Replies

“PS Are there any other FReepers who know you who also post on the other site, the one where you are known as “hicup”...?”

Hmm.. Not sure. I’ve linked there a few times whilst posting here, but other than Harry, I couldn’t say.

Not for nothing, but I was banned from Space dot com, for being, well, a little too conservative. Took almost 8 years, but I skipped rope over there for the longest time. What got me banned was posting a link to pictures of the “Folsom Street Fair”, exposing the real homosexual community. There’s a pretty good mix of ideological differece over there, and it was a good proving ground for my earlier career fighting the good fight. I believe that I have presented the best, none relgious argument against the institutionlizing of homosexuality in our society, on the net.

The trick; if you will allow me, to arguing with a liberal, is spotting when they’re going wrong, and early. Liberals tend to focus on the exception, rather than the rule. It is this delusion that is the primary driving force behind everything they do.. This is also why their logic will inevitably fail when pressed. The exception cannot ever be reason to alter what is good for the rule. Fundamentally, what is good for the greater number, all things being equal should be the direction one take. Now before I hear it from the “he must be a marxist crowd”, pleas eunderstand that the key word to my statement is “Fundamentally”...

Anyone, and I mean anyone, would have difficulty catching me in an inconsistency.. why? Simple, I believe what I believe, and I’ve been around long enough to know what it is I believe. if you plan on getting me to concede a point in an honest debate, you’d better damn well provide a very compelling argument.. The difference between me, and a liberal, however, is that I will admit, publicly, that I may have made an error. That’s called integrity, it’s one of my core values, I live it.

The reason I did not engage you, point by point, in your analysis of my possible “liberalness”, is that, (And I don’t mean this as an attack on you) frankly, you didn’t provide anything tangible to argue against. In reality, all you did was try to make a connection where none existed. My criticism of Sarah is coherant to me, but maybe not others. That means other voters. I may see something, others might not, who knows, but I do stand behind it, even if I want the woman to succeed; which I do.

“I agree that she comes across as less sophisticated than other candidates”

I don’t think it’s that. What I mean is that, I find her as sophisticatet as anyone else, in a southern belle style of sophistication, but yet in Alaska. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that, in fact, I think it adds to her image. It’s not a sophistication type deal, it’s what I said it was. That she seems unable to “create” political policy, on her own - or at the very least, change the way in which the message is delivered, and is the catalyst for changing someones mind on the matter...

The people that hate her, will always hate her, the people that love her will always love her, but the people in the middle are waiting for something innovative, something they can all cling to.

I’m that guy.. I want to be in her camp 100%.. Right now, I’m not.. Close, but not 100%..... Yet. :)

Tim-