Fairmon, you need to do some serious research on MLK. I did not just make that stuff up about him. He was an admitted liberal activist with some very serious socialist leanings. Just like cherry-picking Christians try to mold Christ into the sort of hero/savior that suits their individual ideology, be it conservative, liberal, or libertarian, you conservatives and libertarians cherry pick from Dr. King's activism to make it appear that he embraced your ideology as well. But he was about as far removed from libertarianism or conservatism as anybody could possibly be. Practically every conservative of his day despised Dr. King, and conservatives today are even more rabidly conservative than they were back then, if that's possible. And yet, most conservatives today all speak in such reverent tones about him, as if he were one of their own. It's funny and disgusting at the same time.
As for democratic socialism, it is admittedly a rather ambiguous term but a legitimate one nonetheless. The fact that you have no knowledge of it only shows how out of touch you are. It is a term that has been in use for decades. Most Western European countries have been living under a form of democratic socialism since the end of WW2. It is a form of government in which a democratic political system co-exists with a socialist or socialist leaning economic system, with capitalism existing as well but with strict regulations in place that safeguard the people and the environment. Socialist democratic countries have the good sense to realize that neither full-blown socialism nor unbridled capitalism is the answer but rather a compromise between the two. Most conservatives in America worship unbridled capitalism and individual greed as the Holy Grail and they renounce any aspect of socialism or collectivism as evil. They are mental midgets who cannot seem to wrap their heads around the notion that certain aspects of socialism and capitalism can actually co-exist and work for the benefit of the most number of people.
The conservative stance on immigration is, more than anything else, punitive. They keep whining about how these immigrants broke the law and it's not right that they go unpunished. But their "crime" is a mere misdemeanor, not a felony. What's more, they broke the law with the full compliance of the American business community who were eager for their cheap labor and the compliance of even our politicians who were anxious to please those business leaders. And these people were fleeing from an impoverished country with virtually no chance of a better way of life. The only ones among these immigrants who truly deserve punishment or deportation are those who have committed serious crimes. As for the rest, Obama has done the right thing, and you conservative whiners with your panties all in a wad and calling for impeachment can choke on that foam coming out of your mouth.
For those of you crying about how monarchical he is and how he is showing complete disregard for the Constitution...STFU. None of you flailed your arms in anger when Reagan and Bush did the SAME DAMN THING. Nor did any Democrats whine about it when they did it. The Republicans keep yelling for Obama to sit down and hash it out with them, but they have refused to work with him from day one. Furthermore, just like with health insurance, they have NO PLANS whatsoever for an immigration bill. All they can talk about is "securing the borders" with no ideas whatsoever of what to do with the millions of immigrants. Oh wait....yes, they do have a plan: Lock them up...or deport them. Republicans have gone so batsh#t crazy it's pathetic to watch them try to pass themselves off as adults with any degree of intelligence or reason.
Fairmon, being the unabashed libertarian that your profess to be, your purported love and admiration for Dr. King is almost laughable. It only reveals your complete ignorance of who he really was and what he stood for. Dr. King would have had nothing to do with your libertarianism. He was about as close to a full-blown socialist as anyone could be.
He was always advocating for a strong central government that served the needs of the common folk and not the greed of the rich and the insatiability of the war machine. He would have nothing to do with your worship of states' rights and how you would leave it up to individual states to determine the rights of minorities. He put forth an economic and social bill of rights in which he called for a governmental responsibility to provide jobs to anyone who could not find one and end unemployment completely. And furthermore his bill of rights also included the right of every citizen to a minimum income and the right to an adequate education. He was a brazen critic of capitalism and materialism and believed that America should move towards a democratic socialism. He was also a strong advocate for family planning and believed that access to contraception and family planning programs should be funded by the government.
So how can you possibly square all those things with your libertarianism? I find it repugnant that you libertarians and conservatives alike have so grossly white-washed his image, completely ignoring how radical he was in his embrace of democratic socialism, and made a caricature of him to suit the whims of your own ideology. He would have been the first to tell you that he did not seek the praise of people like you but rather welcomed your hatred.
Timbo, I have shown my full name several times here in the past. I have even responded to your previous claims that I and other posters here hide behind a screen name. My name is Rick Armstrong. The fact that you cannot remember that I have previously revealed my name to you only shows how feeble-minded you are. And it's not as if you have so many names to remember here - there are very few who have bothered to reveal their full names. Looks like you are showing some signs of dementia. Or is that just your usual inability to think clearly, which I am already familiar with? And what's with "Rickarrooboohoo?" I have to admit, that's pretty clever.....for a 10 year-old.
"The fact stands...the girls showed poor judgement on leaving a public place and going to football players apartment. My daughter would have known better. That is the first thing she said to me when she heard about this thing. My wife agreed." - timbo
Why am I not surprised that among all of timbo's other great accomplishments, he has also raised the perfect daughter?
