GLWNJ/NJ Migration of 03/08?

[Mr. Kotter]

:hmmm:

Was today to be the "Great Left Wing Nut Job/ (General) Nut Job" Migration Day.....or some such?

Has anyone else noticed the conspicuous, but refreshing and invigorating, absence of LWNJs & "general" NJ's today?.... :)

(I realize full well this thread could end it, but I wanted to comment on how nice it's been...... :D)

[patteeu]

It's boring when the court jesters aren't here to provide entertainment. :(

[Mr. Kotter]

It's boring when the court jesters aren't here to provide entertainment. :(

Not if we can get all those that left because of them.....to come back. :D

[Reaper16]

How does one become an NJ? IS that like McCain after 3 bottles of Robutussin?

[Mr. Kotter]

How does one become an NJ? IS that like McCain after 3 bottles of Robutussin?

Nothing like that.

Just come here....and rant endlessly about nothing but exclusively ideological dogma that is often merely a regurgitation of DNC or RNC talking points.....with little or no critical thinking done to actually analyze such posts.

The six or eight worst offenders are conspicuously absent today.

[Reaper16]

Nothing like that.

Just come here....and rant endlessly about nothing but exclusively ideological dogma that is often merely a regurgitation of DNC or RNC talking points.....with little or no critical thinking done to actually analyze such posts.

The six or eight worst offenders are conspicuously absent today.
No, not a RW or LWNJ. But just simply a NJ, no branch designation.

That seams difficut to accomplish.

[Chief Henry]

Nothing like that.

The six or eight worst offenders are conspicuously absent today.


I think they're out looking for a job.

[CRONUS]

So who is not posting, don't have time to go through all the threads and figure out. DEnise does not post every day under normal circumstances. I assume jAZ is missing. Ammorix does not post every day. I see a post or two from New Chief and banyon. So who else besides jAZ that is a regular?

[SBK]

So who is not posting, don't have time to go through all the threads and figure out. DEnise does not post every day under normal circumstances. I assume jAZ is missing. Ammorix does not post every day. I see a post or two from New Chief and banyon. So who else besides jAZ that is a regular?

How bout your boy rxjake?

[Pitt Gorilla]

Uh, Kotter, your thread poses a bit of a conundrum; we know you're here because you are posting the thread.

[Taco John]

What is Kotter blathering on about? I guess if I was a Bush apologist, I would celebrate slow news days too.

[Adept Havelock]

What is Kotter blathering on about? I guess if I was a Bush apologist, I would celebrate slow news days too.

SSDPersonality.

J/K Kotter. ;)

[alanm]

I think they're out looking for a job.That or the Welfare checks arrived.
:)

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Could someone please reconcile this quote with the speaker's expressed ideology:

"I'll remind you, I'm a registered Democrat....a bluedog Democrat--I have no interest in helping the GOP. "

WTF?

[Taco John]

That's a pretty funny quote. It's almost as he doesn't know what a bluedog Democrat is. He just likes the way it sounds and decided that's what he'd like to be called. I mean, why be a boring ole "Republican" when you can be a "Blue Dog Democrat?"

As far as I know, the only thing that makes a person a Blue Dog Democrat is to proclaim that you're a Democrat while at the same time serving at the lap of the Republicans. Does that about paint the picture we see here?

[memyselfI]

Could someone please reconcile this quote with the speaker's expressed ideology:


WTF?

:hmmm:

Well, in a nutshell, it's comparable to my proclaimations of being the Queen of England...

[Mr. Kotter]

Truth be told, I lie somewhere between the DLC and the Bluedogs; it depends on the issue....

Despite Blue Dogs' differing degrees of economic and social conservatism, they share a strong orientation toward fiscal responsibility, and as a rule work to promote positions within the House of Representatives which bridge the gap between the two extremes.


For the edification of the ignorant:

:)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Dog_Democrats


The Blue Dog Coalition
The Blue Dog Coalition is a group of moderate to conservative Democrats in the United States House of Representatives; it currently has 35 members.

