U.S. professor compares 9/11 victims to Nazis

[ASsman]

DENVER (AP) - A professor who likened World Trade Center victims to a notorious Nazi refused to apologize but said his treatise was a "gut response" to the terrorist attacks.

"I don't believe I owe an apology," Ward Churchill said Friday on CNN's Paula Zahn Now program - his first public comments since the University of Colorado began a review that could lead to his dismissal.

Meanwhile, Wheaton College in Norton, Mass., and Eastern Washington University cancelled plans for Churchill to speak on campus, citing public safety concerns. Stephen Jordan, president of Eastern Washington University, declined Friday to say whether specific threats had been made.

Churchill defended the essay in which he compared those killed in the Sept. 11 attack to "little Eichmanns," a reference to Adolf Eichmann, who organized Nazi plans to exterminate European Jews. He said the victims were akin to U.S. military operations' collateral damage - or innocent civilians mistakenly killed by soldiers.

"I don't know if the people of 9-11 specifically wanted to kill everybody that was killed," he told Zahn. "It was just worth it to them in order to do whatever it was they decided it was necessary to do that bystanders be killed. And that essentially is the same mentality, the same rubric."

In an interview published Saturday in the Rocky Mountain News, Churchill added, "This was a gut response opinion speech written in about four hours. It's not completely reasoned and thought through."

Churchill said his speech had been misinterpreted. "I never called for the deaths of millions of Americans," he said.

Early editions of the Sunday Denver Post reported Churchill gave another magazine interview in which he was asked about the effectiveness of protests of U.S. policies and the Iraq war, and responded: "One of the things I've suggested is that it may be that more 9/11s are necessary."

The interview prompted Governor Bill Owens to renew his call for Churchill's firing.

"It's amazing that the more we look at Ward Churchill, the more outrageous, treasonous statements we hear from Churchill," Owens said.

The furor over Churchill's essay erupted last month after he was invited to speak at Hamilton College in Clinton, N.Y. The speech was later cancelled.

Churchill, who recently resigned as chairman of the ethnic studies department but remains a tenured professor, said he would sue if he were dismissed.

-------------------
Less talking more sucking Owens. If you don't understand what Churchill meant to say (or rather said, but you were unable to understand it), feel free to ask.

[Rancid_Beasties]

I'm pretty sure I understand, the guy is saying that the victims of 9/11 were as a result of US actions against the arab nations...right?? Because I'm totally unaware of the situation here and the article is not well written...so please clarify ASsman.

[ASsman]

Hey, you qualify as not a dumbass. And yes the report sucks, it was written in Denver, what do you expect.

[Funkaloyd]

How does this even qualify as news? Some guy who nobody in the mainstream has ever heard of before said something controversial? Big fucking deal. I bet this is only making headlines because of the anti-university agenda of certain 'tards.

[ASsman]

Angry crackers wrote to CNN?

Idunno.

[ASsman]

Well, it does illustrate a few things. Like how stupid people are, sure we knew that already. But it's always nice to be reasured.

[checkyourprez]

Well, it does illustrate a few things. Like how stupid people are, sure we knew that already. But it's always nice to be reasured.


id say a good fucking deal of this country is dumbass people. need to read a book get their shit together.

[D_Raay]

This guy is one of our few heroes left...

[Funkaloyd]

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0204-32.htm

[synch]

Am I just not properly awake on this hazy monday morning or is the only thing he said that the people that died on 9/11 weren't the specific target of the terrorists but merely in the wrong place at the wrong time?

I don't get the Eichmann reference though...

[Qdrop]

This guy is one of our few heroes left...

okay.....just stop right there....

don't align yourself with someone who says that "maybe more 9/11's are neccessary".

cmon.....


i don't think he is treasonous.....and i do think his comments were somewhat out of context....
but this guy readily admits that he was writing on pure emotion...and not rationalizing what he was writing....
he, himself admits he crossed the line......

but he is also yet another "chomsky-esqe" character who thinks that America "had it coming".....

the people in those towers did not "have it coming".....
they are not responsible for america's foreign policies, nor are most americans even aware of them.
perhaps that does show ignorance on the part of the american public...
but ignorance is not deserving of death.

excuse me for sounding a tad conservative here.....but there does come a time and a point were you have draw a line in the sand, and put your liberal values in check. you can criticize your country, hate it's policies, ect..(and this is being partriotic)....but supporting someone who says "perhaps more 9/11's are necessary"?....
no....have some fuckin respect for the country you live in, work in, and supports YOU....

