The last thread didn’t go well, so I’ll try again. Have the conservatives in America adopted an “ends justify the means” position? Is it different between liberal and conservatives? Is this a new trend?
It seems to me that it has, as major leaders of the Republican party continue to engage in misrepresenting the facts in order to gain political advantage. In addition, many conservatives see things like torture as acceptable as long as they are effective. I don’t remember such a stark difference in tactics in the past as I see now.
Dude, seriously…get a grip. Have “conservatives in America adopted an “ends justify the means” position”…well yeah. Of COURSE they have. As ‘liberals’ in America have adopted the same position. ‘Moderates’ in America, it’s rumored, have done the same thing. And, while this may shock you, I have to let the cat out of the bag…hold on tight here…POLITICIANS in America lie. I know…it’s shocking, and you wouldn’t find any self respecting politician or member of a political organization or group in Europe, say, doing anything as crass as lying or deciding to let the ends justify the means as far as getting THEIR personal political goals accomplished, but, sadly here in the US we do stuff like that.
And, as another shock to your system, we have pretty much ALWAYS done stuff like that…right back to the founding fathers and the first political parties and first presidents. It’s sad, but it’s sort of traditional. I know…when it’s YOUR ox getting gored it kind of sucks…
I don’t think that is true. Our Constitution is based on the fact that ends don’t justify the means. That’s why we have free speech, and freedom of religion, and the guarantee of fair trials, and checks and balances. If ends justify the means we should lock away people whose ideas we think are dangerous. We shouldn’t bother with trials for people we “know are guilty”, or protect the rights of people who worship the wrong religion. If the ends justify the means we should just drop nuclear bombs on Afghanistan or lock up all the Muslims. If ends justified the means then Gore shouldn’t have taken a principled stand in accepting the Supreme Court decision rather than foment revolt. If ends justify the means then we should stop worshiping Jesus who said turn the other cheek.
:eek: Thank God the Dems never do that. Then we’d really be fucked. Oh, wait…
As I recall the main argument against torture is that it does NOT work. Now if you’re saying that by torturing some dirtbag I CAN save hundreds/thousands of people, I’m in. Hand me that iron over there.
Now, there is another argument that torture should never be employed regardless of any benefits it may have, but the people who adhere that I think is a much smaller pool.
Both of these leave aside what actually constitutes torture, of course.
Do you own a mirror?
I’d just like to add, with no snark intended, that you really don’t seem to understand conservatives. May I suggest you go read a book or two written by a conservative? Seriously.
Shading the ruth is one thing (I don’t like that either) but making stuff up out of whole cloth and then having the gall to keep repeating it after it is shown to be clearly not true is another.
That’s just the argument that is used to persuade people with no morals. If torture is justified to save lives then we could use it on Palin for delaying healthcare reform.
In theory that’s true…but in practice the various political parties AND the politicians in the US from the very beginning pretty much set aside the theory when they had too in order to do what they believed they had too. A half a dozen examples spring to mind even before the Revolution was complete, during Washington’s presidency, Adam’s, Jefferson’s and Madison’s…and this completely leaves aside what the political parties were doing, not to mention the house and senate.
One glaring and obvious example culminated in that nasty dust up in the 1860’s…
All laudable things, no doubt. I’m not trying to take away from the shinning examples of American history, but the reality is that political parties work on less lofty grounds, and always have. ALWAYS have.
And in case you missed the tongue in cheek aspect to my first post, it pretty much is exactly the same in Europe…even more so in some case. And in Japan. And South Korea. In Australia too. Hell, they probably do the same kinds of things in Outer Mongolia, come to think of it.
Fox News being seen as the most trusted news source put me over the edge. I kept waiting for people to get tired of being lied to, or even to understand that they were being lied to. I can see liking Fox News, but it is beyond belief that people would trust it after it repeats such easily proven nonsense again and again. Or that a media outlet would let such crap continue.
You make a funny (and I guessed the author right), but it would give the OP a look into conservatism. At least the reason and logic part of it. She is, admittedly, short on reaching across the aisle. For that he’ll need someone like Huckabee.
Buchanan is also a good source as someone who lays out conservative ideas and ideals. Thomas Sowell, as well, as far as economics.
Dude, you’ve got to get over this “opposition=evil” attitude. I think that liberals are misguided, mistaken, and dead wrong on most things, but I don’t think they are evil. I just think they are on the wrong track, but still pursuing the same goals that we all have.
I disagree with Buchanan on many things, but he harkens back to a time when we had a debate on ideas. He seems very different than the face of today’s conservatism. Centralized vs state level, free market vs regulation, supply side vs demand side, are all great debates to have. They are based on ideas and philosophy, not just pushing your “side” at all costs. When you claim that the other side wants to create a death panel, it’s not about ideas any longer. It’s just using what ever tactics are necessary to gain power and hurt the other side, not to advance the good of the country.
I have to get over it? I don’t think that being conservative means you are evil, I think that acting evilly makes you evil. Reagan was not evil, Buchanan is not evil, neither was William F Buckley, nor scores of other conservatives. Making up a big lie and then repeating it over and over is evil. If you have to advance a cause through lies and deception then any person with a sense of morality or decency would stop and look at their position and question it’s validity.
Yes. she can be shrill, but she also can make her points very well. If you can roll your eyes at 5% of what she writes and read on, there are points to be appreciated.
Actually, she makes her points quite badly. You can tell, because she’s never convinced anyone of anything. If you already agree with her, you’ll think she’s a genius. If you don’t, you’ll think she’s a nutcase. That’s not exactly a gift for persuasion.
Both sides couch arguments in terms that are hyperbolic to the point of being unhelpful. But simply hanging on to a soundbite or two you’re just stooping to their level. Look at the arguments, not the rhetoric. The abortion issue is another place where the language used can very much get in the way and shut down debate. Please do read Buchanan. I particularly suggest, The Death of The West.
I agree she’s not very persuasive. And that is because she cannot, or will not, edit herself to be so. I’d like to edit one of her books for her. I have no doubt that I can excise less than 5% of it and be left with a book that is better AND more persuasive.