Anonymous wrote:

TheManWithAUsername wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a really weak defense of the character of our generation. You are basically saying we are just a different style of bad.

No, as I said, self-centered is morally worse than foolish. If you disagree, I assume you'll tell us why.

But who's defending our generation? I'm just saying they were worse. I haven't heard you defend them, so what's your point?

Our generation built a life on credit card debt, student loans, and easy mortgages, and now we are screaming for the government to fix it for us.

Speaking of ignorant people of our generation. The long-term debts we face are a) taking care of the Baby Boom via Medicare and Social Security; b) the massive infrastructure maintenance costs that the Baby Boom has kicked down the road for decades. To repair the infrastructure that their parents built.

Take a look at what a college education cost in 1970, then shut your pie-hole.

Anonymous wrote:My point is that all of us are responsible for our country's current direction, and the people who point to the "other" - whether it is another generation, another race or ethnicity, or another income level - are the problem.

I said nothing of the kind. I just said that they suck(ed) on the whole. I could say that the Huns sucked; that wouldn't be blaming all of our current problems on them.

Now that you've finally made your point, though, it's ridiculous to say that each of us is equally responsible. There are huge disparities in both power and correctness. Are you as responsible as W? How about the homeless schizophrenic on the street - is he equally responsible?

Apply that idea to other places and times and see how absurd it is. Blacks in 1840 shared equal responsibility for slavery, the people of North Korea all share equal responsibility for their situation...

I hope you won't stand by that statement. It reminds me of the lazy moral and intellectual cop-out parts of the media practice all the time.

Anonymous wrote:In that way, you are no different from a guy who complains about government welfare (either poor or retirees) but readily takes his household mortgage deduction and does not acknowledge that he is the beneficiary of the same welfare policies that he decries. And who probably has a sizable 401(k) and 529 that grow tax-free.

Ridiculous again. The fact that some judgments are hypocritical doesn't make all judgments invalid.

When I look at the problem of rape in this country, I primarily blame the rapists. Now tell me that I'm a hypocrite, and that I'm the real problem with the rape situation b/c I'm one of those who points a finger at "the other."

Anonymous wrote:But this idea that some other generation screwed up the country, when in fact our entire modern history is one big blame-sharing exercise, is I think beneath you as a poster.

I appreciate your general review. I wouldn't say that, and I didn't. This is now the third time that I've specifically stated that our generation has been foolish while theirs was self-centered, and I draw a moral distinction there. I never said which has done more harm. For multiple posts now you've ignored that clear statement of mine and pretended that I was saying that we've been perfect and they ruined everything.

TheManWithAUsername wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

TheManWithAUsername wrote:No, as I said, self-centered is morally worse than foolish. If you disagree, I assume you'll tell us why.

But who's defending our generation? I'm just saying they were worse. I haven't heard you defend them, so what's your point?

Our generation built a life on credit card debt, student loans, and easy mortgages, and now we are screaming for the government to fix it for us.

Anonymous wrote:And did we really NOT vote for deficits? An awful lot of us voted for Bush. Maybe not a majority, but close enough to it.

You continue to refuse to adopt an actual point in all of this, and simultaneously refuse to present a reasoned attack on my general principle.

You appear to be one of those many people who thinks that arguments are per se worth having and winning, and that nit-picking constitutes "winning."

My point is that all of us are responsible for our country's current direction, and the people who point to the "other" - whether it is another generation, another race or ethnicity, or another income level - are the problem.

In that way, you are no different from a guy who complains about government welfare (either poor or retirees) but readily takes his household mortgage deduction and does not acknowledge that he is the beneficiary of the same welfare policies that he decries. And who probably has a sizable 401(k) and 529 that grow tax-free.

Look, I don't mean to pick on you personally. But this idea that some other generation screwed up the country, when in fact our entire modern history is one big blame-sharing exercise, is I think beneath you as a poster.

Anonymous wrote:

TheManWithAUsername wrote:No, as I said, self-centered is morally worse than foolish. If you disagree, I assume you'll tell us why.

But who's defending our generation? I'm just saying they were worse. I haven't heard you defend them, so what's your point?

Our generation built a life on credit card debt, student loans, and easy mortgages, and now we are screaming for the government to fix it for us.

Anonymous wrote:And did we really NOT vote for deficits? An awful lot of us voted for Bush. Maybe not a majority, but close enough to it.

You continue to refuse to adopt an actual point in all of this, and simultaneously refuse to present a reasoned attack on my general principle.

You appear to be one of those many people who thinks that arguments are per se worth having and winning, and that nit-picking constitutes "winning."

Anonymous wrote:
Another poster with delusions of grandeur channeling the 60's...

It has turned you conservatives into cranky grandpas, shaking your fists at those long haired hippies. We love that. Like the hippies of the 1960's, they will change the national dialogue, and you'll never understand why. It will make no sense to you and that's going to piss you off even more. Worse still, the Dems don't control them and so we really don't need to take responsibility for them. They aren't like the Tea Party, they aren't running for office on the Republican ticket.

So bring it. Every post full of anger and loathing lets us know that OWS is doing a great job. Every time someone writes a real zinger, it makes me want to write a check. Let me know if you want it handed to that guy you think is too lazy to get a job, or the trust funder who you believe will never work a day in his life. I don't care, I'm sure the money will be put to good use.

