View Full Version : And now the fun starts
Mainecoons
10-25-2013, 11:38 AM
Remember "Read my lips. . .?"
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/senator-proposes-law-if-you-your-health-plan-you-can-keep-it-act_764734.html#
“One of the most important promises made by President Obama and Democrat congressional leadership to promote the Affordable Care Act was that Americans who were satisfied with their health plans could keep them. That promise has been broken. More than a million Americans have been notified that the plans they like with the coverage they have chosen have been canceled. Millions more Americans will have the plans of their choice canceled in months to come,” says Senator Johnson in a statement.
:rofl:
You're right. I won't vote for Obama next time around. Too bad Congressional Reps are even further down the toilet in the public's estimation.
Kabuki Joe
10-25-2013, 11:50 AM
You're right. I won't vote for Obama next time around. Too bad Congressional Reps are even further down the toilet in the public's estimation.
...LOL...but you will vote for the next Obama...
Mainecoons
10-25-2013, 11:58 AM
Or worse.
jillian
10-25-2013, 12:02 PM
Or worse.
as long as it isn't one of your nutbars, i figute it's ok.
and since you don't know anything about how our laws are passed, let me explain. no one cares what some winger senator proposes. it won't get past the senate.
and if it did... it would be veto'd by the president.
see how that works?
but pleeeeeeeeeeease... keep whining and ranting and tilting at the windmill called the ACA....
you actually have to win elections to change it. but the wingers don't care about winning national elections.
Matty
10-25-2013, 12:55 PM
as long as it isn't one of your nutbars, i figute it's ok.
and since you don't know anything about how our laws are passed, let me explain. no one cares what some winger senator proposes. it won't get past the senate.
and if it did... it would be veto'd by the president.
see how that works?
but pleeeeeeeeeeease... keep whining and ranting and tilting at the windmill called the ACA....
you actually have to win elections to change it. but the wingers don't care about winning national elections.
ha ha, it can be changed by everyone just not signing up for it. That's what's gonna happen, you just wait for it. The only people who will sign on are the leeches. figuring to get something for nothing.
Chris
10-25-2013, 12:59 PM
as long as it isn't one of your nutbars, i figute it's ok.
and since you don't know anything about how our laws are passed, let me explain. no one cares what some winger senator proposes. it won't get past the senate.
and if it did... it would be veto'd by the president.
see how that works?
but pleeeeeeeeeeease... keep whining and ranting and tilting at the windmill called the ACA....
you actually have to win elections to change it. but the wingers don't care about winning national elections.
You squeezed all that out of an "Or worse"!?!? Wind up a winger like you, you don't stop.
as long as it isn't one of your nutbars, i figute it's ok.
That's the attitude, vote for lesser of two evils, that always gets us worse. Bush bad, Obama more of the same, and the next even more.
Chris
10-25-2013, 01:00 PM
Remember "Read my lips. . .?"
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/senator-proposes-law-if-you-your-health-plan-you-can-keep-it-act_764734.html#
:rofl:[/FONT][/COLOR]
Seems the partisans want to sweep this broken promise under the rug.
Codename Section
10-25-2013, 01:02 PM
Seems the partisans want to sweep this broken promise under the rug.
It's what partisans do. Look at libhater this morning with his: what liberties did Bush do away with? I was all, lolwut ninja?
jillian
10-25-2013, 01:03 PM
It's what partisans do. Look at libhater this morning with his: what liberties did Bush do away with? I was all, lolwut ninja?
i'd love to know who on the board isn't "partisan".
the one you're responding to is one of the worst... mostly because he's dishonest about it. go figure.
Mister D
10-25-2013, 01:08 PM
i'd love to know who on the board isn't "partisan".
the one you're responding to is one of the worst... mostly because he's dishonest about it. go figure.
I'm not. None of the self-decribed libertarians are either. If you believe otherwise, cite some partisan comments.
Mister D
10-25-2013, 01:09 PM
Seems the partisans want to sweep this broken promise under the rug.
I do find that very discouraging.
Chris
10-25-2013, 01:10 PM
It's what partisans do. Look at libhater this morning with his: what liberties did Bush do away with? I was all, lolwut ninja?
Exactly, that was a tough one to believe. Bush was just i a long line of Presidents did that, Obama just the next in line.
Chris
10-25-2013, 01:12 PM
i'd love to know who on the board isn't "partisan".
the one you're responding to is one of the worst... mostly because he's dishonest about it. go figure.
Lying again, jillian, and trying to project it on others. Tsk tsk. I understand that you as a partisan see the whole universe that way. But there are other dimensions besides your flat world.
Green Arrow
10-25-2013, 01:14 PM
i'd love to know who on the board isn't "partisan".
the one you're responding to is one of the worst... mostly because he's dishonest about it. go figure.
I'm not. Codename isn't. Alyosha isn't. That's three.
Chris
10-25-2013, 01:14 PM
I do find that very discouraging.
It's discouraging partisans are unwilling to discuss any of this.
Mister D
10-25-2013, 01:17 PM
It's discouraging partisans are unwilling to discuss any of this.
Or at least say nothing. Don't jump to the guy's defense. This is from a woman who is always worried about imaginary theocrats humiliating women. The slavish devotion displayed here is, quite frankly, humiliating.
Mainecoons
10-25-2013, 01:18 PM
as long as it isn't one of your nutbars, i figute it's ok.
and since you don't know anything about how our laws are passed, let me explain. no one cares what some winger senator proposes. it won't get past the senate.
and if it did... it would be veto'd by the president.
see how that works?
but pleeeeeeeeeeease... keep whining and ranting and tilting at the windmill called the ACA....
you actually have to win elections to change it. but the wingers don't care about winning national elections.
