doublegunshop.com - home Forums Is this where we're headed ?

Once again, Comrade King, you miss my point.

This quote from the article illustrates a fundamental misconception. It shows that while identification with the "Tea Party" is down, identification with the founding principles of the Tea Party are at a record level. The name has been somewhat successfully, and of course sociopathically and religiously demonized by statist bigots, but the philosophy has not. I thought I clearly made that point, but in your case I was too subtle.



This quote of yours is illustrative of why you're such a hoot, as obviously the sociopathically bigoted labeling of the Tea Party is a classic example of statist religious demonization, performed by essentially pathological liars. I see that they were exempt from your points about being a "bad fit" or "counterproductive". Obviously to you, members of your religion are merely "Righteous and Good", and speaking "Absolute Truth"..



As far as NRO, and the Conservative ideologues in general, human nature and vanity are involved. To those who consider themselves the "Leaders" of Conservatism, especially those ensconced in D.C., the Tea Party is obviously a potential source of rivals, even though ideology is essentially the same.

Can't admit YOUR are wrong??? Sure I can Gil. I misspelled asterisk in my haste and won't even blame it on a typo... as my gift to you... since that's all you've got.

You sure as hell haven't been able to show us that King was being factual and truthful when he posted all of those lies and bullshit on pg 4 of this thread, (and which I responded to on pg. 5) to support his contention that his brand of Liberalism is thriving and growing. You, or rocky mtn bill, or your pal King also haven't commented about why labeling was OK for him and other Leftists when they denigrated and lied about the TEA Party.



I guess I'm just not one of those "Righteous and Good" people like you Gil, who can just ignore King's endless repeated pathological lies, and try to make lame excuses for them.

So you just cling to that misspelled asterisk like a security blanket crybaby.

When I saw the "Can't admit YOUR are wrong", and some of your other mistakes and typos, I didn't think it was much to worry about compared to your other idiocy and sleazy low-life pride about selling a mercury contaminated house. I'm glad you can joke about that too, and that you can act like you have such high moral standards.

http://georgia.gov/agencies/georgia-department-natural-resources-environmental-protection-division

Why don't you give these folks a call and joke about it? 404-657-5947

keith, if you are so convinced of your high-minded, overblown, self-righteous stance you call the number. If you are convinced that it is indeed a health hazard, you make a full report. You know my name and where I live. I won't be hard to find. Once you do that, then we'll really know who you are. This sounds right up your alley. The Wizard of Ooze. Make all the trouble you think you can stir-up and I will handle it the rest of the way. If you think it will be only "one-call, that's all", you dial the number. It will be a fun game we will play. I need a new hobby. You still want the three-headed dog?

The quote was solidly Republican NRO's, not mine, Ken.

Your last paragraph is dandy labelling: conservatives are human, fight among themselves but think the same!

Comrade King, you miss my point.

You appear to think that labeling has negative connotations. Valid labeling does not, if it's true. Subjective religious demonization that distorts someone's beliefs is what's negative. Me referring to you as a sociopathic, religious statist is a good example. You have demonstrated that philosophy throughout your posts. Demonizing the Tea Party and Conservatives using the sociopathic statist religious lexicon as "Racists, Sexists, Bigots, Homophobes,etc," simply because they refuse to be "Willing Victims" of your sociopathic religious beliefs is "labeling" them according to the subjective morality and falsehoods of your sociopathic, faith-based beliefs. It falls into the category of pathological lying.

Statist Republicans also demonize, the fact that they're attacking other Republicans is nothing new. Democrats do the same to other Democrats as well..

I have no idea if your story is true or not, but I'm a hundred percent positive it is a story of a health hazard. Sad part about it, a craftsman in the trade had mentioned that it was a material that was critical for recreating a historical finish. Can't get the material any more, or at least not in any reasonable way.

What's the answer, make jokes about birth defects resulting from careless handling. Let me get this correct, highlighting the hypocrisy of pc by using a joke like 'libtard' is worse. Nice job with taking that ole high road.

Ken, labelling is good and bad. My earlier quoted reference was to labelling often as a bad fit. I believe no one can be neatly and accurately labelled, certainly not within such broad categories as left and right, conservative and liberal. We're a mixture, amalgams of all in varying proportions, decency dominant. I'd welcome members to my home with whom I've agreed and parried for years, as I do in my community. Otherwise, hell would be an improvement.

Comrade King,

What you say is true, in a very subjective and general sense. People constantly label others, as well as self-label themselves. That's why intellectual analysis and objectivity are so important. Use of pejoratives, according to faith-based beliefs is the labeling of religious demonization. This is the "bad fit" you're referring to. Analysis provides the understanding of the philosophy behind the labeling, to differentiate accuracy from sociopathic religious demonization. "Decency dominant" is subjective, as what is "decent" to a religious statist includes the sociopathic infliction on others both against their will, and at the expense of their individual freedom and equality. There is nothing "decent" about the confiscation of freedom and then awarding it to other's in order to buy their votes. At least not within the Constitutional context of individual freedom and equality. So, the real issue is understanding the philosophical context of a given belief. Is the belief, and consequential actions, based on a philosophy of unconstitutional, sociopathic infliction, or a philosophy of individual freedom and equality?

The answer is obvious, and is the reason why statism requires the massive indoctrination of sociopathic faith-based beliefs, in order to suspend the intellectually objective concept that people are "free and equal" citizens.

The line between religious freedom and religious oppression is when religion becomes sociopathically inflictive upon others against their will. Celebrating Christmas is the free expression of religious beliefs. Forcing an atheist to celebrate Christmas, or an atheist attempting to prevent other's from celebrating it are clearly sociopathically inflictive.

The intellectual part of it may be seen as important by some, but it can never be consider if subjective feelings are accepted as truth. Good, bad, left, right, varying proportions and decency? All I know is bbq at King's place should probably involve tons of vino.

You've always been clear that taxation shouldn't deliver to places where you don't want it to go even if voted as the majority will of the people in their legislatures. Democratic governance cannot accommodate individual wants of free and equal citizens.

Your and our founding fathers made systems in which political parties proselytized, manipulated and bought the electorate to favour their interests. The result overall is two of the most blessed countries in the world. Decent: "respectable, passable, good enough, tolerable, not immodest or indelicate"---OED.