On 12/15/2012 2:26 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Saturday, December 15, 2012 1:41:46 PM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote:
On 12/15/2012 1:27 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Saturday, December 15, 2012 1:04:11 PM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
Hi Stephen P. King
Liberals also always take anything resembling criticism as
Conservative debate tactics are to *always* make it personal to
avoid talking about the issues respectfully. I have seen this
time and again. Look back at your own messages here. Did you post
a link about a politically neutral topic and have a Liberal say
that you must be a Right Winger and how that makes your thinking
clouded by patriarchal racist idiocy? No. That did not happen.
Instead, you politicize this for no reason, repeatedly making
weird hostile remarks that have no basis in science or
philosophy, and then accuse Progressives of taking it personally.
Please link some examples. Let me present you with a
counter-example to your claim:
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3LnVa7zXgc> You might consider
Penn Jillette to be a progressive, but he would disagree...
"[By 1994] "Newt World" was now far-flung, from GOPAC to the
National Republican Congressional Campaign Committee; the
Friends of Newt Gingrich campaign committee; a weekly TV show
on the conservative cable TV network, National Empowerment
Television, and a think tank called the Progress and Freedom
Its messages were coordinated with talk-show hosts such as
Rush Limbaugh and with Christian Coalition groups. [...]
Mr. Gaylord is one of the brains behind Gopac ... . [He] wrote
its how-to textbook, which urges challengers to *"go negative"
early and "never back off". They must sometimes ignore voters'
main concerns because "important issues can be of limited
value". *The book suggests looking for a "minor detail" to use
against opponents, pointing to Willie Horton as a good
example. Though it says a positive proposal also can be
helpful, it counsels candidates to consider the consequences:
"Does it help, or at least not harm, efforts to raise money?"
Mr. Gingrich has called the book "absolutely brilliant".
Even more has been written about the most famous Gopac document,
... a memo by Gingrich called "Language, a Key Mechanism of
Control", in which the then-House minority whip gave
candidates a glossary of words, tested in focus groups, to
sprinkle in their rhetoric and literature. For example,*it
advised characterizing Democrats with such words as "decay,
sick, pathetic, stagnation, corrupt, waste, traitors"*. (LA
Times, 12/19/94, pages A31)"
I have heard Penn speak before. I would say his positions are mostly
Right-leaning Libertarian but socially Left-leaning Libertarian. Which
part of the video should I watch? Penn's ok. He's a blowhard though.
Does he insult Beck? Because Beck is not ok.
Watch the whole thing, at least for context.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at