Republicans are never logical

[drDAK]

"The Status Quo SUCKS." - George Carlin

The Republican Party has always been about status quo. Keep things the way they are: barbarianism. If you look close at every republican argument ever brought forward it is to keep things the way they are without change. No logic brought forth. No science. Just faith in the overlords which they so love: corporate fat cats.

Yeah. What a realistic party. The same party that encourages intelligent design (a theory based not on LOGIC but instead on FAITH! Can you believe this? Have faith. Trust the government. How about shut the fuck up and let the people run things you goddamn WASPs!

And for the record, who decided John McCain was a centrist? That's the worst argument for voting for a candidate ever. If you look at Europe and other advanced nations of the world, they are incredibly "liberal". Meaning America is a country with conservative values already! Therefore, we are behind on things such as Universal Health Care and putting an end to the Death Penalty.. and if we don't change the goddamn status quo we will quickly lose our Superpower status to countries like China, the European Union, and Russia.

What ever happened to the Constitution? I remember a time when we used to have rights.. a time when our phone lines weren't being illegally tapped and ALL PRISONERS HAD A RIGHT TO TRIAL JUST LIKE EVERY GODDAMN HUMAN BEING.

Point being, republicans make no logic. Ever. They are just brainwashed and mindcontrolled by religion and their corporate overlords who run the RNC.

[LordJaric]

another bias thread, no supprise.

[ABsoldier17]

ok... "if it ain't broke, why fix it?"
I have never been opposed to change if it were proven to be for the better. unfortunately socialism has never been successful when applied. Whereas conservatism is a tried and true method, and consistantly wins in the arena of ideals. I dont believe any goverment program can improve life, it has what i call the 'anti-midas touch' (with the exception of a few facets of goverment) anything goverment touches goes south. i.e. American education, postal service ect.

[Tony-DarkGrave]

and like liberals are any fucking better

[Coherent]

Ah, what a breath of fresh air. All I ever seem to see on this forums are long OP posts ranting on about how the liberals are destroying this country, it really seems about time we had a thread like this. Although I don't agree that Republicans are never logical...

[drDAK]

At 7/7/08 09:47 PM, ABsoldier17 wrote: ok... "if it ain't broke, why fix it?"
I have never been opposed to change if it were proven to be for the better. unfortunately socialism has never been successful when applied. Whereas conservatism is a tried and true method, and consistantly wins in the arena of ideals. I dont believe any goverment program can improve life, it has what i call the 'anti-midas touch' (with the exception of a few facets of goverment) anything goverment touches goes south. i.e. American education, postal service ect.

And America is broken. Economically, yes. Foriegn policy-wise, yes. If we want to stay a Superpower in the world and not be run by the likes of China.. we need to change.

Everything changes, my friend. America will fall one day, and so will human civilization. It is wrong to assume the same things will work every time for years and years, especially at the rate our world evolves.

At 7/7/08 09:38 PM, LordJaric wrote: another bias thread, no supprise.

Youre one cool cat. Thanks for you input.

[Ravariel]

Anyone who says "never" or "always" is always wrong, never right.

Remember, one point of data does not an argument make. Add more variables or be ignored.

[Coherent]

At 7/7/08 09:57 PM, Ravariel wrote: Anyone who says "never" or "always" is always wrong, never right.

hehe, kind of shot yourself in the foot there didn't you?

[OhThisGuy]

I believe you have Neo-Cons and those true to the Republican platform mistaken
Enjoy your failure to understand political groups and mindsets

[Coherent]

At 7/7/08 10:02 PM, RadioactiveRabbit wrote: And now, as of late, the Supreme court has decided in it's infinite wisdom to allow detainees to challenge their detention in a prison wear many of those released have been confirmed about going back to waging Jihad on America.

It's kind of a self-fulfilling prophecy don't you think? I mean, you hold a guy for 5 years without telling him what he's being held for, physically abuse him, and then let him go after he's found innocent in a fair trial. Think he might be a little pissed off?

[dySWN]

At 7/7/08 09:30 PM, drDAK wrote: "The Status Quo SUCKS." - George Carlin

You know, it's also said that those who fail to learn from the past are doomed to repeat it.

For example, you writing this thread before noting that other obviously biased threads have fallen to the wayside in favor of real debates.

[drDAK]

At 7/7/08 10:02 PM, RadioactiveRabbit wrote: No, some people think change that brings improvements is better than change just for the hell of it. I mean come on, everyone knows past ideals are never to be regarded.

I was talking about the status quo.. not ignoring past ideals. I was also saying how much it sucks.

You didn't even mention any points you fucktard. I could say the exact same thing about Democrats and liberals, just interchanging those labels with "Republican".

Okay, first off I'm pretty sure I'm not a fucktard. Second, I was talking about how the republicans put a great deal of trust in big organizations such as the military (Not allowing prisoners the right to a fair trial) the government (getting mad when liberals attack the government and demand that people be constantly informed of what their government is doing) or corporations (favoring tax cuts for wealthy and people who already own enough yachts in their private lakes).

You're even more ignorant than I thought. I just thought you were stupid, now I think you're a troll.

Okay, kiddo. You can't even "think" of how I am because you do not know me.

Troll? I'm a troll. Just making sure.

The British healthcare system is in a huge deficit right now and it takes forever for treatment, while private healthcare gives better treatment and puts less of a strain on society and the individual. In case you didn't know, America is a society based on the rights of the individual. Now what are you going to say? Conservative idea? Well, so was the Constitution which you claim to defend vehemently. Although I'm pretty sure that's bullshit, as I never hear leftists talking about how great the Constitution is. The only time I hear anything about it at all is from people like you, using it to bash right wingers. And apparently, CONSERVATIVE IDEAS ARE EVIL D:<

Healthcare requires a lot of money. In any modern society, big government is a must. HOWEVER (read this before you respond to that last sentence): government also must be more efficient and cannot be polluted by big corporations or stupid burocratic bullshit (such as pork.. where our government takes our money and spends it on really fun stuff).

They didn't in the Revolutionary War

Yeah, what a great example. In the time of the revolutionary war there was also slavery.

They didn't in WWI. And a ton of papers were shut down by the government. We used to actually shut down harmful propaganda. But you'll never hear about that. You'll just hear about Bush being evil fascist dictator overlord.

Our government during WWII was very controlling! No one denies that. We had a huge burocratic government that was pretty much a dictatorship. I'd be raising hell about that too.

We actually had internment camps for the Japanese. We executed many prisoners on the battlefield.

Those must have been the "good ol' days" for conservative assholes like you.

And now, as of late, the Supreme court has decided in it's infinite wisdom to allow detainees to challenge their detention in a prison wear many of those released have been confirmed about going back to waging Jihad on America.

Of course they aren't humans either. They are just brown people to you, huh?

And let me ask you this. How many Republicans do you even actually know, or are you basing your retarded and inaccurate views on the Hollywood redneck who loves guns and dislikes gays, Muslims, brown people, and just absolutely loves seeing people die in Iraq.

Okay, listen up kid. My entire family is comprised of republicans. Look at the first posts I wrote on the BBS. They are all conservative. I began to mature over the ages and started to realise how the system really fucks people over (like single moms raising their children. AKA the new poor).

AND I LIVE IN TEXAS YOU IDIOT! Some of my best friends were rednecks.

And please, you gullible moron, lookng up the fucking Sedition Act.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedition_Ac t_of_1918

I'm going to hope you're actually going to read it.

I've been in highschool, unlike you. I studied US History.

[drDAK]

At 7/7/08 10:13 PM, dySWN wrote: For example, you writing this thread before noting that other obviously biased threads have fallen to the wayside in favor of real debates.

I've been on Newgrounds for quite a while. I know the environment.

And everything in the world is biased. You don't think when you go to vote on election day.. you're not biased? Of course you are! For the candidate you choose.

If everyone wasn't biased, there would be no individual opinion.

[ABsoldier17]

drDAK, point out a change for the better and i'll tell you if it's worth it. it has to have been done before, it has to have been successful, and it has to have brought prosperity. it's not a lack of logic, it's really high standards

[drDAK]

At 7/7/08 10:27 PM, ABsoldier17 wrote: drDAK, point out a change for the better and i'll tell you if it's worth it. it has to have been done before, it has to have been successful, and it has to have brought prosperity. it's not a lack of logic, it's really high standards

You are limiting the future to the past. New ideas are what makes humans so incredibly gifted. We can sketch ideas and put them to work. I'm not saying we throw ideas out there that have no logic behind them, but that we look for good options... whether that be what other successful countries are doing or something that we came up with by ourselves.

What happens when China, Russia, and the EU become Superpowers and we're still sticking to the same ol' same ol' until we are so stagnant that our country withers away from the international scene?

[ABsoldier17]

At 7/7/08 10:34 PM, drDAK wrote:

At 7/7/08 10:27 PM, ABsoldier17 wrote: drDAK, point out a change for the better and i'll tell you if it's worth it. it has to have been done before, it has to have been successful, and it has to have brought prosperity. it's not a lack of logic, it's really high standards

Did you notice that the US became a superpower in a mere 200 years and it took china a thousand? what makes America successful is what makes us unique. when you start screwing with that (like we have been doing in the last couple of decades) is when an overal decline starts to occur (like the kind you mentioned earlier).

You are limiting the future to the past. New ideas are what makes humans so incredibly gifted. We can sketch ideas and put them to work. I'm not saying we throw ideas out there that have no logic behind them, but that we look for good options... whether that be what other successful countries are doing or something that we came up with by ourselves.

What happens when China, Russia, and the EU become Superpowers and we're still sticking to the same ol' same ol' until we are so stagnant that our country withers away from the international scene?

The reason china and russia, and the EU are they way they are is because they switched to marxist ideals and systems.

[mindlessdestruction2]

At 7/7/08 09:48 PM, Dante-Son-Of-Sparda wrote: and like liberals are any fucking better

good point

[Tony-DarkGrave]

At 7/7/08 10:47 PM, mindlessdestruction2 wrote:

At 7/7/08 09:48 PM, Dante-Son-Of-Sparda wrote: and like liberals are any fucking better

good point

thank you, liberals only end up going to socialist/marxist Idealogies which are completely obsolete

[Ravariel]

At 7/7/08 10:05 PM, Coherent wrote:

At 7/7/08 09:57 PM, Ravariel wrote: Anyone who says "never" or "always" is always wrong, never right.

hehe, kind of shot yourself in the foot there didn't you?

No, you just missed "wut i did thar".

[animehater]

At 7/7/08 09:30 PM, drDAK wrote: "The Status Quo SUCKS." - George Carlin

Just faith in the overlords which they so love: corporate fat cats.

Have faith. Trust the government. How about shut the fuck up and let the people run things you goddamn WASPs!

We shouldn't trust the government, so let's make it even bigger. What a brilliant concept! I always said Carlin should have just stuck to the one thing I liked him doing, narrating Thomas the Tank engine.

[Al6200]

At 7/7/08 09:30 PM, drDAK wrote:

The Republican Party has always been about status quo. Keep things the way they are

The Republican Party was never been about keeping the status quo. Generally they oppose centralized actions to create social change, but that's very different from "keep things the way they are".

barbarianism.

barbarian comes from barbar, or gibberish. A barbarian is a person who speaks a language that you don't know (and in common stereotype, someone who is uncultured or trying to invade), not someone who opposes change.

If you look close at every republican argument ever brought forward it is to keep things the way they are without change. No logic brought forth. No science. Just faith in the overlords which they so love: corporate fat cats.

Care to find an example?

Yeah. What a realistic party. The same party that encourages intelligent design (a theory based not on LOGIC but instead on FAITH! Can you believe this? Have faith. Trust the government. How about shut the fuck up and let the people run things you goddamn WASPs!

Proponents of Intelligent Design are a minority in the Republican party, in fact only 2 of the candidates in the last Republican presidential primary didn't believe in evolution. Neither of those men came anywhere close to winning the primary.

And for the record, who decided John McCain was a centrist? That's the worst argument for voting for a candidate ever. If you look at Europe and other advanced nations of the world, they are incredibly "liberal".

The word liberal in an American context cannot be blindly applied to other country's political systems. A liberal in Japan is not the same thing as a liberal in the US.

And yes you're going to have to provide some evidence for your massive claims.

Meaning America is a country with conservative values already! Therefore, we are behind on things such as Universal Health Care and putting an end to the Death Penalty..

I agree with both universal health care and ending the death penalty, but you shouldn't insert weasel words (like behind) into your constructive.

and if we don't change the goddamn status quo we will quickly lose our Superpower status to countries like China, the European Union, and Russia.

Huh? America's economy will fall behind if we don't get rid of the death penalty. Liberal nations are always the biggest superpowers? Like North Korea? They must have a great economy!

What ever happened to the Constitution? I remember a time when we used to have rights.. a time when our phone lines weren't being illegally tapped and ALL PRISONERS HAD A RIGHT TO TRIAL JUST LIKE EVERY GODDAMN HUMAN BEING.

I agree with trials for Guantanamo Bay prisoners.

Point being, republicans make no logic. Ever. They are just brainwashed and mindcontrolled by religion and their corporate overlords who run the RNC.

Republicans use logic just as much as democrats, and you've provided no evidence to the contrary.

[uhnoesanoob]

Fuck yeah absolutes! But really, Conservatives recognize that there will always be change in the world, but they don't go ahead making radical policies at the spur of the moment. One who just has change for the sake of change is doomed to failure. You need to know what works well with your government, and what has not worked well. You also have to observe the founding principles of which your country was built on. You should not make too many changes that would differ from those basic principles. Too promising and vague a word "change" is. People will, for the most part, always think that things can be better, because things always CAN be better. However, this hopefulness leads to people believing that all change is good change. Recall another famous democrat who was obsessed with "change". Jimmy Carter. He sure did "change" a ton of things, like changing our well working foreign policy, and gave up the rights to the panama canal, which we built ourselves. This "change" harmed us, and it is but one of many examples of what happens when you have change for the sake of change. Notice the example of Obama. He promises Change, and he mentions what he wants Change in, but he never really talks at detail the specifics of the "change" he will make. This is reckless and foolish. Yet change is such a poison-filled word, offering hope while neglecting any knowledge. Many people cling on to this hope, and what appears like a life boat may well be an anchor. So is it illogical to not be hasty about change? I think, given the examples in the past, that it is only logical to NOT be hasty about it. Change is like the element of sodium, handle it carelessly and it will explode. But, taking the proper time and precautions, like the conservatives do, it can become an improvement to the quality of human life.

[Coherent]

At 7/8/08 12:02 AM, Al6200 wrote: Proponents of Intelligent Design are a minority in the Republican party, in fact only 2 of the candidates in the last Republican presidential primary didn't believe in evolution. Neither of those men came anywhere close to winning the primary.

There were 3 actually. Huckabee, Brownback, and Tancredo. And Huckabee had his moments during the primary, so I wouldn't say he "didn't come anywhere close". And honestly, it's pretty sad that even 3 of the candidates didn't believe in evolution.

[Al6200]

At 7/8/08 12:17 AM, Coherent wrote: There were 3 actually. Huckabee, Brownback, and Tancredo. And Huckabee had his moments during the primary, so I wouldn't say he "didn't come anywhere close". And honestly, it's pretty sad that even 3 of the candidates didn't believe in evolution.

Alright, I forgot Tancredo. So basically one third of the Republican candidates believe in ID. Which is pretty sad, but doesn't concur with the OP's claim that all Republicans support ID.

Anyway, if you look at the three Republican candidates who won primaries, only one believes in ID, and he got the least delegates of the three.

[Coherent]

At 7/8/08 12:35 AM, Al6200 wrote: Alright, I forgot Tancredo. So basically one third of the Republican candidates believe in ID. Which is pretty sad, but doesn't concur with the OP's claim that all Republicans support ID.

Yeah, I don't necessarily agree with him, I don't think all Republicans are like that.

[CommanderQ]

I've always wondered what the people who founded the republican party would think if they saw it today.

[animehater]

At 7/8/08 01:46 AM, CommanderQ wrote: I've always wondered what the people who founded the republican party would think if they saw it today.

I think imagining that with the Democratic founders would be funnier.

[freddorfman]

Good fourtune be upon you comrde for bringing the truth to the light
down with mcain and the fascicst
oh and obama all right but he is not socialist enough for me to vote for him

[Elfer]

At 7/8/08 12:40 PM, MercatorMap wrote: OP, who freed the slaves? Not the democrats. The democrats were keeping the black man in his shackles. But you bitch about the republicans being overlords, what irony!

You're aware that the democratic and republican parties essentially switched roles a while after the civil war, right?

As for the patriot act, it is perfectly legal.

That doesn't make it right.

Why would prisoners be given a right to trial? They aren't guilty of breaking any laws, they were simply captured while fighting on the opposite side.

Do you honestly believe that all accused enemy combatants were captured during combat?

What are you going to try a prisoner for?

Perhaps for war crimes, such as being a non-uniformed combatant. You know, a trial to actually justify detention.

[Gunter45]

Just pointing out several glaring errors.

At 7/8/08 12:40 PM, MercatorMap wrote::

OP, who freed the slaves? Not the democrats. The democrats were keeping the black man in his shackles. But you bitch about the republicans being overlords, what irony!

That's more semantics than anything. The Democrats were the Southern conservative party at the time. The party values switched over time. Saying that the Republican party has maintained the same values as it did at the time of the Civil War is ignorance or delusion of the highest order.

As for the patriot act, it is perfectly legal. Why? Because it was approved by CONGRESS. Not to mention that it was approved BY DEMOCRATS. Illegally tapped you say? Not if you aren't pulling any illegal or conspiratory crap. If you aren't doing anything wrong, why worry about the phone lines of terrorists being tapped?

Just because something passes through Congress doesn't make it legal. If Congress passed a bill saying that talking was illegal, would you consider that to be a legal piece of legislation?

Also, it was passed by nearly everyone because almost nobody read the thing before voting.

Not only that, but saying "if you're not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to fear" is an affront to the exact reason we have the 4th Amendment. The British soldiers did that exact same thing. Guess what happened? We revolted. Letting the government search our property at their discretion is spitting on the faces of those who fought and died for our freedom as a nation.

The 4th Amendment protects the American people against unreasonable search and seizure. There aren't equivocations saying that we can let it slide if it means we can catch a few bad guys. In order to search a person's house, belongings, phone calls, etc, you need to go through the proper channels and get a court order. The Constitution takes precedent over anything short of a new Amendment that Congress passes.

Besides, if the government's action was legal, why are they trying to make it retroactively legal? Isn't that admission of guilt?

Why would prisoners be given a right to trial? They aren't guilty of breaking any laws, they were simply captured while fighting on the opposite side.

What are you going to try a prisoner for? The jury finds the defendant guilty of serving in the german army and impeding the progress of the American army on its way into berlin.

Right.

Enemy combatants, sure. They're considered prisoners of war, that's no problem. In conventional combat, the situation is pretty clear.

The problem is when people are brought to Guantanamo on suspicions of terrorism and held without trial. Being suspected of a crime is not good enough to be imprisoned for it. When you have enemy combatants, simply being in the enemy uniform and on the battlefield is proof. However, bringing someone up on charges of terrorism requires evidence and that means a trial.