Yes actually, I support FISA, both in its old and current form, and I am a Conservative first, Republican Second. I enjoy reading politics on/. from time to time to see how amusing the left can be.
I have read the actual text of the original bill from front to back and the current text, and all provided (contrary to/. opinion) judicial oversight, albeit after the fact. I have NO CLUE why Obama (or some/.ers) thinks the old and new bill are much different in this regard. Political positioning I assume.
Now as to your question...
As a Conservative the reason this bill does not bother me and I in fact support it is because after 9/11, Congress Authorized the use of force in Iraq and the Afghanistan where foreign terrorists are using American cell phones to conduct war & espionage via our communication lines. During War Time when American Soldiers may get kidnapped I do not believe getting a warrant to tap a non-American citizens cell phone should be necessary even if they use American communication lines. They should not be able to hide behind the freedom American citizens enjoy. Both the original NSA program and this bill were subject to judicial review and must have been certified by a judge as legal albeit it after the fact.
Sorry if it drives you crazy that a Conservative would think this way, but perhaps I am in the minority on the "Right".
How many high bandwidth clients could you possibly get off of a single 125MB/sec connection (gigE).
This simply will not scale properly in a corporate environment. Add dozens of gigE, Fibre or Infiniband connectors, and perhaps we can talk about hosting up some serious bandwidth to hundreds of clients.
My wife and a few friends work in television. Avid is on the way out, everyone in the field is now switching to Final Cut Pro. For one thing, it's much more stable. But it's sooo much cheaper.
first off, what "Avid" are you refering 2? Avid Media Composer? Symphony Nitris? DS-Nitris? Digidesign? M-Audio? XSI SoftImage? Pinnacle? Sibelius?
When you say its cheaper? Are you comparing it to Avid Express? Avid Liquid? Or are you comparing it to a Symphony Nitris system, which surely costs more than FCP since it comes with Video Hardware.
Does Final Cut Pro come with any Video Hardware with the price? Does it support Real Time multi-cam, something I am sure most broadcasters and prime-time TV production folks appreciate. Does it support Multiple Streams in Real Time w/o any additional Hardware? Or does it use a Digital Proxy like FCP does and need to render for additional streams of video? Does Software Only Media Composer use a Digital proxy? Does FCP run on anything except the Apple OS?
2 put it plainly, Avid, like Apple, is more than an Editing company. It is the Sum of all its Parts, something which you and perhaps pro-sumers and consumers tend to lose sight of.
How about don't trust me, Lets just look at the 2007 Academy Awards. ALL of the nominated and award winning films in the Best Motion Picture, Directing, Film Editing, Sound Editing, Sound Mixing, Documentary Feature, and Animated Feature categories were created with at least one Avid, Digidesign, or Softimage system. Nearly two-thirds of these nominees employed workflows consisting of multiple Avid systems, and for the seventh-consecutive year, every nominee for a Sound Editing Oscar used the Digidesign Pro Tools system. http://www.avid.com/community/hollywood/AWARD_2007 list.pdf
Do I agree FCP is cheaper, yes I do, but does that mean it is a better product or solution?
Seems your good at throwing swears, but not really any data...
Can't you find a hockey stick graph or something which supports your "theory". Extra-ordinary claims need extra-ordinary evidence, and when you say that its just a "FACT" that temperatures are going up and up, I perhaps will believe you if you show me more than swears or some tree ring data...
Have temps gone up? If so, for how long? Is that length in comparison with the age of man and earth significant? I really do not know the answers to these questions, but with some skepticism and less "bomb throwing" & swears maybe we can all come to an agree able conclusion. But NO. This is not what you come to provide, you and your co-horts would rather everyone just shut up and listen to your enlightened view.
The NOAA Paleoclimatology Program distributes archives of paleoclimatic indicators derived from historical references and documentary evidence, such as church records, harvest dates, harbor ice free dates, etc....
Your data is what? Swears? Do you even know what region the graph the NOAA made is from?
--
Liberalism(Socialism) is a failed ideology which has joined communism/socialism in the trash heap of history.
"There's a very clear trend of increasing global temperatures, you can check meteorological websites and see it."
weird, After reading your post I decided to do what you say and so I went directly to the NOAA weather website to see this Temperature change that is so "VERY CLEAR" as you put it...
e-mail and contacts, than sure?
I on the other hand dont want my desktop shortcuts to video gamez, pron and other various sleazy activities on the Net, sorry...
Actually sir I was refering to the entire wikipedia artical itself, thats why I linked to it. I assume your reading capacity is limited to rationalrevolution.net? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing
I think it is a very concise and accurate depiction of what the definition of "right-wing" is. Also note the wikipedia entry has ZERO reference to slavery or owning people.
Basically if the dictionary and wikipedia entry is not worthy for discussion according to you. My question is, what is worthy for discussion with you? I guess the only site thus far you have pointed to is rationalrevolution.net. By pointing to some random site and not citing a SINGLE authoritative source I really don't know where this argument can go other than more of your insults.
You have yet to explain why my mother had been included in the conversation and you have yet to explain why the single source of YOUR definition is some site run by some guy out of little rock. In his own About Us page he urges you too actually go out and find other sources of info since he is not an authority. I think this speaks volumes to your narrow view and lack of information. You sir have been unable to cite a reliable source for your opinion in ANY of your responses other than your own opinion.
You also fail to explain any of the questions I have asked you or the hypocrisy I continue to point out in your argument.
And you completely fail to acknowledge the simple basic fact that was pointed out to you many times that the vast majority of the blatant racists left the Democratic party en masse and went to the Republicans when the Democrats started standing up for civil rights. Whether or not there is one hanger on you can point to is irrelevant. The fact that you continually try to hold up one bad example to stand up against millions shows for far outside reason you're going with this
Well apparently I am not the only person on/. who thinks you are wrong, here is a an insightfull post proving my point:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=204441&cid=1 6702247
The Republicans did have David Duke (KKK) in their ranks. However, the party repudiated him on a national and state level. They even urged voters to vote for Democrats opposing him. The Dems have yet to shun Robt. Byrd.
You have failed to indicate this intelligent poster is wrong. In fact you completely ignore his point altogether in any of your replies.
Also since I am an intelligent soul who actually has been trying to find where you have been indoctrinated into your opinions I have been googling your assertion itself...http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&sa fe=off&q=Supporting+slavery+right+wing
Odd, the only hits I get are too kook fringe blogs and comments on those blogs.
Basically If I do not agree with you, you insult me. That speaks a lot about you as an individual and points to your narrow view and weak arguements.
The fact that you continually try to hold up one bad example to stand up against millions shows for far outside reason you're going with this.
Are you not doing the same thing. Since a few bad republicans exist, it means all are scum and that must equal the most corrupt congress in history which obviously means, I am a bad citizen? Apparently your the judge who decides who is and isnt a good citizen. The fact that you're afraid to deal with reality as it is is the only thing holding you back from being a decent citizen.
Another one of your wonderfull baseless jumps to conclusion. That since you regard me as ignorant and not in agreeance with you and rationalrevolutions opinion , I must not be a decent citizen. And I am the one out of touch with reality?
Word of the wise, next time you want to argue with a REAL educated person like myself
No reply? Have you conceded that your definition of "right-wing" is wrong yet? If I was to play devils advocate and take your side of the argument I believe I would be able to find many partisan views like rationalrevolution.net to support your view by now...
Perhaps you are having trouble finding soem real references?
Again though, I assume you will just have insults to throw around as oppossed to real facts. I await either your admission of being wrong, or perhaps just another snide remark filled with insults and a lack of actual facts proving your argument is very weak...
I mean sure rigging elections is bad and probably has been done for thousands of years.
I just honestly dont know whether people would make such a big deal if it wasnt bush in office.
Lets say John McCain had won in 2000. I think just the fact that he is a personable guy, people wouldnt be so apt to claim voter fraud.
Bush is pretty well hated, so it makes one wonder how he won i guess...
I totally agree that if it wasn't Bush in office, voter fraud accussations would not be made so loudly by folks like Robert Kennedy and Rolling Stones mag...
Oh I cannot wait to see your rebuttal, certainly filled with anger and insults, trying to cover up the fact that your self declared "informed" mind has NO idea what the definition of "right-wing" is.
Oh and so you don't accuse me of ignoring your lame arguments, let me address this concern of yours:
And you completely fail to acknowledge the simple basic fact that was pointed out to you many times that the vast majority of the blatant racists left the Democratic party en masse and went to the Republicans when the Democrats started standing up for civil rights. Whether or not there is one hanger on you can point to is irrelevant.
The fact that you continually try to hold up one bad example to stand up against millions shows for far outside reason you're going with this
Well apparently I am not the only person on/. who thinks you are wrong, here is a an insightfull post proving my point:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=204441&cid=1 6702247 The Republicans did have David Duke (KKK) in their ranks. However, the party repudiated him on a national and state level. They even urged voters to vote for Democrats opposing him. The Dems have yet to shun Robt. Byrd.
His point is concise, clear and FACTually true. Unlike your failed notion that "right-wing" means your pro-slavery....
Lets see, I cite a published, established dictionary and peer reviewed site like wikipedia, and you cite? rationalrevolution.net.
