A Liberal in Conservative Clothing

Be careful, conservatives.  You might actually be a liberal fighting to convince yourself that you are a conservative.  Oh, the horror!

I know this because I actually talked to one this weekend.  I was in a hotel having dinner, and I began a conversation with a conservative about some hot topics.  As I expected, we made absolutely no headway with the abortion (contraceptives) debate.  There is no winning in a debate about that.  The debates I really enjoyed were about "entitlement" programs and gay marriage.

In these discussions, I simply used a sequence of logical questions to get the poor closet liberal to admit that they didn't really align with conservatives in the way they thought.  We began discussing the law being free from religion.  This conservative played the "Constitution was written on Christian beliefs" card.  Well, that was an easy one.  I simply got the person's agreement that the Constitution was written to protect freedom of religion, and freedom from religion.  Once that was established, I asked if they believed that the government should be forcing some Christians' beliefs on others?  Of course, it was hard to admit, but I got the "no" I was looking for.

Then it was time for the self-proclaimed conservative to play the "but marriage is a gift from God" card.  Another simple one (that seems to be a trend with conservative arguments).  The easy argument here is that, while it is fine for a church to refuse to marry people because of their beliefs, marriage as far as the government is concerned, is purely secular.  It is a contract that has specific rights and responsibilities included.  If religion is taken out of the argument, then we're only left with a contract (called marriage) that the government has no reason to deny to a gay couple.

At this point, I got an agreement that, even though the conservative didn't agree with homosexuality, there was no reason that the government should be denying gay marriage.  This person did attempt to say that they would have to vote against approving gay marriage if it came up because they didn't agree with it personally.  Well, the discussion immediately became about forcing the person's beliefs on others versus allowing others to make decisions on their own.  No matter what logic was used, this was the last hiding place for this faux conservative.  There was not going to be an admission that, even though they said the government should not be writing any religion's beliefs into law and there was no reason that the government should be denying gay marriage, this person actually believed as many liberals do and would vote to see progress in freedom and civil rights.  I warned this person to be careful because they might actually be a liberal in conservative clothes.

At some point, we transitioned to a discussion about "entitlement" programs.  We agreed that Social Security, being a system that is paid into by workers, is not what many people refer to as an "entitlement" program.  (We had a discussion about the word "entitlement" before we started in which we decided that we would use the word to basically "charity" as many conservatives use the term.  We agreed that, by the true definition of the term "entitlement," social security was one.  I'm pretty sure the sentence, "I've paid into that my whole career, you're damn right I'm entitled to it" was uttered.)

Then we agreed that there should be some reform to the programs.  We agreed that people on welfare should be subjected to drug testing.  The surprising part was that, while the conservative thought Medicaid should be destroyed, we agreed that everyone in a country as rich as ours deserved to have basic necessities like food, shelter, and healthcare.  This conservative told me that they believed we should move to a single-payer healthcare system.  Stop.  Re-read that last sentence.  Now realize that this conservative works in the healthcare industry...and has for over 25 years.  At this point, there was no denying the obvious.  I had to tell this person who proclaims to be conservative that they are actually a liberal.  Yes.  This anti-abortion, anti-gay marriage, self-proclaim Christian conservative is actually a liberal who is refusing to see the truth.  If you believe in the freedom to live one's life, if you believe that the fundamental rights outlined in the Constitution apply to all of us, if you are a true Christian...then you should be very careful with whom you align yourself politically.  You may actually be a liberal in conservatives clothing.  

Election 2012: President Obama's Final Debate

We saw President Obama in his final debate tonight.  The debate centered on foreign policy.  Overall I feel like the President severely outclassed Mitt Romney in this debate.  It's not very surprising.  Romney is well known to fall all over himself with foreign relations while President Obama has successful experience dealing with the world. 

What really made me happy is that I saw the Barack Obama that I have expected to see during the debate.  I saw a man who was confident in his position.  Who was forceful in pointing out the inconsistencies and lies in Romney's propaganda.  Who looked Presidential.  I'm glad that the President was able to finish his debating career with a strong statement on the role of the United States in the world.  I look forward to seeing him spend another four years leading our country as the President of the United States. 

Slight of Hand: Conservatives Can't Debate Romney

I've noticed lately that every time someone posts a discussion about Romney, the conversation ends up being about President Obama.  Actually, I noticed this a while ago with some of the conservatives which whom I routinely have debates.  I had hoped that it was a localized phenomenon, but sadly I was wrong. 

Does this sound familiar to anyone who has tried to discuss Romney's many failings with a conservative?

"But look at what Obama did!"

