Supreme Court

Jarod said:
Do you have a quote/cite where she calls for Socialists to unite in order to defeat "the entrenched foe"?
Click to expand...

No. Bravo's nutjob source seems to draw it from this...


"Through its own internal feuding..the SP [Socialist Party] exhausted itself forever and further reduced labor radicalism in New York to the position of marginality and insignificance from which it has never recovered. The story is a sad but also a chastening one for those who, more than half a century after socialism's decline, still wish to change America. Radicals have often succumbed to the devastating bane of sectarianism; it is easier, after all, to fight one's fellows than it is to battle an entrenched and powerful foe. Yet if the history of Local New York shows anything, it is that American radicals cannot afford to become their own worst enemies. In unity lies their only hope."
 
Once again, BRAVO displays his lack of creditability by claiming something says something it does not.

This is the problem with the lunitic Drill baby Drill crowd, the 20% that still say GWB was a good president... They dont care about reality, just what they want reality to be.
 
Having been in the Libertarian Party and greater movement I know exactly what she means about internal feuding.

People's Front of Judea... Splitters!
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Well let's get a few things straight Pavo. You're the biggest political extremist on this sight. You're far more to the extreme right then a center left person like Taichi. You're so reactionary and partisan that you're even farther to the right of Dixie and Southernman whom, unlike you, are actually capable of independent thinking. So you're accusing anyone of extremism is just so fucking laughable. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. God you're a hypocrite.

The fact is, your just an extremist right wing fascist hack and Taichi just ate your lunch by pointing out your attempted lie which, by the way, no one is stupid enough to believe.

So why don't you go back inside your double wide, put on you your white robe and salute the autographed photo of Hitler hanging on your wall.
Click to expand...

Taichi is 'center left'????

LMAO.... yeah and bravo is 'just slightly right of center'.
 
Superfreak said:
Taichi is 'center left'????

LMAO.... yeah and bravo is 'just slightly right of center'.
Click to expand...

I had to laugh when I read that too. Let's just all re-define the political spectrum while we're at it. I can be center-left or maybe even left-center. :)
 
leaningright said:
I had to laugh when I read that too. Let's just all re-define the political spectrum while we're at it. I can be center-left or maybe even left-center. :)
Click to expand...

yeah, though I agree with Taichi's post in this particular instance, he is no where near the center on the political spectrum in general.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Well let's get a few things straight Pavo. You're the biggest political extremist on this sight. You're far more to the extreme right then a center left person like Taichi. You're so reactionary and partisan that you're even farther to the right of Dixie and Southernman whom, unlike you, are actually capable of independent thinking. So you're accusing anyone of extremism is just so fucking laughable. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. God you're a hypocrite.

The fact is, your just an extremist right wing fascist hack and Taichi just ate your lunch by pointing out your attempted lie which, by the way, no one is stupid enough to believe.

So why don't you go back inside your double wide, put on you your white robe and salute the autographed photo of Hitler hanging on your wall.
Click to expand...

You guys are just pissed that Bravo is so much smarter than you.
 
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
You need to start reading beyond what you LIKE to see and what you believe. Observe and learn:


http://mediamatters.org/research/201005110009

Kagan's thesis simply explored historical questions about socialism. As Media Matters for America has noted, Kagan did not express personal support for socialism or radicalism in her thesis. Rather, she explored the historical question of why socialism did not become a major political movement in the United States as it had elsewhere in the world. In addition to Wilentz saying that Kagan has never been a socialist, one of her college peers described her views in college as "well within the mainstream of the ... sort of liberal, democratic, progressive tradition." Despite the fact that Kagan's thesis is publicly available, Republicans did not raise the issue during her confirmation as solicitor general, suggesting that none of them believed that she was actually a socialist.
Click to expand...

bravo said:
You post your shit from mediamatters and Huffington like we really give a shit what the far left-wing blogs say....we don't....just as you would scoff at anncoulter.com or .nationalreview.com.....:gives:
Click to expand...

Translation: Bravo DID NOT READ the information I offered. Unlike his sources, mine DOCUMENT what they say, and FACTUALLY PROVE VIA VALID RESEARCH that the accuastion Bravo ejaculated over is basically erroneous and untrue.

Someone clue in mouth breathers like Bravo....the Rovian propaganda hasn't worked since November 2008. People read the WHOLE story, and not just the excerpts that can be attached to partisan talking points.
 
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
You need to start reading beyond what you LIKE to see and what you believe. Observe and learn:


http://mediamatters.org/research/201005110009

Kagan's thesis simply explored historical questions about socialism. As Media Matters for America has noted, Kagan did not express personal support for socialism or radicalism in her thesis. Rather, she explored the historical question of why socialism did not become a major political movement in the United States as it had elsewhere in the world. In addition to Wilentz saying that Kagan has never been a socialist, one of her college peers described her views in college as "well within the mainstream of the ... sort of liberal, democratic, progressive tradition." Despite the fact that Kagan's thesis is publicly available, Republicans did not raise the issue during her confirmation as solicitor general, suggesting that none of them believed that she was actually a socialist.
Click to expand...

Mott the Hoople said:
It's called "Cherry Picking". You take a small part of something someone wrote or said and you post it completely out of context of the original writing or statement so that it appears that person meant something else. It's dishonest to an extreme. Rush Limbaugh is famous for it.

It just goes to show you what a partisan hack Pavo is. Not only that he must think everyone on this sight must be completely stupid not to see what he's done or he's a blythering idiot himself.
Click to expand...

He's just A-typical of the mindset that you find in the teabagger, birther, oather, Shrub neocon crowd.....willfully ignorant, stubborn and proud. What's really tragic is that Bravo doesn't understand that idiocy like he displays was exposed and denounced in November of 2008....no one is buying it anymore, and like the groups I previously mentioned, those that try are ridiculed for the jackasses they are.
 
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
You need to start reading beyond what you LIKE to see and what you believe. Observe and learn:


http://mediamatters.org/research/201005110009

Kagan's thesis simply explored historical questions about socialism. As Media Matters for America has noted, Kagan did not express personal support for socialism or radicalism in her thesis. Rather, she explored the historical question of why socialism did not become a major political movement in the United States as it had elsewhere in the world. In addition to Wilentz saying that Kagan has never been a socialist, one of her college peers described her views in college as "well within the mainstream of the ... sort of liberal, democratic, progressive tradition." Despite the fact that Kagan's thesis is publicly available, Republicans did not raise the issue during her confirmation as solicitor general, suggesting that none of them believed that she was actually a socialist.
Click to expand...

RStringfield said:
That's what I got out of what bravo posted. There was nothing in it that suggested support for socialism/radicalism.
Click to expand...

And yet that is the accusation folk like Bravo adhere to....which can be found in the neocon punditry of print and radio from the likes of Limbaugh, Maulkin, etc.
 
TuTu Monroe said:
You guys are just pissed that Bravo is so much smarter than you.
Click to expand...
Yup, that's it, just pissed because Bravo is smarter. You too! Sooooo much smarter than us all! Just can't look at the light for too long for fear of being blinded. You hit the nail right on the head.
 
all I can say is this.....we have Obama as president, we have a Democratically controlled House and Senate.....we are going to have a liberal nominee and the liberal nominee is going to be approved.....shucks, we got conservative justices while Bush was president and conservatives didn't even control Congress.....it's how things work......
 
SmarterThanYou said:
I thought you were against expanding executive power? wait, that was only when the bush/cheney team was in, right?
Click to expand...

That depends on what area we are talking about. It is not as simple as blanketly being for or against expanding executive power. Then you add the additional layer of if it is consitutional to expand federal power. One could have that position that it is constitutional, yet still be against doing so, or vice versa.
 
Jarod said:
That depends on what area we are talking about. It is not as simple as blanketly being for or against expanding executive power. Then you add the additional layer of if it is consitutional to expand federal power. One could have that position that it is constitutional, yet still be against doing so, or vice versa.
Click to expand...
hem vs. haw.......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top