Beware the ploys of the left
- Thread starter CDNBear
- Start date
That it is not part of scientific discussion. If you wish to discuss other threads, please go to those threads and refrain from dragging them here.
Ironically, on that other thread, it was you who mentioned postings from other threads.
Not very convenient for you now, is it?
Not very convenient for you now, is it?
Oh right, He may have said things you or someone else don't agree with, boo hoo, it was a freedom we used to have, that of free speech.
Sure we have the freedom of speech, bobnoorduyn. Mr. Worthington can say what he wants. But I also have the freedom not to believe anything he says. Somebody doesn’t have to be charged and convicted for him to be the extremists, bigot of the worst kind. There may be a Nazi who is not convicted of any crime. That doesn’t mean I will accept what he says (what a great guy Hitler was, how Jews deserved to be gassed in Germany etc.) as the Gospel truth.
Just as we have freedom of expression, we also have freedom to believe anybody we want (as is evident from the fact that some people here hang on to every word by the likes of Worthington, accept his every word as the Gospel truth).
Just as Worthington has the right to resort to gay bashing, right to rat on his friends, I have the right not to believe anything he says.
Even bad press is good for scribblers, and besides, lawsuits cost money.
Not that kind of bad press. As for money I assume Worthington probably has millions of followers, the guy must be loaded (he is Canada’s Rush Limbaugh). Whatever the lawsuit costs, it probably is peanuts to him. Also if he is sure of wining, surely he stands to collect millions of dollars in damages form Wikipedia. To me, the fact that he didn’t sue is the surest evidence that Wikipedia was accurate.
Now that's a bit of a stretch, "ratting on friends" is not a criminal act nor is threatening to "out gays", regardless of any perceived third party threat,
What has the criminality got to do with anything? He ahs the right to say anything he wants, but I also have the right not to believe him.
Sure we have the freedom of speech, bobnoorduyn. Mr. Worthington can say what he wants. But I also have the freedom not to believe anything he says. Somebody doesn’t have to be charged and convicted for him to be the extremists, bigot of the worst kind. There may be a Nazi who is not convicted of any crime. That doesn’t mean I will accept what he says (what a great guy Hitler was, how Jews deserved to be gassed in Germany etc.) as the Gospel truth.
Just as we have freedom of expression, we also have freedom to believe anybody we want (as is evident from the fact that some people here hang on to every word by the likes of Worthington, accept his every word as the Gospel truth).
Just as Worthington has the right to resort to gay bashing, right to rat on his friends, I have the right not to believe anything he says.
Even bad press is good for scribblers, and besides, lawsuits cost money.
Not that kind of bad press. As for money I assume Worthington probably has millions of followers, the guy must be loaded (he is Canada’s Rush Limbaugh). Whatever the lawsuit costs, it probably is peanuts to him. Also if he is sure of wining, surely he stands to collect millions of dollars in damages form Wikipedia. To me, the fact that he didn’t sue is the surest evidence that Wikipedia was accurate.
Now that's a bit of a stretch, "ratting on friends" is not a criminal act nor is threatening to "out gays", regardless of any perceived third party threat,
What has the criminality got to do with anything? He ahs the right to say anything he wants, but I also have the right not to believe him.
Gopher, is that what my poodle (I assume you are referring to my poodle, Cannuck) called me? Well, he has been a busy little thing, hasn’t he?
Isn't it amazing how Joey recognizes himself in a couple of words? (even when the letters aren't the same)
"(Occasional failures of capitalism)" What failures? Capitalism was designed to function exactly as it does and exactly as it has with the exact known ramifications to the species and culture. On occasion it ****s up an entire century. In the last four decades it has driven the standard of living in the West down to 1972 levels. It's spent all our resources destroying real humane social and industrial networks and poisoning the cultures circumglobally with AmCrap. And now we hang on the very lip of the abyss capitalists and socialist alike.Try very hard to guess which ism is going over the edge for ever.
There will be a very nice day soon when such dangerous and and obviously ignorant pronouncements will be met with the popular contempt fascist thought deserves. What's the difference between a capitalist and a Nazi? There isn't any.
The Path to Human Development: Capitalism or Socialism?
By Prof. Michael A. Lebowitz
Global Research, April 13, 2009
Monthly Review
If we believe in people, if we believe that the goal of a human society must be that of “ensuring overall human development,” our choice is clear: socialism or barbarism.
These concluding lines from “The Path to Human Development” appear on the back cover of one Venezuelan edition—a pocket-sized edition much like the widely circulated “Socialism Does Not Drop from the Sky” (chapter 5 of Build It Now). The other edition, together with an extended edition of that latter essay (including my “New Wings for Socialism” from the April 2006 Monthly Review), is being published as The Logic of Capital versus the Logic of Human Development for the communal council libraries in Venezuela.
