| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
Atavachron 
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65616
|
 Posted: May 28 2011 at 20:36 |
|
Well then, sir, I oppose him and that most significant social position utterly and completely, and if you take your principles of freedom to be literal, I would expect you would to. Is that fair to say?
|
 |
JJLehto
Prog Reviewer
Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550
|
Posted: May 28 2011 at 20:34 |
 Equality 7-2521 wrote:
Atavachron wrote:
in other words he supports current law but would oppose the practice it if he could legally
|
Well his exact position is that it is up to the States to allow or disallow abortion, and that abortion should be disallowed by the States.
I was disagreeing with your choice of words. Pro-abortion people call it pro-choice to try to label those who oppose it as being against a women's rights. Anti-abortion people call it pro-life to make everyone else seem like murderers. The issue isn't that clear. We don't need to smear both sides of the debate through subtle word play. |
One of the best things I've seen about the debate! 
|
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
|
Posted: May 28 2011 at 20:34 |
Atavachron wrote:
in other words he supports current law but would oppose the practice it if he could legally
|
Well his exact position is that it is up to the States to allow or disallow abortion, and that abortion should be disallowed by the States.
I was disagreeing with your choice of words. Pro-abortion people call it pro-choice to try to label those who oppose it as being against a women's rights. Anti-abortion people call it pro-life to make everyone else seem like murderers. The issue isn't that clear. We don't need to smear both sides of the debate through subtle word play.
|
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|
Atavachron
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65616
|
Posted: May 28 2011 at 20:30 |
|
in other words he supports current law but would oppose the practice it if he could legally
|
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
|
Posted: May 28 2011 at 20:29 |
Atavachron wrote:
yeah I guess Nap is okay, assuming he supports a woman's right to choose, which I don't if he does or not-- I would hope he does, but I don't know
|
He does. But he doesn't support abortion.
|
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|
Atavachron
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65616
|
Posted: May 28 2011 at 20:28 |
|
yeah I guess Nap is okay, assuming he supports a woman's right to choose, which I don't if he does or not-- I would hope he does, but I don't know
|
|
JJLehto
Prog Reviewer
Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550
|
Posted: May 28 2011 at 20:27 |
Atavachron wrote:
No I'm not annoyed at you at all, I'm not even annoyed at your position, just trying to fully understand it which I believe is crucial to political progress
|
To be fair, a long time libertarian friend of mine always tried to tell me that it is the final form of political progress. Like, you go through the stages of your country and eventually once the people can handle it...you're down to minimal government. Nice and idealist, and in a way something I can't argue with... but it raises a few issues.
Edited by JJLehto - May 28 2011 at 20:28
|
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
|
Posted: May 28 2011 at 20:24 |
What's wrong with Napolitano? He's quite the opposite of Beck.
|
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|
Atavachron
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65616
|
Posted: May 28 2011 at 20:21 |
|
I do love a good argument, and I the current ultra-Constitutionalist position does seem to be platform for, or attract, a general social-political ideal I do not like, ie Judge Napolitano or Glen Beck, but on the other hand I also very much like the Libertarian position of real freedom, as allowing both abortion and handgun rights
|
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
|
Posted: May 28 2011 at 20:14 |
I've misunderstood you then. I fully apologize.
|
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|
Atavachron
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65616
|
Posted: May 28 2011 at 20:13 |
|
No I'm not annoyed at you at all, I'm not even annoyed at your position, just trying to fully understand it which I believe is crucial to political progress
|
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
|
Posted: May 28 2011 at 20:09 |
Your responses certainly seemed to be indicating annoyance to me. I see isn't a typical response.
|
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|
Atavachron
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65616
|
Posted: May 28 2011 at 20:04 |
|
Indignant? 'I see' is indignant? Seems to me you're calling the kettle black ;
in·dig·nant adj
angry or annoyed at the unfairness or unreasonableness of somebody or something
|
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
|
Posted: May 28 2011 at 19:59 |
You indignant responses are quite strange given that my opinion of the presidency is clearly expressed in the Constitution.
|
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|
Atavachron
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65616
|
Posted: May 28 2011 at 19:56 |
|
I see.
|
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
|
Posted: May 28 2011 at 19:51 |
Atavachron wrote:
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
Yeah no. The idea isn't to compromise. The idea isn't even to govern. The idea is to do as little as possible. That's the express duty of the President. |
so you would elect Ron Paul to do as little as possible
|
I would elect to him correct the actions of Presidents who did not do as little as possible. Once he undoes what others have done in place of doing as little as possible, Ron could then return to being an inconsequential piece of the political machine as the president is supposed to be.
|
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|
Atavachron
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65616
|
Posted: May 28 2011 at 19:48 |
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
Yeah no. The idea isn't to compromise. The idea isn't even to govern. The idea is to do as little as possible. That's the express duty of the President. |
so you would elect Ron Paul to do as little as possible
Edited by Atavachron - May 28 2011 at 19:48
|
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
|
Posted: May 28 2011 at 19:44 |
Atavachron wrote:
The T wrote:
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
Atavachron wrote:
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
I just came in here to say RON PAUL RON RAUL RON PAUL RON PAUL.
|
my guess is you'd be spitting on him too after three years |
My guess is absolutely not. If he were to be corrupted, it would have taken place already probably. The man hasn't cast a wrong vote as a Congressman yet. |
If he were to deviate from his principles, yes we would spit on him. But so far as Pat mentions that hasn't happened. Why would it start when he's so old?
|
But isn't part of being president compromising some of one's ideals so that you can effectively govern a country as huge and diverse as the US? It's not a matter of age, or of principles for that matter, but rather leadership and good judgment that makes an effective American President. We might all be eating German food right now if Roosevelt and Eisenhower had not been so good at building coalitions and rejecting the Pax Americana that so many of his (and Kennedy's) generals wanted in Europe. Ideals are wonderful things until you actually are in charge, then the reality of governance begins to sink in and you have to consider all perspectives or risk losing the whole thing. That's what being in charge is, and it's no love fest.
|
I'm sure the Japanese and Americans who looked Japanese were very happy with how "effective" Truman and FDR were.
Yeah no. The idea isn't to compromise. The idea isn't even to govern. The idea is to do as little as possible. That's the express duty of the President.
|
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|
manofmystery
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 26 2008
Location: PA, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 4335
|
Posted: May 28 2011 at 19:37 |
Atavachron wrote:
manofmystery wrote:
The ideals of liberty do not need to be compromised. A president is meant to defend the liberties granted by the constitution. It's a cut and dry job. Being "in charge" of the United States has nothing to do with bending to the whim of majority or minority but denying each power to protect the rights of both. |
in other words a kind of compromise
|
Actually, it's the opposite.
|
 Time always wins.
|
|
Atavachron
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65616
|
Posted: May 28 2011 at 19:08 |
manofmystery wrote:
The ideals of liberty do not need to be compromised. A president is meant to defend the liberties granted by the constitution. It's a cut and dry job. Being "in charge" of the United States has nothing to do with bending to the whim of majority or minority but denying each power to protect the rights of both. |
in other words a kind of compromise
|
|
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
The GOP Presidential Race = Reality TV Stars and $
