1. I am a conservative/libertarian Republican who will be voting for Obama.
We know, we know.
Quote:
2. We as a nation have a responsibility to keep higher standards than the animals who seek to hurt us ... we have been dealing as a nation w/ the fine line between the civil liberties, upholding the dignity of all human beings and our national security. This has taken a delicate balancing act ... and the Court, our Congress and President have done what they all have seen as necessary to keep this in "check" while still protecting our survival and integrity.
I have no problem w/ our long track record of treating POW's and ... ( now ... this convenient term "enemy combatants" while fighting the war on Terror) with some higher standards that have made us the greatest nation in human history.
Have American military personel conducted themselves in a way that we should all be proud? Not all, most, but not all. Your talk of precendence for the child rape case goes ignored on this issue b/c we have NEVER in our history given POW's habeas corpus rights. We have always tried them with military tribunals.
We were the greatest nation on earth during the Nuremburg Trials and we prosecuted those war criminals with a military tribunal. Why all of the sudden do we change course and bequeath to these terrorists something we wouldn't even give to the Nazis?
Quote:
Are there concerns I have about this detainee decision ... sure ...
but is this decision a liberal vs. conservative issue?? ... I'm not sure DB.
This is absolutely a conservate/liberal issue. The justices that voted for habeas corpus were all LIBERAL justices with the exception of Kennedy who could go either way. All that dissented were CONSERVATIVE justices.
Quote:
It's your claim that somehow we are reaching an apocalyptic climax when we choose our next President that is alienating many who just don't see it quite that way ... and make this race more about partisanship rather than common sense ...
Dan if you don't recognize that there is evil at work in the culture wars, you good friend are enraptured with the pied piper's music and missing the point. It may not usher in the apocalypse, but enough can be eroded in four to eight years that in many ways our nation will never recover or take generations to undo.
How many tens of millions of babies must be aborted before we realize that who we vote for matters for the defenseless? How many laws passed or judicial decisions be reached before our Constitution is undermined beyond repair? Don't the past 50 years of history show how important presidential elections are to the future of the country? Eight years of undermining the military and intelligence services under Clinton was enough to bring us 9/11. And he was considered a moderate Democrat!
What will four to eight years of a true liberal like Obama bring us? Maybe not the apocalypse, but very grave consequences IMO.
Quote:
As a staunch political conservative I have always been in favor of capital punishment ... a life for a life.
I am even in favor of making capital punishment ... automatic ... if a child is raped and then murdered ...
I believe the capital punishment for the rape of a child did not include older teens being raped by young adults. I believe the laws were narrowed to younger aged children. You don't think its justified to execute a grown man raping an infant or a 3 year old or 10 year old or 14 year old? A life for a life? I don't see that their lives are equally valuable at that point. When that man or woman crossed the line of such egregious perversity they just devalued their own life far below that of the precious innocent child.
I am sure that parameters were or could be inserted in to the law to make the execution limited in certain instances. I don't know how the LA law was written, but if Scalia, Roberts, Thomas and Alito felt like it was a good law, thats good wnough for me.
Quote:
However, even you admittedly say that this notion of executing child rapists is indeed pushing the envelope because you ... like I ... are sickened by the heinous nature of this act ...
I don't recall calling this law "pushing the envelope". I was quoting you.
Quote:
But when did this become a "conservative" issue? That's where I get lost, DB.
Do I cease being a conservative if I believe that the punishment must meet the crime?
I believe you cease being a conservative when you want to provide habeas corpus to terrorists to protect their fundamental rights to a jury trial versus a military tribunal but you want to protect a convicted child repaist from lethal injection? Don't you see the flawed logic in all of this?
Quote:
Not wanting Obama as President is your right ... but using these recent decisions as examples or reasons not to vote for him is IMO .... is wanting at best since they are not necessarily conservative issues.
BTW, thanx for loving me ... I love you too, bro ... even if you're voting for a flip-flopper
So tell me Dan, what are the compelling reasons to vote for Obama? I am eager to here your rationale as a true conservative who has decided to vote for one of the most liberal candidates in history.
__________________
When a newspaper posed the question, "What's Wrong with the World?" G. K. Chesterton reputedly wrote a brief letter in response: "Dear Sirs: I am. Sincerely Yours, G. K. Chesterton." That is the attitude of someone who has grasped the message of Jesus.
Of course ... we know that in the last 30 years ... Conservative Presidents have ruled the day ... and have made the bulk of the last few appointments ... and even Clinton had to get approval from a Republican Congress ....
AND YET WE STILL GET THE DECISIONS THAT DB IS BALKING AT ...
The only true conservative president in then last 30 years was Reagan. W is several steps behind him and GHW is leaps behind him. Ford made an abysmal nomination with Stevens. Sandra Day Oconner and Kennedy were disappointments in many ways. Rhenquist a good one and Thomas. Souter calculated and hid his true nature until he was approved. As a conservative Republican I have not been happy with many of the nominations.
The GOP didn't fight Clinton because the Congress is not supposed to use the SC nominations as a partisan divide. It is a privilege of the executive to select candidates. And unless something is found that is profoundly wanting in a justice, regardless of their ideologies, Congress should not stand in the way.
The Dems did it with Bork and tried with Thomas. The GOP Congress did what they should, conduct fair hearings and vote based on the person's record and reputation. They could've fought like the Dems but chose to honor the Constitution.
Quote:
If today's gun ruling falls in favor of the conservative side ... which I think it will ...
What is the reaction then? ... Probably more of the same ... This is why we can't vote for Obama ... we gotta keep the Court conservative on this issue .... It's a twisted catch-22 that's being presented here as an argument against his candidacy. It's grasping at straws to make this next election about who will tilt the Court ....
This would be one of MANY reasons not to vote for Obama. And its not twisted, its rooted in FACTand HISTORY. Your marginalizing it doesn't change the fact thats what it is.
Quote:
This election will be about an economy on the brink of collapsing and finding a resolution to a war (that I still support) that has cost us trillions of dollars .... THIS IS WHAT IS AT STAKE. The Court will remain moderate ... I believe for years to come ... and will not be the deciding factor ... nor should it be ... when we cast our votes this November.
The Presidency has very little to do with the economy, in spite of the popular media's spin that it is. The ONLY thing a president can do that can make a difference in the economy is raising taxes or cutting taxes. Mostly what government does in relationship to a market economy is counter productive. The more government gets involved, the harder it is for Americans to make money. The less government interference, the better the economy grows.
Capitalism, when studied closely, goes in cycles. This is part of the usual down turn in an economic cycle after years of growth. When I was a kid, there were long lines at the gas stations, inflation was sky high, and we were in a recession. Guess what? American ingenuity and hard work turned things around and we saw a president cut taxes and some of the greatest years of growth occured in the late 80s to early 90s.
Then came a tax increase with GHW Bush's compromise and a down turn in the economy prior to the '92 election. The internet boom was on the verge of exploding and carried us out of that recession. It was American business in innovation that surged the economy.
Clinton raised taxes, but a GOP Congress caused him to change course in '94 and he remained more conservative the rest of his presidency on fiscal policy. The dot com bubble burst late in his presidency and we had a recession in early 2000 until 2002.
The last six years have seen unprecendented growth with the Bush tax cuts and this down turn is just another part of the equation. Give it another two years and things will be moving right along, unless of course Obama gets elected and decides to raise taxes on the "wealthy" most of whom are private business owners who will have to make cuts in job formation and business growth or will be forced to go overseas to find better business environs.
In reality we haven't even reached the technical equivalent of a recession. There has to be two quarters of negative growth, which hasn't happened.
The media hypes up the economy when it is in a down turn and downplays it when it strong and growing, unless of course and liberal Democrat is in office, and then we hear all about how great it is and what a great president this guy is.
WHAT IS A STAKE is all of the hidden consequences of a liberal president like Obama, of which the Supreme Court and the Economy are only the tip of the iceberg.
__________________
When a newspaper posed the question, "What's Wrong with the World?" G. K. Chesterton reputedly wrote a brief letter in response: "Dear Sirs: I am. Sincerely Yours, G. K. Chesterton." That is the attitude of someone who has grasped the message of Jesus.
