It's About Liberty: A Conservative Forum

Topics => Politics/Legislation/Elections => Topic started by: Pandora on November 19, 2011, 03:12:06 PM

Title: Kagan's non-recusal and what it means
Post by: Pandora on November 19, 2011, 03:12:06 PM
The two parties are not playing the same game. (http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/021042.html)

Quote
They play different games, under different rules. What are these different rules? The Republicans more or less follow the laws and constitutional procedures, the Democrats deliberately and consciously break them. But the Republicans, while they complain incessantly about the Democrats, never identify this underlying fact. Why? Because that would show that the system is no longer legitimate. And the function of the Republicans, as "patriotic, conservative Americans," is to uphold the goodness and legitimacy of the system, a legitimacy which rests on the belief that everyone in American politics shares the same basic principles and loyalties. So the Republicans, as defenders of the system and its presumed basic unity, cannot expose what the Democrats are. If they exposed it, politics would be replaced by open war between two radically incompatible parties and America as we know it would come to an end.
Title: Re: Kagan's non-recusal and what it means
Post by: Tom G. on November 19, 2011, 03:43:06 PM
This one and abortion are the two issues where the Dems are all in.  There is nothing sacred or fair when it comes to protecting and/or getting these issues passed to the Dems liking.  Kagan was put there by Obama for this issue, so her recusing was not an option, period.

I just wish those in charge of the Repubs would recognize and deal with this in a proper way other than disappointment and resignation.

Title: Re: Kagan's non-recusal and what it means
Post by: BMG on November 19, 2011, 03:50:16 PM
The really sad side to all this is that, even with all of the covering up that the republican side does in order to hide all of this what will be gained in the end? Nothing as far as I can tell. In the end the democrats will have won over more converts, the republicans will ultimately appear to be the bad guys and the civil war eluded to in the original post on this thread will still come to pass.

Whoever on the republican side that decided it was a good idea to hide all of this behind a thin veil of scruples only served to ultimately make the mess worse by orders of magnitude. If the republicans don't stop playing their games a 2nd civil war will be the end result.
Title: Re: Kagan's non-recusal and what it means
Post by: warpmine on November 19, 2011, 03:51:38 PM
This one and abortion are the two issues where the Dems are all in.  There is nothing sacred or fair when it comes to protecting and/or getting these issues passed to the Dems liking.  Kagan was put there by Obama for this issue, so her recusing was not an option, period.

I just wish those in charge of the Repubs would recognize and deal with this in a proper way other than disappointment and resignation.


They recognize it alright, they just can't be bothered to do anything about it. Apparently, they believe that their job in Congress is to make as much money for themselves as possible without getting their hand caught in the cookie jar. Only thing that will change the minds of those in Congress is   ::guillotine::
Title: Re: Kagan's non-recusal and what it means
Post by: IronDioPriest on November 19, 2011, 03:52:17 PM
I agree about the different game/different rules part. That is obvious. We help the enemy hold us to our own standards and the enemy has no standards aside from accomplishing its agenda.

I do find it a bit of a stretch though, to suppose that the reason Republicans do not identify the double standard to the egregious degree that it exists is because they calculate that full exposure of the Democrats would rob Republicans of the opportunity to play their foil by ruining the illusion of political parity.

I think the far more simple and likely answer is that human beings have a proclivity to disbelieve what is difficult or painful to contemplate. It's because many or most of them simply do not recognize the threat. They lack the courage to name their countrymen enemies of the country. Doing so brings a whole new set of possibilities into the frame of potential reality that most people are loathe to contemplate.
Title: Re: Kagan's non-recusal and what it means
Post by: Libertas on November 20, 2011, 04:40:49 PM
Nothing will make you a war casulaty faster than self-denial...
Title: Re: Kagan's non-recusal and what it means
Post by: AlanS on November 21, 2011, 10:14:21 AM
They lack the courage to name their countrymen enemies of the country.

They lack the cajones..............period.