Curse

C R A F T · Jan 29, 2009, 04:59 PM // 16:59

This is a politically base thread. So tune out if not interested.

People ask me why I am a Conservative person and I tell them I really don’t want to be associated with any of the Liberal actions I see on TV or hear on the radio.

When Bush first took office, people basically vandalized government equipment when they pried off the “W’s” of their keyboards. I didn’t hear of one instance when an “O” was removed. What happened to being a “good loser”?

The last few months I have seen and heard so many instances of when Bush was mentioned the crowd would “boo” and when Obama arrived the crowd would cheer. What ever happened to civility?

When McCain lost the election, he honestly congratulated Obama on the win. When Gore lost, I didn’t see anything of the sort.

Notice that I didn’t bring up any policies that change from administration to administration. I don’t understand all of the decisions that were made in the Bush Administration, but I think that honest people will look back on the past few years and say he did the best he could.

He had no Presidential Honeymoon, the media attacked him from before the time he took office, and when the attacks on the Twin Towers came, he could do no right then either. Obama can do no wrong in the media’s eyes. No matter what he does, it will be the right thing. Why? Because they WANT him to succeed.

Look at the magazines that came out in the last six months; pictures of Conservatives or Republicans were shown to be awkward, goofy, or just not very flattering. Then look at the pictures of Liberals or Democrats and notice the difference.

Then I ask the same people; who they would want to be associated with; a sore loser, an antagonistic winner, or a group that accepts the outcome and moves on?

What type of person are you?

distilledwill · Jan 29, 2009, 05:07 PM // 17:07

From an outside view (I live in the UK) I believe that Obama has been somewhat idolised. A lot of people seem to see him as the Messiah. I also quite admired the humility with which McCain accepted defeat and wished his opponent good luck.

Don't get me wrong, I would have voted for him if I could but I will reserve my adoration till after the first year is over.

Kafiri_Mkorogai · Jan 29, 2009, 05:55 PM // 17:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by C R A F T

This is a politically base thread. So tune out if not interested.

People ask me why I am a Conservative person and I tell them I really don’t want to be associated with any of the Liberal actions I see on TV or hear on the radio.

I'm not a liberal, I'm an anarcho-syndicalist, but regardless... you are a "conservative" (however you are defining this) not because of something that matters, like policy decisions, but because people didn't actually like Bush when he was appointed to president?

Quote:

When Bush first took office, people basically vandalized government equipment when they pried off the “W’s” of their keyboards. I didn’t hear of one instance when an “O” was removed. What happened to being a “good loser”?

There is nothing good about losing when contests for actual social organization comes into play. Besides, the Republicans probably owned the keyboards anyway, so I doubt they would mangle their own equipment, the dirty bourgeois bastards

.

Quote:

The last few months I have seen and heard so many instances of when Bush was mentioned the crowd would “boo” and when Obama arrived the crowd would cheer. What ever happened to civility?

Well, he is responsible for the death of a million or so people, and did a fair job of mangling civil liberties and enriching his friends on the process, so I'd say this shouldn't be a surprise. The better question would be, why weren't you booing as well? Not that I think Obama will be a large improvement. An empire is an empire, even if its new leader is now literate.

Quote:

When McCain lost the election, he honestly congratulated Obama on the win. When Gore lost, I didn’t see anything of the sort.

How does this affect the real world?

Quote:

Notice that I didn’t bring up any policies that change from administration to administration. I don’t understand all of the decisions that were made in the Bush Administration, but I think that honest people will look back on the past few years and say he did the best he could.

That is irrelevant. What matters are the goals and actions that he was "doing his best" to bring about. If you find the goals and actions of a leader reprehensible and immoral, then the fact that he ate his Wheaties in the morning to make sure that he could have the energy to achieve those goals is hardly a virtue.

Quote:

He had no Presidential Honeymoon, the media attacked him from before the time he took office, and when the attacks on the Twin Towers came, he could do no right then either.

Are you serious? The media was especially complicit in jumping on the jingoistic, flag-waving, "OMG WE R AFRAYD!! PLZ BOMB SOME1 ?!!!" bandwagon post-9/11.

Quote:

"Obama can do no wrong in the media’s eyes. No matter what he does, it will be the right thing. Why? Because they WANT him to succeed."

That is a bit of an exaggeration. The last time I turned on CNN before the election, they were still debating whether he was a secret, time-traveling, Muslim Communist. Yes, there is has been a certain degree of adulation towards Obama, but I think that is mostly because he presents a very different image of himself than Bush did... his public persona can read, is quite charismatic, and has the whole "historic presidency" on his side. Had Bush not had the opportunity of 9/11, he never would have been able to establish his War Presidency and generally distract from his crap approval ratings and "suckle the teat of the rich" domestic policies. Most everyone WANTS Obama to not be Bush... is this a surprise?

Quote:

Look at the magazines that came out in the last six months; pictures of Conservatives or Republicans were shown to be awkward, goofy, or just not very flattering. Then look at the pictures of Liberals or Democrats and notice the difference.

All I see is old rich men with a lot of blood on their hands on either side, with token female representatives thrown into the mix. Of course, given that you are focusing on the presence or lack of "goofiness" in media pictures, rather than actual policies and their (inhumane) consequences, I can see why this might seem to matter to you.

Quote:

Then I ask the same people; who they would want to be associated with; a sore loser, an antagonistic winner, or a group that accepts the outcome and moves on?

What type of person are you?

I would rather be associated with an antagonistic winner, assuming such a person actually agreed with my opinions on the matter. I oppose the ideas of certain people because I have fundamental value differences. There is no virtue, in my opinion, in politely acquiescing when you see terrible things occurring. I would rather see the war criminals in the government shamed and tried for crimes against humanity than be a good winner or loser. Of course, Obama is none of these, and I really just have to sit tight for a few weeks until he ramps up the occupation of Afghanistan, killing thousands of people himself, and again revealing that the notion that Reps and Dems are "alternatives" that you can "choose" from is quite illusory when push comes to shove.

The Red Messenger · Jan 29, 2009, 07:39 PM // 19:39

people tend to support the party, not the person. its obvious why the democrats came out and voted in mass this election; the democratic win was predictable since 2006.

to your question, i dont dissasociate myself with anyone because of their political view. same reason for religion; nearly all of the people dont really make a decision based on personal findings and strong values they create in their life. they make their decision based on their parents, and sometimes their friends/coworkers. people want to belong to a group, and will just join the group that everyone else they are around is in.

my parents are liberal/democratic, and all but one of the people i work with are conservative/republican. i voted democratic in this election and republican the last. basically because people around me influenced my vote.

in short, for the bulk of the population, i think it doesnt matter who you want to associate with. beleive or dont, you are probably are easily influenced and flock to the crowd.

Winterclaw · Jan 29, 2009, 10:10 PM // 22:10

IMO liberalism is a disaster. Both FDR in the 30's and Japan in the 90's tried to spend their way out of a recession/depression. If anything, they made it last longer. If you ask me, if you wanted to end this recession right now instead of throwing away 1.1 trillion dollars with interest for programs that won't even really get rolling for the next 2 years, cut taxes on businesses by the same amount. That would ease their burden and would allow them to either lower costs to the consumer, increase spending, hire more people, or some combination of the 3.

Or do something that hasn't been tried instead of tried and failed and just step back and let the economy fix itself. If our economy were likened to a healthy young child, it just got tripped up because of the government's carelessness. Now instead of letting that child learn to pick itself up like they should, they've decided to confine it to a wheelchair for the rest of its life because it tripped once.

Even worse, a good chunk of this new stimulus is laden with leftist pork.

joshuarodger · Jan 29, 2009, 10:47 PM // 22:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by C R A F T

He had no Presidential Honeymoon, the media attacked him from before the time he took office, and when the attacks on the Twin Towers came, he could do no right then either.

actually for the year or so after the attacks were bush's highest approval ratings during his time in the presidency. do you not remember the way the crowd cheered when he threw out the first pitch of the World Series in Yankee Stadium?

i agree that the media has been overly harsh over the last 3-4 years or so and i agree the media wants Obama to succeed but i think all of america wants their president to succeed until he does something they don't agree with. bush had the same feeling of support after the clinton administration. he was the breath of fresh air after the scandals that wracked the previous president's tenure. the same is true of Obama now. eventually he will make a mistake and will, hopefully, be criticized to the same extent that all previous presidents have been.

btw, i'm a republican and voted for McCain, but i hope for america's sake that Obama can fix most of what's wrong in america now, namely the economy and foreign wars that we are paying for and seeing no recompense.

Black Metal · Jan 30, 2009, 02:52 AM // 02:52

I'm right there with you joshua. I'm conservative (don't really like either party though), and I voted McCain, but seeing Obama win is about the best kind of loss I can imagine. Honestly I hope he becomes everything everyone hopes for, and we look back in history and he is up there with the very best Presidents in American history.

I couldn't wish what happened under Bush's Presidency upon anyone. Because so much shit happened during his terms, he'll always be associated with them (some of them his fault, some of them partially his fault and partially Clinton's fault, some not his fault at all). While his overractions (unilateralism, etc) may have made some of this shit worse, I'd take that over an indecisive, ineffective bureaucrat that we see very often in other parts of the Western world.

I think those positions are fair and unbiased. I really don't like partisanship nor bashing (like in the media). Beyond that I really want to see everyone around the world get past this recession/depression soon because it's affecting the livelihood of so many honest families.

Cebe · Jan 30, 2009, 02:21 PM // 14:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by distilledwill

From an outside view (I live in the UK) I believe that Obama has been somewhat idolised. A lot of people seem to see him as the Messiah. I also quite admired the humility with which McCain accepted defeat and wished his opponent good luck.

On British TV the BBC certainly does put Obama in an extremely good light. We only hear of his victories and all the popular things he plans on doing. I have to wonder if it is all true, or if there are less popular things going on under the Obama administration in America that just goes unreported in the UK.

The BBC certainly does always seem to be portraying Obama as a sort of godlike figure, put on earth to save the world's economy.

DreamRunner · Jan 30, 2009, 04:29 PM // 16:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Celestial Beaver

On British TV the BBC certainly does put Obama in an extremely good light. We only hear of his victories and all the popular things he plans on doing.

It just shows how incredibly bias the media is. Obama has a lot of support from the media and well a lot of the general public too. What is worse is the media has really only shown how terrible Bush has been as a president and even the general public got caught onto this as well. It seems that many people seem to forget all of the good things he has done or they were just swept under the rug, left for only for people who wanted to look for them.

Just an example is Bush was pretty successful in Asia. The relationship with China was a huge mess when he first went into power and he developed a stronger bond with Asia and China.

ty3c · Jan 30, 2009, 08:08 PM // 20:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by C R A F T

This is a politically base thread. So tune out if not interested.

People ask me why I am a Conservative person and I tell them I really don’t want to be associated with any of the Liberal actions I see on TV or hear on the radio.

When Bush first took office, people basically vandalized government equipment when they pried off the “W’s” of their keyboards. I didn’t hear of one instance when an “O” was removed. What happened to being a “good loser”?

The last few months I have seen and heard so many instances of when Bush was mentioned the crowd would “boo” and when Obama arrived the crowd would cheer. What ever happened to civility?

When McCain lost the election, he honestly congratulated Obama on the win. When Gore lost, I didn’t see anything of the sort.

Notice that I didn’t bring up any policies that change from administration to administration. I don’t understand all of the decisions that were made in the Bush Administration, but I think that honest people will look back on the past few years and say he did the best he could.

He had no Presidential Honeymoon, the media attacked him from before the time he took office, and when the attacks on the Twin Towers came, he could do no right then either. Obama can do no wrong in the media’s eyes. No matter what he does, it will be the right thing. Why? Because they WANT him to succeed.

Look at the magazines that came out in the last six months; pictures of Conservatives or Republicans were shown to be awkward, goofy, or just not very flattering. Then look at the pictures of Liberals or Democrats and notice the difference.

Then I ask the same people; who they would want to be associated with; a sore loser, an antagonistic winner, or a group that accepts the outcome and moves on?

What type of person are you?

I voted mccain, he lost, I dont like obama and fear what he will do. however mccains bow out was a very nice way to do things and it was very cool, obama is not going to be what people think he will be, for the record I hold nothing aganist george W bush, he did a good job and i'll leave it at that.

obama I pray for you to do a good job.

I Is Special · Jan 30, 2009, 09:33 PM // 21:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by C R A F T

Obama can do no wrong in the media’s eyes. No matter what he does, it will be the right thing. Why? Because they WANT him to succeed.

The nerve of the media.

Wanting Obama to succeed.

Master Fuhon · Jan 30, 2009, 10:34 PM // 22:34

There is a whole other secondary problem that messes things up: liberal has been tied with democrats and the common people; conservative has been tied with republicans and the wealthy. Anyone who knows anything about belief systems can easily recognize that stereotyping and prejudice (and racism and anti-religion) are involved in that mess. There are wealthy liberals (Wall Street people who love having no restrictions placed on their rights in private enterprise) and there are common/poorer conservatives; just like there are liberal republicans (Bush since he cares about his own rights) and there are conservative democrats (Clinton is more conservative than Bush, just not fully conservative). In most minds however, the ties are connected in the same stereotypical ways.

In regards to specifics on the two belief systems, the liberal perspective commonly takes the side of giving more rights to the individual. The conservative perspective usually places restrictions on the rights of the individual based on the point where a person’s individual rights infringe on the rights of other people.

Taking these two in mind, there is a well-documented liberal media bias. The media prefers to have the right to free speech, which includes saying negative things about people to sell more and attract more attention. People also prefer it when the news has free speech, because they have access to more information or the sensationalism they want to hear. However, the conservative side usually steps in and demands restrictions on those rights because those negative things can cause damage to the reputations of innocent and non-related parties.

The right to vote is usually an expression of ‘wants’ instead of ‘needs’ (note ‘usually’, needs appear to have come to the forefront this election for both parties). This is because needs are experienced at a subconscious level, while you can always recognize or vocalize what you want. This is unpreventable.

But as far as liberal expansion goes, I believe the only way to reverse this trend is for people to understand that the free rights everyone is gaining will eventually infringe on someone else’s rights somewhere. I find this to be difficult, because ‘wants’ are experienced at a higher emotional priority than any person telling you logic about how having many rights is going to let someone screw you over in the future, because they will have rights that conflict with what you need.

For that reason, most of the people who go conservative have felt the infringement on their own rights of others who wanted unlimited rights for themselves. Most people who are liberal have more often felt the restrictions on their own rights placed by what they feel are ‘arbitrary’ rules. As a conservative leaner, I can certainly tell you that those rules are supposed to be well thought out and not arbitrary.

And if you are a young conservative, you certainly are part of a rarer demographic. Some youthful immaturity (like the gloating during wins, whining during losses) is also easy to stereotype as being part of the liberal message, although it shouldn’t be.