Island Dog Island Dog

Being a Conservative on the Liberal Internet

Being a Conservative on the Liberal Internet

Every day I visit tons of website, forums, and social networks for all types of topics, most of which are technology based in some sort of form.  This election cycle has really brought out the best of the liberal “group think” mentality regarding Obama.  On just about every social network Obama is praised as “the one” and any hint of disagreement with his policies or ideals is immediately responded with accusations of racism, or just plain insults.  Anybody who wants to claim that liberals are tolerant to others, please give me a shout because I can quickly debunk that.  Even here on our network of sites, there have been insults tossed at the slightest hint of either supporting McCain, or being against Obama.  I’m certainly not saying conservatives don’t dish out their fair share, but the mentality of liberals has once again bordered on the insane and hateful.

It’s tough being a proud conservative, as I will say what I think regardless of what the group and mob mentality is.  The real shame is so many people, especially bloggers in the tech area, are afraid to do the same.  I have received so many private notes and comments in support of standing up for conservatism, it’s almost crazy.  The best comparison I can make is how conservative actors in Hollywood are often ridiculed or turned down for roles because of their conservative beliefs, and the same mentality is going on right now in the blogosphere.  Conservative bloggers, some of which can be considered A-list are having to remain silent about their thoughts on Obama and McCain, simply because they are afraid of retribution from their employers or just not being able to pickup work from other sites.  It’s a shame, and it’s more telling about liberals than it is anything.

I am a conservative, I don’t like Obama, and I will never let anyone intimidate me because of that. 

2,672,633 views 1,276 replies
Reply #1051 Top

Your alleged accomplishments are also conveniently lofty. Shouldn't you be off jetsetting instead of acting like a bitter knowitall on a small forum..in the midwest.
End of quote

 

So John, does that mean your not a Pulitzer prize wining retired astronaut living on your own private island?  The fantasy...it is ruined. X(

Reply #1052 Top

I do have my own private bathroom :rofl:

Reply #1053 Top

Quoting vStyler, reply 2
I do have my own private bathroom
End of vStyler's quote

Sorry...35% of your bathroom belongs to China. Hope they don't try to "collect".   ;)

Reply #1054 Top

I do have my own private bathroom
End of quote

/me built his ....;)

Reply #1055 Top

Sorry...35% of your bathroom belongs to China. Hope they don't try to "collect".
End of quote

 

Hmmm....I thought that was where the 35% went when I flushed! :P

Reply #1056 Top

i thot this was going to die :(

Reply #1057 Top

Quoting Jafo, reply 4
I do have my own private bathroom

Jafo built his ....
End of Jafo's quote

All your Bases is Us.

Reply #1058 Top

Quoting WebGizmos, reply 5
Sorry...35% of your bathroom belongs to China. Hope they don't try to "collect".

 

Hmmm....I thought that was where the 35% went when I flushed!
End of WebGizmos's quote

And comes back to you as "Milk Products", "Pet Food" and "Children's Toys". All can be found at Wal-Mart ... and just about everywhere else.

  :puke:

Reply #1059 Top

Quoting eetmorsqrls, reply 6
i thot this was going to die
End of eetmorsqrls's quote

Noop. We're all trying to morph into something more ridiculous than it's predecessor. It's all part of "Continuous Quality Improvement".

Reply #1060 Top

Wow, what was this article about again? And how does a bathroom fit into all of this?

Reply #1061 Top

And how does a bathroom fit into all of this?
End of quote

The Chinese are coming to take my bathroom I just remodeled. Little do they know, I installed a steel door and bars on the window because I knew they were coming. I need to stock up on bullets! >:( }:)

Reply #1062 Top

No, I'm pointing out that the right wing here seems to have one thing in common - me, me, me. And I believe it's time to talk about we, we, we the people for a change.
End of quote

You have it backwards.  When liberals start walking the walk, you can claim the above.  Until such time, they are the me me me - with your money (if you are earning any).