I have no idea what you are ranting about.
Agravan has you pegged, you really are a far left loon and a very unpleasant one at that.
Codename Section
10-25-2013, 01:26 PM
i'd love to know who on the board isn't "partisan".
the one you're responding to is one of the worst... mostly because he's dishonest about it. go figure.
I am no supporter of any "party"--which puts the "part" in "partisan". ;)
I want everyone to be able to do their own funky thang provided they don't hurt anybody else.
Codename Section
10-25-2013, 01:27 PM
I'm not. Codename isn't. Alyosha isn't. That's three.
That could change if Hemsworth started a political party. She's shallow like that.
Green Arrow
10-25-2013, 01:31 PM
That could change if Hemsworth started a political party. She's shallow like that.
Well, Chris Hemsworth is awesome. I'd join his party too :tongue:
Mainecoons
10-25-2013, 01:35 PM
Me neither. I voted for Clinton, I voted for Bush first time, didn't vote second time, voted Libertarian in 2008 and 2012. I am a libertarian conservative.
The joke here, and the point of this thread is that this idiot in the White House has really stuck his foot in it with his pronouncements about how people can keep their insurance, can keep their doctors, will pay less, yada yada yada. It was all BS and lies. Just like that liberal fool Bush senior and his "no new taxes" crap. We got to throw him out of office, unfortunately we can't do the same with the Thug In Chief.
That's the point.
Green Arrow
10-25-2013, 01:38 PM
Me neither. I voted for Clinton, I voted for Bush first time, didn't vote second time, voted Libertarian in 2008 and 2012. I am a libertarian conservative.
The joke here, and the point of this thread is that this idiot in the White House has really stuck his foot in it with his pronouncements about how people can keep their insurance, can keep their doctors, will pay less, yada yada yada. It was all BS and lies. Just like that liberal fool Bush senior and his "no new taxes" crap. We got to throw him out of office, unfortunately we can't do the same with the Thug In Chief.
That's the point.
Right, he's a liar who is only serving his own self-interest and that of his fellow ruling elite.
In other words, same old same old.
Codename Section
10-25-2013, 01:40 PM
I dunno. The left's gotten real weird lately. They used to be half-way sane, but now it feels very extreme. It's probably what it felt like to them under Reagan. When you have a cult of personality figurehead and you're one of the ones not in the cult, it's scary.
nathanbforrest45
10-25-2013, 01:41 PM
The thing to change is actually Congress. Of course we need a more Conservative leader in the White House but as long as we continue to elect left wing Congressmen or "Moderates" who give in to left wing Congressmen it won't matter who is at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
In all truthfulness the American people are tired of being free. They yearn for the whip and the yoke. They must since they continue to elect those who are in the whip and yoke business.
Green Arrow
10-25-2013, 01:42 PM
I dunno. The left's gotten real weird lately. They used to be half-way sane, but now it feels very extreme. It's probably what it felt like to them under Reagan. When you have a cult of personality figurehead and you're one of the ones not in the cult, it's scary.
I see it from both sides, personally. During the primaries, 70-75% of the GOP hated Romney and didn't want him. Then he won the nomination, and suddenly Malibu Ken is the reincarnation of Ronald Reagan. The rhetoric surrounding him was creepy as shit, not unlike the rhetoric surrounding Obama.
This is what partisanship has given us. It's getting worse, and scarier.
Chris
10-25-2013, 01:43 PM
I am no supporter of any "party"--which puts the "part" in "partisan". ;)
I want everyone to be able to do their own funky thang provided they don't hurt anybody else.
Ditto. But I'd also like even partisans to discuss issues and not just repeat party-san lines.
Chris
10-25-2013, 01:47 PM
I see it from both sides, personally. During the primaries, 70-75% of the GOP hated Romney and didn't want him. Then he won the nomination, and suddenly Malibu Ken is the reincarnation of Ronald Reagan. The rhetoric surrounding him was creepy as shit, not unlike the rhetoric surrounding Obama.
This is what partisanship has given us. It's getting worse, and scarier.
It is from both sides, but there's a difference between partisan, Dem or Rep, and principles, left or right. There are a lot of good people here left and right, and libertarian/volunteryist, who do discuss and disagree without always be disagreeable. There are those who are not enamoured of the cult of personality codename mentioned.
Mister D
10-25-2013, 01:49 PM
It is from both sides, but there's a difference between partisan, Dem or Rep, and principles, left or right. There are a lot of good people here left and right, and libertarian/volunteryist, who do discuss and disagree without always be disagreeable. There are those who are not enamoured of the cult of personality codename mentioned.
Particularly when there isn't much of a personality there.
Alyosha
10-25-2013, 01:56 PM
That could change if Hemsworth started a political party. She's shallow like that.
I'd go Keynesian for him.
http://content.hollywire.com/sites/default/files/thor-chris-hemsworth-into-darkness.jpg
BB-35
10-25-2013, 01:59 PM
as long as it isn't one of your nutbars, i figute it's ok.
and since you don't know anything about how our laws are passed, let me explain. no one cares what some winger senator proposes. it won't get past the senate.
and if it did... it would be veto'd by the president.
see how that works?
but pleeeeeeeeeeease... keep whining and ranting and tilting at the windmill called the ACA....
you actually have to win elections to change it. but the wingers don't care about winning national elections.
Hey,as long as it's a victory,albeit a pyrrhic one,it's all good,Hmm?
