god must bless america

[brianwspencer]

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.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

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.

So Al Gore and his larger than life carbon footprint is now a 'typical conservative' or did he give up on that whole green thing.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

So Al Gore and his larger than life carbon footprint is now a 'typical conservative' or did he give up on that whole green thing.

No, you misunderstand. It's possible to be a hypocrite and NOT a typical conservative.

Much tougher to go the other way it seems.

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

No, you misunderstand. It's possible to be a hypocrite and NOT a typical conservative.

Much tougher to go the other way it seems.

Well played

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

No, you misunderstand. It's possible to be a hypocrite and NOT a typical conservative.

Much tougher to go the other way it seems.

You view your side so clearly it's blinding.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

You view your side so clearly it's blinding.

Which has what to do with agreeing that Gore is a hypocrite sometimes?

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Which has what to do with agreeing that Gore is a hypocrite sometimes?

Al Gore is far from the only one. That is my point.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

Al Gore is far from the only one. That is my point.

Oh of course not. There are others...it's just not such a rampant, defining party trait like it is for you guys.

Never said we don't have them. The words just aren't as interchangeable as they are for you.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

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.

We didn't like Bush's spending either but a lack of a thousand posts on the subject doesnt equal a lack of concern. While most conservatives concede that Bush did spend far too much, compared to obama's spending it is a drop in the bucket. Obama's spending in itself is a concern but WHAT it is spent on is the really troubling issue. And while you may feel free to call me a typical conservative I dont think that I personally fit that bill as nicely as you, Joe, Smooth Operator, and company fit the typical Liberal tag. But that's what keeps things interesting.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

We didn't like Bush's spending either but a lack of a thousand posts on the subject doesnt equal a lack of concern. While most conservatives concede that Bush did spend far too much, compared to obama's spending it is a drop in the bucket. Obama's spending in itself is a concern but WHAT it is spent on is the really troubling issue. And while you may feel free to call me a typical conservative I dont think that I personally fit that bill as nicely as you, Joe, Smooth Operator, and company fit the typical Liberal tag. But that's what keeps things interesting.

Perhaps my assumption is wrong then. Between you guys here, 99% of bloggers, talking heads on TV -- I mean, you'd think if it was a concern, someone somewhere would have been talking about it and making a big deal out of it at some point in EIGHT YEARS. I didn't need thousands of posts or hundreds of hours of cable TV...just a little bit would have really snuffed out the charges of you guys being 'typical conservatives' about it.

The Right didn't seem too upset. Or if they were, you'd have me believe that it was the first time in history that the Right was upset about something and DIDN'T open their mouths?

Please. That's like saying you'd expect me to not complain about something that bothered me for eight years...and that you'd then take my word that it had been deeply troubling me the whole time even though I said absolutely nothing. The Right is more hysterical in reality as they claim the Left is. Just a gut feeling that if they were really upset about it, we'd have heard about it...since we hear about everything else that bothers them even a little bit.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Perhaps my assumption is wrong then. Between you guys here, 99% of bloggers, talking heads on TV -- I mean, you'd think if it was a concern, someone somewhere would have been talking about it and making a big deal out of it at some point in EIGHT YEARS. I didn't need thousands of posts or hundreds of hours of cable TV...just a little bit would have really snuffed out the charges of you guys being 'typical conservatives' about it.

The Right didn't seem too upset. Or if they were, you'd have me believe that it was the first time in history that the Right was upset about something and DIDN'T open their mouths?

Please. That's like saying you'd expect me to not complain about something that bothered me for eight years...and that you'd then take my word that it had been deeply troubling me the whole time even though I said absolutely nothing. The Right is more hysterical in reality as they claim the Left is. Just a gut feeling that if they were really upset about it, we'd have heard about it...since we hear about everything else that bothers them even a little bit.

It may not have been said on TV or Derby Trail... but it was said the past 8 years in the Frey family.. My Dad and uncles are as conservative as it gets. Like so bad that I cant even listen to them without getting into arguments about something. They have been so pissed... maybe not the last 8 years but at least the past 3 or 4 years about the Bush spending. It got so bad for them that my Uncle Tom... who is as crazy and as conservative as it gets (Byk can support this).. actually voted for Obama cause he was so pissed at the Bush admin.

It was out there... people just didnt have the balls to say it in public.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Perhaps my assumption is wrong then. Between you guys here, 99% of bloggers, talking heads on TV -- I mean, you'd think if it was a concern, someone somewhere would have been talking about it and making a big deal out of it at some point in EIGHT YEARS. I didn't need thousands of posts or hundreds of hours of cable TV...just a little bit would have really snuffed out the charges of you guys being 'typical conservatives' about it.

The Right didn't seem too upset. Or if they were, you'd have me believe that it was the first time in history that the Right was upset about something and DIDN'T open their mouths?

Please. That's like saying you'd expect me to not complain about something that bothered me for eight years...and that you'd then take my word that it had been deeply troubling me the whole time even though I said absolutely nothing. The Right is more hysterical in reality as they claim the Left is. Just a gut feeling that if they were really upset about it, we'd have heard about it...since we hear about everything else that bothers them even a little bit.

It is just viewing of the world through different lenses. The left is far more activist driven than the right. That is not really a debatable point. And lets remember that the last 8 years were not operated under an economic meltdown like the last year. People may find it annoying but as long as the economy is humming along it is really easy to overlook issues. Why Obama's spending spree has to be viewed in the context of Bush's spending seems unusual since they are two different animals under two entirely different circumstances.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

It is just viewing of the world through different lenses. The left is far more activist driven than the right. That is not really a debatable point. And lets remember that the last 8 years were not operated under an economic meltdown like the last year. People may find it annoying but as long as the economy is humming along it is really easy to overlook issues. Why Obama's spending spree has to be viewed in the context of Bush's spending seems unusual since they are two different animals under two entirely different circumstances.

That's fair enough. I wasn't really looking for protests in the street...just a mere peep here and there would have been more than enough to make me actually believe that people gave a damn about it then, instead of just saying they do now to use as cover when attacking current spending.

And like I have said here tons of times before in various other threads...I'm reserving judgment on Obama's spending for the time being.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

That's fair enough. I wasn't really looking for protests in the street...just a mere peep here and there would have been more than enough to make me actually believe that people gave a damn about it then, instead of just saying they do now to use as cover when attacking current spending.

And like I have said here tons of times before in various other threads...I'm reserving judgment on Obama's spending for the time being.

Over those 8 years we maintained a deficit in the area of 400 billion. In three months we've gone from 400 billion to 1,750 billion. Hope this explains the concern over this 'drunken sailor' spending.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

Over those 8 years we maintained a deficit in the area of 400 billion. In three months we've gone from 400 billion to 1,750 billion. Hope this explains the concern over this 'drunken sailor' spending.

Fair enough, so it's the excess of overspending you don't like, not the principle of overspending in the first place.

You could have said that a long time ago and I would have understood, since I've always been the type that has no problem with an alcoholic having 8 beers and buckling his kid up in the backseat before driving to the store for smokes....but goddamn, it's those guys that will have 13 before they do it that really get me! Those guys, they make me incredulous!