Isn't This Socialism

[bernardjenkins]

"Fairness doesn't just happen. It requires the right government policies" Senator Clinton

"I prefer a 'we're all in this togther' society", she said.

Clinton: Shared Prosperity Should Replace 'on your own' society.

Doesn't this go aganist what made/makes this country great? Is this the role of government?

Kind of scary!

biz.yahoo.com/ap/070529/clinton_economy.html?.v=1

[stray]

Communism.

[bernardjenkins]

I fiqured it was one of those "ism" Just not individualISM or capitalISM

[Felix]

"Too long." Yeah, but that would be all right if you clearly linked what stories you are cut and pasting together, with your interpretation and editorial content added clearly separated. Saying "From the AP" without a specific link is only marginally helpful.

Your interpretation of the issues raised by Sen. Clinton's acceptance of private jet flights, as well as other points raised, are worth discussing. I just wish you would make clear where the material you are quoting, and your comments on that material, begin and end.

[bernardjenkins]

It has been deleted.

I finally spoke with the friend who sent me the piece. It was not from the AP, but from Rush. You can find it on Thurs.5/31. www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/today.guest.html It is a good read, but I'm still going to leave it alone.

[TNBear]

I agree with Marvell, many do not know the proper way to debate, as opposed to argue.
Always cite your sources, making them up is OK-but prepare to be busted.
Always make clear which are your thoughts and which are your sources.
Above all else be ladies and gentlemen.

[Deleted]

> Above all else be ladies and gentlemen.

Oo, oo, oo. Can I be princess Diana?

[bernardjenkins]

But you would be dead. What fun is that?


Please see FOLLOW UP reply#4 Tks.

[Kordax]

1. Unchecked sanctimonious posturing:

I agree with Marvell, many do not know the proper way to debate, as opposed to argue.
Always cite your sources, making them up is OK-but prepare to be busted.
Always make clear which are your thoughts and which are your sources.
Above all else be ladies and gentlemen.

2. Followed by the hypocrite's actual posted understanding of what it means (for him) to "be ladies and gentlemen."

You can kiss my hairy ass.

[Felix]

I reiterate, the topic was and is worth discussion, and I only requested accurate sourcing of the quotations, which Bernard has done. Thank you, Bernard.

The other stuff, "ladies and gentleman" and all, is outside the discussion that I hope will still go on.

[daworm]

Always cite your sources, making them up is OK-but prepare to be busted.

Or, argue from first principals, as I often do. I don't need (although I sometimes make use of) other people's opinions to decide what is right and what is wrong, and my debating points tend to be along those lines. Sometimes, pure speculation. But you only need sources if what you are saying originated with someone else, or is presented as a "fact" that isn't common knowledge (and remember, common knowledge within a group doesn't mean common knowledge in the wider world at large).

[stray]

(Or, shoot from the hip, spray and pray, and aim in the general direction of the poorest public opinion based on your own personal set of thermometers and barometers. It makes for fun reading, several laughs, and makes you memorable.)

[bernardjenkins]

Aim and fire at will.

[TNBear]

1) Rush is not a source he is a parrot.
2) Damn, busted for being a hypocrite, no doubt the first time this has happened in this forum. Actually you have busted me for contributing under the influence, also no doubt the first time this has happened here.

Mea Culpa

[Kordax]

Bear -- I gave you an exalt for that last post; most posters are reflexively defensive to the bitter end when called out for inconsistencies, but your refreshing response was top drawer.

And please slam me around any time -- it's never personal with me even if it appears that way -- always love a good confrontation....