It must be nice to find any kook site on the net that agrees with you. It must make you feel well informed. Then you can declare anyone who doesnt agree with your kook site as ignorant. Why how smart you must be... perhaps your an avid infowars.com reader, who knows...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_politics Outside the United States (where capitalism is supported by a broad range of politicians and people from the left and the right), the most notable distinction between left and right is in economic policy. The right advanced capitalism, whereas the left advocated socialism (often democratic socialism) or communism. Some on the right advocate laissez faire capitalism, tending toward minarchism, with little government intervention in the economy other than to control the money supply and little taxation except to support military and police functions. At the other extreme within what is usually considered right of centre, the centre-right Gaullists in post-World War II France advocated considerable social spending on education and infrastructure development, as well as extensive economic regulation and even a limited amount of the wealth redistribution measures more characteristic of social democracy.
Odd, I dont see anything about slavery in there...
You know what. I will be man enough to admit perhaps I was too liberal in my usage of the terms liberal and democrat. I do have the integrity to say so. But you sir, with your firmly held belief that to be "right wing" you must be pro-slavery. Or somehow by being "right wing" you must think that, in your own words, one person is inherently better than another to the extreme that it's ok for the one to own the other is entirely 100% right wing by definition. Odd, I don't see that printed in any REPUTABLE locations on the net and you have failed to link me to any dictionary or encyclopedia referencing your belief other than some weird site run out of little rock arkansas... Meanwhile the wikipedia entry has ZERO reference to slavery or owning people.
YOUR DEFINITION IS JUST PLAIN WRONG! it is time to admit it sir, stand up and be a man with some integrity...
Just look at how many of your scum are in prison, on trial, or under investigation right now.
and what "my scum" would that be oh smart one? Last I did my taxes, under occupation I wrote engineer, not Politician.
and whats this?, thats odd,
The fact that you continually try to hold up one bad example to stand up against millions shows for far outside reason you're going with this.
Are you not doing the same thing. Since a few bad republicans exist, it means all are scum and that must equal the most corrupt congress in history which obviously means, I am a bad citizen? Man your all over the place with your opinion today. You the holy one who decides who is and isnt a good citizen.
The fact that you're afraid to deal with reality as it is is the only thing holding you back from being a decent citizen. Another one of your wonderfull baseless jumps to conclusion. That since you regard me as ignorant and not in agreeance with you and rationalrevolutions opinion , I must not be a decent citizen. I am the one out of touch with reality?? You are the one declaring dictionary definitions as "completely worthless in any sort of discussion" yet I am the one out of touch with reality. Are you even listening to yourself? My how nice the weather must be in your lofty ivory tower. You have yet to defend why you needed to bring my mother into the argument. So I assume you feel some embarassment for doing so. At least you should feel childish and immature.
I am going to go out on a limb here, I think you and I could have a wonderfull argument in person if perhaps you would stick t
Thats odd, I don't see any "proof" other than your own baseless claims and opinion.
The idea that one person is inherently better than another to the extreme that it's ok for the one to own the other is entirely 100% right wing by definition.
Instead of using your false statements and opinions as proof, maybe you can cite an example showing your definition of "right wing". Specifically your assertion that it is a person that inherently believes they are better than another. I have yet to see you cite a single source.
Further more, these are really pretty simple concepts which I've explained to you several times. The fact that you keep spouting the same nonsense without a grasp of the definition of "right wing" even though the dictionary clearly states this definition does say a lot about you, none of it good, that is my opinion, not a fact like you would claim.
What other words would you use to describe somebody who uses words they don't know what mean and continually tries to pretend that the Democrats have remained unchanged for a hundred years?
Actually I was stating that the Democrats have not changed over the last generation, say 50 years. Proof as indicated by continually promoting racist policies like affirmitive action and keeping former KKK members like Robert Byrd in there ranks. You fail to acknowledge either fact or cite any facts disproving said points other than your eloquent opinions like:
You are a deeply ignorant person. You have proven that repeatedly. Stating that isn't an insult it's the statement of a fact.
Actually sir, that is your opinion, not a fact. Oh and here are your other "facts"
The fact that the American people are, in general, ignorant of things which it's their responsibility to know is again a basic simple fact.
Again your opinion. Can you cite an example other than your opinion please?
I'm certainly not going to pretend that I don't in order to make you feel better about yourself. Sorry, but that's life. I'd recommend you get used to dealing with it before you move out of your Mom's place.
Thats odd, I own my own home. Again you spew baseless crap, without any evidence to back up your "facts".
I do know more than most people about these topics, because I actually care enough to inform myself.
Gee, thanks for the info, maybe next time you can prove that you know something by citing your knowledge with real examples, definitions and facts other than resorting to name calling, and then refering to your name calling as a fact.. I believe your knowledge is well summed up in your GENIUS sig. Another Opinion of yours...
So your idea of the correct decision would be to reelect the same scum who make up the most currupt congress in our history who have looted this country blind?
I could possibly be convinced of this if you would provide maybe some numbers, some links, anything will do, other than your baseless claims and opinion... At least qualify your statement with "One of the most corrupt" so you don't look dumb when someone else proves your opinion wrong with REAL proof other than an opinion.
You may really think your a smart well informed person. Perhaps you are, I will not speculate your an idiot or ignorant like you so aptly like to do since I don't really know you. Doing so would indicate some real ignorance on my part. I think your name calling specifically points to your weak arguments, your baseless facts and possibly more weaknesses in your ideology than anything else. I am sure you feel at home here on/., many agree wit
Gosh, where do I start with your post, I could start with your immature Sig calling to murder republicans, but I'll ignore that for now... I'll just start with your own words...
Now you're trying to equate "right winger" with Republican, so you're wrong again.
followed by:
the current Republicans in congress are extremist right
wingers...
So your equating Republicans with extremist right wingers, odd, that sounds familiar....
Ok then, back to the original posters point: It's amazing how the Republican Party and their joculators have managed to make the word "Liberal" a term of abuse in the US. Who do you think invented laissez-faire and free market economics, back in the day when right-wingers just wanted to keep their slaves and feudal tenants from escaping to more liberal (i.e. equal and progressive) societies?
The OP was the one equating Republicans with the right wing and slavery, of which i find no indications of slavery being part of the right wing politics platform http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_politics Nor would history or yourself, indicate proof of such a correlation Now back to your opinion of the Right:
Right means you fundamentally *disagree* with the idea that people should be treated equally and further you believe that the power of the state should be used against the individual to keep them down and subservient to the elite.
while "right" originally referred to those who supported the interests of aristocracy, in the United States there is no correlation with
wealth or ancestry, nor do we have an aristocracy. In fact the predominately Liberal party in America has a former KKK member in its ranks, was pro-segregation in the south less than a generation ago, and currently is the party which supports racist policies
that do not promote equality like affirmitive action. I guess we both agree, those are hardly liberal ideas
Some, including myself, consider the political Right to include those forms of liberalism that emphasize the free market more than egalitarianism in wealth and equality for ALL, not just a minority of people(ie: affirmitive action)
Back to your partisan rantings:
It is entirely factually correct. Slavery is entirely a right-wing thing. It's about as purely right wing an idea as it's possible to have.
I am sorry , I do not find any references or facts to back up your claim that Slavery is a right wing "thing" nor did you provide any. I assume by your logic Americas forefathers had been extremist right wingers?
Now on to your baseless insults of myself and the American people...
The problem is that you don't actually know what any of these words mean and so you come across as pretty silly when you try to correct others...
The fact that most "debates" in this country treat all 3 divides as the same jsut shows the hideous ignorance of our citizenry.
Seriously though, you really should try to at least have a basic idea what the hell you're talking about before you twice try to correct people when they are right. It makes you look ignorant and foolish.
So your basic gist is, I am foolish, silly and ignorant, The rest of the American citizenry is ignorant, and none of us know what we are talking about except for "enlightened" people like yourself which seem to know what the "truth" and "equality" means when you profess such knowledge on slashdot.
I have yet to indicate I belong to any political party, but frankly I would like to give our citizenry a little more credit than yourself. Americans do know what they are talking about, sure we cant all have clever sigs like yourself, but come election day I think all of us will be educated enough to make
the right decision... no pun intended...
---
i like sigs which call to kill people i disagree with, it helps undermine my own ideas...
"back in the day when right-wingers just wanted to keep their slaves and feudal tenants from escaping to more liberal (i.e. equal and progressive) societies?"
Which not only isn't factualy correct, its just plain a lie...
Now onto your notion that
"That party doesn't exist anymore for all intents and purposes. In fact, if you look at the people who supported the dixiecrats, you would find that they are considered conservative now."
That is also ignoring the CURRENT Democrat DIXIE senator and former KKK member Robert Byrd from West Virginia
Slashdot Mirror
Yes actually, I support FISA, both in its old and current form, and I am a Conservative first, Republican Second. I enjoy reading politics on /. from time to time to see how amusing the left can be.
I have read the actual text of the original bill from front to back and the current text, and all provided (contrary to /. opinion) judicial oversight, albeit after the fact. I have NO CLUE why Obama (or some /.ers) thinks the old and new bill are much different in this regard. Political positioning I assume.
Now as to your question...
As a Conservative the reason this bill does not bother me and I in fact support it is because after 9/11, Congress Authorized the use of force in Iraq and the Afghanistan where foreign terrorists are using American cell phones to conduct war & espionage via our communication lines. During War Time when American Soldiers may get kidnapped I do not believe getting a warrant to tap a non-American citizens cell phone should be necessary even if they use American communication lines. They should not be able to hide behind the freedom American citizens enjoy. Both the original NSA program and this bill were subject to judicial review and must have been certified by a judge as legal albeit it after the fact.
Sorry if it drives you crazy that a Conservative would think this way, but perhaps I am in the minority on the "Right".
sorry I just had to say that in typical troll fashion...
How many high bandwidth clients could you possibly get off of a single 125MB/sec connection (gigE).
This simply will not scale properly in a corporate environment. Add dozens of gigE, Fibre or Infiniband connectors, and perhaps we can talk about hosting up some serious bandwidth to hundreds of clients.
Good start though...
In pauls mom?
My wife and a few friends work in television. Avid is on the way out, everyone in the field is now switching to Final Cut Pro. For one thing, it's much more stable. But it's sooo much cheaper.
7 list.pdf
first off, what "Avid" are you refering 2?
Avid Media Composer? Symphony Nitris? DS-Nitris? Digidesign? M-Audio? XSI SoftImage? Pinnacle? Sibelius?
When you say its cheaper? Are you comparing it to Avid Express? Avid Liquid? Or are you comparing it to a Symphony Nitris system, which surely costs more than FCP since it comes with Video Hardware.
Does Final Cut Pro come with any Video Hardware with the price? Does it support Real Time multi-cam, something I am sure most broadcasters and prime-time TV production folks appreciate. Does it support Multiple Streams in Real Time w/o any additional Hardware? Or does it use a Digital Proxy like FCP does and need to render for additional streams of video? Does Software Only Media Composer use a Digital proxy? Does FCP run on anything except the Apple OS?
2 put it plainly, Avid, like Apple, is more than an Editing company. It is the Sum of all its Parts, something which you and perhaps pro-sumers and consumers tend to lose sight of.
How about don't trust me, Lets just look at the 2007 Academy Awards. ALL of the nominated and award winning films in the Best Motion Picture, Directing, Film Editing, Sound Editing, Sound Mixing, Documentary Feature, and Animated Feature categories were created with at least one Avid, Digidesign, or Softimage system. Nearly two-thirds of these nominees employed workflows consisting of multiple Avid systems, and for the seventh-consecutive year, every nominee for a Sound Editing Oscar used the Digidesign Pro Tools system. http://www.avid.com/community/hollywood/AWARD_200
Do I agree FCP is cheaper, yes I do, but does that mean it is a better product or solution?
Weird, the Avid stock price doesnt seem to account for the dwindling market share the previous 2 posters assert...
Ask NBC, ABC, Fox, Or the countless Oscar nominated films using Avid if Avid is dead...
Wow, your a smart one arent you...
Seems your good at throwing swears, but not really any data...
Can't you find a hockey stick graph or something which supports your "theory". Extra-ordinary claims need extra-ordinary evidence, and when you say that its just a "FACT" that temperatures are going up and up, I perhaps will believe you if you show me more than swears or some tree ring data...
Have temps gone up? If so, for how long? Is that length in comparison with the age of man and earth significant? I really do not know the answers to these questions, but with some skepticism and less "bomb throwing" & swears maybe we can all come to an agree able conclusion. But NO. This is not what you come to provide, you and your co-horts would rather everyone just shut up and listen to your enlightened view.
The NOAA Paleoclimatology Program distributes archives of paleoclimatic indicators derived from historical references and documentary evidence, such as church records, harvest dates, harbor ice free dates, etc....
Your data is what? Swears? Do you even know what region the graph the NOAA made is from?
--
Liberalism(Socialism) is a failed ideology which has joined communism/socialism in the trash heap of history.
"There's a very clear trend of increasing global temperatures, you can check meteorological websites and see it."
weird, After reading your post I decided to do what you say and so I went directly to the NOAA weather website to see this Temperature change that is so "VERY CLEAR" as you put it...
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/image/grapes.jpg
And you wonder why a non-scientist like myself has a hard time believeing all the Climate Change hype/FUD...
e-mail and contacts, than sure? I on the other hand dont want my desktop shortcuts to video gamez, pron and other various sleazy activities on the Net, sorry...
I get it, dont you?
seriously though, where does Newt say we should forfeit free speech. Kind of jumping to conclusions here no?
I would not want to take part in an FUD, you?
Well I guess you conceded on this argument...
Or I guess maybe you will reply with some snide comment how its worthless to argue with me coz im ignorant.
Either way I provided facts, links, references and you sir have not.
I wonder if this will energize you to insult me some more instead of arguing with me based on the merits of the argument. We shall see...
I could not agree more. Very refreshing...
I mean its only Thursday and we already know who won!, What a novel idea!
Rove let the Democrats win so fixing the 08' elections will be more plausible...
I still think Diebold arranged this one...
Actually sir I was refering to the entire wikipedia artical itself, thats why I linked to it. I assume your reading capacity is limited to rationalrevolution.net?
/. who thinks you are wrong, here is a an insightfull post proving my point:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing
I think it is a very concise and accurate depiction of what the definition of "right-wing" is. Also note the wikipedia entry has ZERO reference to slavery or owning people.
