Reply With Quote
So now you have admitted you don't really know if 93% or 49% are nutters but you choose to continue stating that the majority of dems are beholden to the far left. And you have asked me to admit I was wrong and should be embarassed?
Well I simply proved that less than 50% are nutters. So your baseless claims hae been exposed yet again...
So now you have admitted you don't really know if 93% or 49% are nutters but you choose to continue stating that the majority of dems are beholden to the far left. And you have asked me to admit I was wrong and should be embarassed?
You didn't prove anything. If anything, I proved you're stupid...and, I proved as much as 93.13% of Democrats could be nutters and still not be able to pass their agenda thus refuting your stupid statement that if a majority were nutters they'd pass whatever legislation they wanted.
How'd you prove it was less than 50%?
And, I wasn't making a claim, I was making a characterization of the confrontation between Obey and the nutter he was arguing with. I'd be interested to know just how many votes Pelosi and Murtha have for their nutty surrender plan.
There would be the proof of how many nutters there are. Less than 117 and you're right, more and I'm right. Do we know where the 233 Democrats stand on this issue?
So now your going to admit that the Democratic party as a whole isn't beholden to the far left? I'll remind you every time you do.
When did I ever claim the Democratic party as a whole is beholden to the far left? I merely hypothesized it was somewhere between 50.01% and 93.13%. And, until we have the numbers on which Democrats support the surrender strategy of Murtha and Pelosi and which ones don't, there's no way to know exactly how many are true nutters.
But, it is clear to me that the Democratic leadership are beholden to the nutters.
Why can't you just admit your math sucked or that when you said...
...you just flat weren't thinking about the other side of the aisle.
You and Master Baiter suffer from the same disease.
When I made that comment I was under the influence of my avatar.. Once I woke up I realized that I was actually intending something else. So yes my math did suck during that post. Better?
Sure.
So, the obvious question, would you agree -- even though we disagree on what the exact percentage may be -- that as much as 93.13% of the Democrats in the House of Representatives could be what I call "nutters" and still be unable to pass their agenda?
Because it is from my belief that a good majority -- not all and no, not 93.13% -- are nutters that is being manifested in this "frustration" being displayed by Congressman Obey.
After all, that was the entire gist of my post before you stubbornly took us off on the math tangent.
Yes Yoni it is possible but I think there far fewer nutters than you think there are.
And that's a reasonable position.
So, are there fewer than 117 in the House? Neither of us know for sure. But, if Obey is that frustrated about not having the votes, it would suggest the requisite number is a lot closer to my presumption than yours.
Other than for the belief the Democrats are close to having enough votes to enact their nutter agenda to "end the war," why would Obey become so frustrated and start yelling at a nutter about them being the fly in the ointment that's keeping them from doing what the nutters want?
No, political parties are by their nature moderate. While you can argue that the Dem leadership is liberal, that probably is not true of the rank-and-file Democratic congressman, who is probably only slightly liberal. I'd be willing to bet that alot of these newly-elected Democratic lawmakers want decreased spending, are socially conservative, pro-life, somewhat pro-war (at least not angry and completely against it), etc. They probably wouldn't go along with some of the more nutty proposals from Pelosi, et al. That's my hunch, anyway.
And I don't take the 06 elections as any real vindication of the liberal "agenda" anyway. The reason the GOP lost was (1) they didn't control spending, (2) they didn't do anything about illegal immigration, and (3) didn't manage the after-war in Iraq very well, although the picture there is brighter than the media would have us believe. In short, the GOP failed to govern conservatively. The Democrats won because they weren't Republicans. But don't look for them to turn into Michael Moore all of a sudden.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions