Notice how many pro-abortion advocates are quick to call Schlafly “vicious” and “poisonous”. Compare this to the actual practice of abortion.

Nothing is more vicious and poisonous than abortion itself.

I sure hope that anyone who plans to vote for this ticket will do a LOT of listening, especially to poisonous people like Schlafly. This woman, although ‘book-learned’ is dangerous and hateful.

I prefer the Enlightenment myself, rational thinking and all that.

Yes the Enlightenment was the beginning of modernism, as well as influencing the type of government we have.

Are you referring to my “modern conceit”?? I never said anything about deconstruction or postmodernism. No, I’m definitely not a friend of either perspective. Anyway, the enlightenment deeply shaped modernism in many important ways. If that was what you were meaning to ask.

Maybe David is a practitioner of deconstructionism?

Yes, this is correct.

You clearly don’t have a thesis of your own; you just like to nay-say other people. Your postings are totally content-free. In the time it takes you to write your empty little rants you could easily point us to some academic writings or authors or articles that illustrate/explain/substantiate your views, whatever they are.

And ONCE AGAIN, stop deluding yourself that you have actually provided evidence for anything you’ve asserted above. If you say otherwise you’re seriously putting into jeopardy your claim to “intellectual rigor.” Talk about posing! LOL!

Once again, another mere assertion without the slightest attempt to support your thesis, whatever it is.

Essing, I think you are a poseur. My view of history may be “conventional” but at least that makes it well-documented and accessible. If you have an unconventional “everything we know is wrong” thesis then that places even more of an obligation on you to document or support your assertions.

“NONE of what you have attributed to me have I ever said or argued.”

Could have fooled me.

David your view points are pointing to the right, you even said you have leanings to libertarian party.

I’m a progressive, not a liberal, I’m not wealthy.
I am middle class. I am registered as an independent.

I think we should have a universal health care system.
As this would be good for small businesses, which are the backbone of our country right now.

Moreover, please stop pretending that you are providing “evidence.” You may be fooling someone reading this – but you aren’t fooling me.

In any case, (and no, this was not my original point) you are expressing a very conventional idea of history and I have to say that I simply and strongly disagree with your rather historically-provincial viewpoint that somehow we have, via your alleged progress, achieved a deeper apprehension of reality, and one that is unique in history. It’s the modern conceit – and a dangerous and arrogant one at that.

David your right your input to me is useless. Why? Because I have spent the last 8 years listening to people like you and I for one am tired of it. The Bush and the right have failed. They have all but bankrupted this country and lowered our standing in the world.

Have you looked around lately; a lot of people are hurting financially. Your going to sit here and tell me I should be nice to you and your beliefs because you think one should be civil based on your idea of civility. For one I see you picking arguments with every person on this thread; look at the last few posts.

I spell it out for you; I don’t like right wing demigods who think that they know better.

Does this make me intolerant? Yes it does to a certain extent.
The right has had its day in the sun as far as I’m concerned. They have shut people down for years with rhetoric. Such as if you had any opposing views on the war in Iraq you were pegged as being unpatriotic.

Do feel my contempt for you, no not you personally but what you stand for. I am sorry sir but after 8 years of the worst presidency in modern history I am clear out of pleasant bromides.

Where did I say they need my wisdom?

Anyway, are you saying that you can have a strong democracy and make wise political decisions if people don’t know the basics of their own nation? If they don’t know what’s in the Constitution, what the major items of the federal budget are, who their elected officials are or how they voted on items they care about, or how a bill is passed into law? I’m trying to prevent authoritarianism because if you have an ignorant or uninterested electorate, that power vacuum will be filled by someone.

There are no easy answers – but there ARE answers. Relativism is a cowardly – yet self-flattering, yet self-deceiving- posture.

You’re long on assertions but you haven’t provided any support for why you believe this to be so. I’m one of the people who think that solutions to social problems ARE incredibly complex, subtle, and nuanced. Please provide some evidence why I should not think so.

BTW, people debate about big problems such as unwed pregnancies, druge abuse, healthcare, or illegal aliens, but to give you an idea, try looking at a small, relatively simple problem: How do we get people to save more for retirement? When you think you have an answer, read up on some actual research on the topic by Professor David Laibson at Harvard. Here are some wonderfully entertaining lectures of his at the London School of Economics . . .

http://richmedia.lse.ac.uk/publicLecturesAndEvents/20071121_1830_thePsychologyOfSavingAndInvestmentStickyBiasesAndTheCurseOfEducation.mp3

http://richmedia.lse.ac.uk/publicLecturesAndEvents/20071120_1830_thePsychologyOfSavingAndInvestmentInvestmentForDummies.mp3

http://richmedia.lse.ac.uk/publicLecturesAndEvents/20071119_1830_thePsychologyOfSavingAndInvestmentIntertemporalChoice.mp3

. . . these are great talks and fun to listen to while driving or doing some routine activity where you want to occupy your mind. I listen to stuff like this while mowing the lawn, raking, house-painting, etc.