there is nothing more despicable...

[orpheus]

than a 'republican' who embraces social programs because he suddenly finds himself poor and in need.....


or a liberal who turns republican because he suddenly finds himself in a higher socioeconomic bracket.


statistics bear this out so i'm not pulling this out of my ***... it makes me sick and these people are pathetic.

[Bon]

So people are suppose to stick with a political stance no matter what their situation is in life, or how much it changes.

A "republican" that was against 99.99 percent social programs, suddenly loses his job, loses his home, he's suppose to continue voting the way he has?
And vice versa.

Many times you don't truly understand a situation until you have experienced it.

So people are pathetic when they do what's best for them? That's human nature.

[kikachuck]

I think you're being a tad dramatic there orpheus. There are lots of things more despicable than that. You can see them every week it seems on Dateline NBC or on the news every morning.

[odun]

Originally Posted by orpheus

than a 'republican' who embraces social programs because he suddenly finds himself poor and in need.....


or a liberal who turns republican because he suddenly finds himself in a higher socioeconomic bracket.


statistics bear this out so i'm not pulling this out of my ***... it makes me sick and these people are pathetic.

somehow i feel this post is aimed at me.

ill admit that i changed my views on one subject due to my economic condition...health care.

i generally dont receive any health care. what little ive received in the last year was paid for out of my own pocket.

oh hell. why do i bother? i dont owe you people an explanation.

[odun]

orpheus, by the way, didnt you admit to voting for bush in 2000?

if that is correct, do you consider yourself 'despicable' for having evolving political views?

[Optimistic]

I kind of see your point...political stances can be quite self-serving.

[Bon]

Originally Posted by Optimistic

I kind of see your point...political stances can be quite self-serving.

But aren't they always?

[Becky]

Originally Posted by orpheus

than a 'republican' who embraces social programs because he suddenly finds himself poor and in need.....


or a liberal who turns republican because he suddenly finds himself in a higher socioeconomic bracket.


statistics bear this out so i'm not pulling this out of my ***... it makes me sick and these people are pathetic.

I think there's many things in this world that are worse than someone changing their mind based on their situation,.

[Cerberus]

Yep, I'm pathetic. But so are you. This sort of absolutist kind of thinking seems more akin to something a neo-con would think up, rather than someone who advocates sterilizing the retarded. Wait a minute?


Was that argument I just used guilt by association? Yup. I'm one sneaky little bugger. Oh, Cerberus, how sneaky you are.

[orpheus]

Originally Posted by Cerberus

Yep, I'm pathetic. But so are you. This sort of absolutist kind of thinking seems more akin to something a neo-con would think up, rather than someone who advocates sterilizing the retarded. Wait a minute?

Well perhaps I'm a neo-con then. You've already labeled me a "centrist" derisively.

Originally Posted by realspark

So people are suppose to stick with a political stance no matter what their situation is in life, or how much it changes.

No, they aren't 'supposed' to do anything.

A "republican" that was against 99.99 percent social programs, suddenly loses his job, loses his home, he's suppose to continue voting the way he has?
And vice versa.

I'd expect him to change his politics if he's a true SOB who only cares about what social policies impact him.

Many times you don't truly understand a situation until you have experienced it.

True, and I don't fault those people. They aren't despicable, but merely ignorant.

So people are pathetic when they do what's best for them? That's human nature.

No. They are pathetic for disregarding what's best for people in general, and only making exceptions when it serves them.

Originally Posted by odun

orpheus, by the way, didnt you admit to voting for bush in 2000?

if that is correct, do you consider yourself 'despicable' for having evolving political views?

I wasn't targeting people who merely had evolving political views; rather, those who evolve in politics ONLY when it serves them (if you want to tack a motive on this post that is your business)

And yes, I was 20, under heavy influence from my father, and was very misinformed.

Originally Posted by kikachuck

I think you're being a tad dramatic there orpheus. There are lots of things more despicable than that. You can see them every week it seems on Dateline NBC or on the news every morning.

Of course I am.

[Cerberus]

Originally Posted by orpheus

Well perhaps I'm a neo-con then. You've already labeled me a "centrist" derisively. Not Worthy

I've changed my mind. I'm starting to think the label "islamofascist" suits you better.

Also, before you voted for Bush, were you watching a lot of fox news?

[orpheus]

Originally Posted by Cerberus

I've changed my mind. I'm starting to think the label "islamofascist" suits you better.

Also, before you voted for Bush, were you watching a lot of fox news?

Yes. Though I should point out it wasn't by my own volition. I overheard it during dinner when my dad was watching it.

[odun]

Originally Posted by orpheus

Yes. Though I should point out it wasn't by my own volition. I overheard it during dinner when my dad was watching it.

pardon me for being blunt, but if you let other people tell you how to vote, where do you find the audacity to call other people 'despicable'?

and since this thread was aimed at me, ill gladly note that 99% of the policies and positions i advocate have absolutely zero influence on my life...from gun control, to the dividend tax elimination to affirmative action.

[Cerberus]

Originally Posted by orpheus

Yes. Though I should point out it wasn't by my own volition. I overheard it during dinner when my dad was watching it.

I'm glad I'm not the only one on this board who succumbed to such nonsense.

They really do have a neat little system set up.

[orpheus]

Originally Posted by Cerberus

I'm glad I'm not the only one on this board who succumbed to such nonsense.

They really do have a neat little system set up.

You too, huh? We should start another support group and accept the days long past when we put O'Reilly posters up on our walls and actually thought "we report, you decide" didn't mean, "we distort, you decide."

[orpheus]

Originally Posted by odun

pardon me for being blunt, but if you let other people tell you how to vote, where do you find the audacity to call other people 'despicable'?

and since this thread was aimed at me, ill gladly note that 99% of the policies and positions i advocate have absolutely zero influence on my life...from gun control, to the dividend tax elimination to affirmative action.

My dad influenced my vote, no doubt, but he didn't dictate it. I didn't care for Gore that much, and back in 2000 when Bush had something of a record that wasn't completely tarnished by blunders like Iraq, Katrina, and his Congresses' pork-barrel spending, I thought I'd give him a chance. That was obviously a mistake and indeed said more about my ignorance of politics than anything else.

And yes, you support many issues that don't particularly affect you. But you've also become more open about things like welfare, healthcare, low-income housing etc, even though in the past you'd start posts off with rhetorical spews such as, "i like to issue a challenge to all of those who believe that it is the government's responsibility to help others" (circa May 2005) or your prior posts deriding welfare as a symptom of a "nanny state." You've surpassed me recently in support of the nanny state!

[Tungsten]

Originally Posted by orpheus

statistics bear this out so i'm not pulling this out of my ***... it makes me sick and these people are pathetic.

How do you measure despicableness?

[stylicho]

Originally Posted by orpheus

You too, huh? We should start another support group and accept the days long past when we put O'Reilly posters up on our walls and actually thought "we report, you decide" didn't mean, "we distort, you decide."

You had an oreilly poster on your wall ?

[odun]

Originally Posted by orpheus

My dad influenced my vote, no doubt, but he didn't dictate it. I didn't care for Gore that much, and back in 2000 when Bush had something of a record that wasn't completely tarnished by blunders like Iraq, Katrina, and his Congresses' pork-barrel spending, I thought I'd give him a chance. That was obviously a mistake and indeed said more about my ignorance of politics than anything else.

And yes, you support many issues that don't particularly affect you. But you've also become more open about things like welfare, healthcare, low-income housing etc, even though in the past you'd start posts off with rhetorical spews such as, "i like to issue a challenge to all of those who believe that it is the government's responsibility to help others" (circa May 2005) or your prior posts deriding welfare as a symptom of a "nanny state." You've surpassed me recently in support of the nanny state!

i stand by that challenge that i made in may of 2005.

that is why maybe id support an idea for national health insurance that was floated around in the 1970s...a system that would be funded by a payroll tax, 3% for the employer, 1% for the employee.

id gladly pay more in taxes if it meant our health care system was accessible to all.

[UltraShy]

Originally Posted by odun

that is why maybe id support an idea for national health insurance that was floated around in the 1970s...a system that would be funded by a payroll tax, 3% for the employer, 1% for the employee.

id gladly pay more in taxes if it meant our health care system was accessible to all.

3% + 1% = 4% only. Health care consumes 13% of GNP. How do you cover that huge bill with a 4% tax? I guess health care was a lot cheaper back 30 years ago when folks regularly died fast & cheap instead of living on & on & on due to all the very expensive medical advances that have come along in the decades since.