All you phoney baloney liberals need to just die.

[Eulogy]

Originally Posted by Future Boy

He's bought a bit into the "you could only do so much" stuff, but I wouldn't ******* Eulogy in with that crowd. And I dont think hes a future republican, but then again Debasers an ex reaganite so who knows.

do you disagree with me when i say that some of the things we want can't happen right now given the current constitution of congress/the court/the country/obama?

not that i like this fact or accept it as permanent. but at this moment in time it is true.

[FoolofaTook]

Originally Posted by Future Boy

no, fuck off

ouch. what's next, big boy, a neg rep?

[Future Boy]

Originally Posted by Eulogy

do you disagree with me when i say that some of the things we want can't happen right now given the current constitution of congress/the court/the country/obama?

I don't think everything was possible, no. But there should be no doubt that things could have been better. There may have been a wall we wouldve run into, but they just never really tried. The people worked on to cave were the liberals and the ones catered to were the bluedogs and republicans. I dont believe in buying into this excuse when it wasnt the main problem, as true as it is.

Let me ask, do you believe that it is a center-right country? You mention the country, but I cant think of a single issue where the country didn't support the dem position. Hell, we draw even on gay marriage too.

[Eulogy]

Originally Posted by Future Boy

I don't think everything was possible, no. But there should be no doubt that things could have been better. There may have been a wall we wouldve run into, but they just never really tried. The people worked on to cave were the liberals and the ones catered to were the bluedogs and republicans. I dont believe in buying into this excuse when it wasnt the main problem, as true as it is.

I fully agree with this. I think you mistake my acknowledging that [x] is better than nothing for admitting that [x] was the best possible outcome. That's not what I think, and I don't believe I've ever said that. And with both health care and the tax cuts I think I made that pretty obvious.

Let me ask, do you believe that it is a center-right country? You mention the country, but I cant think of a single issue where the country didn't support the dem position. Hell, we draw even on gay marriage too.

No, this is not a center right country.

But it is full of idiots who are easily manipulated through useless imagery involving God and guns and shit. So that's a bit of a hurdle sometimes.

[Future Boy]

Originally Posted by Eulogy

I fully agree with this. I think you mistake my acknowledging that [x] is better than nothing for admitting that [x] was the best possible outcome. That's not what I think, and I don't believe I've ever said that. And with both health care and the tax cuts I think I made that pretty obvious.

Sure, I didn't mean to, and I dont think I did, lump you into that group. I even said so. I guess what I meant was once someone accepts that it was a problem it might not be long before they decide it was the main problem, so I have a slight unease with anyone taking that position.

[Future Boy]

ok im going to sleep, i'll reply later to anything else

[Eulogy]

i think we're on common ground now.

wtf are you doing going to bed now? are you....somewhere else?

[Debaser]

Originally Posted by Future Boy

He's bought a bit into the "you could only do so much" stuff, but I wouldn't ******* Eulogy in with that crowd. And I dont think hes a future republican, but then again Debasers an ex reaganite so who knows.

it's weird discussing generalizations of my views

i prefer to just talk about actual issues and see where i fall.

Brendan announces that he's against the use of all nuclear power plants. They're too risky. Look at Chernobyl and Fukushima.

I say that since current green solar, wind, hydroelectric technology of today cannot suitably sustain our energy needs then a stand against nuclear power plants is a tacit support of fossil fuel power plants, which I'd say are way worse than nuclear power plants in terms of polluting the environment and causing deaths.

Brendan rebuts with demanding society to consume less and I think that's unrealistic.

by the way, supporting the use of nuclear power (in lieu of coal power) and supporting the advance of renewable energy technology are not mutually exclusive. Then again it's moot because nobody in the world is really cl******g for us to build more nuclear power plants, especially in the U.S. where building natural gas power plants are so much cheaper.

So this stance supposedly means I'm a fake liberal in someones eyes or a cynical hedging politician in another's.

Liberal or not, I at least try not to fall into tribalism, my team versus their team arguments. I want to look at sides of issues based on their merits and not be automatically against nuclear power simply because most people on the right support it.

And identity politics, tribalism itself seems to be a value that Brendan is embodying here, asking me if i'm lefty enough. Which ironically is a value that he's sharing with right wing loons in primaries.

[Trotskilicious]

Debaser, you are dead to me.

You've always been a fake silver spoon liberal but at least at one point you made sense. Now you'd much rather ignore actual theoretical problems with the system and our lifestyles because you don't want your privileged life to change at all. So yes, let us build inconcevably dangerous power plants throughout the country, the fact that they cause cancer, create dangerous waste and when they fail, they tend to decimate local populations and leave areas uninhabitable. I mean, shit that's better than coal right??? LOL!

You're a fucking retard. Arguing for nuclear power is the same short-sighted bullshit that got us hooked on fossil fuels. Mortgage the future so you can continue the pursuit of your lifestyle of wealth and overconsumption.

[Tchocky]

I'm not a David Brooks fan, but Trots seems to think that many if not most Americans who define themselves as "liberals" are in fact something akin to the type of people that Brooks would define as "bobos" i.e.: people who claim to be anti-establishment and counter-culture yet simultaneously maintain the established order through their consumerism. And that fact disgusts him, as apparently "real" liberals are people who realize they should only consume what is necessary and believes that luxuries do nothing but rob future generations of raw materials and other things the planet needs to exist.

In other words, the "true" liberal lives in a sparse home, lives off of canned beans and homegrown vegetables, tells his friends to fuck off when they brag about their new iPhone or Lexus, and he's self-sufficient and luxury-free to the point where when (and if) the world crumbles around him, he or she can just point and laugh at the dying planet and say to people, "See where your greed and ambition got you? A dead, spent planet! Hard to drive that Lexus when there's no gas to fuel it!"

