Obama - Respect My Authoritah!!!

[Goobieman]

You are absolutely correct that I do not because I do not believe that you are making a valid argument.

That your political perspective invalidates areguments you make that start off with statements like "Bush was very conservative"? How is that argument NOT valid?

You are biased, and, absent any additional -factual- evidence, your bias necessarily makes your statement subjective rather than objective. Subjectivity in supporting arguments leads to an unsound premise.

However, as they say, there is no point in arguing with a true believe....

Yes, as evidenced by your contiued support of Geroge Walker Barrack Husseain Obama Bush.

 

[Slartibartfast]

That your political perspective invalidates areguments you make that start off with statements like "Bush was very conservative"? How is that argument NOT valid?

I do view him as very conservative. I have stated why I view him as very conservative. As I said before, as long as I can back my statements up, than my perspective is fine. This is true of anyone whether they are conservative or liberal as it is the cornerstone is constructive conversation.

You are biased, and, absent any additional -factual- evidence, your bias necessarily makes your statement subjective rather than objective. Subjectivity in supporting arguments leads to an unsound premise.

Yes, as evidenced by your contiued support of Geroge Walker Barrack Husseain Obama Bush.

Yes. Of course Bush is not distinguishable from Obama, and I am the biased one. Oops, I guess that invalidates your claim to objectivity.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

Seriously?
Strong right on national security issues (pro war, anti human rights, anti civil rights). Very strong right on religious social issues (anti abortion, anti stem cell, pro conservative christian). Very strong right on regulation (gutted regulations, very pro laissez faire business due to reducing regulations).

Pretty much the standard neocon faire.

And before you claim he is a liberal for his spending, no child left behind, etc. Conservatives do that stuff too. Libertarians are the ones that don't and those oppose conservatives on a lot of things as well. I am talking about standard modern conservative here, not some classical definition from days gone by. I have no interest in the whats a real conservative game. I will define it by what I see right here and right now.

wait, bush was anti-civil rights? :doh

 

[Slartibartfast]

wait, bush was anti-civil rights? :doh

Designated protest zones.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

Sorry, I was thinking embryonic. Thanks.

I wasn't really calling him an extremist. Those guys tend to go beyond conservative in my view. Perhaps an issue is the fact that there is no objective measure for these things. But yeah, I guess if you put Palin or Navy Pride as the benchmark for 100% very conservative and put Nader at the other end, I would rate bush about an 85%. Thats pretty subjective too though, unfortunately.

He also stated he would sign another AWB...


besides what you mentioned. He was center right.

 

[Slartibartfast]

He also stated he would sign another AWB...


besides what you mentioned. He was center right.

Not sure what AWB stands for.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

Designated protest zones.

So then, Obama is "anti-civil rights" then as well, no?


Obama takes his disdain for free speech on the road. « The Confluence

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

Not sure what AWB stands for.

evil black rifles that make thier owners go on kill crazy rampages.

 

[Slartibartfast]

So then, Obama is "anti-civil rights" then as well, no?

Obama takes his disdain for free speech on the road. « The Confluence

Stuff like this is the reason I believe Obama is more centrist. He does things on both sides of the aisle. For example he did the stimulus which is left and does stuff like this which is more right wing.

evil black rifles that make thier owners go on kill crazy rampages.

Ahh, assault weapons ban. Actually, I oppose that ban. But yeah, thats a left thing, still its small in comparison to everything else he has done, being only a single issue and all.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

Stuff like this is the reason I believe Obama is more centrist. He does things on both sides of the aisle. For example he did the stimulus which is left and does stuff like this which is more right wing.

Actually I don't think being "anti-civil rights" is a right wing or a left wing thing. trying to tie good=left and bad=right to me is not a good platform to debate from :shrug:

Ahh, assault weapons ban. Actually, I oppose that ban.

:thumbs:

 

[Goobieman]

I do view him as very conservative. I have stated why I view him as very conservative. As I said before, as long as I can back my statements up, than my perspective is fine.

I did not see any examples of what Bush has done that leads you to believe that he is "very conservative". Care to share again?

Yes. Of course Bush is not distinguishable from Obama, and I am the biased one.

No, He is very much distinguisable from GWB - In all the things that you do not like Bush for, The Obama is worse.

