Do McCain supporters wilfully miss the lies?

How do you deal with people who don't even acknowledge the concept of hypocrisy?

It's pure in-your face, know-nothing bullying, essentially defying all challenge and saying that truth, logic and reason are no longer operative --- and daring you to say differently. It simultaneously degrades the real argument, and creates a false equivalence.

All I can add is to respectfully suggest that you've understated the problem by a bundle.

And "bundle" is also an understatement.

I do not accept your premise
qua the alleged deception -- but suppose next week I discover a lie ?

What is my best, logical response ?
To change my vote and damn my own freedom ?
Down the toilet with my freedom ?
I don t think so.
FREEDOM is more important than LIFE.

I never liked the Bushes much; I disapproved when Reagan chose Bush.
I liked McCain LESS than the Bushes.
I am a Goldwater Republican;
I worked n voted for Goldwater.

I am not about to just forget about voting
nor to put my hand in the fire by voting liberal Democrat.
If, in the future, McCain tells a lie,
I will refuse to pay the penalty for it by sacrificing my personal freedom,
after pretending that liberals do not lie.

DEVIATION from past paradigms,
by means of deception, is the heart and soul of liberalism,
whereas unbending, rigid adherence to past paradigms is conservative.
The constitutional paradigms are libertarian
because (in the Bill of Rights) thay have curtailed n crippled government.

Personal freedom is inversely proportional to the domestic power of government.
I will vote to support & defend my personal freedom as well as possible,
REGARDLESS of ANY lies of ANY politicians.

Election time shoud be defined in the dictionary
as: " the time when politicians, or their speech writers, LIE THE MOST."
If I ever write a dictionary, maybe I 'll put that in.
A vote for Bob Barr ( a friend of mine ) is wasted.
Election time shoud NOT be defined
as " the time when voters throw their freedom down the toilet because politicians lie."

I need to stave off Obama, as I needed to stave off Kerry
and Gore before him,
because this is how I DEFEND MY FREEDOM from government.

A vote against liberalism is a vote toward support of libertarianism ( FREEDOM ).

Maybe YOU will be shocked, JTT, if u discover that a politician can lie; not me.




David

Wrong guy to ask.

Right guy to answer

Yup. You'd surely be one of the top dogs if you got on with the McCain campaign, David.

Where did you ever come up with your cockamamie ideas on what the USA is all about? You're being fucked over in this Wall Street bailout, you've been fucked over over the last eight years with the Iraq invasion and you keep bending over, pleading for more, all the time whining over your personal selfishness.

JTT, Let's face it; they like to bend over "backwards" for their party.

Thank u.
I 've been that route already, with another politician.
I just retired last winter from the job I got from it; it was sweet.
(I prefer not to identify it.)
I will vote against Obama and for Sarah Palin.



From reading history ( I love history ) and historical filosofy,
in addition to biografies, and the Social Political Contract itself: the US Constitution.



Thank u for your concern.
I suspect that I 'll be OK


I have withdrawn my support for this war,
as of the time when Saddam was defeated
and this became a giant foreign aid project, instead of a defensive war.

W was too slow to START the war
and is too slow to STOP the war.

Its now a horrible waste
( but I am STILL not going to burn myself by voting liberal ).


There is NOTHING that outranks my personal selfishness.
Thay shoud put that on my tombstone.
If I were not too lazy, I might shout that from my rooftop
( and if I fell, then thay coud put that on my tombstone ).
Indolence shall be my salvation.

I remember when I was 4 years old.
My mother advised me not to be selfish.
My heart did not beat ONCE, before I dismissed THAT out-of-hand
(tho I respected and respect my mother 's mind very much; she earned it).

VOTING in defense of my personal selfishness
is more important than "whining" over it, as u choose to put it.



David

I know u r trying to be cute; it didn 't work.
Bending over backward will break your back.
That 's not much fun.

We don 't do it FOR our party;
we do it to defeat the enemies of our personal freedom,
the same as fighting off rapists in the night.




David

Well I don't know why I came here tonight,
I got the feeling that something ain't right,
I'm so scared in case I fall off my chair,
And I'm wondering how I'll get down the stairs,
Clowns to the left of me,
Jokers to the right, here I am,
Stuck in the middle with you.

What personal freedom are you talking about? Don'tcha know that Bush took away more of our freedoms than most presidents in this country? Bush imprisoned people at Gitmo and took away all of their constitutional rights, undertook illegal wiretaps, waived habeas corpus, and rounded up Muslims because they are Muslims and nothing else. He's against equal rights for gays and lesbians, wants to take away freedom of choice for women, and favors teaching creationism with science in our schools. Bush's NCLB has been a huge failure for minorities; they're dropping out of school at the highest levels never seen in our country before.

Who exactly are those enemies who are taking away our personal freedoms?

Welcome, Dys.
Pull up a cyberchair.





David

Oh. My. God. I have never been referred to as "understated" on-site before.

I apologise for my behavior

OK; this is gonna be a long post,
owing to the heterogeneous and disparate elements of the mixed bag
contained within your post, C.I., but what the hell; I have the time.

Let me begin by ideological self-definition:
I have always supported laissez faire freedom of contract,
and domesticly crippled government (congentially crippled by the Bill of Rights).
I plight my troth with Adam Smith, James Madison, Ludwig von Mises and Barry Goldwater.
I lovingly adopt Thomas Paine, when he said:
"That government is best which governs least."


More than LINCOLN ?
Don'tcha know that LINCOLN "waived habeas corpus" as u put it,
( a power of Congress, not of the President ) before W was born ?
Anyway, W did that to ALIENS, who have NO rights under the US Constitution,
and he did it in furtherance of his constitutional power to fight wars;
( not to declare them, but to FIGHT them ).



If that is TRUE,
then there must be hundreds of millions of Moslems
in the jail there. I don 't think its true.



As I said above,
I support pure laissez faire freedom of contract,
volitionally arrived at by all parties thereto in an ambience
of free choice with no government interference.
In my emotions, I bear no ill will toward homosexuals,
nor woud I exclude them from friendship,
but I don 't want GOVERNMENT getting coercively involved.


I 've gotta put up the White Flag on that one: I concede the point.
That 's what he WANTS.
However, he has no jurisdiction to interfere.
He can no more prevent a woman from getting an abortion
than he can prevent her from voting Democrat.



That 's a non-issue.
Its not up to the President; he has no jurisdiction over that.

IMO, it also lacks importance; insignificant, except for
taking up a short time of the students' academic lives;
not even a tempest in a teapot.



SO WHAT ?
Its THEIR lives; their choices. Thay don t force THEIR will on YOU, C.I.
Are you willing to live and let live ??
I do not approve of education being coercively FORCED down students' throats.
This is supposed to be the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave,
not the place where individuals are dragged to school against their will.
THAT 's not in the Constitution;
(arguably, the abductees could invoke the 13th Amendment).




Thay are the authoritarian-collectivists engendered in Frank Roosevelt,
Truman, the Kennedys, Lyndon Johnson, the Clintons, Al Gore, Kerry,
Obama and their accomplices.





David

some valid points david but then even a blind pig finds a few acorns.

David wrote:
More than LINCOLN ?
Don'tcha know that LINCOLN "waived habeas corpus" as u put it,
( a power of Congress, not of the President ) before W was born ?
Anyway, W did that to ALIENS, who have NO rights under the US Constitution,
and he did it in furtherance of his constitutional power...

In the first place, this is a different time in history when our concept of wars have changed dramatically from the time of Lincoln.

In the second place, the Muslims he rounded up to question were Americans.
Some were kept for days in jail without any charge of any crime.

I also believe in "free trade," but not blindly. We should not let our competitors in the world marketplace charge us tariffs to protect their own industry while they are free to trade in our country.

Re: on teaching creationism.
David wrote:

David, Wake up and smell the coffee; what the president wishes and vocalizes is very powerful both politically and religious-wise even if he has no jurisdiction over "it." That gives the motivation for others like-minded to push for it. It's not a "non-issue" as you label it.

c.i.'s Quote:



David wrote:


You'll have to spell them out for me, because I don't know what you are talking about.

In its essence,
the ideological dichotomy is this
( speaking very generally & with a few narrow exceptions ):
the Founders were people like me,
who believe and assert that each citizen
has the right to live his life as he wishes, undisturbed,
minding his own business,
whereas a more recent competing filosofy
claims that he has to get out and go to the aid of his fellows,
whether he wants to or not ( and he shoud give blood too,
because maybe someone will need it ).

One filosofy ( mine ) says: "screw them; leave me alone"
and the other ( authoritarian-collectivism a/k/a "liberalism" ) says screw the individual,
he must be forced to aid the general good
( and don 't call that slavery nor involuntary servitude,
because that s not what we want to hear ).





David

some valid points david but then even a blind pig finds a few acorns. Machiavelli wasn't all that wrong either in a pragmatic sense.