A working class hero is something to be - Page 3 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

aklim · #31 04-14-2009, 01:25 PM

I think someone said it best when they said that to be considered working class, you have to be working for a living.

cmac2012 · #32 04-14-2009, 08:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

Wow. That's intense.

Go look up the definition of "liberal." Attacking me wont give you enlightnment.

Attacking you?! How could I be so vicious?

You make an aurgument. I point out that your argument is full of holes, that you and your approximate cohort behave similarly to that which you decry. Funny how that happens.

cmac2012 · #33 04-14-2009, 09:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mwood

How exactly are you different from your bro in law? You're right and he's wrong? Read your posts in this thread alone, you can't give an inch, you are so far left EVERYbody is right (with the exception of JR).

I'm willing to discuss my reasoning and how and why I arrive at my conclusions/opinions. My take with my BiL is that he puts up his defenses and parrots the standard talking points.

I don't claim that I and my nation are somehow endowed with the wisdom to lead the rest of the world to the promised land. Plenty of them that favor massive military junkets are certain beyond certain that we are the greatest nation on earth, that other nations need to learn from us. I say we are good in many ways, and delusional and bullying in others. And that it's a tad ironic that we are stumbling hard in our vaunted way of doing things after 5-6 years of trying to teach Iraq to be more like us.

Know thyself, sayeth the sage.

tankdriver · #34 04-14-2009, 10:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmac2012

Attacking you?! How could I be so vicious?

You make an aurgument. I point out that your argument is full of holes, that you and your approximate cohort behave similarly to that which you decry. Funny how that happens.

I hate to take Bot's side here, because your post was pretty accurate re: non liberals wishing to inflict their vision of social improvement on people who don't agree. In fact, I think they are in general quite adamant about it.
But, just because non liberals did it doesn't mean liberals don't do it. All he said was some liberals do it, which is true. Although I believe those people call themselves progressives, perhaps showing that they realize political liberalism requires a hands off approach to societal mores.
The other side seems to be hiding behind a lack of self labeling, perhaps because the best fitting label is fascist.

Botnst · #35 04-14-2009, 11:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tankdriver

I hate to take Bot's side here, because your post was pretty accurate re: non liberals wishing to inflict their vision of social improvement on people who don't agree. In fact, I think they are in general quite adamant about it.
But, just because non liberals did it doesn't mean liberals don't do it. All he said was some liberals do it, which is true. Although I believe those people call themselves progressives, perhaps showing that they realize political liberalism requires a hands off approach to societal mores.
The other side seems to be hiding behind a lack of self labeling, perhaps because the best fitting label is fascist.

I was with you right up to, "The other side ...". There are many, many perspectives. I wouldn't call them "sides". Sides implies necessary opposition and I don't believe that the case is necessary. There are some (few) things that I agree with concerning modern liberalism: Abortion rights, homosexual rights, etc. Basically flowing from my belief that each individual owns his own body and is absolutely responsible for it and nobody else's.

I agree with the conservatives on some (few) things including maintaining a highly lethal, always superior military force. That's about it.

I agree with (little "L") libertarians on some things including an itty-bitty central government, decentralization of power, and a very narrow view of government responsibility.

It is simple minded to label people as being either "A" or "B". People and the world are complex and their motives are diverse. For which I am eternally thankful.

B

tankdriver · #36 04-15-2009, 09:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

I was with you right up to, "The other side ...". There are many, many perspectives. I wouldn't call them "sides". Sides implies necessary opposition and I don't believe that the case is necessary. There are some (few) things that I agree with concerning modern liberalism: Abortion rights, homosexual rights, etc. Basically flowing from my belief that each individual owns his own body and is absolutely responsible for it and nobody else's.

Yes, there are many perspectives. The other side referred to the political opposite of the type of liberals/progressives you were talking about.
I wasn't suggesting that you were a part of them.

mwood · #37 04-15-2009, 06:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmac2012

I'm willing to discuss my reasoning and how and why I arrive at my conclusions/opinions. My take with my BiL is that he puts up his defenses and parrots the standard talking points.

I don't claim that I and my nation are somehow endowed with the wisdom to lead the rest of the world to the promised land. Plenty of them that favor massive military junkets are certain beyond certain that we are the greatest nation on earth, that other nations need to learn from us. I say we are good in many ways, and delusional and bullying in others. And that it's a tad ironic that we are stumbling hard in our vaunted way of doing things after 5-6 years of trying to teach Iraq to be more like us.

