Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 31

Thread: One of the problems with conservatives.

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    3,718

    One of the problems with conservatives.

    One of the problems that seems to come up often with conservatives is they can't live up to their own values.

    Tenn. GOP congressman's ex-wife had 2 abortions - CenturyLink™

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Limeyland
    Posts
    7,893
    You have had a Democrat President that liked to ejaculate over his intern and a serial groper.
    You also had a Democratic President plus his Attorney general that were serial adulterers...and their father who was a serial womaniser and a bootlegger....and their brother who crashed a car into a river when drunk and let the woman inside drown...and supported terrorists..and supported his rapist nephew.............


    Are we to believe the Democrats have no values to live up to?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    3,718
    Quote Originally Posted by cheaplebronsale View Post
    Nike Air Zoom Hyperfuse Houston, actuality we arise with an exoteric yield on basketball adulatory the arete of the sport’s midseason weekend.
    The mission ascendancy centermost in Texas, broadly apperceive by its radio alarm assurance “Houston,” provides the artistic afflatus for a appropriate accumulating of shoes for Nike Basketball’s assured leaders LeBron James, Kobe Bryant and Kevin Durant.
    Cheap Nike Air Zoom Hyperfuse Space analysis defies applied reality. To barrage into amplitude on a mission to acknowledge the alien can be mind-boggling. Exoteric species, alien planets, new constellations – there is no absolute to the abeyant for discovery. These absolute barriers aswell administer to Nike Basketball’s architecture philosophy- - no limits, no restrictions, abiding in analysis and discovery.
    What began as a simple abstraction by associates of the Nike Basketball architecture aggregation has embodied itself into a artistic anniversary and fabulous estimation for the game’s top players during basketball’s admired weekend. Our heroes arise in a abroad universe, area players are not just stars … They arise to activity as fabulous planets on anniversary of the three afterward shoes.
    Cheap Nike Air Zoom Hyperfuse For Sale
    An abiding force basic from fabulous Nike Amplitude Program (NSP) planet NSP-LJ6, LeBron James’ ascendancy was built-in from the agitable apparent in the planet’s mantle. He is accounted to accept journeyed to apple on a meteor fabricated of the galaxy's hardest actuality – atramentous diamonds.
    Technical allowances of the shoe cover feature arresting Nike Zoom cushioning, activating Flywire technology and Hyperfuse architecture -- a leash set to absolve its acerbity in Houston.
    KOBE 8 SYSTEM
    Engineered to the blueprint of Kobe Bryant’s Houston mission, with origins abiding on a planet apparent as NSP-KB24. The Ice Mamba circles the airy apparent as guardian of the 5 rings. The astute adept is accepted to bang with moves that leave his opponents frozen.
    Built for Bryant’s lightning acceleration and precision, the shoe is Nike+ Basketball enabled for the aboriginal time and this shoe aswell appearance Nike Zoom in the midsole insert. Nike Engineered Mesh high and concrete absorption complete the shoe.
    Identified as Dark Matter, the biological and atomic breakdown of this amount charcoal a addle for scientists. Early readings of its origin, NSP-KD35, accept beatific aback adverse letters of a planet that is accompanying solid, liquid, and gas – backdrop that accomplish his bold adjustable to any situation.
    Joining with Bryant for their adventure to advance the West to victory, this shoe is advised to the blueprint of Kevin Durant’s Houston mission. The KD V appearance the aggregate of Nike Zoom (forefoot) and Nike Air (heel) cushioning forth with Hyperfuse high and activating heel support.
    Houston, Actuality We Come
    Driven by the artistic eyes of Nike Basketball’s blush advance Eugene Rogers and clear extraordinaire Erick Goto, this 2013 accumulating distinctively congenital for Houston pushes the banned with meaningful, all-embracing storylines.
    The aggregation affable into Houston’s amplitude birth to actualize a apocryphal basketball cosmos led by Nike’s aristocratic three players – it was an intricate, artistic and fun activity advised to bless the game’s best.
    The amplitude abstraction aswell comes to activity through baddest Nike Basketball accoutrement including the Nike Hyper Aristocratic Galaxy shorts and accumulating of three t-shirts for James, Bryant and Durant.
    Nike Basketball has aswell abutting armament with , a clandestine ability area shoes yield on a activity of their own.
    The Nike Basketball shoes distinctively engineered for Houston – KOBE 8 SYSTEM, KD V and LEBRON X – will be accessible alpha February 15 at baddest retail food and at cheaplebronsale.com
    You look dumb enough, I bet you're a conservative.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    3,718
    Quote Originally Posted by gansao View Post
    You have had a Democrat President that liked to ejaculate over his intern and a serial groper.
    You also had a Democratic President plus his Attorney general that were serial adulterers...and their father who was a serial womaniser and a bootlegger....and their brother who crashed a car into a river when drunk and let the woman inside drown...and supported terrorists..and supported his rapist nephew.............


