The Great Advantage of the Left.

[bripat9643]

Guess Sanford couldnt get a real job or something. Now I know this country went straight to hell by re-electing him, I expected this crap from the Democrats, but not the Republican voters.

So if you were presented with a choice between Sanford and Steven Colbert's sister, you would choose the later?

 

[Toronado3800]

1. In addition to offering all sorts of benefits from the federal fisc, the Left has the GREAT advantage of never having to reflect morality or even respectability. The obvious case in point is their championing of a rapist and personification of a 'war on women,' Bill Clinton.

2. Then, there the more recent affront to righteousness....support for an individual who would not support even minimal life-saving procedures for a child born of a failed abortion.
3. We on the Right find it difficult to simply march on and overlook moral turpitude, much less embrace same.





4. Mark Sanford is a case in point. This former Republican governor of South Carolina carried on an affair while in office. He lied to his wife and to voters,..." He resigned as chairman of the Republican Governors' Association but did not offer to resign as governor."
South Carolina governor Mark Sanford admits infidelity and resigns from Republican leadership position | World news | guardian.co.uk





6.For many on the Right, nominally the upholders of family values, voting for this....individual...was out of the question.

7. But the choice was put to us in this fashion: the push by the Democrats is to control all of the government, and Sanford's election to the House would be a bar to that.

8. And the Left followed the instructions of their guru, Saul Alinsky, who correctly stated:
"For example, since the Haves publicly pose as the custodians of responsibility, morality, law, and justice (which are frequently strangers to each others), they can be constantly pushed to live up to their own book of morality and regulations. No organizations, including organized religion, can live up to the letter of its own book. You can club them to death with their "book" of rules and regulations. This is what that great revolutionary, Paul of Tarsus, knew when he wrote to the Corinthians: "Who also hath made us able ministers of the New Testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit, for the letter killeth." -- Saul Alinsky, Rules for Radicals, P.152
Archived-Articles: The Totalitarian Minority




9. For many, the decision was made:
"Sanford, however, handily won the Republican primary for the House of Representatives seat he held in the 1990s before he was elected governor. And his victory in Tuesday’s South Carolina special general electionshows just how far political redemption can stretch." Mark Sanford?s political redemption


10. I wish I could say the choice was easy, or even made. I remain conflicted.

PC, instead of claiming any moral advantage which is quite questionable, I think a fella with a liberal constitional view has another advantage.

A liberal can think up an idea, good or bad, and act on it. A true Conservative has a narrow Constitutional view and must live by it, good or bad idea be damned.

A liberal wants universal healthcare, great, it is for the general welfare.

A conservative recognizes the math problem and wants it? Well, here come fifty different systems or a constitutional convention.

A liberal wants to invade someplace? Call it a NATO action in the Balkans.

A conservative wants to overthrow some government with no declaration of war? He looks like he is just giving lip service to the constitution.

Liberal wants to keep government out of the abortion debate? Odd but great.

A Conservative does? Well ain't that backwards. Guess the Constitution does not matter so much to him or her.

So yes, the Conservative in a big way DOES have it harder.

 

[bripat9643]

7. But the choice was put to us in this fashion: the push by the Democrats is to control all of the government, and Sanford's election to the House would be a bar to that.

So the conservative justification for supporting Sanford is that politics trumps morality?

funny

Isn't that why abortion is legal?

Hester Prynne got her scarlett letter in a society where abortion was legal.

Explain that.

Was it legal in those days? Even if it was, it was incredibly dangerous and seldom done.

 

[bripat9643]

If we could all agree that neither the left nor the right has any claim to superiority on the moral high ground,

then we could all move on.

Since liberals have no morals, I'm sure you would like to "move on."

 

[PoliticalChic]

Lessons learned:
1. Power trumps morality.
2. Politics trumps morality.
3. Party trumps morality.

Looks like it was as I had always suspected. Republicans talk about morality and family values, but it is mostly window dressing designed to get rubes to vote for them. In reality, they are no more or less moral than anybody else. Everyone can safely ignore their claims of moral superiority. It's all BS.

