Why I am not a conservative by Moonbeam

[CPA]

Originally posted by: DaveSohmer
I think you guys are off-base attacking Moonie about the military. I get the impression that he would rather we spent some of the money in other places and that war/violence are never justifiied but I've never felt any personal animosity from him based on my being in the service.

I think the question was asked about what makes you conservative or liberal. I'll try--

I am for a strong defense department
I am against affirmative action or any "quota" system.
I am against school vouchers.
I am against spending on programs like the NEA
I am against legalizing drugs except for maybe pot (you people almost have me convinced)
I am against a flag burning amendment.
I think the pledge should go back to it's original form.
I am for teaching all theories of evolution/creationism in schools without stupid disclaimer stickers.
I am pro choice in the first trimester
I despise Hillary Clinton and Jerry Falwell with equal ferocity.
I am pro death penalty.

I am with you there Dave, except for the abortion part. If the body doesn't want the baby it will abort it itself, otherwise leave it alone.

 

[Red Dawn]

Ask Barbara McKinney, or better yet her flaming liberal father, if they love everybody. Make sure you ask them about Jews, J-E-W-S.

And she was ousted by her liberal constituency because of her attitude towards Israel (along with the backing of the Pro Israeli Lobby) In fact it seems that the Liberals are more Pro Israel than the Conservatives (both are extremely pro Israel) Of course there are the fringe idiots on both sides like Jessie Jackson for the Libs and Pat Buchanan for the Cons.

 

[CPA]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Ask Barbara McKinney, or better yet her flaming liberal father, if they love everybody. Make sure you ask them about Jews, J-E-W-S.

And she was ousted by her liberal constituency because of her attitude towards Israel (along with the backing of the Pro Israeli Lobby) In fact it seems that the Liberals are more Pro Israel than the Conservatives (both are extremely pro Israel) Of course there are the fringe idiots on both sides like Jessie Jackson for the Libs and Pat Buchanan for the Cons.

I understand that. My point was to call out Moonbeam's assertion that liberals love everyone. They, indeed, do not.

Moonbeam, also you continue to refer to GWB as "shrub". Where's the love?

 

[Red Dawn]

Moonbeam, also you continue to refer to GWB as "shrub". Where's the love?

Hehehe.. so if you are conservative it's ok to be hipocritical but if you are a Liberal it isn't? Just kidding..hey I said I was kidding damn it. Conservatives have no humor. Wait, they did elect "Shrub" (whom I support)

 

[thebestMAX]

I think I have a pretty good sense of humor though there is a thread of sarcasm mixed in.

 

[CPA]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Wait, they did elect "Shrub" (whom I support)

<= falls of chair in disbelief

 

[schmedy]

Wow Moonbeam looking at your dissection of my last post, you seem to pick and choose what you want to answer. The three that really astound me are that the military should get a raise, what a dollar, one thousand what? Do you think that you should earn more then them? Do you know that they are below the poverty line with the wages they get, so should they get assistance too? What do you think is a fare wage for them? The one that blows my mind even more is your answer about John Walker Lindh

Something should be done.

wow talk about going out on a limb with that response, what do you feel about what he did? Was it his choice and he can do what he wants? Should he get a fine (that us taxpayers pay of course) or serve some jail time, or be killed? How should the military be used.....

carefully

so lets have you expand on that or is it classified?

 

[JellyBaby]

The are good things about liberalism but liberalism requires more government authority than I feel is necessary or healthy. Given how corrupt and unstatesman-like politicians are becoming, I shudder to think of empowering government even more.

Here are my general definitions of both:

liberalism - emphasis on government mandated civil liberties, restriction of capitalism and free trade, moderate government supervision, moderate to high levels of taxation.
conservatism - emphasis on government mandated morality, preservation of tradition, promotion of capitalism and free trade, reduced government and moderate taxation.

Convervatism has good points, too but they need to shed the mandated morality BS and focus on preserving what's best in our country.

The big problem is that most people assume the republican party promotes the converative platform and the democrat party promotes the liberal platform. In reality they both overlap a lot and stray from their respective platforms, especially during elections. And like the old saying goes, "if you stand for nothing, you'll fall for anything".

