A senior aide to Tony Blair says

[madyaks]

World set back 10 years by Bush's new world order, says Blair aide

[Airshark]

More whiny socialist crap. For God's sake, this guy is talking about eco-taxation. His opinion means less to me than my dog's, and my dog isn't too bright. B)

[dredbyrd]

No, he's talking about pussy ass capitalists who have to use government powers to protect their fortunes. Real capitalists can generate wealth without leveraging future sustainability.

Bitch.

[jhanke]

kinda goes easy on his guy whil slamming ours

not sure about this quote

On a whole series of issues including climate change, international aid, family planning, nuclear proliferation, trade and corporate responsibility, "staying true to a discredited model of extreme economic liberalism has set the world back a decade or more", says Mr Porritt.

If by liberalism he mean lax ethics then fine, but GWB is not liberal in many other areas

[King]

Originally posted by dredbyrd@Apr 22 2004, 06:59 AM
No, he's talking about pussy ass capitalists who have to use government powers to protect their fortunes. Real capitalists can generate wealth without leveraging future sustainability.

dredbyrd:

If he/you were sincerely expounding "real capitalism" that generates wealth without "leveraging future sustainability" (whatever that means), then he/you would earn my regard.

But that is clearly not what he/you is/are saying.

You don't disagree with Bush's methods. You disagree with the beneficiaries of his abuse of power. You plan on abusing power yourself - the only difference will be the distribution of spoils.

And that is what post-modern politics has been reduced to today. We are given two bad alternatives - both of which claim all important decisions in life should be imposed from above by that mythical entity known as government.

I'm not buying, and you're not fooling.

[King]

Originally posted by jhanke@Apr 22 2004, 07:16 AM

If by liberalism he mean lax ethics then fine, but GWB is not liberal in many other areas

1. Define your concepts of liberal and conservative.

2. Then let's see how Bush can be labeled.

[dredbyrd]

Originally posted by King in KC@Apr 22 2004, 07:18 AM
You don't disagree with Bush's methods. You disagree with the beneficiaries of his abuse of power. You plan on abusing power yourself - the only difference will be the distribution of spoils.

You couldn't be further from the truth.

I will probably be working to bring democracy to the US until I'm in my grave.

[King]

Originally posted by dredbyrd@Apr 22 2004, 07:20 AM

You couldn't be further from the truth.

I will probably be working to bring democracy to the US until I'm in my grave.

Well then explain where you are in agreement and disagreement with this guy's opinions.

And explain why we need democracy when the Founders feared it.

[jhanke]

Originally posted by King in KC+Apr 22 2004, 07:19 AM-->

QUOTE (King in KC @ Apr 22 2004, 07:19 AM)

dredbyrd Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 11283 Share Tweet #10 04-22-2004, 07:28 AM Originally posted by King in KC+Apr 22 2004, 07:24 AM--> QUOTE (King in KC @ Apr 22 2004, 07:24 AM) King Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 9576 Share Tweet #11 04-22-2004, 07:30 AM Originally posted by jhanke@Apr 22 2004, 07:24 AM I am talking in the modern sence, not the classic sence. Classic liberalism means that you want change, conservitism means you want things to stay the same. Bush is all about change, but he boarders on being reactionary in many areas, social ones mostly. He wants real change in the area of ecconomics, i just think he is wrong. So take it either way you want I agree with the literal definition of conservative. It means most politicians today are conservative - Democrats most of all. Ever been in Washington DC when Congress is debating a bill which rolls back, even slightly, the welfare state? Talk about people who want to conserve the status quo. What "real change in the area of economics" are you talking about with Bush? Comment Post Cancel King Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 9576 Share Tweet #12 04-22-2004, 07:32 AM Originally posted by dredbyrd+Apr 22 2004, 07:28 AM--> QUOTE (dredbyrd @ Apr 22 2004, 07:28 AM) Explain how I am in disagreement and agreement with this guy's opinions.[/b] Huh? jhanke Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 21967 Share Tweet #13 04-22-2004, 07:41 AM I will tackle both, I was talking about what seems to be a return to Laze Fare business, that is a change from the overregulation of the Regan-Clinton years. The founders, like all other elites of their age, feared the public and common people. They were afraid that they would be too ignorant to avoid being swayed by propaganda, charismatic people and popular peer presure. I think that if you look around at the political world we live in, they may have been right Official Sponsor of Marco Gonzales and the Productive Out!!! Said the Quangle Wangle Quee Comment Post Cancel SLUBLUE Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 20466 Share Tweet #14 04-22-2004, 07:45 AM Originally posted by King in KC+Apr 22 2004, 07:18 AM--> QUOTE (King in KC @ Apr 22 2004, 07:18 AM) King Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 9576 Share Tweet #15 04-22-2004, 07:52 AM Originally posted by SLUBLUE+Apr 22 2004, 07:45 AM--> QUOTE (SLUBLUE @ Apr 22 2004, 07:45 AM) you're full of shit.[/b] I'll be nicer (I still have good feelings toward you for the Vive La Hubris quote). You're naive - like a child. Why do I say this? Because you say this: Previous 1 2 template Next English (US) Deutsch (Du) English (US) French Spanish Help Contact Us Go to top Copyright © 2003-13, TippingPitchers.com Powered by vBulletin® Version 5.7.4 Copyright © 2023 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved. All times are GMT-6. This page was generated at 04:37 PM. Working... Yes No OK OK Cancel X

