🚀 go-pugleaf

"istartedi" <comments@vrml3d.com> wrote in message
news:b3m848$c6o$1@bob.news.rcn.net...
>
> Ed Rhodes <edward.j.rhodes@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:eeX6a.8190$8f7.1488@nwrdny02.gnilink.net...
> >
> > "istartedi" <comments@vrml3d.com> wrote in message
> > news:b3elv5$m7e$1@bob.news.rcn.net...
> > > > Who were the Loyalists to the totalitarian monarchy of King George?
> > > >
> > > > Who started our Civil War to defend slavery?
> > > >
> > > > Who fought to keep women as property, and now fights their
sovereignty
> > > over
> > > > their own bodies in the freedom to choose abortion?
> > > >
> > > > Who fought against child labor statutes?
> > >
> > > These are all 18th and 19th century issues, except abortion.  Abortion
> of
> > > course, is the Liberal sacrement so I won't argue about it here.
> >
> > The time frame is unimportant... it was the conservative viewpoint of
the
> > day that these things were all evil and had to be supressed at any cost!
>
> The timeframe is quite important, seeing as how we live *now* and not
> *then*.

The timeframe is [unimportant]! What we are disucssing is the liberal vs the
conservative mindset. The conservative mindset of the 18th and 19th
centuries saw nothing wrong with these things and it took an organized
effort by the liberal mindset to get them abolished. [Now] of course
[everybody] thinks these things were wrong.
>
> > > >
> > > > Who fought against the concept of free public education?
> > >
> > > Who fights against vouchers, which would put the poor on an equal
> footing
> > > when it comes to education?
> >
> > The only reason "private education" gets such good press is that they
get
> to
> > pick and choose whoever they want in their schools. What happens to
those
> > people with vouchers in their hands who can't find a school to take
their
> > children? And if you think "public education" is going to still be there
> > while its funding gets cut even further to reflect all those missing
> > dollars, you're fooling yourself!
>
> No I'm not.  Nobody is suggesting that compulsory education be taken off
the
> books, or the public schools be abolished.

Nobody's going to "abolish" them. But what happens when their budgets get
cut even further to the bone?

 > > > > Who fought against the right of women to vote?
> > >
> > > Men.
> >
> > 100% of all men were against women voting? Or just men in the
conservative
> > faction?
>
> If you choose to define all pro suffragist men as "liberals" then your
> argument is circular.  I'm sure there were plenty of constitutionalist men
> who were pro, as well as some "religious" women who were anti.  The PP's
> attempt to paint everything in black-n-white liberal-vs-conservative
glosses
> over a lot of complexity.

You're assuming that being liberal means being against the Constitution.
Liberals [created] the Consitution, along with the Declaration of
Independence and the United States of America!

The conservatives of the 1700s were doing just fine under King George III
thank you very much!

> A "truck" is defined according to certain characteristics of
> the vehicle body which tend to create vehicles that have a high center of
> gravity, etc.  IIRC, the Dodge minivans were the first vehicle to exploit
> this loophole and produce a non-truck that met the definition of truck.
> SUVs did the same thing.  Thus, Liberals invented the SUV.

Talk about your circular arguments... might as well blame poor people for
poverty!

> The next part of your rebuttal addresses an entirely different issue--that
> of air quality.  The EPA was actually started under... wait for it...
> Richard M. Nixon!  An interesting character he was--a Quaker and a
> Republican.  Conservative?

Did Nixon jump up of his own free will and say; "Damn, we're destroying the
air! I have to [do] something!" Or did he finally take action after
organized protests by the "liberal tree-hugging action groups" may the
situation so obvious even [he] couldn't ignore it?

> > > > Who defended Jim Crow for a hundred years?
> > >
> > > Who defends racial preferences (in the form of so-called "affirmative
> > > action") now?
> >
> > I don't like "affirmative action," but unless we find some way to create
> > "blind bidding" applications, you can't convince me that a person's
color
> > isn't going to affect his ability to be accepted! Affirmative action is
an
> > attempt to tip that situation back to normal. Tell me how else it could
be
> > done! (And see my first line before you tell me that "everybody should
be
> > taken on their merits and nothing else." yes, that would be perfect! Now
> > tell me how that can be done!
>
> It's done.  You will always have some nut-cases who are racist, but they
are
> few and far between.  Racism is thouroughly discredited among the
majority.
> Affirmative action now does more to stir the pot and push people *back*
> towards racism.  End it now.

Racism is only "touroughly discredited" because liberal groups got their
heads busted trying to [get] it discredited. Can you show me one
conservative group in the 60s who spoke out and demanded action in regards
to the situation?
>
> > > > Who fought against voting rights, civil rights,
> > >
> > > bigots.
> >
> > ...who were on [what] side of the equation?
>
> Both sides.  From the "Dixiecrats" who also voted for Roosevelts, to the
> Republicans of the "Southern Strategy".  Both sides are guilty.

Being a "Democrat" (no matter what side of the Mason-Dixon line you're on.)
does not make you a liberal. The actions of liberals to enact civil rights
were bitterly opposed by conservatives who were both Democrat and
Republican.
> > > >
> > > > Who opposes equal rights for gays and other free-lifestyle
minorities?
> > >
> > > Who judges people on the content of their character?
> >
> > Not conservatives, I can tell you that.
>
> I respectfully disagree.

Can you show me a conservative group that has spoken out in favor of gay
rights? Can you show me a conservative group that has requested people be
judged on the content of their character when it [didn't] involve a white
person facing difficulty because of Affirmative Action?

BTW, while I disagree with your opinions, I have to appreciate that you
haven't reduced the argument to name calling and nonsense.