I'm not. Codename isn't. Alyosha isn't. That's three.None of you are a strong supporter of your cause? Color me surprised.
Green Arrow
10-25-2013, 04:22 PM
None of you are a strong supporter of your cause? Color me surprised.
That is a strawman. You're changing the topic now. Jillian said that there are no non-partisans. I said that the three of us are non-partisan. That doesn't mean we aren't supporters of our cause. It means we have no loyalty to any U.S. political party.
Chris
10-25-2013, 04:23 PM
None of you are a strong supporter of your cause? Color me surprised.
Partisans have a funny way of redefining everything as partisan. Partisanship is supporting party above principle. Support for a cause isn't partisanship.
patrickt
10-25-2013, 04:23 PM
For some amazing reason the liberals don't want to address the lie mentioned in the OP. Instead, it's simply toy poodle attack dogs on cue. How pitiful. But, if you like your healthcare, you won't lose it. No one is going to take it away from you.
That's funny. And Jillian and Ravi have their fingers in their ears going lalalalalalalala.
That is a strawman. You're changing the topic now. Jillian said that there are no non-partisans. I said that the three of us are non-partisan. That doesn't mean we aren't supporters of our cause. It means we have no loyalty to any U.S. political party.No strawman. Look up the definition of partisan.
Green Arrow
10-25-2013, 04:34 PM
No strawman. Look up the definition of partisan.
an adherent or supporter of a person, group, party, or cause, especially a person who shows a biased, emotional allegiance.
In context, we're referring to the "adherent or supporter of a party."
Chris
10-25-2013, 04:37 PM
an adherent or supporter of a person, group, party, or cause, especially a person who shows a biased, emotional allegiance.
In context, we're referring to the "adherent or supporter of a party."
And it is emotional rather than rational. If it were rational, it could be discussed.
an adherent or supporter of a person, group, party, or cause, especially a person who shows a biased, emotional allegiance.
In context, we're referring to the "adherent or supporter of a party."
That context was not given. Words have meanings. Own it.
Green Arrow
10-25-2013, 04:40 PM
That context was not given.
Because it was clear.
Words have meanings.
Yes, they do.
Own it.
Own what, exactly?
Chris
10-25-2013, 04:53 PM
That context was not given. Words have meanings. Own it.
On a political forum, context is assumed to be politics, and in that context people argue on two levels, one is partisan, Rep v Dem v whatever party, and it's generally all about winning and spinning your party as perfect and other parties as defective--all win-lose. On the other level, that of principles, people can discuss their views, for example, as a free market capitalist I've always enjoyed discussing economics with Gorilla and even polly and now green arrow about socialism, or Alyosha and Freeze about commutarianism; as a somewhat conservative, I enjoy arguing with liberals like Who and Adelaide, it's always an exchange, win-win. As Goldwater put it, to disagree you don't need to be disagreeable.
Matty
10-25-2013, 04:55 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/10/25/rush-on-medicaid-could-spell-trouble-for-obamacares-health/
See what I mean?
Mainecoons
10-25-2013, 05:00 PM
OK, let's look up the definition of partisan:
par·ti·san
ˈpärtəzən
noun
1.
a strong supporter of a party, cause, or person.
synonyms:
supporter (https://www.google.com/search?espv=210&es_sm=93&q=define+supporter&sa=X&ei=feZqUqeZG4n32wWLrIGIDw&ved=0CC4Q_SowAA), follower (https://www.google.com/search?espv=210&es_sm=93&q=define+follower&sa=X&ei=feZqUqeZG4n32wWLrIGIDw&ved=0CC8Q_SowAA), adherent (https://www.google.com/search?espv=210&es_sm=93&q=define+adherent&sa=X&ei=feZqUqeZG4n32wWLrIGIDw&ved=0CDAQ_SowAA), devotee (https://www.google.com/search?espv=210&es_sm=93&q=define+devotee&sa=X&ei=feZqUqeZG4n32wWLrIGIDw&ved=0CDEQ_SowAA), champion (https://www.google.com/search?espv=210&es_sm=93&q=define+champion&sa=X&ei=feZqUqeZG4n32wWLrIGIDw&ved=0CDIQ_SowAA); [/URL] (https://www.google.com/search?espv=210&es_sm=93&q=define+fanatic&sa=X&ei=feZqUqeZG4n32wWLrIGIDw&ved=0CDQQ_SowAA) (https://www.google.com/search?espv=210&es_sm=93&q=define+enthusiast&sa=X&ei=feZqUqeZG4n32wWLrIGIDw&ved=0CDYQ_SowAA)[URL="https://www.google.com/search?espv=210&es_sm=93&q=define+booster&sa=X&ei=feZqUqeZG4n32wWLrIGIDw&ved=0CDkQ_SowAA"] (https://www.google.com/search?espv=210&es_sm=93&q=define+zealot&sa=X&ei=feZqUqeZG4n32wWLrIGIDw&ved=0CDgQ_SowAA)
2.
a member of an armed group formed to fight secretly against an occupying force, in particular one operating in enemy-occupied Yugoslavia, Italy, and parts of eastern Europe in World War II.
synonyms:
guerrilla (https://www.google.com/search?espv=210&es_sm=93&q=define+guerrilla&sa=X&ei=feZqUqeZG4n32wWLrIGIDw&ved=0CDoQ_SowAA), freedom fighter (https://www.google.com/search?espv=210&es_sm=93&q=define+freedom+fighter&sa=X&ei=feZqUqeZG4n32wWLrIGIDw&ved=0CDsQ_SowAA), resistance fighter, underground fighter,irregular (soldier)
As used pretty consistently in this group, it refers to the first definition and particularly to how you show up here, Ravi, along with Cigar, Nic, and Jillian. You are all devotees of the Democratic Party and the Thug In Chief.
