What is Conservatism?

[sam i am]

I love being a conservative. Defending the institutions and traditions that made the USA great - which is, in fact, a good nutshell definition of conservatism - is an enormous pleasure. Conservatives take pride in America's strength, cherish her goodness, prize her accomplishments, relish her spirit, revere her freedom, and treasure her history.

So, a little history : The conservative movement is built on a foundation of individual liberty. Before "the American experiment" (as the Founding Fathers called it) in self-government, the human experience was rife with subjugation and tyranny. It was the normal state of mankind to live under unaccountable governments and monarchies that controlled the lives, livelihoods, and destinies of their population.

The Founders of the USA, the most remarkable collection of political geniuses ever assembled in one place and time, knew this well. So it is no coincidence that the Founding documents of the USA - the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution - are "conservative" in nature. Both texts establish and safeguard freedoms, and set limits on government. The Founders put "we the people" first in the Constituition for a reason : because "governments...deriv[e] their just powers from the consent of the governed." As Ronald Reagan expressed it in his first inaugural address : "We are a nation that has a government, not the other way around, and this makes us special among the nations of the earth." A uniqueness well worth preserving - conserving.

Conservatives KNOW that individuals, unshackled from excessive governmental control, will always strive to better themselves and their families in their pursuit of happiness; in so doing they benefit society at large (aka altruism). Individuals will couple risk-taking with an entrpreneuralism that government bureaucracy can NEVER produce. The explosion of American invention (still the world leaders in inventions and patents to this day) and innovation is not due to government edict, but rather to individuals following their dreams. We conservatives believe there are no limits on what one person can accomplish, that ordinary Americans can do extraordianry things. As opposed to liberals, who don't even trust citizens to manage their own money.

Liberals often accuse conservatives of being "anti-government," but they are dead wrong. Conservatives believe in LIMITED government - that is, government within its bounds - as circumscribed by the U.S. Constitution. Conservatism well understands government is needed to maintain order, protect society from foreign and domestic threats, and administer justice - including, but not limited to, preserving individual rights. But liberals misunderstand government's role; they believe the purpose of government is to solve problems. That is where they go wrong. Individuals solve problems - government's job is to get out of the way.

Liberals' love of government blinds them to its menace to individual liberty. The threat of power consolidated in the hands of an unaccountable governing body runs the gamut from dangerous to evil. "Dangerous" defines the current trend of activist judges : a handful of unelected people in robes, who have decreed atrocities such as the government's "right" to usurp private property to increase tax revenue. "Evil" defines the modern laboratories of socialism and governmental control : the former USSR, China, North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela, and so on. The Founders' brilliant approach, to dividepower among three competing branches of government, is a guardian of the citizens' own power to order their lives as they see fit.

The conservative view on almost everything else flows from an understanding of the power and goodness of liberty. We believe that low taxes preserve economic freedom and grow a SOCIETY'S wealth. We believe that an Originalist interpretation of the Constitution reigns in an activist judiciary. We believe that a strong national defense at home AND abroad preserves our free way of life - and we understand that the cost to preserve that freedom is always blood and treasure. We believe the more nations are free, the safer the world.

We believe in equality before our Creator and under the law (a profound idea); not, as liberals and socialists insist, in equality of results. Liberals see inequality and to make everyone equally miserable. It frosts them that some are more successful than others within the free enterprise system. Their response : a desire to punish the achievers. It never occurs to them that their paternalistic insistence of a welfare state hurts the poor by keeping them dependent on minimal subsistence (the ultimate outcome of a socialistic system) - a soul killer. Liberals' and Socialists' (and, for that matter, Egalitarianists') prescription of FORCED or coerced equality has never, ever created wealth; socialism fails every time it's tried. On the other hand, as a capitalistic society, the USA has become the wealthiest and most powerful nation in history, providing high living standards for all - even, relative to the rest of the world, America's poor.

I'll state that embracing liberalism or socialism is the most gutless choice one can make - all you need is emotion. Conservatism requires BOTH heart and brain. By seeing doom and gloom everywhere, liberals and socialists exploit every opportunity to say, "I care more than you do." Liberalism marinates in problems while conservatism solves them. No wonder conservatives enjoy life, protect the USA's traditions, and uphold its honor.

[Funkaloyd]

The main problem with this little diatribe of yours is that we could go through it, swap every instance of "conservatism" with "liberalism" and vice-versa, and the argument would still be pretty much just as convincing as yours (minus, perhaps, the second to last paragraph, which would make too little sense):

I love being a liberal. Defending the institutions and traditions that made the USA great - which is, in fact, a good nutshell definition of liberalism - is an enormous pleasure. Liberals take pride in America's strength, cherish her goodness, prize her accomplishments, relish her spirit, revere her freedom, and treasure her history.

So, a little history : The liberal movement is built on a foundation of individual liberty. Before "the American experiment" (as the Founding Fathers called it) in self-government, the human experience was rife with subjugation and tyranny. It was the normal state of mankind to live under unaccountable governments and monarchies that controlled the lives, livelihoods, and destinies of their population.

The Founders of the USA, the most remarkable collection of political geniuses ever assembled in one place and time, knew this well. So it is no coincidence that the Founding documents of the USA - the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution - are "liberal" in nature. Both texts establish and safeguard freedoms, and set limits on government. The Founders put "we the people" first in the Constituition for a reason : because "governments...deriv[e] their just powers from the consent of the governed." As Ronald Reagan expressed it in his first inaugural address : "We are a nation that has a government, not the other way around, and this makes us special among the nations of the earth." A uniqueness well worth preserving - conserving.

Liberals KNOW that individuals, unshackled from excessive governmental control, will always strive to better themselves and their families in their pursuit of happiness; in so doing they benefit society at large (aka altruism). Individuals will couple risk-taking with an entrpreneuralism that government bureaucracy can NEVER produce. The explosion of American invention (still the world leaders in inventions and patents to this day) and innovation is not due to government edict, but rather to individuals following their dreams. We liberals believe there are no limits on what one person can accomplish, that ordinary Americans can do extraordianry things. As opposed to conservatives, who don't even trust citizens to manage their own money.

Conservatives often accuse liberals of being "anti-government," but they are dead wrong. Liberals believe in LIMITED government - that is, government within its bounds - as circumscribed by the U.S. Constitution. Liberalism well understands government is needed to maintain order, protect society from foreign and domestic threats, and administer justice - including, but not limited to, preserving individual rights. But conservatives misunderstand government's role; they believe the purpose of government is to solve problems. That is where they go wrong. Individuals solve problems - government's job is to get out of the way.

Conservatives' love of government blinds them to its menace to individual liberty. The threat of power consolidated in the hands of an unaccountable governing body runs the gamut from dangerous to evil. "Dangerous" defines the current trend of activist judges : a handful of unelected people in robes, who have decreed atrocities such as the government's "right" to usurp private property to increase tax revenue. "Evil" defines the modern laboratories of authoritarianism and governmental control : the former USSR, China, North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela, and so on. The Founders' brilliant approach, to dividepower among three competing branches of government, is a guardian of the citizens' own power to order their lives as they see fit.

The liberal view on almost everything else flows from an understanding of the power and goodness of liberty. We believe that low taxes preserve economic freedom and grow a SOCIETY'S wealth. We believe that an Originalist interpretation of the Constitution reigns in an activist judiciary. We believe that a strong national defense at home AND abroad preserves our free way of life - and we understand that the cost to preserve that freedom is always blood and treasure. We believe the more nations are free, the safer the world.

I'll state that embracing conservatism or fascism is the most gutless choice one can make - all you need is emotion. Liberalism requires BOTH heart and brain. By seeing doom and gloom everywhere, conservatives and fascists exploit every opportunity to say, "I care more than you do." Conservatism marinates in problems while liberalism solves them. No wonder liberals enjoy life, protect the USA's traditions, and uphold its honor.
Of course, you and I both know that the above isn't very convincing at all. It's little more than a load of bs, filled with lies, hypocrisy and contradictions. It would be easy—if maybe a waste of time—to go through it and point out all the errors one by one. But you don't seem to realize that the same can be said for your original.

[Ace42X]

Heh, that is quite amusing. I think it makes the point quite well that Conservatism (at least in the way it is used by the Republican posters on this forum, and probably the case in most of middle-america if we are to take the posters here as representative) is merely the process of trying to rationalise your own personal belief structure and ideology without the benefit of objective fact.

[QueenAdrock]

I'll state that embracing liberalism or socialism is the most gutless choice one can make - all you need is emotion. Conservatism requires BOTH heart and brain. By seeing doom and gloom everywhere, liberals and socialists exploit every opportunity to say, "I care more than you do." Liberalism marinates in problems while conservatism solves them. No wonder conservatives enjoy life, protect the USA's traditions, and uphold its honor.

Really? Just emotion to be a liberal? Then how come most universities are "liberal" in nature? Because they don't believe in using their brains, just their hearts?

How does conservatism require "heart and brain"? Last time I checked, killing innocent civilians and supporting a bullshit war to do so did not require heart. As a matter of fact, I'd say it would require a lack of heart. Not only that, tell me how "conservatism" is helping solve this problem? If you believe truly that Democrats just sit back and complain, whereas your "superior" party goes out and gets shit done - why do we have a deficit? Why have we been in a "quick war" for the past 3 years? Why are we the most split politically than we've ever been before? We may see "gloom and doom" but that's because we don't just turn a blind eye on things and say "Oh, well. It's all for the best, I'm sure. La-la-la..."

Please go to middle America, talk to some of the "conservatives" out there, and tell me that they have heart, AND BRAINS. I've talked to many an ignoramus out there, who believe in killing "any sandnigger" that stands in the way of our freedom. Talk to the conservatives out there who say that Saddam Hussein was the one in charge of 9/11 and God Bless G.W. Bush for bringing him to justice, and then get back to me about the "brains" question.

Unless in your argument you are actually saying they don't count as being conservative, and neither does this administration, it doesn't hold water.

But I'm sure you're right. Conservatives enjoy life. I, and the other half of America, hate my life. Wow, you won't believe how much life sucks to be a liberal. It's just awful. :rolleyes:

[yeahwho]

Compassionate Conservative [k&m-'pa-sh(&-)n&t k&n-'s&r-v&-tiv]: A regular conservative who just talks slower

[SobaViolence]

Heh, that is quite amusing. I think it makes the point quite well that Conservatism (at least in the way it is used by the Republican posters on this forum, and probably the case in most of middle-america if we are to take the posters here as representative) is merely the process of trying to rationalise your own personal belief structure and ideology without the benefit of objective fact.


