Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dalakhani
You are unable to simply admit you are wrong and take the defeat with grace. I think its funny. I give you a definition accepted in every dictionary on the web? You say the definition is wrong. You say "no scholar would call Bush a socialist". So then i provide links to scholars that do indeed call Bush Socialist. What do you do? You say they need to be socialist scholars and question Roubini as reliable. LOL
In the meantime, you have provided nothing except rambling minutiae. Do you have anything to back up your point? Any quote from ANY scholar socialist or not??????????????????????????????
If not, you lose.  |
Still can't find anything huh?
If you refuse to answer my questions....that is fine....I consider the matter closed.
As for me saying that no scholar would call Bush a socialist, I shouldn't have said that and have admitted so in this thread. That was a legitimate overstatement on my part.
As for Roubini, I called him a "generally resepected economist" which I don't see as calling him unreliable.
Again, my point is relatively simple. If George W. Bush was a socialist, don't you think there would be a lot of socialist scholars celebrating this great shift by the G.O.P. to socialism? You have yet to give a single example of such an instance or answer my repeated attempts to get you to explain how a man who disagrees with probably 99% of what a party stands for is actually the same ideologically as that Party.
If you choose to celebrate that as a victory in this discussion, I know of nothing else to do other than to offer you my heartfelt congratulations.
Now seriously, I'm done with this conversation. I'll let this thread get back to discussing your ridiculous hypothetical/blame question.