Monday, November 05, 2007

Democrat's "Wide Stance" on the Issues

I know I've posted on this before... but debating the left is impossible.
As I look around the local extreme liberal blob-o-sphere, (and the Democrat party emails I get) the only issues that seem to catch their eye... are pathetic personal attacks disguised as exposing a conservative to fellow conservatives...(ohhh the outrage) usually on an matter which liberals have already praised within their own party as being heroic.

How about challenging Fred Thompson on his views regarding an issue rather that if a campaign member has "inhaled" or not in the past? Is that the best you've got?

How about challenging Jim Inhofe on his beliefs specifically instead of challenging his honesty and genuine belief (which people supported enough to elect into office) without any substance to your argument other than "He refuses to run on the Issues"?... LOL. Puuuh-Leeeeze
The issues are EXACTLY what Inhofe has and is running on. Global warming is supposedly YOUR biggest issue and Inhofe is the leading Republican on that issue.

How about defeating Bush and Cheney by electing a Democrat to the white house not by calling for impeachment for 8 years while at the same time saying impeachment is "off the table" out of the other side of your mouth?

How about challenging Duncan Hunter on any issue (pick one) instead of resorting to a personal attack by calling him an idiot for taking a position and offering a solution, while you do nothing to tell us what you or the Democrats would do (if anything) to fix any problem or address any issue. Your solution is "when in doubt, ...launch a personal attack".

The difference is that far left liberals (and main stream news media) consider any cheap personal attack on a Republican 'an issue' while conservatives consider a politician having close ties to the socialist and or communist party a legitimate political issue and not a personal attack at all.
How can calling far left liberals something they claim they are proud of being (socialist), possibly be an "attack"? The socialist agenda is the Democrat agenda.
When I criticize Hillary, it 's about her socialist and communist views and not about whether she is a lesbian or not, has a wide stance or not, is dumb, stupid, idiotic or not, unless she has broken a law(s), it doesn't matter I don't want to even think about most of that stuff... and she may be a lot of things but stupid and/or dumb aren't one of them. That's too easy, which is why we get outraged when the left calls the man (#43 in your programs) that outsmarts THEM every single time..."dumb". lol

Call me old fashioned, backward, old school conservative, traditional, knuckle dragging, neo-conservative, anti-communist, capitalist, ...maybe even rightwinger by certain definitions ...I'm fine with that.
So what's your problem when somebody points out that Andrew Rice is your hero?
You've been doing it on your socialist/populist/communist/anarchist/leftwing blogs forever anyway, it's not like it's a big secret.

Nobody on the conservative side is really concerned with Andrew Rice's "stance" in the bathroom as much as we are concerned with his "stances" on America and Democracy, taxes, abortion, big government intervention and a host of other problems... none of which have to do with his religion or lack thereof, mistresses or lack thereof, boyfriends or lack thereof, his children or his staff's personal lifestyle or lack thereof... but if you think someone should look into all those things then by all means....keep making it a legitimate issue.

I can't wait to see which one is the first to claim that this post is a 'personal attack'.
But at the advice of some friends, I didn't use the term moonbat anywhere above... and I tend to agree that calling these people moonbats, is probably an insult to real Moon Mats, to whom I apologize.
UPDATE 10:42 pm 11+ hours after posting this piece.
But speaking of moonbats and avoiding debate on the issues (like global warming for example) check out the latests at the SOONERTHOUGHTalgorewon blog (right on cue 9 hours after this post was published !). How does he defend and debate for algore's claims of manmade global warming? By discrediting any and all who disagree with algore including the majority of scientists in the world by comparing them to those who believe the world is flat. Anyone who disagrees with algore should not be given any forum in which to disagree.
There is the entire case and debate for global warming ladies and genlemen... if you don't believe in global warming then automatically you believe the world is flat and therefore your opinion is invalidated. Silence speech, prohibit debate, discredit any who oppose. End of debate, case closed. LOL No wonder Soonerthoughtalgorewon claims to be a former "journalist" he still acts like one.
Not so fast sparky.

Labels: , ,


Post a Comment

<< Home