Really? I can think of one loyal reader you've alienated with your arrogance. I used to read everything you've written, now I read about 25%...and usually regret it.

I'm tired of your condescending lectures on the Libertarian Party as if I needed to be schooled on it. I'm tired of your thinly disguised socialism where you demand smaller government but increased spending. I'm tired of the way you feel you must put other people down to make yourself feel better. Normally I wouldn't have piled on the whole "nolo contendre", but in your case I was happy to make an exception.

Truthfully, Sean, you're the best advertisement for the GOP I can find. Honestly, you've actually singlehandedly caused me to rethink my membership in the LP. Ironically, instead of recruiting, you might actually be pushing members away.

Before you came here, I wrote many articles on the Libertarian Party. Since you've arrived, it is hardly ever a topic I broach. Why? Because, frankly, I do not want to be identified with your ideology. I honestly believe you are a stain on the Libertarian Party, and THAT is a shame.

Don't like what I just said? Tough, I'm being honest.

You don't have to be liberal, you just have to be infatuated and negatively biased to the point that your opinions come off as knee-jerk. Once you reach that point, your opinions are easily overlooked as just more anti-whatever white noise. You've reached that point with me with Republicans, and this blog is a perfect example as to why.

my readership is fine. and if it wasn't , i wouldn't care too much. sure, everyone likes to be read, but my primary motivation is more for myself than anything else. and this article goes to show just how petty and nitpicky the right wing is.


I don't mind it terribly because this always happens, and more than a year before the election is the perfect time for it to happen. By the time we vote America should be totally numb to this constant drone of political dren, and often creeped out by people who over the years have seemed to become infatuated on a demented level. Their arguments gutted, they become a non-issue.

but you are totally righteous in all your political writing? puhlllleaaaasssseeeee!!!!!BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

it's funny that you only see people who disagree with you on the war as beign "knee-jerk" which is rally laughable. we are the only one' swho have maintained a constant and consistant position that is indeed inline with conservative thought. the "knee-jerk" crowd is the one that let this president and congress get into that mistake of a war and policy in the 1st place.

and the same people (like you) are trying to somehow justify and rationalize that the anti war people were still wrong, even when they themselves realize the war was wrong is a total, transparent joke. the fear the republicans who have now come to realize that this war was a huge mistake has got ya'll tripping over your own tails trying to spin it so you can be against the war but not with any of those "anti war people."

just as dick cheney said.... "lectures, legalisms and carefully worded denials."

check back in nov 2008 and we'll see how it's goin then, ok?

unlike others on here, i don't delete articles because my view at a time turned out to be in error. i learn and grow from it.

Don't like what I just said? Tough, I'm being honest.

no, i don't like what you said. it is insulting. you've let your emotions get the better of ya pal. again, feel free to wallow in your ignorance gid.

but next time i'm being "honest" with you. i hope you remember the standards you set.

Before you came here, I wrote many articles on the Libertarian Party. Since you've arrived, it is hardly ever a topic I broach. Why? Because, frankly, I do not want to be identified with your ideology.

that's your choice sparky. but i don't have an ideology. if you had been paying attention, you would know that. but when someone accuses me of being a democrat, which is false, i simply state what my party affiliation is. a while back, i wrote a little about where i agree and disagree with the platform. and as i've shown you AGAIN on the other thread, i agree with the LP on their major issues. it's not like i put their 3 biggest issues on their site so i could point to them, lol. do i disagree with them on some things, sure, we all do. but thre is no ideology. i leave that to the nutjobs who think that a political ideology is like a religion. in the end, you say what you say because of the friends you keep on here, and you admitted that a couple of months back. your personal emotions have clouded your judgement bad, my friend. i could care less if you agree with me or not. like baker, i enjoy debating with you. but you used to bring more to the table than personal grudges against me. and it's a shame you have sacrificed that for so little in return.

but don't worry, i'll probably be leaving the LP next time i go to the DMV. i want to be able to vote in the 08 republican primary. and in my state, independents can't vote.

A Col Gene reaction. You explode, use lots of exclamation points, and just restate the other argument in reverse dragging the same crap out again. In the end, you are sitting here with this steaming little article, and you can't really deny what's up there. It's petty and lame, and exemplifies your level of discourse.

As time goes on, it'll just be worse, because you work on reflex, and the material isn't there. So, you'll either just bang on he same stuff day after day (like Col Gene), or you'll twist stuff like this into some petty statement against Republicans (like Col Gene). Like I say, I'm in no way complaining about you devaluing your little crusade, it works against you the most, I'm just deriding you for doing it.

