|
Post by thew40 on Mar 8, 2007 23:37:06 GMT -5
Holy crap . . . this is genius. Did anyone catch "comic justice" as the word of the day?
~W~
|
|
|
Post by Van Plexico on Mar 10, 2007 10:44:35 GMT -5
"I side with Iron Man," or words to that effect.
Gotta love Colbert.
|
|
|
Post by balok on Mar 10, 2007 12:24:06 GMT -5
That's interesting. I would have expected him, as a liberal, to take Cap's side.
|
|
Tone-Loc
Reservist Avenger
R.I.P. (... for now)
Posts: 200
|
Post by Tone-Loc on Mar 10, 2007 18:28:24 GMT -5
That's interesting. I would have expected him, as a liberal, to take Cap's side. I don't know if you were being sarcastic or not, but for those who may wonder... Colbert (AFAIK) is a liberal who puts on a nightly mock-conservative, opinion oriented, news show (read: FOX's Bill O'Reilly). So, Balok's presumption would most likely be correct, however I don't know Colbert's overal political stand... though it's safe to say he's about as liberal as they come. What interests me, is the notion that siding with Cap would be something a modern day liberal would do, while siding with Iron Man would conversely be in line with conservatives. I find that interesting and odd, because I am a conservative (NOT a republican, thank you very much) and I have no doubts about who is right (Cap) and wrong (IM) in Marvel's Civil War. I suppose people easily follow along with the whole Civil War and the SHRA is a direct mirror with current state of affairs in the US, in particular the parts that seem to tie in most closely with provisions of the Patriot Act (the restrictions on personal freedom, for example). Of course, everyone forgets that the two issues actually bare little in common... the SHRA being a permanent act, with permanent ramifications for its citizens during peace-time and for all time until repealed, and the Patriot Act being a continually expiring act that needs periodic reapproval, has a limited scope with oversight for its citizens, and is during war time only(which is consistent with historical precedents).
|
|
|
Post by balok on Mar 10, 2007 22:02:40 GMT -5
Liberals tend to tell me that I'm conservative, whereas conservatives seem to regard me as liberal. So my actual goal of being a moderate must be working. I was once far more conservative than I am now, and I believed then as I believe now that true conservatism respects freedom. Unfortunately, today's Republicans have got themselves into bed with some religious folks who have a lot of ideas about making their religion the law of the land. And so the Republicans have come to support that.
I can see more parallels between the Patriot Act and the SHRA - did you notice the recent report citing the FBI for consistently using Patriot Act powers illegally? This is something I knew government would do, which is why I oppose the Act. But, we're told, it's okay because Muller pinky swears he won't do it again!
My chief objection to the SHRA is the same as my opposition to gun control legislation: it presumes that the individual possessing a dangerous weapon will misuse it. In essence, it is a law that presumes guilt embedded in a justice system that is supposed to presume innocence.
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Doom on Mar 11, 2007 4:38:09 GMT -5
I'm somewhere in the middle. I used to be hippy-liberal, but now while I generally support liberal policies (Taxes, minimum wage, big government, death penalty, gun control, homosexuals,) I'm opposed to them on several key issues- like abortion and euthanasia. I think under the right circumstances, I could be a liberal Republican, but with folk like George Bush at the whitehouse, that's really not going to happen. Back on track, it was brilliant- I loved when they said Cap shoul,d get a new costume based on the Threat Level! "Hasn't paid taxes since 1941"
|
|
|
Post by thew40 on Mar 12, 2007 19:44:36 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by The Night Phantom on Mar 17, 2007 14:02:23 GMT -5
Liberals tend to tell me that I'm conservative, whereas conservatives seem to regard me as liberal. So my actual goal of being a moderate must be working. I was once far more conservative than I am now, and I believed then as I believe now that true conservatism respects freedom. I find that politics often has little relationship with the words being bandied about. My understanding of liberalism is that it is basically about favoring liberty, and my understanding of conservatism is that it is basically about conserving that which is currently held or established (or previously held or established, in the case of reactionism). Depending on the circumstances, these are not necessarily competing philosophies—for example, if you oppose the erosion of currently established civil rights, you are espousing a simultaneously liberal and conservative position. But since, in another example of political doubletalk and anti-mentality mentality, ideology is often used to combat ideation, such a simple and obvious analysis stands far outside the tiny box in which the political mainstream prefers to trap itself and anyone else within reach.
|
|