Boycott the Left!

Results:


Conceptual Guerilla | Central Command in the War of Ideas
conceptualguerilla.com/6 hours ago – The problem is the economy. Yes, it is improving . . . but not fast enough. Meanwhile, Mitt Romney is telling everyone who will listen that Obama ...
Defeat the Right in Three ...
Have you got three minutes. Because that's all you need to ...
The Limbaugh Lie Of The Day
10:37 minutes (9.72 MB)It's been a busy August, and a busy ...
Cheap Labor Conservatives ...
For those of you just arriving, who haven't seen the lead article, the ...
Defeat the Right in 3 Minutes
4:04 minutes (1.87 MB). Republicans say failing to ...
Less Government and Cheap ...
“Less Government” is the central defining right-wing slogan. And ...
More results from conceptualguerilla.com »


Does this sound like a website you want to support with your clicks?

Fair? Balanced? Objective? Honest? Both sides? NOPE!
 
Dixie said:
LMAO.. it's actually the French who brought us liberalism.

conceptualguerilla.com ....here's a good one guys... google it and see who's behind them before clicking the link!
Click to expand...

See bold and bottom, it is that change that fascinates me.

That is partly true but there's lots more to the story and many liberals (broadly defined) were British and American during the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries. I've heard these books delve into the ideas that were fundamental to the change from a more religious oriented world view to a more secular individual worldview. I have read neither but may, good lord willing and the creek don't rise. The other books I have read.

The Swerve: How the World Became Modern' Stephen Greenblatt http://www.amazon.com/Swerve-How-World-Became-Modern/dp/0393064476/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8

The creation of the self and the middle class. http://www.amazon.com/Making-Modern...tury/dp/0300121393/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8

"Before 1950 the political designation of “conservative” was disavowed, if not altogether disliked, by most Americans, including Republicans. Yet very soon after, and for the first time in American history, ideological “conservatism” became a more than acceptable political designation. By the 1980s, more Americans called themselves “conservatives” than “liberals.” Much of this was ambiguous, since many Americans were not truly conservative at all, except for their opposition to liberals." John Lukacs 'American Nationalism'

"To understand these ideas, we have to understand that story. For that is what conservatism is: a meditation on - and theoretical rendition of - the felt experience of having power, seeing it threatened, and trying to win it back." http://www.amazon.com/The-Reactionary-Mind-Conservatism-Edmund/dp/0199793743/ref=sr_1_1?s=books


"He argues that a triplet of 'rhetorical' criticisms--perversity, futility, and jeopardy--'has been unfailingly leveled' by 'reactionaries' at each major progressive reform of the past 300 years--those T. H. Marshall identified with the advancement of civil, political and social rights of citizenship...Charmingly written, this book can benefit a diverse readership.... With engaging wit and subtle irony, Albert Hirschman maps the diffuse and treacherous world of reactionary rhetoric in which conservative public figures, thinkers, and polemicists have been arguing against progressive agendas and reforms for the past two hundred years." http://www.amazon.com/The-Rhetoric-Reaction-Perversity-Futility/dp/067476868X/ref=pd_sim_b_1
 
Last edited:
LOL@mudcan.. So instead of linking us to your pinhead liberal blog sites, you decided to link us to their amazon book pages? Cute!

And oh.... HARVARD! Can't forget those totally objective and unbiased minds at Harvard now, can we? Couldn't you find a link from Berkeley as well?
 
Dixie said:
Yes, and generally speaking, on a message board, when many people reply, it means someone does care. So you are again proven to be a liar.

Glad you could admit that for us, now run along.
Click to expand...

Nope. I'll run along when I'm good and ready, rube. I need a good laugh this morning.
 
Bijou said:
Nope. I'll run along when I'm good and ready, rube. I need a good laugh this morning.
Click to expand...

Good, then I am going to put you on ignore, since you seem to only want to find my threads and shit in them, and I am sick of reading the lack of substance from you. I think I have given you ample time to tone your rhetoric down and try to have a civilized conversation, and now I am done with you. So, please know, it has been a pleasure, and perhaps one day I will run across you under another name, because you will eventually change this one to avoid stigma. Hope you have a blessed day. Buh-bye!
 
Dixie said:
Good, then I am going to put you on ignore, since you seem to only want to find my threads and shit in them, and I am sick of reading the lack of substance from you. I think I have given you ample time to tone your rhetoric down and try to have a civilized conversation, and now I am done with you. So, please know, it has been a pleasure, and perhaps one day I will run across you under another name, because you will eventually change this one to avoid stigma. Hope you have a blessed day. Buh-bye!
Click to expand...

Good. See ya!
 
Today, 10:06 AM
Bijou
Agitating the Unwashed
This message is hidden because Bijou is on your ignore list.
View Post
Remove user from ignore list
View Post


Ahhh, much better!!
 
"Before 1950 the political designation of “conservative” was disavowed, if not altogether disliked, by most Americans, including Republicans. Yet very soon after, and for the first time in American history, ideological “conservatism” became a more than acceptable political designation. By the 1980s, more Americans called themselves “conservatives” than “liberals.” Much of this was ambiguous, since many Americans were not truly conservative at all, except for their opposition to liberals." John Lukacs 'American Nationalism'
Click to expand...


Some excellent information to use against the right, enjoy. http://www.conceptualguerilla.com/?q=node/1002#about


"Cheap-labor conservatives have gotten into the habit of wrapping themselves in the flag, quoting Jefferson, and holding themselves out as defenders of “American values”. In fact, from the very beginning, cheap-labor forces have opposed and obstructed realization of Jefferson’s dream of equality, democracy and social justice. Here is a short list of examples of cheap-labor conservatives obstructing of those values." CG http://www.conceptualguerilla.com/?q=node/393
 
Again, we get a flood of liberal propaganda links from midcan.

You see, they can't support or back up ANYTHING they say with legitimate sources, it's almost ALWAYS some liberal blog site or think tank, who they run to for support of their idiocy. And here we are, trying to have an honest debate and discussion, and in the process, we're supporting their liberal presence on the web by clicking the links in earnest. This is why the Boycott is important, we have to shut this crap down, and it starts by rejecting liberal propaganda outlets as legitimate sources, and being diligent about checking before we click. If midcan is unable to make his point without using some radical left-wing site, then the point can't be made legitimately, and should be dismissed as irrelevant.
 
Dixie said:
There are still an abundance of sources which are unbiased and just present the facts. Most all of the details on any legislation can be looked at online at Thomas.org, there is no bias. As for news outlets, most any AP source is credible, as well as Reuters and the BBC...even NPR. They might have some bias, but for the most part, the information presented is reliable and accurate. When we get to the radical left-wing blog sites and dot orgs... there is nothing unbiased at all... they present nothing short of propaganda from the perspective of the left.

We don't see Conservatives here, propping up arguments and making their points using Hannity.com or Rush Limbaugh op-eds as their source. If they did, you would be the first to cry foul and call them out. Yet Liberals can literally do this all day long, and think nothing of it. They get angry that you won't accept their liberal-bias source as the legitimate truth, as if it were presented fairly and honestly without bias. And God forbid someone posts a link to FoxNews for anything! Fucking smoke starts coming out of the liberal's ears, as circuitry starts to short out! But Huffington Post? NO PROB!
Click to expand...

Are you trying to compare the acuracy of fox to huff?
 
Darla said:
This is unbelievable. The gender based harassment here has really gone over the top lately. I know the mods aren't going to do anything about it, though I am collecting usf's posts for the next time the dumb fucks try to tell me to play werewolf with him (and I can't wait to post them all in one shot in response). But I'm seriously done with it. I've tried ignoring it, and I've tried calling the attention of others to it in the hopes that general condemnation would clean things up. But the truth is that the men here simply don't give a fuck.

So, you guys are going to get it back both barrels from now on.
Click to expand...

It's the libertarian thing. When Poet was here, I tried to point to the outright racism that was commonly opined. Damo had said previously that he wouldn't put up with it, yet nothing was ever doe, and finaly Poet left for good.
 
Dixie said:
Your politics are, you are a clueless idiot who doesn't know enough about politics to make an informed decision. Your "I watch Fox" line reminds me of "I have black friends!" It really doesn't PROVE any damn thing, it's just what you feel you need to say at the moment.

As for talking to me, you haven't tried that yet... you've tried lobbing insults at me, and making smarmy snide remarks about me, but talk? Nope... no indication of that from this side of the screen. I don't piss or moan, but I do say "you libs" because you all seem to march in lockstep with whatever the 'mantra' of the day is. You can't admit when your points have been refuted, or when you've lost the debate, because you HAVE to remain true to your "SIDE" and not let the evil righties win! This is a fucking GAME to you people, and whenever someone shines the light on you, we see this lame attempt to run hide behind another label, like you are some kind of new-age libertarian federalist, or anything BUT a Liberal punk.

You will sit here and crucify a Conservative politician over the slightest hint of impropriety, but when it's a Liberal, we get the "all politicians are scum" line. It's Ali's "rope a dope" strategy applied to political discourse. You criticize Conservatives and conservative policies all day long, but when Liberal policies fail miserably and don't do a thing that was promised... suddenly, you aren't liberal... you a "federalist-libertarian!" LMFAO... RIGHT!

If you can't handle it here, go back to from where you came.
Click to expand...

Seriously Dixie, why don't you read some of annata's comments before judging? There are plenty of her posts available, none are pro Obama, (to put it mildly).
You are totally incorrect in your judgement, and if you have any gentleman in you at all, will issue an apology.
 
Dixie said:
Again, it was hyperbolic and inflammatory, and I admit that. It was crude and tactless, I admit that. It was disgusting and vile... admitted! But it was not indicative of a "hatred for women" in any way shape or form. Do you really think I meant the comment literally? Do you just NOT see how the comment was intentionally bombastic and over the top? Have you EVER seen me make a similar comment before? Do you consider my apology sincere or not?
Click to expand...

:facepalm: Dixie, again you are just so friggin wrong.
 
Rune said:
Seriously Dixie, why don't you read some of annata's comments before judging? There are plenty of her posts available, none are pro Obama, (to put it mildly).
You are totally incorrect in your judgement, and if you have any gentleman in you at all, will issue an apology.
Click to expand...

I am well familiar with annata's strategy, and I'm not falling for it. Annata wants us to all believe she is a 'moderate' or 'independent' or 'libertarian' or 'libertarian-ish-federalist" ...or anything besides a flaming left wing nutbag like you! Annata has more sense than you, because she knows there is no way to fight this battle in the uniform of a liberal, so they decided to deceive the enemy by wearing a different uniform.... it's standard military strategy.

And your punk ass doesn't get to tell me who I need to apologize to... got it?
 
Dixie said:
I am well familiar with annata's strategy, and I'm not falling for it. Annata wants us to all believe she is a 'moderate' or 'independent' or 'libertarian' or 'libertarian-ish-federalist" ...or anything besides a flaming left wing nutbag like you! Annata has more sense than you, because she knows there is no way to fight this battle in the uniform of a liberal, so they decided to deceive the enemy by wearing a different uniform.... it's standard military strategy.

And your punk ass doesn't get to tell me who I need to apologize to... got it?
Click to expand...

LOLOL! Annata doesn't have a 'strategy' designed to fool rubes into thinking he's anything other than what he is - an open-minded moderate. I've known him for years and watched many of his views on things evolve. He doesn't see debates with right- or left-leaners as 'battles'. The guy's message-board debate style is one of the most easygoing that I've encountered.

And he doesn't see you as the 'enemy', rube. Jesus H. Christ, get over yourself. :rofl2:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top