“Warner Music (WMG) Tries To Stop McCain’s Hit “Obama Love” Video”

WMG aren’t the only guys tryin’ to protect their intellectual property…!

but their own legislation illuminates their thinking, imho.

Spirit of 1776 on July 27, 2008 at 12:23 AM

Good point.

And by “better than Obama,” you do realize that Obama scored a “7″ and McCain, an “80.” That is a little more than just “better.”

wise_man on July 27, 2008 at 12:19 AM

If I were to prioritize the issues that most concern me and used that to weight the score accordingly, McCain would probably score well below 50.

FloatingRock on July 27, 2008 at 12:10 AM

I think the ACU ratings are a waste honestly. If you don’t vote on a bill, it doesn’t factor in. It’s unreliable.

I think the better measurement is legislation written or sponsored by individuals. I mean generally people vote down party lines, but their own legislation illuminates their thinking, imho.

And by “better than Obama,” you do realize that Obama scored a “7″ and McCain, an “80.” That is a little more than just “better.”

Spirit of 1776 on July 26, 2008 at 11:22 PM

Sounds plausible to me, but I’m not up on the finer points.

On a related note, there are the ACU ratings; in which McCain scores poorly relative to most other Republicans, although better than Obama, certainly. To the best of my knowledge those scores aren’t weighted by the importance a given issue has with the base, and can’t be custom weighted by an individual by going to their web site and submitting a form. So while McCain might score in the 70’s or 80’s, (or whatever), on any given year, if illegal immigration and the 1st amendment were given their proper weight, he would actually score much, much lower. So again, the ACU ratings are a subjective measurement, especially when you take into account that an otherwise conservative voting politician who hypothetically voted to repeal the 2nd amendment might still receive a strong ACU rating in spite of the fact that they’ve voted against a prominent conservative principle which would be a deal killer for many.

Also, the measurement is relative because it is based upon, I presume, bills that go through the process and actually receive a vote. If the “conservatives” in congress aren’t particularly conservative and don’t submit principled conservative legislation yet vote for every bill, they probably get a strong conservative rating despite the fact that they aren’t submitting or voting on sound conservative bills.

However, I’m not familiar enough with the ACU ratings process to know for certain how they score, so I may be wrong on the last point.

It’s another nail in the coffin of people in group 3.

Obama will advance conservatism by discrediting liberalism.

Well, I don’t have a dog in this comment-fight…but I disagree. An Obama presidency with a complicit media means he will control the message…and the message will be that every F**k up he is responsible for will be the fault of the Neo-Cons, Jews, Convervatives and Republicans…and if you doubt that, just look at the message they are sending out now…and observe that how it is resonating with a large (yes, large idiot, but large) portion of the voting public.

adherence to those same principles amounts to libertarianism and adding an additional layer of ideology on top of that amounts to conservatism…. although in either case, adherence to those principles still applies, which is why McCain isn’t a conservative, IMO.

FloatingRock on July 26, 2008 at 11:11 PM

I would argue that is not quite correct. Libertarianism is rooted in personal liberty, which is to say it’s founding documents are really the bill of Rights. I think Conservatives consider the Preamble as the real source of definition on government. A slight difference, you might, but an important one nontheless I think.

Spirit of 1776 on July 26, 2008 at 10:58 PM

I agree in general as it pertains to the present. Adherence to the Constitution and DoI is my basic measure of conservatism but I’m sure some would disagree, and others might claim that adherence to those same principles amounts to libertarianism and adding an additional layer of ideology on top of that amounts to conservatism…. although in either case, adherence to those principles still applies, which is why McCain isn’t a conservative, IMO.

for example the modern conservative movement is largely based on classical liberalism, is it not? [...]

FloatingRock on July 26, 2008 at 10:44 PM

Yes, absolutely. I would just contribute the thought that in certain places absolute values are markers for those places. In England, for example, the Magna Carta, for US DoI and Constitution. Those expression of classical liberalism, and how close we remain to those, to me define the difference between conservationism and liberal.

To apply for example, anything that alters separation of powers, or minimizes personal liberty or the rights of the citizenry (like CFR does, for ex) it is measurably not conservative.

Liberals move toward government as the answer, so in almost everything that is expansion of government for non preamble reasons, to me is measurable liberality.

But I do think there is an actually ideological center for conservative and liberal values.

There is, but it’s still transitory, IMO, for example the modern conservative movement is largely based on classical liberalism, is it not? It’s an honest question because I’m not as well read in history as some here.

Okay, that was funny too. But I didn’t say that.

Not remotely the same.

AHHHHH!!!!

But you didn’t consider the measurement of ‘the same’ as it has always been and always will be a subjective, relative comparison.

Did you?

I don’t think you did.

But you knew that of course.

if what I did yesterday was so bad of me to do,

“And while you’re at it, do you have anything on misterpeasea? I’d love to take that goddamned troll off of this website as well. It would be more than worth it.”

Not remotely the same. Especially considering today’s conversation stemmed from a hypothetical question about what others would do. But you know that of course.

OK, but if I were AP, and I’m not obviously, I would ban you if you continue calling everybody liars all the time.
FloatingRock on July 26, 2008 at 9:55 PM

..it’s okay. But when I said it yesterday, it was wrong, right?

I mean, if what I did yesterday was so bad of me to do, then it should be bad for you to do it as well.

And there is at least one more group, _man. The group I’m in: we think that the positives from a McCain presidency will be outweighed by the long term negatives he inflicts on the country and the party and the ideology of conservatism.
misterpeasea on July 26, 2008 at 10:07 PM

Well, _peasea, you seem to be in group three.

But I wouldn’t want to put words in your mouth or anything like that, as much as what you claim, falls into the definition of group three. (or someone from the other group)

But I wouldn’t dare put any words in your mouth, or anything like that.

wise_man on July 26, 2008 at 10:04 PM

That would be wise.

FloatingRock on July 26, 2008 at 10:09 PM

I really don’t have an argument with that because the term is broadly used for various meanings. But I do think there is an actually ideological center for conservative and liberal values. But those, as you suggest, aren’t referred to as much as the subjective ones. It’s like right now, pro-war is considered Republican and conservative view. But that’s only by context or the current situation. So I follow you.

Sure. I actually think liberality is more tangible because it is an ideology so one can measure, sort of, how closely some is to it. But it have variability, so it has both objective and subjective parts to it.

Spirit of 1776 on July 26, 2008 at 9:39 PM

I agree that there are conventional classifications of political ideology at a given time and place, but it’s subjective, IMO, because it depends upon the time and place. For example, the left and right in this country doesn’t precisely correspond to other nations, such as the UK, where the right is much like our left. And the left and right of today doesn’t precisely correspond with where they were during the founding of America. There are also people who hold divergent views that to some extent spread across the gamut of political ideology.

There is also the aspect that in addition to broad societal classifications of political ideology, there is also a personal classification element. People on the far right probably often conclude that most of society is more liberal than somebody in the center or far left might determine for themselves, and vice versa.

So you want me to stop … responding to incorrect opinions

wise_man on July 26, 2008

Man oh man. You just can’t make this stuff up.

And there is at least one more group, _man. The group I’m in: we think that the positives from a McCain presidency will be outweighed by the long term negatives he inflicts on the country and the party and the ideology of conservatism.

Maybe if McCain was going to advance conservatism it’d be worth the risk. But then, if he was going to advance conservatism, there’d BE no risk.

We think the negatives (and they’re big, we understand) of an Obama presidency will be outweighed by the positives: he will discredit Democrats and liberalism, he will swing the tide of the Congress back to Republicans, and he will be blamed for the stupid and costly policies that he and John McCain agree on (like global warmism and amnesty), rather than John McCain.

Obama will advance conservatism by discrediting liberalism. I’d rather that than McCain advancing liberalism by both advancing liberalism and discrediting conservatism. So you and your fellow-travelers are actually contributing to the damage a President McCain will inflict by insisting that he’s a conservative. Because people will think, oh, the conservative gave amnesty and crippled our economy? Screw conservatives.

Don’t worry, I don’t expect you to either understand or respond substantively.