That is a great deal different than supporting ideals and voting for those whom you have sufficient agreement with to justify voting for them.
I've been a swing participant and voter my entire life. My first political campaign was getting a neighbor of mine, a lifelong Democrat, elected to the County Council in Montgomery County, MD. Later, I gave a lot of financial support to another Democrat neighbor in their unsuccessful run for the same office.
When I moved to New Mexico, it was clear that the party of corruption and endless incumbency was the Democrats. In fact, they ruled New Mexico longer than the PRI ruled Mexico, how about that? So I did a lot of Republican politics, ended up being sent by the party to both the Texas and National Republican campaign schools, and then co-chaired the campaign that unseated the longest running speaker of a state house in the country, one Raymond Sanchez. Subsequent to that election I co-managed the campaign that unseated his counterpart in the State Senate.
I would say that the Bush clan was the straw that broke my Republican back and started me on the path of Libertarianism. Gary Johnson, whom I knew personally and did some speech writing for, hastened that transition. There is one guy who lacks the charisma but not the knowledge to be a brilliant leader.
I just turned 69 years old. Over my lifetime I have watch government grow like a cancer, become totally fiscally irresponsible and in large part, incompetent and brutish. The government we have today in America is far larger than it should or needs to be, spends so much of the national wealth that it is drying up, and fails at pretty much most of what it blunders into. The only political movement that makes sense to me now is ROLLBACK and the only people who advocate that are the libertarians and the Tea Party.
I really am sorry what my generation and the slightly younger boomers have done to America. We let this cancer grow, hell we helped it grow. We've looted the future of the young people. They really should take control and repudiate our illegitimate debts.
Because it was clear.
Yes, they do.
Own what, exactly?
It may have been clear to you, but that is a faulty inference on your part.
On a political forum, context is assumed to be politics, and in that context people argue on two levels, one is partisan, Rep v Dem v whatever party, and it's generally all about winning and spinning your party as perfect and other parties as defective--all win-lose. On the other level, that of principles, people can discuss their views, for example, as a free market capitalist I've always enjoyed discussing economics with Gorilla and even polly and now green arrow about socialism, or Alyosha and Freeze about commutarianism; as a somewhat conservative, I enjoy arguing with liberals like Who and Adelaide, it's always an exchange, win-win. As Goldwater put it, to disagree you don't need to be disagreeable.I didn't get past your first sentence. You are a prime example of a partisan.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/10/25/rush-on-medicaid-could-spell-trouble-for-obamacares-health/
See what I mean?
Rush is on medicaid? I'm not surprised.
OK, let's look up the definition of partisan:
par·ti·san
ˈpärtəzən
noun
1.
a strong supporter of a party, cause, or person.
synonyms:
supporter (https://www.google.com/search?espv=210&es_sm=93&q=define+supporter&sa=X&ei=feZqUqeZG4n32wWLrIGIDw&ved=0CC4Q_SowAA), follower (https://www.google.com/search?espv=210&es_sm=93&q=define+follower&sa=X&ei=feZqUqeZG4n32wWLrIGIDw&ved=0CC8Q_SowAA), adherent (https://www.google.com/search?espv=210&es_sm=93&q=define+adherent&sa=X&ei=feZqUqeZG4n32wWLrIGIDw&ved=0CDAQ_SowAA), devotee (https://www.google.com/search?espv=210&es_sm=93&q=define+devotee&sa=X&ei=feZqUqeZG4n32wWLrIGIDw&ved=0CDEQ_SowAA), champion (https://www.google.com/search?espv=210&es_sm=93&q=define+champion&sa=X&ei=feZqUqeZG4n32wWLrIGIDw&ved=0CDIQ_SowAA);
2.
a member of an armed group formed to fight secretly against an occupying force, in particular one operating in enemy-occupied Yugoslavia, Italy, and parts of eastern Europe in World War II.
synonyms:
guerrilla (https://www.google.com/search?espv=210&es_sm=93&q=define+guerrilla&sa=X&ei=feZqUqeZG4n32wWLrIGIDw&ved=0CDoQ_SowAA), freedom fighter (https://www.google.com/search?espv=210&es_sm=93&q=define+freedom+fighter&sa=X&ei=feZqUqeZG4n32wWLrIGIDw&ved=0CDsQ_SowAA), resistance fighter, underground fighter,irregular (soldier)
As used pretty consistently in this group, it refers to the first definition and particularly to how you show up here, Ravi, along with Cigar, Nic, and Jillian. You are all devotees of the Democratic Party and the Thug In Chief.
That is a great deal different than supporting ideals and voting for those whom you have sufficient agreement with to justify voting for them.
I've been a swing participant and voter my entire life. My first political campaign was getting a neighbor of mine, a lifelong Democrat, elected to the County Council in Montgomery County, MD. Later, I gave a lot of financial support to another Democrat neighbor in their unsuccessful run for the same office.
When I moved to New Mexico, it was clear that the party of corruption and endless incumbency was the Democrats. In fact, they ruled New Mexico longer than the PRI ruled Mexico, how about that? So I did a lot of Republican politics, ended up being sent by the party to both the Texas and National Republican campaign schools, and then co-chaired the campaign that unseated the longest running speaker of a state house in the country, one Raymond Sanchez. Subsequent to that election I co-managed the campaign that unseated his counterpart in the State Senate.
