Topic: The Essential Question in Any Political Debate

[IronDioPriest]

...A little naive my friend....

Just a friendly suggestion... Maybe get a lay of the land before calling admins or anyone else here "naive". Disagree with the point, and you've got no trouble. But we save our name-calling for the enemies of liberty, not our allies and friends...........

Oh man, I hate this stuff.
I thought the statement was naive. I didn't say the person was naive and I did not call anyone any names.

If this is a sign of things to come, maybe I'd better get out now.

You can delete my account.

Really? That's a bit of an over-reaction in my opinion.

Thing is, we're a long-time community of friends here. If you'd taken the time to read into our history at all, you'd know this. You've been welcomed. We don't want wallflowers. If you'd taken the time to look around at the people here, you'd understand that. But there are a few years of history here before your arrival. Is it too much to ask that you respect that, and become "one of us", before calling people naive?

I don't know about you, but I don't walk into a house full of strangers and start telling them they're naive. I observe, fellowship, and offer my opinion. I learn who's who, and make friends. I become more bold over time, as I am accepted as part of the group.

I'm not deleting your account. You can, if you don't want to be here. All I asked for - mildly, I might add - was a bit of respect for those who were here before you. If you don't want to give it, you're not my problem.

[Janny]

Maybe we will lose in 2012 because we did NOT go balls out on the debt ceiling.

I suppose its possible, but I don't think the direction the polls were starting to shift supports that theory.

Are you suggesting that what actually happened did not generate massive negative press?

It did generate negative press, yes, but Obama bore a good portion of the bad press. Hence his rotten poll numbers.

Sorry, but this selective quoting of my posts glosses over my main point, which is that we have to do what is right, and not worry about what the press says.

And there are MULTIPLE reasons for Obama's tanking poll numbers. Your simplistic analysis does not hold water, IMO.

[Weisshaupt]

Wasn't it Sowell who wrote something to the effect of/that many "problems" cannot be solved; there can only be trade-offs?

Something like that. He is an economist, and so sees everything in economic terms. Not sure if he was the originator, or if he was quoting someone else-- but the best expression of the principle was "A  country that could put a man on the moon should be able to do XYZ! To which one replies "No, because we already spent the money going to moon."

If XYA was free, and people wanted it, we would already have it.  Therefore XYZ comes with a cost, and paying that cost means we will have to give something else  up.

[RickZ]

Sorry, but this selective quoting of my posts glosses over my main point, which is that we have to do what is right, and not worry about what the press says.

Yurp.

And when asked a stupid, insipid, ridiculous question on some alphabet soup news interview show (sorry AS), they must come out swinging, must come out making fun of and laughing at asinine questions, no matter who asks them.  One way to whip the media is to force them to cover such rejoinders.  Being able to openly mock Democrats' more insane and communist ideas is the key to winning the real moderates, those who think for themselves.

I still don't like, though, the idea of independents voting in a primary for anyone other than their own Independemnt Party (closed primaries).  Make a choice; pick a side.

[trapeze]

...A little naive my friend....

Just a friendly suggestion... Maybe get a lay of the land before calling admins or anyone else here "naive". Disagree with the point, and you've got no trouble. But we save our name-calling for the enemies of liberty, not our allies and friends...........

Oh man, I hate this stuff.
I thought the statement was naive. I didn't say the person was naive and I did not call anyone any names.

If this is a sign of things to come, maybe I'd better get out now.

You can delete my account.

You have got to be kidding. Really? Seriously? Over that?

[Glock32]

I think Sowell did play a large role in promulgating that "everything is a trade-off" axiom. David Mamet, the liberal-become-conservative playwright, cited this (and Sowell in particular) as playing a big role in his awakening.

To the list of questions, I would add one more that Sowell always asks: "What did we do before?"

These questions are so simple, yet can really lay bare all manner of clever sophistry. Sowell is a first rate intellect.

[trapeze]

The most important inquiry conservatives must posit in every policy debate: "What does our Constitution authorize and mandate?"

Unfortunately, though, liberals and conservatives see the Constitution differently and that makes asking that question not very definitive in a policy debate.

For example, conservatives tend to see the the Constitution as a document that limits government whereas liberals see it more as a quaint historical tourist attraction housed at the National Archives.

[jpatrickham]

Wow, this post has taken on a life of it's own. I assure you I wasn't looking for trouble. I hope everyone can agree to disagree and let it go at that. My main concern is Liberalism has morphed into the most dangerous Ideological entity ever. More dangerous than Nazism, and Communism. Not in the lives lost but, in the hold they have on People. Liberalism can be the last straw. Conservatism in it's broadest form is the only thing that can check it. Make no mistake, we must check it! 

[Glock32]

Wow, this post has taken on a life of it's own. I assure you I wasn't looking for trouble. I hope everyone can agree to disagree and let it go at that. My main concern is Liberalism has morphed into the most dangerous Ideological entity ever. More dangerous than Nazism, and Communism. Not in the lives lost but, in the hold they have on People. Liberalism can be the last straw. Conservatism in it's broadest form is the only thing that can check it. Make no mistake, we must check it! 

This is absolutely true. As I've stated in another thread, liberalism is like cultural AIDS, an insidious disease in the body-politic of a civilization. It corrupts the institutions of a society, perverts them and renders them ineffective in their legitimate functions and aggressively self-destructive in others.

The one example that continues to remind me of this is the threat posed to the West by Islam. In every empirical sense, Islam is to the West no more than an annoying insect to be swatted away with relative ease. But because of liberalism's cultural rot, these external threats become true dangers because we lack the collective will to deal with them.