 

[Slartibartfast]

Actually I don't think being "anti-civil rights" is a right wing or a left wing thing. trying to tie good=left and bad=right to me is not a good platform to debate from :shrug:

:thumbs:

I may be putting words in your mouth and if I do it wrong, I apologize, but most libertarians go with an authoritarian/personal-freedome scale on top of the traditional right-left scale. I imagine for you, that is an authority vs personal freedom thing more than a right vs left thing.

 

[Slartibartfast]

I did not see any examples of what Bush has done that leads you to believe that he is "very conservative". Care to share again?

Rev has it quoted in post 53.

No, He is very much distinguisable from GWB - In all the things that you do not like Bush for, The Obama is worse.

In some of things I disliked Bush for, Obama is worse. In other things, he is better.

 

[Goobieman]

Designated protest zones.

This is a time/place/manner restrictiion, perfectly within the power of the government to designate w/o abridging the constitutional rights of anyeone.
You may try again.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

I may be putting words in your mouth and if I do it wrong, I apologize, but most libertarians go with an authoritarian/personal-freedome scale on top of the traditional right-left scale. I imagine for you, that is an authority vs personal freedom thing more than a right vs left thing.

it is. I see however the left as authoritarian as the so called "authoritarian right"....


One wants me to pray in school, the other wants me to not smoke cigars, give money to bums, and regulate my salt content....


"anti-civil rights" is a vague buzzword. To me, for example there is nothing more "anti-civil rights" than affirmative action and quotas....

 

[Slartibartfast]

it is. I see however the left as authoritarian as the so called "authoritarian right"....

I agree. However, the left tries to go with rules that I happen to agree with. For me, I see rules as necessary (while you do not) and it becomes which rules are important for a healthy and productive society.

One wants me to pray in school, the other wants me to not smoke cigars, give money to bums, and regulate my salt content....

"anti-civil rights" is a vague buzzword. To me, for example there is nothing more "anti-civil rights" than affirmative action and quotas....

I agree that affirmative action and quotas need to diminish in use, but probably for very different reasons. Personally, I think they are no longer useful.

 

[Slartibartfast]

This is a time/place/manner restrictiion, perfectly within the power of the government to designate w/o abridging the constitutional rights of anyeone.
You may try again.

My view of civil rights has very little to do with the constitution. As a matter of fact, the constitution is really not that an important document to me, except where I agree with it. :shrug:

 

[Goobieman]

Rev has it quoted in post 53.

Aha.

Strong right on national security issues (pro war, anti human rights, anti civil rights).

Doesnt this make The Obama a conservative?

Very strong right on religious social issues (anti abortion, anti stem cell, pro conservative christian).

So strong Christian values that affect social policy positions is a "conservative" trat?
What about the liberals that have strong Christian values that affect social policy positions?

Very strong right on regulation (gutted regulations, very pro laissez faire business due to reducing regulations).

You're goung to have to actually show this is true for this to even begin to stick.

Now, what about all the moderate/liberal positions taken by GWB?
How do the things you listed as "very conservative" outweigh them sufficiently to the point to make him "Very conservative" is your eyes?

And you DO remember than a "neoconservative" isnt actually a conservativve, but a liberal with a strong pro-us foerign/domestic policy, right?

In some of things I disliked Bush for, Obama is worse. In other things, he is better

Ah yes -- if only GWB were a Democrat.

 

[Goobieman]

My view of civil rights has very little to do with the constitution

Oh... so you don't have a legally or politically relevant standard to judge if someone is pro- or anti-stance on civil rights.
10-4..

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

I agree. However, the left tries to go with rules that I happen to agree with. For me, I see rules as necessary (while you do not) and it becomes which rules are important for a healthy and productive society.

I don't need you to tell me about how much salt, lard, or smoke I put into my body, thank you....

I agree that affirmative action and quotas need to diminish in use, but probably for very different reasons. Personally, I think they are no longer useful.

well as long as you want them gone, i dont care.

 

[Slartibartfast]

Aha.

Doesnt this make The Obama a conservative?

It moves his personal meter to the right a bit yes. But overall I believe Obama is a slight to moderate liberal.

So strong Christian values that affect social policy positions is a "conservative" trat?
What about the liberals that have strong Christian values that affect social policy positions?

Strong conservative christian values are a conservative trait. For example, if you look at the catholic church, vs orthodox, pentecostal, vs mainline, vs the evangelical movement, you will see that each group places emphasis on different parts of the bible and parts of the believe system. How one goes about their religion is a strong marker of conservativism or liberalism.

