We need the draft back

Originally posted by dadudemon
At fist reading, it would appear we are opposites. That is true, but the magnitude is actually more telling: there is very little magnitude of difference between our statements. We have a very similar opinion.

Lest someone criticize him for dodging, consider this first:

I certainly do not like it when "newbs" think they are entitled to a legitimate consideration in a conversation. They have to "prove" themselves before a large amount of effort is spent on them. What may end up happening is the person is just a sock troll that ends up being banned. Then were did that time and effort go that you put into a legitimate reply?

However, there are obviously huge differences between the 1994 proposition and Obama's Healthcare bill. Calling Obamacare "Bob Dole's original legislation" is just plain dishonest. It is meant to only 'anger' conservatives.

I don't think he was dodging. I think he just didn't have anything for a response. It's certainly a more honest and fair response than your own. Your tactic is to dismiss a perspective because it isn't coming from someone that has, what, done their time, while at the same time putting your spin on their statement. I never said it was exactly the same. I said it was little more invasive or progressive than was Dole's plan from the 90s. What I also said was that since Zeal has made the statements that Obama is an extreme liberal (read Socialist) and all of the people who voted for him are faddists, and he is the brightest kind of person for figuring out that moderately progressive conservatism is the best path for the country, then he should also have been bright enough figure out what Obamacare really is. It isn't some huge socialist push or radically progressive shift to liberalism. It's about as moderately progressive as Mr. Dole's plan was in the 90s when he presented it as a conservative alternative to Mrs. Clinton's plan.

See, that's how the Republican party has gotten it's moderately progressive agenda (or snail's pace progression so it's contributors can figure out how to profit most from it) accomplished. It rents out the front window to the worst nutjobs in their party so that the left has to move more and more towards the middle. This is what Mr. Obama represents. In essence, exactly what Zeal, and yourself, are calling the best path for the country.

But since I've not earned the right to have my points considered, I'll appreciate not reading your argument with that perspective.

Originally posted by skekUng
I don't think he was dodging. I think he just didn't have anything for a response. It's certainly a more honest and fair response than your own. Your tactic is to dismiss a perspective because it isn't coming from someone that has, what, done their time, while at the same time putting your spin on their statement. I never said it was exactly the same. I said it was little more invasive or progressive than was Dole's plan from the 90s. What I also said was that since Zeal has made the statements that Obama is an extreme liberal (read Socialist) and all of the people who voted for him are faddists, and he is the brightest kind of person for figuring out that moderately progressive conservatism is the best path for the country, then he should also have been bright enough figure out what Obamacare really is. It isn't some huge socialist push or radically progressive shift to liberalism. It's about as moderately progressive as Mr. Dole's plan was in the 90s when he presented it as a conservative alternative to Mrs. Clinton's plan.

See, that's how the Republican party has gotten it's moderately progressive agenda (or snail's pace progression so it's contributors can figure out how to profit most from it) accomplished. It rents out the front window to the worst nutjobs in their party so that the left has to move more and more towards the middle. This is what Mr. Obama represents. In essence, exactly what Zeal, and yourself, are calling the best path for the country.

But since I've not earned the right to have my points considered, I'll appreciate not reading your argument with that perspective.

I see lots of whining. If you are not a sock troll (which you seem like you are) then you need to realize that this board is plagued with sock trolls. That's the end of it.

Also, I actually addressed your post, unlike Zeal. 😐 Also, I did not read any of your post beyond the first 3 sentences.

He seems perfectly reasonable to me.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I see lots of whining. If you are not a sock troll (which you seem like you are) then you need to realize that this board is plagued with sock trolls. That's the end of it.

Also, I actually addressed your post, unlike Zeal. 😐 Also, I did not read any of your post beyond the first 3 sentences.

How could you see lots of whinning if you didn't get past the first three sentences?

You didn't address my post. You didn't even understand it. What you did say is that you'll defend another long time member because you've both been here long enough to consider anyone who hasn't been here as long trolls or socks. That's fine. If you need that to have a conversation, then I'm glad we won't be talking in the future. You'll always have been here longer. I'd put you on ignore, but that's about as realistic as you having not read my entire post.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I see lots of whining. If you are not a sock troll (which you seem like you are) then you need to realize that this board is plagued with sock trolls. That's the end of it.

Also, I actually addressed your post, unlike Zeal. 😐 Also, I did not read any of your post beyond the first 3 sentences.

He doesn't seem do be doing anything remotely trollish.

Originally posted by King Kandy
He seems perfectly reasonable to me.

Prolly.

Originally posted by skekUng
How could you see lots of whinning if you didn't get past the first three sentences?

That's simple: the first three posts had lots of...nevermind. You want to argue with someone: find someone else.

Also, I did address your post. I addressed it more than it deserved.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
He doesn't seem do be doing anything remotely trollish.

...

?

Originally posted by dadudemon
However, there are obviously huge differences between the 1994 proposition and Obama's Healthcare bill. Calling Obamacare "Bob Dole's original legislation" is just plain dishonest. It is meant to only 'anger' conservatives.

Aaaaaaaannnnnnnnnd I'm out: I won't post in this thread anymore.

What's whinning? Like a horse?

Originally posted by dadudemon
Prolly.

That's simple: the first three posts had lots of...nevermind. You want to argue with someone: find someone else.

Also, I did address your post. I addressed it more than it deserved.

...

?

Aaaaaaaannnnnnnnnd I'm out: I won't post in this thread anymore.

To be fair, you really haven't posted in it yet. You've just misunderstood my post, attacked someone and then taken the conversation even more off topic than it was before I responded to Zeal.

I'm sure the person that started the thread will appreciate you removing yourself from it.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
What's whinning?

A typo.

I don't think he was dodging. I think he just didn't have anything for a response. It's certainly a more honest and fair response than your own. Your tactic is to dismiss a perspective because it isn't coming from someone that has, what, done their time, while at the same time putting your spin on their statement. I never said it was exactly the same. I said it was little more invasive or progressive than was Dole's plan from the 90s. What I also said was that since Zeal has made the statements that Obama is an extreme liberal (read Socialist) and all of the people who voted for him are faddists, and he is the brightest kind of person for figuring out that moderately progressive conservatism is the best path for the country, then he should also have been bright enough figure out what Obamacare really is. It isn't some huge socialist push or radically progressive shift to liberalism. It's about as moderately progressive as Mr. Dole's plan was in the 90s when he presented it as a conservative alternative to Mrs. Clinton's plan.

See, that's how the Republican party has gotten it's moderately progressive agenda (or snail's pace progression so it's contributors can figure out how to profit most from it) accomplished. It rents out the front window to the worst nutjobs in their party so that the left has to move more and more towards the middle. This is what Mr. Obama represents. In essence, exactly what Zeal, and yourself, are calling the best path for the country.

But since I've not earned the right to have my points considered, I'll appreciate not reading your argument with that perspective.

Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
Please stop lying. Thanks.

Suggestion invalid.

since Zeal has made the statements that Obama is an extreme liberal (read Socialist) and all of the people who voted for him are faddists

Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
This is the best part. It tastes of butthurt and fail:

"since Zeal has made the statement that Obama is an extreme liberal and all of the people who voted for him are faddists"

Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
Liberals only care about something as long as it is in vogue....the liberals lost interest because it was no longer chic to wear Obama pins.

Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
liberalism is a mental disorder that ignores logic and common sense economics.

It is also a mental disorder to assume that the bottom line must be massive profits at the expense of the consumer and the quality of the product. You realize this, which is why I'm supprised that you don't see the same half-assed effort to reform health care by Dole in the 90s and this administration today.

Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
This is the best part. It tastes of butthurt and fail.

In the mind of a liberal, this statement

Liberals only care about something as long as it is in vogue....the liberals lost interest because it was no longer chic to wear Obama pins.

OBAMA'S A SOCIALIST AND HIS FOLLOWERS ARE FASCISTS

But the best part about Obama? He's proving that Dubya wasn't half-bad.

No, saying "liberalism is a mental disorder" allows me to make that assumption. Judging by the responses to your posts I've seen in the other thread on healthcare, you seem to present him as a liberal and argue against him as such. But, I'm glad you said he's center-right. So was Dole. So was his alternative to Mrs. Clinton's healthcare proposal. It was center right, weak and ineffective, and corporatist. When I said this, you said

Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
I honestly don't think enough of you to bother refuting your stupidity.

What you're saying now is that Dadudeman was wrong for defending you against dodging because you agree with me, in essence. In fact, I said you didn't dodge, that youjust didn't have anything to say in response. Now that you have, it seems as though you agree with me.

I wouldn't say he is totally corporatist, but I think he realizes it would be something akin to a mental disorder not to have them at the table when he made his proposals.

Obama is so underwhelming as a President that its a wonder there are still people who would accuse him of being something flashy like a secret Muslim, a proto-Stalin, or the Anti-Christ.

Underwhelming is not the word I would use. He's a much better president than he is being given credit for. Sadly, heathcare reform is not one of those things that is endearing him to me. I would rather he hadn't folded on the public option.

He should have simply allowed the republicans to filibuster, bringing all legislation to a halt until they had to end their tantrum and be discredited.

Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
In the mind of a liberal, this statement

translates to:

Fact: Obama's a center-right politician. He's a corporatist, just like every other recent president. His followers are morons, not fascists. Don't believe that I don't think he's destroying America?

But the best part about Obama? He's proving that Dubya wasn't half-bad.

Oh, and surely you know the difference between a faddist and a fascist. Surely that's a little butthurt on your own part for not realizing you're hte one who said it.