[dredbyrd]

Originally posted by King in KC+Apr 22 2004, 07:24 AM-->

QUOTE (King in KC @ Apr 22 2004, 07:24 AM)

King Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 9576 Share Tweet #11 04-22-2004, 07:30 AM Originally posted by jhanke@Apr 22 2004, 07:24 AM I am talking in the modern sence, not the classic sence. Classic liberalism means that you want change, conservitism means you want things to stay the same. Bush is all about change, but he boarders on being reactionary in many areas, social ones mostly. He wants real change in the area of ecconomics, i just think he is wrong. So take it either way you want I agree with the literal definition of conservative. It means most politicians today are conservative - Democrats most of all. Ever been in Washington DC when Congress is debating a bill which rolls back, even slightly, the welfare state? Talk about people who want to conserve the status quo. What "real change in the area of economics" are you talking about with Bush? Comment Post Cancel King Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 9576 Share Tweet #12 04-22-2004, 07:32 AM Originally posted by dredbyrd+Apr 22 2004, 07:28 AM--> QUOTE (dredbyrd @ Apr 22 2004, 07:28 AM) Explain how I am in disagreement and agreement with this guy's opinions.[/b] Huh? jhanke Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 21967 Share Tweet #13 04-22-2004, 07:41 AM I will tackle both, I was talking about what seems to be a return to Laze Fare business, that is a change from the overregulation of the Regan-Clinton years. The founders, like all other elites of their age, feared the public and common people. They were afraid that they would be too ignorant to avoid being swayed by propaganda, charismatic people and popular peer presure. I think that if you look around at the political world we live in, they may have been right Official Sponsor of Marco Gonzales and the Productive Out!!! Said the Quangle Wangle Quee Comment Post Cancel SLUBLUE Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 20466 Share Tweet #14 04-22-2004, 07:45 AM Originally posted by King in KC+Apr 22 2004, 07:18 AM--> QUOTE (King in KC @ Apr 22 2004, 07:18 AM) King Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 9576 Share Tweet #15 04-22-2004, 07:52 AM Originally posted by SLUBLUE+Apr 22 2004, 07:45 AM--> QUOTE (SLUBLUE @ Apr 22 2004, 07:45 AM) you're full of shit.[/b] I'll be nicer (I still have good feelings toward you for the Vive La Hubris quote). You're naive - like a child. Why do I say this? Because you say this: Previous 1 2 template Next English (US) Deutsch (Du) English (US) French Spanish Help Contact Us Go to top Copyright © 2003-13, TippingPitchers.com Powered by vBulletin® Version 5.7.4 Copyright © 2023 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved. All times are GMT-6. This page was generated at 04:37 PM. Working... Yes No OK OK Cancel X

[King]

Originally posted by jhanke@Apr 22 2004, 07:24 AM
I am talking in the modern sence, not the classic sence. Classic liberalism means that you want change, conservitism means you want things to stay the same. Bush is all about change, but he boarders on being reactionary in many areas, social ones mostly. He wants real change in the area of ecconomics, i just think he is wrong. So take it either way you want

I agree with the literal definition of conservative. It means most politicians today are conservative - Democrats most of all.

Ever been in Washington DC when Congress is debating a bill which rolls back, even slightly, the welfare state? Talk about people who want to conserve the status quo.

What "real change in the area of economics" are you talking about with Bush?

[King]

Originally posted by dredbyrd+Apr 22 2004, 07:28 AM-->

QUOTE (dredbyrd @ Apr 22 2004, 07:28 AM)

Explain how I am in disagreement and agreement with this guy's opinions.[/b] Huh? jhanke Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 21967 Share Tweet #13 04-22-2004, 07:41 AM I will tackle both, I was talking about what seems to be a return to Laze Fare business, that is a change from the overregulation of the Regan-Clinton years. The founders, like all other elites of their age, feared the public and common people. They were afraid that they would be too ignorant to avoid being swayed by propaganda, charismatic people and popular peer presure. I think that if you look around at the political world we live in, they may have been right Official Sponsor of Marco Gonzales and the Productive Out!!! Said the Quangle Wangle Quee Comment Post Cancel SLUBLUE Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 20466 Share Tweet #14 04-22-2004, 07:45 AM Originally posted by King in KC+Apr 22 2004, 07:18 AM--> QUOTE (King in KC @ Apr 22 2004, 07:18 AM) King Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 9576 Share Tweet #15 04-22-2004, 07:52 AM Originally posted by SLUBLUE+Apr 22 2004, 07:45 AM--> QUOTE (SLUBLUE @ Apr 22 2004, 07:45 AM) you're full of shit.[/b] I'll be nicer (I still have good feelings toward you for the Vive La Hubris quote). You're naive - like a child. Why do I say this? Because you say this: Previous 1 2 template Next English (US) Deutsch (Du) English (US) French Spanish Help Contact Us Go to top Copyright © 2003-13, TippingPitchers.com Powered by vBulletin® Version 5.7.4 Copyright © 2023 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved. All times are GMT-6. This page was generated at 04:37 PM. Working... Yes No OK OK Cancel X

[jhanke]

I will tackle both, I was talking about what seems to be a return to Laze Fare business, that is a change from the overregulation of the Regan-Clinton years.

The founders, like all other elites of their age, feared the public and common people. They were afraid that they would be too ignorant to avoid being swayed by propaganda, charismatic people and popular peer presure. I think that if you look around at the political world we live in, they may have been right

[SLUBLUE]

Originally posted by King in KC+Apr 22 2004, 07:18 AM-->

QUOTE (King in KC @ Apr 22 2004, 07:18 AM)

King Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 9576 Share Tweet #15 04-22-2004, 07:52 AM Originally posted by SLUBLUE+Apr 22 2004, 07:45 AM--> QUOTE (SLUBLUE @ Apr 22 2004, 07:45 AM) you're full of shit.[/b] I'll be nicer (I still have good feelings toward you for the Vive La Hubris quote). You're naive - like a child. Why do I say this? Because you say this: Previous 1 2 template Next English (US) Deutsch (Du) English (US) French Spanish Help Contact Us Go to top Copyright © 2003-13, TippingPitchers.com Powered by vBulletin® Version 5.7.4 Copyright © 2023 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved. All times are GMT-6. This page was generated at 04:37 PM. Working... Yes No OK OK Cancel X

[King]

Originally posted by SLUBLUE+Apr 22 2004, 07:45 AM-->

QUOTE (SLUBLUE @ Apr 22 2004, 07:45 AM)

you're full of shit.[/b] I'll be nicer (I still have good feelings toward you for the Vive La Hubris quote). You're naive - like a child. Why do I say this? Because you say this: Previous 1 2 template Next English (US) Deutsch (Du) English (US) French Spanish Help Contact Us Go to top Copyright © 2003-13, TippingPitchers.com Powered by vBulletin® Version 5.7.4 Copyright © 2023 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved. All times are GMT-6. This page was generated at 04:37 PM. Working... Yes No OK OK Cancel X