Compassionate Conservative [k&m-'pa-sh(&-)n&t k&n-'s&r-v&-tiv]: A regular conservative who just talks slower


i love being a social anarchist. (y)

[checkyourprez]

conservatives love whipping out the fact they love america and they defend whats american and really make up what it means to be american. id like to know where this mandate comes from other than the fact that you say thats how it is.


Funkaloyd did a good job showing this with his example.


proof is in the pudding kiddo. its not just the way it is because you say it is.

[Ace42X]

conservatives love whipping out the fact they love america and they defend whats american

I'd be interested in what aspects of America it is they love... Maybe it's the genocide of the land's original inhabitants... Or the forced relocation of a slave work force... Or their corporations trading with the Nazis... Or the various wars and invasions they have embarked upon... The lies, the corruption, the mafia, the nuclear stockpiling, the use of amazing technological feats to massacre defenseless foreigners. Maybe it's the insane gun-crime, or the ridiculously low standard of education? Maybe it's the obnoxious talk-shows, or retrogressive religious beliefs?

Or maybe, just maybe, it's because they are indoctrinated with idiotic notions of jingoistic patriotism that they believe their own mythos. Just like the North Koreans all believe Americans live in squalor and poverty, Americans truly think "hey, we're some of the smartest people in the world!"

Hah!

Personally I think what the "conservatives" (read: wankers) actually love about America is the country's phenominal ability to sweep bad things under the carpet. And anyone who attempts to point out the error of this is "eurotrash" or "a head in the clouds liberal" or "some hippy tree-hugger" or any one of a number of labels designed to reduce a sensible objective argument from something they can't win to some sort of bizarre puppet show.

"Well, admittedly I can't give any facts or evidence for my beliefs, but everyone KNOWS that Conservatisms stand for this this and this, and by sheer virtue of self-importance are clearly the best people to achieve it. Just like everyone KNOWS Kerry wasa flip-flopper, and Saddam had WMDs, and his soldiers threw babies out of incubators onto cold hard floors, and AMERICA IS THE GREATEST COUNTRY IN THE GODDAMN WORLD, even though statistical evidence shows otherwise."

Let us revise our definition:
Conservatism is a meme that is used to rally a bunch of idiotic gullible slack-jawed hicks to whatever cause the fuhrer wants. Like Eloi to the Morlocks.

Any objective person with an ACTUAL history degree (rather than a mail-order one) would be able to trace the originals of conservative policy, check the definition, see what is going on, and see just how little neo-conservatism has to do with the initial principles of conservatism, and just how far from the original intent of conservatism current Republican policies actually are.

But no, they have their cause, their mantra, their scapegoats, their icons.

"If only we kill the Jews, everything will be fine. Everyone knows it is the Jews that are stealing our jobs... It is us hard-working common folk that deserve the money and jobs... Everyone knows it is us that have the common sense, the commitment, it is us that made the country great. Those intellectuals are just parasites!"

Such bold faced revisionism shouldn't be a surprised to anyone who is familiar with what happens when you give a lot of very stupid people an excuse to jsutify their ignorance.

[zorra_chiflada]

what the fuck?

i think everyone's thoroughly sick of this bullshit.

shouldn't you be assassinating hugo chavez or pipe bombing a family planning centre?

[Documad]

I'm still trying to figure out how record deficits are conservative. I've been pondering that one since the 1980s to no avail.

Those gosh-darned borrow-and-spend Republicans!

[D_Raay]

Personally I think what the "conservatives" (read: wankers) actually love about America is the country's phenominal ability to sweep bad things under the carpet. And anyone who attempts to point out the error of this is "eurotrash" or "a head in the clouds liberal" or "some hippy tree-hugger" or any one of a number of labels designed to reduce a sensible objective argument from something they can't win to some sort of bizarre puppet show.
Couldn't have put it better myself... (y)

[sam i am]

Hey....

It was just a statement of my beliefs and ideals.

Zorra - if you don't want to read it, don't.

D_Raay - I know that you hold many of the same ideals as I do, but that you are flabbergasted and completely alienated from the current politcal paradigm.

Queen - same as D_Raay, except that you take offense to being called a Liberal, it seems.


How about a Liberal (or Socialist or Egalitarian) statement of principles to stand against mine? Anyone game?

[sam i am]

what the fuck?

i think everyone's thoroughly sick of this bullshit.

shouldn't you be assassinating hugo chavez or pipe bombing a family planning centre?

"Everyone?" Hmmm.....guess the majority of the country (USA) doesn't care, eh? Then why all the pro- and anti- posts on the BBMB (just as an example)?

I LOVE Hugo...why would I want him assasinated any more than I'd want Fidel assasinated...all it would do is make them martyrs. Fidel'll die soon enough and Hugo is even more of a bit player, especially when the cost of oil goes down.

As for "pipe bombing a family planning centre," well.....you obviously have me mistaken with a rabid anti-abortionist. Talk about a comical stereotype.

[sam i am]

I'm still trying to figure out how record deficits are conservative. I've been pondering that one since the 1980s to no avail.

Those gosh-darned borrow-and-spend Republicans!

