• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is the left becoming more and more authoritarian?

Is the American left becoming more and more authoritarian?

  • Total voters
    74
SocialDemocrat said:
"But your side did it too!" is not a legitimate justification of your position.
Click to expand...

No justification required. Your side bashed Bush based on the Patriot Act, while ignoring the fact that Obama has not only continued the Patriot Act, but expanded it. I am just calling the left out on it's double standards.
 
US Conservative said:
Its worth noting that Obama and the left is actually worse in this regard-because they are hypocrites as well-they ran against it, cried about it-and then not only prevented its sunset but expanded it.
Click to expand...

The left is laughable on this one. They screamed bloody murder during Bush's time in office over phone calls being monitored if a known terrorist was on one side of the call. Yet now it's been expanded to virtually all cellphone calls being tapped....and it's no big deal.
 
ObamacareFail said:
No justification required. Your side bashed Bush based on the Patriot Act, while ignoring the fact that Obama has not only continued the Patriot Act, but expanded it. I am just calling the left out on it's double standards.
Click to expand...

ObamacareFail said:
The left is laughable on this one. They screamed bloody murder during Bush's time in office over phone calls being monitored if a known terrorist was on one side of the call. Yet now it's been expanded to virtually all cellphone calls being tapped....and it's no big deal.
Click to expand...

Yes, the transition between bush and obama made hypocrites of about 90% of the country.. People supporting bush now hate obama for what amounts to expanding on what bush did... And the people fighting bush just buying into obama's platform even though it was just more of the same.

There's only a small minority that actually opposed both by remaining consistent on the issues, rather than blindly following the party politics.
 
BmanMcfly said:
Yes, the transition between bush and obama made hypocrites of about 90% of the country.. People supporting bush now hate obama for what amounts to expanding on what bush did... And the people fighting bush just buying into obama's platform even though it was just more of the same.

There's only a small minority that actually opposed both by remaining consistent on the issues, rather than blindly following the party politics.
Click to expand...

Not a completely fair statement. I was okay with what the Patriot Act appeared to be under Bush, which was monitoring phone calls only if a known terrorist was on one end of the line and sicking close to FISA guidelines. I am not okay with all cellphone calls being monitored, even if it is just metadata. I would not have been okay with that under Bush either.
 
ObamacareFail said:
No justification required. Your side bashed Bush based on the Patriot Act, while ignoring the fact that Obama has not only continued the Patriot Act, but expanded it. I am just calling the left out on it's double standards.
Click to expand...

And if significant portions of "the left" hadn't been critical of Obama for his horrendous record on privacy and surveillance, you might have a point.
 
ObamacareFail said:
Not a completely fair statement. I was okay with what the Patriot Act appeared to be under Bush, which was monitoring phone calls only if a known terrorist was on one end of the line and sicking close to FISA guidelines. I am not okay with all cellphone calls being monitored, even if it is just metadata. I would not have been okay with that under Bush either.
Click to expand...

Ok, I suppose I should have included those that started to realize the scam... I knew from the start that ye Patriot Act was one of those that was sold as a good / necessary thing that was intended to be used against Americans.
But, to be fair there, would have to include those that believed Obama initially but have realized that he is effectively Bush III, and are now rejecting him.

However, realizing that, we cannot afford as a nation to wind up with the choice between hillary (for women's rights, in which case take Obama ' s people's claims of racism and swap it with sexism) and another bush. It's time for the nation to wake up and reject these blue blood fakes.
 
ObamacareFail said:
No justification required. Your side bashed Bush based on the Patriot Act, while ignoring the fact that Obama has not only continued the Patriot Act, but expanded it. I am just calling the left out on it's double standards.
Click to expand...

If Articles of Impeachment were filed against Obama for signing the Patriot Act, I would be supportive of the impeachment. Another reason why the "your side, my side" mentality in regards to politics is generally terrible: making assumptions as to what I believe and who I support without really having a clue what I think. My original post was regarding the hypocrisy of the Republicans on the PATRIOT Act; would you like to address that?
 
WCH said:
So you don't believe in good and evil either?
Click to expand...

Good and Evil are nebulous terms. They have completely subjective definitions and meanings.
 
SocialDemocrat said:
If Articles of Impeachment were filed against Obama for signing the Patriot Act, I would be supportive of the impeachment. Another reason why the "your side, my side" mentality in regards to politics is generally terrible: making assumptions as to what I believe and who I support without really having a clue what I think. My original post was regarding the hypocrisy of the Republicans on the PATRIOT Act; would you like to address that?
Click to expand...

I respect you for your consistency. Can you cite any prominent leftist leaders advocating legal action against Obama?

And another question-which is worse in your mind-advocating for the Patriot act or running as a candidate against the patriot act only to renew the law and then expand it?
 
CMPancake said:
Good and Evil are nebulous terms. They have completely subjective definitions and meanings.
Click to expand...

They're laid out for everyone to see the religious and non-religious text. Saying they're nebulous or subjective is just an excuse of a dishonest person.
 
WCH said:
They're laid out for everyone to see the religious and non-religious text. Saying they're nebulous or subjective is just an excuse of a dishonest person.
Click to expand...

According to your religious text, eating shellfish is evil.
 
US Conservative said:
I respect you for your consistency. Can you cite any prominent leftist leaders advocating legal action against Obama?
Click to expand...

Most Democrats aren't going to speak in favor of impeachment because it isn't politically feasible to do so. However, there are Democrats that have consistently opposed the PATRIOT Act and criticized Obama for it, Russ Feingold, Mark Udall, and Ron Wyden being examples. If you want to look to foreign world leaders, many leftists, including Dilma Rouseff and Rafael Correa have consistently criticized NSA surveillance.

And another question-which is worse in your mind-advocating for the Patriot act or running as a candidate against the patriot act only to renew the law and then expand it?
Click to expand...

The ladder. But I think a better way of describing Republican attitude towards this is originally campaigning for the PATRIOT Act and than pretending they never supported it once they weren't the incumbents. Both parties have been very opportunistic in this regard.
 
WCH said:
They're laid out for everyone to see the religious and non-religious text.
Click to expand...

If that were the case, than why do these varying texts have different rules and standards to live by?

WCH said:
Saying they're nebulous or subjective is just an excuse of a dishonest person.
Click to expand...

Except I find morality subjective and I abhor lying.
 
SocialDemocrat said:
Most Democrats aren't going to speak in favor of impeachment because it isn't politically feasible to do so. However, there are Democrats that have consistently opposed the PATRIOT Act and criticized Obama for it, Russ Feingold, Mark Udall, and Ron Wyden being examples. If you want to look to foreign world leaders, many leftists, including Dilma Rouseff and Rafael Correa have consistently criticized NSA surveillance.



The ladder. But I think a better way of describing Republican attitude towards this is originally campaigning for the PATRIOT Act and than pretending they never supported it once they weren't the incumbents. Both parties have been very opportunistic in this regard.
Click to expand...

How was is politically feasible under Bush? Especially considering nothing came of it. Its was political opportunism, thats all.
 
Kobie said:
According to your religious text, eating shellfish is evil.
Click to expand...

That was a safety issue at the time it was written. As a matter of fact, there's a substantial danger in consuming oysters today.
 
CMPancake said:
If that were the case, than why do these varying texts have different rules and standards to live by?
Click to expand...

If you look closely, they're not that different.



Except I find morality subjective and I abhor lying.
Click to expand...

So you'd really just not have to mess with following any rules of a civilized and decent society?

Where do you think you learned right and wrong from?
 
Kobie said:
According to your religious text, eating shellfish is evil.
Click to expand...

No, that is a mistranslation.

The 11th commandment was to be "Thou shalt not be selfish...."

It became "Thous shalt not eat shellfish" around the 1300s when bad clams took out the Brothers of Immaculate Deception in Genoa.



Just kidding.

Don't shoot up my office.
 
US Conservative said:
Its just another inconsistency from the left.
Click to expand...

The republican party wrote the book on political inconsistencies.
No party has ever flip flopped like the GOP does every cycle.
Ronnie Raygun was the epitome of opportunistic political meandering.
Your post about inconsistency, next to Bonzo's goofy picture, absolutely gushes with historical irony.
 
d head said:
The republican party wrote the book on political inconsistencies.
No party has ever flip flopped like the GOP does every cycle.
Ronnie Raygun was the epitome of opportunistic political meandering.
Your post about inconsistency, next to Bonzo's goofy picture, absolutely gushes with historical irony.
Click to expand...

Reagan knew what he was doing...you are right to be mad.
 
d head said:
The republican party wrote the book on political inconsistencies.
No party has ever flip flopped like the GOP does every cycle.
Ronnie Raygun was the epitome of opportunistic political meandering.
Your post about inconsistency, next to Bonzo's goofy picture, absolutely gushes with historical irony.
Click to expand...

RWR was the second greatest POTUS of the 20th century, trailing only FDR. Notably, neither man was especially consistent. Perhaps they recalled Emerson: "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds."
 
Those poll results can't be right. Liberals are committing voter fraud.. ...as usual.
 
US Conservative said:
Reagan knew what he was doing...you are right to be mad.
Click to expand...


It is your madness that has inclined you to criticize the left for the foibles you then claim to admire in your own St. Ronnie.
Bonzo put his political finger to the wind and leaned however he thought it would benefit his political career.
He never had a bone of true political or moral conviction in his body, ever.
Any real student of Ronnie's political fickleness would understand that.
You are enamored by an imaginary political hero that never really existed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom