"Rudy Canoza" <pipes@thedismalscience.net> wrote in message
news:_iyph.9799$w91.980@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>T Jr Hardman wrote:
>> Rudy Canoza wrote:
>>> T Jr Hardman wrote:
>>>
>>>> Rudy Canoza wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> T Jr Hardman wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Rudy Canoza wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> T Jr Hardman wrote:
>>
>> <snips>
>>
>>>>> It's a play that usually works, for the same bad reason that
>>>>> "supersize me" works. The national motto for stupid Americans is: if
>>>>> a little bit of something is good, a lot must be great. That's
>>>>> plainly a false statement, but it most definitely *is* the American
>>>>> motto, and it explains how an intrinsically fuckwitted label like
>>>>> "radical moderate" could gain any traction. Any stupid shitbag who
>>>>> describes himself as a "radical moderate" is simply engaging in
>>>>> "supersize me" bullshit marketing. There are no *degrees* of being
>>>>> centrist; you're either a centrist, or you're not.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I don't characterize myself as a "radical moderate".
>>>
>>>
>>> Uh-huh. That's why you *twice* have posted this "radical center"
>>> bullshit link.
>>
>> A "moderate" is generally partisan to either the Democratic or Republican
>> party, and within the spectrum of that particular Party is moderate only
>> because they are not extremist.
>>
>> I'm more in the center, but as regards being in the center, I am
>> extremist rather than moderate. Understand?
>
> I've got it all along, softman. My usage of "radical moderate" is
> correct. As I said, you wrongly think there are degrees of being at the
> center, and that's just crap.
>
>
>>>>>>>> http://www.radicalcenter.org/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yeah, they show their true rightwing colors soon enough:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Most Americans are really rather conservative in
>>>>>>> their core values. They want to perpetuate their way
>>>>>>> of life. They want a strong nation with a robust
>>>>>>> economy. They want to have savings accounts that
>>>>>>> grow and pay interest. They want careers that will
>>>>>>> pay them decently for their hard work. They want
>>>>>>> good educations for their children. They want their
>>>>>>> Constitution honored by the government.
>>>
>>>
>>> You see, stupid? I already went to your corny "radical center" page.
>>
>> But I want everyone else to go.
>
> It's a waste of time.
>
>
>>>>>>> Actually, all of those apply to virtually all Americans, but the
>>>>>>> last one - constitutional governance - does *not* apply to the sort
>>>>>>> of bigoted suburban conservative these fraudsters are trying to
>>>>>>> reach.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Really? First, kindly demonstrate that conservatives are suburban,
>>>>>> that suburban conservatives are bigoted, and that conservative
>>>>>> suburban bigots are the core audience to whom we intend our appeal.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I could never demonstrate it as well as they do themselves, softman.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Please demonstrate how this is so.
>>>
>>>
>>> As I said, softman - I leave that to the practitioners of the bullshit.
>>> I only take note of it.
>>
>> In other words,
>
> In other words, softman, I'm not letting you waste my time.
>
>
>>>>>> And having demonstrated that, you'll have demonstrated that the
>>>>>> Radical Center doesn't at all have that as our target audience,
>>>>>> because we really do want our Constitution honored by the government.
>>>>>> And according to you, they don't.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> They don't. You support all kinds of right-wing shredding of the
>>>>> Constitution.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Do I? Please demonstrate that this is so.
>>>
>>>
>>> softman, please stop trying to trick me into wasting time demonstrating
>>> the obvious. I'm far too clever to fall for that trick, and you only
>>> look even more stupid for attempting it.
>>
>> In other words,
>
> In other words, softman, I'm not letting you waste my time.
>
>
>>>>>> BTW, the hardcore leftwing necessarily will find us to its right, and
>>>>>> the hardcore rightwing necessarily will find us to its left.
>>>>>
>>>>> As if that's any great endorsement for your mush.
>>>>
>>>> Oh, there's no mush involved.
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, there is.
>>
>> Please provide evidence for this alleged "mush".
>
> In other words, softman, I'm not letting you waste my time.
>
>
>>>> Can _you_ pass the Trout Test?
>>>
>>>
>>> Never heard of it. However, I know for certain how you would fare on
>>> the World's Smallest Political Quiz,
>>> http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz.html
>>
>> It claims I'm a "liberal".
>
> A statist, in other words - just what I've been saying.
>
>
>>>>> The same thing applies to how the extreme left and the extreme right
>>>>> view libertarians, and yet there is little in common between your
>>>>> "radical moderate" bullshit and authentic libertarianism.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm not in the least Libertarian.
