[eavesdropper]

[quote=meadandale]eavesdropper…my post was simply meant as a tongue in cheek response to the original post on this thread: that government is the solution to all of our problems–that money confiscated by the government from the private sector is ALWAYS spent more wisely and more productively by the government than those that it was confiscated from.

CLEARLY this isn’t the case…

However, even as a conservative, I see the danger in unfettered free markets where externalities are ignored.

I do find it ironic, however, that the very people that advocate larger and larger governments seem to dance around events like the gulf oil spill (we had regulations and bureaucrats to enforce them that were corrupt or incompetent) or the continual problems with the food supply (ecoli in spinach and salmonella in eggs, recently) even though IT is also heavily regulated and we supposedly have an army of bureaucrats and inspectors policing the industry. These are examples of this awesome government that some want more of at work. Of course, some will argue “we just need more regulations and more inspectors”; these are the same people that, in spite of every increasing budgets and flat or declining test scores argue that the solution to declining education efficacy is more money…and of course, more laws and government involvement.[/quote]

I can’t find anything here that I disagree with, meadandale. And I concur that we don’t need more government regulation in many places. I think we need more regulation enforcement. It seems to have escaped the attention of those in charge that regulations aren’t any such thing – unless they’re backed up by enforcement.

I was listening to the congressional hearings on the egg E.coli mess last week. Freakin’ unbelieveable. I was thinking that if the Federal and state inspectors don’t want to do their jobs – and that means the entire job, which isn’t simply issuing citations – they should resign. There are plenty of people who are ready, able, and – thanks to across-the-board high unemployment rates – more than qualified to step in their shoes.

And while we’re at it, can we outlaw Congressional hearings? They’re an exercise in vanity, a heaven-sent opportunity for publicity to be used at campaign time, and the way in which Congressional members attempt to show the folks back home how hard they’re working. They waste several days lobbing “tough” questions and disingenuous claims of outrage at whatever poor slob is behind the microphone, and then proceed to do nothing further. Seriously, what do you want to bet that we have another E.coli and salmonella outbreak at another egg producer within a year?

What does worry me these days is the level of polarization among our citizenry. My belief is that most people in this country, when you get right down to the basics, want the same things and are worried about the same things. But that’s gotten lost in all the insane infighting and namecalling and false accusations, which, for the most part, has been incited by those with something to gain from it: politicians who want to stay in office, lobbyists who want something from them, and pundits/political commentators who want high ratings and advertising revenue and worshipful fans. We’re destroying ourselves for the sake of these asswipes.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=meadandale]eavesdropper…my post was simply meant as a tongue in cheek response to the original post on this thread: that government is the solution to all of our problems–that money confiscated by the government from the private sector is ALWAYS spent more wisely and more productively by the government than those that it was confiscated from.

CLEARLY this isn’t the case…

However, even as a conservative, I see the danger in unfettered free markets where externalities are ignored.

I do find it ironic, however, that the very people that advocate larger and larger governments seem to dance around events like the gulf oil spill (we had regulations and bureaucrats to enforce them that were corrupt or incompetent) or the continual problems with the food supply (ecoli in spinach and salmonella in eggs, recently) even though IT is also heavily regulated and we supposedly have an army of bureaucrats and inspectors policing the industry. These are examples of this awesome government that some want more of at work. Of course, some will argue “we just need more regulations and more inspectors”; these are the same people that, in spite of every increasing budgets and flat or declining test scores argue that the solution to declining education efficacy is more money…and of course, more laws and government involvement.[/quote]

I can’t find anything here that I disagree with, meadandale. And I concur that we don’t need more government regulation in many places. I think we need more regulation enforcement. It seems to have escaped the attention of those in charge that regulations aren’t any such thing – unless they’re backed up by enforcement.

I was listening to the congressional hearings on the egg E.coli mess last week. Freakin’ unbelieveable. I was thinking that if the Federal and state inspectors don’t want to do their jobs – and that means the entire job, which isn’t simply issuing citations – they should resign. There are plenty of people who are ready, able, and – thanks to across-the-board high unemployment rates – more than qualified to step in their shoes.