I would say that the Bush clan was the straw that broke my Republican back and started me on the path of Libertarianism. Gary Johnson, whom I knew personally and did some speech writing for, hastened that transition. There is one guy who lacks the charisma but not the knowledge to be a brilliant leader.
I just turned 69 years old. Over my lifetime I have watch government grow like a cancer, become totally fiscally irresponsible and in large part, incompetent and brutish. The government we have today in America is far larger than it should or needs to be, spends so much of the national wealth that it is drying up, and fails at pretty much most of what it blunders into. The only political movement that makes sense to me now is ROLLBACK and the only people who advocate that are the libertarians and the Tea Party.
I really am sorry what my generation and the slightly younger boomers have done to America. We let this cancer grow, hell we helped it grow. We've looted the future of the young people. They really should take control and repudiate our illegitimate debts.
Do you vote in Mexican elections? Just curious.
Chris
10-25-2013, 05:14 PM
I didn't get past your first sentence. You are a prime example of a partisan.
Because you're a partisan. Not my problem, partisan.
Chris
10-25-2013, 05:15 PM
Rush is on medicaid? I'm not surprised.
You can't even read willow's headline correctly: From "Rush on Medicaid could spell trouble for ObamaCare’s health" you get 'Rush is on medicaid? I'm not surprised." Partisan, I'm not surprised.
:rofl:
Green Arrow
10-25-2013, 05:43 PM
It may have been clear to you, but that is a faulty inference on your part.
So far, you're the only person here to have a problem with my meaning. Even jillian and nic have had no problem telling exactly what I mean when I say "partisan."
Agravan
10-25-2013, 05:46 PM
So far, you're the only person here to have a problem with my meaning. Even jillian and nic have had no problem telling exactly what I mean when I say "partisan."
That's because jillian and nic, are smarter than ravi can ever hope to be. Smarter, but hopelessly misguided.
zelmo1234
10-25-2013, 05:54 PM
as long as it isn't one of your nutbars, i figute it's ok.
and since you don't know anything about how our laws are passed, let me explain. no one cares what some winger senator proposes. it won't get past the senate.
and if it did... it would be veto'd by the president.
see how that works?
but pleeeeeeeeeeease... keep whining and ranting and tilting at the windmill called the ACA....
you actually have to win elections to change it. but the wingers don't care about winning national elections.
You not real up on the situation either. but here is a little skit from my youth that should help you out!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyeJ55o3El0
Green Arrow
10-25-2013, 05:55 PM
That's because jillian and nic, are smarter than ravi can ever hope to be. Smarter, but hopelessly misguided.
I disagree. I don't think Ravi is stupid, she seems very intelligent, and cunning. She's dishonest, however, and yes, misguided. Dishonest and misguided are not the same as lacking intelligence, though.
zelmo1234
10-25-2013, 05:59 PM
I dunno. The left's gotten real weird lately. They used to be half-way sane, but now it feels very extreme. It's probably what it felt like to them under Reagan. When you have a cult of personality figurehead and you're one of the ones not in the cult, it's scary.
How old were you when Reagan was in office?
Chris
10-25-2013, 06:20 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partisan_(political)
In politics, a partisan is a committed member of a political party. In multi-party systems, the term is widely understood to carry a negative connotation - referring to those who wholly support their party's policies and are perhaps even reluctant to acknowledge correctness on the part of their political opponents in almost any situation. Partisanship can be affected by many factors including current events, figureheads (presidents), decisions, and even location.
For example, in Commonwealth realms, the monarch is seen as being distinctly non-partisan and thus is vested with certain powers to form or dissolve governments when there is a democratic impasse. This is in contrast to professional politicians who are expected to push for their party's interests.
In the United States, the meaning of the term has changed dramatically over the last 40 years. Before the American National Election Study (described in Angus Campbell, et al., in The American Voter) began in 1952, an individual's partisan tendencies were typically determined from their voting behavior. Since then, "partisan" has come to refer to an individual with a psychological identification with one or the other of the major parties.
AmazonTania
10-25-2013, 06:23 PM
People are obviously confusing partisanship with bias...
Green Arrow
10-25-2013, 06:35 PM
People are obviously confusing partisanship with bias...
Partisanship is inherently biased.
AmazonTania
10-25-2013, 06:44 PM
Partisanship is inherently biased.
Mostly, but not in the case of people who are not partisan. Bias is when a person is prejudice for or against a particular cause or person, while partisanship only results in prejudice in favor of a particular cause or person. Bias can be in reference to more than one instance, while partisanship only flows in one particular fashion. Some people are not partisan, but they just can't stand a particular side of a spectrum. That is referred to as bias, and is confused for partisanship.
Chris
10-25-2013, 06:45 PM
If we include "cause" as meaning then I'm partisan for liberty.
Green Arrow
10-25-2013, 06:57 PM
Mostly, but not in the case of people who are not partisan. Bias is when a person is prejudice for or against a particular cause or person, while partisanship only results in prejudice in favor of a particular cause or person. Bias can be in reference to more than one instance, while partisanship only flows in one particular fashion. Some people are not partisan, but they just can't stand a particular side of a spectrum. That is referred to as bias, and is confused for partisanship.
Put that way, I agree.
Mainecoons
10-25-2013, 09:30 PM
Do you vote in Mexican elections? Just curious.
No, I'm not a Mexican citizen. I live there part time. I vote in Texas elections.
Mainecoons
10-25-2013, 09:32 PM
If we include "cause" as meaning then I'm partisan for liberty.
