Interesting that you chose to round down the percentage of those who voted "the other way" to 40%, implying that a pretty solid majority chose the conservative agenda. The reality of course is that the majority of citizens (48.38% to 47.87%) didn't vote "the other way."

It was a poorly worded passage. I'm arguing from the premise that both parties hover around 40 percent support with 20 percent or so truly up for grabs. But, no, the actual voting behavior is different because most of that 20 percent chooses between the major parties.

Ronald Reagan. He pretty much turned me into a democrat single handedly. I was just voting like I was raised, only just turned 18. The next four years were a disaster and taught me a lot about politics. In college, I took the usual route of wearing black berets, smoking dope in the dorms and wigging out on Libertarian treatise as a response to the Reagan administration's utter depravity. Boy was I a rube to be roped in by that clap trap. Finally wised up when I realized that Libertarians were basically unable to solve even the simplest of prisoner's dilemna scenarios - which is kind of what politics is all about, imho - and they couldn't even build a frickin' hiway network with the framework they were offering. Figured the democrats had all the civil libertarian ideals I wanted and when I looked - really looked, mind you - at their platforms and talked to other liberals, I found they were just as big of capitalists as I was.

My god. I just realized I answered a question posed by a troll honestly. Geebus. I'm cursed.

"Do with less -
so _they'll_ have
enough!

Rationing gives you your fair share."

I don't know of any conservative who believes that but perhaps you can refer me to one.

Dude, I was raised an ultra conservative, evangelical christian. I voted for Ronald Reagan in 1980 and whomever the Libertarian dude was in 1984.

As the saying goes, "Don't teach your grandmother to suck eggs".

G. A. Phillips provides a text book example for us all to enjoy.

cause I don't beet around the bush talking endless amounts of poop about nothing and try to tell you people the things about yourselves that can't see, or refuse to see.

I'm sure I'm suppose to treat you people like real debaters, all you ever do is not listen and spout propaganda.

I just laid out most of what your ideology is made up of now and you totally missed it and said sum stupidly weak insult, if your gonna insult me employee someone to write some for you.

And cause you can't handle the truth you say nothing about nothing because thats all you know.

I just taught you how much you are like the Nazi in the beginning, yet you say nothing.

Dude I was raised liberal, and I changed, why can't you even start or at least look at your side if not mine.

It was placed as a courtesy to James - and to prevent his rather onerous spam filter from kicking in ;)

experiment on humans
murder unwanted babies
socially control the population
surpass all debate that is not liberal
replace Christianity with your doctrine of evolution
violent protests for descent
terrorism for descent
rewriting of history
socially control the economy
propagandized control the media
propagandized control the education system
super belief in and worship of the occult

Liberal=Nazi

all in all in the great green hell you are even after the smokers like the frocking Nazi!!

I got more but this should be enough, but of course it won't be, for you.

I did entertain myself with a comment on Thers Whisky Fire blog. I cross post it here because I am inordinately proud of the link hidden under the reference of putting pants on one leg at a time… Do not ask me why, it would take too long.

I happen to be a reader, and occasional commentator of Outside the Beltway. Although my social and political leanings are strongly Center Left, I find James Joyner’s writings reasoned, and well stated. Good enough, so that a slow writer / slow thinker like myself is a bit jealous. Like all of us who put their pants on, one leg at a time, he occasionally strays outside the boundary of reasonable argument.

The same cannot be said Thers. His language, and that of some his fans posted above, is atrocious. My sentiments are best expressed by Irate Historian | May 25, 2008 at 09:17 PM (above):Can't see why anyone would boast about the poverty of his vocabulary. I suspect that Christy Hardin Smith, Diggby, and others toes are curling at this man’s crudity.

If the language chosen is a measure of the man, it not surprising that Thers would attribute the original post to Michael Goldfarb, when it was actually written by Dean Barnett.

how in the **** you can start out as racist slave owners and separatists, turn into Communists,and then into the new Nazi order is kind of beyond me

Actually, they turned into republicans.