And while we’re at it, can we outlaw Congressional hearings? They’re an exercise in vanity, a heaven-sent opportunity for publicity to be used at campaign time, and the way in which Congressional members attempt to show the folks back home how hard they’re working. They waste several days lobbing “tough” questions and disingenuous claims of outrage at whatever poor slob is behind the microphone, and then proceed to do nothing further. Seriously, what do you want to bet that we have another E.coli and salmonella outbreak at another egg producer within a year?

What does worry me these days is the level of polarization among our citizenry. My belief is that most people in this country, when you get right down to the basics, want the same things and are worried about the same things. But that’s gotten lost in all the insane infighting and namecalling and false accusations, which, for the most part, has been incited by those with something to gain from it: politicians who want to stay in office, lobbyists who want something from them, and pundits/political commentators who want high ratings and advertising revenue and worshipful fans. We’re destroying ourselves for the sake of these asswipes.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=Russell][quote=desmond]I do work from home so does my wife. She will have to drive to Santa Barbara (2 hours) a couple of times a month but she works at a hotel and can spend the night there. I have had the same 800 number for the last 15 years so my customers never know where I am. It is only about 45 minutes north of Valencia where a lot of my customers are. Whenever the “Grapevine” is closed from snow, I’ll be “working” at home.[/quote]
That’s great Desmond I grew up in Ventura and SB counties and spent lots of time in the mountains and foothills there to the west of where you are going.This is a great area for motorcycle day trips, eavesdropper. You can hit the mountains and the coast on the same day, with lots of great places to stop in between. Say hello to Enorah(pigg poster) in Ojai on the way through.[/quote]

Desmond, congratulations on scoring a great rental! I envy you.

Russell, thanks for the m-cycling tip. I look at those roads and drool. A month’s vacation wouldn’t be long enough.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=Russell][quote=desmond]I do work from home so does my wife. She will have to drive to Santa Barbara (2 hours) a couple of times a month but she works at a hotel and can spend the night there. I have had the same 800 number for the last 15 years so my customers never know where I am. It is only about 45 minutes north of Valencia where a lot of my customers are. Whenever the “Grapevine” is closed from snow, I’ll be “working” at home.[/quote]
That’s great Desmond I grew up in Ventura and SB counties and spent lots of time in the mountains and foothills there to the west of where you are going.This is a great area for motorcycle day trips, eavesdropper. You can hit the mountains and the coast on the same day, with lots of great places to stop in between. Say hello to Enorah(pigg poster) in Ojai on the way through.[/quote]

Desmond, congratulations on scoring a great rental! I envy you.

Russell, thanks for the m-cycling tip. I look at those roads and drool. A month’s vacation wouldn’t be long enough.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=Russell][quote=desmond]I do work from home so does my wife. She will have to drive to Santa Barbara (2 hours) a couple of times a month but she works at a hotel and can spend the night there. I have had the same 800 number for the last 15 years so my customers never know where I am. It is only about 45 minutes north of Valencia where a lot of my customers are. Whenever the “Grapevine” is closed from snow, I’ll be “working” at home.[/quote]
That’s great Desmond I grew up in Ventura and SB counties and spent lots of time in the mountains and foothills there to the west of where you are going.This is a great area for motorcycle day trips, eavesdropper. You can hit the mountains and the coast on the same day, with lots of great places to stop in between. Say hello to Enorah(pigg poster) in Ojai on the way through.[/quote]

Desmond, congratulations on scoring a great rental! I envy you.

Russell, thanks for the m-cycling tip. I look at those roads and drool. A month’s vacation wouldn’t be long enough.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=Russell][quote=desmond]I do work from home so does my wife. She will have to drive to Santa Barbara (2 hours) a couple of times a month but she works at a hotel and can spend the night there. I have had the same 800 number for the last 15 years so my customers never know where I am. It is only about 45 minutes north of Valencia where a lot of my customers are. Whenever the “Grapevine” is closed from snow, I’ll be “working” at home.[/quote]
That’s great Desmond I grew up in Ventura and SB counties and spent lots of time in the mountains and foothills there to the west of where you are going.This is a great area for motorcycle day trips, eavesdropper. You can hit the mountains and the coast on the same day, with lots of great places to stop in between. Say hello to Enorah(pigg poster) in Ojai on the way through.[/quote]

Desmond, congratulations on scoring a great rental! I envy you.