 

[Moonbeam]

schmedy:

I see my last answers provided you insufficient data to store me in a box on the written off shelf. But I love tests that are designed for me to fail. So here we go. Maybe this time.

Wow Moonbeam looking at your dissection of my last post, you seem to pick and choose what you want to answer. (Like I said I would)The three that really astound me are that the military should get a raise, what a dollar, one thousand what? (Not having here at my fingertips the entire national budget with a full accounting of all expenses and debits, anticipated revenue and obligatory expenditures, and having had to surrender my mentat cap before debarking from the mothership, I cannot set you an exact amount. A dollar seems rather crummy and not in the spirit of supporting a pay increase though, so more than a dollar surely. But I guess after I determine the exact amount the military itself should get, weighing all the competing voices screaming for their piece of the pie, I will have to set it low enough, I guess, so we can still by some bullets. Of course if you just want the money and no weapons to fight with, you might be able to play off my liberal sensibilities.) Do you think that you should earn more then them? (Boy is this a tough one. Are you sure you don't want to know if I stopped beating my wife? I'm going to plea irrelevancy and classified sorry )Do you know that they are below the poverty line with the wages they get, so should they get assistance too? (I believe that is family size dependent, I forget, family of 4? Assistance, no the raise hopefully will do it. We don't want them on assistance though because the Conservatives will turn on them like they were welfare Moms.)What do you think is a fare wage for them? (see above) The one that blows my mind even more is your answer about John Walker Lindh
Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Something should be done.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

wow talk about going out on a limb with that response, what do you feel about what he did? Was it his choice and he can do what he wants? Should he get a fine (that us taxpayers pay of course) or serve some jail time, or be killed? How should the military be used.....
Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
carefully
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

so lets have you expand on that or is it classified?

--------
---------

It's not classified, it's just not germane. I can't make myself waste effort on that theme, sorry. I would much rather focus on the psychological factors found in so many Conservatives that require them to devote masses of their life energy extracting vengeance in the form of assured punishment for perceived transgressions. The Republicans are even accusing each other of being traitors, or so I hear.

Can't you just taste your hate for Walker, wouldn't you just love to get his neck in your hands, your fist in his face. Sink into it. Feel it. What is that rage. Where did it come from. You want the red pill or the blue pill.

CPA:

A statistical anomaly does not a case make. Huh? McKinney SmaKinney Liberals like Christians preach love. The practice is full of obvious signs of practice not perfection.

Shrub is a term of endearment.

And you needn't fall off your chair every time Red takes liberties with the language. Bush wasn't elected to anything except maybe governor. Gore was elected; Bush was selected. And by the way, I must have typed Bush about a thousand bejillion times before I decided I needed some relief from the boredom and called him a largish weed.

And no, I haven't forgotten that you are completely ill informed about the BS articles you read claiming Bush won. Gore won bro but you don't want to know! And the facts were published but nicely and cleverly buried so you didn't have to feel like the Pres. is a thief.

Jelly:

Nice post. The essence of the matter, I think, goes to the heart of the question as to the nature of man. Is man basically good or basically evil. My view of Liberalism implies that man is basically good but can be made to think he is evil. Once that feeling sets in and a pretense that it isn't true rather than real knowledge that it isn?t true begins to command the self, all hell breaks loose. Evil, a form of egotism, pits everybody against everybody else. It pits the people against each other, against the government (themselves) and the government against the people, business against business, against the people and so on and so forth. Depending on who has the upper hand at any one time you have to make adjustments to try to restore balance, which reminds me we still need somebody to strike Shomer.

 

[JoeBaD]

moonbeam,

don't you have anything else to do?

 

[linuxboy]

So... Moonie... why aren't you a conservative again?


Cheers !

 

[schmedy]

Can't you just taste your hate for Walker, wouldn't you just love to get his neck in your hands, your fist in his face. Sink into it. Feel it. What is that rage. Where did it come from.

Marine Corps... I was taught to defend our nation and constituion.

Well actually I don't feel any hate at all towards him, more of disgust with his parents letting him be a free spirit and have no guidance. You think they might try to give him a slight clue of what is right and wrong, but then they would be imposing their views on him and all and that wouldn't be right now would it. But then again they are the same type of people suing cigarette companies since people are too dumb to figure smoking is bad, put stickers on hair dryers so you don't use them in a shower, and want everyone to wear a helmet when you aren't in bed because you may just bump you head. But hey that?s ok too since they want everyone to have free health coverage, no need to work and get a job, let me pay your premium. It's funny how you guess about how I am on issues I haven't brought up Moonbeam, I actually am more middle of the road then either side, just I hate when my rights are taken away to "protect" the idiots or scammers out there who can't figure out coffee is hot, electricity and water don't mix, or maybe just maybe if you went after the criminal not the gun crime would go down.

 

[sandorski]

schmedy: Be nice to Moon, there are guys like me who consider Defense as: Keeping enemy forces off one's soil and off one's soil only! I'd have few qualms with balancing the budget and providing tax cuts/program spending through military cut backs.

 

[FrancesBeansRevenge]

Originally posted by: sandorski
schmedy: Be nice to Moon, there are guys like me who consider Defense as: Keeping enemy forces off one's soil and off one's soil only! I'd have few qualms with balancing the budget and providing tax cuts/program spending through military cut backs.

Watch hockey? Ever see how on some shots, like a breakaway, the goalie must make an agressive move to 'cut down the angle' of the shot?

By this definition of defense you would have no problems with the Soviet Union parking a bunch of nuclear warheads on Cuba in the early 60s?
Afterall who cares if they have a nuclear arsenal 80miles from Florida if it isn't on 'our soil' right?

Often the best defense if an effective and smart offense.

edit: just checked your profile... of course you watch hockey. hehe
btw, what 'cut backs' would you propose making to the already sparse Canadian military?

 

[Moonbeam]

schmedy, did you see that. You may have been in the Marine Core, but it's sandorski that's willing to take a bullet for me. I find it highly counterproductive to argue with people's claims about their won mental state, but to be perfectly frank, I don't buy your answer about Walker. I think if you were shooting straight, you'd admit the guy makes you sick. But if not, I'd be overjoyed at being wrong.

Hi linuxboy, I see you've caught me indulging my weakness for political threads. Moonie hides his head in shame.

The reason I'm not a conservative is because I'll be one in say 50 years. If I were to reappear here on Anandtech in say 50 years via some past life regression, people would be calling me a retrograde hoary conservative reactionary wacko flag waving loony. I'm just getting a jump on the criticism. At least that's my claim here.

JoeBad: Don't I have anything else to do. Not the question of focus at the moment. You got me wondering instead if maybe I don't have anyONE else to do.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Hmmm. Sowing the seeds of OT discord M?
Keep up the good work!


I think that for me, if I have to choose between Conservative or Liberal, I'll choose the third option.

The short answer to my approach would be to conserve the values I think worth keeping, and liberally share my good fortune with others.

 

[FrancesBeansRevenge]

IMHO,

in order to be 'liberal' you must be optimistic to a fault.

in order to be a 'conservative' you must be pessimistic to a fault.

Hopefully most of us fall somewhere in between.

 

[Moonbeam]

Hi Hay, hehe, my third way was another reason I posted. So many things seemed to cry out for an airing including your own questioning.

FBR, I think you're right and for the reasons of viewpoint on fundamental human nature


Hi Hay, hehe, my third way was another reason I posted. So many things seemed to cry out for an airing including your own questioning.

FBR, I think you're right and for the reasons of viewpoint on fundamental human hature (Rest of post lost, dang)

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: FrancesBeansRevenge

Originally posted by: sandorski
schmedy: Be nice to Moon, there are guys like me who consider Defense as: Keeping enemy forces off one's soil and off one's soil only! I'd have few qualms with balancing the budget and providing tax cuts/program spending through military cut backs.

Watch hockey? Ever see how on some shots, like a breakaway, the goalie must make an agressive move to 'cut down the angle' of the shot?

By this definition of defense you would have no problems with the Soviet Union parking a bunch of nuclear warheads on Cuba in the early 60s?
Afterall who cares if they have a nuclear arsenal 80miles from Florida if it isn't on 'our soil' right?

