Support NeoGAF

[Phoenix]

Modern republican philosophy revolves around the belief that all problems can be solved if you have a strong, growing and relatively stable economy. They believe that it is in the best interest to empower and encourage those with money to invest as that will lead to more growth, jobs, and stability.

This works... if you live in a world with Scrooge McDuck. These principles of 'voodoo economics' are mostly based on wishful thinking and not on any hard and fast economic models. They are the height of logical fallacy, generally falling into the "Affirming the Consequent" view in propositional logic, i.e.:

A->B

suppose B

therefore A

 

[bob_arctor]

Modern republican philosophy revolves around the belief that all problems can be solved if you have a strong, growing and relatively stable economy. They believe that it is in the best interest to empower and encourage those with money to invest as that will lead to more growth, jobs, and stability.

This works... if you live in a world with Scrooge McDuck. These principles of 'voodoo economics' are mostly based on wishful thinking and not on any hard and fast economic models. They are the height of logical fallacy, generally falling into the "Affirming the Consequent" view in propositional logic, i.e.:

A->B

suppose B

therefore A

Hasn't this idea--the one of the "enlightened" man (read: wealthy, of good stock, etc.) as the only possible option for prolonged prosperity been around forever though?

 

[Shig]

I'm still coming to grips with the gleeful jeering that one crowd heaps on another about these moral gray issues. Think, everyone; we're talking about harvesting human embryos to help other humans. This isn't some cheeky "Gotcha!" political scandal moment, this is a MAJOR crossroads for morality worldwide here.

I bet you a cow (or whatever living creature) feels a million times more of a level of cognizant pain being slaughtered than one of those embryos would. Yet a vast majority of people have no problem whatsoever eating meat.

Seems a tad weird to me.

 

[ToxicAdam]

I bet you a cow (or whatever living creature) feels a million times more of a level of cognizant pain being slaughtered than one of those embryos would. Yet a vast majority of people have no problem whatsoever eating meat.

Seems a tad weird to me.

An embryo has more rights than a cow does (under our legal system).

 

[Phoenix]

Hasn't this idea--the one of the "enlightened" man (read: wealthy, of good stock, etc.) as the only possible option for prolonged prosperity been around forever though?

Yep, and it continues to bring problems wherever it goes. Motivation, chance, and circumstance are really the only thing that seperates us from one another. The moment you forget that and start to assume you're better than other people because of where you are - all hope is lost.

 

[demon]

An embryo has more rights than a cow does (under our legal system).

Using the legal system to rationalize legalities?

 

[KingGondo]

Come on, guys... I think any reasonable person can see that there are reasons to support either side on this issue, and just because someone (Bush) doesn't support it, never has, and follows through on his promise, he's a "fucking douchebag"?

Sorry, but just because someone disagrees with you doesn't make them ignorant, a "halter of progress", or evil.

I'm sure you guys are just as outspoken with your far-left beliefs everywhere else, as well. I'm sure you don't get off on spouting your beliefs to a nearly completely complicit audience, where your thoughts are always reinforced and only challenged by a few. Try using some common sense and compassion, try to at least understand that someone possibly could have another (equally logically valid) view.

Also, did anyone happen to notice that the mighty, evil Republicans actually allowed this bill to pass in the house? Quit lumping people together--you preach against Bush's black-and-white policies, then do the same when comparing the political parties.

 

[ronito]

Sorry, but just because someone disagrees with you doesn't make them ignorant, a "halter of progress", or evil.

See, that's just where you're wrong you evil ignorant halter of progress.

 

[videogamer]

Come on, guys... I think any reasonable person can see that there are reasons to support either side on this issue, and just because someone (Bush) doesn't support it, never has, and follows through on his promise, he's a "fucking douchebag"?

No he's a "douchebag" not because he doesn't support embryonic stem cell research. It's the fact that he won't support the potential that it holds.

Sorry, but just because someone disagrees with you doesn't make them ignorant, a "halter of progress", or evil.

No, not automatically. It depends on the issue. Also, I assume that whomever said that, assumes that their audience already knows how he got to that pov.

I'm sure you guys are just as outspoken with your far-left beliefs everywhere else, as well. I'm sure you don't get off on spouting your beliefs to a nearly completely complicit audience, where your thoughts are always reinforced and only challenged by a few. Try using some common sense and compassion, try to at least understand that someone possibly could have another (equally logically valid) view.

Uh what do you think a devil's advocate does?

Also, did anyone happen to notice that the mighty, evil Republicans actually allowed this bill to pass in the house? Quit lumping people together--you preach against Bush's black-and-white policies, then do the same when comparing the political parties.

Did you notice the word "some"? This thread is targeted mainly at fundamentalist/evangelical Christians. Notice where Tom Delay and Bush stand on this issue?