>>>
>>>
>>> Oh, don't I know it! That's the last thing I would have labeled you,
>>> softman.
>>>
>>>
>>>> As noted elsewhere, I see Libertarians as being the political
>>>> equivalent of a pack of wolves agitating for the repeal of laws
>>>> prohibiting them from devouring sheep.
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, you would, little statist.
>>
>> Actually, I think that the State's primary goals should be to provide for
>> the common defense, and should only out of clear necessity restrain
>> liberty.
>
> The problem is the low bar at which you define "necessity".
>
>
>> "Statist" is one of the last things anyone would call me,
>
> Probably wrong.
>
>
>> unless they were a frothing Objectivist.
>>
>>
>>>>> You and your fellow goofy "radical moderates"
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I am not, nor do I claim to be, a "radical moderate".
>>>
>>>
>>> You don't use the label, but it explains your repeated reference to
>>> "radical centrist/moderate" bullshit.
>>
>> I'm not moderate in my centrism.
>
> Exactly, you idiot, softman - you're radical in it, as if you think it's a
> virtue.
>
>
>> I'm fairly extremist
>
> aka radical...
>
>
>> in my centrism, which I believe is a good thing.
>
> It isn't. "Centrist" mostly means embracing the WORST of left and right.
>
>
>>>>> are farther down in the lower right quandrant of this chart than you
>>>>> like to admit:
>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Pournelle_chart_color.gif.
>>>>> Small-ell libertarians are up in the upper left quadrant.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I might point out the simpleness and incomprehension -- or is it
>>>> disingenuousness? -- that you display by simply pointing to a Pournelle
>>>> Chart without also including a link to the text required to understand
>>>> it.
>>>>
>>>> From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pournelle_chart
>>>
>>>
>>> I did give you at least enough credit for the ability to look it up for
>>> yourself. Good dog, softman.
>>>
>>> The point is, you
>>
>> I do not. Prove that I do.
>
> In other words, softman, I'm not letting you waste my time.
>
>
>>> simplistically invoke a left-right linear model, when in fact the
>>> Pournelle chart and others correctly elaborate that there is more than
>>> just a simple line, as you
>>
>> Do I?
>
> Yes.
>
>
>>> wish (wrongly) to portray it. Any such physical depiction of the
>>> political spectrum is going to be a simplification, but theirs is better
>>> than yours.
>>
>> Mine?
>
> Yes, yours.
>
>
>>> I'm beginning to think that what you really are, softman, is a radical
>>> simpleton.
>>
>> Wow, go ahead, put words in my mouth
>
> I didn't. I never do that.
>
>
>>>> Personally, I don't think that society is perfectable, due to the
>>>> fallibility of human nature.
>>>
>>>
>>> That's fundamentally a conservative proposition. I don't dispute it, I
>>> just want you to know that this is a cornerstone of why you're a
>>> conservative, not a centrist or moderate.
>>
>> According to the Pournelle Chart,
>
> No, the chart makes no such determination. You clearly didn't get it.
>
>
>> it's not solely a conservative position, it's also a position of the
>> counter-culture, anarchists, etc.
>
> Any way you slice it, softman, you're at the irrational end of the scale.
>
>
>>>> I do believe that people should do their best to become sufficiently
>>>> informed so as to be able to make personal moral choices that enable
>>>> them to attempt to perfect themselves; and as they free their minds,
>>>> their asses will follow, and following on that will be the improvement
>>>> of the State
>>>
>>>
>>> Improper use of capitalization that, however, is useful in revealing
>>> your rather high degree of state worship.
>>
>> Now you're a fucking grammar critic?
>
> No, not exactly; not here, anyway. You just don't understand how your
> involuntary choice of which words to capitalize reveals your values.
>
>
>> It's common enough to capitalize that
>
> False.
>
>
>>>> and the reciprocal relationships between the constituents and their
>>>> governance.
>>>
>>>
>>> You're so funny. "Reciprocal" my ass. In any free society, there is
>>> *no* reciprocity - our governors are supposed to be our servants.
>>
>> "People get the government they deserve," don't you think, Rudy? There's
>> your reciprocity.
>
> That's not reciprocity.
>
>
>>>> This is, of course, a reflection of the concepts in Confucius's "Great
>>>> Learning":
>>>>
>>>> <quote>
>>>>
>>>> [wheeze]
>>>>
>>>> </quote>
>>>>
>>>> See? I told you I was Pagan.
>>>
>>>
>>> Pig-headed. Pretty bad misspelling, softman.
>>
>> But what about the Trout?
>>
>> The public has a right to know how you feel about Trout.
>
> It's delicious.
