Thank you. I thought I was paying attention! I'm sure I at least came close to the origin of the matter. Anyway, thanks again for clearing that up, and I hear you on this, I don't disagree, and again, may the best candidate win.

By the way, I'm a lifelong Republican and congenital conservative. So much for the convenience of jamming people into boxes.

There is no longer any way to distinguish between the neocons and neolibs. Both are equally unhinged and looney. As Yeats once noted, the best are silent while the worst are full of passionate intensity and the center can not hold.

However I do apologize to you on another matter. You've been civil and admitted your political orientation which is more than most of the righties on these threads You've also been somewhat articulate which is way way more most of the neolibs.

Have a great day.

With apologies to Barry Goldwater, Extremism in any form is worse than any vice. You're right -- we're looking from man to pig, pig to man, and as Orwell observed, the differences have all but disappeared. This always happens when people go to extremes. It's the one place they can all hang out together.

Thank you very much, for your congenial response. It is much appreciated. I'm never ashamed of what I am, but I do attempt to continue to grow and improve. We do what we can.

Speaking of Yeats and "the center of interest", looking at this thread I am reminded of something my old friend, the late John Fahey, wrote, with apologies to Yeats: "The center of interest will not hold."

Mine's pretty well worn through. You've provided some small comfort in this craziness. You have a great day your own self!

what is happening here. When we first joined Salon -

(my dad and I) he told me that this is a blog, where pretty intelligent people - who kind of have the same political views - exchange interesting arguments and ideas and where I could learn a lot. I did - and I also joined a debate club in school. The rule there is - to give a good argument - to listen to others and finally come to a conclusion, based on the facts. I get a lot of "facts" here but there never seems to be anybody who is won over. Everybody only seems to give statements and my dad explained to me that happens with "old people" who already have made up there mind before the argument begins.

Is that true - or is there one person on this thread who has been won over by the argument of somebody else today??

"By the way, I'm a lifelong Republican and congenital conservative. So much for the convenience of jamming people into boxes."

I contend that there are no "Clinton republicans" but that there is a chance of "Obama Republicans". Do you have an opinion about that? Will Republicans cross over to support Hillary? Will they do so to support Barack?

See your ranting is the exactly the reason the Democrats keep losing base after base.

So Hillary's "single vote" in your sacrosanct opinion overrides all the good she's done. Ever. Leaving aside aside the idiocy of it, I'm guess there are millions and millions if not billions of people in the world that disagree with that.

We can probably start with the 20 or so million people that have fallen under the poverty line and the other approximately 70 million members of the working poor.

The DLC, the WTO, HRC, and whatever other boogeyman and rational you've created for YOUR OWN DUMB DECISIONS haven't done anything. YOU cost Gore the election in Florida alone because he siphoned off more votes than Bush stole. The electoral loss Nader cost Gore of New Hampshire alone would have swung the election to him. It's YOUR FAULT NEOLIB .

Sitting there in your comfortable lifestyle pontificating on your phoney moral superiority. No wonder so many Americans have come to loathe the neolibs.

"my dad and I) he told me that this is a blog, where pretty intelligent people - who kind of have the same political views - exchange interesting arguments and ideas and where I could learn a lot. I did - and I also joined a debate club in school. The rule there is - to give a good argument - to listen to others and finally come to a conclusion, based on the facts."

Mr/Ms pieceofcake:

I have been posting on blogs for almost 20 years. In all that time, I have seen few meetings of the mind, and a lot of venal nastiness. Regretably, the web is often a place of the venting of spleen, and seldom of the meeting of minds.

dataguyx wrote: I contend that there are no "Clinton republicans" but that there is a chance of "Obama Republicans". Do you have an opinion about that?

Yes, I think it's very interesting. If you stand for core Democratic principles (e.g., universal health care), you're not likely to draw Republicans. "Obama Republicans" is another way of saying: my guy is a squishy centrist who doesn't believe anything. I'm sure you're not saying that.

God,I do feel your pain! And while I like your dad's explanation of debating and of Salon's letters department, competitive debating is a won orlost based on points awarded. There's no referee here. There's also no presumptive concensus, at least not anymore. I think there used to be.

I joined a debate club in school too -- one led by Ben Stein. We'd never have allowed a formal debate to deteriorate into what's happened here. Welcome to the digital age,though.

I really don't think anyone could score this debate here. It's a mess! Interesting, but who's gonna pick up afterward?

I think we'll find out who's been converted come November. I know, that's a long time to wait.

Gonna take a nap now.

The Dems keep losing base after base because they don't listen.

The biggest vote in Hillary's career was the war resolution, and yet, in my opinion, it is a bigger vote than any other votes she has done, and carries more weight in indicating the type of leader she is under pressure. If people disagree with me that is their business of course.

Your position that somehow my view is an opposite view of millions of poor people is in my opinion silly. One does not translate into the other. Did Hillary Clinton pull millions of people out of poverty? If so, I will be interested to hear how she did that.

I am not even sure what you are talking about, I did not vote for Nader and was appalled anyone else would. In fact, people who voted for Nader I thought were very wrong headed and I told some of them that (face to face, by the way) before the election. I think Nader is an arrogant putz.

Keep making things up however. It doesnt help Hillary Clinton.