 

[KingGondo]

Did you notice the word "some"? This thread is targeted mainly at fundamentalist/evangelical Christians. Notice where Tom Delay and Bush stand on this issue?

evil solrac's original post said "almost every Republican except one" (I'm not even sure what that means, actually), but the intention is clearly there--to incite a one-way flamewar against Republicans. Also, as far as I can see, most GAFers don't care to discriminate between Republicans of varying degrees of conservatism.

Also, you don't have to be fundamentalist to be against embryonic stem-cell research.

 

[videogamer]

evil solrac's original post said "almost every Republican except one" (I'm not even sure what that means, actually),

Read the sentence above. He's talking about CSPAN. You're taking it out of context and stuffing words in his mouth.

but the intention is clearly there--to incite a one-way flamewar against Republicans.

No, it's to shame them. BTW, it's one-way because the Republicans choose not to respond. Not the OP's problem.

Also, as far as I can see, most GAFers don't care to discriminate between Republicans of varying degrees of conservatism.

Read more politics threads.

Also, you don't have to be fundamentalist to be against embryonic stem-cell research.

Of course not. However, the strongest opposition to the research belongs to the fundamentalists/evangelicals.

 

[evil solrac v3.0]

evil solrac's original post said "almost every Republican except one" (I'm not even sure what that means, actually), but the intention is clearly there--to incite a one-way flamewar against Republicans. Also, as far as I can see, most GAFers don't care to discriminate between Republicans of varying degrees of conservatism.

Also, you don't have to be fundamentalist to be against embryonic stem-cell research.

well, first of all , my intent was not to start a flame war but rather start some meaningful dialogue between people to see why they would oppose or support this.
and when i said almost all republicans i meant the ones that i saw speaking and i should have made that clearer. i apologize for the confusion. however, it's clear to me that most republicans will oppose most of what the democrats want and vice versa simply becasue.
i was glad to see the bill pass and sadenned when i saw bush trot out these families who ..... well, it dont quite matter what they said but their arguments just used inflammatory rethoric and erroneous logic.
one man in a wheelchair said "should i kill my five year old daughter so that i can walk?" i can only shake my head at that kind of thinking because it's so devoid of ...... i'm not smart enough to come up with the right word but it really gets to me to hear some these people make life and science so political when it should be using reason and logic. i'm pretty sure the bible encourages us to use science and reasoning, after ifwe are to believe the holy book, god created these things, n'est pas?
so the bill passed in the congress but it will more likely than not die in the senate or be vetoed.... damn shame.

 

[Jdw40223]

Unfortunately, the same can be said about Democrats. A bunch of rich, pro-socialist, Hollywood stars don't really feel much of a pinch from high taxes ... etc.

Exactly.

 

[KingGondo]

Read the sentence above. He's talking about CSPAN. You're taking it out of context and stuffing words in his mouth.

BTW, it's one-way because the Republicans choose not to respond. Not the OP's problem. However, the strongest opposition to the research belongs to the fundamentalists/evangelicals.

Whoa, whoa...

Actually, his first post is worse than I made it out to be. He goes on to equate "they" (which means Republicans, or at least their C-SPAN representatives) with stem-cell detractors and Iraq war supporters. As most of us know, Republicans aren't one huge clump, speaking as a hive-mind. It's just an incredibly irresponsible argument, and I wanted to point that out.

In response to your second point--honestly, how many Republicans are there on GAF? I can only name a few, and their conservatism is usually coupled with some aspect of religious faith (Iceman, Cooter, Oli). Remember the GAF "political chart" a few months back? Nearly everyone at GA ended up on the left side, except for a few. Admit it, this is a lefist-dominated forum.

one man in a wheelchair said "should i kill my five year old daughter so that i can walk?" i can only shake my head at that kind of thinking because it's so devoid of ...... i'm not smart enough to come up with the right word but it really gets to me to hear some these people make life and science so political when it should be using reason and logic.

Of course it's ridiculous. I'm a Democrat, too--we just shouldn't be reduced to these kinds of cheap arguments and scare tactics. The important thing is to realize when it's being used (by either party) and be able to reasonably discuss it.

 

[videogamer]

Whoa, whoa...

Actually, his first post is worse than I made it out to be. He goes on to equate "they" (which means Republicans, or at least their C-SPAN representatives) with stem-cell detractors and Iraq war supporters. As most of us know, Republicans aren't one huge clump, speaking as a hive-mind. It's just an incredibly irresponsible argument, and I wanted to point that out.

Yes, like I pointed out, he's talking about the Republicans on C-SPAN he saw. I don't know who those Republicans are, so I can't tell you if they voted on both stem cells and the Iraq war. However, the name that I have seen in the newspaper is Tom Delay's. Not only did he oppose the research, he also voted for various pro-Iraq invasion votes.