For me, my religious beliefs are a large part of why I am a liberal. :shrug:

You're goung to have to actually show this is true for this to even begin to stick.

Obama Cleans Up After Bush - TIME

Now, what about all the moderate/liberal positions taken by GWB?
How do the things you listed as "very conservative" outweigh them sufficiently to the point to make him "Very conservative" is your eyes?

I cannot think of many moderate/liberal positions taken by him except no child left behind and perhaps the assault weapons ban as mentioned by Rev. Its a small number of issues though.

And you DO remember than a "neoconservative" isnt actually a conservativve, but a liberal with a strong pro-us foerign/domestic policy, right?

Ah yes -- if only GWB were a Democrat.

So you have claimed. However, when you look at his polling, his core supporters were strong conservatives. I am going to take that over your reinterpretation of stances.

Oh... so you don't have a legally or politically relevant standard to judge if someone is pro- or anti-stance on civil rights.
10-4..

All law is based on belief. If enough people believed in something, in a democracy, its likely going to become a law at some point. Whether it is a law or not has little to do with the rightness or wrongness of it since that is based on each person's personal perspective.

Besides, using your logic, if an amendment was passed that made it illegal for black people to use modern banking services, than that would not be a civil rights violation since its "in the constitution"

 

[Goobieman]

It moves his personal meter to the right a bit yes. But overall I believe Obama is a moderate liberal.

So you believe that a few isntances of 'conservative' action do not make one a conservative; you have to took at the aggregate of the whole. Good. remember that.

Strong conservative christian values are a conservative trait.

What, exactly, are liberal christian values, and how does GWB not have those as well?

Obama Cleans Up After Bush - TIME

Seems to me that if your claim were accurate, you;d have something better than this. Something that describes more than a few actions taken regarding the environment in the last few months of his administration does nothing to support the grand scale of your claim Thus, you may try again.

I cannot think of many moderate/liberal positions taken by him...

Of course you cannot - because you find it convenient not to do so.
Fortunately, others have a wide range of them:
George W. Bush is a Liberal - Associated Content - associatedcontent.com
Richard Cohen - Bush the Neoliberal - washingtonpost.com
George W. Bush, liberal. - By William Saletan - Slate Magazine
The shockingly liberal legacy of George W. Bush | Macleans.ca - World - USA

Its a small number of issues though.

It doesnt appear that way.

But, it doesnt matter how many of GWB's liberal positions I show you-- from -your- perspective, GWB is very consevative.
This is either due to your apparent ignorance of GWB's policy positions/actions, or because of your impressivelty left-lean of your own personal ideology.

Remmeber though - you believe that a few isntances of 'conservative' action do not make one a conservative; you hate to took at the aggregate of the whole.

So you have claimed.

Oh, its not MY claim.
Neo-conservative - SourceWatch
Conservative vs. Neo-Con - Right Mind
Conservative Vs. Neoconservative- know the difference! | Ron Paul War Room
Paleoconservatism vs. Neoconservatism

However, when you look at his polling, his core supporters were strong conservatives. I am going to take that over your reinterpretation of stances.

Of course you are -- when it suits you, you find it convenient to ignore the truth.

All law is based on belief.

Um..... no.
Law is based on.... welll.. law.
Law in the US is based on the federal amnd state Constitutions, legislation and judicial rulings.
Now, you can "believe" that an action that, by all of the above, does not infringe on a right does indeed infringe o a right, but your belief has no legal or poliical basis in fact.
In other words, your statement to that effect is unsupportable nonsense.

 

[Slartibartfast]

So you believe that a few isntances of 'conservative' action do not make one a conservative; you have to took at the aggregate of the whole. Good. remember that.

That is correct.

What, exactly, are liberal christian values, and how does GWB not have those as well?

Liberal Christian values tend to promote social justice. I cannot think of anything he did in that regard, except foreign aid.

Seems to me that if your claim were accurate, you;d have something better than this. Something that describes more than a few actions taken regarding the environment in the last few months of his administration does nothing to support the grand scale of your claim Thus, you may try again.
Of course you cannot - because you find it convenient not to do so.
Fortunately, others have a wide range of them:
George W. Bush is a Liberal - Associated Content - associatedcontent.com
Richard Cohen - Bush the Neoliberal - washingtonpost.com
George W. Bush, liberal. - By William Saletan - Slate Magazine
The shockingly liberal legacy of George W. Bush | Macleans.ca - World - USA

It doesnt appear that way.

But, it doesnt matter how many of GWB's liberal positions I show you-- from -your- perspective, GWB is very consevative.
This is either due to your apparent ignorance of GWB's policy positions/actions, or because of your impressivelty left-lean of your own personal ideology.

Remmeber though - you believe that a few isntances of 'conservative' action do not make one a conservative; you hate to took at the aggregate of the whole.

Oh, its not MY claim.
Neo-conservative - SourceWatch
Conservative vs. Neo-Con - Right Mind
Conservative Vs. Neoconservative- know the difference! | Ron Paul War Room
Paleoconservatism vs. Neoconservatism

Of course you are -- when it suits you, you find it convenient to ignore the truth.

As I said, Bush's support was based in the conservative crowd. If thats where his supporters were, than probably going to be where is ideology lies. Also, there is more than one type of conservative, there is fiscal conservative, social conservative, neo conservative, reagan conservative, Palin conservative, Paleoconservative, etc. Alternatively, there are different types of liberals such as progressives, socialists, old school liberals, etc. Ultimately none of those links really prove anything.

Just because there are different factions within the conservative spectrum as a whole does not mean that Bush is a liberal. It just means that there are factions that disagreed with his ideology while still being allied to him politically and falling under the conservative umbrella.

Um..... no.
Law is based on.... welll.. law.
Law in the US is based on the federal amnd state Constitutions, legislation and judicial rulings.
Now, you can "believe" that an action that, by all of the above, does not infringe on a right does indeed infringe o a right, but your belief has no legal or poliical basis in fact.
In other words, your statement to that effect is unsupportable nonsense.

Surprisingly I agree. Legally, you are correct rights do change based on the law. Morally, we all have different ideas. Morally, I believe it was a civil rights violation. However, this goes back to my statement that I do not consider the constitution to be terribly important, its just a bunch of laws that I will work to change where I disagree. So what the law states is irrelevant to my argument.

 

[Goobieman]

That is correct.

So then why do you refuse to look at the previously cited multitude of GWB's liberal actions and apply your standard accordingly?

Liberal Christian values tend to promote social justice. I cannot think of anything he did in that regard, except foreign aid.

This has a lot more to do with your selective ignorance and your defintion of social justice than anything else.

As I said, Bush's support was based in the conservative crowd. If thats where his supporters were, than probably going to be where is ideology lies

This is you not even -trying- to create a substantive response, and ignoring the truth, as demostrated.

Note specifically you didnt even -try- to address the eaxmples of GWB's liberalism.

But then, if you don't acknowledge these actions, you dont have to worry about having to revise you claim that GWB was "very conservative". Keeping your head in the sand it easier than being intellectually honest, I guess.

Surpringly I agree. Legally, you are correct rights do change based on the law. Morally, we all have different ideas.

Your version of morality is neither legally binding nor legally enforceable, and as such, your claim that the restrictions on the protesters in qustion is a violation of civil rights of said protestors is unsupportable.

 

[Slartibartfast]

So then why do you refuse to look at the previously cited vast multitude of GWB's liberal actions and apply your standard accordingly?

You misunderstand me than. The fact is, as I have stated, there is more than one type of conservative and Bush matches one of those factions.

This has a lot more to do with your selective ignorance and your defintion of social justice than anything else.

Perhaps, perhaps not, but I have no interest in arguing it since it will probably sidetrack us yet again.

This is you not even -trying- to create a substantive response, and ignoring the truth, as demostrated.

Note specifically you didnt even -try- to address the eaxmples of GWB's liberalism.

But then, if you don't acknowledge these actions, you dont have to worry about having to revise you claim that GWB was "very conservative". Keeping your head in the sand it easier than being intellectually honest, I guess.

Of course I did not even try to address Bush's liberalism because there is no reason to do so. Sure he may look liberal to your perspective, but your perspective is not the only conservative perspective out there.

Your version of morality is neither legally binding nor legally enforceable, and as such, your claim that the restrictions on the protesters in qustion is a violation of civil rights is said protestors is unsupportable.

Noone's is really as none of us are kings or dictators. And yes, your are right when it comes to legalities.

Anyway, this is starting to bore me as neither of us are going to give ground here and I have better things to do with my time, so go ahead and declare victory, I will forfeit and let you have it, the empty one that it is.