Other than the occasional posting here every couple of weeks or so lampooning the rats, rapes and general stupidity who even remembers OWS? Comparing OWS to the 60's is just so sad...

This poll from Rasmussen pretty much sums it up.

Rasmussen Reports: 51% See Occupy Wall Street Protesters As Public Nuisance
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/pol..._protesters_as_public_nuisance

Enough is enough as far as most voters are concerned when it comes to the Occupy Wall Street protesters. In fact, 51% of Likely U.S. Voters now view the protesters as a public nuisance. Only 39% see them as a valid protest movement representing the frustrations of most Americans.

A majority of Americans think OWS is a nuisance and the rest just don't care.

85% of Americans disapprove of Congress. Maybe we should send the OWS protestors to Capitol Hill and send the congress to sleep in a park.

Another poster with delusions of grandeur channeling the 60's...

It has turned you conservatives into cranky grandpas, shaking your fists at those long haired hippies. We love that. Like the hippies of the 1960's, they will change the national dialogue, and you'll never understand why. It will make no sense to you and that's going to piss you off even more. Worse still, the Dems don't control them and so we really don't need to take responsibility for them. They aren't like the Tea Party, they aren't running for office on the Republican ticket.

So bring it. Every post full of anger and loathing lets us know that OWS is doing a great job. Every time someone writes a real zinger, it makes me want to write a check. Let me know if you want it handed to that guy you think is too lazy to get a job, or the trust funder who you believe will never work a day in his life. I don't care, I'm sure the money will be put to good use.

Other than the occasional posting here every couple of weeks or so lampooning the rats, rapes and general stupidity who even remembers OWS? Comparing OWS to the 60's is just so sad...

This poll from Rasmussen pretty much sums it up.

Rasmussen Reports: 51% See Occupy Wall Street Protesters As Public Nuisance
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/pol..._protesters_as_public_nuisance

Enough is enough as far as most voters are concerned when it comes to the Occupy Wall Street protesters. In fact, 51% of Likely U.S. Voters now view the protesters as a public nuisance. Only 39% see them as a valid protest movement representing the frustrations of most Americans.

A majority of Americans think OWS is a nuisance and the rest just don't care.

And did we really NOT vote for deficits? An awful lot of us voted for Bush. Maybe not a majority, but close enough to it.

TheManWithAUsername wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a really weak defense of the character of our generation. You are basically saying we are just a different style of bad.

No, as I said, self-centered is morally worse than foolish. If you disagree, I assume you'll tell us why.

But who's defending our generation? I'm just saying they were worse. I haven't heard you defend them, so what's your point?

Our generation built a life on credit card debt, student loans, and easy mortgages, and now we are screaming for the government to fix it for us.

Anonymous wrote:This is a really weak defense of the character of our generation. You are basically saying we are just a different style of bad.

No, as I said, self-centered is morally worse than foolish. If you disagree, I assume you'll tell us why.

But who's defending our generation? I'm just saying they were worse. I haven't heard you defend them, so what's your point?

TheManWithAUsername wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We were all voting age when we launched those wars and cut those taxes.

Our (at least my) generation didn't vote for Reagan and the advent of deficits and privatization designed to enrich the richest.

Re Bush's policies, I'm complaining about selfishness, not stupidity. The younger and poorer people who support Rep economic policies do so because they're foolish, which is less reprehensible IMO.

Anonymous wrote:And I see nothing to indicate that fidelity has increased in our generations.

I don't know either way, but I don't hear a bunch of BS about how it's all about freeing oneself from an oppressive system.

This is a really weak defense of the character of our generation. You are basically saying we are just a different style of bad.

Anonymous wrote:We were all voting age when we launched those wars and cut those taxes.

Our (at least my) generation didn't vote for Reagan and the advent of deficits and privatization designed to enrich the richest.

Re Bush's policies, I'm complaining about selfishness, not stupidity. The younger and poorer people who support Rep economic policies do so because they're foolish, which is less reprehensible IMO.

Anonymous wrote:And I see nothing to indicate that fidelity has increased in our generations.

I don't know either way, but I don't hear a bunch of BS about how it's all about freeing oneself from an oppressive system.

We were all voting age when we launched those wars and cut those taxes. And I see nothing to indicate that fidelity has increased in our generations.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^^ this! How many conservatives WERE 1960's hippies?

A Hell of a lot. They were self-indulgent little shits who thought they had the world figured out when they were 18, and they're self-indulgent little shits now. Only difference is that they've got wealth to protect now, and can't get it up any more.

The Worst Generation.

War sucks when I might have to fight it. Conventional morality sucks when I want to fuck my friend's spouse. Taxes suck when I want to buy another power suit. Deficits suck when they threaten my peaceful retirement.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Zzzzzzzzzzzz

Signed,
99%

^^^ this! How many conservatives WERE 1960's hippies?

A Hell of a lot. They were self-indulgent little shits who thought they had the world figured out when they were 18, and they're self-indulgent little shits now. Only difference is that they've got wealth to protect now, and can't get it up any more.

Anonymous wrote:I understand symbolic perfectly well. The symbolism is wrong, both factually and tacticly.

I love people who use deliberate literalism as a rhetorical technique.

If I told you to get a clue, you would probably tell me I need to specify where, because you are in the wrong location to obtain one.