[Schmeltz]

I applaud Qdrop's inferred association of conservatism with censorship and the limitation of free speech. Good one, Q, even if you didn't mean it. Stick it to those liberals, disrespecting America's freedom.

[Qdrop]

I applaud Qdrop's inferred association of conservatism with censorship and the limitation of free speech. Good one, Q, even if you didn't mean it.

well, those things go hand in hand.

but there are limits to any speech - and while it should remain free.....certain sentiments should be called what they are: hate speech.

and guess what.....liberal spew hate speech too....just of a differant nature.

(ie- bush is as bad a hitler, the 3,000 in the twin towers "had it coming", our country needs a few more "9/11's", ect)


Stick it to those liberals, disrespecting America's freedom.

me thinks i denote a smackle of sarcasm.

[ms.peachy]

The man still has free speech and he is still free to say the same not-well-thought-out thing again if he chooses. He can (and may well) write books and do lecture tours and whatever else he wnats to do. However, the university is entirely entitled to decide whether or not they want this man in their employ, given that he has (by his own admission) excercised poor judgement. I don't know that it's neccessarily fair that he would lose his job over this incident, but a)it's not up to me to decide, it is up to the university and b)life's quite often not fair, but when we make mistakes we have to suck it up and deal with the consequences.

[Running_Beastie]

QDrop, you need to get in touch with reality. After 9/11 we had the perfect opportunity to unite the world against Al-Qaida and finish them off for good. Instead, our asshole of a President, who doesn't know shit about protecting a nation, decided to piss the entire world off at us by starting an "unnecessary and counter-productive war in Iraq." Those are the words of Bush's own Chief Counterterror Advisor (CTA), Richard Clarke. Instead of fighting terrorism, he made more people around the world hate us, thus creating more terrorists as Donald Rumsfeld acknowledged in his own Pentagon memo. As Clarke said, we ARE LESS SAFE now as a result of the war in Iraq. In order to get the world on our side, we probably do need to get hit again. I hate to say that; I never want to see the country I swore to defend get attacked. However, we can't defeat terrorism without the rest of the world, and there is no chance of them joining our side unless they think we are maliciously attacked again. Even one attack probably won't do it because they will all say we had it coming because of Iraq. It might take two or three to unite the world on our side again.

Qdrop, you have just proven to all of us why the conservatives have their heads so far up their asses right now. "How dare anyone say anything potentially negative about our country even if it is true." I was heard a great analogy about the difference between the way conservatives and liberals love their country. "Conservatives love America the way a two year old loves mommy. Anything mommy does is perfect and anyone who critisizes her is evil. Liberals love America the way an adult loves something. They recognize its faults and point them out in an effort to make America better for those that come after us, thus making America not just the best in the world, but the best it can possibly be."

[synch]

Qdrop, you have just proven to all of us why the conservatives have their heads so far up their asses right now. "How dare anyone say anything potentially negative about our country even if it is true." I was heard a great analogy about the difference between the way conservatives and liberals love their country. "Conservatives love America the way a two year old loves mommy. Anything mommy does is perfect and anyone who critisizes her is evil. Liberals love America the way an adult loves something. They recognize its faults and point them out in an effort to make America better for those that come after us, thus making America not just the best in the world, but the best it can possibly be."
He didn't say that. You are twisting his words.

This coming from someone that is left winged in Holland, which translates to "supporting anarchy" on the US political scale I reckon.

(The Dutch equivalents of your "liberal" politicians would be considered "right of the middle" in Holland)

[ASsman]

"It's amazing that the more we look at Ward Churchill, the more outrageous, treasonous statements we hear from Churchill," Qdrop said.


okay.....just stop right there....

don't align yourself with someone who says that "maybe more 9/11's are neccessary".

cmon.....
Yah, let the ignorant be.




i don't think he is treasonous.....and i do think his comments were somewhat out of context....
but this guy readily admits that he was writing on pure emotion...and not rationalizing what he was writing....
he, himself admits he crossed the line......
Yah, and? Did he say "Oh, that's not what I meant", or apologize? No, he said it came out as bluntly as possible, some people can't swallow the truth.


the people in those towers did not "have it coming".....
they are not responsible for america's foreign policies, nor are most americans even aware of them.
perhaps that does show ignorance on the part of the american public...
but ignorance is not deserving of death.
And whose responsibility is it to keep the Government in check? Who do they derive their ONLY power from? And since when does ignorance stop you from being at fault, or directly benefiting from said policies. As an American citizen, it's you fucking duty. Or are we in some sort of dictatorship?
Hell, even the Germans got up with their guns and tried to stop Hitler.


but he is also yet another "chomsky-esqe" character who thinks that America "had it coming".....
Yey! Hooray for more asshats, less intellectuals.


excuse me for sounding a tad conservative here....
It goes without saying, everytime you post.


you can criticize your country, hate it's policies, ect..(and this is being partriotic)....but supporting someone who says "perhaps more 9/11's are necessary"?....
You can criticize your country, but not when it's been attacked. Especially not if that attack was a justified retribution. On the other hand you can support millions of dead dune coon babies, because your Government deserves unconditional love.

no....have some fuckin respect for the country you live in, work in, and supports YOU....
Heh, supports me so much they built a wall to keep all of my friends safe, from other friends who weren't succesful in climbing it.

but there are limits to any speech - and while it should remain free.....certain sentiments should be called what they are: hate speech.
Yes, you can't scream fire, and you can't incite violence or other criminal acts. Now whether or not people are too pussy to handle the truth or not, don't really give a fuck about that. If you can express your free speech by supporting terrorism, then hell, why can't I say, "You had it coming honkeys".


and guess what.....liberal spew hate speech too....just of a differant nature.
And some people are black.... no one is perfect.


And now I have to drive back to school, so don't expect an immediate rebuttal.

[Qdrop]

He didn't say that. You are twisting his words.



thanks.


Qdrop, you have just proven to all of us why the conservatives have their heads so far up their asses right now.

i'm not conservative, jack ass.
if you read any of my posts, you would gather that.

independant centrist.


"Conservatives love America the way a two year old loves mommy."


funny, i posted this same quote myself about conservatives.......

assume, assume....ass out of U and ME

[Qdrop]

Yah, let the ignorant be.

man, you're just looking for fight.
what the fuck is up with you since friday?




Yah, and? Did he say "Oh, that's not what I meant", or apologize? No, he said it came out as bluntly as possible, some people can't swallow the truth.

"In an interview published Saturday in the Rocky Mountain News, Churchill added, "This was a gut response opinion speech written in about four hours. It's not completely reasoned and thought through."

Churchill said his speech had been misinterpreted. "I never called for the deaths of millions of Americans," he said."


dude, read your own fuckin article before you post it.


And whose responsibility is it to keep the Government in check? Who do they derive their ONLY power from? And since when does ignorance stop you from being at fault, or directly benefiting from said policies. As an American citizen, it's you fucking duty. Or are we in some sort of dictatorship?
Hell, even the Germans got up with their guns and tried to stop Hitler.


yes, i see your point.
but ignorace is not deserving of death.
you will not convince me otherwise.





It goes without saying, everytime you post.


oh fuck off.
you fucking know i'm not a conservative.

you just wish it were so, so you could dismiss me easier.


it's funny though...
for a liberal....you sure loooooooooove death and violence.



You can criticize your country, but not when it's been attacked. Especially not if that attack was a justified retribution. On the other hand you can support millions of dead dune coon babies, because your Government deserves unconditional love.

word twisting.
you know those are not my sentiments.

straw man.


Heh, supports me so much they built a wall to keep all of my friends safe, from other friends who weren't succesful in climbing it.

explain.


Yes, you can't scream fire, and you can't incite violence or other criminal acts. Now whether or not people are too pussy to handle the truth or not, don't really give a fuck about that. If you can express your free speech by supporting terrorism, then hell, why can't I say, "You had it coming honkeys".

cause you marginalize yourself as a hate-mongering asshole.
but maybe you don't really give a shit.