Russell, thanks for the m-cycling tip. I look at those roads and drool. A month’s vacation wouldn’t be long enough.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=Russell][quote=desmond]I do work from home so does my wife. She will have to drive to Santa Barbara (2 hours) a couple of times a month but she works at a hotel and can spend the night there. I have had the same 800 number for the last 15 years so my customers never know where I am. It is only about 45 minutes north of Valencia where a lot of my customers are. Whenever the “Grapevine” is closed from snow, I’ll be “working” at home.[/quote]
That’s great Desmond I grew up in Ventura and SB counties and spent lots of time in the mountains and foothills there to the west of where you are going.This is a great area for motorcycle day trips, eavesdropper. You can hit the mountains and the coast on the same day, with lots of great places to stop in between. Say hello to Enorah(pigg poster) in Ojai on the way through.[/quote]

Desmond, congratulations on scoring a great rental! I envy you.

Russell, thanks for the m-cycling tip. I look at those roads and drool. A month’s vacation wouldn’t be long enough.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=eavesdropper]
Bingo, Allan! There is no statement more true than your last. And when that is the case, economic systems, well laid out as they are on paper, sometimes stumble over human foibles.[/quote]

Eavesdropper: Given your intellect, I thought you’d appreciate this little exegesis about business and political interests getting closely entwined. Back in the 1980s, I did military advisory work in Central America. The “bible”, if you will, for counterinsurgency work was the USMC Small Wars Manual, written circa 1940, and largely based on the Marine campaigns during the so-called “Banana Wars”. The main architect of these campaigns was a Marine named Smedley Butler, who was something of a Zelig-like character for the US during the 1920s and 1930s.

I bring Butler up, largely because of comments he made later in his life, wherein he recounted that his time with the Marines in places like Central America, China and elsewhere was largely in support of American business interests in those parts of the world, and I think we’d all agree that little has changed since then.

His comments, “War is a Racket” are interesting, to say the least:
http://www.fas.org/man/smedley.htm

“Plus c’est la meme chose”.[/quote]

Ain’t that the truth, though, Allan.

LOVED the Butler quotes! Don’t necessarily love that things haven’t changed. But this sort of thing has gone on since the beginning of our great nation, and, I’m sure, long, long before that. What I did get a bang out of was that someone of this gentleman’s rank and status not only made a public speech of this sort, but wrote a book with the same sentiments, and made his anti-war opinions known for the rest of his life.

Liked the website it came from, also.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=eavesdropper]
Bingo, Allan! There is no statement more true than your last. And when that is the case, economic systems, well laid out as they are on paper, sometimes stumble over human foibles.[/quote]

Eavesdropper: Given your intellect, I thought you’d appreciate this little exegesis about business and political interests getting closely entwined. Back in the 1980s, I did military advisory work in Central America. The “bible”, if you will, for counterinsurgency work was the USMC Small Wars Manual, written circa 1940, and largely based on the Marine campaigns during the so-called “Banana Wars”. The main architect of these campaigns was a Marine named Smedley Butler, who was something of a Zelig-like character for the US during the 1920s and 1930s.

I bring Butler up, largely because of comments he made later in his life, wherein he recounted that his time with the Marines in places like Central America, China and elsewhere was largely in support of American business interests in those parts of the world, and I think we’d all agree that little has changed since then.

His comments, “War is a Racket” are interesting, to say the least:
http://www.fas.org/man/smedley.htm

“Plus c’est la meme chose”.[/quote]

Ain’t that the truth, though, Allan.

LOVED the Butler quotes! Don’t necessarily love that things haven’t changed. But this sort of thing has gone on since the beginning of our great nation, and, I’m sure, long, long before that. What I did get a bang out of was that someone of this gentleman’s rank and status not only made a public speech of this sort, but wrote a book with the same sentiments, and made his anti-war opinions known for the rest of his life.

Liked the website it came from, also.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=eavesdropper]
Bingo, Allan! There is no statement more true than your last. And when that is the case, economic systems, well laid out as they are on paper, sometimes stumble over human foibles.[/quote]

Eavesdropper: Given your intellect, I thought you’d appreciate this little exegesis about business and political interests getting closely entwined. Back in the 1980s, I did military advisory work in Central America. The “bible”, if you will, for counterinsurgency work was the USMC Small Wars Manual, written circa 1940, and largely based on the Marine campaigns during the so-called “Banana Wars”. The main architect of these campaigns was a Marine named Smedley Butler, who was something of a Zelig-like character for the US during the 1920s and 1930s.