Both editions depart from the traditional format for books (and Monthly Review) because of the numbering of sections and paragraphs. There is a reason for this. While the analysis of capitalism and the presentation of a socialist alternative are there for individual readers (for whom the numbers are unnecessary), collective readers are the real target for this work. In other words, “The Path” has been prepared to support educational and political discussions in Venezuela (in, for example, trade unions, communal councils, and socialist formations). Numbering sections and paragraphs facilitates this kind of discussion. In short, this work is not at all intended as an end product to be consumed by an individual passive reader; rather, its purpose is to be a means to encourage collective struggle against capitalism and for socialism. As the line which precedes those quoted above indicates, “we know we have to be prepared to fight.”
Obviously, it is not only in Venezuela that we have to be prepared to fight for a society which permits the full development of human beings. As an example of the important work it does, Monthly Review’s policy of placing its articles online will make it possible for organizations to make whatever use of “The Path” they think may help the struggle. I think that this is one of the many contributions that the people at Monthly Review regularly make through the Press and now MRzine. In my talk
Last edited:
''Well, he has been a busy little thing, hasn’t he? ''
Yup. He's got that typical right wing idea that it is perfectly OK for him to preach unto others but to never practice what he preaches.
And so it goes ...
Yup. He's got that typical right wing idea that it is perfectly OK for him to preach unto others but to never practice what he preaches.
And so it goes ...
LOL - Gopher never quoted me so SJP obviously read the post. No surprise really.
That is what makes conservatives so amusing, Gopher, they thrive on hypocrisy. And what is more, they honestly don’t see anything wrong with hypocrisy. When their hypocrisy is pointed out to them, their reaction is, ‘so what is the problem’?
Thus Gingrich was sanctimoniously trashing Clinton for having an affair with his intern. Later it turned out that Gingrich was doing the same thing while he was condemning Clinton, he was having an affair with his intern (I think that was about the time his wife was hospitalized with serious illness).
Or look at Senator Larry ‘wide stance’ Craig. The good Senator had spent his whole life trashing gays. And it turns out he was gay himself all the time. But there was no way he could become a Senator if it became known that he was gay. So he decided to become conservative, trash gays all his life and build his political career on that, while he had gay tendencies all along.
Or Rush Limbaugh, the de facto leader of the Republican Party. He had advocated giving drug addicts practically the chair. And all the while he was himself a drug addict.
Or Bill Bennett, who wrote “Book of Virtues’, which the far right lapped up (I think it was on best seller list). Then it turned out that the guru of virtues himself had a gambling problem, he routinely goes to Las Vegas and gambles away thousand of dollars. It was his own money, so there is no scandal here, only the hypocrisy.
But that is what makes the right wingers so amusing. They are hypocrites and see nothing wrong with hypocrisy. Their philosophy is, look at the message, not the speaker.
Does this also apply to anti-privatization political leaders who jump the quewe of public health care to attend private clinics?
You and groper make a cute couple. Left fringe and vacant.
There's no doubt in that comment, you have no need of truth, you make your own up as you go along.
Let me just agree to think your a leftard putz. And you assume wrong, I do not believe everything he says, just this OP/ED piece hit some nails squarely on the head and apparently left a big bump on yours.
btw, if you would have read the OP/ED piece, instead of jump to conclusions, you would have realized that he wasn't refering to Liberals or Kneeddipers. He was refering to the left fringe. Of which you so richly deserve a place of honour. Expressed solely by your rants and fringe behavior. You and groper most certainly do have a lot in common...;-)
Wise men speak because they have something to say. Fools speak, because they have to say something. SJP falls head over heels into the latter.
A$$hat fits just as good. I wonder if he lives in Hamilton.
''The fringe stupidty pushes us moderates away. ''
That's horsesh/t. Still, I'm curious to know why you as an admitted queer suddenly defend a noted queer basher.
You likely recall how in the past I challenged you to reconcile your defense of Reagan who killed so many Ixils who are members of your race. It is quite evident that you are bent on self destruction and defend those who hate you and seek to exterminate you the most.
By the way, you and Cannuck are demonstrating that you make a lovely couple. Two of a kind for darn sure..
That's horsesh/t. Still, I'm curious to know why you as an admitted queer suddenly defend a noted queer basher.
You likely recall how in the past I challenged you to reconcile your defense of Reagan who killed so many Ixils who are members of your race. It is quite evident that you are bent on self destruction and defend those who hate you and seek to exterminate you the most.
By the way, you and Cannuck are demonstrating that you make a lovely couple. Two of a kind for darn sure..
'That is what makes conservatives so amusing, Gopher, they thrive on hypocrisy.''
Every last one of them is laughably pathetic. They are so quick to point the finger at people, use all kinds of name calling, and then when some one retaliates, they go around crying and bitching to no end.
But you are correct - that's what makes them so amusing. If it wasn't for the fact that they make me laugh so much I would ignore these pathetic f*ckos.
Every last one of them is laughably pathetic. They are so quick to point the finger at people, use all kinds of name calling, and then when some one retaliates, they go around crying and bitching to no end.
But you are correct - that's what makes them so amusing. If it wasn't for the fact that they make me laugh so much I would ignore these pathetic f*ckos.
LOL!
you never answered my question about your own hypocrisy and you're taking up someone's argument??? Pathetic!
you never answered my question about your own hypocrisy and you're taking up someone's argument??? Pathetic!