Often the best defense if an effective and smart offense.

edit: just checked your profile... of course you watch hockey. hehe
btw, what 'cut backs' would you propose making to the already sparse Canadian military?

Of course I watch hockey.

Yes, goalies do cut down the angle, but they do it within their zone.

Cuba and missiles: It wasn't, in the longterm scheme of things, much of an issue. Not long afterward the Soviets were capable of parking nukes within sight of all their coastal targets anyway. Not having Cuba as a base may have actually accelerated that much more lethal and effective capability.

Using an offense as a defense in a wartime situation is a good idea, but using an offense as defense during peacetime is risky and usually ends up being simple agression.

The Canadian Military has already been cut back further than what could be called a defensible level already.

 

[Daedalus]

Well you're in fine form Moonbeam and it's good to know.

 

[Sketcher]

Was going to give my 2 cents, then read some and realized somebody already spent $10.00.

There's some good stuff here. The only thing I'd add is that I think even the Libs here might not realize that there's a difference between upper and lowercase "L". Otherwise, it's pretty much as stated below:

Originally posted by: syzygy
the original post should have been bracketed as a rant.

Look at Galilelo. He was a liberal and the Conservative church finally got around to his point of view how long later?

baaaah. galileo was not a liberal; he was a staunch conservative, loyal church supporter, devoted worshipper, sycophant to the
pope like all the other catholic subordinates. the mere fact his scientific discoveries contradicted church dogma does not ispo facto
mean he was a political liberal.

All conservatism is yesterday's liberalism.

if not for conservative restraint, we could offer the example of nihilists, anarchists, and others who by whim, fashion or whatever
their caprice would take society for a joy ride and see how long she would last before imploding. conservatism is a critical check
against the innate slip into excess that doctrinaire theories fall victim to. most revolutionaries think in the immediate present,
wanting to correct their perceived evils without any regard that their remedies may prove more disastrous than the disease.
there are countless examples where liberalism's do-gooder revelry led to disastrous social change. nihilism, anarchy circles,
and other vile isms were very popular in the 19th century and look at their results.

Originally posted by: syzygy

syzygy, there are as many threats of those kinds on the right as on the left. And I knew galilelo wasn't a political liberal. It was an example with if only in steriotype, pictures what I was saying

i'm not conducting a bean counter here, counting threats. the nature of these threats (and excesses) are in fact part of the innate differences between the two.

has there ever been a 'liberal revolution' that did not, in the end, exceed its own limits of change and not produce degeneracy ?
remember, these revoltuioanry forces had to overcome the same conservative elements you consider to be the essence of wrong.

yet, the french revolution replaced one despot with another. same in russia, vietnam, cambodia, china, and every eastern
european country. if the agitators in france, america (remember president mckinley was assassinated by an anarchist in
1902), great britain, greece, and few other spots had not been defeated, there would have been more failures at greater
cost to contend with today.

even liberal reform programs that fight the good fight on social issues have exceeded their original noble goals and slid into
horrible excesses that have created problems worse than the original evil.

one major example: roosevelt's new deal. it gave birth to the welfare industry whose righteousness we are still struggling to overcome.

Originally posted by: tm37
Well here we go playing the labling game once again.

As the political cycle spins round and round typically the uninformed exit out of the woodwork to challenge the ideals of logic and common sense. Again we shall focus mearly on the negitives that may or may not be nailed to a particular party and we shall also be sure to ridicule those who shall disagree with what we believe to be RIGHT. Because if i'm right and you disagree then that makes you..... well I shouldn't need to spell it out. I DONOT vote down the party line I rarely listen to the LEADERS of a party when voting for a person I look at their track record, what they tell me they intend to do and what they claim to believe.

I KNOW what I want in my life I and I also know the best way to get it is not to wait for it to be handed to me. Want to know the biggest failure of social politics look no further than the new deal which insured that we would stay recessed UNtil a war took us out.

and sinse we have taking to proclaiming core beliefs I shall partake. Remeber If we don't agree I can look at your side however I will also point out why I beleive what I do.