Yep, exactly. And that "bias" is to be found in libertarianism these days. It sure as hell isn't to be found in either of the major political parties.
Chris
10-25-2013, 10:01 PM
Yep, exactly. And that "bias" is to be found in libertarianism these days. It sure as hell isn't to be found in either of the major political parties.
And I'm biased against statism.
The problem is explaining to partisans who exist in a flat one-dimensional world of party politics that there are entire whole other dimensions.
junie
10-25-2013, 10:16 PM
So far, you're the only person here to have a problem with my meaning. Even jillian and nic have had no problem telling exactly what I mean when I say "partisan."
the reference point though, is what jillian meant by 'partisan'...
i'd love to know who on the board isn't "partisan". ...
Green Arrow
10-25-2013, 10:19 PM
the reference point though, is what jillian meant by 'partisan'...
I'm assuming she meant the same thing, as that's about the only meaning of "partisan" in common usage.
So far, you're the only person here to have a problem with my meaning. Even jillian and nic have had no problem telling exactly what I mean when I say "partisan."
None of that means you aren't partisan.
Chris
10-26-2013, 08:11 AM
None of that means you aren't partisan.
Define partisan as you seem to have a special meaning for the word.
Codename Section
10-26-2013, 08:16 AM
None of that means you aren't partisan.
partisanism1. favoritism shown to members of one’s own party, faction, sect, or cause.
2. strong adherence to the tenets of one’s party, faction, sect, or cause. — partisan, n., adj.
See also: Favoritism (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Favoritism)an action or spirit of partiality for a specific political party. Also partisanship. — partisan, n., adj.
What political party is Green Arrow a part of? He's a socialist and anti-statist that likes Rand Paul and Justin Amash, both statists, neither socialists. He's good friends with anarcho-capitalists.
Can you explain what makes him partisan by any definition?
Codename Section
10-26-2013, 08:18 AM
How old were you when Reagan was in office?
I was born in 1985.
Agravan
10-26-2013, 08:20 AM
partisanism1. favoritism shown to members of one’s own party, faction, sect, or cause.
2. strong adherence to the tenets of one’s party, faction, sect, or cause. — partisan, n., adj.
See also: Favoritism (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Favoritism)an action or spirit of partiality for a specific political party. Also partisanship. — partisan, n., adj.
What political party is @Green Arrow (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=868) a part of? He's a socialist and anti-statist that likes Rand Paul and Justin Amash, both statists, neither socialists. He's good friends with anarcho-capitalists.
Can you explain what makes him partisan by any definition?
The left gives the same definition to "partisan" as they do "extremist", "winger", etc,.
that definition is basically this: "if you do not agree with my leftwingnutjob ideas, then you are a partisan". Oh, and only those on the right can be partisan, those on the left are always "independent thinkers".
Codename Section
10-26-2013, 08:26 AM
The left gives the same definition to "partisan" as they do "extremist", "winger", etc,.
that definition is basically this: "if you do not agree with my leftwingnutjob ideas, then you are a partisan". Oh, and only those on the right can be partisan, those on the left are always "independent thinkers".
I'm done with Ravi. She adds nothing to any conversation. Her sole purpose is to just irritate people.
partisanism1. favoritism shown to members of one’s own party, faction, sect, or cause.
2. strong adherence to the tenets of one’s party, faction, sect, or cause. — partisan, n., adj.
See also: Favoritism (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Favoritism)an action or spirit of partiality for a specific political party. Also partisanship. — partisan, n., adj.
What political party is @Green Arrow (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=868) a part of? He's a socialist and anti-statist that likes Rand Paul and Justin Amash, both statists, neither socialists. He's good friends with anarcho-capitalists.
Can you explain what makes him partisan by any definition?
Why does everyone avoid the word "cause" in the definition?
Chris
10-26-2013, 08:37 AM
Why does everyone avoid the word "cause" in the definition?
Because this is a political forum, ravi, and politically the meaning is more limited. Again:
"In politics, a partisan is a committed member of a political party. In multi-party systems, the term is widely understood to carry a negative connotation - referring to those who wholly support their party's policies and are perhaps even reluctant to acknowledge correctness on the part of their political opponents in almost any situation. ...In the United States, the meaning of the term has changed dramatically over the last 40 years. Before the American National Election Study (described in Angus Campbell, et al., in The American Voter) began in 1952, an individual's partisan tendencies were typically determined from their voting behavior. Since then, "partisan" has come to refer to an individual with a psychological identification with one or the other of the major parties."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partisan_(political)
And again, if you want to include cause, then yes, my cause is liberty.
Mister D
10-26-2013, 08:39 AM
It's called context.
Alyosha
10-26-2013, 09:03 AM
Why does everyone avoid the word "cause" in the definition?
Why do you never make a statement with links and only ask snide questions? Just cause.
But to his statement, how is Green Arrow partisan? He has a "cause" and yet is willing to back people he thinks are good people even though they are contrary to his cause.
http://24.media.tumblr.com/87a441429ce0cb8f1f9e4c97cf779541/tumblr_mkv16zGYMI1rmam31o1_400.gif
Alyosha
10-26-2013, 09:05 AM
I'm done with Ravi. She adds nothing to any conversation. Her sole purpose is to just irritate people.
Good idea. She can irritate the hell out of people and I've let her vex me. I'm too gorgeous for that.
http://worldofwonder.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/tumblr_mp0xm4an2o1spey9uo1_500.gif
Green Arrow
10-26-2013, 09:30 AM
Why does everyone avoid the word "cause" in the definition?