Please, feel free to explain how this is a Republican scandal, or grab a spoon and eat your little steamer. No doubt you could spend every minute trolling the Internet for registered Republican county clerks and dog catchers that have gotten into trouble, too.

No, I say what I say because I believe it, Sean. The last straw for me was when you came out with your little "Libertarian 101" lecture for me in response to my comment directed towards you. Don't treat me like a child, Sean, I don't do that to you. Oh, and your "King of all Blogging", which is BEYOND pretentious and wholly inaccurate. Self promotion only works when you have something to promote.

The fact is, Sean, when you stick with ideas like UNIVERSAL health care, it is the very antithesis of smaller government. To say "we're going to make government smaller by making it bigger" is absurdist at its very core. You also pretty much unilaterally attack Republicans to the exclusion of Democrats; one has to look far and wide to find a good well rounded attack on the dems in your speeches. Do you not think it the slightest bit ironic that you claim to be independent of these two parties, yet you hold back for the party that holds the majority of seats in both the House and Senate?

Your rudeness and condescending nature is not something only I see, Sean. Others see it as well. But, of course, they couldn't be right, could they? It's just a witch hunt; "the man" is keeping you down (which brings me to another point: you DON'T win elections with a victim mentality, which I see pretty much prevalent in your writing).

Please, feel free to explain how this is a Republican scandal, or grab a spoon and eat your little steamer.

do you even read what i wrote above? or do you just focus on the 10% you wanna nitpick? i already said the headline was gratuitous. i was in a mood, and it really didn't have anything to do with politics. sue me.

but you are completely consistant in your pattern of ignoring most everything and nitpicking and poo-pooing the rest.

i have no crusade there pal...i just do what i do. the crusade is from the right.

As time goes on, it'll just be worse

Bahahahaha...whatever don. go back and read some of my stuff from 2004 on here. i was a lot more "liberal" then in my writing. like most people, i went a little further to one side than i normally am on the whole between 9/11 and 2004.

but compare that to the increased balance on my site, esp since the 06 election...exactly as i said would happen both before and after the election. i made no bones that my support of the democrats was for a very few select reasons, which i'm to going to get into all over again. after the election, i was putting some rough drafts on here in regards to some music writing i am doing, but you felt compelled to turn it into a political debate and got extremely rude and were ...well...just being a big ol ass. that was the only time i ever gave you a "time out" remember? you've had your own brand of creepiness around here. but i try to see past such transgressions and errors in judgement. but, since then, i keep those articles either private or offline as it's not really fun for me to get into that type of "knock down, drag out" fight about something i truly do love in a way that this political crap doesn't even compare.

you can go on with whatever ya want here sparky, but if you really look within yourself, you know that i am much more fair than 99% of the bloggers on here or anywhere. that i can "take" a rough argument as good as anyone, and can dish it out as good as anyone. and that unlike most, have no qualms about standing up for others, evn those i may not agree with. like you, like others from the right, and in this case, i guess col gene.

cmon, don,,,you can do better than just talk out yer ass here.

no, i don't . you try to pin that on me, but it's not true. i do believe that we have a reponsibility to cover every child. i have yet to see a plan that can insure everyone from the private sector. i keep challenging people to show me one, or show me things on other issues...but you just see what you want, call me a democrat or a liberal and attack.

i think helth care is a complex issue and have never endorsed any specific plan. your accusation is false sir.

which brings me to my point. which is you can't even keep your story consistant in the same comment. how can i be arrogant and "kingly" and at the same time "have a victim mentality." sorry gid, no matter how many coats you put on that primer, it's still not true. and when the same lil group of people attack me, i hardly see that as "others" but just a lil mob of cronies. big whoop.

i'm just the target of your personal emotions, which have gotten the best of you...how sad

I KNOW what I read, Sean. As did OTHERS.

Like I said, it has nothing to do with how Liberal you are, just the insane need. There are a lot of Liberal bloggers who have something valid to say. Then there are bloggers that just reiterate everything that KO said last night and do junk like this because they feel such a need to dig at Republicans that they regurgitate a seven year old story that had nothing whatsoever to do with politics.

And it isn't just the title. You reiterate the party emphasis more than once here, even implying that Mark Foley did the same thing, when he didn't. Like I say, feel free to waste your time digging for criminal Republican dog catchers in small town America, too. It amounts to as much of a "Republican" scandal, and sheds light on the growing desperation of people who are finding it harder and harder to scapegoat Republicans now that their pet flavor of crook has the majority.

