The Power of the SCOTUS III: Roberts' Rules of Order

[Kepler]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS III: Roberts' Rules of Order

Nice try.

The left and the centrists voted down the conservatives in 1848.

But I hear conservative values made a little comeback in Germany about 90 years later, so there's still hope for our own "enlightened" righties.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS III: Roberts' Rules of Order

The left and the centrists voted down the conservatives in 1848.

But I hear conservative values made a little comeback in Germany about 90 years later, so there's still hope for our own "enlightened" righties.

You're on a roll.

 

[geezer]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS III: Roberts' Rules of Order

The left and the centrists voted down the conservatives in 1848.

But I hear conservative values made a little comeback in Germany about 90 years later, so there's still hope for our own "enlightened" righties.

because Scott Walker is just like Adolph Hitler. I saw that bumper sticker too. Good thing President Obama and "Mitt" Romney are more highly evolved and perfected version of mankind than these dang conservatives which are basically Hitler.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS III: Roberts' Rules of Order

because Scott Walker is just like Adolph Hitler. I saw that bumper sticker too. Good thing President Obama and "Mitt" Romney are more highly evolved and perfected version of mankind than these dang conservatives which are basically Hitler.

We just aren't highly evolved enough to understand such enlightened insights.

 

[Kepler]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS III: Roberts' Rules of Order

because Scott Walker is just like Adolph Hitler. I saw that bumper sticker too. Good thing President Obama and "Mitt" Romney are more highly evolved and perfected version of mankind than these dang conservatives which are basically Hitler.

Perhaps you are unfamiliar with the term Satire. (I should have left it to Scoob and Rover; they're a lot better at it than I am.)

The point is: "Enlightenment" cuts both ways. People who snipe and snark about how the other side is playing elitist superiority games should reckon with the reality that when they assert politics based on Magical Thinking that supposedly makes them better people, that's all they're doing, too.

 

[Kepler]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS III: Roberts' Rules of Order

We just aren't highly evolved enough to understand such enlightened insights.

It's a good thing you're going to heaven because of your superior enlightenment.

Oh, gee. Turns out that game works the other way, too.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS III: Roberts' Rules of Order

It's a good thing you're going to heaven because of your superior enlightenment.

Oh, gee. Turns out that game works the other way, too.

I'm not the one making ridiculous comparisons about those whose views I disagree with.

 

[joecct]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS III: Roberts' Rules of Order

The left and the centrists voted down the conservatives in 1848.

But I hear conservative values made a little comeback in Germany about 90 years later, so there's still hope for our own "enlightened" righties.

Considering the times, I'm surprised that only a few European countries went over the cliff in the 30's. And if my history books are correct, the Reich was admired on both sides of the Atlantic as a bulwark against the godless Communists.

 

[geezer]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS III: Roberts' Rules of Order

Perhaps you are unfamiliar with the term Satire. (I should have left it to Scoob and Rover; they're a lot better at it than I am.)

The point is: "Enlightenment" cuts both ways. People who snipe and snark about how the other side is playing elitist superiority games should reckon with the reality that when they assert politics based on Magical Thinking that supposedly makes them better people, that's all they're doing, too.

I know, but those self-righteous people you're talking about have nothing to do with actual "conservatives", which is the term you chose. Although they've been confused with conservatives often enough I suppose, perhaps the meaning has shifted.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS III: Roberts' Rules of Order

I agree with Bob.

End of life decisions are not easy but it should be made by family, not a death panel or insurance companies, or the government. Personally, I won't turn off the feeding tube or the liquids. If death is inevitable, make me comfortable, but don't starve me or let me die of thirst. But that's me, not the rest of the board.

Gnarly subject. It is too easy to go from saying "we won't provide care to these people because they are too old to be worth it" to say "we won't provide care to these other people too, because...."


and it is far more than just "end of life" care.

What about hip replacements for people in their late 70s? is it "worth it" because they "only" have 15 years of life left?