I am for freedom and responsibity
People should give give the right to choose their own destiny with out the hand of government ting them down or steering them away. However with this freedom comes responsibility. You can do as you want BUT you and you alone shall suffer the consicences of thoose actions. Do as you wish but don't expect or DEMAND that everyone ACCEPT your choices as right. You have a right to live with a same sex partner, and I have the right to not like it. You have the right to produce smut and I have the right to not purchase it.

I am for free SPEECH
True free speech where I can say what I want about what I believe, not some scewed Bill Mahar free speech where when no one no longer want to fund his speech then he feel his right has been taken away. Bill you can still talk but corperate americia isn't paying for the microphone. My free speech is just as free as your free speech.

I am against a flag burning ammendment
I am for however the full prosicution of thoose who ignite ANYTHING in a public place without a fire permit. If I can't launch my fireworks then you can't light ANY PIECE of cloth without having the fire marshall give the go ahead. And if you meet the required criteria for open flame the fire marshall WILL give you a Permit regardless of your political motives.

I beleive that a strong national defence is the key to a strong country
Make love sounds nice but if the other guy has a gun the lovers die pretty quick. I am for closing of the borders to stop the flow of illegal immigration and I am for giving our men and women in the armed forces the means to raise a family. I beleive that sometime the best defence is offense and that knowing the rational of your enemies is worth about as much as know the make and model of the bullet lodged in your chest. I believe that we need a STRONG intelligence gather network around the world and any country that supports the killing of ANY AMERICAN just because they are american should feel the full rath of our military.

I believe people should be held accountible for their choices
There are so many people that want me to feel their pain it makes me sick. I have my own pain and I don't expect you to take it. I try to minimize thoose pain giving action to insure the lease possible amount of pain for me and I don't need your pain lumped into it. YOU and YOU alone should forced to deal with your actions. If someone else WANTS to help they can but forcing americans to pay for the mistakes and misjudgements of the few is just UNamerican.

I believe the federal government powers should be few and well defined
Just as our fore fathers did. How many of you who hide behind the constitution have actually read the entire document? I always hear liberals screaming about some seperation of church and state that doesn't exist yet they fail to read

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

What this says is that If the constitution doesn't give the federal government the power the government doesn't have that power.

I believe that a woman has the right to choose and pay for that choice
While I may be morally opposed to obortion I am against the governement making that choice for me( I have made it already) or anyone one else. The government should be NEUTRAL on this issue and should not give one dollar of funding to support this action.

I am against teaching of evolution or creation in ANY REQUIRED CLASS IN A PUBLIC SCHOOL
The state is not the one who should be teaching the many theories of how we arrive hear walking on two feet UNLESS the parents consent to that teaching. SO often a teacher will try to pass a set of values on to thoose that they are teaching and those values should NEVER go against what the parent has been teaching at home in the matters of faith. For some faith is all they have and if they want to attempt to instill that samee faith the school shouldn't tell johnny that there is or isn't heaven.

I am for school vouchers and for creating accountability within our public education system
Public schools are failing for too many reasons to go into here (I could spend the next week). But I am for letting parents take some of the money that would have been earmarked for a public school and putting it towards the education that the feel best suits their child regardless of that schools religous or political leanings. At the same time I think that public schools should be given the ability to remove thoose teacher who can't teach or don't know the subjects they are supposed to be teaching. Teaching our children is a hard job and schools need to make learning harder as well. No one has ever benifited in the long term from lazyness and ignorance however the number of people who have failed and looked at that failure and learned is huge.

I believe that the people who work and spend are the backbone of this economy not the government
People are the econmy and I believe in a free market to exchange goods and services and the goverments role is only to ensure that transactions are made in good faith. If I want to sell a product and you want to buy it the governemnt only role should be that the product does what I say it does and that you use real money.

I believe that no two people are the same and some people have better talents than others.
I would bet that there is not one person on this board that was born with the gifts that A-Rod has when it comes to playing baseball. People are born with different 'gifts' and put through entirely different enviorments. the fact is some people have a better knack for learning and are 'smarter' than the rest of us. We are all not the same we posess different tastes, values, and abilities. If you try to please everyone then you will never please anyone. What i enjoy is not of your concern as long as it doen't cause you harm if you are forced to be around me. If my actions donot effect your person or propety where you have zero control over it then you can tell me what to do but if you can easily avoid me that should be what you do If I offend you. We all have the rights and we should respect each other. Laws should be made at the will of the people and not by the will of judges. The government should serve the people and people should serve it in return.


