Bush Is A Moran, Vol. XXI, Chapter 310

[Merijeek]

@Lord_Ashtar

Strawberry.

That’s “Strawbrary”. It rhymes with “Library”.

Dumbass!

-Joe

[Squink]

@sqweels

Liberalism is a rection to conservatism, but conservatism is not a reaction to liberalism. Conservatism is the belief that tradtional values are God-given and therefore prefect. Liberalism is simply the process of challenging the idea that conservatism is perfect and advocating reforms.

Conservatives cannot point to liberals to shore up their credibility, because conservative credibility is measured agains standards of moral and intellectual perfection. Liberalism’s credibility, OTOH is measured against that of conservatism.

This sounds like an old treatise on the problem of the existence of evil.

[sqweels]

@Lord_Ashtar

Your understanding of conservative and liberal philosophies is incorrect.

I guess that settles that. Not.

Incorrect or not, my understanding of conservative philosophy is the idea that the well-established or traditional institutions, mores, vales, etc. in society must be maintained lest a “breakdown” lest to worsening societal problems. The motivation here often transcends the understanding of an issue that reason can bring to bear.

For example, conservative philosophy maintains that people must remain sexually abstinent until they marry. On the one hand this is due to the perennial threats of accidental pregnancy and disease, OTOH religion has long since weighed in the issue, and has declared premarital sex to be “immoral”.

But now that there are methods to manage the physical risks, reason would suggest premarital sex is OK, but conservatism would maintain the traditional ban anyway.

Liberalism would challenge the conservative position and/or encourage people to disregard it. But true liberalism would not impose a specific pattern of sexual behavior onto the individual. You can have sex OR be abstinent, it’s your choice.

Traditional sexual morality could not have been developed thousands of yeas ago in response to the 1960s-era counterculture, could it?

Same deal with racism. Racism goes way back in history, the civil rights movement is a more recent reaction to that.

I could go on, but explain again how my understanding is incorrect.

[Aji_de_Gallina]

@sqweels

I guess that settles that. Not.

1. Incorrect or not, my understanding of conservative philosophy is the idea that the well-established or traditional institutions, mores, vales, etc. in society must be maintained lest a “breakdown” lest to worsening societal problems. The motivation here often transcends the understanding of an issue that reason can bring to bear.

2. For example, conservative philosophy maintains that people must remain sexually abstinent until they marry. On the one hand this is due to the perennial threats of accidental pregnancy and disease, OTOH religion has long since weighed in the issue, and has declared premarital sex to be “immoral”.

3. But now that there are methods to manage the physical risks, reason would suggest premarital sex is OK, but conservatism would maintain the traditional ban anyway.

4)Liberalism would challenge the conservative position and/or encourage people to disregard it. But true liberalism would not impose a specific pattern of sexual behavior onto the individual. You can have sex OR be abstinent, it’s your choice.

5. Traditional sexual morality could not have been developed thousands of yeas ago in response to the 1960s-era counterculture, could it?

6. Same deal with racism. Racism goes way back in history, the civil rights movement is a more recent reaction to that.

7. I could go on, but explain again how my understanding is incorrect.

(numbers mine - i don’t know how to “break” a quote)

1. Your first mistake is thinking conservatism = GOP 2009. A social conservative would say “we’ve had this institution for a long time and seems to be working, despite its problems. Before you dismantle it (or change it) show me you’re not creating more problems than you’re trying to solve”.

2. Second mistake: religion =/= US fundamentalist Christianity.
   You’re wrong. Conservatism has little to do with sex. Religious people who are also Christian (or Muslim) and are also conservative are against pre-marital sex.
   Also, pregnancy and disease are not the reason why Christianity has traditionally been against marriage.

3. see #2

4. Personal responsibility is a staple of social conservatism.

5. Of course, but that IN ITSELF doesn’t mean it’s wrong.

6. Are you saying that racism is a socially conservative position?

7. Glad I could help.

[wmfellows]

@Peanut_Gallery

And while the OP’s quote does reflect more on Paulson than Bush, it still paints a pretty desperate picture of the state of our “leadership” back then. Paulson is a scary dude, to make me feel sympathetic toward Bush.

Whatever for?

It rather reads like Paulson did not particularly trust Bush to quite grasp the situation, and so took the ball and kicked it down field. As I think Bush went through several Treasury heads, I think I can sympathise with a Treasury man who understood the catastrophe looming, did not trust his head man, and decided to bull forward.

[El_Kabong]

@Lord_Ashtar

No, I don’t think GWB was a particularly good president.

Just because I’m exhausted with “OMG BUSH SUXX!!!11” threads does not mean that I am a Republican. But thank you for showcasing your partisanship.

I’ve got no dog in this fight, but that cod leet-speak shit is the one that makes want to start beating people with a hammer. No one, NO ONE on this board ever actually uses a phrase like that except to belittle an opponent. Please stop it, for the sake of my fragile sanity.

[Starving_Artist]

The may not use the exact same phrasing but it’s definitely how they come off.

[Lord_Ashtar]

@El_Kabong

I’ve got no dog in this fight, but that cod leet-speak shit is the one that makes want to start beating people with a hammer. No one, NO ONE on this board ever actually uses a phrase like that except to belittle an opponent. Please stop it, for the sake of my fragile sanity.

no u

[El_Kabong]

Uh huh. So to Starving Artist, this:

@elucidator

I find, to my astonishment, that my vast reservoirs of snark are not adequate to the inspiration.

comes off like this:

OMG BUSH SUXX!!!11!!

Right. Got it. No comprehension problem there, you bet.

[El_Kabong]

@Lord_Ashtar

no u

What? I’ve got plenty of u’s. If you need some, just ask.

[Lord_Ashtar]

No, this:

@Enfant Terrible

After what he and his cronies did to this country, there should be one every day. Minimum. Until (please!!!) the trials begin.

comes off as OMG BUSH SUXX!!!11!!

[Starving_Artist]

Exactamundo! luci’s posts are rarely so hysterical as to rise to the “OMG BUSH IS TEH SUXXOR !!!11!!” level.

Many others’ are.

[kaylasdad99]

Well, Bush did definitely suck, but I don’t see any reason to think that conventional spelling and syntax are inadequate to the task of pointing that out.

[elucidator]

Well, let’s test that proposition.

Bush sucks.

Well, it has the lyrics, but not the music.

[The_Understander]

@Lord_Ashtar

No, I don’t think GWB was a particularly good president.

Just because I’m exhausted with “OMG BUSH SUXX!!!11” threads does not mean that I am a Republican. But thank you for showcasing your partisanship.

You’re welcome. And Bush SUCKS.

[elucidator]

Needs more cowbell.

[The_Understander]

@elucidator

Needs more cowbell.

If he can dodge shoes, he can probably dodge a cowbell too. Now, a shuriken…

[Lord_Ashtar]

@Enfant Terrible

You’re welcome. And Bush SUCKS.

Keep on fighting the good fight, brah.

[elucidator]

@Enfant Terrible

…Now, a shuriken…

“I’'m sure I can, I’m sure I can!” said the Little Ninja That Could…

[kaylasdad99]

Go. To. Your. Room.