Reply #12: You're making this mistake AGAIN?! [View All]

[mindwalker_i]

Where you seem to think that what comes out of a Republican's face has something to do with what they actually believe? That's not how it works. The republican has a goal, usually something like getting more taxpayer or consumer money to the rich, because a portion will come back as campaign contributions. The republican then comes up with some reason to make that happen and if the reason sounds plausible in some way, that's great. Plausibility usually means there's some underlying principle. In this case, "support the troops," or "don't criticize the president during war," but it's only a means to get the end result, the underlying principle does not represent anything that should be applied anywhere else.

Later, when said principle appears to conflict some other goal that the Republican has, it really doesn't. That principle had a lifetime only for the previous argument supporting a specific goal and isn't applicable anywhere else. Hence, to apply "support the troops" to a soldier that is gay is a complete misuse of the principle of "support the troops." Another misuse would be to attempt to apply "support the troops" to getting them equipment when that money could be used for tax cuts instead. Likewise, saying "don't criticize the president during war" when nobody is questioning a Republican president is meaningless: it doesn't apply to the situation.

Above all, don't apply "fiscal responsibility" to things other than cutting money out of programs that help Americans. That principle was never meant to be used to argue that a war should be paid for, a capital gains tax cut shouldn't be enacted, or deficits under a Republican president. It's scope is limited to unemployment insurance, social security, and schools or infrastructure such as roads and bridges.

And of course, "personal responsibility" only applies to Clinton's penis.