Republicans

[Talvenada]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

TAL,

Most of your gripes about 'Conse 'Pubs' can equally be said about you. Your debate style is political because you put people into narrowly defined political parties and then claim to know their entire point of view based on whatever political party you've classified them as. That leads to mistakes, like when you think I'm a conservative republican, and therefore must be against clinton too. The fact that I had already defended clinton against republicans apparently made no difference, and you still have not acknowledged this. You probably think I'm a bible thumper as well, which would be another mistake.

This is a very simplistic view. I'm sorry if my arguments, which are often backed by verifiable information, doesn't fit in your narrow view of permissible topics or falls into one of your taboo topics, but facts are facts and you can choose to ignore them if you want, and you do, but own up to it. Don't just assign me the title of Conse 'Pub (which I'm not btw) and dismiss everything I say based on that. Say "you do not fit in my narrow point of view so I will ignore what you say and blame you for not fitting in my narrow point of view."

TRACY:

Since, your side has the facts, could you please humor me with 3 or 4 examples out of the many you imply? If I'm guilty of most of what I gripe about, it should be easy to point this out to me. Could you elaborate, please?

I refer to myself as a Mod Dem, so how is it narrow and political to refer to myself that way? Sorry for referring to you as a Conse 'Pub, what are you?

I've acknowledged that you felt Obama is a citizen with proof, that Palin might not be presidential timber, and that Bush 43 did a couple things that you didn't like: immigration, pharm. deal, financial decisions. The Clinton issue wasn't addressed, because I was addressing all of your other catastrophes with Obama in The WH for 1 year. Let me get this straight. Bush did 3 things you didn't like, and you like some of what Obama does like Bush only. I don't think anyone on the site is a bible thumper, and have never mentioned religion. I'm guilty by question?

What topics have I said are taboo or permissible, because I'm too stupid to comprehend that aspect of your post? I dismiss what you say based on what you say, and not based on you're being a party of one. I've heard that 'Pubs cut taxes and Dems raise taxes. Are you saying that Dems blow excesses of money, while 'Pubs--other than Bush--balance the budget and lower taxes? Did I miss anything? I'm sure you have a multitude of examples of my transgressions. I await your angst.

TAL

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by Talvenada

TRACY:

Since, your side has the facts, could you please humor me with 3 or 4 examples out of the many you imply? If I'm guilty of most of what I gripe about, it should be easy to point this out to me. Could you elaborate, please?

I think this link spells out my credentials:
http://forum.transladyboy.com/showpo...&postcount=806

Originally Posted by Talvenada

I refer to myself as a Mod Dem, so how is it narrow and political to refer to myself that way? Sorry for referring to you as a Conse 'Pub, what are you?

I said why you are political, and it's not because you are a mod dem. I also said you had a narrow view, not because you're a mod dem, but for something else. Go back and read again.

Originally Posted by Talvenada

The Clinton issue wasn't addressed, because I was addressing all of your other catastrophes with Obama in The WH for 1 year. Let me get this straight. Bush did 3 things you didn't like, and you like some of what Obama does like Bush only.

I don't remember if I said I liked some of the things BO did that Bush did. Are there any? People here see me debating against Obama's policies and assume I'm a hard right winger. I'm fiscally conservative and socially liberal. This is what the liberal party was before it was hijacked by the Progressives. In the Bush vs Gore election, I had to seriously think about who I would vote for. In hindsight I'm so glad Bush won instead of Gore. I also had to think hard about the Clinton vs Dole election. In the election before that I voted for Ross Perot. I probably don't exactly fit in any one well defined political party, but Conservative Libertarian probably is the closest.

Originally Posted by Talvenada

I don't think anyone on the site is a bible thumper, and have never mentioned religion. I'm guilty by question?

I was just saying if you thought I was a republican you probably lumped me in with all those other bible thumpers in the party like Palin, Bush, Pat Robertson, etc...

Originally Posted by Talvenada

What topics have I said are taboo or permissible, because I'm too stupid to comprehend that aspect of your post?

Originally Posted by Talvenada

TRACY:

I'm not going to even read posts that sound like a certain show.

TAL

Originally Posted by Talvenada

I dismiss what you say based on what you say, and not based on you're being a party of one.

Mmmm hmmm.

