Did I say the Fox team was Reagan? Let's put it like this. By my postings on ETand by my stance on the issues during my 2004 campaign for Congress as detailed on votesmart.com I would be correctly characterized as a "right winger." Pro-life, pro-gun, lower taxes, ect. Yet I've never read a book by Coulter, I haven't seen a total of two Hannity programs and haven't heard ten composite hours of Rush in the decade plus he's been on the air. In fact since the 80's days of Novak on Crossfire I consume very little electronic political commentary. Yet I'm a poster child for the reactionary right that you loathe. Given that the number of conservatives is a multiple of Hannity's, Rush's or Coulter's audience I think it's safe to assume that the views of most conservatives are based on information sources other than those you cite.
Man, oh man, Z. I mean, what is it with you? Of all the people on this site, how on earth can you presume to accuse others of intellectual dishonesty? You cut and ran in your latest ID thread when I asked you to clarify your claim that your use of the phrase 'goose-stepping' didn't evoke images of Nazi Germany. You cut and ran when challenged on your about-face regarding the meaning of the phrase 'magistrates materialized out of pure potentiality'. You spent 50 pages evading the challenges by kjkent, based on direct quotes of your own statements, of the faith-based beliefs you were asserting as facts. When asked in the spirit of open and honest debate to clarify some of your statements and assertions, you started posting a series of bizarre cartoon images from your personal collection. And now you're on this thread accusing another respected member of intellectual dishonesty? A bad day to be a liberal.
Those conservatives who are pathological control freaks, preach conformity, favor totalitarian thought, shun diversity, intimate racial or political superiority, are what I believe the article is referring to as conservatives, more in the vein of Hannity, Coulter, Limbaugh, Savage, et al. Reagan was able to bring people together, Bush and his crew, supported in his efforts by Coulter, Hannity, Limbaugh et. al are not uniters....they are dividers. I personally am not a fan of Reagan, but at least he was able to govern from more of a centrist position rather than from the extreme, as was Clinton, which is probably the reason for their continued popularity. It is your constant expression of bigotry and extreme style of hate laced posts that makes you a poster child for the extremist version of the right wing conservative, not the mainstream conservatism of Reagan, Goldwater, and other gentlemen who happened to embrace conservatism. Face it, yours is a crude political expression.....as much as Michael Moore is crude in his politicise.
As usual you're off base. Reagan's strength was neither diversity nor centrism. It was the ability to sell his ultra right views to the electorate. Was a man who spent billions winning the arms race against a nation he termed the "evil empire" a centrist? Was the President who summarily fired striking Federal air traffic controllers a uniter? Was the Commander in Chief who's air strikes killed Quadafi's young daughter during an assassination attempt on the Libyan President a multi-lateralist? American's favored Reagan's policies because Reagan acted in a manner consistent with his beliefs. His passion and reasoning when communicated artfully to the American people had the ring of truth that was missing during Nixon and the commitment to idealism missing from Carter. His cabinet was lilly white. He was distrustful of liberals of all stripes. He courted the Tip O'Neills of Congress because the Democrats were vastly the majority Party. There's not a person in America who believes George W. Bush with his medicare big government give away is a conservative in the mode of Reagan. And true, I could care less about being a "gentleman" to those who's actions threaten American's safety. I have no quarrel with those who are belligerent in the belief that American workers should command control of their pay check, I believe in politically destroying those who seek to impose Soviet style socialism into America's free markets. And I believe respecting life starts with punishing those who commit heinous crimes and extending liberties to the not yet born. If that makes me a hateful bigot then it's a badge I wear with pride.
Yawn. Pointless, I already know your belief systems..... http://bigpicture.typepad.com/comments/2004/06/reagans_liberal.html
The rebuttal is in the link provided. The yawn is because I have read the same "beliefs" from Pabst before.
Just goes to show that Z doesn't post here in the spirit of 'intellectual honesty'. That spirit would encompass the willingness to engage in debate and make an honest effort to rebut the arguments of those who challenge your positions. Right, Z? 'Yawn' means "I'm not interested in your opinions. When I want your opinions, I will ask for them". btw... that's a direct quote from the Z thread on ID - that was in response to one of literally hundreds of requests for clarifications of his assertions that he recieved. The other response he typically gave was "I think your question is stupid, and I don't have to answer stupid questions. Both of these statements can be found in this thread, but it's a bit of a slog. Just for those who are interested in this unique ET member and the explanations behind his fascinating posting efforts here. http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=60861&highlight=Intelligent+design