I bring Butler up, largely because of comments he made later in his life, wherein he recounted that his time with the Marines in places like Central America, China and elsewhere was largely in support of American business interests in those parts of the world, and I think we’d all agree that little has changed since then.

His comments, “War is a Racket” are interesting, to say the least:
http://www.fas.org/man/smedley.htm

“Plus c’est la meme chose”.[/quote]

Ain’t that the truth, though, Allan.

LOVED the Butler quotes! Don’t necessarily love that things haven’t changed. But this sort of thing has gone on since the beginning of our great nation, and, I’m sure, long, long before that. What I did get a bang out of was that someone of this gentleman’s rank and status not only made a public speech of this sort, but wrote a book with the same sentiments, and made his anti-war opinions known for the rest of his life.

Liked the website it came from, also.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=eavesdropper]
Bingo, Allan! There is no statement more true than your last. And when that is the case, economic systems, well laid out as they are on paper, sometimes stumble over human foibles.[/quote]

Eavesdropper: Given your intellect, I thought you’d appreciate this little exegesis about business and political interests getting closely entwined. Back in the 1980s, I did military advisory work in Central America. The “bible”, if you will, for counterinsurgency work was the USMC Small Wars Manual, written circa 1940, and largely based on the Marine campaigns during the so-called “Banana Wars”. The main architect of these campaigns was a Marine named Smedley Butler, who was something of a Zelig-like character for the US during the 1920s and 1930s.

I bring Butler up, largely because of comments he made later in his life, wherein he recounted that his time with the Marines in places like Central America, China and elsewhere was largely in support of American business interests in those parts of the world, and I think we’d all agree that little has changed since then.

His comments, “War is a Racket” are interesting, to say the least:
http://www.fas.org/man/smedley.htm

“Plus c’est la meme chose”.[/quote]

Ain’t that the truth, though, Allan.

LOVED the Butler quotes! Don’t necessarily love that things haven’t changed. But this sort of thing has gone on since the beginning of our great nation, and, I’m sure, long, long before that. What I did get a bang out of was that someone of this gentleman’s rank and status not only made a public speech of this sort, but wrote a book with the same sentiments, and made his anti-war opinions known for the rest of his life.

Liked the website it came from, also.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=eavesdropper]
Bingo, Allan! There is no statement more true than your last. And when that is the case, economic systems, well laid out as they are on paper, sometimes stumble over human foibles.[/quote]

Eavesdropper: Given your intellect, I thought you’d appreciate this little exegesis about business and political interests getting closely entwined. Back in the 1980s, I did military advisory work in Central America. The “bible”, if you will, for counterinsurgency work was the USMC Small Wars Manual, written circa 1940, and largely based on the Marine campaigns during the so-called “Banana Wars”. The main architect of these campaigns was a Marine named Smedley Butler, who was something of a Zelig-like character for the US during the 1920s and 1930s.

I bring Butler up, largely because of comments he made later in his life, wherein he recounted that his time with the Marines in places like Central America, China and elsewhere was largely in support of American business interests in those parts of the world, and I think we’d all agree that little has changed since then.

His comments, “War is a Racket” are interesting, to say the least:
http://www.fas.org/man/smedley.htm

“Plus c’est la meme chose”.[/quote]

Ain’t that the truth, though, Allan.

LOVED the Butler quotes! Don’t necessarily love that things haven’t changed. But this sort of thing has gone on since the beginning of our great nation, and, I’m sure, long, long before that. What I did get a bang out of was that someone of this gentleman’s rank and status not only made a public speech of this sort, but wrote a book with the same sentiments, and made his anti-war opinions known for the rest of his life.

Liked the website it came from, also.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=meadandale][quote=briansd1]eavesdropper, that was a great post.[/quote]

Except for the part where he repeatedly referred to me as an ‘ultra-conservative’…which erodes most of the credibility for the rest of the rant.[/quote]

Meadandale, I apologize. I mean, it’s so easy to generalize on these threads, especially the ones that tend to elicit knee-jerk reactions.

I used the word “ultraconservative” twice, so, in theory, I guess that counts as “repeatedly”. But the petty part of me can’t help but feel it’s a bit of hyperbole on your part.