You'll notice that I didn't mention Bush or the current crop of Republicans even once in my statement of principles....but rather talked about optimism and hope and strength and character.

Deficits ARE manageable, as long as they stay as a small percentage of GDP. Would I rather they didn't occur...of course. I just see the prescription to fixing deficits much differently than most who post on this message board do....

[checkyourprez]

I'd be interested in what aspects of America it is they love... Maybe it's the genocide of the land's original inhabitants... Or the forced relocation of a slave work force... Or their corporations trading with the Nazis... Or the various wars and invasions they have embarked upon... The lies, the corruption, the mafia, the nuclear stockpiling, the use of amazing technological feats to massacre defenseless foreigners. Maybe it's the insane gun-crime, or the ridiculously low standard of education? Maybe it's the obnoxious talk-shows, or retrogressive religious beliefs?

Or maybe, just maybe, it's because they are indoctrinated with idiotic notions of jingoistic patriotism that they believe their own mythos. Just like the North Koreans all believe Americans live in squalor and poverty, Americans truly think "hey, we're some of the smartest people in the world!"

Hah!

Personally I think what the "conservatives" (read: wankers) actually love about America is the country's phenominal ability to sweep bad things under the carpet. And anyone who attempts to point out the error of this is "eurotrash" or "a head in the clouds liberal" or "some hippy tree-hugger" or any one of a number of labels designed to reduce a sensible objective argument from something they can't win to some sort of bizarre puppet show.

"Well, admittedly I can't give any facts or evidence for my beliefs, but everyone KNOWS that Conservatisms stand for this this and this, and by sheer virtue of self-importance are clearly the best people to achieve it. Just like everyone KNOWS Kerry wasa flip-flopper, and Saddam had WMDs, and his soldiers threw babies out of incubators onto cold hard floors, and AMERICA IS THE GREATEST COUNTRY IN THE GODDAMN WORLD, even though statistical evidence shows otherwise."

Let us revise our definition:
Conservatism is a meme that is used to rally a bunch of idiotic gullible slack-jawed hicks to whatever cause the fuhrer wants. Like Eloi to the Morlocks.

Any objective person with an ACTUAL history degree (rather than a mail-order one) would be able to trace the originals of conservative policy, check the definition, see what is going on, and see just how little neo-conservatism has to do with the initial principles of conservatism, and just how far from the original intent of conservatism current Republican policies actually are.

But no, they have their cause, their mantra, their scapegoats, their icons.

"If only we kill the Jews, everything will be fine. Everyone knows it is the Jews that are stealing our jobs... It is us hard-working common folk that deserve the money and jobs... Everyone knows it is us that have the common sense, the commitment, it is us that made the country great. Those intellectuals are just parasites!"

Such bold faced revisionism shouldn't be a surprised to anyone who is familiar with what happens when you give a lot of very stupid people an excuse to jsutify their ignorance.


respek

[sam i am]

I've talked to many an ignoramus out there, who believe in killing "any sandnigger" that stands in the way of our freedom.

You know, it's quite amusing to me that you and ace are the two posters on this board who employ this term, which is about the most offensive piece of garbage you can employ.

Why, even to illustrate it's ignorant usage, would you even post such tripe and expect not to offend those towards whom it is derogatorily aimed?

BTW, ANYBODY who uses such language is not indicative of conservatives in general. Period.

[sam i am]

respek

The love affair begins.... ;)

[QueenAdrock]

You know, it's quite amusing to me that you and ace are the two posters on this board who employ this term, which is about the most offensive piece of garbage you can employ.

Why, even to illustrate it's ignorant usage, would you even post such tripe and expect not to offend those towards whom it is derogatorily aimed?

Because it's important to let people know to know how deep the ignorance in America is. What's more effective, saying "The Nazi's didn't like homosexuals and therefore killed some of them," or say "The Nazi's dragged out one homosexual, put a bucket on his head, stripped him naked and had German Shepards devour him alive"? Which one makes you realize the EXTENT to which the Nazis were evil?

Just like using the word "sandnigger." I have never used it in a derogatory way, but I think it's important for people in this country to be aware of the extreme racism in this country. I've heard it many times, and I refuse to sit back and hear people say they love GWB and Jesus Christ and whatnot, and STILL use that word. It shows the immense hypocrisy in this country, much more so than using non-blunt words or euphemisms.

And I don't take offense to being called a liberal, I love being a liberal. I just don't like it when Republicans get up on their high horses and parade around the fact that they're "so much better" than liberals, and try to use the word liberal itself as an insult.

[sam i am]

Because it's important to let people know to know how deep the ignorance in America is. What's more effective, saying "The Nazi's didn't like homosexuals and therefore killed some of them," or say "The Nazi's dragged out one homosexual, put a bucket on his head, stripped him naked and had German Shepards devour him alive"? Which one makes you realize the EXTENT to which the Nazis were evil?

Just like using the word "sandnigger." I have never used it in a derogatory way, but I think it's important for people in this country to be aware of the extreme racism in this country. I've heard it many times, and I refuse to sit back and hear people say they love GWB and Jesus Christ and whatnot, and STILL use that word. It shows the immense hypocrisy in this country, much more so than using non-blunt words or euphemisms.

