Conservatives Hate Obama More Than They Love America

[Sephie]

Originally Posted by DalekSec

Wearing a swastika and saying SEIG HEIL does not make one a Nazi I suppose.

NO R.B. Either you have a Free Market or you do not. Either we are a Capitalist society or we are not.

Trying to slip in bits of Socialism while denying it is rather like the rapist who whispers "I am not raping you." in your ear as he bends you over a desk.

It is not a binary condition but a sliding scale. Your claim is saying because it is not black it must be wight, when reality it is a really dark grey.

[Lord T Hawkeye]

Originally Posted by Herr Onymous-Bosch

It is not a binary condition but a sliding scale. Your claim is saying because it is not black it must be wight, when reality it is a really dark grey.

But there isn't grey here because the definition of a capitalist free market is very specific. If it doesn't fit the definition, then it doesn't get to claim that status.

Besides, socialism didn't happen overnight. It started with little sprinklings here and there. Do I really have to remind everyone that socialism resulted in shortages, riots and even war?

Socialism had it's chance and failed. Get over it folks.

[DalekSec]

Here here!

Rather like being a "Part time slave".

[kia252]

Originally Posted by Lord T Hawkeye

"Blah blah blah...I'm a big time winner and now I'm going to entertain you all with a whole paragraph about how great I am!"

I feel I'm going to be sick...

If you want to interpret it to say that I won the argument, then that says something now, doesn't it? Seriously, I explained how debate ought to work, and if it shows that I have displayed the better argument or "won" then that says a lot.
You're just trying to whine and moan your way out of it because you can't really argue my points, and would rather resort to, unsurprisingly, an ad hominem attack. Sure, I was more than happy to send some smug right back at you when you chuck it at me, but that in no way detracts from the arguments I have made and that you are unable debate them as you want to just want to ignore or dismiss them on no grounds whatsoever.

Originally Posted by Lord T Hawkeye

No, because they're not following their oaths as I explained in plain King's English which you continue to blow off so you are in no position to lecture me about closed mindedness. That's just a desperate tactic to discredit me and it's not fooling anyone with a functioning brain.

You don't have to move mountains to convince me of something. I can and have been convinced for far less than that.

If you have a claim to make, then make it. Cut the politico speak, I haven't the slightest interest in that nonsense.

Seems to me "politico speak" is when someone shows that your claim is unfounded so you can disregard it as nonsense rather than try to debate it any further. This is not terribly different from your meaning of "deceitful" being anyone that is genuinely convinced they have grounds to disagree with you.

Here's the real story, paraphrased, as much as you like to muck it up:
"Everything is messed up because people willfully ignore the Constitution!"
"I disagree. Most people believe that positions they advocate are constitutional. Though they may be wrong due to misunderstanding or poor interpretation, that is not blatant ignorance."
Now, you and I have debated that claim, but now you want to pretend I never made a claim for you and I to have argued. I'm sorry, but I'm not gonna let you weasel out that way and pretend I'm the bad guy here.

Originally Posted by Lord T Hawkeye

As for Obama, check his voting record. He voted in favor of the war in Iraq and went along with just about everything Bush put foreward (I'm pretty sure he voted for the patriot act too though I'm not positive) so for him to claim "change" as being his big platform is just laughable. He's no agent of change. He's just same old same old like all before him. Nothing special whatsoever.

He may have his problems, but I thought I'd interject here that he was not a U.S. Senator when the Patriot Act was passed (2001) or when the resolution to declare war on Iraq was passed (2003). I will, however, temper that with the fact that he did vote Yea to the USA PATRIOT and Terrorism Prevention Reauthorization Act of 2005 which extended and/or expanded certain provisions of both the PATRIOT Act and the IRTPA Act of 2004, and has probably voted Yea on spending bills related to the Iraq War.

[DalekSec]

Really?

Why are most Constitutional Scholars scratching their heads at the idea of requiring citizens to buy health insurance? Why the worry over the Patriot Act then?

You DO realize how badly the "Commerce Clause" has been abused to pass all manner of insane legislation don't you?

[qzar9999]

Originally Posted by DalekSec

You still fail to show me just what Lord Obama has managed to do beyond give pretty speeches to empty headed sycophants who think money comes from his arse with the waving of his mystical hands.

See, you can't be shown what he's done beyond that. Because there ISN'T anything else.