And some people are black.... no one is perfect.

oh, yet another tongue in cheek racist comment.

beat the dead horse....beat it.



And now I have to drive back to school, so don't expect an immediate rebuttal.

i'm on fuckin pins and needles......

[D_Raay]

okay.....just stop right there....

don't align yourself with someone who says that "maybe more 9/11's are neccessary".

cmon.....

Ok and just why not? This guy risked his career over the truth, as unpopular as that truth is... I would call that heroic.. I wish we had more people with the balls to go on national TV and tell it like it is.. or would you rather keep living in a society of fabrication?

[Running_Beastie]

First of all, that quote was sacarsm. I guess you aren't quick enough to pick up the sarcasm that I was laying on pretty heavily. I didn't actually attribute the quote to QDrop; maybe you need to read. ASS U ME

Secondly, calling yourself an idependent centrist doesn't make you one. It often means you are just dillusional. If you are from Holland, why does your info say Rochester, NY? Just a question. When I refer to conservative, I'm refering to the neo-con movement that has hijacked the Republican party over the last ten years. Just because you aren't a card carrying member of the movement doesn't mean to aren't one of them, the same as just because you aren't a card carrying member of the DNC doesn't mean you aren't a democrat. I suggest reading Clarke as I have mentioned before, or General Anthony Zinni who resigned from the Bush administration over Iraq. Maybe even read the former head of the CIA's Bin-Laden task force, Mike Scheuer. His work is titled "Imperial Hubris, Why the West is Losing the War on Terror." He quit the CIA about a week after Bush's re-election so he could continue to speak publicly about how Bush's foreign policy is destroying US national security.

I never said those people in the towers deserved to die. However, when we try to suppress the rest of the world for our own benefit, we can't expect them to do nothing forever. Terrorism is not bread by hatred of freedom as Bush says, its bread by socio-economic inequality that leads people to feel their only recourse is violence.

You sure sound like the neo-cons, "We must save freedom by taking it away from people." -NOT ATTRIBUTED TO QDROP, since you seem to think every time I put something in quotes I'm attributing it to him.

[phinkasaurus]

the professor's comments, taken from the link provided by Funkaloyd

Well, really. Let’s get a grip here, shall we? True enough, they [technocrats] were civilians of a sort. But innocent? Gimme a break. They formed a technocratic corps at the very heart of America’s global financial empire – the “mighty engine of profit” to which the military dimension of U.S. policy has always been enslaved – and they did so both willingly and knowingly. Recourse to “ignorance” – a derivative, after all, of the word “ignore” – counts as less than an excuse among this relatively well-educated elite. To the extent that any of them were unaware of the costs and consequences to others of what they were involved in – and in many cases excelling at – it was because of their absolute refusal to see. More likely, it was because they were too busy braying, incessantly and self-importantly, into their cell phones, arranging power lunches and stock transactions, each of which translated, conveniently out of sight, mind and smelling distance, into the starved and rotting flesh of infants. If there was a better, more effective, or in fact any other way of visiting some penalty befitting their participation upon the little Eichmanns inhabiting the sterile sanctuary of the twin towers, I’d really be interested in hearing about it. [emphasis added]
(i added my own emphasis of underline)
i think he addresses the ignorance factor pretty well.
and besides, the u.s. had been shitting on the rest of the world for ever, militarily (s. america, se.asia) and economically (s.america, se.asia). a rebuttle of some sort was on it's way.
"every action has a equal and opposite reaction"
not that anyone derserves death like that, but the u.s. gov't cannot act surprised. oppresion breeds struggle.

[D_Raay]

Churchill’s intent was to merely challenge us – to get us to look in the mirror and ask if maybe we all have a little Eichmann in us... That is the POINT. He had to use strong speech to get that across, but that's what he meant.
In some ways, we all do – no matter how hard we try to buy recycled toilet paper or not to buy Air Jordans. As Americans, we are all complicit in varying degrees in an exploitative system. It’s the acknowledgment of my special responsibility as a privileged person on this planet that keeps me doing what I’m doing.

[Schmeltz]

You keep saying you're not a conservative, Q, but if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and swims like a duck...

[Qdrop]

I wish we had more people with the balls to go on national TV and tell it like it is.. or would you rather keep living in a society of fabrication?

a rhetorical question, obviously.

but i don't agree with his stance altogether.

sure, he can say it....he has that right.

just like i have the right to say his sentiment is just to far to the left....to the level of hate mongering.

[DroppinScience]

You keep saying you're not a conservative, Q, but if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and swims like a duck...

No, QDrop thinks for himself. I don't think he follows the "sheep"-like rhetoric of either the right or left. He'll call either side to task.

And I love him for it! (y)

[Qdrop]

First of all, that quote was sacarsm. I guess you aren't quick enough to pick up the sarcasm that I was laying on pretty heavily. I didn't actually attribute the quote to QDrop; maybe you need to read. ASS U ME

Secondly, calling yourself an idependent centrist doesn't make you one. It often means you are just dillusional. If you are from Holland, why does your info say Rochester, NY? Just a question. When I refer to conservative, I'm refering to the neo-con movement that has hijacked the Republican party over the last ten years. Just because you aren't a card carrying member of the movement doesn't mean to aren't one of them, the same as just because you aren't a card carrying member of the DNC doesn't mean you aren't a democrat. I suggest reading Clarke as I have mentioned before, or General Anthony Zinni who resigned from the Bush administration over Iraq. Maybe even read the former head of the CIA's Bin-Laden task force, Mike Scheuer. His work is titled "Imperial Hubris, Why the West is Losing the War on Terror." He quit the CIA about a week after Bush's re-election so he could continue to speak publicly about how Bush's foreign policy is destroying US national security.

I never said those people in the towers deserved to die. However, when we try to suppress the rest of the world for our own benefit, we can't expect them to do nothing forever. Terrorism is not bread by hatred of freedom as Bush says, its bread by socio-economic inequality that leads people to feel their only recourse is violence.

You sure sound like the neo-cons, "We must save freedom by taking it away from people." -NOT ATTRIBUTED TO QDROP, since you seem to think every time I put something in quotes I'm attributing it to him.

do you know which person you are talking to?

synch or Qdrop?

i am from rochester, synch is from holland.

i call myself an independant centrist.
and that i am.
some of my views lean toward the right....most toward the left.
but i align with no "side" or one sentiment.
i am not a lemming.


Terrorism is not bread by hatred of freedom as Bush says, its bread by socio-economic inequality that leads people to feel their only recourse is violence.

true, but there is more to it.
it is also bread from lack of education, and religious indoctination- which is rampant in the world of poverty.

[Qdrop]

No, QDrop thinks for himself. I don't think he follows the "sheep"-like rhetoric of either the right or left. He'll call either side to task.

And I love him for it! (y)

thanks, at least i have precious few on this board who support me.


schmeltz: why the fuck would i lie about my political leanings?
what?...you think i'm a conservative but just don't know it....and you're showing me the mirror?
pompous prick.

you people just can't tolerate someone who doesn't "join a club".

you don't know where to place me....
you want to throw me in with the conservatives so you can dismiss me...

i don't tow the liberal line....so you can't count me among your numbers...

so i just piss all of you off.


tell me, how many conservatives do you know who are athiest, pro-choice, pro-gay rights, and pro drug legalization?

hmmmm...

quacks like a duck, huh fucker? ;)

[Schmeltz]

The 9/11 hijackers were not poor, nor were they stupid. They were reasonably affluent, well-educated men who bought into a static, toxic ideology in which religion played a predominant role.

"Independent centrist" is nothing but a euphemism for a fence-sitter - which makes you a conservative by default.

[checkyourprez]

a rhetorical question, obviously.

but i don't agree with his stance altogether.

sure, he can say it....he has that right.

just like i have the right to say his sentiment is just to far to the left....to the level of hate mongering.


agree but then disagree. in everything there has to be a ying and a yang, hes kinda just showing the extreme to the other side. i think thats what michale moore does, he knows some shit he does is shady but its to get a point across that would not get picked up on if it was not so drastic of a stance.