And I don't take offense to being called a liberal, I love being a liberal. I just don't like it when Republicans get up on their high horses and parade around the fact that they're "so much better" than liberals, and try to use the word liberal itself as an insult.

Fair enough. So....it's perfectly OK for those on the "Left" to employ inflammatory rhetoric that does nothing but appeal to base emotions? Sounds like my last paragraph in my original post was correct, after all.... ;)

[QueenAdrock]

Yeah, you're right Sam. We should shut up and let racism exist, because it's better to be ignorant than it is to appeal to people's emotions to make it stop. The reason WHY it's employed is to get people to start thinking about the choices they make, and where this world is headed. It's not just to piss people off, like you seem to believe.

[Ace42X]

"Originally Posted by sam i am
Why, even to illustrate it's ignorant usage, would you even post such tripe and expect not to offend those towards whom it is derogatorily aimed?"

Ah the benificent concern of the compassionate conservative for the lower orders...

[sam i am]

Yeah, you're right Sam. We should shut up and let racism exist, because it's better to be ignorant than it is to appeal to people's emotions to make it stop. The reason WHY it's employed is to get people to start thinking about the choices they make, and where this world is headed. It's not just to piss people off, like you seem to believe.

I know it's not just to piss people off. It's just ironic that the people I know in my life who are the most racist and ignorant about race relations are almost universally Liberal.

Guess we travel in different circles, eh? You seem to spend your time talking to those in "Middle America" who you see as slack-jawed idiots spewing hatred and racism while I spend my time talking to Liberal elitists who think they have all the answers for racism while making racist jokes constantly and living off the sweat and hard work of others. Maybe we can meet in the middle sometime?

[sam i am]

"Originally Posted by sam i am
Why, even to illustrate it's ignorant usage, would you even post such tripe and expect not to offend those towards whom it is derogatorily aimed?"

Ah the benificent concern of the compassionate conservative for the lower orders...

First of all...you don't know what race I am.

Second of all....judge me at your peril, oh King Ace from on high. Judgment shall be yours someday and I'd rue the day it's taken, if I were you.

Third, you are the worst purveyor of racist language on here, employing that term that Queen also used to illustrate your points, yet never condemning the fact that it's employed in the first place.

Take the plank out of your own eye before pointing out the splinter in mine, please.

[QueenAdrock]

I know it's not just to piss people off. It's just ironic that the people I know in my life who are the most racist and ignorant about race relations are almost universally Liberal.

That is ironic, where in fact, do you live? In Maryland, we have a mix of people. Near DC, we've got the liberals who are for civil rights and equality. In Frederick (Close to the "panhandle"), we have active KKK members, and these ignorant people who call themselves conservative. My cousins live there because it's much cheaper housing (my county is ridiculously expensive), and anytime I go up there and see their neighbors....ugh. Just one racial epithet after another.

I only know of one "liberal" friend of mine who is racist. He is also a homosexual, and has voted Republican in the past two elections. He's a very mixed up boy.

[QueenAdrock]

Third, you are the worst purveyor of racist language on here, employing that term that Queen also used to illustrate your points, yet never condemning the fact that it's employed in the first place.

I thought it went without saying that we're condemning the fact that it's being employed. We use it in quotation marks, conveying the fact that it's someone else's ideas. Around that quotation, we use sarcastic and biting language that should show we're against the langauge.

[Ace42X]

I thought it went without saying

It does. There is no point explaining it to him, as he is either trying to start an argument for the sake of it, being deliberately obstinate because he is too arrogant to see that all he is doing is making an ass of himself, or too stupid to get the point.

He's not really worth the effort. Yeah it's nice having a Republican who can string words together, but given what he chooses to do with them, it's not that much of a step up from that cretin Valvano.

And his entirely fictional history qualification totally discredits him anyway. If he is going to lie bare-facedly to us in a vain effort to make a point, there is no point in trying to debate reasonably with him.

[greedygretchen]

Take the plank out of your own eye before pointing out the splinter in mine, please.

Conservatives shouldn't be plagiarizing Jesus...
:p

[D_Raay]

D_Raay - I know that you hold many of the same ideals as I do, but that you are flabbergasted and completely alienated from the current politcal paradigm.
Which is why we find ourselves on opposite sides of the debate sam.

Come back from the dark side brother. Please...

[discopants]

Thomas Hobbes, Thomas Hobbes riding through the glen.
Thomas Hobbes Thomas Hobbes with his band of men
Loved by John Locke
Hated Frederick Rousseau
Thomas Hobbes
Thomas Hobbes
Thomas Hobbes

[ASsman]

You know, it's quite amusing to me that you and ace are the two posters on this board who employ this term, which is about the most offensive piece of garbage you can employ.

Why, even to illustrate it's ignorant usage, would you even post such tripe and expect not to offend those towards whom it is derogatorily aimed?

BTW, ANYBODY who uses such language is not indicative of conservatives in general. Period.
Heheh, you haven't been around long have you..

[SobaViolence]

i wonder:
are ukrainian people peroginiggers?
are the irish potatoniggers?
are the french wineniggers?
are polish people sausageniggers?


someone, help me out...

[EN[i]GMA]

i wonder:
are ukrainian people peroginiggers?
are the irish potatoniggers?
are the french wineniggers?
are polish people sausageniggers?


someone, help me out...

Skin color is the determinating factor.

Arabs are darker and thus the term, ostensibly, applies to them.

I don't understand it either.

[sam i am]

That is ironic, where in fact, do you live? In Maryland, we have a mix of people. Near DC, we've got the liberals who are for civil rights and equality. In Frederick (Close to the "panhandle"), we have active KKK members, and these ignorant people who call themselves conservative. My cousins live there because it's much cheaper housing (my county is ridiculously expensive), and anytime I go up there and see their neighbors....ugh. Just one racial epithet after another.

I only know of one "liberal" friend of mine who is racist. He is also a homosexual, and has voted Republican in the past two elections. He's a very mixed up boy.

I find the term offensive, period.

I live in Las Vegas.

That IS a mixed up boy. Log Cabin Republican?

[sam i am]

I love being a liberal.

What, specifically, do you "love" about being a Liberal? Can you frame your response without impugning anyone who is not a Liberal or without framing your ideology in non-anti-Republican or Conservative terms?

[sam i am]

It does. There is no point explaining it to him, as he is either trying to start an argument for the sake of it, being deliberately obstinate because he is too arrogant to see that all he is doing is making an ass of himself, or too stupid to get the point.

He's not really worth the effort. Yeah it's nice having a Republican who can string words together, but given what he chooses to do with them, it's not that much of a step up from that cretin Valvano.

And his entirely fictional history qualification totally discredits him anyway. If he is going to lie bare-facedly to us in a vain effort to make a point, there is no point in trying to debate reasonably with him.

Oh, ace......such a canard.

I just think the term is severly offensive and the debate can be framed without resorting to your midless drivel of employing racial epithets or vulgarities.

My history degree is from UCLA and I can PM you a copy, if you'd like.

As for your ridiculous assumption that I "...lie[d] bare-facedly to [you] in a vain effort to make a point, there is no point in trying to debate reasonably with [me]..." I can unabashedly say I never LIED to you. I was pointing out absurdity by being absurd, and you, especially, oh King Ace, continued to fall for it hook, line, and sinker because you were SO SURE that you had me by the tail.

Unfortunately for you, as usual, I outsmarted and outwitted you.

[sam i am]

GMA']Skin color is the determinating factor.

Arabs are darker and thus the term, ostensibly, applies to them.

I don't understand it either.

Glad to see that there are reasonable people who think it's asinine to employ incendiary language for the sole purpose of illustrating their own lack of wordsmithery. (y)

[EN[i]GMA]

Glad to see that there are reasonable people who think it's asinine to employ incendiary language for the sole purpose of illustrating their own lack of wordsmithery. (y)

Yes, I generally choose to employ my incendiery language when I'm demonstrating my wordsmithery.

It's funner.

[QueenAdrock]

What, specifically, do you "love" about being a Liberal? Can you frame your response without impugning anyone who is not a Liberal or without framing your ideology in non-anti-Republican or Conservative terms?

You mean you don't want me to have a response like your first one?

Well, here's the reasons why I'm a Democrat, which is not hand-in-hand with liberal, which most people SHOULD know but don't:

-First and foremost, I love being associated with a group that celebrates diversity and accepts homosexuals, blacks, Jews, anybody and everybody that makes this country great. I love being for homosexual marriage, because I think more love is what this world needs, and less hate. I agree with affirmative action, and the civil rights movements that have for the most part been associated with liberals.

-The right to choose. It's my fuckin' body, I can do what I want with it. That's not to say I'd get an abortion, but I would like to have the option open.

-Anti-war stances. I, like many other Democrats, were for this war before we found out it was based on false premises. However, since we have since found out it's total bullshit and there were no WMD's, I believe our priorities should rely on bringing people home safe since I see no palpable solution to the quagmire that's Iraq.

-I believe in higher taxes, because I realize that in order for society to work, we need to pay for things and not rely on people's own selfish interests to decide "where the money needs to go" because then we'd have shitty roads and big shiny SUV's to dodge the potholes, which is a little backwards to me. What we do need is a government that knows how to spend the taxes.

-Freedom of religion. I want to be able to live in this country and believe what I want to believe and not constantly have Christianity shoved down my throat by the right. Instead, I believe that all religions have good aspects and all should be respected, much like the other Democrats do.

-Environment. This is a big one. We need to realize that the only way for us to survive as a civilization, WE NEED TO PROTECT OUR ENVIRONMENT. People don't seem to realize that EVERYTHING THEY DO relies on the environment, and we need stronger laws protecting it. Primarily, Democrats have been extremely pro-environment, and I absolutely agree. All I ask for is clean drinking water, fresh air, and plants to create oxygen and food.

-Gun control laws. I believe that guns should be monitored more closely. This is not to say I believe everyone should be free of guns (in a perfect society we would be, since majority of the household guns are used against family members, but that's unrealistic in American society), I just think that they should have to go through training and sensitivity courses, and guns should be required to have bullet fingerprinting. I find it ridiculous to hear that the NRA is trying to pass laws to have "fingerprintless" gun handles. What's the purpose other than to kill someone and not be caught?

Can't think of what else. In summary, religious tolerance, homosexual and race tolerance, higher gun control, higher taxes, better laws for the environment, the right to choose, no war.

[K-nowledge]

All anti-conservatives on this board can only do is HATE any different view of thier's, wich is very hypocritical of the exact purpose of which they claim to stand. How is that tolerance?

[ASsman]

All anti-conservatives on this board can only do is HATE any different view of thier's, wich is very hypocritical of the exact purpose of which they claim to stand. How is that tolerance?
That was stupid. Try again sandnigger.


No one is telling you to shutup, we are having a debate... get it?

[zorra_chiflada]

All anti-conservatives on this board can only do is HATE any different view of thier's, wich is very hypocritical of the exact purpose of which they claim to stand. How is that tolerance?

is that all you're got? i mean, seriously.

"you say you're tolerant, but...but.. you don't tolerate my god-fearin', minority-hatin', dubya-lovin' opinions, you commies!"

[yeahwho]

Have never seen it in action. Most of the people I know who say they're conservative voted twice for our current President. So needless to say, most of the people I know who label themselves conservative are easily misled. And full of bad advice.

[sam i am]

Well, here's the reasons why I'm a Democrat, which is not hand-in-hand with liberal, which most people SHOULD know but don't:

-First and foremost, I love being associated with a group that celebrates diversity and accepts homosexuals, blacks, Jews, anybody and everybody that makes this country great. I love being for homosexual marriage, because I think more love is what this world needs, and less hate. I agree with affirmative action, and the civil rights movements that have for the most part been associated with liberals.

Actually, affirmative action and civil rights movement were "federalized" by Republicans, over the objections of Democratic leaders such as Robert Byrd (D-W Va.). Republicans also fought the Civil War to free the slaves (after the Emancipation Proclomation). Lincoln was a Republican.

Republicans celebrate diversity by implementing it : Condi Rice is black and the first female black Secretary of State ever in US history. Democrats COULD have done this earlier, especially under Clinton, but didn't. Wonder why?

The homosexual marriage thing, I agree, will not fly in the Republican Party. If that's your issue, you're where you belong.

-The right to choose. It's my fuckin' body, I can do what I want with it. That's not to say I'd get an abortion, but I would like to have the option open.

Roe v. Wade is law. Republicans operate under the law as well. If the law changes, well, then, we have a whole 'nother story. Then, Democrats would have to operate under the law as well. The "right to choose" has never been voted on by our elected representatives, who are the ones who LEGALLY should make decisions like this.

-Anti-war stances. I, like many other Democrats, were for this war before we found out it was based on false premises. However, since we have since found out it's total bullshit and there were no WMD's, I believe our priorities should rely on bringing people home safe since I see no palpable solution to the quagmire that's Iraq.

The Democratic Party (and Presidents) have taken the USA into FAR more wars than the Republicans ever have : Wilson into WWI, Roosevelt into WWII, Truman into Korea, Kennedy/LBJ into Vietnam, etc. Republicans have led us into two wars in recent memory that deserve mentioning : the first Gulf War, which nearly the entire world supported and endorsed and was over swiftky and victoriously (and supported almost universally by Democrats, BTW); the current Iraq War, which is the first Republican-led war in the last 140 years to be as difficult as it is. Still, all in all, it's been far less bloddy than the Vietnam conflict, by FAR.

Currently, you could make a good argument that the Republicans are more hawkish than the Demos, unless you alienate a decent number of Demos who continue to support the war's prosecution : i.e, Lieberman, Hillary Clinton, etc., et al. As a matter of fact, wasn't there a recent vote in the House for immediate withdrawal that went down like 400+ to 3? How many Republicans are there in the House, again?

-I believe in higher taxes, because I realize that in order for society to work, we need to pay for things and not rely on people's own selfish interests to decide "where the money needs to go" because then we'd have shitty roads and big shiny SUV's to dodge the potholes, which is a little backwards to me. What we do need is a government that knows how to spend the taxes.

And the Sun shone forth on the TRUE reason many people are Democrats : higher taxes and more government intervention in the daily lives of it's citizens. "Give the money to the bureaucrats! THEY know how to spend it MUCH better than you, poor American taxpayer sap, do. Why, you MIGHT spend it as YOU see fit, rather than how we in power see fit."

Hope that continues to be the mantra for the forseeable future, because it sure got Democrats far under Mondale, etc. BTW, didn't Kennedy LOWER taxes because it was better for America? Didn't Clinton END Welfare, because it was better for America? Weren't they both Demos?

-Freedom of religion. I want to be able to live in this country and believe what I want to believe and not constantly have Christianity shoved down my throat by the right. Instead, I believe that all religions have good aspects and all should be respected, much like the other Democrats do.

As a Christian, I believe that freedom of religion is one the foundational stones that the US is predicated upon. ANY faith or non-faith should be allowed to freely practice as they see fit, as long as it doesn't break any law.

More Republicans than you know feel exactly the same way.

-Environment. This is a big one. We need to realize that the only way for us to survive as a civilization, WE NEED TO PROTECT OUR ENVIRONMENT. People don't seem to realize that EVERYTHING THEY DO relies on the environment, and we need stronger laws protecting it. Primarily, Democrats have been extremely pro-environment, and I absolutely agree. All I ask for is clean drinking water, fresh air, and plants to create oxygen and food.

This one cracks me up. Sure....Republicans want dirty drinking water, dirty air, and no plants. Let's just kill off the Earth and lose any ability to live.

We HAVE protected, and continue to protect our environment. The environment, unfortunately, is not just made up of what happens in the USA. Countries around the world put pollutants into the air and water that impact the global ecology. ONE VOLCANO spews more crap into the air than all human activity, COMBINED, has since the dawn of time. Krakatoa, Mount St. Helens, etc., et al., have all erupted over the past 150 years or so and have diminished the environment FAR more than anything we puny humans can do. The Sun, with one solar flare, can wipe out the Earth in a matter of minutes, something we humans could never accomplish, no matter how hard we tried.

Republicans agree with protecting the environment, bu want to measure that protection against the need for continued human development. What's more important : humanity or the other creatures of the Earth?

-Gun control laws. I believe that guns should be monitored more closely. This is not to say I believe everyone should be free of guns (in a perfect society we would be, since majority of the household guns are used against family members, but that's unrealistic in American society), I just think that they should have to go through training and sensitivity courses, and guns should be required to have bullet fingerprinting. I find it ridiculous to hear that the NRA is trying to pass laws to have "fingerprintless" gun handles. What's the purpose other than to kill someone and not be caught?

Gun control laws are up and enacted in every single state in the Union, PLUS federal laws that disallow immediate sales and federal laws that take away the right to purchase such things as machine guns.

Most conservatives, I agree, would rather see LESS gun laws. If everyone (or nearly everyone) were armed, what idiot would point a gun, KNOWING that the vast majority around them had a gun as well, and was willing to use it to defend themselves and others? Talk about deterrent value!

Can't think of what else. In summary, religious tolerance, homosexual and race tolerance, higher gun control, higher taxes, better laws for the environment, the right to choose, no war.

Queen - I'm sure you already know this, but I really respect your ideas and opinions. You and I and D_Raay seem to all be on the same wavelength, I hope, as fellow Americans who would like to see our country be better in many respects. How we get there is the whole debate, I suppose, but I'd not rather debate it with anybody else. Thank you for being a part of the debate and (hopefully) the soultions we all envision as the best way for America to move forward.

[STANKY808]

[QUOTE=sam i am]

Roe v. Wade is law. Republicans operate under the law as well. If the law changes, well, then, we have a whole 'nother story. Then, Democrats would have to operate under the law as well. The "right to choose" has never been voted on by our elected representatives, who are the ones who LEGALLY should make decisions like this.

[QUOTE]

Sorry, explain again how deciding what an individual does with her own body for them is a conservative or Republican ideal? What about personal liberty? Isn't that the mantra?
Seems to me the desire to reverse Roe v Wade grows from the christian wing of the party and isn't really a conservative value. Just one that's useful to get votes IMO.

[sam i am]

Sorry, explain again how deciding what an individual does with her own body for them is a conservative or Republican ideal? What about personal liberty? Isn't that the mantra?
Seems to me the desire to reverse Roe v Wade grows from the christian wing of the party and isn't really a conservative value. Just one that's useful to get votes IMO.

I was just stating the fact that Roe v. Wade is the law and Republicans and Conservatives, in America, follow the law, whether we like it or not.

IF Roe v. Wade is overturned as bad law, I hope there is a great national debate over the efficacy and outcomes of abortion rights and that we have a proper vote in the House and Senate to make a law that has been fully vetted and decided upon by the American PEOPLE, not by the Supremes.

[QueenAdrock]

I'm not even going to get into a discussion about all that, Sam. You asked me my opinions, I gave them to you. Although I do appreciate your feeble attempt for a set-up to draw me into some sort of debate, I'm not up for it. Not to say that every single one of your points can't be debated, because they can. I've got more important crap to do like study for my final exams. However, before I go, I will point out one of your more outrageous points, that I'll refuse to go unmentioned: "We HAVE protected, and continue to protect our environment."

Like I said, I don't have time to explain, so I'll give it to you simply:

No you haven't. If you cared about the environment, you wouldn't be using "treehugger" as an insult. If you cared, you wouldn't be allowing dumping in our major rivers, and bans on air pollution to be lifted, which Bush has done. Bush doesn't give one shit about this environment, and if you believe it to be so, do your research.

As for the war statement, go re-read my stance and rethink what you said about WWII. And for taxes, you're right. People in this country are too fucking stupid and selfish to "decide" where that extra 2% of their paycheck goes, so it'll probably go to an SUV or tittybar or something equally as useless. They can deal without it, to let society benefit, or is the extra $10 a paycheck just sooo awful?

[STANKY808]

That debate should happen right after the one about the efficacy and outcomes for hip replacement surgery. I mean why the state should be involved with medical decisions is beyond me. Then again I ain't no conservative.

[sam i am]

No you haven't. If you cared about the environment, you wouldn't be using "treehugger" as an insult. If you cared, you wouldn't be allowing dumping in our major rivers, and bans on air pollution to be lifted, which Bush has done. Bush doesn't give one shit about this environment, and if you believe it to be so, do your research.

OK. We don't have to debate it. I was just enjoying the back and forth.

For clarification : I have never used the term "treehugger" in my life. I don't believe in "allowing" dumping in our major rivers. The record is pretty clear on the fact that the rivers and lakes and air in the USA are FAR cleaner today then they were in the 1970's. Check your facts.

Republicans are not universally behind Bush on every single issue, but we think he's far better than the alternative, which would have been Gore and/or Kerry...ugh (n)