Just curious -

[D. Scarlatti]

Originally Posted by alphamale

Does anyone NOW doubt the utility of the term "feminazi"?

I don't doubt its utility but ms. thrope's point about her uterus being no concern of yours seems to have escaped you.

[ChuckF]

Originally Posted by alphamale

Does anyone NOW doubt the utility of the term "feminazi"?

Does anyone NOW doubt the utility of the term "ms_ann_thrope completely fucking owned alphamale"?

[alphamale]

Originally Posted by ChuckF

Does anyone NOW doubt the utility of the term "ms_ann_thrope completely fucking owned alphamale"?

Ahhh, put a cork in it, dimwit!

[Adam]

Originally Posted by alphamale

Uh, political history 101 for you: The word "liberal" as it is used in america means almost exactly the opposite of what it did in the nineteenth century, that's because the american left hijacked the term in the early twentieth century. The word still has the original non-hijacked meaning in other parts of the world. You cannot be a classical liberal and modern liberal unless you have multiple personalities.

Hey, did you happen to read what I wrote? No? I didn't think so. As I noted, I do try to distinguish betwen the part of my political thinking that is rooted in classical political liberalism (i.e. the rule of law, the rigts of the individual, etc.) and the part of my political thinking that is more 'modern liberal' by referring to the latter as 'progressive'. And, no, there is no inherent contradiction between the two, although early liberals did tend to favor fewer economic regulations than modern liberals do. You know what happend though? This might be hard for you to grasp, but the world done changed! Sheeoot! While an unregulated market was more conducive to individual liberty than the various economic systems that preceded it (serfdom, mercantilism, etc.), some people began to notice that a completely unregulated market could still quite detrimental to indivudual liberty, so liberals did what they still do, and what intelligent people in general do; they changed their ideas to fit the new reality! Some people call this 'flip-flopping'. Those people are stupid.

Thanks for playing!

[Adam]

Originally Posted by ms_ann_thrope

But yeah, alphamale, you know what? Sometimes I think about deliberately getting pregnant, JUST SO THAT I CAN HAVE AN ABORTION. I'll be happy to send you the hoovered-out tissue if you like! I was always planning on having a suction-aspiration abortion if I ever needed one, but for you, I'd be willing to risk my health through the second trimester so that I could send you the scraps from a D&X. You could serve them on little toasts, topped with some caviar!

No, wait, I wouldn't, because you're a complete douchebag and not worth stretchmarks or morning sickness (something I'm sure your poor mother laments to this day having endured to bring what ended up being you into this world). However, I would be more than happy to send you one of my used tampons -- one of the ones with big, ugly, fried egg-looking bloodclots stuck to it -- so that you can revel in the power and glory and possibility that is my fertility! I mean, since you seem to think that ANY woman's uterus is your concern, it's only appropriate that you should have a totem. From me, to you, thanking you for your interest in my welfare.

That
Was
Beautiful

I'm in tears.

[alphamale]

[QUOTE=Adam]

Originally Posted by alphamale

Uh, political history 101 for you: The word "liberal" as it is used in america means almost exactly the opposite of what it did in the nineteenth century, that's because the american left hijacked the term in the early twentieth century. The word still has the original non-hijacked meaning in other parts of the world. You cannot be a classical liberal and modern liberal unless you have multiple personalities.

Hey, did you happen to read what I wrote? No? I didn't think so. As I noted, I do try to distinguish betwen the part of my political thinking that is rooted in classical political liberalism (i.e. the rule of law, the rigts of the individual, etc.) and the part of my political thinking that is more 'modern liberal' by referring to the latter as 'progressive'. And, no, there is no inherent contradiction between the two, although early liberals did tend to favor fewer economic regulations than modern liberals do.

Only an utter ignoramnus could think there is no contradiction! The first uphbolds the individual, the latter deprives him of property, the badge of his freedom. It constricts his freedom in a million other ways. Oh god, another "shit is ice cream" thread.

You know what happend though? This might be hard for you to grasp, but the world done changed! Sheeoot! While an unregulated market was more conducive to individual liberty than the various economic systems that preceded it (serfdom, mercantilism, etc.), some people began to notice that a completely unregulated market could still quite detrimental to indivudual liberty, so liberals did what they still do, and what intelligent people in general do; they changed their ideas to fit the new reality! Some people call this 'flip-flopping'. Those people are stupid.

The standard liberal "college textbook" BS. Saying an unregulated market is detrimental to individual liberty is like saying air is detrimental to breathing!

You're a lightweight! Go to the playground and impress a 2 year old with your fluff!

[alphamale]

That
Was
Beautiful

I'm in tears.