I've seen your posts....and they leave little doubt that you have not even the most tensile association with learning of any kind.


You should stick to your 'strengths'....Try out for the javelin retrieval team.

Your posts are all the same too. You are a legend in your own mind. You put out these lengthy, multipoint, mostly unsupported diatribes. If people take the time to read through and respond to every point, you just throw out some snippy put down or insult. In fact if anyone dares disagree with you on any point, they are given this treatment.

1. It's true, in the case of responding to your posts, 'just throw out some snippy put down or insult.'
That's because I believe in giving folks what they deserve.
Ooops....I did it again, didn't I.

2. " You put out these lengthy, multipoint, mostly unsupported diatribes."
Not true.
They always are supported with links, sources, and quotes.





3. "Your posts are all the same too."
Well....you may have a point:
I do always tell the truth...
..and I regularly reveal what low-lifes (apologies to Luc Sante)...the Democrat/Liberal/Progressives are....


... for example, the following is the justification of the Democrat/Liberal/Progressives for allowing four Americans to be assassinated, and neither lifting a finger to save them, or ever admitting their hand in the deaths.

Imagine that they excused their behavior in, heaven forbid, the demise of your kith or kin:


Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD), ranking member of the House Oversight Committee, tells Benghazi witnesses that "death is a part of life."

CUMMINGS: And, as I listen to your testimony I could not help but think of something that I said very recently -- two years ago now -- in a eulogy for a relative. I said that death is a part of life, so often we have to find a way to make life a part of death. And, I guess the reason why I'm saying that, going back to something Mr. Nordstrom said, he wanted, I guess all of you said this, he wanted to make sure we learn from this.


I dare you to find a way to excuse this explanation.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Guess Sanford couldnt get a real job or something. Now I know this country went straight to hell by re-electing him, I expected this crap from the Democrats, but not the Republican voters.

So if you were presented with a choice between Sanford and Steven Colbert's sister, you would choose the later?

As consistent with the title of the OP, many on the Right might not vote.

I wonder if many evangelicals felt that way in the past few elections.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. In addition to offering all sorts of benefits from the federal fisc, the Left has the GREAT advantage of never having to reflect morality or even respectability. The obvious case in point is their championing of a rapist and personification of a 'war on women,' Bill Clinton.

2. Then, there the more recent affront to righteousness....support for an individual who would not support even minimal life-saving procedures for a child born of a failed abortion.
3. We on the Right find it difficult to simply march on and overlook moral turpitude, much less embrace same.





4. Mark Sanford is a case in point. This former Republican governor of South Carolina carried on an affair while in office. He lied to his wife and to voters,..." He resigned as chairman of the Republican Governors' Association but did not offer to resign as governor."
South Carolina governor Mark Sanford admits infidelity and resigns from Republican leadership position | World news | guardian.co.uk





6.For many on the Right, nominally the upholders of family values, voting for this....individual...was out of the question.

7. But the choice was put to us in this fashion: the push by the Democrats is to control all of the government, and Sanford's election to the House would be a bar to that.

8. And the Left followed the instructions of their guru, Saul Alinsky, who correctly stated:
"For example, since the Haves publicly pose as the custodians of responsibility, morality, law, and justice (which are frequently strangers to each others), they can be constantly pushed to live up to their own book of morality and regulations. No organizations, including organized religion, can live up to the letter of its own book. You can club them to death with their "book" of rules and regulations. This is what that great revolutionary, Paul of Tarsus, knew when he wrote to the Corinthians: "Who also hath made us able ministers of the New Testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit, for the letter killeth." -- Saul Alinsky, Rules for Radicals, P.152
Archived-Articles: The Totalitarian Minority




9. For many, the decision was made:
"Sanford, however, handily won the Republican primary for the House of Representatives seat he held in the 1990s before he was elected governor. And his victory in Tuesday’s South Carolina special general electionshows just how far political redemption can stretch." Mark Sanford?s political redemption


10. I wish I could say the choice was easy, or even made. I remain conflicted.

PC, instead of claiming any moral advantage which is quite questionable, I think a fella with a liberal constitional view has another advantage.

A liberal can think up an idea, good or bad, and act on it. A true Conservative has a narrow Constitutional view and must live by it, good or bad idea be damned.

A liberal wants universal healthcare, great, it is for the general welfare.

A conservative recognizes the math problem and wants it? Well, here come fifty different systems or a constitutional convention.

A liberal wants to invade someplace? Call it a NATO action in the Balkans.

A conservative wants to overthrow some government with no declaration of war? He looks like he is just giving lip service to the constitution.

Liberal wants to keep government out of the abortion debate? Odd but great.

A Conservative does? Well ain't that backwards. Guess the Constitution does not matter so much to him or her.

So yes, the Conservative in a big way DOES have it harder.

1. You appear clueless about what a conservative is.

2. As for your view of Liberal behavior, I recommend Dr. Thomas Sowell's "Applied Economics: Thinking Beyond Stage One."

From the Amazon review:

Sowell takes the key political issues and challenges the reader to analyze not only their short term (Stage One) political impact but to also think ahead to their long term (Stage Two, Three, etc) economic impact. He reminds the reader that politicians do not think beyond Stage One because they will be praised (and elected) for the short term benefits but will not be held accountable much later when the long term consequences appear.

He lays out the Stage One benefits of each political issue and then predicts the long term consequences that politicians don't address. Price controls on drugs and health care may have an immediate benefit, but the consumer will pay years later as health care quality decreases and new drug research declines. Reducing the price does not reduce the cost. Does raising the minimum wage really help entry level workers? What happens in the long term when communities raise taxes on businesses? Is free health care really free, or better?
We need to look beyond Stage One and separate politics from economics on the hot election year issues.


Your post reflects said Stage One thinking.

 

[PoliticalChic]

7. But the choice was put to us in this fashion: the push by the Democrats is to control all of the government, and Sanford's election to the House would be a bar to that.

So the conservative justification for supporting Sanford is that politics trumps morality?

funny

Isn't that why abortion is legal?

Hester Prynne got her scarlett letter in a society where abortion was legal.

Explain that.

Only a moron who pretends to have read "The Scarlet Letter" would imagine that the "A" stood for 'Abortion.'

Raise your paw.

 

[candycorn]

7. But the choice was put to us in this fashion: the push by the Democrats is to control all of the government, and Sanford's election to the House would be a bar to that.

So the conservative justification for supporting Sanford is that politics trumps morality?

funny

Content=credibility in Conservistan.

 

[Crackerjaxon]

7. But the choice was put to us in this fashion: the push by the Democrats is to control all of the government, and Sanford's election to the House would be a bar to that.

So the conservative justification for supporting Sanford is that politics trumps morality?

funny

Isn't that why abortion is legal?

Hester Prynne got her scarlett letter in a society where abortion was legal.

Explain that.

I believe it is because Nathaniel Hawthorne saw fit to write his novel that way.

 

[Crackerjaxon]

Isn't that why abortion is legal?

Hester Prynne got her scarlett letter in a society where abortion was legal.

Explain that.

Only a moron who pretends to have read "The Scarlet Letter" would imagine that the "A" stood for 'Abortion.'

Raise your paw.

Heh, It never occurred to me that someone would be stupid enough to think that the A in The Scarlet Letter stood for abortion.

I am amazed.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Isn't that why abortion is legal?

Hester Prynne got her scarlett letter in a society where abortion was legal.

Explain that.

Only a moron who pretends to have read "The Scarlet Letter" would imagine that the "A" stood for 'Abortion.'

Raise your paw.

Hester Prynne lived in a society where adultery was a crime but abortion before quickening was legal.

The other poster tried to make an analogy between the immorality of adultery and the immorality of abortion.

I used the Puritan example of a society where adultery was immoral, but abortion was not,

and thus asked him for his explanation of why that was so.

Feel free to help him with his explanation.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Hester Prynne got her scarlett letter in a society where abortion was legal.

Explain that.

Only a moron who pretends to have read "The Scarlet Letter" would imagine that the "A" stood for 'Abortion.'

Raise your paw.

Heh, It never occurred to me that someone would be stupid enough to think that the A in The Scarlet Letter stood for abortion.

