The best thing Republicans have going for them is, the Democrats themselves

[Malintent]

Democrats, Class and Russia-gate Magic

The best thing Republicans have going for them is, the Democrats themselves, from their corrupt-to-their-reeking core leadership class down to their willfully and belligerently obtuse rank-and-file. In particular, professional and political-class liberals’ refusal even to acknowledge the grim plight of the besieged U.S. working class, and when they deign to notice their economic lessers, at all, they, as a rule, evince an aura of condescension and scorn

So the first thing any reasonable person does when someone starts to tell you something is to evaluate the reliability of that person... If a raving lunatic says that the sky is falling, you ignore them... if your spouse asks you to come to the window and look at what they say looks like the sky falling, you're going to take a look for sure at what this person you trust is saying...

So let's take a look at the author of this opinion piece...

Phil Rockstroh is a poet, lyricist and philosopher bard living, now, in Munich, Germany. He may be contacted: philrockstroh.scribe@gmail.com and at FaceBook: http://www.facebook.com/phil.rockstroh

what a silly little jingle this "bard" wove. Why is his opinion meaningful?

 

[KeepTalking]

The best thing Republicans have going for them is, the Democrats themselves

And the best thing Democrats have going for them is, the Republicans themselves. It is a mantra as old as the two party system.

Meanwhile, President Obama, while far from perfect, attempted to work with Republicans over and over again, only to be blocked by them at every turn. The only thing they did during his presidency was oppose Obama, and he still managed to get a few progressive items on his agenda enacted. He also made for a fine figurehead, who attempted to unite those who he governed, rather than divide them. And now, the Republican dolt sitting behind the big desk in the oval office has done nothing but try to roll back everything Obama accomplished, while seizing on every opportunity to divide those he is supposedly governing.

 

[sharon45]

What's important is what these actually are, and how they are planned to be implemented. I also want cheaper and better education, but I'll bet my ideas easily clash with someone else's.

Would you agree that generally dems wants a larger safety net, republicans want smaller?

I wouldn't know which either generally wants in this case. Republicans generally claim that they want smaller government, but I mainly see them exchanging funds out of one system and only add it to another.

 

[Will Wiley]

Democrats, Class and Russia-gate Magic

So the first thing any reasonable person does when someone starts to tell you something is to evaluate the reliability of that person... If a raving lunatic says that the sky is falling, you ignore them... if your spouse asks you to come to the window and look at what they say looks like the sky falling, you're going to take a look for sure at what this person you trust is saying...

So let's take a look at the author of this opinion piece...

Phil Rockstroh is a poet, lyricist and philosopher bard living, now, in Munich, Germany. He may be contacted: philrockstroh.scribe@gmail.com and at FaceBook: http://www.facebook.com/phil.rockstroh

what a silly little jingle this "bard" wove. Why is his opinion meaningful?

Surely an intelligent person deals with the subject matter rather than launching a personal attack on the author?

So no you are wrong. A reasonable person would consider what the person is saying.

In short, there is a howling, class chasm between the cultural criteria that separates affluent liberals from the struggling laboring class.

It could be that you are just out of touch with the struggles or ordinary working class people? Maybe that has some real life experience with that and you don't?

If you had some experience with ordinary working people I doubt you'd be sneering down your nose at this author.

it is difficult to work up any degree of sympathy for contemporary Democrats, enclosed as they are in their insular, bristling, psychical citadels, from where they unloose volleys of supercilious scorn upon those who remain unmoved by their partisan casuistry and are rankled by the condescension they direct at those who are not graced with their privileged status.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Surely an intelligent person deals with the subject matter rather than launching a personal attack on the author?

Not on the internet, not these days. Far better to first deal with the author, since just about any raving lunatic can post matter on any subject.

So no you are wrong. A reasonable person would consider what the person is saying.

OR, consider the person, first. IF the author is not a credible reporter, than pointing out an uncredible history of reporting is not a personal attack.
And it's perfectly reasonable to evaluate the source, first, these days.

 

[Will Wiley]

Not on the internet, not these days. Far better to first deal with the author, since just about any raving lunatic can post matter on any subject.

So no you are wrong. A reasonable person would consider what the person is saying.

OR, consider the person, first. IF the author is not a credible reporter, than pointing out an uncredible history of reporting is not a personal attack.
And it's perfectly reasonable to evaluate the source, first, these days.

Get real! Malintent made no effort to deal with any of the subject matter. Apparently you think that is quite ok. Pfft.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Surely an intelligent person

And, frankly, you could probably have tried to find some support for the guy's opinion, reasons to accept his credibility, or you could attack Malintent personally as a response to your perception that he attacked Phil personally....

I see which one you chose.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Get real!

I am.

Malintent made no effort to deal with any of the subject matter.

And explained exactly why he did so.

Apparently you think that is quite ok. Pfft.

Pfft your goddamned, self. Deal with is actual objections if you can, rather than just heap more personal attacks in response.

 

[Will Wiley]

Malintent probably doesn't like Paul Street either I'll bet. I'm sure there will be some excuse.

Show

Paul Street is an independent journalist, policy adviser, and historian. Formerly he was Vice President for Research and Planning at the Chicago Urban League. Among his recent books are Barack Obama and the Future of American Politics (Paradigm, 2008), Racial Oppression in the Global Metropolis: A Living Black Chicago History (Rowman & Littlefield, 2007), and Segregated Schools: Educational Apartheid in Post-Civil Rights America (Routledge, 2005). His many articles have appeared in the Chicago Tribune; In These Times; Dissent; Z Magazine; Black Commentator; Monthly Review, Journal of American Ethnic History; Journal of Social History, and other publications.

Presidentially Obsessed: Trump on the Brain

Con Don may be widely loathed, but so are the corporate Democrats and their noxious and demobilizing brand of elitist and neoliberal identity politics. Among other things, Russiagate has been all about helping the dismal, dollar-drenched Dems continue to avoid any meaningful confrontation with the reasons for the contempt they richly deserve from much of the nation’s working-class majority.

 

[Will Wiley]

I am.

Malintent made no effort to deal with any of the subject matter.

And explained exactly why he did so.

Apparently you think that is quite ok. Pfft.

Pfft your goddamned, self. Deal with is actual objections if you can, .

There were no objections.

 

[Keith&Co.]

I am. And explained exactly why he did so.

Apparently you think that is quite ok. Pfft.

Pfft your goddamned, self. Deal with is actual objections if you can, .

There were no objections.

So, denial is your method of dealing? Denial and personal attacks. Or are you trying to be ironic?

 

[Patooka]

It could be that you are just out of touch with the struggles or ordinary working class people? Maybe that has some real life experience with that and you don't?

If you had some experience with ordinary working people I doubt you'd be sneering down your nose at this author.

I'm curious as to what your criteria for out of touch is. It does not mean what you think it means. For example, you are going to be very hard pressed to convince anyone that this:

it is difficult to work up any degree of sympathy for contemporary Democrats, enclosed as they are in their insular, bristling, psychical citadels, from where they unloose volleys of supercilious scorn upon those who remain unmoved by their partisan casuistry and are rankled by the condescension they direct at those who are not graced with their privileged status.

sounds like someone who resonates with working class people with real life struggles. To be perfectly blunt, the author sounds like they have the vocabulary of a patronising carpet bagger who fucked a snake oil salesman. Why do I have the sneaking suspicion that you are an avid reader of Piers Akerman and Quadrant? With a little bit of Tim Blair thrown in for good measure?

 

[Malintent]

So the first thing any reasonable person does when someone starts to tell you something is to evaluate the reliability of that person... If a raving lunatic says that the sky is falling, you ignore them... if your spouse asks you to come to the window and look at what they say looks like the sky falling, you're going to take a look for sure at what this person you trust is saying...

So let's take a look at the author of this opinion piece...

Phil Rockstroh is a poet, lyricist and philosopher bard living, now, in Munich, Germany. He may be contacted: philrockstroh.scribe@gmail.com and at FaceBook: http://www.facebook.com/phil.rockstroh

what a silly little jingle this "bard" wove. Why is his opinion meaningful?

Surely an intelligent person deals with the subject matter rather than launching a personal attack on the author?

So no you are wrong. A reasonable person would consider what the person is saying.

In short, there is a howling, class chasm between the cultural criteria that separates affluent liberals from the struggling laboring class.

It could be that you are just out of touch with the struggles or ordinary working class people? Maybe that has some real life experience with that and you don't?

If you had some experience with ordinary working people I doubt you'd be sneering down your nose at this author.

it is difficult to work up any degree of sympathy for contemporary Democrats, enclosed as they are in their insular, bristling, psychical citadels, from where they unloose volleys of supercilious scorn upon those who remain unmoved by their partisan casuistry and are rankled by the condescension they direct at those who are not graced with their privileged status.

I sneer down the nose at any person claiming expertise in an area with which they haven't any. In person, you can size a stranger up in terms of initial reliability.. on the internet, you have to read about them to get where they are coming from.

This author is a "poet"... so their ability to analyze political happenings I judge to be at "poet level". I would not take the political opinions of a 'poet' any more seriously than any other non-professional opinionator.

 

[Malintent]

Not on the internet, not these days. Far better to first deal with the author, since just about any raving lunatic can post matter on any subject.

OR, consider the person, first. IF the author is not a credible reporter, than pointing out an uncredible history of reporting is not a personal attack.
And it's perfectly reasonable to evaluate the source, first, these days.

Get real! Malintent made no effort to deal with any of the subject matter. Apparently you think that is quite ok. Pfft.

Sure I did! The subject matter was this persons feelings... to which I say, "so what". What alleged facts were stated in this opinion piece that you find worthy of comment?

 

[Malintent]

By the way.. I do agree with the Thread title... The only thing Repugs have is a long history of "whatabouts". Without the Dems, the repugs wouldn't have anything to offer or say, "not that" to.

"Nuh-uh!" is not a position.... so the thread is aptly named, even if it is based on some rando's opinion for which no one has a reason to reckon.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

By the way.. I do agree with the Thread title... The only thing Repugs have is a long history of "whatabouts". Without the Dems, the repugs wouldn't have anything to offer or say, "not that" to.

"Nuh-uh!" is not a position.... so the thread is aptly named, even if it is based on some rando's opinion for which no one has a reason to reckon.

The Democrats to the Republicans is Israel to the Iranian leadership.

 

[sharon45]

It could be that you are just out of touch with the struggles or ordinary working class people? Maybe that has some real life experience with that and you don't?

If you had some experience with ordinary working people I doubt you'd be sneering down your nose at this author.

The author is sneering at ordinary working people.

 

[J842P]

The Democrats have been thoroughly corrupted by corporate money.

Hillary Clinton was totally corrupted by corporate money.

The evil today are the unaccountable corporations. They are the reason we have a third-world health insurance system and are the root cause of many many problems, besides all the environmental damage they are doing.

People need to wake up to that fact.

You're living in dream land. In the US, a politician has to have money to win. That's the bottom line. In 99% of the elections, the winner was the one who raised the most money. The democrats must have corporate money, wall street, and white collar worker contributions to win.

Yes. A southern plantation owner must have slaves to compete. You are living in a dream-land, the bottom line is, 99% of successful plantation owners have slaves. Telling people to wake up to the fact that slavery is evil is a non-starter, you must have slaves to win.

 

[Harry Bosch]

You're living in dream land. In the US, a politician has to have money to win. That's the bottom line. In 99% of the elections, the winner was the one who raised the most money. The democrats must have corporate money, wall street, and white collar worker contributions to win.

Yes. A southern plantation owner must have slaves to compete. You are living in a dream-land, the bottom line is, 99% of successful plantation owners have slaves. Telling people to wake up to the fact that slavery is evil is a non-starter, you must have slaves to win.

I have to tell you, I'm totally shocked that you'd want the democrats to unilaterally disarm. Don't take any money from the corporations. I'm sure the republicans would do the same. Even if they didn't, you don't need money to win an election right? Even if we lost the next ten elections, we'd have a lot of moral victories on our side!!

 

[sharon45]

Yes. A southern plantation owner must have slaves to compete. You are living in a dream-land, the bottom line is, 99% of successful plantation owners have slaves. Telling people to wake up to the fact that slavery is evil is a non-starter, you must have slaves to win.

I have to tell you, I'm totally shocked that you'd want the democrats to unilaterally disarm. Don't take any money from the corporations. I'm sure the republicans would do the same. Even if they didn't, you don't need money to win an election right? Even if we lost the next ten elections, we'd have a lot of moral victories on our side!!

Like a dirty habit one wants to quit, figure out how to take it one step at a time.