Liberal Racist?
 

I doubt that Chuck. I see it all the time. Every time someone shows
their bias against rich people, or those who somehow feel that the
rich should pay a disproportionately higher percentage of tax than any
one else, for no other reason than "they can afford it". All this so
that liberals can fix "the ills of society" by throwing taxpayer money
at it. That's counter to the basic principles of freedom (With
personal responsibility) and free market capitalism.

The further to the left your ideology goes, the closer to socialism
you get.

No, you don't "see it all the time".
You hear about it all the time on AM radio.
All most people know about liberals is what Rush LImbaugh tells them. :-)

Liberal Racist?
 

Gould,

It may not be the attitude of most liberals, but we see it everyday in the
posts made by Harry, jps, bb and Basskisser. What you do not understand is
that the majority of conservatives do not listen to talk radio, Rush or any
of the other talking heads who spew propaganda.

When you assume they do, you are guilty of generalization and demonizing the
enemy, the same thing that you accuse AM radio talk shows of doing.



"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
I doubt that Chuck. I see it all the time. Every time someone shows
their bias against rich people, or those who somehow feel that the
rich should pay a disproportionately higher percentage of tax than any
one else, for no other reason than "they can afford it". All this so
that liberals can fix "the ills of society" by throwing taxpayer money
at it. That's counter to the basic principles of freedom (With
personal responsibility) and free market capitalism.

The further to the left your ideology goes, the closer to socialism
you get.

No, you don't "see it all the time".
You hear about it all the time on AM radio.
All most people know about liberals is what Rush LImbaugh tells them. :-)

Liberal Racist?
 

It may not be the attitude of most liberals, but we see it everyday in the
posts made by Harry, jps, bb and Basskisser. What you do not understand is
that the majority of conservatives do not listen to talk radio, Rush or any
of the other talking heads who spew propaganda.


While you may sincerely believe that most conservatives do not listen to the
radio propaganda, those shows have the largest listening audience, by far, of
anything on the radio. Somebody is listening, and probably only about 5-10% of
the audience are liberals like myself trying to get some advance indication of
what the "talking points" for the following week are going to be.

As regularly as clockwork, whatever spews forth on Hannity, Limbaugh, Savage,
etc will be repeated almost verbatim by millions of zealots within a very few
days.

The left is no less guilty, just not as well organized. :-)

Liberal Racist?
 

Gould,

I agree that the talk radio propaganda shows do have a large audience, what
I disagree with is that the majority of conservatives listen to them. To
have the majority of conservatives listening to talk radio, they would have
to have approx. 50,000,000 people tuning into talk radio, normally during
the working day. The majority of people work and do not have the ability to
listen to talk radio during the day, even if they wanted to, which I am not
certain they would want to.

The few times I have listened to talk radio, the majority of the
conversation is "entertainment" and like the tabloid newspapers, some of
what they say is correct, it is just very hard to figure out the BS from the
facts.

I think you put too much credence into the size of their audience and those
that believe everything they say.


"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
It may not be the attitude of most liberals, but we see it everyday in
the
posts made by Harry, jps, bb and Basskisser. What you do not understand
is
that the majority of conservatives do not listen to talk radio, Rush or
any
of the other talking heads who spew propaganda.


While you may sincerely believe that most conservatives do not listen to
the
radio propaganda, those shows have the largest listening audience, by far,
of
anything on the radio. Somebody is listening, and probably only about
5-10% of
the audience are liberals like myself trying to get some advance
indication of
what the "talking points" for the following week are going to be.

As regularly as clockwork, whatever spews forth on Hannity, Limbaugh,
Savage,
etc will be repeated almost verbatim by millions of zealots within a very
few
days.

The left is no less guilty, just not as well organized. :-)

Liberal Racist?
 

"John Smith" wrote in message
news:FEVIc.45804$WX.44113@attbi_s51...
Gould,

I agree that the talk radio propaganda shows do have a large audience,
what
I disagree with is that the majority of conservatives listen to them. To
have the majority of conservatives listening to talk radio, they would
have
to have approx. 50,000,000 people tuning into talk radio, normally during
the working day. The majority of people work and do not have the ability
to
listen to talk radio during the day, even if they wanted to, which I am
not
certain they would want to.

