Republican Slime
- Thread starter Cancel7
- Start date
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
I have repudiated you.
The word is 'refudiate' and it's the points you need to do that to, not me. Thus far, you haven't refuted a single point I've made, you've denied the truth, you continue to bluster with mindless rants and liberal platitudes, but you've not made a valid argument, nor have you demonstrated how my argument is invalid.
You use these economic arguments to justify things which are stupid from a security, morality, sovereignty point of view.
Actually, they are not stupid from ANY point of view. We've gone through each of these individually, and you haven't shown were this is the case, nor can you, we just get more of the same liberal platitudes. We are far better off with China, in regards to our national security and sovereignty, with them as a strong allied trading partner involved in capitalist ventures together, than snubbing our noses at them and banning trade. From a moral standpoint, the people who are being abused in China have a far better chance for change and improvement, if we are engaged in diplomacy with China, as opposed to making empty demands they have no motivation to adhere to. So, nothing is really stupid here except for your idiotic ideas to the contrary, and the kook liberal conspiracy theories you spew.
You're not seeing things in a balanced manner. I fail to see how your way will work, even from a theoretical standpoint. You are rewarding their activities as sweatshop slavedrivers.
I'm seeing this in a rather logical manner. We can't effect change without some form of leverage to effect it with, it's inherently impossible, and there is no example of this ever being the case, with regard to China, or any other country, or party, for that matter. From a theoretical standpoint, it makes more logical sense to be friendly with China and attempt to pressure them politically and diplomatically, than to isolate ourselves, condemn them, and ignore the problem. If you are too dumb to see this in theory, I can't help you, but it's pretty clear to me, and anyone thinking rationally.
Wanting to not buy slave goods is NOT isolationism. you're resorting to overhyped rhetoric to create a straw man argument.
It is economic isolationism, what else would you call it? Hey... if we could control what the rest of the world did, and we could all join together and boycott Chinese products, then the idea you have might work. China would have to change because they would starve to death if they didn't. The thing is, we don't control the world, and we can't rally the world to boycott China, so we can boycott them by ourselves, and let Europe and the Communists benefit from cheap goods from China... (that was what we did for the last century, and China grew into the #2 world superpower.)
We have been trading with China since 1972, and they have been granted MFN status (by Clinton) since the 90's, so this is not something Bush and the Neocons plotted and planned in secrecy, as some part of a sinister plot to rule the world. Trade with China has been a debated political issue since the 1940's! The "strawman" in this argument, is your continued attempts to tie trade with China to Neocons, the NWO, and PNAC.
I've not 'overhyped' anything, Mr. Fake Liberal Moral Outrage! You are the one doing that! In every post, you make certain to include some tidbit to tug at the heartstrings of the liberal inside us all... you keep going to the well of misused words, and pejorative insults, to lend some sense of urgency to your message. Damo has caught this several times, and so have I. Nothing about my position is rhetorical at all, I have stated very clearly, why I support strong trade alliances with China, and how I think it will eventually effect a change in the political dynamic of that country. This is met with your unreasonable expectation that since China hasn't changed overnight, they are never going to change, and we should abandon common sense and logic, and stick our heads in the sand.
This is mostly about competition in the European market, when you get right down to it. If the EU is able to buy $2 widgets from China, why would they ever be compelled to buy $4 widgets from the US? Besides stupid Americans, who is going to buy $4 widgets from the US, when China offers $2 widgets? Take it further... who is going to buy $3 French widgets, or $5 English widgets? How many countries of the world, are going to take the moral stand you are expecting, and not buy the $2 widgets from China? Answer: Zilch!
Okay, so.... we can accept that China will probably sell quite a few $2 widgets, while the rest of us 'moral crusaders' struggle to get anyone to buy our products on the market.... that is precisely what happened up until 1972, when some smarter people than us figured out, we can't keep doing this forever, things aren't going to ever improve in China like this, and subsequently, our entire economy as well as the overall world economy outside of China, is suffering from it. The "plan" as you like to call it, lies in fostering a strong trade alliance with China, where we can and will engage in capitalist ventures with the Chinese, and form mutual interests economically. Once this starts to happen, we begin to build something that can leverage the Chinese government, we have a bargaining chip to effect some sort of change in China. Maybe it works, maybe it don't? We know that your idea doesn't work, it only breeds a stronger China and weaker world market elsewhere, while the human rights abuses continue on.
Of course, you really couldn't give two shits about the human rights in China, that is not what this is about. You think that we can keep paying union wages to people with record increases, and simply deal China out of the game. If we ignore them in trade, we can go on pretending that widgets are cheap at $4... an American Bargain!
It seems every time this country can afford to be stupid, liberals demand we do it! We can ban trade with China! SURE! We can all afford to pay a higher price for things, and why shouldn't we take the moral stand, and do so? We can afford to go another 50-100 years with a declining market, and trade deficits, and we can keep paying union workers astronomical wages, and trying to beg and bribe the EU into buying our $8* widgets! (*union wage increase) ...That'll show 'em!!
American Liberal Ingenuity at it's best!
The word is 'refudiate' and it's the points you need to do that to, not me. Thus far, you haven't refuted a single point I've made, you've denied the truth, you continue to bluster with mindless rants and liberal platitudes, but you've not made a valid argument, nor have you demonstrated how my argument is invalid.
You use these economic arguments to justify things which are stupid from a security, morality, sovereignty point of view.
Actually, they are not stupid from ANY point of view. We've gone through each of these individually, and you haven't shown were this is the case, nor can you, we just get more of the same liberal platitudes. We are far better off with China, in regards to our national security and sovereignty, with them as a strong allied trading partner involved in capitalist ventures together, than snubbing our noses at them and banning trade. From a moral standpoint, the people who are being abused in China have a far better chance for change and improvement, if we are engaged in diplomacy with China, as opposed to making empty demands they have no motivation to adhere to. So, nothing is really stupid here except for your idiotic ideas to the contrary, and the kook liberal conspiracy theories you spew.
You're not seeing things in a balanced manner. I fail to see how your way will work, even from a theoretical standpoint. You are rewarding their activities as sweatshop slavedrivers.
I'm seeing this in a rather logical manner. We can't effect change without some form of leverage to effect it with, it's inherently impossible, and there is no example of this ever being the case, with regard to China, or any other country, or party, for that matter. From a theoretical standpoint, it makes more logical sense to be friendly with China and attempt to pressure them politically and diplomatically, than to isolate ourselves, condemn them, and ignore the problem. If you are too dumb to see this in theory, I can't help you, but it's pretty clear to me, and anyone thinking rationally.
Wanting to not buy slave goods is NOT isolationism. you're resorting to overhyped rhetoric to create a straw man argument.
It is economic isolationism, what else would you call it? Hey... if we could control what the rest of the world did, and we could all join together and boycott Chinese products, then the idea you have might work. China would have to change because they would starve to death if they didn't. The thing is, we don't control the world, and we can't rally the world to boycott China, so we can boycott them by ourselves, and let Europe and the Communists benefit from cheap goods from China... (that was what we did for the last century, and China grew into the #2 world superpower.)
We have been trading with China since 1972, and they have been granted MFN status (by Clinton) since the 90's, so this is not something Bush and the Neocons plotted and planned in secrecy, as some part of a sinister plot to rule the world. Trade with China has been a debated political issue since the 1940's! The "strawman" in this argument, is your continued attempts to tie trade with China to Neocons, the NWO, and PNAC.
I've not 'overhyped' anything, Mr. Fake Liberal Moral Outrage! You are the one doing that! In every post, you make certain to include some tidbit to tug at the heartstrings of the liberal inside us all... you keep going to the well of misused words, and pejorative insults, to lend some sense of urgency to your message. Damo has caught this several times, and so have I. Nothing about my position is rhetorical at all, I have stated very clearly, why I support strong trade alliances with China, and how I think it will eventually effect a change in the political dynamic of that country. This is met with your unreasonable expectation that since China hasn't changed overnight, they are never going to change, and we should abandon common sense and logic, and stick our heads in the sand.
This is mostly about competition in the European market, when you get right down to it. If the EU is able to buy $2 widgets from China, why would they ever be compelled to buy $4 widgets from the US? Besides stupid Americans, who is going to buy $4 widgets from the US, when China offers $2 widgets? Take it further... who is going to buy $3 French widgets, or $5 English widgets? How many countries of the world, are going to take the moral stand you are expecting, and not buy the $2 widgets from China? Answer: Zilch!
Okay, so.... we can accept that China will probably sell quite a few $2 widgets, while the rest of us 'moral crusaders' struggle to get anyone to buy our products on the market.... that is precisely what happened up until 1972, when some smarter people than us figured out, we can't keep doing this forever, things aren't going to ever improve in China like this, and subsequently, our entire economy as well as the overall world economy outside of China, is suffering from it. The "plan" as you like to call it, lies in fostering a strong trade alliance with China, where we can and will engage in capitalist ventures with the Chinese, and form mutual interests economically. Once this starts to happen, we begin to build something that can leverage the Chinese government, we have a bargaining chip to effect some sort of change in China. Maybe it works, maybe it don't? We know that your idea doesn't work, it only breeds a stronger China and weaker world market elsewhere, while the human rights abuses continue on.
Of course, you really couldn't give two shits about the human rights in China, that is not what this is about. You think that we can keep paying union wages to people with record increases, and simply deal China out of the game. If we ignore them in trade, we can go on pretending that widgets are cheap at $4... an American Bargain!
It seems every time this country can afford to be stupid, liberals demand we do it! We can ban trade with China! SURE! We can all afford to pay a higher price for things, and why shouldn't we take the moral stand, and do so? We can afford to go another 50-100 years with a declining market, and trade deficits, and we can keep paying union workers astronomical wages, and trying to beg and bribe the EU into buying our $8* widgets! (*union wage increase) ...That'll show 'em!!
American Liberal Ingenuity at it's best!
maineman
Banned
-Originally Posted by Dixie: "I have repudiated you. The word is 'refudiate'"
-Maineman: "ummm there is no such word as REFUDIATE.
is that in one of those redneck dictionaries?"
LMAO!
What a moron. That's alabama public schools for you.
Come to think of it, in Dixie's Obamaism thread, maybe Dixe really didn't know how the word presumptuousness was spelled or pronounced.
Maybe that's why he ran away from his own thread, when he was shown that obama actually did pronounce the word correctly.
-Maineman: "ummm there is no such word as REFUDIATE.
is that in one of those redneck dictionaries?"
LMAO!
What a moron. That's alabama public schools for you.
Come to think of it, in Dixie's Obamaism thread, maybe Dixe really didn't know how the word presumptuousness was spelled or pronounced.
Maybe that's why he ran away from his own thread, when he was shown that obama actually did pronounce the word correctly.
maineman
Banned
nah...when he gets his ass handed to him, he usually pops up again in some new thread.
He never goes back to the scene of his whippings, and on the off chance that he does, he never has the grace to acknowledge them.
I look forward to him "REFUDIATING" that statement however!
ROFLMFAO!
He never goes back to the scene of his whippings, and on the off chance that he does, he never has the grace to acknowledge them.
I look forward to him "REFUDIATING" that statement however!
ROFLMFAO!
Last edited:
Litmus
Verified User
I have repudiated your points. You have taken the basic arguments for free trade and twisted their significance so that they now trump all other concerns in your narrow short term mind.
WHy not reintroduce slavery here, we could probably increase our gdp? Or why not sell your child into the sex trade? That would make you money.
It's called morality, look into it.
WHy not reintroduce slavery here, we could probably increase our gdp? Or why not sell your child into the sex trade? That would make you money.
It's called morality, look into it.
Litmus
Verified User
Very good questions.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
How have my arguments for free trade "trumped" all other concerns, long or short term? If our concern is global market stability, my argument clearly addresses that, if our concern is human rights in China, my argument does more to afford an opportunity for reform and change than your argument.
We probably could increase the GDP by reintroducing slavery, but we are not interested in enslaving people, that isn't what our objective is, or what we want to promote or support, neither is the sex slave trade. Why must you continue to exhibit the classic liberal tactics of introducing straw men and red herrings? You've tried really hard to not expose yourself for the true liberal pinhead you are, it seems you would realize when you are being so obviously transparent in your debate style, I don't believe you are fooling anyone. So far, I count about 20 times in two or three threads, where you've had to be reeled back into reality, and called out for your over-the-top exaggerations and mischaracterizations. Let's stay on the topic, trade relations with China, and what that does or doesn't do for the human conditions in China.
Again, with the pinhead AssHat approach, we revert to the ways of old, stick our American heads in the sand, and forget about the problems in China! That is your solution in a nutshell... let the UN handle it! With the official US Policy currently being, to trade as MFN with China, as enacted by President Clinton, there is an opportunity to create some leverage for political change in China. By including China into the WTO, and the world markets, we diminish the effects of cheap Chinese goods by absorption into the market, instead of the Chinese helping the specific countries they choose, while others gain no benefit and decline in their own markets.
If your concern is genuine, if you really want to help the people in China gain a better life someday, you have only three options... war, embargo, diplomacy. You support embargo, although that is what has been tried for almost the past century, and China has only grown stronger. I think we can agree, America is not going to war to stop the human rights abuses in China, so this leaves diplomacy. In order to have effective diplomacy, we must have some tangible to bargain with, otherwise, diplomacy is a futile effort. Trade is that tangible, or eventually will be, when the Chinese have enough financial interest in US trade, and enough money is at stake, they will listen and reform.
Now, I am going to give you one more chance to repudiate the points I've made, and I hope you will avoid behaving like a pinhead and going to the well of misused words and insults. Let's hear why your approach deserves to be tried some more, how it is supposed to effect a change, where we are supposed to garner leverage with the Chinese, and how that happens with your idea? The way I see it, we can't expect the Chinese to stop abusing their people if there is no motivation for them to, taking something they don't need or really have, is kind of stupid.
maineman
Banned
Now, I am going to give you one more chance to repudiate the points I've made, and I hope you will avoid behaving like a pinhead and going to the well of misused words and insults.
but wait...I thought the word was REFUDIATE???????
fuckin' moron... don't you feel like an idiot when you play word nazi like that and you get it crammed right back up your well travelled ass?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
but wait...I thought the word was REFUDIATE???????
fuckin' moron... don't you feel like an idiot when you play word nazi like that and you get it crammed right back up your well travelled ass?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Litmus
Verified User
Because you repuse to consider anything else in your calculations. You see no problem with being dependant on an enemy nation, which is builiding it's military to defeat us as we speak. HOW has this occurred? Too much family ties and fantasizing about a nubile michael p. keaton?
Market stability is actually a secondary concern of mine. Your program rewards cruelty. You can call that "an opportunity to afford to create a base for possible change" or watever, but it's shyte-minded.
I believe it is what you are interested in. You believe there should be no moral prerequisites to joining the family of nations. It's stupid for lambs to lie down with lions, no matter how stunning the imagery.
Im not a liberal. Im a nationalist. You're the one singing kumbah yah about how we can all get along, and apparently caring more about the chinese than americans. You neocons are just anti-americans who have realized you can exploit america's patriotism and loyal citizenry to build your new world order, which is suited only for yourselves.
You're the true liberal pinhead.
You keep repeating the same thing. YOu keep repeating your trade arguments which are valid to a degree, but you apply them in an extreme fashion and factor no other considerations into policy.
Not forget, just not reward the totalitarians with billions in trade. Why can't you see the abject stupidity of your actions?
The UN should be disbanded. And honestly, highlighting clinton's support for the chinese doesn't sweeten the deal. Im not REALLY a liberal, that's just the only compartment your feeble mind possesses to slot me into it.
You're living in fantasy land.
Your approach should be abandoned, because empowering enemies TO THIS EXTENT is never wise. Im not saying we should return to autarky. Look it up.
Last edited:
Dixie, after your disasterous foray into the world of spelling and pronunciation fascism, if I were you I'd never criticize someone else's grammar or spelling ever again.
The word is repudiate....NOT refudiate.
And Obama correctly pronounced the word presumptuousness....it wasn't presumptioness.
The word is repudiate....NOT refudiate.
And Obama correctly pronounced the word presumptuousness....it wasn't presumptioness.
The word is refute, if you actually want the correct meaning. To repudiate is a totally different meaning.
One would say, I have refuted your points.
If one says they "repudiate" it simply means that they "reject" it as having no authority, it does not mean that they have done it by making any other point.
If one says that they refuted the point it means that they have proven the point to be wrong.
So you all are fricking wrong. Unless all he has supposedly done is "reject" the point with no evidence, in that case then "repudiate" would be accurate, if he believes he has proven the point wrong then he wants to say he "refuted" the point.
maineman
Banned
my GOD.... do you have to stick up for him all the time? He was the one who made up a word, for crissakes.... and we gave him shit about it.
Stick up for him? I said you were all wrong. Do you have to assume that when I say all I am excepting him for some reason? Your assumption has made you look the ass.
Refudiate is not a word.
Repudiate is to reject, not to prove wrong.
Refute is to prove wrong with valid answers to a point.
Now, which word do you think he wanted to use?
Uh, maineman and I know what these words mean.
It was dixie who made the mistake, while trying to be a spelling nazi. Did you mean to post this below dixie's post, rather than mine or MMs?