"We the people" is the historical "we". Q.E.D.
End of quote

I guess you missed the second part where I blew it outof thewater that AMericans had done it?  But you dont seem to read even what you quote.  "We the People" (if you are referring to the pre-amble) is not the historical people, but the current population of the US.  It is clear to all but Chicago democrats that dead people have no rights.

I think it's safe to say that the American people as a whole are behind it by now.
End of quote

And you have empirical data to back up your fantasies?  Dont state your opinions as facts.

Only if you are measuring since 2001.
End of quote

No, it is a tax increase period.  I have $1000 today.  Next year, I will not.  My disposable income went down by the amount my taxes went up.  That is a tax increase.

Your only delusion is that you appear (note not a statement of fact, just an opinion) to think that all monies are the governments and what they graciously allow us to keep is a gift.  That is patently wrong and so far absurd.

and universally remembered as one of peace and prosperity
End of quote

Yes, we can forget the Twin towers in 1993, Sudan, The African Embasies, the Cole, Sudan, Afghanistan, even Iraq and Kosovo!  And of course Bush created the dot com bust 2 years before he took office!  YOu sling slogans without thinking about what you are saying, and have no retort for when you are called upon them.

You're assuming that Obama is going to be able to top Bush here?
End of quote

I assume nothing.  He is not even president yet, and already has his first to date.  His err and umms are an annoyance and one that most people will see as not of a smart man (perception, not reality is playing a role here) but of a very indecisive president that is a few quarts short of a bushell.  I dont have to assume, you just have to excuse.

Reply #1063 Top

Nancy Reagan DID do the whole spiritual mumbo jumbo thing.
End of quote

YOur ignorance is again showing.  Your opinion is not fact.  Better re-read what she beleived and did, and stop trying to spin Obama Gaffs (already appologized for - you dont appologize unless you are WRONG).

Nancy using astrologers to dictate her husband's schedule while in office...
End of quote

Hey Genius!  Using Astrology is not holding seances.  Of is making a speech in the Greek Parthenon, having a toga party?  Your logic would dictate it was.

Reply #1064 Top

Brad, you have the mind and experience of a small businessman in the midwest.  I have a great respect for that but it is no wonder that you don't see economic issues as I do.  Without violating MY right to privacy here, I can say...
End of quote

I think you assume too much there.  

On economics, there are certainly many different philosophies but a lot of what you say absolutely seems to me to show a very narrow view of economics.  And I don't say that meaning any disrespect but just that your views sound very much like the views of most people who don't have a lot of experience dealing with business economics.

I'll illustrate what I mean more below but I want to address a couple things you wrote first.

The SMALLEST company I have ever owned grossed $10+ million annually and had 60 employees at the time I sold my stake to my partners.

The most famous company I was senior staff/key man for grossed $100+ million annually and had a valuation of just under $1 billion 8 years ago.   It's a household name founded by household names.  At the time I left to form my own company, it had a staff of 2,000.

The last PROJECT I headed up (earlier this year, and why I can afford to take the rest of this year off) was as the Director/Writer/Producer of the digital animation centerpiece of a $2 billion entertainment complex.   I built a company larger than Stardock in November just to complete this one project.  And I did it in two weeks, pulling some of the top talent from all over the world to do it.  This was done on my word and reputation alone.

I have been fortunate enough in my life to have creatively contributed to FIVE different billion dollar franchises and have collaborated with the most famous and successful people in the world.  Again, without violating my personal privacy here, I can say that one of them is Star Wars.  The other four are just as well known.

And, odds are, it's safe to say that you or your family own products related to ALL of these franchises.

In short, Brad, no, I don't think small business.  I have been talking the economics of how billionaires see the world, because that's the calibre of men I have worked with.  So, it's no wonder you don't get it or me.  And it's also why I'm always talking about the BIG picture here, the movers and the shakers.

End of quote

But none of what you say implies you have any understanding of economics. 

For example, let's say you're heavily involved in the entertainment industry where a given project involves the formation of lots of LLCs.  

When they make a Star Wars movie (for instance) they form numerous companies to produce it. Many of these companies are disolved after the project is completed.  Each of these companies, on paper, make many millions of dollars and employ lots of people.

And technically, they ARE companies. But they are one-project companies. 

Similarly, Hollywood actors and producers form companies all the time, companies worth many millions of dollars and employing lots of people in order to accomplish some specific objective.

Outside of Hollywood, there are companies formed that manage the investment portfolios of wealthy clients. These companies may employ many people and manage millions, if not billions, of dollars of capital.

Closer to home, many game companies will turn each project into its own corporation with the producer in charge of it. I know of some extremely well known game studios that are set up like this. But the general managers and such of these companies don't necessarily have familiarty with economics or business. 

But none of these examples imply that the people who run these organizations, projects, etc. have any serious understanding of economics. It is often that these companies are set up where the talent and/or project lead is also the "owner" of the business.  That doesn't make them qualified to speak on macro economics.

So when I use my experience as evidence that I know something on this. It's not just that I have run a successful business that makes N millions of dollars a year.  It is that my personal talent is not that heavily involved in what the company produces but rather my talent is my ability to run the business and it's a business I started from nothing and built by making products and services over a long period of time. The emphasis being that it's the same business over many years dealing with the production of a wide variety of products and services, managing budgets, etc.

In fact, you outright say the smallest company you've ever run is a 10 million dollar company with 60 employees. This outright implies that you've only been involved in the types of companies I mention above. And there's nothing wrong with that. It just doesn't serve as evidence that you're familiar with business economics.

Now, I'm not saying you don't know how to do any of that. It is only that the things you say don't jive with an understanding of business economics. (which again, I'll talk about below).

But what really annoys me here is that I have to get all egotistical just because you're insecure.  That's NOT who I am.
End of quote

I am not sure how I'm being insecure. I don't think you're sounding egotistical because you say you have lots of money or whatever. I do think you sound egotistical because you strongly imply that those who disagree with your political views are somehow greedy, selfish "me me me me" types (and by imply, I really mean you outright say these things).

Now, you say you want to talk about issues, that's fine, but you keep ignoring them choosing to focus only only personal things so I'll bring up some of the things I mentioned that you ignored:

  1. Regarding hiring you wrote "I don't dispute that, since more money in your hands is a good thing, if you indeed pass it down to your employeers.".  I responded pointing out that the money I earn isn't buried in the back yard. It gets spent on a variety of things.  I want you to explain why 435 people in congress are better qualified to spend that money than I, who earned it, am.  I obviously have a track record of creating wealth. Those 435 people in congress have a terrible record with managing money.
     
  2. You have stated that we will get universal healthcare and it will only require our tax rate to go back to the way it was under Clinton.  What do you base this on? There's no evidence to support this.  In addition, our health insurance premiums have decreased over the last few years thanks to more competition in insurance companies and changes in government regulation (like health savings accounts). Our employees get world class health insurance.
     
  3. I have stated flat out that if our taxes are increased, it will cost jobs here. 
     
  4. You have stated that Bush "tanked" the economy but don't explain how.
     
  5. You have said my beliefs and my deeds are contradictory because I give heavily to charity. You have never explained how they are contradictory. I believe that the people who earn money are more competent to decide how that money is spent than the 435 people in congress whose job security is based on getting 51% of their constituents to vote for them regardless of why.  I keep mentioning the 435 people issue (535 if you count the senate) because when you talk about "the government" you're realling talking about 435 people.  I think the collective wisdom of 300 million individuals trumps 435 politicians any day.
     
  6. You have said that right-wingers are all about "me me me me" but you don't explain what you base this on other than right-wingers not thinking the federal government (the 435 people in the house of representatives) is better qualified to spend that money than they are. I should also mention that there are plenty of studies and books that show that conservatives good more to charity, volunteer more, give more blood, etc. than liberals.  It should be noted that Obama and Biden have given less to charity in the last 10 years than McCain has done in any single year for the past 10 years even when looking at it as a % of income.  In other words, there's no evidence at all to show that the left is more compassionate or "we" oriented at all.
So there 6 issues, off the top of my head, that haven't been addressed that I think are pretty significant.

 

 

Reply #1066 Top

I would think too, but every time I do I realize just how retarded this country is. I therefore have abstained from all rational thought and am doing quite well because of it ^.^

Reply #1067 Top

So Brad,

 

If I understood correctly what you are, in a way, trying to point out, you are basically saying that while Excalpius may claim to have worked for several companies that made lots of money, that does not necessarily mean he has the knowledge of how the economics part worked.

Kinda like looking at the resumes of 2 people, 1 has several comapnies he worked for, major companies, with great reviews and the other has 1 or 2 with several years invested in each. The second guys sound better in my opinion. More stable, more knowledge.

Am I correct in my assumption?

Reply #1068 Top

To sum up economics in the U.S....The government and irresponsible big business digs the hole...and we...as in us and our next several generations are left to try and fill it in. Which is pretty much an exercise in futility since they just keep making the hole bigger and bigger since there isn't anyone stopping them. I think what we need is a private group of people that can take direct and immediate actions against this type of behavior. If your company goes belly up....sucks to be you. Especially these car makers that pay they're workers high wages to put out crappy cars in the first place. Let'em go under.

Reply #1069 Top

it seems to me to be an examle of your inability to say you were wrong about anything in your insistence that Obama did not make a gaff here.
End of quote

I think if you look back you will see that I have admitted I was in error at least twice when I have been corrected.

Reply #1070 Top

I think if you look back you will see that I have admitted I was in error at least twice when I have been corrected.
End of quote

Then it would be my turn to stand corrected!

Reply #1071 Top

You have it backwards. When liberals start walking the walk, you can claim the above. Until such time, they are the me me me - with your money.
End of quote

They can't do any worse with our money than the GOP has over the past 8 years.  I believe they will handle it sanely with an eye on everyone's needs, not just their rich friends and patrons.  And if they don't they I will be one to call them out.  But based on what they do or don't do, not based on your fears of what they might do.  That's just silly.

"We the people" is the historical "we". Q.E.D.
End of quote


I guess you missed the second part where I blew it outof thewater that AMericans had done it? [quote]

If you say so.  I read everything and felt my response demonstrated quite clearly that you had missed the letter and spirit of what our founding fathers intended for this country.

I think it's safe to say that the American people as a whole are behind it by now.

And you have empirical data to back up your fantasies? Dont state your opinions as facts.
End of quote

After 80 years, no President or congress has done anything but tinker with the welfare state, clearly with the support of the majority of the American people.  Except for some right wing nutjob pundits, no one even talks about repealing welfare anymore, except from the perspective of welfare REFORM...in the hopes of making it more effective.  You can't seriously see large scale protests over welfare out there?   There are NONE.

Your only delusion is that you appear (note not a statement of fact, just an opinion) to think that all monies are the governments and what they graciously allow us to keep is a gift. That is patently wrong and so far absurd.
End of quote

Actually, it appears to be your delusion that I said anything of the kind.  Please stick to debating the actual points I am making.  Putting words into my mouth and debating some phantom imaginary poster only discredits your position.

and universally remembered as one of peace and prosperity

Yes, we can forget (long list of minor typical year after year life goes on crap)...
End of quote

I have forgotten nothing.  I lived through all of that.

The USS Cole, first towers bombing, etc. were standard terrorist fare.  Nothing on the level of 9-11.

We had UN mandates to go into Kosovo and help/be the peacekeepers.  We only maintained the no-fly zone during Clinton's administration as the first gulf war was during Bush Sr.'s administration.  Not sure why you are bringing that up, as it's clear that there is again no comparison with either of the two Bush Iraq wars and we didn't spent a trillion dollars on preemptive invasion or lose 4,000+ soldiers in combat during those years.

Either way, THERE'S NO COMPARISON, objectively or relatively. 

You're assuming that Obama is going to be able to top Bush here?
I assume nothing. He is not even president yet, and already...
End of quote

He's better than Bush for the past 8 years...period.  :grin:

Reply #1072 Top

Nancy Reagan DID do the whole spiritual mumbo jumbo thing.

(insults edited out)  Better re-read what she beleived and did,

End of quote

I cited the references in the earlier post. 


Hey Genius! Using Astrology is not holding seances. Of is making a speech in the Greek Parthenon, having a toga party? Your logic would dictate it was.
End of quote

And again, you're saying I said things I didn't say.

And, for the record, holding seances is EQUALLY IGNORANT as consulting astrology.  Period.

You also might want to proof-read better.  It's getting hard to make sense of your point through the typos and insults.  :grin:

Reply #1073 Top

Quoting CharlesCS, reply 17
So Brad,

 

If I understood correctly what you are, in a way, trying to point out, you are basically saying that while Excalpius may claim to have worked for several companies that made lots of money, that does not necessarily mean he has the knowledge of how the economics part worked.

Kinda like looking at the resumes of 2 people, 1 has several comapnies he worked for, major companies, with great reviews and the other has 1 or 2 with several years invested in each. The second guys sound better in my opinion. More stable, more knowledge.

Am I correct in my assumption?
End of CharlesCS's quote

Somewhat.  What I am saying is that in many companies, the guy in charge is "the talent".  Maybe he's a great designer or a great artist or an actor.  But that doesn't mean he's a business person.  At Stardock as well as in most businesses, I am in charge of running the company. I don't make the skins or design the skins or write the software. My value add is that I know a lot about a lot of things but I am not the key talent in any of the actual products.

For example, let's say someone is a famous visual effects artist who did worked on Titanic's special effects. That person could easily get investment capital and start an effects house with lots of employees and work making visual effects for movies.  But that doesn't make the CEO good at business economics.

As a real world example, I work with Chris Taylor, founder and CEO of Gas Powered Games. Terrific guy. Genius. But he is the central talent that GPG is built around and he would be the first to tell you that his forte is not business economics. 

Stardock's success, for instance, is not because I'm personally skilled at making skins or writing software or developing games. The people around me are not there to accentuate my existing capabilities at desktop enhancement coding or skinning. I've never written a line of code in any of our key desktop enhancement programs. I'm not an artist. 

Most businesses are more along the lines of a Stardock than of the model in which the founder/CEO is the hyper-talent that the company revolves around.

 

Reply #1074 Top

Quoting WebGizmos, reply 18
To sum up economics in the U.S....The government and irresponsible big business digs the hole...and we...as in us and our next several generations are left to try and fill it in. Which is pretty much an exercise in futility since they just keep making the hole bigger and bigger since there isn't anyone stopping them. I think what we need is a private group of people that can take direct and immediate actions against this type of behavior. If your company goes belly up....sucks to be you. Especially these car makers that pay they're workers high wages to put out crappy cars in the first place. Let'em go under.
End of WebGizmos's quote

Whether it is the government or a big company, we should always be wary of concentrations of power. The more power that the individual has in a society, the freeer and more prosperous we can become.

The fundamental problem with Republicans and Democrats is that they both back a concentration of power.  The Democrats prefer the government and the Republicans prefer big business. Neither should be trusted.

 

Reply #1075 Top

And, for the record, holding seances is EQUALLY IGNORANT as consulting astrology.  Period.
End of quote

BTW, for the record, it wasn't Nancy Reagan who did seances. It was Hillary Clinton.