Originally Posted by Talvenada

I've heard that 'Pubs cut taxes and Dems raise taxes. Are you saying that Dems blow excesses of money, while 'Pubs--other than Bush--balance the budget and lower taxes? Did I miss anything? I'm sure you have a multitude of examples of my transgressions. I await your angst.

TAL

Not all republicans cut taxes. Bush Sr raised them, so that Clinton could take credit for a surplus. You can't just look at the president. You also have to look at the congress. i.e., there's Bush with a republican congress. Bush with a democrat congress. There are differences in spending. What's going on in the world? Could it be that jets crashing in the heart of the US's financial center and the following war might affect our budget? Things that make you go hmmmm....

[Talvenada]

[QUOTE=TracyCoxx;133714]I think this link spells out my credentials:
http://forum.transladyboy.com/showpo...&postcount=806


1- I said why you are political, and it's not because you are a mod dem. I also said you had a narrow view, not because you're a mod dem, but for something else. Go back and read again.

2- People here see me debating against Obama's policies and assume I'm a hard right winger.

QUOTE]

TRACY:

Read above I marked 1 for your question, and 2 for your answer. That makes me narrow, because you appear that way. A conservative libertarian is to the right of a Neo-Con from what I can tell.

I call very-right-leaning political posters Conse 'Pubs until they state otherwise. I've been called a Lib by Conse 'Pubs, Neo-Cons and Libertarians, and then called a liar when I said I'm a Mod Dem. So, I'm a liar on the receiving end, and narrow-minded on the other end. I do post on a local political board, and I learned that calling someone a 'Pub gets you no answer to your question with an I'm-a-conservative blast to the face. If you say they're a conservative, no republican is accountable by them, and the talkers are entertainers only. The strategy is that the attacker can be on offense 100% of the time. Sorry, but these individuals want to crush any opposing opinion, while passing out insults to anyone who dares to have an offending opinion.

The Commie-Marxist-Obama debate is not a taboo or not a permissible subject. Sorry, I have no desire to debate Glenn Beck. I refuse to debate something I don't respect. I could describe it in a more offending way, if you confuse distaste for weakness and fear.

Sorry, I find it distasteful to defend any American President, EVEN BUSH 43, from questions about his loyalty to America.


TAL

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by Talvenada

I call very-right-leaning political posters Conse 'Pubs until they state otherwise. I've been called a Lib by Conse 'Pubs, Neo-Cons and Libertarians, and then called a liar when I said I'm a Mod Dem. So, I'm a liar on the receiving end, and narrow-minded on the other end. I do post on a local political board, and I learned that calling someone a 'Pub gets you no answer to your question with an I'm-a-conservative blast to the face etc etc etc

I could care less about political labels. I deal in actions and results.

Originally Posted by Talvenada

The Commie-Marxist-Obama debate is not a taboo or not a permissible subject. Sorry, I have no desire to debate Glenn Beck.

Tracy looks around. Sees no Glenn Beck... shrugs.

[TracyCoxx]

Here's one democrat I can get behind...

[GRH]

I for one consider myself an independent, but I WHOLEHEARTEDLY disregard topics which devolve to calling people by shallow nicknames such as "Cons," "Pubs," "Dems," "Mods," etc, etc, etc. If a topic can't bother to name the variety by which I might find myself labeled (without resorting to base labeling), that topic doesn't deserve my input.

[smc]

Originally Posted by GRH

I for one consider myself an independent, but I WHOLEHEARTEDLY disregard topics which devolve to calling people by shallow nicknames such as "Cons," "Pubs," "Dems," "Mods," etc, etc, etc. If a topic can't bother to name the variety by which I might find myself labeled (without resorting to base labeling), that topic doesn't deserve my input.

Thank you for this post, from the bottom of my heart!!!

[Talvenada]

Originally Posted by GRH

I for one consider myself an independent, but I WHOLEHEARTEDLY disregard topics which devolve to calling people by shallow nicknames such as "Cons," "Pubs," "Dems," "Mods," etc, etc, etc. If a topic can't bother to name the variety by which I might find myself labeled (without resorting to base labeling), that topic doesn't deserve my input.

GRH:

You and SMC consider abrevs. to be shallow. They are not insults or nicknames, but abbreviations. It is not base labeling IMHO. Is t-girl base labeling too? I do that, does that make me shallow?


TAL