When my father-in-law received heart surgery at age 90, I wondered about that decision.....and he lived until 103! Shows how much I know.....13 more years of a decent, humane life, instead of wheezing and suffering....

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS III: Roberts' Rules of Order

I know, but those self-righteous people you're talking about have nothing to do with actual "conservatives", which is the term you chose. Although they've been confused with conservatives often enough I suppose, perhaps the meaning has shifted.

Considering they all vote for the same party for the most part, yes, the meaning has shifted.

 

[Priceless]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS III: Roberts' Rules of Order

Rover

If they overturn DOMA, do poly marriages become legal? It's a slippery slope that I am not sure, nor do I want to know, where the bottom is.

It's a very slippery slope. Just as when we extended the right to vote to blacks, women and men who didn't own land and then saw it extend down that slippery slope so now dogs, cats and box turtles can vote.

 

[Kepler]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS III: Roberts' Rules of Order

Considering the times, I'm surprised that only a few European countries went over the cliff in the 30's. And if my history books are correct, the Reich was admired on both sides of the Atlantic as a bulwark against the godless Communists.

The right thought Adolf was doing God's work protecting us all from the Bolshies.

Another thing that gets lost is there was massive anti-Semitism throughout Europe and America well into WW2. Pawning that off solely on the Germans was a historical rewrite on par with pawning off racism solely on the South.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS III: Roberts' Rules of Order

It's a very slippery slope. Just as when we extended the right to vote to blacks, women and men who didn't own land and then saw it extend down that slippery slope so now dogs, cats and box turtles can vote.

Romney lost the dog vote when they found out they're fellow dog had to ride on the car roof for the family trips.

 

[geezer]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS III: Roberts' Rules of Order

Considering they all vote for the same party for the most part, yes, the meaning has shifted.

But I can understand a conservative person voting for the Republican candidate as the "lesser evil" without subscribing to every belief of every elected Republican out there. If you waited for the perfect match candidate nobody would ever vote.
Still, as proven out by the last many years of overspending I'd say there haven't been any conservative presidents for a long, long time. Perhaps there have been some in the legislature.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS III: Roberts' Rules of Order

It's a very slippery slope. Just as when we extended the right to vote to blacks, women and men who didn't own land and then saw it extend down that slippery slope so now dogs, cats and box turtles can vote.

You love comparisons that are totally apples and oranges don't you?

 

[Kepler]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS III: Roberts' Rules of Order

Still, as proven out by the last many years of overspending I'd say there haven't been any conservative presidents for a long, long time. Perhaps there have been some in the legislature.

Depends on how you feel about the Libertarians -- they have been faithfully nominating fiscal conservatives since the 70's. Of course, their social policies make a lot of social conservatives' hair stand on end.

The only true (in the sense of post-1950 Bob Taftian) conservative major party nominee since the 40's was Goldwater. Reagan liked to talk the talk when he needed money, and the movement used him as a great-looking figurehead, but when all was said and done he was perfectly happy naming a Rockefeller Republican VP in 1976. As with All Things Reagan, his "conservatism" was a Potemkin village.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS III: Roberts' Rules of Order

You love comparisons that are totally apples and oranges don't you?

The same arguments being made today against Gay Marriages were made against mixed racial marriages.

Not apples and oranges at all.

 

[Kepler]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS III: Roberts' Rules of Order

The same arguments being made today against Gay Marriages were made against mixed racial marriages.

Not apples and oranges at all.

And before that against mixed ethnic marriages. And before that against mixed religious marriages.

That train has kept a rollin' all night long. End's in sight, though. Took humanity long enough.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS III: Roberts' Rules of Order

And before that against mixed ethnic marriages. And before that against mixed religious marriages.

That train has kept a rollin' all night long. End's in sight, though. Took humanity long enough.

Without even dissecting the differences there, I'd have you note that Priceless's comparison I was responding to was marrying things such as box turtles. You liberals aren't paying close attention to postings today.