Ahh... the voice of experience.:cool: I say that we should end this discussion before things get really nasty. Already people seem to be going out of the box to hurt one another.

EDIT: Or at least chang the subject off of the political spectrum.

I'm not sure we're on the same thread here. Where exactly is this happening?*

*No neo-ultra-conservative talking-head dead-heads named Ann Coulter were injured in the making of these posts. We were sure to use holograms of the subject and we received permission from the Republican Party, the NRA, Jerry Falwell and Rush Limbaugh prior to submission.

P.S. Groin, I find it interesting that you will go out of your way to give a good rep to someone who denigrates liberals and basically labels them as great Satans, such as your post here...

...but if someone pokes fun at one of your ideologists, they receive a bad rep and you claim things have gotten nasty and 'people seem to be going out of the box to hurt one another'. The windows in your glass house are rather smudged, my friend, perhaps you should spend some time spring cleaning. To be honest, I am rather taken aback by your hypocrisy.

Instead of going after the ideas, everyone seems content with going after the people themselves.

In my defense, I saw Animalmother's point very accurate and I approved it. However, you will note that that was early in the debate, before everything got heated, and I have stayed out of it, listening, every since.

Great Satan is not a word to joke about! I have found no text from Animalmother, or anyone else, that mentions the words Satan, devil, or anything else that resembles the great Satan. You are taking things to the extreme and have no proof whatsoever. This is what I mean, this subject has gotten so heated that you are beginning the think with your heart instead of your head.

I disapproved of your post and so I gave you a negative rep., I did not insult you in it in anyway, I did not insult your beliefs. If you want to give me a negative rep. for what I'm saying now that's OK by me, that's why I wrote my name at the end so you knew who it was coming from.

Hypocrisy, what hypocrisy? I told you how I felt in the previous post and when you still didn't listen I disapproved,and I let you know as such. I did not "hurt" you with foul language or take the time to look up an article that slanders a particular political leader (sound familier). How is disapproving of your antics hurting you?

Thank you,
G.R.

*chimes in*

What was the original topic of the thread? Ah yes.

It is a good point that Saruman can be looked upon as a manipulating politician. That's really a thing I am sure everybody can agree with. However, I tend to look at Animalmother's view as rather simplified, if anything else. Yes, Saruman can be seen as a nice archetype of a corrupt, people-manipulating politician with all sorts of traits you named. But why leftist, necessarily? He can be ANY politician who uses rhetorics and manipulates others for his own cause, (ev. not actually caring about what he is preaching) - and such politicians exist, and in both camps. He can be a politician building his career on saying "I am bringing you a change!" or "Don't worry, I will see to it that the old values are not disrupted!" I am sure Saruman would be capable of doing both, depending on the situation when it would suit him (many-coloured robes! "I will be red, or blue, or green, whatever is currently needed"). Remember his double-dealing with both Sauron and the Free Peoples (the thing about old values is exactly what he has been saying to Théoden, or actually even Gandalf). So here you go - neither red nor green nor blue nor yellow, but a chameleon. That is Saruman of Many Colours.

I merely said Ann Coulter 'never inhaled or exhaled' (I was not the one to look up the article about her fondness for the Grateful Dead, that was Bêthberry). How exactly (and by any stretch of the imagination) is that slander? Actually, in written form it would be libel, but that is beside the point. I then went on to point out that 'no neo-ultra-conservative talking-head dead-heads named Ann Coulter were injured in the making of these posts'. Let's see, is Ann Coulter a neo-ultra-conservative? Yes, I believe she may give herself that descriptor. Is she a talking-head? Yes, that is a description for every commentator on TV, no matter their political persuasion. Is she a dead-head? Yes, by her own admission (if you were unaware, a dead-head is an ardent follower of the Grateful Dead).

Hmmm...I am taking things to an extreme? I think not. The term 'Great Satan' is actually levelled at Western politicians (particularly the U.S. government) quite often by commentators in the Muslim world. You seemed enchanted and agreed with Animalmother's anathemization of liberal politicians (which, in essence, equated Hitlerian rhetoric and social engineering with current, as he called them, leftist-liberals). You may exchange 'Great Satan' for 'Eternal Judas' if you like (that is perhaps more apt for Saruman in any case).

You are evidently incapable of discerning the difference between a pun about an individual with the systematic attack on an entire belief system; therefore, any further attempts to discuss the matter would be futile.

Sorry for the digression, but I will not comment on this thread any longer.

Please can you stop arguing! People! People!

Legate, I like your idea about the many colours corresponding to the many positions and viewpoints he is willing to take to achieve Supreme Ruling Power (I probably would give you a rep but I think you are doing well enough in that area *cough*two squares*coughcough*)