Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Cannon Shell
So your "indifference " to Obamas spending is why you defend him and attack us? To maintain some kind of political thread status quo?
Come on, you would have been all over him for spending so much on the war. For us the social agenda put forth in the current administration spending spree is as big a issue as the war is to you. Perhaps you disagree with our take but the reasoning is the same. I guess the thing that is most bothersome is that you guys consistently call conservatives or Reps names or make generalizations about us which are really not true as they are generally opinions of yours while at least I only resort to calling you typical liberals which, well, is true.
|
There's a big difference you're failing to see. Earlier in this thread, Dell is concerned that the spending is "X" dollars and that it is more than Bush's "X" dollars.
I already admitted that I would surely have said something like I wish we would spend less money on killing people, of course I would have said that, because I believe it. But I would not have had any problem with the "X" dollars of overall spending -- that doesn't bother me now, and wouldn't have then. I can't be any more honest than that. Big government spending isn't top of my agenda for being pissed off. You're saying it is yours, so all I've been wondering here all day yesterday is where your guys' consistency is, and since there obviously is none, what about that keeps you from being hypocrites?
And ok, you don't like the name calling. I take back the calling you guys hypocrites. I'll stick to "typical conservatives," since that seems more palatable to you. It's fine by me, since "typical conservatives" have proven time and again that they mean the same thing anyway.