Mark, you do have a problem with facts - and questions.

Quote:

Quote:
The answer to your second question: I don't depend totally on ANY source for my information in total.

That wasn't my question and you know it. What is the most "liberal" source you visit or listen to for another view on the topics of the day? Surely, you have the talking points of someone who visits contemporary information sites. What is the most liberal information site you employ for your view of the day to day? Hegel didn't know Obama but you do. So you must visit some "news" sites or shows and magazines. What is the most "liberal" in your estimation? It's a fairly simple question, Mark.

This is like asking for your priorities in audio gear, if you can't name three off the top of your head or you have to dance around the question, it's pretty likely you've never given the issue much thought.

Please, Mark, answer that one question. What's your most liberal source of news and opinion? This shouldn't be all that difficult if you actually are openminded about all this.

Quote:
But from the length of your posts I'm beginning to believe you think you have all the answers that those illiterate founders who crafted the Constitution and Bill of Rights didn't have

Here's the problem I see with people who do not have facts on their side, they think all the answers to any issue can be reduced down to one or two, black and white sentences. Sprinkle it with a bit of "Founding Fathers", "Liberty", "this Great Nation we love" and "Freedom" and someone who doesn't want to think can find all sorts of people and ideas to hate in those few words.

You have many statements which are quite literally wrong. You have presented nothing in the way of "alternative facts" which would disprove my statements. To you repeating the same incorrect thing several times over is meant to be sufficient proof of its veracity. You have not taken the time to do the research to realize you are being misled. I'm guessing you still do not have a clear concept of how a logical fallacy might work or how to recognize when the pundits are providing them in rapid succession. However, the more you buy into their fallacious propoganda, the farther away from the truth you get.

"Truth is the mortal enemy of the lie."

But you have no truth, Mark, only the lies and misconceptions you prefer to accept as believable because they easily prey on your innate fears and prejudices. When you place a dozen of those misconceptions in a post, it takes a while to make a reasoned attempt at presenting the facts. Very much like the problems we face after eight years of W backed for six years by total control of the Legislative Branch of Government. These things do not get turned around in a short, black and white sound bite. Listen to the candidates as they try to explain exactly what they would do to improve this Nation. Most often they have nothing which will amount to a hill of horseshit let alone solve one problem. For how many years have politicians beeen running away from Washington? If you believe any of this year's crop have better answers than the previous crop, then please go here; http://forum.stereophile.com/forum/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=97200&an=0&page=0#Post97200

If realizing more than one of your statements is patently false is wearing to you, Mark, the prescription would be to do your own reserach and to stop buying into what the pundits are spouting. If that is too taxing on you, then maybe this "political stuff" is not the line of argument you should pursue.

Quote:
O.K. Jan,
If you don't think Hegel can be applicable to the current political spectrum, then how do you explain away George Santayana then?

"Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it." - George Santayana

Quote:
Either way, Mark, if you only cling to the past and not to facts, you'll end up being duped. Looks like you're well on your way.

So, according to that statement, Nothing can be learned from the past to avoid future mistakes.

I'll can make this one short and to the point, show me where I said nothing can be learned from the past. Answer which is the most liberal source you use in the present and we can move forward.

Quote:
I hope you enjoy your democrat party and the panacea it promises, especially come this November

Now, look, Mark, don't get pissed at me because you do not have facts or truth on your side. I'm doing my best to straighten this all out but you do not seem very receptive to the truth and you don't seem to have any idea where or how to find facts. I'm steering the lifeboat but you're barely treading water.

And, isn't this how we eneded another thread? You stomping off in a huff because I wouldn't accept your version of the truth and you refused to accept facts?

Quote:
When you place a dozen of those misconceptions in a post, it takes a while to make a reasoned attempt at presenting the facts.

During the Health Care Reform debate Al Franken brought all this to a useful point. Paraphrasing he said, "The Republicans' bumper sticker says, "NO!". Our bumpersticker reads, "By substantial reforms to the health care industry we will; first, reduce cost across the board, furthermore the benefits of such ... continued on the next bumpersticker."

I don't come here to make enemies, Mark. Friends.

Now, between friends, what's your liberal source?

Robert Gibbs? You mean the sound bites of Gibbs they play on Fox?