TP wouldn’t have put the icon there if they didn’t want us to use it. PLEASE use it. Thanks.

Comment by hterrya — November 2, 2007 @ 6:35 am

Excellent dodge! ;)

TP wouldn’t have put the icon there if they didn’t want us to use it. PLEASE use it. Thanks.

There, ignorant trolls! Now that I have repeated that meaningless derogatory smear for all of you smear trolls, those of us who are NOT trolls will call Dennis Kucinich what he TRULY is: PROGRESIVE!

What are these regressive trolls doing on a PROGRESSIVE site, anyway?

Let’s report the trolls for abuse, and STAY ON TOPIC.

UNDER THE BRIDGE REGRESSIVE TROLLS! You have been reported for abuse.

The TOPIC is a “strategy” document that IGNORES Dennis Kucinich’s PLAN to achieve what they call for in their document. Let’s talk about THAT!

Comment by hterrya — November 1, 2007 @ 6:45 pm

No need to get all excited, bud. Prog it is. Had you gotten past “radical left” without losing it, you would have seen that I addressed the topic posted by TP which is “prog strategic drift” not Kucinich’s plan for anything. Seems a conservative is doing a better job of staying on topic than you are, bud. But I didn’t report ya for abuse. That would be intolerant. ;)

Comment by impeachcheneythenbush — November 1, 2007 @

Ok, far left. I would be happy to discuss what that means on the appropriate thread. This one is about progressive’s strategic drift on Iraq. I keep seeing prog posts complaining

Comment by Lefty Patriot — November 1, 2007 @ 2:56 pm

Now that you’ve gotten that out of your system, how about a discussion of the topic “Progressives lack clarity on Iraq.” Perhaps you failed to notice that part of my comment, since we all know that progs don’t avoid the issue. ;)

Comment by Lefty Patriot — November 1, 2007 @ 2:54 pm

You won’t forget, but you are significantly left of center, hate Bush, and would probably never vote for a Republican. The majority of Americans are near the center, are much less likely to blame Bush for 9/11, Katrina and bin laden and disagree with some of his policies but don’t hate him. Most Americans don’t hold one man’s failures against an entire party. Otherwise, the Dems and Republicans would both be gone. Both parties have had many failed policies and scandals over the years. It’s foolish to think Republicans will never have the White House again if you consider the history of the office. ;)

Comment by hterrya — November 1, 2007 @ 6:45 pm

I have noticed you are awfully quick to call for others to report abuse. Could you tell me what constitutes abuse in your mind? Did you report my comment in 40 as abusive? I said nice things about Kucinich, while Lefty Patriot said he had to “sink” to appearing on O’Reilly for publicity – did you report Lefty?

If it weren’t for me reporting the troll for abuse, we could still be talking about Clinton and the Media Putz.

Instead, the TOPIC is: A “strategy” document that IGNORES Dennis Kucinich’s PLAN to achieve what they call for in their document.

Let’s talk about THAT!

There, ignorant trolls! Now that I have repeated that meaningless derogatory smear for all of you smear trolls, those of us who are NOT trolls will call Dennis Kucinich what he TRULY is: PROGRESIVE!

What are these regressive trolls doing on a PROGRESSIVE site, anyway?

Let’s report the trolls for abuse, and STAY ON TOPIC.

UNDER THE BRIDGE REGRESSIVE TROLLS! You have been reported for abuse.

The TOPIC is a “strategy” document that IGNORES Dennis Kucinich’s PLAN to achieve what they call for in their document. Let’s talk about THAT!

Comment by impeachcheneythenbush — November 1, 2007 @ 2:11 pm

Aw c’mon, impy, do I also have to define “willing” and “pull” and every other word I used to get you to address the issue? Can nothing be accepted for the sake of discussion? We all know Kucinich is left of every other candidate. If I said far left instead of radical left, would you have still found some way to avoid the actual discussion? Is there any term to describe his position in regard to the others that you would consider acceptable? If so, imagine that I used that term instead. ;)

Comment by upright left — November 1, 2007 @ 2:48 pm

Fine. “Far left” then. Now…define and argue against them. I’m not the one avoiding actual discussion here. You are. You flung out a term, without defining what you meant by the term. It’s called “hit and run.” Back it up or shut up.

Comment by Keltoi — November 1, 2007 @ 2:27 pm

Because she doesn’t need to sink to that level for publicity, and Dennis does. Very simple, like you.

Comment by upright left — November 1, 2007 @ 2:48 pm

if by radical left you mean in favor of freedom, democracy and the rule of law, loyalty to the Constitution and compassion towards all Americans, then radical left will do just fine. It certainly is the polar opposite position of the radical rightwing, fascist mini-me tyrants you fools have thrown up.

Comment by upright left — November 1, 2007 @ 1:59 pm

You conveniently forget 9/11, Katrina, Bin Laden and the myriad Bush failures and embarrassments. We won’t, for decades.

Comment by impeachcheneythenbush — November 1, 2007 @ 2:11 pm

Aw c’mon, impy, do I also have to define “willing” and “pull” and every other word I used to get you to address the issue? Can nothing be accepted for the sake of discussion? We all know Kucinich is left of every other candidate. If I said far left instead of radical left, would you have still found some way to avoid the actual discussion? Is there any term to describe his position in regard to the others that you would consider acceptable? If so, imagine that I used that term instead. ;)

Who was a guest on the O’Reilly show last night! I was impressed he ventured into that forum. Ironically, he is the furtherst left of any of the Dem candidates, yet he is the only one who will go on to the conservative boogeyman’s show. I have to respect him for that, even if I disagree with him. If Hillary is “right of center”, why won’t she go on O’Reilly?

Comment by upright left — November 1, 2007 @ 1:59 pm

Please define “radical left” issues for us. Then provide your argument for calling those stances “radical left,” and your counterarguments opposing them.

ha! yes, i remember that…
wonder if that opinion still holds…
.