[Qdrop]

"Independent centrist" is nothing but a euphemism for a fence-sitter - which makes you a conservative by default.

my, your logic is flawless.

yes, keep trying to typecast me.
whatever it takes to dismiss me, coward.

[Qdrop]

. i think thats what michale moore does, he knows some shit he does is shady but its to get a point across that would not get picked up on if it was not so drastic of a stance.

and in doing so, marginalizes himself.
he fullfills the stereotype that conservatives set up...just like they want him to.

[Schmeltz]

First, I never said anything about dismissing you; I only said that you're a closet conservative. Second, you do enough typecasting of yourself to compete with any typecasting done by anyone else. Third, give yourself a pat on the back: your internet message board bravado has trumped my internet message board "cowardice." Maybe next we can post pictures of our dicks and compare those!

[Qdrop]

First, I never said anything about dismissing you; I only said that you're a closet conservative.


yes yes again:
tell me, how many conservatives do you know who are athiest, pro-choice, pro-gay rights, and pro drug legalization?

can't answer that huh?
are you confused?

sit down, take a deep breath, think of witty sarcastic comment to counter with....and type it out.

this is so productive.



Second, you do enough typecasting of yourself to compete with any typecasting done by anyone else.

really? examples?


Third, give yourself a pat on the back: your internet message board bravado has trumped my internet message board "cowardice." Maybe next we can post pictures of our dicks and compare those!

yes, E-penis debates are pathetic, i agree.

[synch]

Don't be too hard on them man, it took me a while as well to figure out that you weren't a war loving right wing nut ;)

[Qdrop]

Don't be too hard on them man, it took me a while as well to figure out that you weren't a war loving right wing nut ;)


well then YOU tell him! ;)

[ASsman]

man, you're just looking for fight.
what the fuck is up with you since friday?
Put 'em up. And who said I was refering you, only?

"In an interview published Saturday in the Rocky Mountain News, Churchill added, "This was a gut response opinion speech written in about four hours. It's not completely reasoned and thought through."

Churchill said his speech had been misinterpreted. "I never called for the deaths of millions of Americans," he said."


dude, read your own fuckin article before you post it.
I did, but I understood it. Quite different, reading and comprehending that is. And you just made my point, people are morons. They see what they want to see, (not you, necessarily, but America).

"This was a gut response opinion speech written in about four hours. It's not completely reasoned and thought through."
IF HE WOULD HAVE SAID SOMETHING THAT HE DIDN't MEAN, OR THOUGHT IT WAS OUT OF LINE, he would have apoligized, prayed to Allah, and been done with it. Christ, he didn't say, "no I didn't mean to say that , I take it back", he said you Neo-Con cocksucker you misenterpreted my words. I didn't CALL FOR THE DEATHS OF MILLIONS!


but ignorace is not deserving of death.
Hmm, now that I think of it, it's not ignorance, the facts are looking straight in the face. It's stupidity.

it's funny though...
for a liberal....you sure loooooooooove death and violence.
Who said I was liberal.... I'm not a self proclaiming liberal. Unlike someone I know.

word twisting.
you know those are not my sentiments.
Then what are they, 9/11 happened and instead of trying to figure out why these people did what they did. We put our hands under our shoulders and say "They must hate out freedom".
I don't know about you, but if that kid doens't listen, he needs a good beating. What else would knock some sense into these people? Huh? Tell me.

explain.
They only love us when we can vote.

cause you marginalize yourself as a hate-mongering asshole.
but maybe you don't really give a shit.

Give a shit about what? Rich Jews?

oh, yet another tongue in cheek racist comment.

beat the dead horse....beat it.
That ones on the house. Boy.

[D_Raay]

"Independent centrist" is nothing but a euphemism for a fence-sitter - which makes you a conservative by default.
Seems I'm not the only one who sees this Q.... I am a supporter of you however. Mainly because you don't force your opinion down anyone's throat.. unlike some people I know..

[jegtar]

man, you're just looking for fight.
what the fuck is up with you since friday?




"In an interview published Saturday in the Rocky Mountain News, Churchill added, "This was a gut response opinion speech written in about four hours. It's not completely reasoned and thought through."

Churchill said his speech had been misinterpreted. "I never called for the deaths of millions of Americans," he said."


dude, read your own fuckin article before you post it.



yes, i see your point.
but ignorace is not deserving of death.
you will not convince me otherwise.






oh fuck off.
you fucking know i'm not a conservative.

you just wish it were so, so you could dismiss me easier.


it's funny though...
for a liberal....you sure loooooooooove death and violence.



word twisting.
you know those are not my sentiments.

straw man.


explain.


cause you marginalize yourself as a hate-mongering asshole.
but maybe you don't really give a shit.





oh, yet another tongue in cheek racist comment.

beat the dead horse....beat it.




i'm on fuckin pins and needles......

I herby announce Qdrop the winner of this debate, now you can all go to another thread. However I have to declare Assman the tougher and meaner "liberal" (just look at his avatar, he's tough!)

[ASsman]

Less talking, more sucking.

[checkyourprez]

and in doing so, marginalizes himself.
he fullfills the stereotype that conservatives set up...just like they want him to.



yea and conservatives who already dont like him dont like him more, swing people can be swayed (and are) by his tatics. some get turned off and go the other way.

its what he does is no different than what conservatives do all the time and no one seems to jump on them for it. which i dont know why.

[Ace42]

yes yes again:
tell me, how many conservatives do you know who are athiest, pro-choice, pro-gay rights, and pro drug legalization?

Incidently, in the UK there is no reason why a Conservative (admittedly with a big C, but that generally means lowercase by implication) cannot hold any of the above sentiments.

There are plenty of Conservative homosexuals (Michael Portillo being an obvious example) many of whom have made the papers. Most of them are athiest, or at least not not zealous to the point where their religious sentiments effect their judgement, I don't think there are many conservatives who are for outlawing abortion (Ebeneezer Scrooge was a conservative).

And Peter Lilley (former Conservative MP) described the prohibition of Mary-Jane as "indefensible."

Just goes to show how polarising US politics really is. No wonder you wind up electing extremist nutjobs into power.

[Schmeltz]

I guess I don't know many conservatives who are atheist, pro-gay rights, pro-choice, and pro-legalization (at least not all at once). But I know plenty of conservatives who are fundamentally opposed to changing the status quo and are interested only in preserving it so that they can benefit while others can go to hell. Not all conservatives are atheist or pro-gay rights, but in my experience all conservatives are self-interested, first and foremost.

By my definition, if you're not progressive, you're conservative. That's just my opinion, though.

[Qdrop]

why so black and white?

fuck this "you this or you're that....nothing in between".

i call myself labels like centrist, independant, pragmatic, rational, ect....because that best sums up how i think of my politics in the world.

i have extensive education on a variety of subjects (a primary weapon in this world), and have educated myself most on the tactics of objective, rational, skeptical thinking. "baloney detection" as Carl Sagan wrote.
no matter what the topic, be it social or political or whatever....i look at with fresh eyes, and apply the litmus test of scientific deductive reasoning, skepticism, and objective reasoning.
sometimes the outcome is not "liberal".
tough shit.


see, i refuse to believe that all of you on this board who call yourself liberal, or progressive or conservative or republican or liberatarian, ect...."JUST HAPPEN" TO SHARE VIRTUALLY ALL OF THE COMMON BELIEFS OF YOUR PARTY/OFFILIATION!
bullshit, you do.
people of prescribed political offiliations do not turn to those parties because they "by chance" happen to share all of those views.
you share or appreciate a view of the sentiments....then "join the club" and begin swallowing and supporting every other mantra and sentiment that the "club" forces down your throat.
you become indoctrinated.....parrots.
each of you know goddamn well that they are parts of the either liberal or conservative sentiment that you don't like or share.....and in fact, there are sentiments of "opposing" parties that you do share.
BUT HEEEEEEEEELL NOOOOOOOOO will you ever admit it, or allow yourself to even explore it.

i say fuck that.
fuck parties, fuck offiliations, fuck shared sentiments or molds.....

i am objective, i look at everything without filters...
if that makes my a "fence sitter"....fuck it.
deal with it.