|
10junebug01 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
By the way one the alaskan senators who is up for reelection has about 7 things of fraud pinned on him. If he is reelected, he will be kicked out of the senate, and the governer will have to appoint a new senator. And of course, that would be Sarah Palin. There's word that she will appoint herself.
10junebug01 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
I'm sorry, but did you just say that polititions wont change your life? That's one of the stupidest thing I've heard.
mtlhd928 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
oh no another man who hates everything in the world and cant do anything but complain..... fuck get over and realize ur life isnt gonna change at all because of sum fuckin politician...... ur still gonna wake up, eat food, take shits and showers, most likely watch tv or read, fuck ur wife, or husband, and go to bed and redo it all again..... fuck politicians and any1 who thinks that they change your life
Marbles471 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
On the contrary, I've watched, listened to, and read them quite frequently (not so much Beck and Levin, very much Coulter, Hannity, Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Malkin, Schlussel, to a lesser extent Savage and Liddy). I've seen the results of the culture they've cultivated. Particularly with this election, some very ugly genies were let out of the bottle, genies that THEY helped tease out.Be specific. Which aspects of what I said are baseless? You watch them. You know their tactics.
bunshine8plutz (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
you apparently havent had much experience with these people, your ideas of them are completely base-less
Marbles471 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
You know why they're willing to debate anyone? Because they know they'll always "win". Through sheer bullying, brazen libel, black-and-white logic, and shameless appeals to our worst instincts, they "win" by simply being dominant and tough, facts be damned. This is why, for example, Ann Coulter's followers are able to say she "wins" debates when she hasn't actually said anything substantive at all. Sarcasm and a domineering personality = "winning" for those who have been nurtured on this stuff.
Marbles471 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
No. What many of those people engage in is not debate. This is exactly what I'm talking about. They have normalized viciousness so thoroughly that many people have come of politcal age not knowing anything different, and think that the awful things they say are within the parameters of sensible debate. Millions have become desensitized to it--they can't even recognize viciousness when they hear it anymore, because it's everywhere. And it's the people on that list who created this environment.
bunshine8plutz (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
Michael Savage, and men like him, are willing to debate anything. He, and many others (Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, Glenn Beck etc) are all willing to debate. the problem comes from the leftists that brand every opposing viewpoint as bigotry and hate.
Marbles471 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
bunshine, you know perfectly well that "homosexual extremists, "anti-American taxationists, and pot smokers" are not actual constituencies or voting blocs (the only one that even comes close is the first, and it's such a strawman caricature that I can't take it seriously).
Marbles471 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
bunshine8plutz, smartness isn't really the issue. After all, the guy has to have some brains if he earned two PhD's. But being smart does not protect someone against being ignorant (willful ignorance is different from stupid ignorance), and worse, against being MEAN. I happen to think many of the eliminationist regressives are very stupid people, but what truly makes them reprehensible is the way they have poisoned American politics with their bigoted, sometimes outright murderous rhetoric. | 
