Paul Ryan

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I Misspoke—What I Meant To Say Is 'I Am Dumb As Dog Shit And I Am A Terrible Human Being'

By Rep. Todd Akin (R-MO)

I have to point out that pretty much the entire Republican establishment has withdrawn support from Akin. Meanwhile, when Biden talks about putting people in chains, the Democrats close ranks and support him.

Adkins is a typical Republican. Getting rid of one of them isn't going to do much. If the party had ousted him BEFORE he made it obvious that he was a total asshole I might have more respect for the GOP. However, this is the kind of person that is attracted to the Republican party.

[Ian]

I Misspoke—What I Meant To Say Is 'I Am Dumb As Dog Shit And I Am A Terrible Human Being'

By Rep. Todd Akin (R-MO)

I have to point out that pretty much the entire Republican establishment has withdrawn support from Akin. Meanwhile, when Biden talks about putting people in chains, the Democrats close ranks and support him.

Akin's positions are not at all unusual for his party (i.e. have a look at the VP candidate); he just forgot to evade the question on a talk show. Be he's not at all unusual - perhaps you haven't noticed thta your party has gone batshit insane in recent years.

I don't really mind what Biden said. He used what some of refer to as a "metaphor".

[Coito ergo sum]

He is quite "unusual." http://washingtonexaminer.com/democrats ... DN-yN2PXOV

Which is why the Democrats spent $1.5 million to help him win the GOP primary...

[Gawdzilla Sama]

He is quite "unusual." http://washingtonexaminer.com/democrats ... DN-yN2PXOV

Which is why the Democrats spent $1.5 million to help him win the GOP primary...

And the GOP voters bought it.

[Coito ergo sum]

Well, this is just namecalling bullshit.

You're right. I shouldn't respond in kind.

Ah, we've found a way to shut you up.

Ha. Funny.

[Coito ergo sum]

He is quite "unusual." http://washingtonexaminer.com/democrats ... DN-yN2PXOV

Which is why the Democrats spent $1.5 million to help him win the GOP primary...

And the GOP voters bought it.

Yes, the GOP voters, as we know, are stupid. That's why they are able to puzzle out how to register to vote and obtain identification, whereas Democrats are "disproportionately disenfranchised" by the onerous requirement of having to fill out a form.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Yes, the GOP voters, as we know, are stupid.

Don't be so hard on yourself.

[Ian]

Yes, the GOP voters, as we know, are stupid.

[Coito ergo sum]

Not all GOP voters are "conservative."

But, you guys are so smart, you must have missed that. Conservative economics in Mill's time was called "liberal."

John Stuart Mill, by the way, would be called a "conservative" today -- and you folks would call him evil and selfish, to boot - because he was a champion of liberty. He'd be quite libertarian in this day and age. That's why the Von Mises institute lauds J.S. Mill, and Mill's "classical liberalism" is embraced by today's economic conservatives....

But, do go on and pretend that he's suggesting that today's Liberalism, which scorns everything JS Mill stood for, are where the smart people go....

[Coito ergo sum]

Yes, the GOP voters, as we know, are stupid.

Don't be so hard on yourself.

it's o.k., it's been in the playbook of Democrat asshats for 60 years.

[Ian]

You think we'd belittle Mill because he was a champion of liberty?

Ah... you must be going with the "But, but... Republicans are the FREEDOM-loving party!" logic.

[Coito ergo sum]

You think we'd belittle Mill because he was a champion of liberty?

Typically, yes. He'd be characterized as a libertarian. Listen to what Gawdzilla has to say about those "libertardians" and "librarians." They're selfish, mean and want nothing more than to destroy the poor.

Ah... you must be going with the "But, but... Republicans are the FREEDOM-loving party!" logic.

It depends -- neither PARTY is freedom loving. There are segments and factions of each party which are freedom loving.

What I'm saying is JS Mill would be considered libertarian today, and a supporter of laissez-faire capitalism, which was a LIBERAL idea when he was writing. What he believed would make him a libertarian today, which are almost always lumped in as "conservatives" and the the "neocons" who believe in classical liberal economics. That sort of thing.

We've had plenty of threads on here where Liberals castigate libertardians and "classical liberals" and the concept of liberty is not something most of the Liberals around here even take seriously. Even the idea of fundamental rights that the government can't invade (a concept Mill fully supported) is poo-pooed routinely by Liberals, especially our Left-leaning Brits, who often espouse the position that the government should be allowed to do what it wants as long as the majority votes for it and the US is "backwards" and silly for having a system where there are certain areas that the majority can't do things even by majority vote. Surely, you've seen those threads -- they're quite common.

Bottom line - J.S. Mill would not be a "Liberal" today, if he espoused the views he wrote about in "On Liberty." He would be a laissez-fair capitalist (conservative) and social libertarian. That's why I love JS Mill so much. I've read On Liberty quite a few times. My paper copy is falling apart.

[MrJonno]

We've had plenty of threads on here where Liberals castigate libertardians and "classical liberals" and the concept of liberty is not something most of the Liberals around here even take seriously. Even the idea of fundamental rights that the government can't invade (a concept Mill fully supported) is poo-pooed routinely by Liberals, especially our Left-leaning Brits, who often espouse the position that the government should be allowed to do what it wants as long as the majority votes for it and the US is "backwards" and silly for having a system where there are certain areas that the majority can't do things even by majority vote. Surely, you've seen those threads -- they're quite common.

Its called looking down upon worship

I don't worship god but I also don't worship government, freedom, liberty, rights, capitalism, constitutions, politicians, nature, Richard Dawkins, myself , my wife, doctors, anything with the word 'fundamental' in it . You name it I don't worship it.

I think someone Americans are just grey-phobic, the atheists don't believe in god so they need to find some other absolute , they can't simple cope with most things in life not being either right or wrong and people just do their best to muddle along

[Ian]

CES- I don't really agree with all of your last post, but I won't go point for point on it. To me, the quote was more important than who said it. The only thing I'll say about the context you're trying to bring is that he lived a couple centuries ago. I wasn't trying to have a discussion on Mr. Mill or the economics of his day.

However, the quote is very much true of today's conservatives. Grab a dozen people at random from Kentucky and a dozen random people from Massachusets and tell me which group is more intelligent. Then let's see discuss how they vote.

[Coito ergo sum]

CES- I don't really agree with all of your last post, but I won't go point for point on it. To me, the quote was more important than who said it.

Yes, but the term "Liberal" and "Conservative" in JS Mill's day didn't mean what they mean today. Today, the people that agree with Mill are "classical liberals" (of the Jeffersonian kind) and libertarians -- not Liberals. The Liberals today call classical liberals like Mill "conservative.

The only thing I'll say about the context you're trying to bring is that he lived a couple centuries ago. I wasn't trying to have a discussion on Mr. Mill or the economics of his day.

In other words, you wanted to take the quote out of context, and with a meaning that does not apply today, since today's "Liberals" do not agree with the liberalism Mill was espousing or referring to. Today's liberals would have been considered conservative at the time Mill wrote those words.

However, the quote is very much true of today's conservatives. Grab a dozen people at random from Kentucky and a dozen random people from Massachusets and tell me which group is more intelligent. Then let's see discuss how they vote.

There are plenty of conservatives in Massachusetts. They aren't the majority, but they are there.

And, there is no evidence that one group is more intelligent than the other. Let's not take the dozen people at random from Kentucky -- let's take them from Compton or Harlem and let's see how intelligent they compare to folks from Iowa. Then let's see how THEY vote on various issues....