The few times I have listened to talk radio, the majority of the
conversation is "entertainment" and like the tabloid newspapers, some of
what they say is correct, it is just very hard to figure out the BS from
the
facts.

I think you put too much credence into the size of their audience and
those
that believe everything they say.


The liebrals just believe that the same must be true about the conservatives
that is true about liebrals....i.e. what ever the talking points spew out,
that is what ever good liebral must believe......look at krause and
asslicker....... :-)

The primary thing most people I know have picked up from talk radio is to
question so called 'stats' and to look beyond the sound bite, and not to
look toward guvmint to solve all your problems.



"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
It may not be the attitude of most liberals, but we see it everyday in
the
posts made by Harry, jps, bb and Basskisser. What you do not
understand
is
that the majority of conservatives do not listen to talk radio, Rush or
any
of the other talking heads who spew propaganda.


While you may sincerely believe that most conservatives do not listen to
the
radio propaganda, those shows have the largest listening audience, by
far,
of
anything on the radio. Somebody is listening, and probably only about
5-10% of
the audience are liberals like myself trying to get some advance
indication of
what the "talking points" for the following week are going to be.

As regularly as clockwork, whatever spews forth on Hannity, Limbaugh,
Savage,
etc will be repeated almost verbatim by millions of zealots within a
very
few
days.

The left is no less guilty, just not as well organized. :-)

Liberal Racist?
 

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 12:02:19 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
.. .

I'd be curious as to see the precise details of each and every bill
that this president has signed, versus the previous president, and
compare to those vetoed and the reasons given.


Liar. You're not curious at all. If you were, you'd simply call your
senator's office and ask for the information you mentioned above. You'd
get
it, and easily.

Dealing with political offices is an exercise in frustration.

It's probably easier to search on the web. Point being that there is
little factual information here and lots of speculation.

Dave


Weenie. You keep closing doors. YOU said "I'd be curious...". It's easy to
find out how presidents voted on legislation. You're either too lazy, or you
really don't want the answer to your question. Someone here would almost
certainly ask you to post a link, and the information might let the air out
of your argument.

Liberal Racist?
 

The problem is he believes it.


"WaIIy" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 18:15:01 GMT, "John Smith"
wrote:

Gould,

I agree that the talk radio propaganda shows do have a large audience,
what
I disagree with is that the majority of conservatives listen to them.

Everything Chuck said was his opinion and his opinion only.

He tried to state it as fact, but he just made it up as he went along.

Liberal Racist?
 

On 13 Jul 2004 17:01:00 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote:

I doubt that Chuck. I see it all the time. Every time someone shows
their bias against rich people, or those who somehow feel that the
rich should pay a disproportionately higher percentage of tax than any
one else, for no other reason than "they can afford it". All this so
that liberals can fix "the ills of society" by throwing taxpayer money
at it. That's counter to the basic principles of freedom (With
personal responsibility) and free market capitalism.

The further to the left your ideology goes, the closer to socialism
you get.

No, you don't "see it all the time".
You hear about it all the time on AM radio.
All most people know about liberals is what Rush LImbaugh tells them. :-)

That last statement is your "hug me pillow". By continuing to promote
the idea that the only opposition to your ideals are coming from Rush
Limbaugh, it re-enforces your notion that yours are the correct views.
It's little more than a convoluted denial, Chuck. Rush Limbaugh merely
gives a high profile voice to feelings that have been held by many
mainstream Americans for MANY years now (long before Limbaugh was on
the radio). That's why he (and other conservative shows) are so
immensely popular. It's little more than preaching to the choir. Rush
isn't planting these ideas, he's just repeating them.

Yes, I do "see it all the time", as I am far more connected than the
simple talk radio listener that you are trying to discredit me as.

Dave

Liberal Racist?
 

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 18:42:15 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"Dave Hall" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 12:02:19 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
.. .

I'd be curious as to see the precise details of each and every bill
that this president has signed, versus the previous president, and
compare to those vetoed and the reasons given.


Liar. You're not curious at all. If you were, you'd simply call your
senator's office and ask for the information you mentioned above. You'd
get
it, and easily.

Dealing with political offices is an exercise in frustration.

It's probably easier to search on the web. Point being that there is
little factual information here and lots of speculation.