[Trotskilicious]

I remember someone saying Debaser used to be a young Reaganite. What's the "used to be" thrown in for? Because now he "cares" about "social issues"?

[Eulogy]

shouldn't you get rid of your computer you consumerist whore

[Trotskilicious]

Originally Posted by Tchocky

I'm not a David Brooks fan, but Trots seems to think that many if not most Americans who define themselves as "liberals" are in fact something akin to the type of people that Brooks would define as "bobos" i.e.: people who claim to be anti-establishment and counter-culture yet simultaneously maintain the established order through their consumerism. And that fact disgusts him, as apparently "real" liberals are people who realize they should only consume what is necessary and believes that luxuries do nothing but rob future generations of raw materials and other things the planet need to exist.

In other words, the "true" liberal lives in a sparse home, lives off of canned beans and homegrown vegetables, tells his friends to fuck off when they brag about their new iPhone or Lexus, and he's self-sufficient and luxury-free to the point where when (and if) the world crumbles around him, he or she can just point and laugh at the dying planet and say to people, "See where your greed and ambition got you? Hard to drive that Lexus when there's no gas to fuel it!"

word up, i'm getting there slowly but surely.

[Trotskilicious]

Originally Posted by Eulogy

shouldn't you get rid of your computer you consumerist whore

at work

computers are tools

and also, you're still a stupid fucking shitbag that can't handle truth so you try and point out my "hypocracy" when you're the young republican that believes in luxuries and status items.

it's that same shitbag logic as "if you're such a communsit why are you working hur hur hur" look i have to still live under these rules, you fucking assclown.

[Trotskilicious]

besides my home pc is from 2002. I don't have some kind of nuclear powered super computer that can run Crysis like I'm sure Debaser has.

[Eulogy]

food trucks use fossil fuels

[Eulogy]

YOU KNOW HOW MUCH WASTE GOES INTO IMPORTING YOUR AUTHENTIC MEDITERRANEAN HUMMUS?

[Trotskilicious]

i dunno it's made in austin...so i'm guessing none.

[Trotskilicious]

you can't "import" hummus dude it would go bad.

[Trotskilicious]

yes here we go

in order for me to have a legitimate point, i have to not exist in a capitalist society or do anything in it.

I thought you got past freshman year of college, eulogy. This is bushleague shit. Laughable, man. HAAA HAAAA HAAAA!

[Eulogy]

Originally Posted by Trotskilicious

i dunno it's made in austin...so i'm guessing none.

unless you're making it yourself then there is bound to be a lot

consumerist whore

[Eulogy]

Originally Posted by Trotskilicious

yes here we go

in order for me to have a legitimate point, i have to not exist in a capitalist society or do anything in it.

unless you're admitting that you're just as phony and guilty as everyone else

but instead you want to rail against debaser because he has a better computer than you.

[Trotskilicious]

i mean seriously, i think fossil feuls are bad for the world so i should stop using them entirely is eulogy's logic.

that makes so much sense.

[Future Boy]

Originally Posted by Debaser

Then again it's moot because nobody in the world is really cl******g for us to build more nuclear power plants, especially in the U.S. where building natural gas power plants are so much cheaper.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpu...in-the-us.html

[Trotskilicious]

Originally Posted by Eulogy

unless you're admitting that you're just as phony and guilty as everyone else

but instead you want to rail against debaser because he has a better computer than you.

yes this is about "jealousy" i know you young republicans like to say that a lot. your stuff is so super duper cool i want it that's why i'm mad blah blah blah

you just refuse to look at anything beyond the most shallow terms. it's quite remarkable.

[Eulogy]

Originally Posted by Trotskilicious

i mean seriously, i think fossil feuls are bad for the world so i should stop using them entirely is eulogy's logic.

Originally Posted by Eulogy

unless you're admitting that you're just as phony and guilty as everyone else

[Trotskilicious]

Yes, but I'm not because I don't just go along with it. I criticize it and argue against it, I do my best to lead the lifestyle that I think is appropriate and I do not fetishize things or gadgets. i do not celebrate christmas, I don't buy things I think have no use. Yes, I have tokens and items of this 21st Century Age (old computer, discount mp3 player, ancient cell phone) but that doesn't diminish any actual criticisms I have with the inherent bankruptsy of our lifestyles or the cultural hypocracy of people who advocate "the people" when they really are just yuppies who dream of living in a mansion, built on the backs of the poor complete with house serfs that they underpay and mistreat just because they're so far up their own ass they don't even know what they are actually doing.

Again, this is freshman level logic. "If you don't do X to my standards of X then I will not accept your position on anything because I'm a navel gazing shitbag that hates facing reality."

Fact is, post-consumerism is not happening now or any time soon but that doesn't necessarily mean that I shouldn't criticize it even if I do have an mp3 player and a computer.

[Debaser]

Originally Posted by Trotskilicious

Now you'd much rather ignore actual theoretical problems with the system and our lifestyles because you don't want your privileged life to change at all.

In 2003, I drove a gas guzzling sports car. Today I putt around in a Prius. Don't accuse me of refusing to change my lifestyle in support of my beliefs.

Also, my home computer is an old POS pentium 4 that can't even play youtube videos smoothly. When you have to make assumptions to criticize me...

[Eulogy]

you just haven't done a very good job at all at distinguishing yourself from, say, debaser at all. why is his forced existence in a capitalist society worse than yours? because he drives a car (a hybrid, iirc) and has a better computer?

[Future Boy]

Originally Posted by Trotskilicious

I remember someone saying Debaser used to be a young Reaganite. What's the "used to be" thrown in for? Because now he "cares" about "social issues"?

its like 10 posts up, I'd hope you'd remember. He outted himself a while back.