The Patroit Act works in Germany as well!!

[palerider]

First off, Republican sexual indiscretions involve much more than a single individual. As you know, Reliant supplied an extensive list, which could not be refuted. As for Republicans sending their right-wing perverts "packing", I think we both know that is purely for political reasons and not a true indication of the darkness that resides within many "family values" Republican hearts.

No. There is no place within conservativism for the relativism of liberalism. Conservatives who are caught in such behavior know that they have done wrong and are, in the eyes of their peers, and constituents, no longer fit to do the job they were sent to do.

The list is irrelavent in that no group is pure as the wind driven snow and only an indication that some liberal made a blatant hypocrite out of him or herself by bringing that which liberals claim to be a private matter out for public view.

Gerry Studds is the literal face of liberal acceptance of child molesters. He admitted to the crime and got a standing ovation and kept his job. Enough said.

 

[Popeye]

No. There is no place within conservativism for the relativism of liberalism. Conservatives who are caught in such behavior know that they have done wrong and are, in the eyes of their peers, and constituents, no longer fit to do the job they were sent to do.

The list is irrelavent in that no group is pure as the wind driven snow and only an indication that some liberal made a blatant hypocrite out of him or herself by bringing that which liberals claim to be a private matter out for public view.

Liberals do believe it is a private matter, until Republican hypocrisy rears its ugly head. Right-wing, bible thumping Republicans are all about judge, judge, judge. So, when they are caught in the same behavior they publicly condemn, it becomes an issue. An issue, I might add, that Republicans,understandably, are extremely uncomfortable with. Hypocrisy has claimed another victim and it's the Republican party.

 

[palerider]

Liberals do believe it is a private matter, until Republican hypocrisy rears its ugly head. Right-wing, bible thumping Republicans are all about judge, judge, judge. So, when they are caught in the same behavior they publicly condemn, it becomes an issue. An issue, I might add, that Republicans,understandably, are extremely uncomfortable with. Hypocrisy has claimed another victim and it's the Republican party.

And by attempting to make a public spectacle out of it make hypocrits of themselves. The lack of depth in your thinking is typical of liberals.

It is as I always say, liberals are doomed to become the very thing they claim to hate. You clearly hate the hypocricy of people on your "list" but then make a hypocrit of yourself by doing that which liberalism claims to hate, ie making private matters public.

You are right in that it does become an issue. It is an issue to conservatives as well and as you can see in all cases, they are forced to step down as opposed to yours who are embraced. The true, and deeper hypocricy lies, as always, within liberalism. Conservatives, as a group, would be hypocrits if they claimed to stand against moral relativism but allowed people who clearly don't live up to the claim to remain within their ranks. Clearly they don't. Liberals, on the other hand, are hypocrits, as a group, because they embrace their own deviants while loudly, and conspicuously, condemming conservatives who get caught in behavior that is acceptabe to liberals.

Reference the definition of hypocrite:

One who pretends to have virtues, moral or religious beliefs, principles, etc., that he or she does not actually possess, esp. a person whose actions belie stated beliefs.

Clearly the conservative who is behaving in a way contrary to conservative principles is a hypocrite but conservatives in general are not hypocrites because they do not accept the one who is behaving in such a manner. Liberals as a group, however, are hypocrites as they embrace and accept those of their own who behave in such a manner (and worse) while condemning those across the aisle who behave in the same manner.

So long as you are a liberal, you are doomed to become the very thing you claim to distain. It is the nature of liberalism.

 

[Popeye]

And by attempting to make a public spectacle out of it make hypocrits of themselves. The lack of depth in your thinking is typical of liberals.

It is as I always say, liberals are doomed to become the very thing they claim to hate. You clearly hate the hypocricy of people on your "list" but then make a hypocrit of yourself by doing that which liberalism claims to hate, ie making private matters public.

You are right in that it does become an issue. It is an issue to conservatives as well and as you can see in all cases, they are forced to step down as opposed to yours who are embraced. The true, and deeper hypocricy lies, as always, within liberalism. Conservatives, as a group, would be hypocrits if they claimed to stand against moral relativism but allowed people who clearly don't live up to the claim to remain within their ranks. Clearly they don't. Liberals, on the other hand, are hypocrits, as a group, because they embrace their own deviants while loudly, and conspicuously, condemming conservatives who get caught in behavior that is acceptabe to liberals.

Reference the definition of hypocrite:

One who pretends to have virtues, moral or religious beliefs, principles, etc., that he or she does not actually possess, esp. a person whose actions belie stated beliefs.

In general, both conservatives and liberals can be guilty of a "lack of depth" in thinking. I do believe however, that conservatives wrote the book on it. It also appears, apparently, that they wrote the book on stereotyping as well. As for hypocrisy, while both groups can be guilty of that as well, it's conservatives who pretend to be morally superior while many of them have boyfriends on the side, not liberals. The definition of hypocrite fits many of the closet homosexual, Christian right Republicans like a glove. The only reason the Republican party wishes them to resign, when found out, is because they've been exposed, in more ways than one.

 

[USMC the Almighty]

It also appears, apparently, that they wrote the book on stereotyping as well.

Ironic coming from the arguably the board's most partisan member who has never found a conservative stereotype that he didn't cling to.

 

[Popeye]

Ironic coming from the arguably the board's most partisan member who has never found a conservative stereotype that he didn't cling to.

"Arguably" is the key word, because there are certainly members of this forum who never heard a liberal stereotype they didn't repeat. I, on the other hand consider myself an independent thinker. I'm not to be faulted if conservatives leave themselves open to a vast array of criticism.

 

[USMC the Almighty]

"Arguably" is the key word, because there are certainly members of this forum who never heard a liberal stereotype they didn't repeat. I, on the other hand consider myself an independent thinker. I'm not to be faulted if conservatives leave themselves open to a vast array of criticism.

Indpendent thinker? Tell me three of your positions that differ from the Democratic party.

 

[Popeye]

Indpendent thinker? Tell me three of your positions that differ from the Democratic party.

Without going into specifics, gun control, illegal immigration, legalization of drugs. Liberals are, by nature, more independent in their thinking.

 

[USMC the Almighty]

Without going into specifics, gun control, illegal immigration, legalization of drugs. Liberals are, by nature, more independent in their thinking.

Just to get you on record -- you are against gun control, illegal immigration, and legalization of drugs?

And what exactly is it that makes liberals more independent than conservatives?

 

[Popeye]

Just to get you on record -- you are against gun control, illegal immigration, and legalization of drugs?

And what exactly is it that makes liberals more independent than conservatives?

For the record, I am completely against any and all gun control, I am completely against any amnesty for illegal immigrants, lastly, I am for the legalization of drugs something the Democratic party doesn't agree with. Now, what makes liberals more independent than conservatives? I'm a liberal, I just demonstrated my independence, and I'm far from alone. Again, liberals are, by their nature, more independent in their thinking.

 

[USMC the Almighty]

To recap:

Liberals are, by nature, more independent in their thinking.

And what exactly is it that makes liberals more independent than conservatives?

I'm a liberal, I just demonstrated my independence, and I'm far from alone. Again, liberals are, by their nature, more independent in their thinking.

You can't providing support for a statement includes more than copying and pasting it.

 

[Popeye]

To recap:







You can't providing support for a statement includes more than copying and pasting it.

Lets make it simple, liberals are, by definition, open to new things. Therefore, they are more independent in their thinking. Conservatives, by definition, are less open to new ideas. Therefore, they are less independent in their thinking. Sure it's a generalization but the basic truth is irrefutable.

 

[jb_1430]

Lets make it simple, liberals are, by definition, open to new things. Therefore, they are more independent in their thinking. Conservatives, by definition, are less open to new ideas. Therefore, they are less independent in their thinking. Sure it's a generalization but the basic truth is irrefutable.

Biggest line of crap Ive heard in a while. Liberals are more open to new things simply because they are new. They are more open because they dont think. More open because they dont do enough independent thinking to develope their own foundation from which to judge new things. So they embrace new things because they become popular, the new fad.

 

[Popeye]

Biggest line of crap Ive heard in a while. Liberals are more open to new things simply because they are new. They are more open because they dont think. More open because they dont do enough independent thinking to develope their own foundation from which to judge new things. So they embrace new things because they become popular, the new fad.

Liberals don't do enough independent thinking? untrue, that is a quality they embrace. Meanwhile, conservatives are stuck in a kind of right-wing cement as the beast of conservatism has hardened around them. Just look at the way they follow the dictates of a corrupt administration, goose-stepping all the while.

 

[jb_1430]

Liberals don't do enough independent thinking? untrue, that is a quality they embrace. Meanwhile, conservatives are stuck in a kind of right-wing cement as the beast of conservatism has hardened around them. Just look at the way they follow the dictates of a corrupt administration, goose-stepping all the while.

What makes you think they are "following" the Bush Administration? I supported most current Bush administration policies before the Bush administration even existed.