Traits of a republican? Traits of a democrat? - The Orange Mane

Atlas · 10-21-2008, 08:56 PM

Republican: Religion, guns, low taxes, Invade countries that hate us, Invade countries we hate, death row, Anti Abortion, Main strength Southern State (low IQ), more interest in making money than almost any other thing. .

Democrat Higher IQ, Willing to sacrifice income for a balanced budget, Woman's right to choose, Main Strength Northeastern (hi IQ), Respect the lives of the poor and elderly, Often takes job that pays less but gives greater satisfaction.

W*GS · 10-21-2008, 09:48 PM

Both: Using the State to enforce their particular hypocritical "morality" on everyone; anti-freedom, anti-liberty, anti-rights; pro-censorship; anti-science; irrational; paranoiac.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN · 10-21-2008, 11:04 PM

W*GS: Has serious issues with people in positions of power (probably stems from some kind of unresolved daddy issues) unless they practice his anti-regulation/"government is the problem"/"the free market can police itself" religion (as elucidated by patron Saint Ron and Grover Norquist.)

BABronco · 10-21-2008, 11:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by W*GS

Both: Using the State to enforce their particular hypocritical "morality" on everyone; anti-freedom, anti-liberty, anti-rights; pro-censorship; anti-science; irrational; paranoiac.

W*GS · 10-22-2008, 05:58 AM

LABF can't argue the point, so he goes for the personal attack.

Thanks for illustrating so clearly how empty your dogma is, son.

W*GS · 10-22-2008, 06:16 AM

It's also ironic that radical lefty LABF, who views the 1960s as the zenith of his ideology, is now a "Trust authority, they know best!" peddler.

TailgateNut · 10-22-2008, 06:31 AM

W*GS
Both: Using the State to enforce their particular hypocritical "morality" on everyone; anti-freedom, anti-liberty, anti-rights; pro-censorship; anti-science; irrational; paranoiac.

I had to "yank this from BA's post because I generally ingore "Wigged Out".

You need to get out of that Glass bubble house with the reflective coating on the wrong side of the glass if you think Dems are anti-science, anti freedom and resort to generalized censorship. You are fugging "out there".

alkemical · 10-22-2008, 06:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by W*GS

Both: Using the State to enforce their particular hypocritical "morality" on everyone; anti-freedom, anti-liberty, anti-rights; pro-censorship; anti-science; irrational; paranoiac.

++

kappys · 10-22-2008, 07:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

W*GS: Has serious issues with people in positions of power (probably stems from some kind of unresolved daddy issues) unless they practice his anti-regulation/"government is the problem"/"the free market can police itself" religion (as elucidated by patron Saint Ron and Grover Norquist.)

You must be kidding me. Wags is spot on the money here. Anyone in power is not to be trusted - it is their responsbility to prove why they should have power to you and trust only extends sofar as their abilities to do that.

Rohirrim · 10-22-2008, 07:23 AM

We do have a Constitution. Some brilliant people worked very hard on it. Maybe we could try following that?

L.A. BRONCOS FAN · 10-22-2008, 08:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rohirrim

We do have a Constitution. Some brilliant people worked very hard on it. Maybe we could try following that?

According to W*GS' logic, the framers were "scumbag politicians" who shouldn't have been trusted either.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN · 10-22-2008, 08:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kappys

Anyone in power is not to be trusted -

Wrong.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kappys

it is their responsbility to prove why they should have power to you and trust only extends sofar as their abilities to do that.

Correct.

kappys · 10-22-2008, 08:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

Wrong.

Correct.

I disagree completely. There are plenty of people that start from a trusting position and wait to be disproven - which seems to be what you are suggesting.

I think it is wiser to start form a position of distrust and wait for the trust to be earned.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN · 10-22-2008, 09:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kappys

I disagree completely. There are plenty of people that start from a trusting position and wait to be disproven - which seems to be what you are suggesting.

No - that's not what I am suggesting at all.

I am simply denying W*GS' claim that "all politicians are scumbags" and that a man should not be trusted just because he holds power.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kappys

I think it is wiser to start form a position of distrust and wait for the trust to be earned.

I agree that trust must be earned.

W*GS · 10-22-2008, 09:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

I am simply denying W*GS' claim that "all politicians are scumbags" and that a man should not be trusted just because he holds power.

Name a trustworthy politician.

Whatever happened to "Question authority!"?

You're promoting "Obey!".

L.A. BRONCOS FAN · 10-22-2008, 09:14 AM

You still don't get it.

Question authority? Absolutely. Always.

However, it doesn't follow that a man who holds power isn't trustworthy just because he holds power.

If he's not trustworthy, then it's because he has done something specific to abuse his power or to betray the public trust - not just a priori because he holds power, as you suggest.

SJ Bronco · 10-22-2008, 09:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by W*GS

Name a trustworthy politician.

Whatever happened to "Question authority!"?

You're promoting "Obey!".

1. George Washington...

(I'm kidding, you win there)

2. the idea is to question authority, not close your mind to what they are saying or completely dis-obey. The point to question authority is to use your own mind to make your conclusions and not have them told you.

3. I'm not, but I do see a reason to do so most of the time.

W*GS · 10-22-2008, 09:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

However, it doesn't follow that a man who holds power isn't trustworthy just because he holds power.

Never trust anyone with power.

Those with power will abuse it. Guaranteed.

For someone as obsessed as you are with Bush, having to spell out such a basic truism to you is rather pathetic.

If you don't believe me, re-read your Constitution. It's all about limiting and dividing power, because its authors didn't trust anyone with it. Period.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN · 10-22-2008, 09:19 AM

I'll grant W*GS that rulers or politicians who have used their power for the greater good and to empower their subjects have probably always been the exception rather than the rule throughout human history.

However, I still believe our founders were striving to make America one of those exceptions.

W*GS · 10-22-2008, 09:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

I'll grant W*GS that rulers or politicians who have used their power for the greater good and to empower their subjects have probably always been the exception rather than the rule throughout human history.

Weaselly. Politicians always abuse their power. Period.

Quote:

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

However, I still believe our founders were striving to make America one of those exceptions.

Like I said, re-read your Constitution. It's all about not trusting those with power. 100%.

The founders knew exactly what I've been saying; they'd be horrified to see the opposite view ("Trust me. I'm from the government") passed off as some sort of reasonable position.

kappys · 10-22-2008, 09:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

You still don't get it.

Question authority? Absolutely. Always.

However, it doesn't follow that a man who holds power isn't trustworthy just because he holds power.

If he's not trustworthy, then it's because he has done something specific to abuse his power or to betray the public trust - not just a priori because he holds power, as you suggest.

Again I disagree. Anyone seeking to hold power is automatically( a prior) untrustworthy in my book. Now that is not set in stone and can certainly be changed - however that trust must be earned.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN · 10-22-2008, 09:42 AM

To say that politicians "always" abuse their power is simply absurd.

Examples of the abuse of power are obvious, but we can also point to examples of leaders using their power to empower citizens.

As for the Constitution, it's not "all about not trusting those in power" - it's about not trusting the concentration of power in the hands of one individual or office - and the recognition that the seperation of powers is a mechanism for accountability (the safeguard against corruption and abuse of power.)

W*GS · 10-22-2008, 09:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

To say that politicians "always" abuse their power is simply absurd.

Show me a politician that didn't.

Quote:

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

Examples of the abuse of power are obvious, but we can also point to examples of leaders using their power to empower citizens.

Examples?

Quote:

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

As for the Constitution, it's not "all about not trusting those in power" - it's about not trusting the concentration of power in the hands of one individual or office - and the recognition that the seperation of powers is a mechanism for accountability (the safeguard against corruption and abuse of power.)

Separation of powers is one instance of the founders understanding that politicians abuse power; that power is granted to politicians by the people is another, and that powers not explicitly given to politicians are reserved to the people is a third.

The founders didn't trust politicians with power, and that's why the Constitution is as it is. Claiming otherwise just shows ignorance on your part.

kappys · 10-22-2008, 09:49 AM

[QUOTE=L.A. BRONCOS FAN;2136676]
Examples of the abuse of power are obvious, but we can also point to examples of leaders using their power to empower citizens.

[QUOTE]

Have to agree with Wags here. Leaders do not empower citizens. Citizens empower themselves. Our rights are primarily the results of decades of popular struggle against oppressive forces. The names of these heroes are lost but their legacies are the freedoms that they have left us.

Leaders may take the credit - but in most cases they are simply responding to the demands of the people. When enough people clamour for something a leader will eventually step up to take advantage of that and in the process make those demands a reality.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN · 10-22-2008, 09:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kappys

Again I disagree. Anyone seeking to hold power is automatically( a prior) untrustworthy in my book. Now that is not set in stone and can certainly be changed - however that trust must be earned.

As I said, I agree that trust must be earned.

However, I don't agree that an individual should be regarded as untrustworthy simply because he seeks power and before we know anything about him.

That would imply that the human impulse to power is somehow intrinsically bad or evil.

Power can be used for good or evil - it depends on the individual.

10-21-2008, 08:56 PM	#1
Atlas Draft Defense Early&Often Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 18,526	Traits of a republican? Traits of a democrat? Republican: Religion, guns, low taxes, Invade countries that hate us, Invade countries we hate, death row, Anti Abortion, Main strength Southern State (low IQ), more interest in making money than almost any other thing. . Democrat Higher IQ, Willing to sacrifice income for a balanced budget, Woman's right to choose, Main Strength Northeastern (hi IQ), Respect the lives of the poor and elderly, Often takes job that pays less but gives greater satisfaction.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

10-21-2008, 09:48 PM	#2
W*GS Ring of Famer Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Earth Posts: 19,507	Both: Using the State to enforce their particular hypocritical "morality" on everyone; anti-freedom, anti-liberty, anti-rights; pro-censorship; anti-science; irrational; paranoiac.

10-21-2008, 11:04 PM	#3
L.A. BRONCOS FAN Mo' holla fo' yo' dolla! Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: In a bunker in an undisclosed location Posts: 52,694	*WGS:** Has serious issues with people in positions of power (probably stems from some kind of unresolved daddy issues) unless they practice his anti-regulation/"government is the problem"/"the free market can police itself" religion (as elucidated by patron Saint Ron and Grover Norquist.)

10-22-2008, 05:58 AM	#5
W*GS Ring of Famer Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Earth Posts: 19,507	LABF can't argue the point, so he goes for the personal attack. Thanks for illustrating so clearly how empty your dogma is, son.

10-22-2008, 06:16 AM	#6
W*GS Ring of Famer Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Earth Posts: 19,507	It's also ironic that radical lefty LABF, who views the 1960s as the zenith of his ideology, is now a "Trust authority, they know best!" peddler.

10-22-2008, 06:31 AM	#7
TailgateNut Bleedin' orange! .......as much as tebonites Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mile High Posts: 20,018 Adopt-a-Bronco: Howard Griffith	W*GS Both: Using the State to enforce their particular hypocritical "morality" on everyone; anti-freedom, anti-liberty, anti-rights; pro-censorship; anti-science; irrational; paranoiac. I had to "yank this from BA's post because I generally ingore "Wigged Out". You need to get out of that Glass bubble house with the reflective coating on the wrong side of the glass if you think Dems are anti-science, anti freedom and resort to generalized censorship. You are fugging "out there".

10-22-2008, 07:23 AM	#10
Rohirrim Partisan Human Cannonball Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater Posts: 48,808	We do have a Constitution. Some brilliant people worked very hard on it. Maybe we could try following that?

10-22-2008, 09:14 AM	#16
L.A. BRONCOS FAN Mo' holla fo' yo' dolla! Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: In a bunker in an undisclosed location Posts: 52,694	You still don't get it. Question authority? Absolutely. Always. However, it doesn't follow that a man who holds power isn't trustworthy just because he holds power. If he's not trustworthy, then it's because he has done something specific to abuse his power or to betray the public trust - not just a priori because he holds power, as you suggest.

10-22-2008, 09:19 AM	#19
L.A. BRONCOS FAN Mo' holla fo' yo' dolla! Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: In a bunker in an undisclosed location Posts: 52,694	I'll grant W*GS that rulers or politicians who have used their power for the greater good and to empower their subjects have probably always been the exception rather than the rule throughout human history. However, I still believe our founders were striving to make America one of those exceptions.

10-22-2008, 09:42 AM	#22
L.A. BRONCOS FAN Mo' holla fo' yo' dolla! Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: In a bunker in an undisclosed location Posts: 52,694	To say that politicians "always" abuse their power is simply absurd. Examples of the abuse of power are obvious, but we can also point to examples of leaders using their power to empower citizens. As for the Constitution, it's not "all about not trusting those in power" - it's about not trusting the concentration of power in the hands of one individual or office - and the recognition that the seperation of powers is a mechanism for accountability (the safeguard against corruption and abuse of power.)

10-22-2008, 09:49 AM	#24
kappys Ring of Famer “It will be of little avail to the Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 3,900	[QUOTE=L.A. BRONCOS FAN;2136676] Examples of the abuse of power are obvious, but we can also point to examples of leaders using their power to empower citizens. [QUOTE] Have to agree with Wags here. Leaders do not empower citizens. Citizens empower themselves. Our rights are primarily the results of decades of popular struggle against oppressive forces. The names of these heroes are lost but their legacies are the freedoms that they have left us. Leaders may take the credit - but in most cases they are simply responding to the demands of the people. When enough people clamour for something a leader will eventually step up to take advantage of that and in the process make those demands a reality.