Codename said that I was not partisan in any definition of the word. That includes cause, and he's correct. I have, in the past, supported people contrary to my "cause."
Alyosha
10-26-2013, 09:33 AM
Codename said that I was not partisan in any definition of the word. That includes cause, and he's correct. I have, in the past, supported people contrary to my "cause."
Why you triflin' with her?
http://media.tumblr.com/7ea88969979b1d5f43c551d52da1e0db/tumblr_inline_mqzw90lU7T1r3dc3a.gif
Green Arrow
10-26-2013, 09:38 AM
Why you triflin' with her?
http://media.tumblr.com/7ea88969979b1d5f43c551d52da1e0db/tumblr_inline_mqzw90lU7T1r3dc3a.gif
Because I'm bored :tongue:
Alyosha
10-26-2013, 09:42 AM
Because I'm bored :tongue:
Remember how Jujubee and Raven were my old favorite queens. I'm in love with Willam now after watching all his makeup tutorials.
If you're bored check this out. HILARIOUS.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mr51afj7eJY
If we could ONLY make Code do drag for Halloween we could be DWV.
Matty
10-26-2013, 09:43 AM
circle jerking!
Chris
10-26-2013, 09:49 AM
circle jerking!
That would be a suitable definition of partisanship. It is somewhat self-congratulatory.
Codename Section
10-26-2013, 10:06 AM
If we could ONLY make Code do drag for Halloween we could be DWV.
No.
Green Arrow
10-26-2013, 10:07 AM
Remember how Jujubee and Raven were my old favorite queens. I'm in love with Willam now after watching all his makeup tutorials.
If you're bored check this out. HILARIOUS.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mr51afj7eJY
If we could ONLY make Code do drag for Halloween we could be DWV.
If we could, I call Vicky :tongue:
Codename Section
10-26-2013, 10:09 AM
I would never be able to look at myself in the mirror again.
Mainecoons
10-26-2013, 11:04 AM
And the ObamaNews just keeps coming!
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/362263/500000-californians-lose-health-policies-wesley-j-smith
Five hundred K Californians are losing their health policies.
Matty
10-26-2013, 12:07 PM
And the ObamaNews just keeps coming!
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/362263/500000-californians-lose-health-policies-wesley-j-smith
Five hundred K Californians are losing their health policies.
This is going to be a cluster fuck of gargantuan proportions and NOT ONE REPUBLICAN voted for it. The demon craps own it lock stock and barrel.
Green Arrow
10-26-2013, 12:29 PM
This is going to be a cluster fuck of gargantuan proportions and NOT ONE REPUBLICAN voted for it. The demon craps own it lock stock and barrel.
That may work for you partisans, but those of us who are unaffiliated recognize that Republicans pushed and supported Obamacare-lite right up until 2009, just before the Democrats tried for it. Republicans even got it passed in a state by their last Presidential nominee.
So, yes, Democrats own Obamacare..but the individual mandate? Well, both of you own that fucker.
Matty
10-26-2013, 01:17 PM
That may work for you partisans, but those of us who are unaffiliated recognize that Republicans pushed and supported Obamacare-lite right up until 2009, just before the Democrats tried for it. Republicans even got it passed in a state by their last Presidential nominee.
So, yes, Democrats own Obamacare..but the individual mandate? Well, both of you own that fucker.
not a single solitary Republican in the House or the Senate voted for obamacare. That's a fact Jack! The democrats own it lock stock barrel.
Green Arrow
10-26-2013, 01:22 PM
not a single solitary Republican in the House or the Senate voted for obamacare. That's a fact Jack! The democrats own it lock stock barrel.
Does repeating it make you feel better about supporting a party of corrupt assholes against a party of corrupt assholes? I said Democrats own Obamacare. But your guys share partial blame for the existence of the individual mandate in the first place. We would have had Obamacare with or without Obama.
zelmo1234
10-26-2013, 01:37 PM
I was born in 1985.
That explains it. Imagine if the next president could make people believe in American Exceptionalism Again And then created 21 million jobs?
And won the cold war on the side line!
Because this is a political forum, ravi, and politically the meaning is more limited. Again:
"In politics, a partisan is a committed member of a political party. In multi-party systems, the term is widely understood to carry a negative connotation - referring to those who wholly support their party's policies and are perhaps even reluctant to acknowledge correctness on the part of their political opponents in almost any situation. ...In the United States, the meaning of the term has changed dramatically over the last 40 years. Before the American National Election Study (described in Angus Campbell, et al., in The American Voter) began in 1952, an individual's partisan tendencies were typically determined from their voting behavior. Since then, "partisan" has come to refer to an individual with a psychological identification with one or the other of the major parties."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partisan_(political)
And again, if you want to include cause, then yes, my cause is liberty.
Wikipedia is only a good source when it has information that is sourced. Your link is totally unsourced. For all we know, you wrote it yourself.
Codename said that I was not partisan in any definition of the word. That includes cause, and he's correct. I have, in the past, supported people contrary to my "cause."
That is interesting. I thought you had recently posted that you wouldn't vote for someone in particular for x reason. But I admit someone else could have posted that.
Regardless, the definition of partisan you posted is the definition of partisan. One need not belong to a political party or support a political party to be partisan. Everyone is partisan to some extent. Being unable to admit to it is what makes partisanship a bad thing. And there quite a few people on this forum that can't admit to being partisan. I am not one of them.
circle jerking!
Damn, I just had skimmed past the insults and then went back and read them. No reason for me to be in this thread as I see no one actually wanted a discussion. Back to yard work.
