Here is your first post on the subject, claming (albeit not specifically socially) that the GOP has become too liberal:
And powell is wrong -the GOP has gone too liberal and strayed from it's Conservative roots. powell may not be a liberal but the reality of the situation is - he's really only a Military/foreign policy guy - he has nothing else with regards to economic, social policy.
Then, after a little prodding, you produce this gem:
Wrong. Even socially they have given in to the liberals as their spine was already compromised fiscally. Also there is no such thing as a church free state - which is what you seem to suggest needs to happen. And no, it's not a "core part" of the Constitution. What the Constitution states is that the gov't can't establish a religion....you know...like England had - which people were looking to escape. But that's a whole different discussion and one that's been had here many many times.
This, I feel, is the core of your argument. That by not actively changing or "standing up to" "liberal" social policies, they have now adopted them de-facto. The same argument, here:
They've also given into the liberal views socially as they haven't pushed these ideals because they wanted to be too "nice" and thus didn't stand up for their core beliefs. They allowed the liberals to set the premise of too many discussions and didn't challenge those premises when they were dead wrong.
So really what you've been saying this whole time is that..I don't know how to phrase it so I'm going to use a generality... society has been too liberal and that the GOP has failed to change it because they've not had a strong leader to bring them into some kind of conservative utopia?
So to dumb it down for you(and others) - they were too liberal by default since they did not stand up for Conservative ideals nor challenge many liberal premises. Accepting fringe liberal premises is dangerous as once it's assumed it's many time too late.
That seems to support your argument. However, you've yet to cite any specific liberal policies that the GOP now accepts by default, which is all anyone really wanted in the first place. Kind of.
So you started this thread as a lame attempt at a call out thread?
:heart:
So now we know that the GOP has become more liberal by "default" but we don't know on what specifically. We only know that it has, in fact, happened and we (I) am not smart enough to "get it,":
READ what I posted. Take it all together as it was written. Then read the dumbed down version(which still might not be dumbed down enough for the likes of you). It's all there if you'd actually look and try to read/comprehend.
Sheesh. You can whine about "specifics" if you wish but it doesn't change my statements. I didn't state they were specifically liberal on XYZ - which would invite you asking me specifically about what. So basically you are asking for something I never made an argument for.
Now please...please actually try to read what I've posted instead of ASSuming like you people tend to do here.
I see what you're doing with the word assume here. What a cute rhetorical device you have. That's really sweet.
Again, you're refusing to address the issue here when clearly many, if not all of the people participating in the thread don't understand your obtuse answer. Just because you're telling us something, doesn't make it true:
I've already addressed this. Just because YOU don't understand what I've posted doesn't mean I need to answer your irrelevant questions. Again, nowhere did I say they specifically adopted liberal views - if you'd have actually read what I posted - they failed to challenge too many premises of liberals - which is defaults things to liberal if they put out the premise. Sheesh.
Then we have a somewhat clearcut statement:
Then find someone who made those assertions - I did not make the assertion they adopted specific liberal views - which you'd realize if you'd have read my posts.
Great! Now we're getting someplace! If you did not state that they have
specifically become more liberal, then they MUST have become
generally more liberal. What the fuck that means, I have no idea. If they have become overall more liberal, certainly you would be able to cite a specific example. Unless of course, this is another example of Republican magical thinking. "We'll be greeted as liberators!"
So I ask you:
So you asserted that they adopted "general" liberal views?
You reply:
No. Generally they didn't stick to Conservative ideals and thus allowed the liberal premises to take hold. My whole post was a generality - not saying specifically they adopted liberal views, but you people don't understand that and ASSume I was talking specifically. You people need to read my whole posts instead of trying to pull one portion out and trying to run with it.
And this the crux of your argument, which is some of the weakest shit I've ever seen on these boards. If your whole post was a generality, then what's to stop me from saying:
"All Republicans are hillbillies/racists/bible thumpers/baby eaters/sister sexers"
.....generally speaking
NOTHING, that's what. Had that been the case though, there would be (rightly) hell to pay. Generally the level of discourse on these boards is higher than the average bear but I think this brought it right into the tank.
Again, my statements were not specific - because the statement was general. You people don't seem to understand that.
Awesome. Generally, your posts are morose.
But just to appease you who are too slow(or just really that ignorant) to understand my statements - One good example is stem cell research. Everyone assumes the GOP is against it when that is demonstrably false. The GOP did not challenge the premise the libs and media put out there and thus they will always be clubbed with the issue by people who are ignorant.
Holy shit! A specific example!!! You're arguing that the GOP is NOT against stem cell research - a premise which is proven in the posts following this.
Generally, the GOP has been historically opposed to stem cell research not only on fiscal grounds (the basis of your next post, here
The issue came about due to FEDERAL FUNDING of embryonic stem cell research. Not wanting the FEDERAL GOV'T sponsoring it is different than opposing the moral side. The media and libs were successful in cementing the premise that Republicans oppose stem cell research when that isn't the case - it's just the same old typical obfuscation and twisting the libs do on these issues. Conservatives like me oppose the FEDERAL funding of the research not on the moral front but rather due to it not being something the FEDERAL GOV'T should be involved with. THAT is why it's a premise the GOP lost and thus defaulted to the liberal view.
But on moral grounds as well. Just because
you have no moral qualms with it, doesn't mean that the leaders of your backwoods, dinosaur-ignoring party don't and that is what we're talking about here, my friend. Go back and look at all of those links that I posted and you ignored - you'll find plenty of moral objections there.
Also note that you've blamed both the "liberals for the same old typical obfuscation and twisting." We'll need that later.
Now we're going in circles:
2. you still haven't read what I stated if that's what you think I stated. How many ways can I try to say this before we get to a dumbed down enough version for you to understand? If a premise that is flawed or is biased in a liberal way isn't challenged by a Conservative - the issue's premise is set in a liberal fashion thus a Conservative or GOP member has to address it from there which is liberal. Yes, accepting liberal premises means you have moved away from Conservatism - thus becomeing more liberal. Why is it so hard for you oh so enlightened liberals to understand?
Great! Splendid! Wonderful! I want
specificsof this happening outside of your ridiculous stem cell research "example." What else have you got?
A fellow conservative chimes in here and you attack him:
You see, people like you are the problem with the GOP. You think they have stayed the same? Puhleeze. They have not held true to the Conservative ideals they once held.... When are people like you who claim to be Conservative and claim to generally vote Republican going to wake up and realize that voting for the left is not going to make the Republicans do anything but lurch leftward? Conservatism wins in America and the GOP is loosing because it's forgotten what Conservatism is - both economically and socially
Remember what we talked about a few paragraphs ago, about everything being "twisted" by those dastardly liberals? Do ya?
Where did I say it was the democrat's fault? Oh wait... I didn't. I have definitely laid the GOP problems at the feet of Republicans - not that you've read anything I've posted anyway...
Here, I'll re-quote it so you don't have to scroll up:
The issue came about due to FEDERAL FUNDING of embryonic stem cell research. Not wanting the FEDERAL GOV'T sponsoring it is different than opposing the moral side. The media and libs were successful in cementing the premise that Republicans oppose stem cell research when that isn't the case - it's just the same old typical obfuscation and twisting the libs do on these issues.
Ouch.
I provided an explaination of why I stated what I did. Just because I didn't claim specifics does not mean the opinion is baseless like you seem to suggest.
Really? So I can claim things like:
"Those who live in Iowa have no education above the 5th grade and have a tough time dressing themselves in the morning. Also, the smell."
I have no specifics but hey, it ain't baseless!
Get caught yet again making strawman aguments so it's time to whine about the use of the word "libs". ...let me call the WHAAAAMBULANCE for your...
You can call them on the pwnphone. It's been ringing for you through this entire thread.
Facebook
Twitter