Teachable Moment - Part 3

Q8. It always amazes me that a liberal's heart will bleed at the thought of a rapist/murderer going 'nite nite' with a needle while being comforted by a minister and not blink an eye when an abortionist murders a baby by ramming scissors in the skull to prevent the birth. A liberal could never talk to me about torture, oh please.

Q12. I guess liberals do not watch "Dirty Jobs". I have never seen an illegal alien in one of these positions.

Sam, I admire you for trying to respond to this guy. Don't you ever tire of reading the same old lies i.e. Limbaugh hopes the president fails. Only an idiot would repeat that junk after the actual Limbaugh statement has been aired many, many times. I too hope Obama's socialist plans for this Nation FAIL.

I dont think its a difference between Republican and Democratic philosophy, but I do agree that governmental regulation is necessary in many cases.

Sam, buddy, there is no question that water boarding is torture. The only people who don't think it is are Bush and his apologists. The world over has said with a loud and clear voice that water boarding is torture.

You say waterboarding isn't though and that's fine. Try it. Find someone in the military that is trained in it. Hell since it isn't torture there should be plenty of people that are trained and let them perform the harmless little trick on you.

So you say all these things that liberals are afronting God on. What about Conservatives. Are you guys truly holier than us. No stones under you carriage?

Let those without sin cast the first stone. Nice to know every single one of you aren't sinners.

And I seriously doubt God gives a good crap about taxes and who it goes to. Using him to talk about taxes and who gets money and who doesn't seems a little sacrilege to me. But then again I'm liberal so I must be godless.

Ha ha ha it's been fun

And another comment from the g5 "douch bag"

"If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts."

Albert Einstein

Sam,

I'm sure Mike is happy that you took the time to answer all of his questions. Reading your answers, I don't agree with most of your positions (as usual). And I unfortunately don't have the luxury of time to respond to all of your responses.

But I think it was a mistake for Mike to cast such a wide net with his questions. I'm not saying they weren't good questions (I ask many myself), just that asking so many at once has made the last few blog posts very hard to follow with so many people discussing so many different topics. So I would like to ask a question for you (and anyone on this blog to respond to). It's not meant to be a trap question or a baited question, I honestly want to know what some people think. Here goes:

Since Obama has become president, we have seen tremendous outrage from the conservative right (including many on this site). They've proclaimed that he's a socialist. They've proclaimed that he is spending too much money, and that this will eventually destroy the economy for future generations. They've claimed that he is the most fiscally irresponsible president ever. They've even arranged 'tea parties' as protests. They have claimed that he is trampling on the constitution of the USA.

On one level, I can understand this. This is what fiscal conservatives are supposed to do. They are supposed to complain loudly when the government spends large amounts of money. That is their position, and I can respect that.

But here is my question, where were all of the fiscal conservatives for the last 8 years?

I am not trying to baselessly bash President Bush here, but he spent an ASTOUNDING amount of money. His prescription drug plan is projected to cost trillions. The Iraq war is projected to cost trillions. He even spent all of this money while reducing taxes (something I believe that has never happened during a war). He took a budget surplus when he came into office and turned it into a Trillion+ dollar deficit. The national debt inflated by over 6 trillion dollars during his presidency.

Now, I know what many of you will say. That you don't agree with what president Bush did, and that he's not a true conservative. That he was really a liberal. But I'm not asking about President Bush, I'm asking the question about conservative outrage.

But where were the fiscal conservatives when he was president? I know I heard a few people complain about the spending here and there. But it has been NOTHING like the tremendous conservative outrage that has sparked since Obama took office. I understand that conservatives may think Obama is worse than Bush, but still they largely remained silent for 8 years of trillion dollar spending and deficit increases.

I'm simply trying to explain why liberals think all of this conservative outrage rings a little hollow. When we hear people like Glenn Beck or Sean Hannity bemoaning the spending and the deficit so loudly, we wonder why that hasn't been par for the course for the last 8 years.

I can understand and respect people who hold the fiscally conservative position, but only when they hold ALL politicians to the same standards, not just the other side.

Sorry, that was a long and detailed question. But I earnestly want honest and constructive answers. I'm not trying to start a flame war, and I thought I worded it in a fairly non-inflammatory way.

Doodle,

Thanks for the response. I generally agree with your post. I think one of the biggest problems with our political system and mainstream media is that the relatively small fringe is SO much louder than the much larger moderate majority.

They are louder for two reasons.

1) They talk more. The moderates are not nearly as vocal (typically).

2) The press covers them more. Sadly, moderate viewpoints tend to get lower ratings. You'd think that this would not be the case, since there are more moderates, but we (as humans) like to see things that are more exciting/interesting/out there, even if they differ from our own views.

But to clarify my original statement, I'm not talking about 'fringe' conservatives. I'm talking about mainstream fiscal conservatism, the policy that was supposed to be the bedrock of the republican party. For 8 years the mainstream fiscal conservatives were ominously silent while Bush spent trillions, and they seem to have only found their voice once Obama got into office.

I think I'm trying to express why myself and so many liberals are suspicious of the sudden surge of fiscal responsibility in the Republican party.

Don't get me wrong, I know plenty of real fiscal conservatives who vocally opposed Bush's spending spree and deficit ballooning, and they continue to oppose spending now that Obama is in office. I respect them and their position because of its consistency. What I have trouble with is the people who only started complaining about crazy spending on January 21st. Their outrage rings a little hollow if you know what I mean. To some observers, it seems like they are simply looking for an avenue to attack a President they don't like rather than acting out of genuine concern for the future of the country. It seems that if they were genuinely concerned with the future of the economy, they would have started complaining about deficits 7 years ago.

And I'm sure you could cite a time when people on the left did the same thing. For instance, so many liberals were against Bush's war in Afghanistan until it became Obama's war in Afghanistan. I think I have as much contempt for them as I do for the people who just decided to be fiscal conservatives 3 months ago.

If this new 'movement' is genuinely an attempt to return the republican party to a fiscally conservative status, than kudos. But to me, it currently reeks of political theater and attack politics. Which I find just as detestable from the left as I do from the right.

I'm sure the Republicans will get their chance to be back in the White House eventually. And when they do, I hope they actually put for a fiscally conservative budget. But simply looking at recent history, I see my choice as one between a party who spends too much money on things I don't think are necessary, and a party that spends too much money on things I think actually benefit the people of this country.

lol, I thought you would. Though I expect we disagree as to which party is spending too much money on things that are actually good for Americans.

(actually, maybe I don't. After all, I'm currently in the Virgin Islands because of a government contract that was created under President Bush. I probably shouldn't look a gift horse in the mouth, LOL)