• 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!

Does One Wrong Justify Another?

Does One Wrong Justify Another?

  • Total voters
    14
Ethereal

Ethereal

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 17, 2005
Messages
8,211
Reaction score
4,179
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
It seems like every time a Democratic scandal or lie is being discussed Obama supporters will invariably rationalize or dismiss it by citing what they perceive to be an analogous instance of Republican dishonesty or malfeasance.

So, my question is this: why does it matter what the Republicans did? Does their dishonesty or malfeasance justify the dishonesty or malfeasance of Obama, his administration, or the Democratic Party? If a wrong has been committed shouldn't it be rectified regardless of what has happened in the past?

To be honest, you people are starting to scare me. Why are you so reticent to scrutinize or criticize Obama and, to a lesser extent, the Democrats? I understand there will be non-issues which are blown out of proportion by partisans but there have been legitimate concerns and grievances regarding his conduct on the campaign trail and in the White House and I've yet to see any significant scrutiny coming from the left.

Partisans are ruining this country and I'm getting awfully sick and tired of their nonsense - Republicans included - but, for now, the left is on the hot-seat because their man is in office and I believe it's time you faced up to the un-face-up-to-able (Simpsons reference, sorry); that perhaps you ARE a partisan and that perhaps you HAVE been hypocritical despite your insistence to the contrary. Take a long, hard look at yourselves...
 
As I've stated in other posts, the sins of the past do not forgive the sins of the present.
 
The silence is defeaning...
 
It is never ok to justify one wrong with another. I am also fed up with it from all sides. Obama's stimulus mess, hey Bush lied about the war and all that good stuff. The sad part is I don't think anyone will own up to doing it. Someone prove me wrong-- please.
 
americanwoman said:
It is never ok to justify one wrong with another. I am also fed up with it from all sides. Obama's stimulus mess, hey Bush lied about the war and all that good stuff. The sad part is I don't think anyone will own up to doing it. Someone prove me wrong-- please.
Click to expand...

No one is going to prove you wrong. The people bitching about Bush are going to excuse the actions of Obama. The people excusing the actions of Bush will bitch about Obama. That's just the way it's gonna be. Obama lied in campaign promises, continuing the war in the Middle East, expanding government, his cabinet seems to all have tax problems, etc. But it's all "Well Bush did this" or "Bush did that". And before that we had "Clinton did it", it always goes back. At some point you'd think we'd have to stop this crap because each President is doing bad things and we keep say "Oh well so and so did blah" to excuse it.

It's not healthy, it's not going to help us out of preserve this Republic. But I guess if all you want is terrible, partisan politics; continue onward.
 
Ethereal said:
It seems like every time a Democratic scandal or lie is being discussed Obama supporters will invariably rationalize or dismiss it by citing what they perceive to be an analogous instance of Republican dishonesty or malfeasance.

So, my question is this: why does it matter what the Republicans did? Does their dishonesty or malfeasance justify the dishonesty or malfeasance of Obama, his administration, or the Democratic Party? If a wrong has been committed shouldn't it be rectified regardless of what has happened in the past?

To be honest, you people are starting to scare me. Why are you so reticent to scrutinize or criticize Obama and, to a lesser extent, the Democrats? I understand there will be non-issues which are blown out of proportion by partisans but there have been legitimate concerns and grievances regarding his conduct on the campaign trail and in the White House and I've yet to see any significant scrutiny coming from the left.

Partisans are ruining this country and I'm getting awfully sick and tired of their nonsense - Republicans included - but, for now, the left is on the hot-seat because their man is in office and I believe it's time you faced up to the un-face-up-to-able (Simpsons reference, sorry); that perhaps you ARE a partisan and that perhaps you HAVE been hypocritical despite your insistence to the contrary. Take a long, hard look at yourselves...
Click to expand...

My problem is not with Republicans, or Independents, or Tucker-Case going against Rev. Hellhound's Messiah (obama). My problem lies when individuals use scare words to panic the ignorant masses. There has been an influx in the notion that Obama is responsible for a growing Presidential power, and that whenever we are to turn out our lights he will take control of the entirety of American life.
My problem is with people who grab their "lassiez-faire" economic standards and scream bloody murder when there is a stimulus package issued in by the current government to follow the Keynesian idea of "help for the short term". My problem is when people do not understand that a completely hands-off government is not an ideal that can withstand the modern day economy; Adam Smith could not even imagine the way the world is right now, as the differences on all fronts are staggering.
My problem is with people viewing the $787 Billion dollars as the entirety of America's money. That if this ripple does not cause a nourishing, and reviving wave, then we are all fooked. This package is just a ripple.. that is all it is. Look at the $2.5 Trillion suggested by the Secretary of Treasury.
 
Arch Enemy said:
My problem is not with Republicans, or Independents, or Tucker-Case going against Rev. Hellhound's Messiah (obama). My problem lies when individuals use scare words to panic the ignorant masses. There has been an influx in the notion that Obama is responsible for a growing Presidential power, and that whenever we are to turn out our lights he will take control of the entirety of American life.
Click to expand...

Its not necessarily presidential as it is government power as a whole.

He is growing government power, this welfare package is proof of that.

Arch Enemy said:
My problem is with people who grab their "lassiez-faire" economic standards and scream bloody murder when there is a stimulus package issued in by the current government to follow the Keynesian idea of "help for the short term". My problem is when people do not understand that a completely hands-off government is not an ideal that can withstand the modern day economy; Adam Smith could not even imagine the way the world is right now, as the differences on all fronts are staggering.
My problem is with people viewing the $787 Billion dollars as the entirety of America's money. That if this ripple does not cause a nourishing, and reviving wave, then we are all fooked. This package is just a ripple.. that is all it is. Look at the $2.5 Trillion suggested by the Secretary of Treasury.
Click to expand...

The problem is that your appealing to modern times as if it couldn't apply.

Government caused the recession and now your ok with them fixing it?

That sounds like insanity to me.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Its not necessarily presidential as it is government power as a whole.

He is growing government power, this welfare package is proof of that.



The problem is that your appealing to modern times as if it couldn't apply.

Government caused the recession and now your ok with them fixing it?

That sounds like insanity to me.
Click to expand...

The Government is not the reason for the lack of consumer buying power. Capitalism does not increase wages unless the Government mandates; it is not good business to give "unnecessary" pay increases.

The innate Phil Grahamm, and the mind-on-other-things Bill Clinton do hold accountability. However Capitalism as a structure is not blameless. The consolidation of wealth is a good place to begin the blame-game.
 
Arch Enemy said:
The Government is not the reason for the lack of consumer buying power.
Click to expand...

But its the cause of the non uniform deregulation and cheap credit which led to this recession and in turn led to less consumer buying power.

Arch Enemy said:
Capitalism does not increase wages unless the Government mandates; it is not good business to give "unnecessary" pay increases.
Click to expand...

The market increases or decreases wages based on supply and demand, that is why the surplus of people who can flip hamburgers are always paid much less than nuclear engineers.

Capitalism rewards innovation and efficiency with raises and pay increases.

Arch Enemy said:
The innate Phil Grahamm, and the mind-on-other-things Bill Clinton do hold accountability. However Capitalism as a structure is not blameless. The consolidation of wealth is a good place to begin the blame-game.
Click to expand...

I'm not your typical partisan who blames one party or another when both support a failed economic theory.

The market functions whether or not you try to manipulate it. The manipulations are short lived and the corrections hurt.

Until people realize this we will go through another boom, bust cycle in 7-10 years and again we will be assigning blame to another defunct government policy and the people who support it.

Wealth consolidates only with those who manipulate the system or with those who produce or innovate.
 
*cricket* *cricket*
 
Ethereal said:
It seems like every time a Democratic scandal or lie is being discussed Obama supporters will invariably rationalize or dismiss it by citing what they perceive to be an analogous instance of Republican dishonesty or malfeasance.

So, my question is this: why does it matter what the Republicans did? Does their dishonesty or malfeasance justify the dishonesty or malfeasance of Obama, his administration, or the Democratic Party? If a wrong has been committed shouldn't it be rectified regardless of what has happened in the past?

To be honest, you people are starting to scare me. Why are you so reticent to scrutinize or criticize Obama and, to a lesser extent, the Democrats? I understand there will be non-issues which are blown out of proportion by partisans but there have been legitimate concerns and grievances regarding his conduct on the campaign trail and in the White House and I've yet to see any significant scrutiny coming from the left.

Partisans are ruining this country and I'm getting awfully sick and tired of their nonsense - Republicans included - but, for now, the left is on the hot-seat because their man is in office and I believe it's time you faced up to the un-face-up-to-able (Simpsons reference, sorry); that perhaps you ARE a partisan and that perhaps you HAVE been hypocritical despite your insistence to the contrary. Take a long, hard look at yourselves...
Click to expand...

Conversely, many Republicans are attacking Obama as vengence for similar attacks on Bush over the past eight years. Is that OK? Absolutely not. It is idiotic partisan hackery. Both sides are blame. and there are so many partisan hacks on this site that refuse to admit the obvious: THEY ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM.
 
Ethereal said:
*cricket* *cricket*
Click to expand...

The partisan hacks on this site aren't going to admit to anything, Ethereal. They are in denial and are clueless about their own hyperpartisanism. They just believe what they believe in a closedminded way, with no ability to look at things objectively. Absolutism, on either side, is exclusionary, illogical, and shows small minded. Just because one has a belief, doesn't mean that belief is fact, nor does it mean that all other beliefs must be silenced. Hyperpartisans cannot understand this concept.

I tried to challenge the forum to look at themselves about 6 months ago. Some folks did and became more open-minded because of it. Some folks did not, and stayed in their own small-minded, scared little world.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
The partisan hacks on this site aren't going to admit to anything, Ethereal. They are in denial and are clueless about their own hyperpartisanism. They just believe what they believe in a closedminded way, with no ability to look at things objectively. Absolutism, on either side, is exclusionary, illogical, and shows small minded. Just because one has a belief, doesn't mean that belief is fact, nor does it mean that all other beliefs must be silenced. Hyperpartisans cannot understand this concept.

I tried to challenge the forum to look at themselves about 6 months ago. Some folks did and became more open-minded because of it. Some folks did not, and stayed in their own small-minded, scared little world.
Click to expand...

Then I challenge you to set the example. Barack Obama lied about lobbyists, flip-flopped on FISA and campaign finance, spent one-hundred million dollars on his inaguration during an economic disaster, appointed a man who can't even pay his taxes to head the US Treasury, and railroaded a pork-laden bill through Congress, just to name the big ones. I believe any objective person would admit that a large portion of the things I've listed are blatantly dishonest, hypocritical, or foolish. Perhaps you can provide us with some analysis.
 
As an outsider, I am tired of the double standard. When the Republicans were in power, and those with a Democratic leaning were calling out bad policy decisions, Republican supporters would say, "Well, look at what the Dems did in such and such year. You think Clinton was any better?" Now Obama is in power and doing controversial things, and the Republicans are on the complete reverse side of the coin, AND the Democrat supporters are giving the same responses!

When are you partisan hacks going to wake up and start treating the issues on a case by case basis? You need to get over yourselves. This partisan division which has become even more extreme in the past 10 years is the reason why recent Presidents are able to get away with so much. They are laughing all the way to bank while America bickers over which side of the same damn coin is correct.
 
When Bush was president and the partisan democrats were complaining about everything Bush the Republicans were saying it was Clinton's fault and not Bush's. Now that Obama is President it's "don't focus on past policies, it's the present that matters". And in 2012, if a Republican takes office again it will be back to blaming the previous President (the Democrat) for all the woes of the new Republican President.

Obama has made some decisions that lowers my confidence with who he surrounds himself with. The so called "pork" stimulus is called such because it focuses on more left leaning spending projects. Is that really a surprise from a Democratic Senate/Congress/Executive? Granted I haven't read the spending line by line but I haven't seen any major spending in the package that will not flow funding into the commercial market (thus stimulating the economy). What is debatable if it's the best way or will have the needed impact.

The inauguration spending wasn't a surprise either. Bush's ceremony had about 300,000 people attend. Obama had between 1.2-1.7 million. Obviously spending would increase. What isn't talked about is the economic stimulus that occurred by those 1.4 million people traveling to DC and the other millions of people attending parties/bars/restaurants/etc.
 
Gibberish said:
What isn't talked about is the economic stimulus that occurred by those 1.4 million people traveling to DC and the other millions of people attending parties/bars/restaurants/etc.
Click to expand...

I suppose you could use exactly the same argument to support the high-roller banking junkets to Vegas or other vacation destinations.

After all... they're stimulating the economy by spending 'millions' on bars, hotels, airline tickets, limousines, restaurants... etc.

:rofl
 
Grateful Heart said:
I suppose you could use exactly the same argument to support the high-roller banking junkets to Vegas or other vacation destinations.

After all... they're stimulating the economy by spending 'millions' on bars, hotels, airline tickets, limousines, restaurants... etc.

:rofl
Click to expand...

Yes they are. Those millions of dollars seep to hundreds of industries and thousands of people.
 
Gibberish said:
Yes they are. Those millions of dollars seep to hundreds of industries and thousands of people.
Click to expand...

By your logic it should be possible for the government to perpetually stimulate the economy simply by spending tax-payer's money at a constant rate in the form of a monthly "stimulus" bill. If the underlying principle of your strategy is sound then there is no reason it shouldn't work. By the way, how much stimulus did Bush's bills provide?
 
All things being equal, a wrong does not justify a wrong. However, some wrongs are bigger than others, and arguably some wrongs are worth it in the face of bigger wrongs.
 
Ikari said:
Obama lied in campaign promises, continuing the war in the Middle East, expanding government, his cabinet seems to all have tax problems, etc.
Click to expand...


It was only a "lie" to those ingorant souls who were weak enough to believe it. Those who knew better had the ability to seperate campaign BS and real world practical demands.

"Right and wrong" will only get a person so far before he is faced with real world twists and turns. To the Republicans....recognize what you supported under Bush and applaud Obama a little more. To Democrats....become the hypocrits Republicans expect you to be or continue the protests and undermine our President.
 
Last edited:
Ethereal said:
By your logic it should be possible for the government to perpetually stimulate the economy simply by spending tax-payer's money at a constant rate in the form of a monthly "stimulus" bill. If the underlying principle of your strategy is sound then there is no reason it shouldn't work. By the way, how much stimulus did Bush's bills provide?
Click to expand...
I'm talking about consumers spending their money on goods and services because the inauguration was an event on the scale that it was.

Those millions of people that went to Washington DC and tens of millions of others watching, spent hundreds of dollars each on goods/services. That spending helped the economy that night.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom