When He Talks Abortion, President Obama Pretends to Be a Libertarian

The Atlantic ^ | Apr 29 2013 | Conor Friedersdorf

[presidio9]

Addressing Planned Parenthood last week, President Obama made what must be one of the least self-aware statements of his tenure. "Forty years after the Supreme Court affirmed a woman's constitutional right to privacy, including the right to choose, we shouldn't have to remind people that when it comes to a woman's health, no politician should get to decide what's best for you," he said. "No insurer should get to decide what kind of care that you get. The only person who should get to make decisions about your health is you."

It's no secret that

[presidio9]

I don’t reject fiscal conservatism

But you already did just that. Specifically.

Which is it: Did you make a mistake when you said it before or are you lying now?

What else could you be wrong about I wonder...

[TArcher]

Poor Socrates, the more it squirms the further its proboscus becomes mired into the “fithcally conthervative” cup it has devised for itself.

LOL.

[TArcher]

>>But you already did just that

Nope.

You’re mistaken, Socrates.

[presidio9]

The thread speaks for itself. You can try denying it all you like. Your rejection of fiscal conservatism is there for anyone interested to see.

It puts you in disagreement with every last conservative on the planet.

[TArcher]

Your circle of homosexual, Log Cabin, RINO, Fithcally “Conthervative” friends speaks for itself, Socrates.

Drink up.

[presidio9]

Actually very few of my gay friends pay much attention to politics at all. You seem to have a very limited understanding of the demographic for someone with such strong opinions.

Conversations with people who are ignorant of a subject and who demonstrate no interest in being educated bore me. Let's contiue with your rejection of fiscal conservatism. Would you vote for a socialist who promises reinstate the sodomy laws?

They had that for a while in the former Soviet Union you know.

[presidio9]

Sure you did. In fact you just rejected it again in your next post. Allow me to sum up your world view for you:

"Fiscal issues are secondary to strict enforcement of all social conservative values. Particularly so the elimination of homosexuality from American society."

Do you dispute this?

[TArcher]

“Sum up” your Socratic self, Jackwagon.

NO SALE

[presidio9]

If I was trying to sell you something, trust me, you couldn't afford it.

Have you run out of stupid ideas our was your failure to make a point inadvertent?

[TArcher]

>>you couldn’t afford it.

You could always try selling the derision of others you so proudly wear on your homepage sleeve.

“33 posted on Tuesday, May 21, 2013 10:18:45 PM by M-cubed”

What’s the going rate for that these days?

[presidio9]

What’s the going rate for that these days?

That I give away for free to people stupid enough to deserve it.

Now, again, what is you alternative to fiscal conservatism?

[TArcher]

American Conservatism requires Fiduciary conservatism in the context of MORAL Conservatism.

The fiscal "conservatism" of your homosexual interior decorator pals is nothing but the post-modern worship of the golden calf; and that Idolatry is what produced the RINO fertilized Rainbow manure left behind by the last "conthervative" administration:




How's that "conservative" Derivative RINO A$$Paper floating in the global eonomic pipeline these days?

FAIL

[presidio9]

American Conservatism requires Fiduciary conservatism in the context of MORAL Conservatism.

You keep saying that, but you don't seem to be capable of defining what you mean by "MORAL Conservatism." Without a definition, all we know is that you oppose fiscal conservatism. Whether you realize it or not, I'm trying to help you clarify your own point here.

[TArcher]

It’s the opposite of amoral, golden-calf-worshipping, Log Cabin Fithcal Conthervatism - obviously.

[presidio9]

Since you are obviously too stupid or too much of a pussy to answer an easy question I will point out that saying that it is hypothetically possible to be gay and conservative is not even remotely the same thing as being a "log cabin republican." On the other hand, it is CERTAINLY philosopically impossible to be conservative without being fiscally conservative.

If any of this is news to you, you don't belong on this website.

[TArcher]

Did you know that ESAD and FOAD are double ententes for which the lesser know meaning is not a directive but simply a statement of fact that if you do, you will?

Bon Appetit, Socrates.

[TArcher]

>>answer an easy question

The credibility of your questions, like that of your “conservatism”, is lost somewhere within your large circle of Log Cabin / GOPRoud / Judas Goat homosexual friends.

Your cup awaits, Socrates. Drink up.

[presidio9]

Questions don't have credibility dumbass. They are objective interrogative expressions. Either you can answer them or you can't. Or you're afraid to.

Does your political philosophy embarass you?

[presidio9]

Did you know that ESAD and FOAD are double ententes for which the lesser know meaning is not a directive but simply a statement of fact that if you do, you will?

Hmmm... how to respond to this scatological post without lowering myself (way down) to your level. I suppose I can't call attention to the multiple typos. That's another one of your obsessions, not mine. I guess I'll just remind you that the purpose of a debate is to examine the facts in the hope of better understanding.

Instead you posted irrelevant insults, something frowned upon on this conservative website. I could continue leading you down this road to the point where you get suspended or banned from this website. I admit, I've done it in the past with losers like you. In lieu of that, I will remind you that you started this conversation. You have been busy researching my home page and stalking me on other threads. It has gotten you nowhere.

[TArcher]

>>Does your political philosophy embarass you?

Nope. I’m and American Conservative. Nothing embarrassing about that.

What’s the wind blowing like out there in the Village today Mr. Weatherman?