Dave


Weenie. You keep closing doors. YOU said "I'd be curious...". It's easy to
find out how presidents voted on legislation. You're either too lazy, or you
really don't want the answer to your question. Someone here would almost
certainly ask you to post a link, and the information might let the air out
of your argument.

Or if they were so inclined as to actually PROVE me wrong, THEY could
post the link.

In any case, I have already gotten one answer, and if you believe the
link that Chuck provided, then Bush HAS vetoed at least one spending
bill.....

Dave

Liberal Racist?
 

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
On 13 Jul 2004 17:01:00 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote:

I doubt that Chuck. I see it all the time. Every time someone shows
their bias against rich people, or those who somehow feel that the
rich should pay a disproportionately higher percentage of tax than any
one else, for no other reason than "they can afford it". All this so
that liberals can fix "the ills of society" by throwing taxpayer money
at it. That's counter to the basic principles of freedom (With
personal responsibility) and free market capitalism.

The further to the left your ideology goes, the closer to socialism
you get.

No, you don't "see it all the time".
You hear about it all the time on AM radio.
All most people know about liberals is what Rush LImbaugh tells them.
:-)

That last statement is your "hug me pillow". By continuing to promote
the idea that the only opposition to your ideals are coming from Rush
Limbaugh, it re-enforces your notion that yours are the correct views.
It's little more than a convoluted denial, Chuck. Rush Limbaugh merely
gives a high profile voice to feelings that have been held by many
mainstream Americans for MANY years now (long before Limbaugh was on
the radio). That's why he (and other conservative shows) are so
immensely popular. It's little more than preaching to the choir. Rush
isn't planting these ideas, he's just repeating them.

Hell you don't need to hear it from talk radio......you have the liebral
idol, Mikey Moore saying he thinks the top tax rate should be 70%.



Yes, I do "see it all the time", as I am far more connected than the
simple talk radio listener that you are trying to discredit me as.

Dave

Liberal Racist?
 

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 18:42:15 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"Dave Hall" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 12:02:19 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
.. .

I'd be curious as to see the precise details of each and every bill
that this president has signed, versus the previous president, and
compare to those vetoed and the reasons given.


Liar. You're not curious at all. If you were, you'd simply call your
senator's office and ask for the information you mentioned above.
You'd
get
it, and easily.

Dealing with political offices is an exercise in frustration.

It's probably easier to search on the web. Point being that there is
little factual information here and lots of speculation.

Dave


Weenie. You keep closing doors. YOU said "I'd be curious...". It's easy
to
find out how presidents voted on legislation. You're either too lazy, or
you
really don't want the answer to your question. Someone here would almost
certainly ask you to post a link, and the information might let the air
out
of your argument.

Or if they were so inclined as to actually PROVE me wrong, THEY could
post the link.

In any case, I have already gotten one answer, and if you believe the
link that Chuck provided, then Bush HAS vetoed at least one spending
bill.....

Dave


Doesn't matter to me. I was simply reminding you that you're the guy who
recently came up with a bunch of excuses for not getting involved in town
politics, and that this suggests the unlikelihood of your taking any
intitiative to find out how your president or representatives vote.

Liberal Racist?
 

Doug Kanter wrote:
"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 18:42:15 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"Dave Hall" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 12:02:19 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
.. .

I'd be curious as to see the precise details of each and every bill
that this president has signed, versus the previous president, and
compare to those vetoed and the reasons given.


Liar. You're not curious at all. If you were, you'd simply call your
senator's office and ask for the information you mentioned above.
You'd
get
it, and easily.

Dealing with political offices is an exercise in frustration.

It's probably easier to search on the web. Point being that there is
little factual information here and lots of speculation.

Dave


Weenie. You keep closing doors. YOU said "I'd be curious...". It's easy
to
find out how presidents voted on legislation. You're either too lazy, or
you
really don't want the answer to your question. Someone here would almost
certainly ask you to post a link, and the information might let the air
out
of your argument.

Or if they were so inclined as to actually PROVE me wrong, THEY could
post the link.

In any case, I have already gotten one answer, and if you believe the
link that Chuck provided, then Bush HAS vetoed at least one spending
bill.....

Dave


Doesn't matter to me. I was simply reminding you that you're the guy who
recently came up with a bunch of excuses for not getting involved in town
politics, and that this suggests the unlikelihood of your taking any
intitiative to find out how your president or representatives vote.



Worse, he doesn't read books, either. And he doesn't mind if 10,000 dogs
crap on his lawn.

Liberal Racist?
 

Harry Krause wrote:

And he doesn't mind if 10,000 dogs crap on his lawn.

Did you hear about those rouge American vigilantes in Afghanistan that
were running their own justice system and prison out of a rented house?

I immediately thought of kanter.

I wonder if they included dogs, cats, and children.

-- Charlie

Liberal Racist?
 

"Charles" wrote in message
...


Harry Krause wrote:

And he doesn't mind if 10,000 dogs crap on his lawn.

Did you hear about those rouge American vigilantes in Afghanistan that
were running their own justice system and prison out of a rented house?

I immediately thought of kanter.

I wonder if they included dogs, cats, and children.

-- Charlie

"rouge" ????? Red?

Liberal Racist?
 

Doug Kanter wrote:

"Charles" wrote in message
...


Harry Krause wrote:

And he doesn't mind if 10,000 dogs crap on his lawn.

Did you hear about those rouge American vigilantes in Afghanistan that
were running their own justice system and prison out of a rented house?

I immediately thought of kanter.

I wonder if they included dogs, cats, and children.

-- Charlie

"rouge" ????? Red?

No, rogue, an individual exhibiting a chance and usually inferior
biological variation.

-- Charlie

Liberal Racist?
 

On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 14:45:21 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"Dave Hall" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 18:42:15 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"Dave Hall" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 12:02:19 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
.. .

I'd be curious as to see the precise details of each and every bill
that this president has signed, versus the previous president, and
compare to those vetoed and the reasons given.


Liar. You're not curious at all. If you were, you'd simply call your
senator's office and ask for the information you mentioned above.
You'd
get
it, and easily.

Dealing with political offices is an exercise in frustration.

It's probably easier to search on the web. Point being that there is
little factual information here and lots of speculation.

Dave


Weenie. You keep closing doors. YOU said "I'd be curious...". It's easy
to
find out how presidents voted on legislation. You're either too lazy, or
you
really don't want the answer to your question. Someone here would almost
certainly ask you to post a link, and the information might let the air
out
of your argument.

Or if they were so inclined as to actually PROVE me wrong, THEY could
post the link.

In any case, I have already gotten one answer, and if you believe the
link that Chuck provided, then Bush HAS vetoed at least one spending
bill.....

Dave


Doesn't matter to me. I was simply reminding you that you're the guy who
recently came up with a bunch of excuses for not getting involved in town
politics,

Which was based on personal experience. When you hit yourself on the
head with a brick, and you find out that it hurts, do you do it again?


and that this suggests the unlikelihood of your taking any
intitiative to find out how your president or representatives vote.

You have absolutely NO idea of just what I am currently involved with
politically. To give you a hint, I was invited to attend the
republican convention, but I declined because I just don't have that
kind of money to throw around.

Dave

Liberal Racist?
 

On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 10:48:27 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

Doug Kanter wrote:
"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 18:42:15 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"Dave Hall" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 12:02:19 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
.. .

I'd be curious as to see the precise details of each and every bill
that this president has signed, versus the previous president, and
compare to those vetoed and the reasons given.


Liar. You're not curious at all. If you were, you'd simply call your
senator's office and ask for the information you mentioned above.
You'd
get
it, and easily.

Dealing with political offices is an exercise in frustration.

It's probably easier to search on the web. Point being that there is
little factual information here and lots of speculation.

Dave


Weenie. You keep closing doors. YOU said "I'd be curious...". It's easy
to
find out how presidents voted on legislation. You're either too lazy, or
you
really don't want the answer to your question. Someone here would almost
certainly ask you to post a link, and the information might let the air
out
of your argument.

Or if they were so inclined as to actually PROVE me wrong, THEY could
post the link.

In any case, I have already gotten one answer, and if you believe the
link that Chuck provided, then Bush HAS vetoed at least one spending
bill.....

Dave


Doesn't matter to me. I was simply reminding you that you're the guy who
recently came up with a bunch of excuses for not getting involved in town
politics, and that this suggests the unlikelihood of your taking any
intitiative to find out how your president or representatives vote.



Worse, he doesn't read books, either. And he doesn't mind if 10,000 dogs
crap on his lawn.

I wouldn't read your book, assuming you could write one. My time is
precious. I don't waste it reading untruths. I do read books, but
mostly non-fiction, and technical publications.

At least I don't take the position that I have a right to "shoot on
sight" any dog who might inadvertently crap on my lawn.

Dave

Liberal Racist?
 

Dave Hall wrote:

I do read books, but
mostly non-fiction,


You don't seem to absorb much.

Liberal Racist?
 

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...

Doesn't matter to me. I was simply reminding you that you're the guy who
recently came up with a bunch of excuses for not getting involved in town
politics,

Which was based on personal experience. When you hit yourself on the
head with a brick, and you find out that it hurts, do you do it again?

Awwww....poor Dave. It was too difficult to get to your local politicians,
so you stepped out of the democratic process for good.

Sometimes, doing some sort of maintenance in your attic requires getting all
itchy from the fiberglass insulation. But you still do it.



and that this suggests the unlikelihood of your taking any
intitiative to find out how your president or representatives vote.

You have absolutely NO idea of just what I am currently involved with
politically. To give you a hint, I was invited to attend the
republican convention, but I declined because I just don't have that
kind of money to throw around.

Oooh. That must've been a really exclusive mailing list you were on, along
with 23 million other people.

Liberal Racist?
 

On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 07:46:48 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

Dave Hall wrote:

I do read books, but
mostly non-fiction,


You don't seem to absorb much.

I'm not the one trying to pass off emotionally charged rhetoric, and
pure speculation, as fact.

What good does knowing more do for you, when most of it is wrong?

Dave

Liberal Racist?
 

On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 12:31:11 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
.. .

Doesn't matter to me. I was simply reminding you that you're the guy who
recently came up with a bunch of excuses for not getting involved in town
politics,

Which was based on personal experience. When you hit yourself on the
head with a brick, and you find out that it hurts, do you do it again?

Awwww....poor Dave. It was too difficult to get to your local politicians,
so you stepped out of the democratic process for good.

Not for good, just from different means.

Sometimes, doing some sort of maintenance in your attic requires getting all
itchy from the fiberglass insulation. But you still do it.

There is a point where the hassle becomes much easier to deal with if
you pay someone else to do it.


and that this suggests the unlikelihood of your taking any
intitiative to find out how your president or representatives vote.

You have absolutely NO idea of just what I am currently involved with
politically. To give you a hint, I was invited to attend the
republican convention, but I declined because I just don't have that
kind of money to throw around.

Oooh. That must've been a really exclusive mailing list you were on, along
with 23 million other people.

It wasn't a mailing list, it was a personal invite.

Dave

Liberal Racist?
 

Dave Hall wrote:

On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 07:46:48 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

Dave Hall wrote:

I do read books, but
mostly non-fiction,


You don't seem to absorb much.

I'm not the one trying to pass off emotionally charged rhetoric, and
pure speculation, as fact.

What good does knowing more do for you, when most of it is wrong?

Dave


There's no doubt there's little in your head but right-wing extremism
and selfishness. Wait...they're the same thing.

Liberal Racist?
 

Dave Hall wrote in message . ..
On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 12:31:11 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
.. .

Doesn't matter to me. I was simply reminding you that you're the guy who
recently came up with a bunch of excuses for not getting involved in town
politics,

Which was based on personal experience. When you hit yourself on the
head with a brick, and you find out that it hurts, do you do it again?

Awwww....poor Dave. It was too difficult to get to your local politicians,
so you stepped out of the democratic process for good.

Not for good, just from different means.

Sometimes, doing some sort of maintenance in your attic requires getting all
itchy from the fiberglass insulation. But you still do it.

There is a point where the hassle becomes much easier to deal with if
you pay someone else to do it.


and that this suggests the unlikelihood of your taking any
intitiative to find out how your president or representatives vote.

You have absolutely NO idea of just what I am currently involved with
politically. To give you a hint, I was invited to attend the
republican convention, but I declined because I just don't have that
kind of money to throw around.

Oooh. That must've been a really exclusive mailing list you were on, along
with 23 million other people.

It wasn't a mailing list, it was a personal invite.

Dave

Yep, along with the other 23 million "personal invites".