In response to your second point--honestly, how many Republicans are there on GAF? I can only name a few, and their conservatism is usually coupled with some aspect of religious faith (Iceman, Cooter, Oli). Remember the GAF "political chart" a few months back? Nearly everyone at GA ended up on the left side, except for a few.

Even if the numbers are smaller, what matters is how many of them post and with what frequency. Ripclawe, Makura, and The Promised One used to post a lot here. But they got themselves banned for whatever reason. Whatever.

Admit it, this is a lefist-dominated forum.

The word "admit" implies that I said something to the opposite.

Of course it's ridiculous. I'm a Democrat, too--we just shouldn't be reduced to these kinds of cheap arguments and scare tactics. The important thing is to realize when it's being used (by either party) and be able to reasonably discuss it.

Link to the "scare tactics" and "cheap arguments".

 

[Manders]

republicans are awesome. i love being one. w00t

 

[ronito]

I do too! You like my hat? It's made of MONEY!!!

(sorry couldn't resist)

 

[Rawk Hawk]

Question: Why is it that this 90% liberal forum finds fun in making anti repulican posts every 6.1 seconds... And despite all the crying and whining, Geogre W Bush still got more votes than any other president in history, ouch.

 

[demon]

Question: Why is it that this 90% liberal forum finds fun in making anti repulican posts every 6.1 seconds... And despite all the crying and whining, Geogre W Bush still got more votes than any other president in history, ouch.

I have absolutely no idea how that first point relates to the second one. But while we're bringing up statistics, Question: when's the last time a President won a re-election with as low of a percentage of the votes as 'Geogre' W Bush?

 

[Rawk Hawk]

Do you need a tissue? I got some...

 

[KingGondo]

I know many intelligent Republicans in real life, and there are a few on this board.

Unfortunately, Rawk Hawk will have to suffice for this thread.

 

[Rawk Hawk]

Oh in all fairness, not to toot my own horn, but over all I'm a fairly intelligent person, just because I get a kick out of pulling peoples chains doesn't make me stupid. Although when it comes to liberal cry babies, I kind of have a short fuse, I just can't take their whining... If you want something different, do something about it, vote in a democrat. I live in NY, don't complain to me about Bush. I lived through Clinton, although in all fairness he was a shady liberal, but I rarely complained, I just get a little TOed hearing everyone crying about something because they lost.

In conclusion, I'd just appreciate it if you ouldn't bash my intelligence, or call me a republican... I'm not registered with either party, as I choose my presidents not based on the letter before their name, but by the grounds they stand for.

 

[Triumph]

Oh in all fairness, not to toot my own horn, but over all I'm a fairly intelligent person, just because I get a kick out of pulling peoples chains doesn't make me stupid. Although when it comes to liberal cry babies, I kind of have a short fuse, I just can't take their whining... If you want something different, do something about it, vote in a democrat. I live in NY, don't complain to me about Bush. I lived through Clinton, although in all fairness he was a shady liberal, but I rarely complained, I just get a little TOed hearing everyone crying about something because they lost.

In conclusion, I'd just appreciate it if you ouldn't bash my intelligence, or call me a republican... I'm not registered with either party, as I choose my presidents not based on the letter before their name, but by the grounds they stand for.

So I take it you voted for Bush? Care to elaborate what "grounds" he stands for?

 

[Incognito]

seriously, don't bash my intelligence. it's not like i refer to everyone of you liberals as "cry babies" who consistently "whine" over losses. let's be fair.

 

[Rawk Hawk]

I did vote for Bush, and the grounds we're pretty balanced as to why. Personally I prefer his theory of Social Security, or at least the direction it is going in, I'd just prefer them not do anything... I'm noy 10 years old I can save my own money, just because some bum doesn't know what a 401K is here we are, and you can thank FDR for that. Plus Kerry was terrible, utterly horrible. There might have been a chance with Dean, but Kerry? Oh God, I'd rather rip off my own nipples and feed them to Dick Cheney's daughter. Kerry had nothing, he had this misterious plan, what was it? Who knows... He wasn't going to tell us anything other than it was a plan, of some sorts. Another reason Bush got my vote is with our country at war, we need a strong president, and anyone who needs to buy someone to come up with catch phrases so they sound strong (i.e. Kerry) is not the type of person we need in office. I just felt Bush was a better man for the job, at leaast over Kerry.

 

[Rawk Hawk]

seriously, don't bash my intelligence. it's not like i refer to everyone of you liberals as "cry babies" who consistently "whine" over losses. let's be fair.

Aw, I'm sorry, did I offend? You look like you could use a hug.

