Hey John,

>Nice one, Steven.
Thank you. I didn't have much time...

> I try to explain my position and you go into a ridiculing rant.
Nope. I see your idealogue-ness and ridicule *that* with sarcasm -- and a bit of parody in another thread. You deserve as much.

> Par for the course for libs, which is why you keep getting your butts kicked in elections. As you will again in 2004.

You don't know my politics so keep your mind on your own butt. Idealogues like you tend to assume that anyone who might question or differ from your righteous assertions is automatically on some "other side." There are lot's of sides John. Not just "yours" and not just "not-yours". Lots.

> Americans want positive messages and a vision for the future - not childish rants.

And yet there is nothing of this sort in your original post.

> BTW, I *did* run for office. So I put my money where my mouth was.

I knew that, and the result. You lost. Your "positive vision" didn't fly. :-(

> Have you?

I am active in the manner I choose to be. You don't know how or what my inclinations are, or the effect. Nor will I reveal them to you or argue them with you. I don't accept invitations to dance when you're not my type. Idealogues such as yourself predictably fill in the blanks with their own demons. You are to political consciousness as fundamentalists are to religions. Look elsewhere in the world and see how nationalists and zealots appear -- that's your mirror. Or wait, let me guess...everyone else in the marching band is out of step except for lil' John-John. Right? ;-)

Good luck with your simplistic absolutes and predictable little dogma, I'm sure there's a much better world just waiting to unfold -- once anyone that disagrees with you is out of the way.
Your fellow American,
Steven-


>>Golly! We're all really impressed way down here I'll have you know. Yours is the only uber-pragmatic and clear thinking opinion amongst humans. I'm sure if *you* ran for any political office you'd win with your right thinking. What a dumba** the rest of us must be! You expressions are so refreshing -- satisfying even. I mean, who needs sex when your little ideas are so exciting? (I kinda wish I were you actually.) And I'll bet you sing wonderfully too. Lemme know when you run for office -- I'll be there to support you. We're talkin' a Koziol landslide fer shur. Wouldn't you agree? C'mon, run. Let's see what happens. Ok? "Go Koziol!" ;-)
>>
>>P.S. I 'spose you got the red states, brother: http://www.realstupidnews.com/america_deeply.html
>>
>>
>>>Yes they are, for the most part. Conservatives are pragmatic. In fact, I know a lot of people who are pragmatic and don't even consider themselves political nor conservative yet find themselves on the conservative side of issues.
>>>
>>>Why? I dunno for sure, but mainly I think because the left has just lost a grip on reality and now spouts ideological crap. I mean, you can poke huge logical and factual holes in just about anything the major Dems say. I heard a speech from Ted Kennedy the other day that was absolutely laughable if anyone bothered to research what he said. You know, Ted, the guy who let a woman die in 1969?
>>>
>>>And there's the secret to what limited success you guys have: You talk crap knowing that the vast majority of the populace has better things to do than to refute your bull. So some may accept it. But those with the tools to research won't.
>>>
>>>Which leads me to my final points: As the internet grows and more people adopt it, you guys with the spin doctors and loose control of the facts are dead meat. Furthermore, there is a vast majority of talk radio shows that are right-leaning. Liberals ask (or whine) why? Simple. Conservative ideals, based in pragmatism, are defensible while liberal ideals, based in ideology and proudly contrafactual, are not. Therefore, a liberal talk show cannot sustain audience in a fair manner without draconian board control because any well informed caller will kill 'em.
>>>
>>>So, Chris, I have a "grip". It's y'all who need to get one. Soon, I hope.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Of course, conservatives are completely different. Get a grip.
>>>>
>>>>>Dan,
>>>>>
>>>>>In the late 80's and early 90's, liberals moved away from contesting ideas to misintepreting the facts and lying to themselves. Heck, these folks could even convince themselves the sky is green. It's called "see what sticks to the wall" and it worked for Clinton as long as he went with majority poll results.
>>>>>
>>>>>Don't worry - they got wiped out in 2002 and they're going to get killed in 2004 as well. Until they learn that you can't always be negative; you have to compete with ideas and facts; and you have to adopt a realpolitik that's broad-based they will always lose. And I like it that way.
>>>>>
>>>>>>The math just doesn't work, no matter how you slice it. Even counting all of the striking grocery store workers as moving from the "unemployed" to the "employed" category (and knowing a little about how the government classifies workers I find this unbelievable), you have left nearly a 2/3 gap in your number.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Your theory to be amazingly lacking in substantiation, bordering on libelous, and you should count yourself lucky governments don't make a habit of taking people to court over statements like that. It's one thing to have an opinion, but something completely different to make an accusation such as you have. In the future I would suggest that you do some research and present some documentable facts before dining on your foot.