The coalition was formed in the 1994 104th Congress as a way for more conservative congressmen of the primarily liberal Democratic party to have a unified voice in Congress. The group's name came from the older description of many in the South who "would vote for a yellow dog if he ran as a Democrat" combined with the feeling that moderate-to-conservative views had been "choked blue" by the Democratic party in years prior to the election.

They were notably successful in a special election of February 2004 in Kentucky, to fill a vacant Representative's seat. They were also successful in the November 2004 elections, with three of the five races where a Democrat won a formerly Republican seat in the House won by Blue Dog Democrats. Freshman Blue Dogs in the House are sometimes known as "Blue Pups."

Often, the group will be instrumental in striking a balance between liberal and conservative ideas. Despite Blue Dogs' differing degrees of economic and social conservatism, they share a strong orientation toward fiscal responsibility, and as a rule work to promote positions within the House of Representatives which bridge the gap between the two extremes. Blue Dogs are an important swing vote on spending bills and, as a result, have gained an influence in Congress out of proportion to their small numbers. They are frequently sought after to broker compromises between the Democratic and Republican leadership.

The Democratic Leadership Council
The DLC is an influential non-profit corporation that argues that the United States Democratic Party should shift away from the its traditionally liberal positions. Conservative and moderate Democratic party leaders founded the DLC in response to the landslide victory of Republican candidate Ronald Reagan over Democratic candidate Walter Mondale during the 1984 Presidential election. The founders believed the United States Democratic Party needed to shift to the center to remain viable during the Reagan era. The DLC hails President Clinton as proof of the viability of third way politicians and a DLC success story. Critics contend that the DLC is effectively a powerful, corporate-financed mouthpiece within the Democratic party that acts to keep Democratic Party candidates and platforms sympathetic to corporate interests and the interests of the wealthy.

Differences between the Blue Dogs and the Democratic Leadership Council
Blue Dog Democrats tend to differ ideologically from another coalition of moderate Democrats, the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC). The DLC describes itself as new Democrat and positions itself as centrist while taking liberal positions on social issues and conservative positions on economic issues and trade. Democrats who identify with the Blue Dogs, on the other hand, tend to be social conservatives, but have differing positions on economic issues ranging from fiscal conservatism to economic populism. For example, most Blue Dogs are strong supporters of gun rights and get high ratings from the National Rifle Association, many have pro-life voting records, and some get high ratings from immigration reduction groups, which cannot be said for most members of the DLC. On economic issues, Blue Dogs span the spectrum from fiscal conservatives to supporters of labor unions, protectionism, and other populist measures, while the DLC tends to favor free trade.

A small number of newer Blue Dogs, however, hold positions closer to those of the DLC, and some Blue Dog Coalition members are also DLC members. Blue Dogs share with the DLC a desire to keep the Democratic Party grounded in their view of the political center, and to ensure that the party does not drift too far to the left of their own positions and no longer appeal to what they believe to be the majority of U.S. voters.

If the DLC are the "new Democrats", the Blue Dogs are almost surely "old Democrats", hearkening back to the party's past during the eras of Franklin D. Roosevelt and Harry S. Truman, and to the party's former electoral stronghold in the southern United States (see also: Boll weevil and Dixiecrats). Most members of the Blue Dog Coalition in the House represent rural districts, and a large proportion of them represent Southern states.

Differences between the Blue Dogs and the party's left wing
The Blue Dogs' moderate agenda in Congress has angered many in the Democratic party, as it often leads to them voting with the more conservative Republicans. In 2005, the members of the Blue Dog Coalition voted 32 to 3 in favor of the bill to limit access to bankruptcy protection (S 256). Congressman Collin Peterson was subjected to a heated round of questioning from colleagues in the Democratic Party over several votes where he strayed from the party line before being nominated as the Ranking Member on the U.S. House Committee on Agriculture, in what would otherwise have been a routine nomination.