This is alot longer than I intended it to be and you can draw your own conclusions on what my political leaning are and try to lump me into some group if you please BUT remember I am an individual ewith my own set of values developed over a lifetime of experence, just like you.

syzygy and tm37 - EXCELLENT POSTS!! I haven't read your other stuff, but I'm darned near 98% in agreement with your viewpoints in this thread thus far. Thank you for posting reasonable explaination and staying out of the club labelling bash fest. .

-Sketcher

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: tm37
Well here we go playing the labling game once again.

As the political cycle spins round and round typically the uninformed exit out of the woodwork to challenge the ideals of logic and common sense. Again we shall focus mearly on the negitives that may or may not be nailed to a particular party and we shall also be sure to ridicule those who shall disagree with what we believe to be RIGHT. Because if i'm right and you disagree then that makes you..... well I shouldn't need to spell it out. I DONOT vote down the party line I rarely listen to the LEADERS of a party when voting for a person I look at their track record, what they tell me they intend to do and what they claim to believe.

I KNOW what I want in my life I and I also know the best way to get it is not to wait for it to be handed to me. Want to know the biggest failure of social politics look no further than the new deal which insured that we would stay recessed UNtil a war took us out.

and sinse we have taking to proclaiming core beliefs I shall partake. Remeber If we don't agree I can look at your side however I will also point out why I beleive what I do.

I am for freedom and responsibity
People should give give the right to choose their own destiny with out the hand of government ting them down or steering them away. However with this freedom comes responsibility. You can do as you want BUT you and you alone shall suffer the consicences of thoose actions. Do as you wish but don't expect or DEMAND that everyone ACCEPT your choices as right. You have a right to live with a same sex partner, and I have the right to not like it. You have the right to produce smut and I have the right to not purchase it.

I am for free SPEECH
True free speech where I can say what I want about what I believe, not some scewed Bill Mahar free speech where when no one no longer want to fund his speech then he feel his right has been taken away. Bill you can still talk but corperate americia isn't paying for the microphone. My free speech is just as free as your free speech.

I am against a flag burning ammendment
I am for however the full prosicution of thoose who ignite ANYTHING in a public place without a fire permit. If I can't launch my fireworks then you can't light ANY PIECE of cloth without having the fire marshall give the go ahead. And if you meet the required criteria for open flame the fire marshall WILL give you a Permit regardless of your political motives.

I beleive that a strong national defence is the key to a strong country
Make love sounds nice but if the other guy has a gun the lovers die pretty quick. I am for closing of the borders to stop the flow of illegal immigration and I am for giving our men and women in the armed forces the means to raise a family. I beleive that sometime the best defence is offense and that knowing the rational of your enemies is worth about as much as know the make and model of the bullet lodged in your chest. I believe that we need a STRONG intelligence gather network around the world and any country that supports the killing of ANY AMERICAN just because they are american should feel the full rath of our military.

I believe people should be held accountible for their choices
There are so many people that want me to feel their pain it makes me sick. I have my own pain and I don't expect you to take it. I try to minimize thoose pain giving action to insure the lease possible amount of pain for me and I don't need your pain lumped into it. YOU and YOU alone should forced to deal with your actions. If someone else WANTS to help they can but forcing americans to pay for the mistakes and misjudgements of the few is just UNamerican.

I believe the federal government powers should be few and well defined
Just as our fore fathers did. How many of you who hide behind the constitution have actually read the entire document? I always hear liberals screaming about some seperation of church and state that doesn't exist yet they fail to read

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

What this says is that If the constitution doesn't give the federal government the power the government doesn't have that power.

I believe that a woman has the right to choose and pay for that choice
While I may be morally opposed to obortion I am against the governement making that choice for me( I have made it already) or anyone one else. The government should be NEUTRAL on this issue and should not give one dollar of funding to support this action.