Why is it that guys like timbo (this seems to come mostly from conservatives) cannot resist resorting to finding some way of blaming the victims whenever rape or sexual assault takes place? Regardless of what your perfect and always rational acting daughter would have done, timbo, most teens and college-age kids (men and women alike) do not exercise good judgment when it comes to parties and drinking in bars and pairing up. No matter how drunk or stoned a woman gets and no matter if she is naïve enough to invite a guy she just met back to her dorm room or apartment, or go with him to his, once she says NO, or worse yet, she is passed out, that is where the blame rests SOLELY on the guy. So shut up already with your..."the girls showed poor judgment." Yes, they probably did. Most people agree with that. But that does not in any way excuse guys from forcing themselves on girls who are not consensual. I'm not necessarily referring specifically to what is purported to have happened with those 2 Vols football players - we don't know all the facts yet. I am just speaking in general.
Jenileeintn, timbo owns his own business and he seldom lets an opportunity go by where he can boast about it. He thinks that because he runs a business he is the ultimate Renaissance man and should be regarded by everyone as one of the most important people in the country, if not the world. He is also a chemist, or so he claims, and as a chemist he knows everything there is to know about climate change (it's all just a liberal hoax, according to him), and the actual climate scientists are know-nothings and or frauds who are all involved in a massive conspiracy, their research being tainted because either they are liberals and they place their ideology above science, or they are lying in order to keep getting government funding.
He is a fascinating character. I marvel at how such an obvious simpleton who spouts the most inane and unoriginal conservative talking points has managed to convince himself that he is such a profound thinker. It is cliched to say this but I can think of nobody for whom this saying is better suited: he truly is a legend in his own mind.
David Cook did not write about what timbo deemed to be newsworthy or weighty, therefore it is "BS." Perhaps because this article is ideologically neutral he is frustrated by not being able to pounce on Mr. Cook for his usual liberal-slanted views? Poor timbo. For this one article from Mr. Cook he is denied the chance to indulge in his usual whining about how evil and disgusting liberalism and liberals are. But buck up, buckaroo. There are other liberal leaning articles in the paper today for you to bark at and sink your salivating choppers into. Now, go get 'em, boy!
All, your ignorance is unbelievable. Unless you have children you can forget Medicaid. That means that there were millions of single people and older people with grown, non-dependent children throughout the country who could not get Medicaid and thus were uninsured. Many, if not most, of the people who signed up for Obamacare were precisely those people.
Furthermore, you honestly think that because Republicans won the mind-terms that was some sort of mandate to repeal Obamacare and dispense with the "liberal agenda?" You fool. The only reason the Repubs won is because the Democrat voters stayed home. And the reason they stayed home was because there were no Democrats who had the guts to stand up and be counted as a progressive and fight for their rights.
Go ahead and repeal Obamacare and see how fast and furious the public will rise up against you. Then you will see the true colors of the people, not just in Tennessee but throughout the country.
And the fact that those similarities are striking, Mr. Bartmess, is a bad thing? Not hardly. There is absolute truth in what Marx and Warren both said. If Marx can be faulted for anything it is being naïve enough to envision a utopia which will most likely never exist. Other than that he was a brilliant thinker and he elucidated the flaws and evils inherent in unbridled capitalism. The fact that you capitalist worshiping conservatives refuse to see those flaws only attests to your stubborn embrace of an economic system that has been proven to be a corrupting power-grab for those at the top of the chain and enslaving for everyone else.
Karl Marx was not the anti-Christ that you conservatives make him out to be. His profundity of thought was simply beyond your ability to grasp the truths he was espousing.
Timbo is a legend in his own mind. He thinks that he is a true Renaissance man, that because he owns a business he knows all there is to know about economics and running a government; he thinks that because he is a chemist he knows all there is to know about climatology and that those who actually have devoted years of study to it do not exist, or if they do exist (and they do) they don't know what they are talking about. But timbo the chemist knows.
His delusions of his own grandeur are a real hoot.
"These 'real people' you speak of might have some expertise but the motivation is either financial or philosophical. That taints any of their findings. Also, the fact that they are so sure, and there is no more debate, is an indication that their results are slanted." - timbo
I seriously doubt that you know personally any climate scientists, timbo. Oops...beg your pardon....climate scientists don't really exist, according to you - they are just a "hodge-podge." You cannot possibly know what really motivates them. You simply heard what the right-wing talking heads have been mouthing and you believe it and then parrot their mindless babblings. Funny how you have no trouble believing the "scientists" who have known ties to the polluting industries and you believe their findings to be pure and untainted, but every climate scientist is somehow involved in an elaborate liberal hoax, all for the sake of getting grant money or because of their "philosophy."
As for being "so sure," you and the other deniers are expressing every bit as much cock-sure certainty about your beliefs as those on the opposing side. But you're too busy being impressed with yourself to see that.