The only true conservative president in then last 30 years was Reagan. W is several steps behind him and GHW is leaps behind him. Ford made an abysmal nomination with Stevens. Sandra Day Oconner and Kennedy were disappointments in many ways. Rhenquist a good one and Thomas. Souter calculated and hid his true nature until he was approved. As a conservative Republican I have not been happy with many of the nominations.
The GOP didn't fight Clinton because the Congress is not supposed to use the SC nominations as a partisan divide. It is a privilege of the executive to select candidates. And unless something is found that is profoundly wanting in a justice, regardless of their ideologies, Congress should not stand in the way.
The Dems did it with Bork and tried with Thomas. The GOP Congress did what they should, conduct fair hearings and vote based on the person's record and reputation. They could've fought like the Dems but chose to honor the Constitution.
This would be one of MANY reasons not to vote for Obama. And its not twisted, its rooted in FACTand HISTORY. Your marginalizing it doesn't change the fact thats what it is.
The Presidency has very little to do with the economy, in spite of the popular media's spin that it is. The ONLY thing a president can do that can make a difference in the economy is raising taxes or cutting taxes. Mostly what government does in relationship to a market economy is counter productive. The more government gets involved, the harder it is for Americans to make money. The less government interference, the better the economy grows.
Capitalism, when studied closely, goes in cycles. This is part of the usual down turn in an economic cycle after years of growth. When I was a kid, there were long lines at the gas stations, inflation was sky high, and we were in a recession. Guess what? American ingenuity and hard work turned things around and we saw a president cut taxes and some of the greatest years of growth occured in the late 80s to early 90s.
Then came a tax increase with GHW Bush's compromise and a down turn in the economy prior to the '92 election. The internet boom was on the verge of exploding and carried us out of that recession. It was American business in innovation that surged the economy.
Clinton raised taxes, but a GOP Congress caused him to change course in '94 and he remained more conservative the rest of his presidency on fiscal policy. The dot com bubble burst late in his presidency and we had a recession in early 2000 until 2002.
The last six years have seen unprecendented growth with the Bush tax cuts and this down turn is just another part of the equation. Give it another two years and things will be moving right along, unless of course Obama gets elected and decides to raise taxes on the "wealthy" most of whom are private business owners who will have to make cuts in job formation and business growth or will be forced to go overseas to find better business environs.
In reality we haven't even reached the technical equivalent of a recession. There has to be two quarters of negative growth, which hasn't happened.
The media hypes up the economy when it is in a down turn and downplays it when it strong and growing, unless of course and liberal Democrat is in office, and then we hear all about how great it is and what a great president this guy is.
WHAT IS A STAKE is all of the hidden consequences of a liberal president like Obama, of which the Supreme Court and the Economy are only the tip of the iceberg.
Excellent post, DB.
I have a problem with Obama because of his voting record, I don't trust him with our National Security and because he first agreed to do the 10 town meetings with McCain and then decided to do just two - "Take it or leave it".
One on the 4th of July when people are busy - go figure. He knows that the meetings will draw out who he really is and he isn't prepared to do that. He wants to glide in on his personality ratings at the polls. I'm not fooled by this.
Another thing that bothers me, and this is just me - his name. My mother had my name spelled differently on my birth certificate, but we always spelled it another way when I started school. I didn't know about it until I was in Junior High. When I got older I had it changed because I couldn't identify with the spelling on the birth certificate. It wasn't me. I tried to spell it the other way but I couldn't become that person. She was a stranger.
He appears to be able to identify with Hussein, even though changed when he was younger. It wasn't working for me, so I'm wondering why it is working for him. Just a personal observation.
It was important to me to identify with who I really was. I guess that's what he is doing.
Deacon Blues, you do a very good job of articulating your points, Brother. I like reading your posts. It sure beats the recycled e-rumors that get posted around here.
For those of you planning to vote for Obama for various reasons consider this: should he get elected he will definitely have the chance to nominate a Supreme Court Justice and maybe two. As a liberal he would most likely appoint justices that lean to the left.
The Supreme Court has just in the past two weeks ruled in favor of two horrible cases. They basically gave prisoners of war the same legal rights as American citizens. Terrorists, jihadists and Islamic fanatics are given the right to go to court even if they have killed and maimed many. Should they win their freedom, they could return with more death in their wake. The decision went 5-4. McCain will nominate strict constructionist judges.
The SC said this week that it unconstitutional to sentence to die someone who has raped children. Again the vote went 5-4.
There is too much at stake this election to vote because someone is an eloquent speaker.
could have used you around here yesterday. had a really nice discussion about this.
__________________ If I do something stupid blame the Lortab!
Deacon Blues, you do a very good job of articulating your points, Brother. I like reading your posts. It sure beats the recycled e-rumors that get posted around here.
Thanks bro. I can't stand crazy conspiracy theories. I always hated those stupid "backward masking" gimmicks people tried to use against heavy metal music when I was a kid. I always told folks, "just look at the album cover, read the lyrics. You don't have to play it backwards to get a subliminal message. The obvious message is plain as day. You know like 'I'm on a highway to hell' and the album entitled 'The Mark of the Beast'."
I don't need outlandish claims about Obama and his dubious secret Muslim ties to know what I see and hear right out in the open.
__________________
When a newspaper posed the question, "What's Wrong with the World?" G. K. Chesterton reputedly wrote a brief letter in response: "Dear Sirs: I am. Sincerely Yours, G. K. Chesterton." That is the attitude of someone who has grasped the message of Jesus.
1. I am a conservative/libertarian Republican who will be voting for Obama.
2. We as a nation have a responsibility to keep higher standards than the animals who seek to hurt us ... we have been dealing as a nation w/ the fine line between the civil liberties, upholding the dignity of all human beings and our national security. This has taken a delicate balancing act ... and the Court, our Congress and President have done what they all have seen as necessary to keep this in "check" while still protecting our survival and integrity.
I have no problem w/ our long track record of treating POW's and ... ( now ... this convenient term "enemy combatants" while fighting the war on Terror) with some higher standards that have made us the greatest nation in human history.
Are there concerns I have about this detainee decision ... sure ...
but is this decision a liberal vs. conservative issue?? ... I'm not sure DB.
It's your claim that somehow we are reaching an apocalyptic climax when we choose our next President that is alienating many who just don't see it quite that way ... and make this race more about partisanship rather than common sense ...
As a staunch political conservative I have always been in favor of capital punishment ... a life for a life.
I am even in favor of making capital punishment ... automatic ... if a child is raped and then murdered ...
However, even you admittedly say that this notion of executing child rapists is indeed pushing the envelope because you ... like I ... are sickened by the heinous nature of this act ...
But when did this become a "conservative" issue? That's where I get lost, DB.
Do I cease being a conservative if I believe that the punishment must meet the crime?
Remember the Duke Lacrosse team ???... what if hypothetically this group of 19-21 year old males had indeed raped a 17 year old minor ...????
Do you really believe they need to be executed for committing this atrocity?
Something in my gut tells me that this is not type of retribution that our ideologues have argued for when defending capital punishment. My gut tells me that you ... nor I think that these hypothetical 19 year olds would be deserving of this punishment.
Where do we draw the line with what we think is deserving of capital punishment or heightening our punishments for growing problems??? ... do we regress and start chopping off the hands of those that are habitually shoplifting since it's a growing epidemic and affects us all?
The Supreme Court has a responsibility ... no matter who appointed them ... or the political mood of the country ... to uphold the sanctity of the Constitution ...
In this last decision about capital punishment they have kept precedent with what has been the law of the land and decided on caution when it comes to the issue of cruel and unusual punishment.
Not wanting Obama as President is your right ... but using these recent decisions as examples or reasons not to vote for him is IMO .... is wanting at best since they are not necessarily conservative issues.
BTW, thanx for loving me ... I love you too, bro ... even if you're voting for a flip-flopper
That disappoints me Danial. I have said it before and I will say it again. Those who vote for politicians who support funding of abortion is taking part in that sin and in no way reflects Christ. It would be better that a millstone be put around their neck and cast into the sea.
Not only does Obama support abortion, he support the hideous act of partial birth abortion. A vote for him is a vote to take part in those murders.
__________________ Never burn the bridge of mercy... You never know when you will need it to cross.
Doctrine makes a wonderful servant but a horrible master!
I have no problem w/ our long track record of treating POW's and ... ( now ... this convenient term "enemy combatants" while fighting the war on Terror) with some higher standards that have made us the greatest nation in human history.
The distinction is critical. A POW is a prisoner when there is a war against a specific country. We are not at war with a country so the distinction between a POW and an enemy combatant is a necessary distinction. An enemy combatant doesn't qualify for Geneva convention protections.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea
Remember the Duke Lacrosse team ???... what if hypothetically this group of 19-21 year old males had indeed raped a 17 year old minor ...????
Do you really believe they need to be executed for committing this atrocity?
Terrible example, the law stated the child had to be under the age of 12. These were not cases of statutory rape where one might be mistaken about an individuals age.
__________________
"Beware lest you lose the substance by grasping at the shadow." ~Aesop
The distinction is critical. A POW is a prisoner when there is a war against a specific country. We are not at war with a country so the distinction between a POW and an enemy combatant is a necessary distinction. An enemy combatant doesn't qualify for Geneva convention protections.
I am very aware of the distinctions,bro. It is a convenient distinction, IMO. Especially when everyone and their mother knows we're fighting an undeclared war on terror and people in a specific region - Afghanistan/Iraq.
My point again ... was that I do have some issues w/ this decision ... which I stated before ... however it is the tone and intent of the first post thread that categorically said Terrorists have the same legal rights as Americans and therefore somehow a vote for Obama is a vote that tilts the Court to anarchy ... an apocalyptic catastrophe.
I have pointed out that it dealt w/ due process and habeas corpus ... which has been an issue even in the Civil War.
We could debate the finer aspects of it ... however each body of our gov't has sought to bring checks and balances in an issue that is new to us ... while still keeping the integrity we have continued to show the world that we are a cut above.
Quote:
Terrible example, the law stated the child had to be under the age of 12. These were not cases of statutory rape where one might be mistaken about an individuals age.
My example was not to again to discuss the finer aspects of the specific law in question but once again ... this notion that if I am a conservative I have to disagree w/ this decision ... I'm sorry but I won't ...
I gave that example in response to DB stating:
Quote:
Life in prison? I know that I would want the man or woman who violates my young children taken from this world for such a disgusting and terribly life altering act. No child rapist should be permitted to live period. That's not pushing the envelope, thats justice.
It's statements like these that are making those who are supporting McCain just on his party affiliation seem extreme when we all know he's held multiple positions and multiple issues .... including for abortions, Verlon. All the while making Obama ... McCain's foil ....
when you and I both know that's not accurate based on McCain's fluid track record. Do we even know if McCain is a conservative? Geez, Louise.
Statements like a vote for Obama is a vote for partial birth abortions... or even better ... murder and "not reflecting Christ".... is just the tip of the iceberg of the nonsense rhetoric being spewed in the name of a man who has proven to waffle on issues, especially moral ones, important to all of us in the conservative camp.
Later on in this thread even DB conceded that some child rapists should live based on various situations.
I still uphold the notion as a libertarian at heart that the punishment does not fit the crime and I do not have to gravitate toward fascism to keep my conservative label to do so.
If my views have done anything in this thread at least the author of it no longer believes all child rapists should die and wants exceptions to the rule based on ages of the offenders and offendees..... even if they are adults or legally children... *wink*
And conversely ... now believes if some child rapists live that's justice.
I refuse to let talk radio and my party card/koolaid formulate my opinions, talking points or decisions.
In this thread I vote for common sense over hyperbole.
Lastly DB .... I don't lose my conservative label if I believe in due process even for the least of these or refuse to execute someone who I believe will receive a fairer form of retribution with an appropriate yet harsh sentence. It sounded cute, however.
Keeping in mind that I'm willing to personally execute any sexual offender who commits this offense followed by murdering the victim. Conservative enough?
Linear Mode