I am against teaching of evolution or creation in ANY REQUIRED CLASS IN A PUBLIC SCHOOL
The state is not the one who should be teaching the many theories of how we arrive hear walking on two feet UNLESS the parents consent to that teaching. SO often a teacher will try to pass a set of values on to thoose that they are teaching and those values should NEVER go against what the parent has been teaching at home in the matters of faith. For some faith is all they have and if they want to attempt to instill that samee faith the school shouldn't tell johnny that there is or isn't heaven.

I am for school vouchers and for creating accountability within our public education system
Public schools are failing for too many reasons to go into here (I could spend the next week). But I am for letting parents take some of the money that would have been earmarked for a public school and putting it towards the education that the feel best suits their child regardless of that schools religous or political leanings. At the same time I think that public schools should be given the ability to remove thoose teacher who can't teach or don't know the subjects they are supposed to be teaching. Teaching our children is a hard job and schools need to make learning harder as well. No one has ever benifited in the long term from lazyness and ignorance however the number of people who have failed and looked at that failure and learned is huge.

I believe that the people who work and spend are the backbone of this economy not the government
People are the econmy and I believe in a free market to exchange goods and services and the goverments role is only to ensure that transactions are made in good faith. If I want to sell a product and you want to buy it the governemnt only role should be that the product does what I say it does and that you use real money.

I believe that no two people are the same and some people have better talents than others.
I would bet that there is not one person on this board that was born with the gifts that A-Rod has when it comes to playing baseball. People are born with different 'gifts' and put through entirely different enviorments. the fact is some people have a better knack for learning and are 'smarter' than the rest of us. We are all not the same we posess different tastes, values, and abilities. If you try to please everyone then you will never please anyone. What i enjoy is not of your concern as long as it doen't cause you harm if you are forced to be around me. If my actions donot effect your person or propety where you have zero control over it then you can tell me what to do but if you can easily avoid me that should be what you do If I offend you. We all have the rights and we should respect each other. Laws should be made at the will of the people and not by the will of judges. The government should serve the people and people should serve it in return.


This is alot longer than I intended it to be and you can draw your own conclusions on what my political leaning are and try to lump me into some group if you please BUT remember I am an individual ewith my own set of values developed over a lifetime of experence, just like you.

Hot damn, TM, that's a mighty fine post you got there. Who knew we had such similar ideals?

 

[heartsurgeon]

conservatives pay taxes

liberals consume goverment services

the beauty of the american system is the dynamic tension between the "haves" and the "have-nots"

by having this dynamic (messy) political system we hopefully keep a societal balance in place that minimizes civil unrest, and maximizes personal freedoms.

when both the conservatives and the liberals are "upset" the balance is probably just right.

 

[smp]

All conservatism is is yesterday's liberalism. The Constitution was written not by merely genius level Liberals but flaming left winged radicals. They were off the chart. Now you can pretend to believe in the Constitution and call yourself a Conservative. My my, how times change. So what's with Conservatives? What's with them is they are Chicken Liberals. They're scared to be Liberals until enough time passes and it gets popular enough so it doesn't take any courage to be one.
I couldn't agree with you more... except liberals suck too, the radicals are the smart ones.

 

[smp]

Originally posted by: syzygy
the original post should have been bracketed as a rant.

Look at Galilelo. He was a liberal and the Conservative church finally got around to his point of view how long later?

baaaah. galileo was not a liberal; he was a staunch conservative, loyal church supporter, devoted worshipper, sycophant to the pope like all the other catholic subordinates. the mere fact his scientific discoveries contradicted church dogma does not ispo facto mean he was a political liberal.

All conservatism is yesterday's liberalism.

if not for conservative restraint, we could offer the example of nihilists, anarchists, and others who by whim, fashion or whatever their caprice would take society for a joy ride and see how long she would last before imploding. conservatism is a critical check against the innate slip into excess that doctrinaire theories fall victim to. most revolutionaries think in the immediate present, wanting to correct their perceived evils without any regard that their remedies may prove more disastrous than the disease. there are countless examples where liberalism's do-gooder revelry led to disastrous social change. nihilism, anarchy circles, and other vile isms were very popular in the 19th century and look at their results.

You seem to think that all anarchists just want to smash windows and fvck sh!t up eh? Have you ever known any? .. and I'm not talking about those 16 year olds you see wearing balaklavas at anti-globalization protests either.