epsecially think it's insanity for both parties to both deficit spend AND push for tax cuts. I'm no ecconomist, but I'm pretty sure that doesn't actually work as a long term plan.
What should happen? We should live within our means. Is that going to happen? No -- forget right and wrong, that's a simple statement of reality. The absolute best I hope for is to slowly, slowly chip away at the spending gap, in bite-sized chunks that Americans can stomach. Personally, I think that's a dream, but I'm a dreamer.
Regardless, I DO want universal health care. I don't favor a "big brother" style of government, but I do think there are some things that the government should do. It should protect us. It should insure our saftey from each other. And it should heal the sick. I consider that part of their moral perogative. I know most people here disagree with me, but that's my stand. That is something that is worth paying for (and if necessary worth raising taxes for). So is the military. So is the FDA. So is the EPA (I don't particularly care about Mother Nature . . . I just don't want to live in the run-off from a chemical factory).
The Democratic Party's budget is deeply in the red . . . but so was the Republicans, so it's not as if I have a choice between deficit spending or not as those are my only two real choices.
I know this isn't addressed to me, but . . .
"Who is to say that the signs we see of the current trends of this Democratic-dominated and leftist administration and Congress are actually benign to the US?"
Because they are Americans, and they don't want to destroy America anymore than Republicans do. Define "benign". If "leftist" is the same as "malevolent", then ONLY Republicans can be trusted with the safety of this country . . . and I just can't accept that as a reasoned position, to say "only me and mine are trustworthy (please ignore all examples of mine being untrustworthy), and everybody else is a dangerous sociopath".
Comment Posted By busboy33 On 1.09.2009 @ 03:22
@manning:
"The problem with that, I think, is once the end results are reached it is too late to correct them if they are hurtful. If the sudden direction of these ideologues happens, by sheer chance of course, to be in concert, and that direction is governed by a tyrannical model, it just might be too late to redirect."
A fair concern . . . but how is this concern different for idealogues as opposed to any human in power? I would think idealogues would be a better buttress against this, as those that oppose their "master plan" will watch them like a hawk and alert at every perceptible drift toward dangerous territory.
Comment Posted By busboy33 On 31.08.2009 @ 17:51
On the other side, if those in power share your "vision" it is easy to gloss over concerns with minor shifts in the system . . . and minor shifts add up.
