Rhetoric
Steve opines: "No, he wasn't. He was a Democrat at one time, and that is an important difference. And since Reagan was never, ever a socialist, he certainly would never have qualified for the neocon tag."
Reagan was once a FDR Democrat who supported FDR's New Deal programs... During the late 50's to early 60's, Reagan saw the light and became a conservative.
"I hope you don't really believe that. It is nothing more than well-rehearsed bushbot polemic (talk about predictable!). Before the issue of American involvement in the Middle East, there is no other god to the neocons, so anyone who disagrees with their policies must be an unrepentant, lefty peacenik."
"It is also completely inaccurate. Have you ever visited either of those sites? I hardly believe you will see anyone there posting the kind of things I do about Moore, Sheehan, or even Cynthia McKinney. You certainly won't see much quoting of Hayek, Adam Smith, or Von Mises there, let alone Steyn, Sowell, or Vox Day. There are grains of truth in just about anything that someone might write publicly, even Michael Moore. It is pure jingoism to say otherwise. But because I might believe that the Bush family has a disturbingly deep political and personal loyalty to the House of Saud doesn't mean that I believe the Bush Administration is owned by Saudi Arabia."
I'm talking about the words you use... What you say about Bush are the same words that Moore, Franken and other left wingers say about him all the time. In other words, you would be considered a Bush hater.
"The Republican über alles mentality these days bears more of a resemblance to the rhetoric of the far left than mine does. Don't buy into Bush's "if you're not with us, you're against us" bombast, Andy. That's not living up to the long American tradition of political discourse."
No, your rhetoric towards Bush and most Republicans bears more of a resemblance to the rhetoric of the far left towards him and most Republicans.
Reagan was once a FDR Democrat who supported FDR's New Deal programs... During the late 50's to early 60's, Reagan saw the light and became a conservative.
"I hope you don't really believe that. It is nothing more than well-rehearsed bushbot polemic (talk about predictable!). Before the issue of American involvement in the Middle East, there is no other god to the neocons, so anyone who disagrees with their policies must be an unrepentant, lefty peacenik."
"It is also completely inaccurate. Have you ever visited either of those sites? I hardly believe you will see anyone there posting the kind of things I do about Moore, Sheehan, or even Cynthia McKinney. You certainly won't see much quoting of Hayek, Adam Smith, or Von Mises there, let alone Steyn, Sowell, or Vox Day. There are grains of truth in just about anything that someone might write publicly, even Michael Moore. It is pure jingoism to say otherwise. But because I might believe that the Bush family has a disturbingly deep political and personal loyalty to the House of Saud doesn't mean that I believe the Bush Administration is owned by Saudi Arabia."
I'm talking about the words you use... What you say about Bush are the same words that Moore, Franken and other left wingers say about him all the time. In other words, you would be considered a Bush hater.
"The Republican über alles mentality these days bears more of a resemblance to the rhetoric of the far left than mine does. Don't buy into Bush's "if you're not with us, you're against us" bombast, Andy. That's not living up to the long American tradition of political discourse."
No, your rhetoric towards Bush and most Republicans bears more of a resemblance to the rhetoric of the far left towards him and most Republicans.
posted by Andy W. Rogers | 9:58 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home