Matty
10-26-2013, 02:20 PM
Damn, I just had skimmed past the insults and then went back and read them. No reason for me to be in this thread as I see no one actually wanted a discussion. Back to yard work.
there's some good football on too.
Chris
10-26-2013, 02:30 PM
That may work for you partisans, but those of us who are unaffiliated recognize that Republicans pushed and supported Obamacare-lite right up until 2009, just before the Democrats tried for it. Republicans even got it passed in a state by their last Presidential nominee.
So, yes, Democrats own Obamacare..but the individual mandate? Well, both of you own that fucker.
From what I understand RomneyCare is not doing that well. I certainly wouldn't want it.
Chris
10-26-2013, 02:35 PM
Wikipedia is only a good source when it has information that is sourced. Your link is totally unsourced. For all we know, you wrote it yourself.
And your dictionary definitions are sourced? By your illogic then they are not valid either.
Already post you want to include cause I am "partisan" to the cause of liberty.
Green Arrow
10-26-2013, 02:40 PM
That is interesting. I thought you had recently posted that you wouldn't vote for someone in particular for x reason. But I admit someone else could have posted that.
No, I said I wouldn't vote for Democrats until they came out as a party against using terms like "terrorist" to describe their political opposition. That's not really a cause, though, and even if it was, I haven't heard hardly any Democrat politicians actually use it, so I'll just settle for sending Democrats vying for my vote letters asking how they feel about it.
Regardless, the definition of partisan you posted is the definition of partisan. One need not belong to a political party or support a political party to be partisan. Everyone is partisan to some extent. Being unable to admit to it is what makes partisanship a bad thing. And there quite a few people on this forum that can't admit to being partisan. I am not one of them.
I used to be a partisan. Not so much anymore. When I found transcendentalism and moral relativism, it kinda killed the whole partisan thing for me. If you can show me you have strong character and honesty, I'll vote for ya or help you achieve your goals. Don't care if you're Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, Green, Socialist, Communist, etc.
Green Arrow
10-26-2013, 02:40 PM
From what I understand RomneyCare is not doing that well. I certainly wouldn't want it.
Nor would I.
there's some good football on too.
Are you a Gator, Seminole, or Hurricane fan? Or some ungodly team from one of those stupider states?
GrassrootsConservative
10-26-2013, 04:48 PM
Are you a Gator, Seminole, or Hurricane fan? Or some ungodly team from one of those stupider states?
Don't forget the Dolphins. They're absolutely atrocious.
Alyosha
10-26-2013, 05:05 PM
Wikipedia is only a good source when it has information that is sourced. Your link is totally unsourced. For all we know, you wrote it yourself.
http://26.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m04kd6q2v51qgb5p1o1_500.gif
AmazonTania
10-26-2013, 05:07 PM
Wikipedia is only a good source when it has information that is sourced. Your link is totally unsourced. For all we know, you wrote it yourself.
Obviously someone doesn't understand the purpose of citations...
And last time I checked, when you look into a dictionary, there are no sources.
Why is that?
Don't forget the Dolphins. They're absolutely atrocious.
Yes. My cross to bear in life.
Obviously someone doesn't understand the purpose of citations...
And last time I checked, when you look into a dictionary, there are no sources.
Why is that?I dunno, sweetheart. Why don't you tell us what the OED says?
AmazonTania
10-26-2013, 06:12 PM
I dunno, sweetheart. Why don't you tell us what the OED says?
You do realise that it's been found that Wikipedia has just as many errors per article as the Oxford Dictionary, right?
And yet, here you are. Dismissing a wikipedia article simply because it contains a definition you don't like.
How does that work?
Codename Section
10-26-2013, 06:21 PM
That is interesting. I thought you had recently posted that you wouldn't vote for someone in particular for x reason. But I admit someone else could have posted that.
Regardless, the definition of partisan you posted is the definition of partisan. One need not belong to a political party or support a political party to be partisan. Everyone is partisan to some extent. Being unable to admit to it is what makes partisanship a bad thing. And there quite a few people on this forum that can't admit to being partisan. I am not one of them.
http://weknowmemes.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/can-you-die-from-constipation.jpg
Matty
10-26-2013, 06:32 PM
Are you a Gator, Seminole, or Hurricane fan? Or some ungodly team from one of those stupider states?
Today I'm a FSU, ALABAMA and MISSOURI>
I don't know what the hell will happen on NOV. 30 FSU VS Gators. FSU has a mighty fine freshman quarterback so I'll probably go with FSU.
Matty
10-26-2013, 06:33 PM
Don't forget the Dolphins. They're absolutely atrocious.
We're talking college football, not NFL. FSU is awesome 7-0
Green Arrow
10-26-2013, 06:33 PM
Don't forget the Dolphins. They're absolutely atrocious.
Tannehill's been kick ass for fantasy points though. Troof.
You do realise that it's been found that Wikipedia has just as many errors per article as the Oxford Dictionary, right?
And yet, here you are. Dismissing a wikipedia article simply because it contains a definition you don't like.
How does that work?
I see you are afraid to post the OED definition.
Alyosha
10-27-2013, 09:46 AM
I see you are afraid to post the OED definition.
http://25.media.tumblr.com/bc3efa522b4cc1bd8d0305140ed8dca6/tumblr_miwux1fjy81s5ntsto1_500.gif
If I were her I would wait to post it until after you post that link that shows where most pedophiles are Republicans. I know I won't answer a single one of your questions until you do.
By the way, where is that link again?
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.8 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.