Muscatine

Get hold of yourself choken. Your embarrassing yourself.

I'm sorry if my post  embarrass anyone. I just really like it when a person can translate a thought into writing so well. JOS is very good at it and should be commended for it.

Peace 

jesusofsuburbia said: "If you don't like the way I answer things, feel free to avoid asking me questions in the future. I'm not into sugar coating things."

There is a line between giving straight answers and being an asshole.  No offense, but you seem to like to flirt with that line.  You can "tell it like it is" and still be respectful.  That's all I'm saying.  Perhaps you misread my comment about wanting to know what your answers to IMC were, and for that I apologize for not communicating better.  However that's done and gone, so let's move on.

jesusofsuburbia said: "...to claim that the points I make are "genuine conservative values" is rather disingenuous. They aren't conservative or liberal, they're simply common sense."

Fair enough; I can't really argue that point, especially since it's one of my core beliefs that most of us want the same basic things, and even though many of us disagree on how to get there, we still share more in common than we have things that divide us.

Regardless though, what I said was not wrong: the items you listed were in fact associated with conservatives and have never particularly been associated with liberals or Democrats within any reasonable time frame.  You may think the Regan era was a long time ago, but sorry, it wasn't. 

jesusofsuburbia said: "...most of today's voters view conservative and Republican as one in the same."

True, but just because a lot of people think it, that doesn't make it correct either.

You are also right in asserting that the Republicans have done more to dilute the term "conservative" than anyone else.  However, they do this to appeal to these "classic conservative values," shall we say, that most Americans share in common.  Just like the Democrats tell you everything they're going to give you to buy your vote, the Republicans harp on those "classic conservative values" to buy votes too, even though a lot of them have no intention of making good.

jesusofsuburbia said: "Now this doesn't mean that I believe Democrats are perfect. They certainly aren't, but I don't believe that the answer to the problem is to elect Republicans to balance them out."

Now you're talking about voting for the lesser of two evils--a quite indefensible position to take.  Voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil.

jesusofsuburbia said: "In my opinion, the solution is to simply elect better officials..."

Agreed, 100%.  So why are you voting for Obama?  Why would someone vote for Hillary?  Or McCain?

And don't tell me Obama's better than Bush either.  You can't possibly know that since he's never been president, and just judging by his extremely brief time in Congress representing one of those most miserable states on the Union, one sees that his voting record is dismal--and that's when he shows up to vote, which isn't very often!

jesusofsuburbia said: "...which brings me to the allusions you made to non-Democrats and non-Republicans - third parties."

No, I never made any allusion to a third party.  I said that parties do nothing but divide us, thereby causing harm to our system of government and national well-being.  Not having parties is perfectly plausible, no matter how idealistic you claim that may be.  There is simply NO justification for political parties except 1) to dumb down the political process for ignorant, apathetic and lazy voters, and 2) money.  Well, here's an idea: how about candidates raise money and collect votes based on the merit of their platform and/or voting record?  Hmmm...How about that!

As it stands now, most idiots head to the voting booth and select the "Straight Republican Ticket" or the "Straight Democrat Ticket" options and head for home, thinking they've done some grand civic duty, when in fact all they've done is sustain a corrupt system.  And for the folks who vote a broken ticket, selecting various candidates of various parties supposedly based on "the issues," do so only because they ate the manure fed to them on TV commercials.  I've got news: party politicians lie!

And so here we are, heading south in this hand basket...

jesusofsuburbia said: "It's not socialism, but a shared sense of responsibility for making our country great."

I'm all for shared responsibility within the scope of the Constitution (which may I remind you, is the supreme law of the land under which ALL other laws must abide; if it's not explicitly listed in the Constitution as a power of government, it's illegal!).  However, the government hasn't the right (it has NO rights) to take what's mine without my permission and give it to someone else.  That is the quintessential definition of "Socialism" and no matter how far you try to run from it, the Democrats are all about taking away from one and giving it to someone else.

That's not to say the Republicans aren't responsible for their fair share of garbage (particularly the last few terms of 'em), but this "redistribution" notion is firmly a Democratic platform point and they ALL talk about it when campaigning.  The Democrats have all these big ideas (read: expensive), but the only way they can accomplish them is by screwing the country...And the Democrats are not widely known for cutting spending.  You can believe the campaign promises if you like, but I'd prefer to go by what they've done in the past.

jesusofsuburbia said: "There's another great conservative/Republican scam - quote the Bible but make no attempt to actually live it."

Not sure how this became an issue, but for the record, I do count myself among the faithful, but I firmly believe that religion has no place in government.  A religious tyranny is as dangerous as any other.

jesusofsuburbia said: "And as far as the whole constitution issue, I know that's a reference to Ron Paul. (At least that's the refrain of his supporters.)"

Uh, no, it's a reference to the law!  As I said above, the Constitution is the supreme law of the land.  Each and every law passed must abide by the Constitution or it is illegal, plain and simple.  Every time a public official takes office, he takes an oath, and that oath is to the Constitution--not to a president, not to Congress, but to the Constitution itself.  They swear to uphold and defend it, thereby binding themselves to do so.  Thus, any public official that violates the Constitution not only violates their oath, but they break the law...And for that, they should be kicked out of office.

Now, that very well may be the "Ron Paul Supporter Mantra," or whatever you want to call it, but perhaps you should consider why.

jesusofsuburbia said: "I would remind you that before joining the US Senate, Barack Obama taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago. So I think he probably understands the constitution pretty well."

I never said he didn't understand it.  Understanding something doesn't make one abide by that something.  Thieves know it's illegal to steal, but they do it anyway.  Congress takes an oath to the Constitution and are legally bound by the Constitution to follow the Constitution, but that doesn't mean for a second that they do.

A good lot of what Obama believes in is flatly un-Constitutional.  If you don't believe me, just read through Article 1, Section 8.  Then compare Obama's platform with that list.  Notice how most of what's on Obama's list isn't in the Constitution's list?  Same goes fo Hillary and McCain.  Funny how that works.  And people still want to vote for them...Perhaps our public schools need to start teaching civics again.

jesusofsuburbia said: "In the end, lawdog, you're going to vote for the candidate that you think is best to lead our country and I'm going to do the same. Is my candidate perfect? Certainly not. None of them are. But if we're not going to try and defend them or make a case for our own candidate of choice than what's the point of getting involved in the first place?"

Again, we agree entirely.  However, as Americans, we have a duty to ensure that the candidates we elect will obey the law.  It's fine if they don't; we'll just elect someone else to fill their position next go-around.  But when we completely neglect our obligations, ignore transgressions (in many cases, become apologists), and vote for the candidates who promise to give us the most "stuff," we get exactly the government we deserve.  If we're an irresponsible electorate, we get an irresponsible government.  It's very simple.  And voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil, no matter how you slice and dice it.

It's high time Americans remember that WE are the government and that the Constitution is THE LAW above all else.  If we can manage to get that figured out again, we'll have a whole new, better, more responsible and respectful government, once more afraid of The People and therefore extremely mindful of what they do while representing us.

Thanks for the discussion, Jesus.

QUOTE: "And don't tell me Obama's better than Bush either." -by LawDog

You can't be serious.......................

QUOTE: "Thanks for the discussion, Jesus." - by LawDog

I agree you both are doing well. Kudos to both of you.

Peace