On the other hand, some prominent Blue Dogs have also gotten strong support from progressive activists within the party, most notably Brad Carson of Oklahoma in his unsuccessful 2004 run for the U.S. Senate, John Tanner of Tennessee (whose Republican opponent in 2004, James L. Hart, was a radical eugenics advocate denounced by his own party), Jim Matheson of Utah, and Loretta Sanchez of California in her successful bid to unseat former Congressman Bob Dornan. Online fundraising efforts by liberal weblogs in 2004 named Brad Carson's campaign a top national priority. In some cases this support for Blue Dogs came about because the Republican opponent was seen as holding radical right wing views; in other cases the support is because in some states like Tennessee, Oklahoma, and Utah, a conservative Democrat is seen as the only kind of Democrat who can be viable at the polls. Some progressive activists also view the Blue Dogs as an important part of a Democratic Party big tent coalition, which will give the party important credibility with rural voters and social conservatives, while viewing the Blue Dogs as perhaps easier to swing to the left on fiscal and trade issues than the DLC.

Others in the party's left wing disagree, and have promoted the idea of running future primary challenges against both Blue Dog Coalition and DLC members in an effort to unseat Democratic Party members they view as unreliable or too conservative.

[Dave Lane]

It's boring when the court jesters aren't here to provide entertainment. :(


Well you're here so I guess that theory is blown all to hell...

Dave

[patteeu]

Well you're here so I guess that theory is blown all to hell...

Dave

Who are you again?

[WilliamTheIrish]

The smell of napalm in the morning...

[go bowe]

Nothing like that.

Just come here....and rant endlessly about nothing but exclusively ideological dogma that is often merely a regurgitation of DNC or RNC talking points.....with little or no critical thinking done to actually analyze such posts.

The six or eight worst offenders are conspicuously absent today.well, which is it?

6 or 8?

btw, i didn't know there was still that many of you... :p :p :p

[Cochise]

I can see why Kotter might piss some people off, but it is also pretty lame that every thread ends up being mudthrowing at him ad hominem.

[go bowe]

I can see why Kotter might piss some people off, but it is also pretty lame that every thread ends up being mudthrowing at him ad hominem.aw c'mon...

there's a difference between ad hominem and ad kidding...

it's a chiefs planet institution to tease him about his multiple identities (from the past)...

besides, mud is better than hot tar...

[Mr. Kotter]

I can see why Kotter might piss some people off, but it is also pretty lame that every thread ends up being mudthrowing at him ad hominem.

Ah, shucks, Cochise.....I didn't know you cared :redface:

Seriously though, I consider the source. When go bo and Phil got on me last year for a little bit (not just kidding, but called me on something that "crossed the line')--that made me think. Some of these clowns--my purpose is to rile them, so I just laugh.

Thanks though. Heh. :p

[Baby Lee]

aw c'mon...

there's a difference between ad hominem and ad kidding...

it's a chiefs planet institution to tease him about his multiple identities (from the past)...

besides, mud is better than hot tar...
ad hominy
http://www.rchs.com/harvest/hominy.JPG
ad kidney beans
http://www.mccullagh.org/db9/1ds2-4/kidney-beans.jpg

[Taco John]

I can see why Kotter might piss some people off, but it is also pretty lame that every thread ends up being mudthrowing at him ad hominem.



Maybe if he wasn't such an empty hat, it wouldn't be so easy.

[|Zach|]

Ok, this thread is stupid.

[Mr. Kotter]

Maybe if he wasn't such an empty hat, it wouldn't be so easy.

You know...that might mean something to me, if it were coming from someone else.

Have you ever wondered what people here really think about you? I might tell you if you are curious, because I've attended a number of CP events...

Have a nice day, Taco. :)

[CRONUS]

You know...that might mean something to me, if it were coming from someone else.

Have you ever wondered what people here really think about you? I might tell you if you are curious, because I've attended a number of CP events...

Have a nice day, Taco. :)

ROFL

Like TJ does not know that people at Chiefs related events are going to say bad things about a Broncos agitator that posts on this BB so regularly. I am sure he would be proud.

[Chiefs Express]

I can see why Kotter might piss some people off, but it is also pretty lame that every thread ends up being mudthrowing at him ad hominem.:shake:

[Mr. Kotter]

ROFL

Like TJ does not know that people at Chiefs related events are going to say bad things about a Broncos agitator that posts on this BB so regularly. I am sure he would be proud.

Eh, it goes beyond the "he's a troll" and those that are offended by his "agitation".....Garcia, listo, MHM, and others certainly don't fall into the same category.