55
   

AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

 
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Jan, 2010 10:29 am
@parados,
Give it up, Parados, you know you are on the losing end of a few discussions of reason between us. Just admit you are a hardcore leftist that uses lawyerly dodging and weaving here to defend any leftist notion or politician, you use evidence like O.J. Simpson's lawyer used evidence, to get a verdict that you want, without regard to the truth.

Even you should be able to agree however, that elections are won by either the liberal or conservative base being able to convince the people in the middle that are more wishy washy about what they believe, to convince those people and move them to one side or the other.
Diest TKO
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Jan, 2010 10:31 am
@okie,
It's good that you love the smell of your own **** okie because it comes out of your mouth.

Your metaphor about what is trendy in politics is cute, but ultra dumb. Specifically the notion that one party is going to be more prone to trendy candidates. You're so full of it.

Candidates get popular, but cynicism is what is trendy. I somehow doubt it will go out of fashion.

T
K
O
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Jan, 2010 10:31 am
@okie,
okie wrote:

Give it up, Parados, you know you are on the losing end of a few discussions of reason between us. Just admit you are a hardcore leftist that uses lawyerly dodging and weaving here to defend any leftist notion or politician, you use evidence like O.J. Simpson's lawyer used evidence, to get a verdict that you want, without regard to the truth.


It just seems that way to you, because he's defeated you in so many different discussions using logic, a weapon that you have yet to master or understand fully.

Quote:
Even you should be able to agree however, that elections are won by either the liberal or conservative base being able to convince the people in the middle that are more wishy washy about what they believe, to convince those people to one side of the other.


This is true, though there are many local variations.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Jan, 2010 10:32 am
@okie,
So which is it okie? Am I all emotional or do I use reason to the extreme? You seem confused about what liberals do as you claim first one then the opposite.
okie
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Jan, 2010 10:44 am
@parados,
If you want my opinion on what you are, I will offer it. Of course, I do not know you personally, I can only guess by judging your online personality and posts. I perceive you as very far left, and perhaps you know that Obama was no centrist, he is a Marxist sympathizer, and you support him because you have similar beliefs. Marxism is rooted in emotion, not reality however, as it takes root in people that think life is unfair, the system is unfair, and they are looking for a power that will make it fair. And since they have a minimal belief in God, they look to government as the ultimate arbitor of fairness.

It is further true that hard core leftists that believe in leftist philosophy also rely upon their crusade to use the large numbers of people in the middle that do not have much grounding in one philosophy or another, to capitalize on whatever discontent and feelings of helplessness that they may feel, to draw them into the camps of the hardcore left. There are many ways to do that, but some include the portrayal of an ultra leftist as being a centrist, a bright young new hope, as Obama is, and another way is to use the media to hype how bad or how miserable things are on many fronts, such as when Bush was in office. The left used the press to demonize Bush in regard to the economy, Gitmo, the war, on and on, and they were able to spin many things in order to do that, essentially lie to do it. In a previous election, you even had Dan Rather, a major news anchor, directily involved with making up fraudulant stories and broadcasting it days ahead of an election in an effort to alter a federal election, which is a felony, but nothing happened, nothing.

So Parados, I will stick to well thought out and reasoned conservative political philosophy that works, just as it works in my own private life, don't spend more than you make, practice personal responsibility, work hard, and so forth.
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Jan, 2010 10:53 am
@okie,
You love to refer to libs as Marxists, socialists, commies, et al. I guess it is only fair to refer to you as a Nazi, fascist, beast, moron, et al. These latter terms are much more fitting for you than the former are for libs.

I guess your resorting to name calling is a reflection of the dearth of intellectual thought on your behalf. In any event, you are a disgusting human being, unworthy to walk the earth.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  2  
Reply Wed 20 Jan, 2010 11:15 am
@okie,
So your well thought out argument is to call me a "Marxist"?
Actually, what you are doing is making an emotional appeal okie. There is no reason involved in what you are doing because you have provided no evidence to support your argument. Your second paragraph at no time references me but you seem to think it makes some great argument.

Quote:
So Parados, I will stick to well thought out and reasoned conservative political philosophy that works, just as it works in my own private life, don't spend more than you make, practice personal responsibility, work hard, and so forth.
That's funny okie because I don't spend more than I make, I tend to work hard and I practice personal responsibility. I also believe in educating myself wherever possible. Does that make me a conservative? Or does that mean you are trying to redefine conservative to make yourself look good?
parados
 
  2  
Reply Wed 20 Jan, 2010 11:22 am
@parados,
I guess the thing that separates me from you okie is I recognize that simply working hard and spending less than you make doesn't protect people from catastrophe in their lives. Illness, acts of God and even the greed of others preying on their good will can destroy what they are trying to do. I recognize that not all people have the same capacity, capability or opportunity to do things I can do. I also recognize that as a "Christian" or a moralist of any kind I have a duty to help others that need help. I like Thomas Jefferson also recognize that as a society we have that duty.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Jan, 2010 11:29 am
@parados,
I also agree with your philosophy of life although I'm not religious. My wife and I both saved for our retirement early in our marriage, and through good luck and perseverance have accumulated enough "wealth" to retire comfortably. My two favorite charities are Habitat for Humanities and Second Harvest Food Bank. We're not rich by any means, but we have no mortgage or car payment, and have enough cash to live a comfortable retirement.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Jan, 2010 11:39 am
@parados,
parados wrote:

I guess the thing that separates me from you okie is I recognize that simply working hard and spending less than you make doesn't protect people from catastrophe in their lives. Illness, acts of God and even the greed of others preying on their good will can destroy what they are trying to do. I recognize that not all people have the same capacity, capability or opportunity to do things I can do. I also recognize that as a "Christian" or a moralist of any kind I have a duty to help others that need help. I like Thomas Jefferson also recognize that as a society we have that duty.


