[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: "Can't we all just get along?"



(From Digest V7 #205)
>Unforntunately, this is a race between Beta males. But like any
>reasonable individual, I don't want the economy to be screwed by thoughtless
>tax cuts and superficial retoric, by a hypocrite who is the champion of a
>party which wrongly believes they know what's best for us all.
>
>         Cheers                 ML

Mark,

"...a party which wrongly believes they know what's best for us all." 
Which party are you talking about? Let's see.

Who raised taxes in 1993, retroactively? Referring to projected 
federal surpluses, who said, "We could give the money back [with tax 
cuts], but you [the American taxpayer] might not spend it right"? 
That was Bill Clinton. He's a Democrat. He thinks he knows better 
than you how to spend the money than you earn. He thinks you're too 
stupid.

Who said "It takes a village to raise a child"? That was Hillary 
Clinton. She's a Democrat. She thinks she knows better than you how 
to raise your own children. Both parents should just go to work to 
pay your taxes and let the Federal government raise your children. 
She thinks you're too stupid to do it.

Who said privatization of Social Security is a "risky scheme"? That 
was Vice President Albert Arnold Gore, "Jr." He's a Democrat. He 
thinks he knows better than you how to save for your retirement. He 
doesn't want you keeping your money and investing it and letting it 
grow with compound interest over 40 years. He thinks you're too 
stupid to do that. No, he wants to take other people's money away 
from them when you retire, just like he took your money away from you 
while you were working and gave it to retirees. The same argument 
goes for health care. He thinks you're too stupid to take care of 
yourself, buy your own health insurance, or buy your own prescription 
drugs.

The inherent tenet of Liberalism, the ideology of the Democratic 
party, is that people are too stupid to take care of themselves and 
that only "Left-wing intellectuals" know what's best for everyone. 
Taken to extreme, this leads to Socialism and Communism. Just give 
them all your money (in taxes), and they'll take care of you. On the 
other hand, Conservatism believes in giving freedom to individuals to 
provide for themselves and achieve great things on their own (like 
owning and running a successful CD store) without government 
interference.

If you change the words in your second sentence above from "tax cuts" 
to "Federal spending", then I completely agree. That's why I vote for 
Republicans.

BTW, should I start using a signature that reminds everyone here that 
you misspelled "unfortunately" and "rhetoric" and imply that you are 
a mental midget? No, that would be childish and untrue.

>Dan,
>
>I wholeheartedly agree! While I have nothing but the utmost respect for
>Mark's knowledge of all-things-Who, the signature comments seem a bit of
>a non sequitur, and are becoming more annoying as each day passes. One
>can sense a bitterness...no...hatred towards Bush/Cheney that has
>manifested itself in silly "quotes" and anti-Bush comments.
>
>Mark, you and I have had some great discussions in the past. (It's been a
>while though) Remember how you pointed out the drop-out in "Pure and
>Easy" to me that I had never previously been aware of? What developed
>from a simple e-mail from you to me turned into a great and
>intellectually-stimulating exchange that lasted for several weeks. I
>enjoyed it very much, and still enjoy learning from you whenever you
>decide to include the Who as a topic in your otherwise vitriolic
>political posts. :-) Come on! Now you've even resorted to constructing
>comments based on things you think Cheney may have said? Please! Without
>turning this post into an example of said vitriolic political posts, I'd
>like to mention to you that I dislike the current President and your
>current choice for the next President. (Gore, I presume) You should never
>criticize ANYONE for drug use or draft-dodging after the exposure of Bill
>Clinton's past. The man in office now (who, again, I presume you're a
>supporter of) has been revealed as a fraud, and a lying, draft-dodging,
>womanizing, drug-ingesting, flag-burning degenerate, and that was only
>what we found out in the first year of his administration! Please don't
>sling mud at others, it's flagrant hypocrisy. None of us are
>uncomfortable with what "our guys" say, but if we were in your place,
>we'd be very uncomfortable crticizing others. Gore soundbites are quite
>easy to find, it's just that I don't feel they are appropriate for this
>list. Lastly, you can affix these statements to your messages claiming
>they're wrapped in the righteous cloak of humor, but please excuse me if
>I detect something more than "humor."
>
>Again, I respect Mark very much and enjoy his posts when they are related
>to the Who and I apologize to the list for taking up space with
>this...but I wanted Dan to know that he's not alone in his antipathy
>toward Mark's bumptious anti-Republican comments. This list is not the
>place for them...it's for the Who, the band we love, and ONLY THE WHO!
>
>Rick

Rick,

Very well said, especially the "righteous cloak of humor" part. I 
enjoyed your Gore "Jr." quote last week from Monticello (Digest V7 
#203). I've seen that video clip.

To everyone complaining about these political "discussions",

The Conservatives on this list have shown a whole lot of patience 
with Mark and his liberal rants. If you're going to be tolerant of 
his views, then at least be consistent and show tolerance toward 
dissenting views. It's very hypocritical to complain only after Mark 
is challenged.

>IMHO - I do not mind Mark's one-liners, but I do mind the rambling political
>monologues that have found their way to this list lately.
>
>I invite folks to trade cute one-line barbs, but can we please keep the
>extended politcal debates offline?

Jeff,

When Mark calls Bush a "cokehead, alcoholic, draftdodger, and 
adulterer" (Digest V7 #204), it's not cute anymore.

>I would hate to see the list crowded with political discussion when 
>we are in the midst of the most interesting and exciting Who 
>activity in the last 10 years.

So would I. But some of Mark's comments require a response.

>"Can't we all just get along?"  Rodney King
>
>Jeff in Massachusetts
>- -Where we have nearly eliminated the Republican Party

Great set-up. I just heard this yesterday:

Before Nixon went to China, a reporter asked him, "Have you ever been 
to a Communist country before?" Nixon replied, "No, but I have been 
to Massachusetts a few times."

>One of the things that
>separates the two is the ability to say anything you
>want on the IGTC and no one gets pissed off.We allow
>each other to have different opinions.But we all still
>respect each other.Come on guys we may disagree on some
>things,but some of you are forgetting we all have the
>same goal,to celebrate the Who and their music.
>
>    -jess in jersey

Jess,

Good points. I agree. Now let's change the subject to something less 
contentious...like religion. :^)

Jim