I am amazed.

I didn't. I just explained it to those of you who were too illiterate to read my other post in the context of what the other poster was trying to do.

 

[NYcarbineer]

If we could all agree that neither the left nor the right has any claim to superiority on the moral high ground,

then we could all move on.

Since liberals have no morals, I'm sure you would like to "move on."

If you cannot participate intelligently, you should try a different thread, or forum.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Hester Prynne got her scarlett letter in a society where abortion was legal.

Explain that.

Only a moron who pretends to have read "The Scarlet Letter" would imagine that the "A" stood for 'Abortion.'

Raise your paw.

Hester Prynne lived in a society where adultery was a crime but abortion before quickening was legal.

The other poster tried to make an analogy between the immorality of adultery and the immorality of abortion.

I used the Puritan example of a society where adultery was immoral, but abortion was not,

and thus asked him for his explanation of why that was so.

Feel free to help him with his explanation.

Ironic.

Imagine....if you weren't noted for dishonesty, the charge probably wouldn't stick.

That's justice for ya'.


Your only sentence was:
"Hester Prynne ... scarlett letter ... abortion."



And, even funnier...you criticized my posts as not being short enough!
If you actually meant what you now claim you meant.....
...and you wrote in a clear fluent post....you wouldn't have indicted yourself.


Now you have to back-petal faster than Ed Begley, Jr. making himself a piece of toast!


Sometimes this is sooooo much fun!

 

[NYcarbineer]

[


I have no desire for concision, .

If enough of us stipulate to the fact that we understand you are the classic example of a middleaged female delusional know-it-all who is incapable of saying anything in less than 10 times the number of words it requires,

will you at least refrain from feeling the need to remind us of said condition?

 

[Crackerjaxon]

Only a moron who pretends to have read "The Scarlet Letter" would imagine that the "A" stood for 'Abortion.'

Raise your paw.

Heh, It never occurred to me that someone would be stupid enough to think that the A in The Scarlet Letter stood for abortion.

I am amazed.

I didn't. I just explained it to those of you who were too illiterate to read my other post in the context of what the other poster was trying to do.

I am literate enough to recognize a ridiculous moral equivalency argument when I see one.

Does that count for anything?

 

[Crackerjaxon]

[


I have no desire for concision, .

If enough of us stipulate to the fact that we understand you are the classic example of a middleaged female delusional know-it-all who is incapable of saying anything in less than 10 times the number of words it requires,

will you at least refrain from feeling the need to remind us of said condition?

Big words bothering you again?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Only a moron who pretends to have read "The Scarlet Letter" would imagine that the "A" stood for 'Abortion.'

Raise your paw.

Hester Prynne lived in a society where adultery was a crime but abortion before quickening was legal.

The other poster tried to make an analogy between the immorality of adultery and the immorality of abortion.

I used the Puritan example of a society where adultery was immoral, but abortion was not,

and thus asked him for his explanation of why that was so.

Feel free to help him with his explanation.

Ironic.

Imagine....if you weren't noted for dishonesty, the charge probably wouldn't stick.

That's justice for ya'.


Your only sentence was:
"Hester Prynne ... scarlett letter ... abortion."



And, even funnier...you criticized my posts as not being short enough!
If you actually meant what you now claim you meant.....
...and you wrote in a clear fluent post....you wouldn't have indicted yourself.


Now you have to back-petal faster than Ed Begley, Jr. making himself a piece of toast!


Sometimes this is sooooo much fun!

The fact that you didn't know that adultery was a Puritan crime, but abortion was not doesn't surprise me at all.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Heh, It never occurred to me that someone would be stupid enough to think that the A in The Scarlet Letter stood for abortion.

I am amazed.

I didn't. I just explained it to those of you who were too illiterate to read my other post in the context of what the other poster was trying to do.

I am literate enough to recognize a ridiculous moral equivalency argument when I see one.

Does that count for anything?

Who made that?

My argument was that morality is arbitrary and only exists as a collective opinion, varying from culture to culture.

I suspect you should ask the poster I responded to what moral equivalency argument he was attempting.