He's on Neal Cavuto's show. I disagree with what he's saying, obviously, and he's made some real bone-headed remarks thus far ("How would I fix Social Security? I would fix the economy"), but that's a real stand-up thing to do. I'm impressed with him for going on Fox given that he's getting the kind of treatment conservatives get from, say, Dan Rather. Voluntarily taking on challenging questions like that and appearing before a naturally hostile audience is ballsy, no question. And he did make some good, factual remarks. The Bush Administration's spending is absurd. Now, if I thought I could count on Kerry to show any kind of fiscal restraint, he might have a shot at my vote...
Think Clinton...as soon as the republicans took over the house getting even minor spending bills through congress became a hassle. Here's to hoping history repeats itself.
No kidding. Talk about a lose-lose situation. I didn't see the interview but I wouldn't be surprised if the first question posed to him was, "OK you lying weasel liberal tax-and-spend flip-flopping French-looking married-a-rich-white-girl Senator from the state that likes gays to marry; thanks for appearing on FOX." "Uh..."
Do you know that the word "modicum" means "a small amount"? I love it when people try to work their new words into conversation. I'm guessing you tried to say that he has a lot of cojones.
Don't worry: it's just bigtexxx heaping more shame on the alumni of Rice University. (What I mean is that rmtex clearly knew the essential meaning of "modicum." He was using a colloquial "cajones" as most of us do, meaning "more than your usual amount of courage," as opposed to literally "testicles." Hence, rmtex was saying that even detractors must admit that Kerry has "at least a little more than an average helping of courage." And that has been demonstrated by his military honors, and it's consistent with his appearing on Faux News. In turn, both are consitent with him being antagonistic in his campaign and occasionally saying not-so-political things.)
Dude, I am totally the one in front. Sam's tapir costume, pathetic as it is, appears on the far right. I ain't hunting conservatives. Hardly. I was hunting you being picky about "modicum," however. Man oh man, would I ever vote for a fiscal conservative right about now.
BK, thanks for posting. You have no idea how much that means to me! I really wish we could get more conservatives back on the board. I have my own theory as to why most've them have left, but I don't want to get into that right now. That being said, I'd gladly welcome all of them back and wish we could all make a committment to discussing the issues without personal attacks. On the topic, I'm not sure what this proves other than BrianKagy admitting that FoxNews isn't Fair and Balanced!
The reason us conservatives are so few on the board is because we can't punch you in the face to end arguments.
Actually, most conservatives I've seen argue on this board have lost consistently in terms of proving the practicality, rationality, and common sense of their cause. So, maybe what you mean to say is "The reason us conservatives are so few on the board is because we can't punch you in the face once we've been PWNED."
Nope. Thought it meant "reasonable amount" rather than "small amount". I stand corrected. Thanks. By the way, I love it when people who don't know a thing about me try to interpret the meaning behind what I post. BigTexx, it must be slow in the office today.
I would like to hear this theory. I know for me personally, it boiled down to several things: 1) I use my real name on this site. The last thing I need is a poster with a grudge to try to interfere in my professional life by claiming I'm a "racist" or any of the other favorite ad hominem terms liberals use for conservatives. It's unlikely but enough of a possibility that I decided to curtail political posting. 2) Everything changed after 9/11. I have zero patience for partisanship any more. It seems like most people, as it pertains to politics, treat their political party of choice as a favorite sports team, to the point of rooting against America if success would benefit the opposing party. I know most of you would deny it, but I simply think that's how most partisans behave. Neither side has a monopoly on this behavior, of course. I'm not one of those people that likes to loudly proclaim membership in a third party-- I am still a Republican-- but I do not subscribe to much of the party's platform (the GOP is too conservative on much of its social policy, and as the policy is driven by religion, it's a serious turn-off for me. I'm not religious and I'm not even sure I believe in God, so I don't want anyone telling me how God thinks I should vote). What 9/11 helped me to realize is that almost all liberals and Democrats are good, hard-working American citizens with the same goals in life that I have: a good job, financial security, a family, long life. We're all in this together. If you want to shut out half of the population and deride them based on their party affiliation, that's your prerogative, but I am no longer interested in that kind of attitude. We're all in this together. This country has serious problems that need to be addressed and little to no progress is being made, regardless of which party has control of the Executive or Legislative branches. Which brings me to my next point: 3) I'm sick of liars, and I'm sick of political speech (redundant, I know). Even when one side is right on an issue, the other side will unfailingly attack, because to agree would be to cede the issue and thus lose political face. What a crock of ****. You know, we're pouring millions of dollars into Social Security and it's the dumbest goddamned government program ever concocted. That needs to be fixed. But any honest attempt to address the issue is quickly attacked as "cutting Social Security". The same thing applies to the tax code, and minority performance in public schools. We need to start honestly addressing these issues and we need to make some progress towards solving them, and I have zero faith that either side of the aisle is either capable or even interested in doing so. Both parties are interested in staying in power, and to stay in power they need pet issues to drive their consituents to the polls. 4) The culture on this forum made it absolutely no fun to participate as a conservative. I made a tongue-in-cheek reference once to the "cadre of backslapping BBS liberals", but there was some truth in that statement. How often do you see conservatives jump in and say "Great post, I agree, ha ha"...? Not saying it never happens, but it's considerably more rare than similar behavior by liberal posters. I got tired of having to engage in five-on-one "debates", which most of the time degenerated into rolleyes and snide insults back and forth any way. 5) I don't like the way I act in political debate. I feel very passionately about my political beliefs and that inevitably led to overreaction and conduct unbecoming someone in a position of authority here. I didn't think it was appropriate for an admin to get into poo flinging with posters and I just didn't seem to have the ability to avoid it. I look at it like this: when I was actively involved in D&D prior to the forum splits, I was constantly at odds with posters with whom I should have been friendly. RocketManTex makes a great example. I've posted some things to him that I would have banned other people for saying. We were at each other's throats constantly. That's just no fun. Take politics out of the equation, and I think he and I get along pretty well now. I certainly enjoy reading his posts. Fox's news coverage is no further to the right than CNN's is to the left. However, its commentary and news discussion shows are uniformly slanted to the conservative point of view-- case in point, Neal Cavuto asking John Kerry what he'd done with the tax cut the President had given him. Now, that's a pretty snide question, and Kerry blew him off beautifully ("I don't remember off the top of my head, but I definitely didn't deserve it"). Cavuto was considerably more gentle with the Bush Administration official that followed Kerry. However, that is no more antagonistic than Keith Olberman on whatever network he's working for this week, or Aaron Brown on CNN, would be to a conservative guest.
