How so? A lunatic proposing that the world is round does not change the facts of the matter, nor is the wisest, most sensitive or insight authority exempt from human falibility.

Let's simplify this in internet terms: "Would the extremity of a Jew's complaints about Hitler, and the terms with which he were to revile him disprove the Holocaust?"

Anybody so stupid as to get the entirety of their opinions from a magazine deserves to be misinformed, anyway.

Why? They boil down to issues of freedom & personal liberty or life & death issues. There is no reasonable compromise or "equally valid" opposing perspective on such things. Moderate, milquetoast, eqivocating opinions are pointless anyway, and don't serve anything other than to bore the electorate into indifference. Saying that "It appears the administration might have committed too hastily to a military solution, based on faulty intelligence" is meaningless. "Bush lied, kids died!" fires up the crowds and might draw them out to vote. You losers who politely offer your moderate, restrained applause to the former can congratulate yourselves in your pointless salons and circle-jerks, while an electorate that is outraged by the latter mindless and inaccurrate slogan might actually effect some change.

Yes, they are what are technically termed "pretentious hypocriotes." The right and left or red and blue die hards are at least honest about their not caring for the other side. The ones who "just want to solve the problems" are posing as tolerant and superior, when in fact they are just as intolerant as anyone else, merely affecting an attitude of tolerance. No one should tolerate an affront to his liberty, property or moral values. The difference is the sissies who want the benefits without having to fight for them, affect this false air of tolerance saying they are open to everything because they just want to solve the problem, when in reality, the conflict paradigm actually works very well for many people, but the "problem solvers" are intolerant of THAT system.

And what the hell does that mean anyway "look at things strictly from a problem-solving viewpoint"? All you are doing is refusing to acknowledge the other point of view when you say this! Take the global warming issue. What is the so-called "problem-solving viewpoint" on that issue? In effect, someone who says "Stop fighting over the issue and let's all work together for solutions to the problem" is demanding that everyone accept his perspective that global warming is a threat that must be dealt with. In fact the actual issue for a lot of people is whether or not the threat even exists! Likewise for the problem of moral decay, or pornography, or excess drug abuse. To many people, the problem is not stopping the trade in such things, but that anyone is taking steps against these things in the first place!

And then there are the issues where both sides ARE trying to solve the problem. Your obnoxious affectation of a superior stance when you claim to be just trying to solve the problem is an uncalled-for slap in the face at everyone else who is ALSO trying to solve the problem but perceive the causes differently. The left might claim that the solution to unemployment is to create new programs to alleviate the sufferings of the unemployed, to study the job market and ascertain areas where government support can get the hiring process started, and legislation to protect the rights of workers to retain their jobs. The right on the other hand, believe that such measures place undue burdens on the employers, which leads to unemployment, because employers must cut costs in other areas to comply with the regulations and oversight, and that the taxes to pay for such programs will further stunt economic growth, because if the businesses that are so taxed were able to keep that money instead, they could afford to hire or retain more employees.

Both sides are sincerely trying to solve the problem. You know why they are spewing such hatred? Because in their perception, they care so much about solving these problems that the efforts of the other side to impede their solutions, outrages them every bit as much as the virulent rhetoric outrages you! They at least have their reasons for believing the other side is evil (opposing what they see as a necessary and good thing is a perfectly valid reason for that viewpoint), whereas all you are doing is insulting their own commitment and motives by claim that UNLIKE them, YOU are the one who cares about a solution, and reducing all their sincere and dedicated efforts to effect change to a knee-jerk partisan pissing contest between people who would rather get in one another's way than solve the problem.

Yeah. Put all the uniformed jerkwads who flit in, sniff at the contentious political atmosphere and flit back off to their ivory towers to disdain the rest of us, into camps and gas chambers. "For thou art neither hot nor cold, but because thou art lukewarm, I will vomit thee out of my mouth."


Suck it. It's our game, and if you don't like how it's played, go cry on the sidelines with the other cheerleaders. Just don't get in our way.