If you did actually read my post, I made every attempt to avoid name-calling. And, while I may have apologized, I AM tired of ultraconservatives (whether that describes you, or not) equating dissatisfaction with distortions of capitalism with unreserved endorsements of communism and socialism. I’m tired of ANYBODY doing it. It’s untruthful. It’s inaccurate. It’s polarizing. And it’s getting old.

Perhaps I completely misread the post, and, in reality, you meant every word you said. If so, I must tell you that I don’t agree with you. I may have problems with the actions of a number of corporations and their officers and executives. But I do not believe the United States should turn to socialism or communism as an economic/sociopolitical alternative.

As for my “rant”, I’m sorry that you see it in that way. I prefer to think of it as a well-thought out dissertation on the misuse of words, distortion of their meanings in an effort to change peoples’ minds about an issue when the truth is not adequate, and use of terms to elicit fear, revulsion, and other visceral responses in the citizenry.

To be perfectly honest, your post did not deserve a response of this length and breadth of topic. However, every day I come across dozens and dozens of polarizing posts of the “Liberals/moderates/ RHINOs hate capitalism and love communism and socialism” variety that are penned by authors from a range of IQs and educational backgrounds. There is never a shortage of accompanying information, but there is always a complete absence of proof. Most of them I simply do not respond, but once every 5000 posts, I react. You were the big winner today. Again, I apologize. (Gee, I’m starting to feel like one of those whiny, wimpy, sandal-wearing, Prius-driving, Obama-worshiping, socialism-practicing, liberal-leaning Commiecrat with all of this apologizing)

In all seriousness, meadandale, I took your post as a sarcastic riposte to the individual who started the thread. I interpreted this as being from someone who is 100% for capitalism, and 100% against communism and socialism. I found it a rather black-and-white view, and I did not see it as a response to the opinions of the OP, but as an emotional reaction. I encounter many posts of this variety on a range of websites; virtually all of the websites and/or the posters are right-wing/conservative by admission. I view “Liberal/Progressives = Communists/Socialists” sentiments as polarizing and untruthful, and I view individuals making these statements as ultraconservatives, meaning that they are conservative to the exclusion of everything else. It was not meant to be an insult, and I’m not sure why you took it as such. However, we appear to be in a period of reverse political correctness, and it’s becoming increasingly difficult determining what everyone wants to be called.

As for my use of the term “ultraconservative”, I don’t see why it affects the credibility of what I brought up in my post. Could you cite examples from the text to which you take exception?

[eavesdropper]

[quote=meadandale][quote=briansd1]eavesdropper, that was a great post.[/quote]

Except for the part where he repeatedly referred to me as an ‘ultra-conservative’…which erodes most of the credibility for the rest of the rant.[/quote]

Meadandale, I apologize. I mean, it’s so easy to generalize on these threads, especially the ones that tend to elicit knee-jerk reactions.

I used the word “ultraconservative” twice, so, in theory, I guess that counts as “repeatedly”. But the petty part of me can’t help but feel it’s a bit of hyperbole on your part.

If you did actually read my post, I made every attempt to avoid name-calling. And, while I may have apologized, I AM tired of ultraconservatives (whether that describes you, or not) equating dissatisfaction with distortions of capitalism with unreserved endorsements of communism and socialism. I’m tired of ANYBODY doing it. It’s untruthful. It’s inaccurate. It’s polarizing. And it’s getting old.

Perhaps I completely misread the post, and, in reality, you meant every word you said. If so, I must tell you that I don’t agree with you. I may have problems with the actions of a number of corporations and their officers and executives. But I do not believe the United States should turn to socialism or communism as an economic/sociopolitical alternative.

As for my “rant”, I’m sorry that you see it in that way. I prefer to think of it as a well-thought out dissertation on the misuse of words, distortion of their meanings in an effort to change peoples’ minds about an issue when the truth is not adequate, and use of terms to elicit fear, revulsion, and other visceral responses in the citizenry.

