(02-04-2020 12:43 PM)mrbig Wrote:  

(02-04-2020 12:17 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(02-04-2020 11:09 AM)mrbig Wrote:  

(02-03-2020 06:30 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  1Perhaps you have blocked me again, but if you read my comment more carefully, you will note that my "Fox News talking points" comment was only about the remaining things you mentioned in that specific post (which I bolded). That comment was not meant at all to be directed at everything you have posted on politics or policy.

I don't think all your policy viewpoints are Fox News talking points. To the contrary, I realize (and you have done a good job pointing out) areas where you do not agree with mainstream conservative orthodoxy. My comment was limited to your discussions of impeachment, false dossiers, and lying to FISA courts (etc.). I find your comments on political discussions (as opposed to policy discussions) to be very similar to the blurbs I see on Fox News and being screamed at me by Lindsey Graham.

[quote='OptimisticOwl' pid='16651671' dateline='1580772651']
I am not a party animal, certainly not to the extent you are.

3I mean, I like beer, but I live a pretty boring existence and am hardly a party animal.

(02-03-2020 06:30 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  How diverse have your presidential votes been?

[5Gore, Kerry, Obama x2, Clinton. I haven't been thumping my chest about not being a democrat . I will say that my favorite politicians throughout high school and college were Republicans from the northeast like Jim Jeffords, Lincoln Chaffee, Olympia Snow, and Arlen Specter. I felt my beliefs most closely aligned with them, but there haven't been many people like them on ballots in states where I have lived.

Notably, I liked all 4 of them while they were still Republicans in the late 90's and early 00's. Of course, Jeffords, Chaffee, and Specter later transitioned to independents with Jeffords and Chaffee both ultimately landing in the democratic party.

Good morning, Big. No, you are not blocked.
For ease of reference, I have numbered your responses.

1- first, even if only in part, you did accuse me of parroting "Fox News Talking Points", as though I was some mindless village idiot who wouldn't know what to say with their prompting.

Second, WTH are Fox News Talking Points (FNTP) anyway? Where do I fins them? Is there a website where they are enumerated so I will will know what to say? If I say the sky is blue, and some Fox anchor says the sky is blue, is that me parroting him?

Third, what is the difference between Fox and the other networks in this regard? Do not other networks present their own opinions, which closely match yours? Does that mean you are presenting their talking points, not your own?

Fourth, "Fox News Talking Points" is one of the phrases used by certain people to diminish the importance of other people's opinions. That is the way you used it on me.
...
3 - nice way to doge by intentionally misunderstanding the statement. (And so people say I am obtuse at times!!) But no, what I meant is that you hew to the Democratic party lines a lot more than I hew to the Republican party lines. Both in what you support and what you choose to ignore or explain away.

1 - honestly, as I think about it, Fox News talking points is not as accurate as "congressional republican talking points". My bad. I don't listen to Fox News at all so I really don't know what their hosts and talking heads are saying. But I do see almost every Republican saying the same thing on some of these political issues and some of what you have said on impeachment/Ukraine and Mueller/Russia issues sounds like it has been straight from the mouth of the most ardent Trump supporting republican congresspersons.

3 - I was making a joke. I agree that I am pretty close to the democratic party generally on policy matters. I disagree with you on me choosing to ignore or explain things away like the average democratic politician. I think Bill Clinton should have been impeached and removed from office for lying under oath. I think a lot of the rules/procedures in Congress should be formalized into law so that the parties can't mess with the rules/procedures every time a different party swings into power. That's why I don't really care if Reid/Schumer started it or McConnell started it, I just want to see "it" fixed. Get rid of the pocket filibuster. Get rid of the majority leader and speaker's ability to sit on legislation passed by the other part of congress. Set formalized deadlines for how judicial nominees are handled, increase the number of votes required for "advice and consent", and get rid of filibusters for appointees. I'm basically for anything that can stop politicians on both sides from being hypocrites.

(02-04-2020 12:17 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  So, if it comes down to Trump V. Sanders, who will you vote for and why? I have explained many times why I will vote for Trump. Why will you vote for the Socialist? Because he would be the Dem candidate? To beat Trump? Because you support Socialist policies over Capitalist policies?

Hold my nose and vote for Sanders, for the same (but mirror image) reasons you held your nose and voted Trump in 2016. But most of Sanders' socialist policies will never pass through Congress so he will either compromise to positions I can largely support or at least not fear. Plus, I think Bernie is a decent human being even if I disagree with him on some stuff.

Last first. Have you not been listening all the 2,279 times I explained I did not vote for Trump in 2016?

Yes I think Sanders is a decent but misguided man. I did not think Hillary was a decent person.

But I am not going to rely on congress to slow him down. What if you are wrong, and Congress passes it all?

First last -

You just cannot give me any credit for thinking for myself, can you? You do realize that everything you say about me could just as easily be said about you.

I will just quote the old saying: Great minds run in the same path. Just because somebody in Congress or on TV has the same ideas as me or you does not mean we got the idea there.

For example, my thinking on illegal immigration has been shaped by 70 years of intimate involvement with immigrants, both legal and illegal. It was not some Congressman's speech. But maybe, we can to similar conclusions. When you come to a similar conclusion as some Democrat in Congress, is it because they have told you what to think? That is the insulting part - that you think I am so stupid that I have to find my opinions from somebody else. I do not return the implication that you are stupid because your issues, solutions, and even words mirror those of somebody else.

I think your opinion of me is demeaning. But it is not unusual for people on the left to consider right-wingers as mindless fools who just follow the leader. Remember "Deplorables"? Remember the cheering when Hillary said that?

Whatever. You think I am a mindless bot. Let's just move on.