    Are we to believe the Democrats have no values to live up to?
    You should get dumber I bet it would make you look smarter.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    2,342
    Quote Originally Posted by gansao View Post
    You have had a Democrat President that liked to ejaculate over his intern and a serial groper.
    You also had a Democratic President plus his Attorney general that were serial adulterers...and their father who was a serial womaniser and a bootlegger....and their brother who crashed a car into a river when drunk and let the woman inside drown...and supported terrorists..and supported his rapist nephew.............


    Are we to believe the Democrats have no values to live up to?
    I think what is meant is the degree of hypocrisy that exists with conservatives. Not all and Liberals have their own issues as you point out. As I see it the problem is not so much the failure to maintain a value system one supposedly considers worthwhile, no one is perfect, but most conservative politicians don't act in way that one would expect from a person who believes strongly enough in certain ideals that they must impose them on others in the strictest terms. When politicians act this way they put themselves above and separate from the ethics they supposedly stand for.

    It is a failure of US politics that government is no longer Representative. We are now forced to follow the beliefs that most closely match those because our Representative will vote as he/she thinks based on their own values. Their hypocrisy only further undermines a damaged system. Liberals by definition are less affected by this, not never, but less often as their overall position is one of greater tolerance.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    1,575
    Quote Originally Posted by pappillion001 View Post
    It is a failure of US politics that government is no longer Representative. We are now forced to follow the beliefs that most closely match those because our Representative will vote as he/she thinks based on their own values. Their hypocrisy only further undermines a damaged system. Liberals by definition are less affected by this, not never, but less often as their overall position is one of greater tolerance.
    Incorrect. The overall position held by the liberal party is not one of greater tolerance. Rather it is a position of intolerance for positions and beliefs that run counter to their political ideals and support for special interest groups.
    If one cannot have an argument without resorting to hyperbole, name calling and emotional rhetoric, then they have lost the argument from their first post.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    2,342
    Quote Originally Posted by Xenamnes View Post
    Incorrect. The overall position held by the liberal party is not one of greater tolerance. Rather it is a position of intolerance for positions and beliefs that run counter to their political ideals and support for special interest groups.
    Sorry you are just absolutely wrong.

    lib·er·al
    [ líbbərəl ]

    broad-minded: tolerant of different views and standards of behavior in others
    progressive politically or socially: favoring gradual reform, especially political reforms that extend democracy, distribute wealth more evenly, and protect the personal freedom of the individual
    generous: freely giving money, time, or some other asset

    You have a tendency to get caught up in biased information presented by certain media outlets and looks like you have done so here.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    11,660
    Quote Originally Posted by pappillion001 View Post
    Sorry you are just absolutely wrong.

    lib·er·al
    [ líbbərəl ]

    broad-minded: tolerant of different views and standards of behavior in others
    progressive politically or socially: favoring gradual reform, especially political reforms that extend democracy, distribute wealth more evenly, and protect the personal freedom of the individual
    generous: freely giving money, time, or some other asset

    You have a tendency to get caught up in biased information presented by certain media outlets and looks like you have done so here.
    I think there is some confusion here. One can't say a liberal is anyone who adheres to the above definition while a conservative is anyone who says they are conservative. This is basically what we see here. You seem to imply a person isn't liberal if they are not tolerant of other views. There are numerous self identified liberals who have the viewpoint that the only views to tolerate are those that a liberal sees as correct. Likewise there are numerous self identified conservatives that do not adhere to the definition of a conservative.