Know thyself, sayeth the sage.

I don't know what your second paragraph has to do with the comment you were responding to from me, but ok. As for your open-mindedness, I haven't seen any evidence of it on this forum.

cmac2012 · #38 04-16-2009, 02:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tankdriver

I hate to take Bot's side here, because your post was pretty accurate re: non liberals wishing to inflict their vision of social improvement on people who don't agree. In fact, I think they are in general quite adamant about it.
But, just because non liberals did it doesn't mean liberals don't do it. All he said was some liberals do it, which is true. Although I believe those people call themselves progressives, perhaps showing that they realize political liberalism requires a hands off approach to societal mores.
The other side seems to be hiding behind a lack of self labeling, perhaps because the best fitting label is fascist.

I wasn't trying to claim that two wrongs make a right, just that many, if not most proposals on how to move the country forward are going to displease someone, some loosely affiliated group in the country.

Not that B is in this crowd, but about 10 to 20% of the nation are sorta apoplectic at the prospect of some damn demo actually governing the country. Their opinion (major approximation here) seems to be that their preferences should still carry the day.

To them I say: welcome to the democratic process.

cmac2012 · #39 04-16-2009, 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mwood

I don't know what your second paragraph has to do with the comment you were responding to from me, but ok. As for your open-mindedness, I haven't seen any evidence of it on this forum.

The connection, as I see it, is that many in our country believe that we are qualified to teach the world how to live. Talk about not giving an inch.

One reason I laud the esteemed Geo. Will, in spite of my frequent differences with him, is that he has moved me, several time, to consider that parts of my POV were bogus. I don't want to hang onto dogma merely from stubbornness and that's a lot of what I get from my BiL. He's no dummy but his allegiance to the Inhoffe position of AGW (he's always forwarding me links about the guy, the Oklahoma Senator) is not surprising given that he has made his living for decades on coal fired electricity generation.

As for no open-mindedness, I've seen no indication from you that you're willing to consider that anything outside of what happens in your head might be correct, worthy of further study, etc.

panZZer · #40 04-16-2009, 04:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pj67coll

Define social boon.

- Peter.

Define social poon

mwood · #41 04-16-2009, 05:23 PM

[QUOTE=cmac2012;2176229]The connection, as I see it, is that many in our country believe that we are qualified to teach the world how to live. Talk about not giving an inch.

One reason I laud the esteemed Geo. Will, in spite of my frequent differences with him, is that he has moved me, several time, to consider that parts of my POV were bogus. I don't want to hang onto dogma merely from stubbornness and that's a lot of what I get from my BiL. He's no dummy but his allegiance to the Inhoffe position of AGW (he's always forwarding me links about the guy, the Oklahoma Senator) is not surprising given that he has made his living for decades on coal fired electricity generation.

As for no open-mindedness, I've seen no indication from you that you're willing to consider that anything outside of what happens in your head might be correct, worthy of further study, etc.[/QUOTE]

What the hell kind of comment is that? Please give some examples. I've fully supported Obama on the pirate thing, and I don't think I've been very critical of anything he's done while in office. I didn't vote for him and I don't think he has the necessary experience, but he's got the job and I support our President. I won't agree with everything he does and if he steps on his johnson I'll call him on it, if he makes good moves (like the pirate one) I'll congratulate him (as I did).

aklim · #42 04-16-2009, 06:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mwood

I've fully supported Obama on the pirate thing,

I didn't vote for him and I don't think he has the necessary experience,

if he makes good moves (like the pirate one) I'll congratulate him (as I did).

I'll bite. What did he really do?

He was the lessor of the two evils so I had to IN SPITE OF his current VP saying he lacks proper experience.

Was he really responsible for it or did he delegate it to the field commanders?

mwood · #43 04-16-2009, 07:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aklim

I'll bite. What did he really do?

He was the lessor of the two evils so I had to IN SPITE OF his current VP saying he lacks proper experience.

Was he really responsible for it or did he delegate it to the field commanders?

He's the man in charge and he gave the go-ahead. 'Nuff said.

aklim · #44 04-16-2009, 07:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mwood

He's the man in charge and he gave the go-ahead. 'Nuff said.

He is the CIC but I thought it was the commander of the USS Banebridge that gave the snipers the shoot orders?

http://en.rian.ru/world/20090413/121075017.html

"The on-scene [US Navy] commander determined that the captain was in imminent danger," Vice Admiral William Gortney, head of the US Naval Central Command, said in a Pentagon briefing from Bahrain.