To be perfectly honest, your post did not deserve a response of this length and breadth of topic. However, every day I come across dozens and dozens of polarizing posts of the “Liberals/moderates/ RHINOs hate capitalism and love communism and socialism” variety that are penned by authors from a range of IQs and educational backgrounds. There is never a shortage of accompanying information, but there is always a complete absence of proof. Most of them I simply do not respond, but once every 5000 posts, I react. You were the big winner today. Again, I apologize. (Gee, I’m starting to feel like one of those whiny, wimpy, sandal-wearing, Prius-driving, Obama-worshiping, socialism-practicing, liberal-leaning Commiecrat with all of this apologizing)

In all seriousness, meadandale, I took your post as a sarcastic riposte to the individual who started the thread. I interpreted this as being from someone who is 100% for capitalism, and 100% against communism and socialism. I found it a rather black-and-white view, and I did not see it as a response to the opinions of the OP, but as an emotional reaction. I encounter many posts of this variety on a range of websites; virtually all of the websites and/or the posters are right-wing/conservative by admission. I view “Liberal/Progressives = Communists/Socialists” sentiments as polarizing and untruthful, and I view individuals making these statements as ultraconservatives, meaning that they are conservative to the exclusion of everything else. It was not meant to be an insult, and I’m not sure why you took it as such. However, we appear to be in a period of reverse political correctness, and it’s becoming increasingly difficult determining what everyone wants to be called.

As for my use of the term “ultraconservative”, I don’t see why it affects the credibility of what I brought up in my post. Could you cite examples from the text to which you take exception?

[eavesdropper]

[quote=meadandale][quote=briansd1]eavesdropper, that was a great post.[/quote]

Except for the part where he repeatedly referred to me as an ‘ultra-conservative’…which erodes most of the credibility for the rest of the rant.[/quote]

Meadandale, I apologize. I mean, it’s so easy to generalize on these threads, especially the ones that tend to elicit knee-jerk reactions.

I used the word “ultraconservative” twice, so, in theory, I guess that counts as “repeatedly”. But the petty part of me can’t help but feel it’s a bit of hyperbole on your part.

If you did actually read my post, I made every attempt to avoid name-calling. And, while I may have apologized, I AM tired of ultraconservatives (whether that describes you, or not) equating dissatisfaction with distortions of capitalism with unreserved endorsements of communism and socialism. I’m tired of ANYBODY doing it. It’s untruthful. It’s inaccurate. It’s polarizing. And it’s getting old.

Perhaps I completely misread the post, and, in reality, you meant every word you said. If so, I must tell you that I don’t agree with you. I may have problems with the actions of a number of corporations and their officers and executives. But I do not believe the United States should turn to socialism or communism as an economic/sociopolitical alternative.

As for my “rant”, I’m sorry that you see it in that way. I prefer to think of it as a well-thought out dissertation on the misuse of words, distortion of their meanings in an effort to change peoples’ minds about an issue when the truth is not adequate, and use of terms to elicit fear, revulsion, and other visceral responses in the citizenry.

To be perfectly honest, your post did not deserve a response of this length and breadth of topic. However, every day I come across dozens and dozens of polarizing posts of the “Liberals/moderates/ RHINOs hate capitalism and love communism and socialism” variety that are penned by authors from a range of IQs and educational backgrounds. There is never a shortage of accompanying information, but there is always a complete absence of proof. Most of them I simply do not respond, but once every 5000 posts, I react. You were the big winner today. Again, I apologize. (Gee, I’m starting to feel like one of those whiny, wimpy, sandal-wearing, Prius-driving, Obama-worshiping, socialism-practicing, liberal-leaning Commiecrat with all of this apologizing)

In all seriousness, meadandale, I took your post as a sarcastic riposte to the individual who started the thread. I interpreted this as being from someone who is 100% for capitalism, and 100% against communism and socialism. I found it a rather black-and-white view, and I did not see it as a response to the opinions of the OP, but as an emotional reaction. I encounter many posts of this variety on a range of websites; virtually all of the websites and/or the posters are right-wing/conservative by admission. I view “Liberal/Progressives = Communists/Socialists” sentiments as polarizing and untruthful, and I view individuals making these statements as ultraconservatives, meaning that they are conservative to the exclusion of everything else. It was not meant to be an insult, and I’m not sure why you took it as such. However, we appear to be in a period of reverse political correctness, and it’s becoming increasingly difficult determining what everyone wants to be called.

As for my use of the term “ultraconservative”, I don’t see why it affects the credibility of what I brought up in my post. Could you cite examples from the text to which you take exception?

[Author]

Posts