    If you want to look at hypocrisy of people I suspect you will find it does not break by conservative vs liberal.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    1,575
    Quote Originally Posted by pappillion001 View Post
    Sorry you are just absolutely wrong.

    lib·er·al
    [ líbbərəl ]

    broad-minded: tolerant of different views and standards of behavior in others
    progressive politically or socially: favoring gradual reform, especially political reforms that extend democracy, distribute wealth more evenly, and protect the personal freedom of the individual
    generous: freely giving money, time, or some other asset

    You have a tendency to get caught up in biased information presented by certain media outlets and looks like you have done so here.
    Quite incorrect. A mere definition does not amount to tangible proof.

    What tolerance has the liberal party shown with regard to those that believe a fetus is alive and should not be terminated indiscriminately simply because the mother no longer wishes to carry it?

    What tolerance has the liberal party shown those that continue to maintain anti-homosexual standpoints?

    What tolerance has the liberal party shown those that continue to maintain that undocumented aliens should be treated as criminals and be deported rather than given blanket amnesty?

    What tolerance has the liberal party shown those that wish to indulge in cigarettes in public places?

    What tolerance has the liberal party shown with regard to an individual's choice in religious beliefs?

    What tolerance has the liberal party shown with regard to an individual's choice to not have health insurance?

    What tolerance has the liberal party shown with regards to an individual's right to consume large caffeinated beverages and trans fats because that is what they wish to consume?

    What tolerance has the liberal party shown with regard to the ownership of firearms that they believe the populace doesn't need because they are not of a century's old traditional design?

    There is a great deal of intolerance displayed by many members of the liberal party. They are not a party of tolerance and acceptance unless it is a position they agree with.
    If one cannot have an argument without resorting to hyperbole, name calling and emotional rhetoric, then they have lost the argument from their first post.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    7
    I think the issue lies in the labels we place on people. I have been called a Liberal, republican, blue dog, and Rhino simply because my thoughts and value structure don't fall in a neat party box.

    Brief example of my belief.

    I don't believe in abortion(general rule there are some exceptions), but I also don't believe in beating people over the head with my belief. So while I would disagree with someones choice I would support them because in the end that is a choice they will have to live with not I.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    2,342
    Quote Originally Posted by Xenamnes View Post
    Quite incorrect. A mere definition does not amount to tangible proof.
    I see accepted meanings that allow for the successful expression of ideas and concepts are of less import as evidence than your opinion?


    What tolerance has the liberal party shown with regard to those that believe a fetus is alive and should not be terminated indiscriminately simply because the mother no longer wishes to carry it?
    First a liberal party does not make that choice, but as for an answer they do not try to make it illegal for one to be able to choose nor is that choice forced upon someone. IF one does not want to have an abortion they are not required to have one. Also there comes a point early on where abortion is no longer legal. Seems there exists some element of what each side would like in the arrangement. Can you explain how completely banning it would be more tolerant?

    What tolerance has the liberal party shown those that continue to maintain anti-homosexual standpoints?
    Last time I checked they were leaving it to an impartial third party to decide, but again if you disagree with the homosexual lifestyle then don't be a homosexual.

    What tolerance has the liberal party shown those that continue to maintain that undocumented aliens should be treated as criminals and be deported rather than given blanket amnesty?

    What tolerance has the liberal party shown those that wish to indulge in cigarettes in public places?

    What tolerance has the liberal party shown with regard to an individual's choice in religious beliefs?
    This is to good to pass up. Like all of your false claims you seem to think religious beliefs are a fact and therefore have some special significance in the public space. How are liberals preventing people from worshiping as they believe? They have places of worship that are free from taxes, they are permitted to express their beliefs however they want as long as it does not interfere with anthers ability to do the same.

    What tolerance has the liberal party shown with regard to an individual's choice to not have health insurance?

    What tolerance has the liberal party shown with regards to an individual's right to consume large caffeinated beverages and trans fats because that is what they wish to consume?

    What tolerance has the liberal party shown with regard to the ownership of firearms that they believe the populace doesn't need because they are not of a century's old traditional design?

    There is a great deal of intolerance displayed by many members of the liberal party. They are not a party of tolerance and acceptance unless it is a position they agree with.
    Care to cite some examples where a liberal party is attempting to prevent something that does not infringe upon the freedoms of another?
    Last edited by pappillion001; 04-23-2013 at 04:07 PM.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    2,342
    Quote Originally Posted by Steeeeve View Post
    I think there is some confusion here. One can't say a liberal is anyone who adheres to the above definition while a conservative is anyone who says they are conservative. This is basically what we see here. You seem to imply a person isn't liberal if they are not tolerant of other views. There are numerous self identified liberals who have the viewpoint that the only views to tolerate are those that a liberal sees as correct. Likewise there are numerous self identified conservatives that do not adhere to the definition of a conservative.

