You’re going to be disappointed if you’re looking for somewhere to argue with conservatives who think they have “the Truth.” David Horowitz, many of my Freedom Center colleagues, and myself tend to fit into a kind of “postmodern conservatism.” We don’t have “the Truth.”
http://booksindepth.blogspot.com/2009/07/david-horowitzs-conservatism-postmodern.html

I mean if you keep an eye on the comments you’ll often see me arguing with “True Believer” conservatives who are often rather dogmatic.

In fact if you’re opposed to a religious mindset then I’d encourage you to read Horowitz’s “The Politics of Bad Faith.” In it Horowitz makes the case that the Left is a religious movement and a secular faith.

When we say “the Left” we’re not talking about every single person who identifies with the Left. Think of the Left as one might think of Christianity or Islam. Within these religions/ideologies there’s plenty of diversity, but there are some things which they have in common. To say “Christians believe Jesus rose from the dead” is a generalization but still a moderately accurate one even if there are Christians who don’t believe Jesus rose from the dead. Most do, so it’s a fair statement.

Demanding that we basically speak in E-Prime inserting “maybe” or “most” or “some” as a qualifier in every sentence shouldn’t be necessary. So just give us the benefit of the doubt that we’re reasonably intelligent and not bigoted.

“it was used to demonize an entire people to help further the “official” Israeli narrative”

We don’t demonize an entire people. We are critical of Islam for some very legitimate reasons; we do not hate Muslims.

Sorry….

But you COULD eliminate the problem you know……………

DAVID’S FREEDOM TO PUT FORTH ARGUMENTS ISN’T YOURS TO GRANT YOU ARROGANT POS !

No dodging involved. Though I thought this statement covered that there are respectable conservative positions, I do not know what you mean by “DO YOU RESPECT NEWSREAL’S BLOGGERS AND COMMENTERS?” I respect their worth as human beings and their freedom to hold whatever ideas choose. The respect for their ideas (and their consistency and honesty) is on a case by case basis. As an atheist who’s argued theology with believers, I tell them that I consider it a sign of respect to share my views openly and honestly; to do otherwise meant that I didn’t care what they thought and that they didn’t matter. That isn’t the same thing as necessarily agreeing with their views, just that any worthwhile discussion starts with an honest compare and contrast. Sometimes there’s much common ground, sometimes there’s very little.

I agreed with David Horowitz on the freedom to run the Mohammad cartoons but having seen his presentation on it with Yaron Brook, also felt it was used to demonize an entire people to help further the “official” Israeli narrative (i.e. our side = reasonable / their side = irrational). He did the same thing with his quote about “leftists are in fact the enemies and oppressors” of the groups he listed. Stated as an absolute is its biggest weakness. It’s professing some sort of omniscience that somehow knows that at all times in all ways this is true and conversely, the conservative side is always the non-opppressing non-enemy. To me, it’s that sort of mentality that belies the Republican claim of loving America when there is a clear hatred of around half of the population (you cannot be much clearer than labeling an entire group holding a particular view “the enemy”).

Haven’t read enough of the authors here to know which ideas to connect with which writer. Therefore, my comments deal with taking an issue with some element of the idea or substance, and not so much on the writer.

As far as the desire for dialog, that would be nice. It’s not always easy to separate the legitimate responses from the smokescreens. I’m dealing with contrary views at abot a 10/1 ratio with only a fraction of them dealing with tangibles. I wouldn’t dream of telling you what to do, but your advice to Swemson was good; chill. Your side doesn’t always have to sound like a pack of alarmed howler monkeys. If you think your ideas and philosophies have so much merit, you needn’t be so defensive. Rest assured knowing you alone possess the truth and that others cannot see things with the same remarkable clarity that you do. I should be like the gnat encountering your thick elephantine hides.

You have granted me the freedom to leave and I grant you the freedom to put forth an argument anytime you see fit. At that time, I will gladly engage.