Valtrex. How does valtrex affect coumadin….

You are so good.

What's important is how the lefties label things. That's the key.

If I label rat poison "Coca Cola", would you drink it?

Politics is all about gesturing.

What Meyerson feels is largely irrelevant to the issue anyway (the substance of which I absolutely agree with Don on) – so the only reason to bring up whether he cares is to smear him.

That doesn't give me license to conclude you don't give a damn about [the poor].

You don't need a license … yet. When the statesmen starting licensing compassion, expect the licensees to start building themselves castles … or cathedrals … whatever.

I support free trade with few conditions, but the U.S. doesn't trade freely with the rest of the world as a matter of fact, so my support and five bucks will buy you a cup of coffee at Starbucks … for the moment.

I believe that Don supports free trade with few restrictions, but I'd like to see him address the established restrictions more forthrightly, like restrictions on immigration (trade in labor), international patents (which hardly existed before the 1990s), subsidies (like incredible state expenditures on non-commercial goods from Boeing and GE) and "health and safety" regulations of all sorts. The devil is always in the details, and I prefer discussing the details.

That doesn't give me license to conclude you don't give a damn about [the poor].

You don't need a license … yet. When the statesmen starting licensing compassion, expect the licensees to start building themselves castles … or cathedrals … whatever.

I support free trade with few conditions, but the U.S. doesn't trade freely with the rest of the world as a matter of fact, so my support and five bucks will buy you a cup of coffee at Starbucks … for the moment.

I believe that Don supports free trade with few restrictions, but I'd like to see him address the established restrictions more forthrightly, like restrictions on immigration (trade in labor), international patents (which hardly existed before the 1990s), subsidies (like incredible state expenditures on non-commercial goods from Boeing and GE) and "health and safety" regulations of all sorts. The devil is always in the details, and I prefer discussing the details.

What is the difference between caring about the poor and actively hurting them and not caring about them? You can't eat caring, Danny.

Thus, if he doesn't understand that he's keeping people in poverty, he's a moron. If he publicly advocates for a course of action that will hurt the poor, then he's a dangerous moron and deserves to be identified as such.

If he purposely proposes to keep some poor in favour of others, then he's not…um…as compassionate as he claims to be. Since the left is all about "feelings" and passion, I think it's pretty relevant.

So, he's either a lying asshole or a moron. Take your pick, but he's one or the other.

You don't understand the point of questioning caring and feelings? Are you serious? Have you never ever listened to a political speech? Politicians – particularly leftists – trade in feelings. If you don't see the point of what Don said, who really cares?

There are other areas – outside of trade policy – where I would probably think your conclusions end up hurting the poor

When you can name one, then we can talk. Otherwise, it's just your fantasies playing in your head.

And Al Franken is a comedian. What's your point?

Exactly my point when I said it's irrelevant. I'm glad you seem to agree with me. I'm not the one that seems to care what Meyerson thinks.

RE: "So, he's either a lying asshole or a moron. Take your pick, but he's one or the other."

Is this really how you approach people that disagree with you? I mean – I'm against Meyerson on this and many other points too. But I wouldn't go this far. It's possible to be wrong and not be a moron or a liar.

RE: "Politicians – particularly leftists – trade in feelings."

Right… and their feelings are equally irrelevant. But just because I question the arguments of a particular politician doesn't mean I conclude he hates poor people.

RE: "When you can name one, then we can talk. Otherwise, it's just your fantasies playing in your head."

My you're argumentative today! It wasn't a challenge to you – it's just a statement about getting the vitriol out of the discussion.

What Meyerson feels is largely irrelevant to the issue anyway (the substance of which I absolutely agree with Don on) – so the only reason to bring up whether he cares is to smear him

In a mob-rule society such as ours, the inanities being fed to the mob on a daily basis is relevant and important to the powerless minorities. The enlightened minority will have to do their tiny bit to shine light on the darkness being perpetrated by Meyersons of the world, whether the darkness is spread intentionally or unintentionally is immaterial.

It's probably because you do not view his writings as leading to dangerous and destructive ideologies for the many that have their views shaped by his.

>>It's possible to be wrong and not be a moron or a liar.<<

Maybe! But it's a very fine line if the person who is wrong is writing definitively…that's just my opinion, though.

>>Right… and their feelings are equally irrelevant<<

Except when those on the other side of the trade (of feelings) are encouraged to accept more governance as a result. Many of us who can see through the bullshit also have to suffer with more governance. In the climate change arguments, you like to bring up externalities. What's different with the externality that bad governance is…certainly those voters that can see through the bullshit feelings and class envy have to put up with the externality of what those voters who cannot see through it bring through their voting patterns.

No, it's because:

1. I can separate his feelings about the poor from the value of his perscription for the poor, and

2. Once those two are separated I can recognize that no matter what he personally thinks about the poor, it's irrelevant to the poor themselves. As Methinks said when he decided to agree with me, "you can't eat caring".

RE: "Maybe! But it's a very fine line if the person who is wrong is writing definitively…that's just my opinion, though."

And you are neither a moron or a liar for having it

RE: "What's different with the externality that bad governance is…certainly those voters that can see through the bullshit feelings and class envy have to put up with the externality of what those voters who cannot see through it bring through their voting patterns."

Be careful not to assume that voters you disagree with have succombed to "bullshit feelings". That's a really big assumption for you to make.

Either way – Meyerson demonstrates no ill will towards the poor. To query whether he cares about the poor is a little out in left field, I think.