 

[Triumph]

I did vote for Bush, and the grounds we're pretty balanced as to why. Personally I prefer his theory of Social Security,

That's where I stopped reading, because I knew you're either joking or actually stupid.

 

[Incognito]

I did vote for Bush, and the grounds we're pretty balanced as to why. Personally I prefer his theory of Social Security, or at least the direction it is going in, I'd just prefer them not do anything... I'm noy 10 years old I can save my own money, just because some bum doesn't know what a 401K is here we are, and you can thank FDR for that. Plus Kerry was terrible, utterly horrible. There might have been a chance with Dean, but Kerry? Oh God, I'd rather rip off my own nipples and feed them to Dick Cheney's daughter. Kerry had nothing, he had this misterious plan, what was it? Who knows... He wasn't going to tell us anything other than it was a plan, of some sorts. Another reason Bush got my vote is with our country at war, we need a strong president, and anyone who needs to buy someone to come up with catch phrases so they sound strong (i.e. Kerry) is not the type of person we need in office. I just felt Bush was a better man for the job, at leaast over Kerry.

Is this satire?

...

:lol :lol

You prefer reduced benefits in social security? You prefer taking risks with your retirement nest-egg? Oh, wait, you'd prefer them not do anything -- well, thankfully, Bush has made sure of this during his Social Security Bombapoolza tour across the US funded by OUR tax dollars to preach to the already converted.

As for the "buy someone to come up with catch phrases," line. You just summed up the GOP with those words. Ask any Democrat what their party stands for, and you'll get a different answer each and every time. Ask a Republican and you'll get the same response 9 out of 10 times. To anyone who doesn't have jello mold between their ears, the GOP has successful won the catchphrase wars and it's hurting the Democrats. Also, nearly every word out of Bush's mouth is focus-group tested mother approved for the weak of knees out there who can't handle "privatization" but instead would prefer "personal accounts."

 

[Rawk Hawk]

Eh I suppose that is your own opinion, but I always wondered why it is everyone wants the government holding their money for them for retirement... I would rather just have the money myself, I mean even if I just put it in a bank somewhere and didn't risk any of it, I would feel better knowing that if my kid needed medical attention or something the money is there. The way I see it is it's my money, why shouldn't I be able to do with it as I please? But like I said, the problem would be the people who can't manage their money, they would be old and on the streets or working, but why should we care? That's not my fault... I don't see why I'm suppose to feel bad for that person who pissed their money away, but oh well.

 

[Dilbert]

Rawk Hawk is well on his way to a STELLAR career on GAF.

 

[Fatghost]

"Personal Accounts" would be fantastic for those of us in the investment business.

I wish Canada would privatize our Canada Pension Plan.

 

[Scrow]

As a religious person I've said it before and I'll say it again:

Religion shouldn't have anything to do with politics.

I find it disgusting and offensive to see religion used to pander for votes.

yeah, seperation of church and state is meant to be the norm, but recently it has become a tool to win elections.

 

[Macam]

Eh I suppose that is your own opinion, but I always wondered why it is everyone wants the government holding their money for them for retirement... I would rather just have the money myself, I mean even if I just put it in a bank somewhere and didn't risk any of it, I would feel better knowing that if my kid needed medical attention or something the money is there. The way I see it is it's my money, why shouldn't I be able to do with it as I please? But like I said, the problem would be the people who can't manage their money, they would be old and on the streets or working, but why should we care? That's not my fault... I don't see why I'm suppose to feel bad for that person who pissed their money away, but oh well.

It's evident that you don't really know or understand how Social Security works and moreover, you're absolutely generalizing its purpose and simplifying the mechanics of it. As for dubbing Bush to be a "strong president", particularly when it comes to matters of war, is utterly laughable and needs no further ridiculing.

 

[demon]

Do you need a tissue? I got some...

Well ya got me there.

Idiot.

 

[videogamer]

Eh I suppose that is your own opinion, but I always wondered why it is everyone wants the government holding their money for them for retirement... I would rather just have the money myself, I mean even if I just put it in a bank somewhere and didn't risk any of it, I would feel better knowing that if my kid needed medical attention or something the money is there. The way I see it is it's my money, why shouldn't I be able to do with it as I please? But like I said, the problem would be the people who can't manage their money, they would be old and on the streets or working, but why should we care? That's not my fault... I don't see why I'm suppose to feel bad for that person who pissed their money away, but oh well.

Are you saying that you would rather have social security taken away?

On a side note, when I speak to conservatives, they'll often talk about social security "reform", but when I did deeper, they tend to show their real goals. They want to get rid of social security. I'm not saying that opinion is bad (yet), but I do find it strange that these people are obscuring their real vision. It ought not take that much prodding to get them to tell me what they really want.