Basically if the dictionary and wikipedia entry is not worthy for discussion according to you. My question is, what is worthy for discussion with you? I guess the only site thus far you have pointed to is rationalrevolution.net. By pointing to some random site and not citing a SINGLE authoritative source I really don't know where this argument can go other than more of your insults.
You have yet to explain why my mother had been included in the conversation and you have yet to explain why the single source of YOUR definition is some site run by some guy out of little rock. In his own About Us page he urges you too actually go out and find other sources of info since he is not an authority. I think this speaks volumes to your narrow view and lack of information. You sir have been unable to cite a reliable source for your opinion in ANY of your responses other than your own opinion.
You also fail to explain any of the questions I have asked you or the hypocrisy I continue to point out in your argument.
And you completely fail to acknowledge the simple basic fact that was pointed out to you many times that the vast majority of the blatant racists left the Democratic party en masse and went to the Republicans when the Democrats started standing up for civil rights. Whether or not there is one hanger on you can point to is irrelevant. The fact that you continually try to hold up one bad example to stand up against millions shows for far outside reason you're going with this
Well apparently I am not the only person on
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=204441&cid=1 6702247 The Republicans did have David Duke (KKK) in their ranks. However, the party repudiated him on a national and state level. They even urged voters to vote for Democrats opposing him. The Dems have yet to shun Robt. Byrd.
You have failed to indicate this intelligent poster is wrong. In fact you completely ignore his point altogether in any of your replies.
Also since I am an intelligent soul who actually has been trying to find where you have been indoctrinated into your opinions I have been googling your assertion itself...http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&sa fe=off&q=Supporting+slavery+right+wing
Odd, the only hits I get are too kook fringe blogs and comments on those blogs.
Basically If I do not agree with you, you insult me. That speaks a lot about you as an individual and points to your narrow view and weak arguements.
The fact that you continually try to hold up one bad example to stand up against millions shows for far outside reason you're going with this.
Are you not doing the same thing. Since a few bad republicans exist, it means all are scum and that must equal the most corrupt congress in history which obviously means, I am a bad citizen? Apparently your the judge who decides who is and isnt a good citizen.
The fact that you're afraid to deal with reality as it is is the only thing holding you back from being a decent citizen.
Another one of your wonderfull baseless jumps to conclusion. That since you regard me as ignorant and not in agreeance with you and rationalrevolutions opinion , I must not be a decent citizen. And I am the one out of touch with reality?
Word of the wise, next time you want to argue with a REAL educated person like myself
No reply? Have you conceded that your definition of "right-wing" is wrong yet? If I was to play devils advocate and take your side of the argument I believe I would be able to find many partisan views like rationalrevolution.net to support your view by now...
Perhaps you are having trouble finding soem real references?
Again though, I assume you will just have insults to throw around as oppossed to real facts. I await either your admission of being wrong, or perhaps just another snide remark filled with insults and a lack of actual facts proving your argument is very weak...
I mean sure rigging elections is bad and probably has been done for thousands of years. I just honestly dont know whether people would make such a big deal if it wasnt bush in office. Lets say John McCain had won in 2000. I think just the fact that he is a personable guy, people wouldnt be so apt to claim voter fraud. Bush is pretty well hated, so it makes one wonder how he won i guess... I totally agree that if it wasn't Bush in office, voter fraud accussations would not be made so loudly by folks like Robert Kennedy and Rolling Stones mag...
Oh I cannot wait to see your rebuttal, certainly filled with anger and insults, trying to cover up the fact that your self declared "informed" mind has NO idea what the definition of "right-wing" is.
/. who thinks you are wrong, here is a an insightfull post proving my point:
1 6702247
Oh and so you don't accuse me of ignoring your lame arguments, let me address this concern of yours:
And you completely fail to acknowledge the simple basic fact that was pointed out to you many times that the vast majority of the blatant racists left the Democratic party en masse and went to the Republicans when the Democrats started standing up for civil rights. Whether or not there is one hanger on you can point to is irrelevant. The fact that you continually try to hold up one bad example to stand up against millions shows for far outside reason you're going with this
Well apparently I am not the only person on
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=204441&cid=
The Republicans did have David Duke (KKK) in their ranks. However, the party repudiated him on a national and state level. They even urged voters to vote for Democrats opposing him. The Dems have yet to shun Robt. Byrd.
His point is concise, clear and FACTually true. Unlike your failed notion that "right-wing" means your pro-slavery....
Lets see, I cite a published, established dictionary and peer reviewed site like wikipedia, and you cite?
rationalrevolution.net.
It must be nice to find any kook site on the net that agrees with you. It must make you feel well informed. Then you can declare anyone who doesnt agree with your kook site as ignorant. Why how smart you must be... perhaps your an avid infowars.com reader, who knows...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_politics
Outside the United States (where capitalism is supported by a broad range of politicians and people from the left and the right), the most notable distinction between left and right is in economic policy. The right advanced capitalism, whereas the left advocated socialism (often democratic socialism) or communism. Some on the right advocate laissez faire capitalism, tending toward minarchism, with little government intervention in the economy other than to control the money supply and little taxation except to support military and police functions. At the other extreme within what is usually considered right of centre, the centre-right Gaullists in post-World War II France advocated considerable social spending on education and infrastructure development, as well as extensive economic regulation and even a limited amount of the wealth redistribution measures more characteristic of social democracy.
Odd, I dont see anything about slavery in there...
You know what. I will be man enough to admit perhaps I was too liberal in my usage of the terms liberal and democrat. I do have the integrity to say so. But you sir, with your firmly held belief that to be "right wing" you must be pro-slavery. Or somehow by being "right wing" you must think that, in your own words, one person is inherently better than another to the extreme that it's ok for the one to own the other is entirely 100% right wing by definition. Odd, I don't see that printed in any REPUTABLE locations on the net and you have failed to link me to any dictionary or encyclopedia referencing your belief other than some weird site run out of little rock arkansas... Meanwhile the wikipedia entry has ZERO reference to slavery or owning people.
YOUR DEFINITION IS JUST PLAIN WRONG! it is time to admit it sir, stand up and be a man with some integrity...
Just look at how many of your scum are in prison, on trial, or under investigation right now.
and what "my scum" would that be oh smart one? Last I did my taxes, under occupation I wrote engineer, not Politician.
and whats this?, thats odd,
The fact that you continually try to hold up one bad example to stand up against millions shows for far outside reason you're going with this.
Are you not doing the same thing. Since a few bad republicans exist, it means all are scum and that must equal the most corrupt congress in history which obviously means, I am a bad citizen? Man your all over the place with your opinion today. You the holy one who decides who is and isnt a good citizen.
The fact that you're afraid to deal with reality as it is is the only thing holding you back from being a decent citizen. Another one of your wonderfull baseless jumps to conclusion. That since you regard me as ignorant and not in agreeance with you and rationalrevolutions opinion , I must not be a decent citizen. I am the one out of touch with reality?? You are the one declaring dictionary definitions as "completely worthless in any sort of discussion" yet I am the one out of touch with reality. Are you even listening to yourself? My how nice the weather must be in your lofty ivory tower. You have yet to defend why you needed to bring my mother into the argument. So I assume you feel some embarassment for doing so. At least you should feel childish and immature.
I am going to go out on a limb here, I think you and I could have a wonderfull argument in person if perhaps you would stick t
In fact I did provide exactly such proof.
Thats odd, I don't see any "proof" other than your own baseless claims and opinion.
The idea that one person is inherently better than another to the extreme that it's ok for the one to own the other is entirely 100% right wing by definition.
Apparently you are so smart you don't need to check the definition of "right wing" before you declare that your opinion is the definition
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/right%20win g
Instead of using your false statements and opinions as proof, maybe you can cite an example showing your definition of "right wing". Specifically your assertion that it is a person that inherently believes they are better than another. I have yet to see you cite a single source.
Further more, these are really pretty simple concepts which I've explained to you several times. The fact that you keep spouting the same nonsense without a grasp of the definition of "right wing" even though the dictionary clearly states this definition does say a lot about you, none of it good, that is my opinion, not a fact like you would claim.
What other words would you use to describe somebody who uses words they don't know what mean and continually tries to pretend that the Democrats have remained unchanged for a hundred years?
Actually I was stating that the Democrats have not changed over the last generation, say 50 years. Proof as indicated by continually promoting racist policies like affirmitive action and keeping former KKK members like Robert Byrd in there ranks. You fail to acknowledge either fact or cite any facts disproving said points other than your eloquent opinions like:
You are a deeply ignorant person. You have proven that repeatedly. Stating that isn't an insult it's the statement of a fact.
Actually sir, that is your opinion, not a fact. Oh and here are your other "facts"
The fact that the American people are, in general, ignorant of things which it's their responsibility to know is again a basic simple fact.
Again your opinion. Can you cite an example other than your opinion please?
I'm certainly not going to pretend that I don't in order to make you feel better about yourself. Sorry, but that's life. I'd recommend you get used to dealing with it before you move out of your Mom's place.
Thats odd, I own my own home. Again you spew baseless crap, without any evidence to back up your "facts".
I do know more than most people about these topics, because I actually care enough to inform myself.
Gee, thanks for the info, maybe next time you can prove that you know something by citing your knowledge with real examples, definitions and facts other than resorting to name calling, and then refering to your name calling as a fact.. I believe your knowledge is well summed up in your GENIUS sig. Another Opinion of yours...
So your idea of the correct decision would be to reelect the same scum who make up the most currupt congress in our history who have looted this country blind?