[IronDioPriest]

Wow, this post has taken on a life of it's own. I assure you I wasn't looking for trouble. I hope everyone can agree to disagree and let it go at that....

I didn't think anyone was looking for trouble - particularly not you JP - but I didn't think CC was looking for trouble either. I just tried in the mildest way I knew to suggest to CC that calling established members who he doesn't know "naive" on his first day here might be rethought and approached fresh. We don't ask anyone to walk on eggshells. At the same time, we are an established community into which we invite anyone who shares our concern for the nation. Having people answer that invitation by name-calling on their first day is just... rude; unintentionally so, I am certain. I tried to convey that to CC, but I guess I failed. Perhaps knowing him, you could speak to him on my behalf, let him know I wasn't trying to chase him away. But as I said, if he doesn't want to be here, it can't be my problem.

...My main concern is Liberalism has morphed into the most dangerous Ideological entity ever. More dangerous than Nazism, and Communism. Not in the lives lost but, in the hold they have on People. Liberalism can be the last straw. Conservatism in it's broadest form is the only thing that can check it. Make no mistake, we must check it! 

You're in the right place brother.

[Weisshaupt]

Not in the lives lost but, in the hold they have on People. Liberalism can be the last straw. Conservatism in it's broadest form is the only thing that can check it. Make no mistake, we must check it!  

As resident pessimist, I have to point out that Conservatism  is unlikely to be able  check it at this point. As this thread pointed out, just winning the elections requires unseemly compromises. As I have pointed out on other threads, there just isn't an option to fix this anymore. The Tea Party could have gotten everything they wanted, and it wouldn't matter. Conservatism isn't going to check this. The liberals cannot think, they cannot listen. They cannot be reasoned with. They will not stop. We cannot check them. Reality, however, can, and  will.

 And the reality is someone has to get slaughtered, and someone's ox must be gored - Social Security/Medicare   Recipients,  foreign creditors- someone isn't going to get paid and promises are not going to be kept.  It will be a default in some way shape or form. If the Tea Party gets their way, it WILL force a very painful deflationary depression - and  in the short term .  If the Liberals get theirs, we WILL eventually get hyperinflation. It really the whole band-aid question - are you the type to rip it off and take the pain now, or the type to try and procrastinate and take it off bit by bit? Pain is involved either way. I , like most of this forum, would prefer a deflationary depression - I saved money, and I would be rewarded for doing so in such an event, and the event would be shorter lived. Prices would return to normal quickly  and then we can get on with rebuilding. . But the majority of Americans didn't save money, so extend and pretend, and make the problem bigger and worse  is and will remain the name of the game.

And when this goes it will be world wide,  and the standard of living world wide will drop at least 50%, and there is a really good chance there will be a World War, since similar events caused the last two.  Its rather unchristian of me, but I am hoping that most of the liberals die in the political upheaval, riots, and famines that follow. I certainly won't lift a finger to save or help them.  

[Pandora]

Wow, this post has taken on a life of it's own. I assure you I wasn't looking for trouble. I hope everyone can agree to disagree and let it go at that. My main concern is Liberalism has morphed into the most dangerous Ideological entity ever. More dangerous than Nazism, and Communism. Not in the lives lost but, in the hold they have on People. Liberalism can be the last straw. Conservatism in it's broadest form is the only thing that can check it. Make no mistake, we must check it! 

This is NOT on you!

IDP's right; you're in the right place for relating to the rest and forming a working opposition.

[IronDioPriest]

...The liberals cannot think, they cannot listen. They cannot be reasoned with. They will not stop. We cannot check them....

So essentially what you're saying is...

Dawn of the Dead - Zombie Hunt

[Pandora]

The liberals cannot think, they cannot listen. They cannot be reasoned with. They will not stop. We cannot check them.

Terminating the terminators.

[Weisshaupt]

...The liberals cannot think, they cannot listen. They cannot be reasoned with. They will not stop. We cannot check them....

So essentially what you're saying is...

Dawn of the Dead - Zombie Hunt

Boy, are they are doing it wrong.  Rule #2 Double Tap.

Zombie Land Double Tap Human Happy Meal

Woulda. Coulda. Shoulda. Problem is these Zombies look and act like people well enough that we can't just shoot them and point and say "Zombie" - They are more like body snatchers - except these snatchers are overly emotional and completely irrational - which just means its more hate filled when they point at you and scream because you are not one of them.

Invasion of the Body Snatchers edited end scene clip


 (Case in point, in the recent remake of the Body Snatchers,  the liberals wonder if life isn't  better under the snatchers, because in the absence of free will, there was no war.  No kidding. )
Here are the snatchers (liberals)  explaining how,with unity, life is better. (8:30)  Yeah. Thats spooky isn't it? You have heard those some words come out of a liberal's mouth haven't you

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1oILJyErMmo&feature=player_profilepage#t=492s

In the end the humans launch an attack, and we get a demonstration of how awful humans are compared to the snatchers. (1;30)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smo2FMmn4Jo&feature=player_profilepage#t=86s

[Pandora]

Aw sht.  Now that's just damned depressing.

[charlesoakwood]

The one example that continues to remind me of this is the threat posed to the West by Islam. In every empirical sense, Islam is to the West no more than an annoying insect to be swatted away with relative ease. But because of liberalism's cultural rot, these external threats become true dangers because we lack the collective will to deal with them.

DDT ace insecticide and saves lives too; bring it back.

[trapeze]

You can delete my account.

[Predator Don]

Dang....the essential question answered......

[Pandora]

Dang....the essential question answered......

'Zack right!  Right on, trap!