That's all I seem to hear anymore.  Romney economic plan a joke?  But Obama increased the debt!  Romney proving he is a complete failure at foreign relations?  But Obama didn't have any experience and look at the riots in Libya and Egypt!  Romney obviously trying to hide something in the tax returns that he refuses to release?  But Obama hasn't given us all of his educational records!  Romney dismissed 47 percent of Americans as not his problem?  But Obama is a radical Muslim communist!

I like to call this recent tactic by conservatives, "slight of hand."  They are like magicians trying to hide what they are doing in one hand by making you focus on something else in their other hand.  The problem is that they don't really have any way to defend Romney's complete inadequacy as a candidate because he is practically indefensible.  By his own admission he doesn't have any complete plans for the country.  He is relying on certain "principles" to guide his policies and actions.  But try to bring that up with a conservative and you'll get a discussion of Obama's policies.  

I love debates.  They are a big reason that I do this blog.  I think that, as long as we keep an open mind in a debate, we open ourselves to new perspectives that help us learn and grow.  But that doesn't work if a debate is simply a forum for pointing fingers at Obama without actually discussing the issue.  I would love to see a conservative debate something posted about Romney without using the word Obama.  Just once.  You never know, maybe if they had some good points I might look at an issue differently. 

The Rumble 2012: The Best Debate of the Election

If you haven't seen it, please watch Jon Stewart and Bill O'Reilly in The Rumble 2012.  While there are a lot of jokes floating around in this mock debate, there are a lot of good points being made.  I saw more passion and conviction in Stewart and O'Reilly than I have seen in any candidate in an election since I have followed politics.

I understand that this was really only for entertainment purposes (and half of the proceeds from the live stream went to charity), but there was a level of seriousness in the discussions.  I even found points that O'Reilly made with which I would agree (not many).  For example, Bill discussed why he believes that the political discourse in our country is so poor.  He blames it on capitalism.  He says that people can make money selling hate, and that is what is driving such severe polarization and hatred in our discourse.  I completely agree with this sentiment.

I would love to see an actual debate with the candidates for president that was as impressive as this.  Hell, I'm practically ready to put Jon Stewart in office in November.  Like I said before, if you haven't seen this, give it a watch.  It's only about 90 minutes, but you'll be entertained and you might even actually get some good perspective. 

Ignorance is Bliss...

Since the Supreme Court decision on the Affordable Care Act, I have spent a lot of time debating the issue with some conservatives.  This isn’t another attempt to do that.  This is a discussion of the problems I have with debating these people. 

I have a fairly simple request when I debate people…support your arguments.  It’s not a difficult thing to do if you are using sound, reasoned arguments.  That’s the problem.  While I did have a couple of people actually use sources, the majority of these people just posted the same recycled arguments that they have heard on television, radio, or read on their conservative websites.  After using articles from peer-reviewed journals and trusted sources that included facts and figures, I was met with people who just chose to turn a blind eye.  First, they would try to dispute the validity of the facts and figures.  Unless there is a valid reason to dispute them, such as them coming from an untrustworthy source, they are valid.  For statistics like the population of the United States, the commonly accepted trusted source is the Census Department.  (Yes, I used this and it was questioned.)  Then they would attack the journal articles.  Now, I’m not saying everyone has to agree, but don’t tell me an article from a scholarly, peer-reviewed journal is invalid if you haven’t even read the research and have a real point of opposition.  Because you don’t like the fact that it totally invalidates most of your argument is not justification for the conclusions being valid.  These kinds of articles are the standard for academic discussion.  Finally, in a last, desperate attempt to have an argument, my citations were completely ignored.  I was first told that I didn’t use any, and when I proved it, I was told all of my information was refuted.  Well, that’s pretty impossible since I know that not one person I was debating can refute the Census Department or a journal article for which they only have access to read the abstract. 

Retrieved from http://www.politicalruminations.com/2010/09/cartoon-of-the-week.html

Now, I have some friends who might read this and say, “Wait a minute!  I don’t do that.”  I do have some conservative friends who can give me a very challenging and worthy debate.  I have even lost debates with a couple of them (I’m looking at you, Josh.)  Not because I think my position was wrong, just because I wasn’t prepared enough to provide reasonable responses.  Obviously, this is not directed at those people.  In fact, none of those people even attempted to debate the issue.  (I wonder why?) 

After two days of repeating myself over and over for two days and having people stare at the face of my arguments and ignore reason, I have grown tired.  I usually enjoy these kinds of debates.  I like proving people wrong.  It’s even easy in most cases.  But, when the only response you get is nonsense, it stops being fun.  I have fully embraced the fact that I am truly a full-blooded liberal at heart.  I don’t apologize for it, and I don’t apologize for the fact that I think conservative philosophy is nonsense founded in stupidity.  All I’m asking is, please, for the love of Pete, have at least some standards when you debate me.  While I love stomping on conservative ideas, it’s becoming too easy.  It’s almost not even fun anymore.  Almost.

© Keith Tucker