hey glynch, didnt you say in your previous post "there doesn't seem to be any further use for me to try to engage you further on this point"? so what are you doing now? and what exactly am i not "self-aware" about glynch? and what "name calling" - i just referred to you as your other handle, glynch. i guess if someone was calling me "glynch" i would be pretty offended too though, so im sorry if that hurt your feelings. i said i wasnt a republican and you said "I haven't been posting here long enough to refute this".
I don't care how you label me politically just don't put beans in my Chili and call it Chili! And for Ohioans don't put it on spaghetti and call it Chili!
Jo mama: I too tire of the same boring argument about moderate libertarianism and it's complete lack of tangible policy positions. My picking on you was simply because I a) enjoy it and b) it allowed me to bring up the 'beans in chili' battle which is still funny as hell no matter which side of "legume-gate" you fall on.
He seems to have gotten it into his head that I am glynch because I unfortunately interjected myself into their ongoing bickering. I asked him some tangentially related substantive questions related to his position that party labels are meaningless and he flew off the deep-end. I foolishly followed him through his descent this time, but I hope that I will learn from this mistake. To bring the discussion back to the actual thread topic, Where Have All the Log Cabin Republicans Gone. The author says that the big split and disaffection with the Republican party label is the current social issues stance of the base. This seems to be a widely adopted explanation by many people for where have all the Republicans gone. I would say it drives more young people toward the Libertarian affiliation, while the stance simply embarrasses most moderate Republicans.
i think so. when false started posting glynch disappeared. and its interesting how someone who hasnt even been here a year and barely has over 100 posts knows all about basso and references specific things i said to glynch in previous threads. if its not glynch he certainly has been following him closely. and someone who only had 100 posts in almost a year is now all of a sudden all over this thread (while glynch has disappeared) coming to glynchs defense and criticizing me. things that make you go hmm... and its worth noting again that i had no interest in posting in this thread until i was dragged into it. as someone who is not a republican and is not supporting romney i have absolutely nothing to add here.
ive discussed my policy positions w/ you over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again and your response is always to tell me that im ignoring things and that my responses are not valid. my question to you is why you dont challenge those who refer to themselves as "moderate republicans" or "moderate democrats" the same way you do when i say im a "moderate libertarian"?
again, i never said "party labels are meaningless". stop misquoting me glynch! i said glynch's (your) labels are meaningless. it is you who flew off the deep-end when you irrationally came to glynchs (your) defense here. why are you getting so defensive on behalf of glynch? why do you know so much about our back and forths to the point that you can reference specific things i said in previous threads?
I am not. Is it true that you have support the systematic murder and cannibalization of little girls? What is this Foxnews where you have to deny each dumb accusation?
Calm down. I was just wondering. Nobody is conducting an inquisition here. Wipe the sweat from your brow, let out a deep breath and drink a glass of water. The interrogation is over and you are free to go.
lol that's not even remotely true. Our conversations are usually rather productive, although that has fallen off some as of late because (I think) we're both tired of repeating ourselves. That's a good, fair question. I don't think I ever (intentionally) belittled the moderate libertarian political position - I simply questioned how it would work, and I've yet to see a good answer: I apologize for the chili-induced thread derail.
Phew! This is just further ammo to use in criticizing the injustices of the police state. And while I do feel rather relieved at this point, I'm still troubled. Your silence seems to indicate that you support the systematic murder and cannibalization of little girls. Please confirm or deny, or torture me and drive me into further paranoia with your acquiescence through silence.
I can neither confirm nor deny my position on this issue you have raised. I will only assert that I believe whatever you do you should do with the highest level of proficiency.