I could possibly be convinced of this if you would provide maybe some numbers, some links, anything will do, other than your baseless claims and opinion... At least qualify your statement with "One of the most corrupt" so you don't look dumb when someone else proves your opinion wrong with REAL proof other than an opinion.
You may really think your a smart well informed person. Perhaps you are, I will not speculate your an idiot or ignorant like you so aptly like to do since I don't really know you. Doing so would indicate some real ignorance on my part. I think your name calling specifically points to your weak arguments, your baseless facts and possibly more weaknesses in your ideology than anything else. I am sure you feel at home here on
Gosh, where do I start with your post, I could start with your immature Sig calling to murder republicans, but I'll ignore that for now... I'll just start with your own words...
Now you're trying to equate "right winger" with Republican, so you're wrong again.
followed by:
the current Republicans in congress are extremist right wingers...
So your equating Republicans with extremist right wingers, odd, that sounds familiar....
Ok then, back to the original posters point:
It's amazing how the Republican Party and their joculators have managed to make the word "Liberal" a term of abuse in the US. Who do you think invented laissez-faire and free market economics, back in the day when right-wingers just wanted to keep their slaves and feudal tenants from escaping to more liberal (i.e. equal and progressive) societies?
The OP was the one equating Republicans with the right wing and slavery, of which i find no indications of slavery being part of the right wing politics platform
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_politics
Nor would history or yourself, indicate proof of such a correlation
Now back to your opinion of the Right:
Right means you fundamentally *disagree* with the idea that people should be treated equally and further you believe that the power of the state should be used against the individual to keep them down and subservient to the elite.
while "right" originally referred to those who supported the interests of aristocracy, in the United States there is no correlation with wealth or ancestry, nor do we have an aristocracy. In fact the predominately Liberal party in America has a former KKK member in its ranks, was pro-segregation in the south less than a generation ago, and currently is the party which supports racist policies that do not promote equality like affirmitive action. I guess we both agree, those are hardly liberal ideas
Some, including myself, consider the political Right to include those forms of liberalism that emphasize the free market more than egalitarianism in wealth and equality for ALL, not just a minority of people(ie: affirmitive action)
Back to your partisan rantings:
It is entirely factually correct. Slavery is entirely a right-wing thing. It's about as purely right wing an idea as it's possible to have.
I am sorry , I do not find any references or facts to back up your claim that Slavery is a right wing "thing" nor did you provide any. I assume by your logic Americas forefathers had been extremist right wingers?
Now on to your baseless insults of myself and the American people...
The problem is that you don't actually know what any of these words mean and so you come across as pretty silly when you try to correct others... The fact that most "debates" in this country treat all 3 divides as the same jsut shows the hideous ignorance of our citizenry. Seriously though, you really should try to at least have a basic idea what the hell you're talking about before you twice try to correct people when they are right. It makes you look ignorant and foolish.
So your basic gist is, I am foolish, silly and ignorant, The rest of the American citizenry is ignorant, and none of us know what we are talking about except for "enlightened" people like yourself which seem to know what the "truth" and "equality" means when you profess such knowledge on slashdot.
I have yet to indicate I belong to any political party, but frankly I would like to give our citizenry a little more credit than yourself. Americans do know what they are talking about, sure we cant all have clever sigs like yourself, but come election day I think all of us will be educated enough to make the right decision... no pun intended...
---
i like sigs which call to kill people i disagree with, it helps undermine my own ideas...
hahaha, I am not a very sarcastic fellow, I added you as a friend, so indeed you had taught me something new...
Wow, learn soemthing new everyday, thanks krell
I will agree with you on that, It just bothered me the parents post was equating right wingers with slavery... which is factually incorrect...
I was responding to his notion
a tion_in_the_Ku_Klux_Klan
"back in the day when right-wingers just wanted to keep their slaves and feudal tenants from escaping to more liberal (i.e. equal and progressive) societies?"
Which not only isn't factualy correct, its just plain a lie...
Now onto your notion that
"That party doesn't exist anymore for all intents and purposes. In fact, if you look at the people who supported the dixiecrats, you would find that they are considered conservative now."
That is also ignoring the CURRENT Democrat DIXIE senator and former KKK member Robert Byrd from West Virginia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Byrd#Particip
I am just tryign to set the record straight. Imagine if the GOP still had a former KKK member in there ranks... Geee, he would have to resign
In fact, all of those Democrats who sought to maintain segregation? They've long since switched parties and are Republicans now.
a tion_in_the_Ku_Klux_Klan
Nice try to re-write history buddy, How about this?
Still a Democrat DIXIE senator and former KKK member Robert Byrd
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Byrd#Particip
I am just tryign to set the record straight. Imagine if the GOP still had a former KKK member in there ranks... Geee, he would have to resign