You know, Dalek, I'll tell you like I told HOB: You're disputing something with (1) a woman (2) who's completely convinced of her own correctness. I'd have thought you already knew that's a complete waste of time. It took me less than 2 years of marriage to work that one out...

[kia252]

Originally Posted by Lord T Hawkeye

But there isn't grey here because the definition of a capitalist free market is very specific. If it doesn't fit the definition, then it doesn't get to claim that status.

I don't think that's his point. He contends that there can be systems that are not 100% laissez-faire capitalism and not 100% socialism, but rather take aspects from both.

Originally Posted by Lord T Hawkeye

Besides, socialism didn't happen overnight. It started with little sprinklings here and there. Do I really have to remind everyone that socialism resulted in shortages, riots and even war?

Is this unique to socialism and entirely consequent of socialism? I do not believe so on either count. Capitalism can easily be blamed for these same results in just as many cases, so you might want to have a better ground to deny socialism in favor of capitalism.

Originally Posted by Lord T Hawkeye

Socialism had it's chance and failed. Get over it folks.

I'm not so sure about this. Social democracies still seem to be doing just fine. The problem with chucking around the word "socialist" anymore seems that it is too often an appeal to McCarthyan paranoia by tying it intimately with Soviet Russia without any appreciation for divergences in socialist theory. To that extent, the use of it more and more seems to reflect Godwin's Law.

Dalek, I'm a bit confused with your problem with Al Gore. While I understand questioning him, what does he have to gain, personally, from his environmentalist efforts? Isn't he basically set for life financially after his senatorial and vice-presidential tenure and the speaking engagements he can get as a result? Hasn't money he's earned from, namely, An Inconvenient Truth been given to fund environmentally-minded foundations? Basically, I believe you're suggesting that there is some ulterior motive and I would like to understand what it is and why you believe it exists.

[kia252]

Originally Posted by DalekSec

Really?

Why are most Constitutional Scholars scratching their heads at the idea of requiring citizens to buy health insurance? Why the worry over the Patriot Act then?

You DO realize how badly the "Commerce Clause" has been abused to pass all manner of insane legislation don't you?

I heard the individual insurance mandate come up as an idea. Is that in the current draft? If so, that is a horrible idea and hopefully proponents can be convinced that such a thing does not have a constitutional basis. However, I don't think it reflects systematic disregard.

What do you mean why worry over the Patriot Act?

Abused or interpreted more broadly? Let's also not forget that not all bad/insane laws are unconstitutional.

[DalekSec]

Originally Posted by qzar9999

See, you can't be shown what he's done beyond that. Because there ISN'T anything else.

You know, Dalek, I'll tell you like I told HOB: You're disputing something with (1) a woman (2) who's completely convinced of her own correctness. I'd have thought you already knew that's a complete waste of time. It took me less than 2 years of marriage to work that one out...

Now now please. While I may call R.B. on things from time to time I do like her and respect her. If I did not, I would not take the time to answer her posts.

We can be polite and respectful even when others have an off night after what she described as a terrible day.

Personally I consider her very intelligent and devoted to her chosen faith and I can not see disregarding her feelings over a disagreement on the Net.

I happen to like you all too much to hold grudges or get angry with any of you.

Originally Posted by kia252

I heard the individual insurance mandate come up as an idea. Is that in the current draft? If so, that is a horrible idea and hopefully proponents can be convinced that such a thing does not have a constitutional basis. However, I don't think it reflects systematic disregard.

What do you mean why worry over the Patriot Act?

Abused or interpreted more broadly? Let's also not forget that not all bad/insane laws are unconstitutional.

Yep. It is in MANY of the BILLS being crammed together to form the final House and Senate versions. THANKFULLY, the Obama Presidency pretty much ended tonight with the drubbings in VA, NJ and very possibly NY. As it stands, the Senate shelved the mess as a whole until Dec. and it looks pretty well dead for good now. Praise be the fickle nature of the American voters.

[qzar9999]

Dalek, I didn't say anything about Rachel specifically--I said "a woman." If you can find *ANY* woman who, heretofore completely convinced she's correct, can be persuaded otherwise... Well, you're not on this planet. ^_^

[DalekSec]

I stand corrected and I do tend to see the best in folks.

I remain, however, a misanthrope. *snickering*

[qzar9999]

"I see the best in folks." "I remain a misanthrope."

I C WUT U DID THAR.

There's something insidiously disturbing about combining those two statements. Possibly it's because I see your point...