I didn't say you WERE kingly, only that you professed to be so. Or are you going to deny the title of your own blog now, too?

lol, look at the pattern. I'm not obsessed, YOU are obsessed. It's not my crusade, it's the right's crusade. I'm not being petty, YOU'RE being petty.

Take argument,
deny it,
restate it verbatim toward the opposition,
mention Dick Cheney.

No, nothing like Col Gene, what was I thinking, lol.

OK, here are YOUR words on health care, Sean, from your "perfect party" article. You can find the article here (WWW Link):

Health Care...All American children are inherently covered by their citizenship. Universal coverage is the ultimate goal, but the needs of children, followed by seniors, comes 1st and foremost. Health care cannot be denied to any child by anyone licensed to practice in the US.

That's advocating for universal health care any way you slice it, Sean.

Now, let's move on to some more platform issues, shall we? All of these are viewable at the same linked article. I'm leaving off the platform issues which, though liberal, are at least not far from the LP's platform (gay marriage, etc):

Social Security....Social Security has worked and is the most successful public system ever created. Social Security will not be privatized and must be kept out of "for profit" interests. It is a public trust which must be upheld. Suggestions for improvement must have the forementioned requirements.

To not be privatized it must be government controlled. Yup, sounds like socialism to me. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, talks like a duck...

Now:

Environment /Global Warming...Is real and must be invested in to ensure our children's futures. Envormental concerns are to be considered at all times and given proper weight against other factors.

So much for private property rights. In your world, my property belongs to the state. Nice.

The first issue was the one I felt most pressing. You called me a liar for saying you advocated universal health care, yet there it is IN YOUR OWN WORDS. If you've changed your position on that, that's great. But I have not seen one single retraction of a single point expressed in this article.

If you're going to call someone a liar it's best if you erase all past traces. Especially since you have a fetish for bringing others' past comments against them in such a vindictive manner.

to refresh your memory...


Health Care...All American children are inherently covered by their citizenship. Universal coverage is the ultimate goal, but the needs of children, followed by seniors, comes 1st and foremost. Health care cannot be denied to any child by anyone licensed to practice in the US.


i also said, in another discussion....

if given the choice of having the goverment help, or having a person suffer becasuse of a political platform plank, i choose helping. no, it may not be the ideal way, but if mouths are fed, medicine is given, etc, i can support it.

and have pointed out that no one ever comes out with any decent idea that doesn't involve the govt. if they do, i am ALL EARS. when i challenged people to, they gave me nothing, just insults and false charges, like here.

what i said in another conversation, ironically, with the same 2 attackers, you and baker....

people have skewed my willingness on healthcare, esp for our children, to do certain things to ensure their health and wellbeing as an endorsement to every social program.

the libertarian party, on their platform say that they are against any social program. their reasoning is not that they are all bad, it is that , in their opinion, goverment doesn't know where to stop. their scenarios claim that eventually, everyone will expect a goverment handout.

i agree with them on many levels of that. i personally make an exception for our children amd am willing to let ss continue until someone comes up with something other than a handout to wall street.

you and baker can keep squaking, but you are wrong and are just trying to selectively nitpick my words, put words in my mouth and skew how i really feel.

in the end, i'm still a libertarian and there isn't thing 1 ya'll can do about it.

that has nothing to do wit hpersonal property rights. i did say there "given proper weight."




that's right. not "for profit" interests. later i clarified...


i don't think i would jump off the cliff on that issue. just as some think leaving iraq would create a disaster, abandoning all the federal assistance at once in my mind, would do the same. not only in the people it would instantly impact from a help standpoint, but literally 100's of thousands of jobs would be eliminated at once.

do i like giving hard earned money for someone else's benefit to the goverment? not really. but if it helps someone, that does make it better. sometimes goverment programs are a waste and help no one. sometimes, like ss, they have helped millions. i'm not so greedy or cold that i can willingly turn my back. and business has yet to provide adequate alternatives. are there other people outside the goverment who can provide certain services? maybe, but i haven't seen a model that i like.
one sidenote on ss. people focus on retirement benefits. they forget that social security provides many services that have nothing to do with retirement.

i believe we should work towards a "more perfect union" and reduce and eliminate taxes as we can. but i am not for throwing the poor out on their ass. i am not for turning my back on someone in need. perhaps someday we can create systems and people will be good and honest enough to do things instead of a goverment tax system, but today, we are nowhere near ready for that.

but in a perfect world, with no one suffering, sure, we would not need the systems or the taxes.

like i said before, i don't use libertarian philosophy to justify being a cheapskate or cold hearted bastard.