I'd be fine with a pure dumbass-ness, but this is just insulting, very much along the lines of "don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining"

__________________
you can't always eat lobster, sometimes you gotta have fish (so says my son)

Now at least you all know where comrade Lina gets her daily dose of liberal drivel: ********thedemocraticdaily.com/

__________________
Новые фотки - у дочери на дне рождения. 16 лет. Very BIG DEAL !!!

I just read that article - OMG!! :-O Reagan is a racist because in Mississippi he gave a speech and said he was for state rights!!??!! (hu) - they say it's code word for racism..how narrow-minded..(md)

However Harry Reid can call Obama a "light-skinned" African American "with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one" and not be considered a racist. Nice double standards

__________________
you can't always eat lobster, sometimes you gotta have fish (so says my son)

OMG!! :-O Reagan is a racist because in Mississippi he gave a speech and said he was for state rights!!??!! (hu) - they say it's code word for racism..how narrow-minded
---------------------------------------------------------------------
I know I make fun of your reading comprehension skills, but I'm starting to think that it might not be a laughing matter. I don't know if Reagan was a racist or not (I don't think he was, although I believe we all are to varying degrees), but is that really what you got out of reading the article?
"Reagan told an all-white crowd he was for “state’s rights” – the old Southern code word for slavery and Jim Crow segregation. He denied he was pandering to racial prejudice."
In case you're still not getting it, pandering is not the same as racism. Now some of those who voted for him may very well have been racists, hence, the association between racists and the "Party of Lincoln".

you know what I noticed?
and, please, correct me if I'm wrong:
Liberals object to something and can't explain why they object, can't keep up with the discussion, are not familiar with the matter..
---------------------------------------------------------------------
are you sure you meant liberals?

but since we're making observations, you know what I've noticed: some in this group seem to completely miss (perhaps intentionally) the intended point their opponent is trying to make, and then go off on a tangent -ranting, raving, and blowing the entire thing out of proportion.

Лина, из ротика какой нежной снежинки вылетает трёхэтажная матерщина? Их там несколько в первом ряду...

Теперь понятно, откуда наша дражайшая Лина Детсадовна черпает свои глубочайшие познания. :-|

You know what, if conservatives really think the health-care reform package currently in Congress is sooooo bad, and sooooo unpopular with the American people, they should just shut the fuck up and let it pass so that Democrats suffer at the polls for having passed it. Isn't that what they want?


But you know what, I've had it. Conservatives should just shut the fuck up,period. All they are is a bunch of bullshitting obstructionists who have no interest whatsoever in meaningful reform of any kind.

Man, this is deep |-)

I thought a bit about American Exceptionalism.
First, there is a difference between nationalism -- in a sense of patriotism, being proud for your nation and its accomplishments -- and exceptionalism. Patriotism identifies a person and his/her country -- and thus should be taught, cultivated, and encouraged.
On the other hand, IMHO, exceptionalism implies entitlement. In a sense that someone does not need to follow general rules and principles. If one defines the whole nation that is above the rules of the world one can quickly get to Nazism. This is what happened to Germany (and Italy) in the early 20th century.
Moreover, according to the Declaration of Independence "all men are created equal", which excludes exceptionism as a basis on which this country is built.