I think this is really an important point. People like Okie do not feel that we have any real duty towards our fellow man at all, or that people should be able to decide to ignore that duty with no consequences.

Cycloptichorn
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Jan, 2010 11:42 am
Why are the feds attempting to convert the USA capitalist society to a USA statist society?

I suspect that is because the feds--that is the Obama apostles of Saul Alinski community organizers--are greedy for power?

Why does anyone prefer greed for power to greed for profits?

Greed for power reduces total employment, while greed for profits increases total employment.

What say you?
Quote:

ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/suppl/empsit.cpseea1.txt
Total employment in the USA in:
December 2006 = 144,427,000
December 2007 = 146,047,000 (maximum total employment in USA history)
December 2008 = 143,338,000
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf
December 2009 = 137,792,000


Total USA Employment Gain:
December 2006 to December 2007 = 1,620,000

Total USA Employment Losses:
December 2007 to December 2008 = 2,709,000
December 2008 to December 2009 = 5,546,000
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Jan, 2010 11:53 am
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:
I think this is really an important point. People like Okie do not feel that we have any real duty towards our fellow man at all, or that people should be able to decide to ignore that duty with no consequences.

That, Cyclo, is a damn lie!

We conservatives give more to private charities than most of you who slander and libel conservatives. We conservatives oppose government intervening and controlling charitable giving. We conservatives oppose government taking away our God given rights.

We conservatives believe that the most important role of government is securing the rights to the lives, the liberties, and the pursuits of happiness possessed by all of us who do not deny those rights to others.
Cycloptichorn
 
  2  
Reply Wed 20 Jan, 2010 11:57 am
@ican711nm,
ican711nm wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
I think this is really an important point. People like Okie do not feel that we have any real duty towards our fellow man at all, or that people should be able to decide to ignore that duty with no consequences.

That, Cyclo, is a damn lie!

We conservatives give more to private charities than most of you who slander and libel conservatives.


This is a long-standing falsehood, a trope that Conservatives throw around to convince themselves that they are not stingy, when the truth is the exact opposite.

Quote:
We conservatives oppose government intervening and controlling charitable giving. We conservatives oppose government taking away our God given rights.


Like your rights to not help people who need it. That's why you've seen Conservatives - both on TV and here on A2K - arguing against using any tax dollars to help Haiti earthquake victims or anyone in trouble really.

Quote:
We conservatives believe that the most important role of government is securing the rights to the lives, the liberties, and the pursuits of happiness possessed by all of us who do not deny those rights to others.


Like I said: you think the job of government is to protect YOU and YOUR stuff, and that's it. You couldn't care less about anyone else, because to you, all that matters is that THEY have the right to try and help themselves.

Your post supports my position completely, Ican. Thanks.

Cycloptichorn
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Jan, 2010 11:58 am
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:

ican711nm wrote:

We conservatives give more to private charities than most of you who slander and libel conservatives.


This is a long-standing falsehood, a trope that Conservatives throw around to convince themselves that they are not stingy, when the truth is the exact opposite.


Do either of you know what the hell you are talking about ?
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Jan, 2010 12:01 pm
@georgeob1,
georgeob1 wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

ican711nm wrote:

We conservatives give more to private charities than most of you who slander and libel conservatives.


This is a long-standing falsehood, a trope that Conservatives throw around to convince themselves that they are not stingy, when the truth is the exact opposite.


Do either of you know what the hell you are talking about ?


I have never seen any data which confirms this long-standing lie, and I have seen significant amounts of data which show it to be untrue.

Cycloptichorn
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Jan, 2010 12:08 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
I'm not positive about Bill Gate's political affiliation, but Warren Buffett is a democrat. These two icons have donated billions for charitable purposes.

Who are the richest conservatives who have given to charities, and how much have they given?
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Jan, 2010 12:21 pm
@ican711nm,
How many times are you going to post those numbers after being told you are using them incorrectly?
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Jan, 2010 12:41 pm
@parados,
parados wrote:
How many times are you going to post those numbers after being told you are using them incorrectly?

At least as many times as you tell me I am using those numbers incorrectly without providing me rational evidence to support your claim.

What do you claim is my use of these numbers?
What is incorrect about my use of these numbers?
What is your evidence to support your claim?
Quote:

ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/suppl/empsit.cpseea1.txt
Total employment in the USA in:
December 2006 = 144,427,000
December 2007 = 146,047,000 (maximum total employment in USA history)
December 2008 = 143,338,000
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf
December 2009 = 137,792,000

Total USA Employment Gain:
December 2006 to December 2007 = 1,620,000

Total USA Employment Losses:
December 2007 to December 2008 = 2,709,000
December 2008 to December 2009 = 5,546,000
parados
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Jan, 2010 12:54 pm
@ican711nm,
The explanation of how you were using them wrong is HERE-

http://able2know.org/topic/113196-917#post-3880345

When a table tells you you can't COMPARE the numbers between years that means you can't subtract one from the other to give a total number of jobs lost.

When the numbers are for the YEAR it also means you can't claim they are for December of that year.
okie
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Jan, 2010 10:20 pm
@parados,
parados wrote:
That's funny okie because I don't spend more than I make, I tend to work hard and I practice personal responsibility. I also believe in educating myself wherever possible. Does that make me a conservative? Or does that mean you are trying to redefine conservative to make yourself look good?

Then why not demand the same of your government?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.2 seconds on 11/19/2024 at 08:45:46