Flint, that's a republican congressman's website. It's called propaganda, you'll find it's reasonably coloured information.

You forget about WWI then.

The allied forces beat Germany twice. You won't have any help now..

Wolfmother - Dimension

true.

"Every time I try to tell somebody that they often say: "polls are unreliable but there is some truth in it". Then usually follows a brilliant conclusion explaining the result."

Of course, there's some truth in them, but they tend to alter the voting behaviour, stricter rules should be applied.

"Yes, we should all be slaves to a benevolent state! Socialist tyranny is awesome. I wish I had the standard of living of China or Cuba!"

Yet you say that I'm offensive.

polls are unreliable by default..

A strong N-VA is in many ways a good thing, but they shouldn't be part of the actual government now. It's probably best for everyone if they chose to be in the opposition.
BHV will be split more easily, a state reform would be easier etc. The N-VA has chances to mature and could become a full fledged party in the next elections. I fear they still lack a bit of subtile politics. They'd make great opposition though!
Don't get me wrong, I rather like the N-VA. I'd never vote for them, but they're a proper party that drains all the lost votes on silly parties like VB and LDD. And it realizes concessions have to be made. I'd never vote for them though (well, I'd rather vote them than VLD).

It's not Straus' radetsky march East, I know that piece.

Bah. I was planning to rejoin you on doing this again, after I got a few points..

"Advocating a government with no limits on its power is advocating tyranny. I'm not interested in equivocating on word choice."

I never advocated limitless power to the government. I only advocate big responsible government. Some things (like health care) are better left to a body that consists entirely out of elected people rather than the free market. The first you can change all the time, the latter only wants to make profits out of it.

"I didn't say you've all been indoctrinated."

Well this seems to say otherwise: "I simply don't admire the BBC's quality particularly much. Perhaps you've grown used to propaganda and indoctrination in your news media as many on your continent have."

"The theory that everything is fair, that somehow government funded news media and free market news media are are magically equal in value, doesn't even have face validity. If that's your argument, you're not even trying, and there's no sense in responding. You're here accusing me of not accepting that we do things differently. But I'm merely discussing the differences."

No, if you claim we're all indoctrinated for merely supporting the idea that state funded media isn't so bad after all, you sort of push the discussion into a corner. Time and time again, people turn to insults when a different approach is suggested. Then it's not me who blows up the discussion, but then it's you. That was merely what I wanted to say. Or as you put it: "If that's your argument, you're not even trying, and there's no sense in responding".

You seem to be the only one around here that represents the american right wing movement intelligently (apart from Chris, but I think he's flying inside sometimes), and I have respect for your manner of debating, but that post you made, lade you look like you slided off into the more common style that gives me diarrhoea.

"This isn't a socialism is evil by default attitude, Commander Christ. Though I do believe that tyranny is evil and you obviously disagree. I simply don't admire the BBC's quality particularly much. Perhaps you've grown used to propaganda and indoctrination in your news media as many on your continent have. I don't desire to move in that direction."

I have never advocated tyranny whatsoever. There's a difference between not linking funding and controlling and supporting a tyranny. And the statement you made that we've all been indoctrinated is only as intelligent as a goose trying to mow the lawn. Another senseless EU vs. US thread is not what this board needs. If you can't accept that we do certain things differently, and that another approach isn't always worse than your approach or evil, than it only shows your narrow view (wich ironicly is always one of the first insults people use against your countrymen).

------

Note: I don't care wether the newspapers should be funded or not. I'm only saying that protecting agencies that supply verified newsfacts and other true information (wich varies to scientific magazines to international news) is a valuable thing and necessairy everywhere.