    If you want to look at hypocrisy of people I suspect you will find it does not break by conservative vs liberal.
    I agree and don't attempt to suggest that hypocrisy belongs only to people who claim to be conservative. In a broad sense and I would agree not the best way to define an individual, conservatives hold themselves to a higher moral standard, no that does not mean liberals have less moral integrity, although on an individual basis they might. We have to start somewhere though and then can offer more descriptions to give an accurate portrayal of where a person stands both in general terms and specific issues.

    Maybe a better way to explain is we start with a broad definition of liberal and conservative with each having beliefs that place them within those labels. As we refine down to the individual, ones values may see them become better described with a contrary label to their overall belief. As an example my own beliefs would generally find me best described as liberal, but on some issues I am conservative. I think this is where your statement becomes applicable when the attempt is made to use a generalized term towards specific positions. It really doesn't work because it gives a description that may or may not be true.

    So to label someone a conservative or liberal is typically a description of their general philosophy on social issues and not meant to leave out the option of holding values of an opposing view on specifics.

    Conservatives traditionally have the view that a behavior is unacceptable as in the case of abortion or homosexuality. Having an abortion or being gay then puts them in a situation as I first described. The only time I take exception is when the view is expressed based on misinformation or the intent is prohibit another from whatever the issue is (reasonably speaking I don't suggest we allow child molesters because that prohibits their desire to molest children). I have no problem with someone taking a position on the basis of "because" as long as they are willing to say so instead of putting forth false evidence to cover it up.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    11,660
    Quote Originally Posted by pappillion001 View Post
    I agree and don't attempt to suggest that hypocrisy belongs only to people who claim to be conservative. In a broad sense and I would agree not the best way to define an individual, conservatives hold themselves to a higher moral standard, no that does not mean liberals have less moral integrity, although on an individual basis they might. We have to start somewhere though and then can offer more descriptions to give an accurate portrayal of where a person stands both in general terms and specific issues.

    Maybe a better way to explain is we start with a broad definition of liberal and conservative with each having beliefs that place them within those labels. As we refine down to the individual, ones values may see them become better described with a contrary label to their overall belief. As an example my own beliefs would generally find me best described as liberal, but on some issues I am conservative. I think this is where your statement becomes applicable when the attempt is made to use a generalized term towards specific positions. It really doesn't work because it gives a description that may or may not be true.

    So to label someone a conservative or liberal is typically a description of their general philosophy on social issues and not meant to leave out the option of holding values of an opposing view on specifics.
    I think one problem is that the definition of liberal and conservative has been abused over the years to the point where it is hard to tell what the definition actually is. In my opinion a conservative view is one where you resist change and prefer a traditional approach while a liberal view is one where you prefer departure from the past and exploring something new. Naturally I have conservative definition of conservative and liberal .

    Assuming the above, or some variation of the above, a single view could be both conservative and liberal depending on the time and place you are talking about. So support for the Bill of Rights would have been a liberal view back in 1791ish because they radically departed from the traditional government. Today, sticking to the Bill of Rights is traditional and therefore more of a conservative view. Further, a developing country adopting our Bill of Rights today might be considered a liberal view in their country.

    I realize no one thinks like this so I'm willing to recognize another definition for debates sake. Just about every self-identified "conservative" out there thinks low tax rates are a conservative value but I don't see how that's traditional; as an example.

    Conservatives traditionally have the view that a behavior is unacceptable as in the case of abortion or homosexuality.
    Yeah, this is true within the US.

    I have no problem with someone taking a position on the basis of "because" as long as they are willing to say so instead of putting forth false evidence to cover it up.
    I agree. I'd like to add that when discussing issues you generally have two different things you are discussing at once. You can argue for a process and a policy. For example, if we banned the color purple by popular vote I'd support the process from which that was done but I would oppose the policy. Now if a court banned the color purple because they think it is wrong I'd oppose the process and policy. This is exactly what happens to me when arguing about smoking in private businesses. In Virginia we banned it via the legislative process which I support and agree is legitimate but I oppose the policy (oddly enough I also rather enjoy no smoking in private businesses). This tends to get mixed up in people's minds a lot. To extend on this, you can also oppose a policy but like the result. I oppose a government policy mandating companies offer free birth control but at the same time I think every company should have a health insurance policy that offers it and without a prescription. Finally, you can oppose a policy but still use it to the fullest extent. For example, I don't think I should be able to deduct more mortgage interest on my tax return but you better believe I deduct every dime I pay.

    None of the above are hypocritical in my opinion.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    2,342
    Quote Originally Posted by Steeeeve View Post
    I think one problem is that the definition of liberal and conservative has been abused over the years to the point where it is hard to tell what the definition actually is. In my opinion a conservative view is one where you resist change and prefer a traditional approach while a liberal view is one where you prefer departure from the past and exploring something new. Naturally I have conservative definition of conservative and liberal .

    In very broad and general terms that would suffice.

    Assuming the above, or some variation of the above, a single view could be both conservative and liberal depending on the time and place you are talking about. So support for the Bill of Rights would have been a liberal view back in 1791ish because they radically departed from the traditional government. Today, sticking to the Bill of Rights is traditional and therefore more of a conservative view. Further, a developing country adopting our Bill of Rights today might be considered a liberal view in their country.

    Yes and no. Both would support the Bill of Rights, but for reasons they would share in common and then others that would differ. An example might be Conservatives may look at alterations may cause instability while liberals may say a need not previously recognized warrants additional language.

    I realize no one thinks like this so I'm willing to recognize another definition for debates sake. Just about every self-identified "conservative" out there thinks low tax rates are a conservative value but I don't see how that's traditional; as an example.

    Yeah, this is true within the US.

    I agree. I'd like to add that when discussing issues you generally have two different things you are discussing at once. You can argue for a process and a policy. For example, if we banned the color purple by popular vote I'd support the process from which that was done but I would oppose the policy. Now if a court banned the color purple because they think it is wrong I'd oppose the process and policy. This is exactly what happens to me when arguing about smoking in private businesses. In Virginia we banned it via the legislative process which I support and agree is legitimate but I oppose the policy (oddly enough I also rather enjoy no smoking in private businesses). This tends to get mixed up in people's minds a lot. To extend on this, you can also oppose a policy but like the result. I oppose a government policy mandating companies offer free birth control but at the same time I think every company should have a health insurance policy that offers it and without a prescription. Finally, you can oppose a policy but still use it to the fullest extent. For example, I don't think I should be able to deduct more mortgage interest on my tax return but you better believe I deduct every dime I pay.

    None of the above are hypocritical in my opinion.
    Sorry I think we are to close to having the same view to really argue about it. I think the process only becomes a factor to those who oppose the policy as a means to try and get it reversed otherwise I don't really have any meaningful disagreement.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    11,660
    Quote Originally Posted by pappillion001 View Post
    Yes and no. Both would support the Bill of Rights, but for reasons they would share in common and then others that would differ. An example might be Conservatives may look at alterations may cause instability while liberals may say a need not previously recognized warrants additional language.
    You are talking about changing or adding a specific amendment. I was merely using a very broad and generic example. A more specific example might be the 2nd amendment. A conservative viewpoint would leave the amendment as is allowing for ownership of most weapons while a liberal viewpoint would be more about changing the amendment or eliminating it for whatever reason.

    Sorry I think we are to close to having the same view to really argue about it. I think the process only becomes a factor to those who oppose the policy as a means to try and get it reversed otherwise I don't really have any meaningful disagreement.
    If a person complains about the process when it goes against their policy but ignores it when it is for their policy I'd say they are hypocrites. This happens all the time and hurts the people that really are distinguishing between process and policy.

    For example, if the supreme court decided tomorrow that abortion is unconstitutional I'd obviously approve of the policy but I'd argue the decision was not legitimate and therefore it should return to a state issue. I'd say 90% of people would call me a "pro-choice murderer" if I argued the supreme court case is wrong but I'm not an ends justifies the means kind of person.

    As an aside, this is how we ended up calling our supreme court "conservative" or "liberal" (using them inappropriately). In my opinion a court should always be conservative (using my definition again) when deciding statutory law cases; we don't pay them to reinvent the law.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •