A lesson in politics....

[actinanass]

I'm going to make a couple of examples, and everyone draw their own conclusion.

Unemployment:

Liberal mindset: Since we are in a recession, I know everyone is dealing with hardship due to unemployment, lets give more welfare/unemployment checks until they get a job. Meanwhile, lets raise taxes to the working class so we can pay for it.

Conservative mindset: This is a small recession. However, I'm going to cut taxes to businesses so they will feel better to hire more staff, and grow their business. BTW, I'm going to cut spending on unemployment to urge people to want to get a job instead of using the system. My workers= more tax payers.

Foreign Policy:

Liberal mindset: This country must be the leader of all things peaceful. The U.N. is a great institution to solve world problems, and we must help establish peace in every region. The only reason we have such problems is because conservatives have fought unjust wars for profit. If we use war, we will only do it if it's the last ditch effort *via attacked*.

Conservative mindset: This country is the leader for world peace. However, if you FUCK with us, or our allies, we will wipe the floor with your ass. The UN is cool, however, we do not feel that we should be obligated to it. We will build our military for any threat. BTW, building our military means more jobs for the economy. We believe that our military is the best tool to keep peace in EVERY region. Without America, the world would be in chaos. It's best not to attack us if you know what's good for you.

Environmental issues:

Liberal mindset: Damn corporations do not care about our environment. We need to heavily regulate every move they do. In fact, we need more agencies to regulate every aspect of every American's life. The earth means more than one individual citizen. Everything one person can do can help this crisis.

Conservative mindset: We do need to find ways to consume less. Instead of regulating the corporations more, lets give them more tax incentives to develop better ways to produce. We do need some sort of regulation, but over regulation will stunt a growing economy. Let's give corporations a chance to do right, however, if they abuse this privilege.....

*This is the result of reading all the bs threads today*

 

[Lamarr]

Foreign Policy:

Conservative mindset: We believe that our military is the best tool to keep peace in EVERY region. Without America, the world would be in chaos. It's best not to attack us if you know what's good for you.

What happened to "a humble foreign policy", No "nation-building", No "policing of the world"?

The policy of pre-emptive strikes, Is that really conservative?

 

[actinanass]

What happened to "a humble foreign policy", No "nation-building", No "policing of the world"?

The policy of pre-emptive strikes, Is that really conservative?

The policy of not letting another nation become the third reich is. Not necessarily promoting pre-emptive strikes. However, never take any type of attack off the table. In most conservatives minds, the UN is an albatross around our country neck when it comes to dealing with a foreign problem. Many understand the use *the reason it was made*, however, many do not trust the parties within this organization. That's the big issue.

That is why many agreed to go into Iraq without the UN's blessings. History was on the right's side due to the "Oil for Food" scandal that happened a year later after the invasion.

 

[QueEx]

That is why many agreed to go into Iraq without the UN's blessings.

History was on the right's side due to the "Oil for Food" scandal that happened a year later after the invasion.

LOL. Funny you would use the coalition of One or the Willing as justification for
the UN being wrong on Iraq. In the end, didn't the UN actually win this one ???

I'm just saying; didn't the failure to produce the smoking gun "WMD" in Iraq show
that the U.N. exercised far better judgment than the Notiorious G. W. B. ???

This is not an attempt by you to re-write G.W.'s Iraq history, is it ??? LOL

QueEx

 

[Cruise]

The policy of not letting another nation become the third reich is.

So, you're saying every nation the conservatives don't like is the next 3rd Reich?

That sounds like an excuse to attack everyone, all the time, if they don't do what you want.

Are you saying conservatives do not respect national sovereignty?

 

[Megazell]

Revisionist nonsensical propaganda.


The End.

 

[thoughtone]

So, you're saying every nation the conservatives don't like is the next 3rd Reich?

That sounds like an excuse to attack everyone, all the time, if they don't do what you want.

Sounds absurd but actinanass actually believes this.

Are you saying conservatives do not respect national sovereignty?

They don't. Ever since the Gulf War, the bar has been lowered to defending democracy (which was a shame slogan) to now ensure critical resources.

 

[thoughtone]

LOL. Funny you would use the coalition of One or the Willing as justification for
the UN being wrong on Iraq. In the end, didn't the UN actually win this one ???

I'm just saying; didn't the failure to produce the smoking gun "WMD" in Iraq show
that the U.N. exercised far better judgment than the Notiorious G. W. B. ???

This is not an attempt by you to re-write G.W.'s Iraq history, is it ??? LOL

QueEx

This is not an attempt by you to re-write G.W.'s Iraq history, is it ??? LOL

Well GW's memoir is suppose to be released this fall...after the November election.

 

[actinanass]

LOL. Funny you would use the coalition of One or the Willing as justification for
the UN being wrong on Iraq. In the end, didn't the UN actually win this one ???

I'm just saying; didn't the failure to produce the smoking gun "WMD" in Iraq show
that the U.N. exercised far better judgment than the Notiorious G. W. B. ???

This is not an attempt by you to re-write G.W.'s Iraq history, is it ??? LOL

QueEx

First, and foremost, I'm not trying to "rewrite history". However, you totally took out the whole notion of the "Oil for Food" scandal. That, itself, is an attempt to rewrite history.

So, you're saying every nation the conservatives don't like is the next 3rd Reich?

That sounds like an excuse to attack everyone, all the time, if they don't do what you want.

Are you saying conservatives do not respect national sovereignty?

Don't be naive. I'm not saying my side just wanna go out, and fight every nation. However, if a nation threatens us, or our allies *with proper intelligence to prove such actions* we will offer a good solid ass kicking to that country. I swore I stated this before...

 

[QueEx]

First, and foremost, I'm not trying to "rewrite history". However, you totally took out the whole notion of the "Oil for Food" scandal. That, itself, is an attempt to rewrite history.

Oh yeah, I left out oil for food because it had NOTHING TO DO WITH whether WMD existed in Iraq and whether member nations in the U.N. expressed their doubt of the existence of same, before the invasion. Now, if I'm wrong about that, I'll gladly say I was wrong. But, thats my recollection, without goggling.

QueEx

 

[actinanass]

Oh yeah, I left out oil for food because it had NOTHING TO DO WITH whether WMD existed in Iraq and whether member nations in the U.N. expressed their doubt of the existence of same, before the invasion.

QueEx

Honestly, this is all past tense now. The point of this thread was to point out the difference between liberals, and conservatives. I'm taking it that all you disagree with conservatives is their foreign policy efforts. If that's the case, then fine. You have your opinion, I'll keep mine. When issues come up, we debate. On this issue, I'm on the "right" of you que.

I could go on....but I have to hit the gym... I'll be on later on tonight...

 

[QueEx]

Honestly, this is all past tense now. The point of this thread was to point out the difference between liberals, and conservatives. I'm taking it that all you disagree with conservatives is their foreign policy efforts. If that's the case, then fine. You have your opinion, I'll keep mine. When issues come up, we debate. On this issue, I'm on the "right" of you que.

I could go on....but I have to hit the gym... I'll be on later on tonight...

No. I disagree with your entire analysis of conservatives and liberals. LOL

I don't think you really know the difference. I think you are attracted to labels, names & mascots -- like they are the logo etc., of your favorite team. Hence, when you purport to discuss them, its like you're a cheerleader, chanting go my team go ! ! !

I've been telling you for years now, labels are useless. I am probably as conservative on many issues as you will ever be. I support candidates that support my views, whether they be republican, democratic or independent. But one thing you will NOT see me do is wave the banners, flags and wear the pendants and colors of ANY of them. Frankly, I think this party shit is extremely misleading and is used, in many, many cases to capture the hearts, minds and support of party-loyalist; those who are unwilling or unable to think for themselves; and <FONT SIZE="3">Cheerleaders.</FONT SIZE>

QueEx

 

[actinanass]

No. I disagree with your entire analysis of conservatives and liberals. LOL

I don't think you really know the difference. I think you are attracted to labels, names & mascots -- like they are the logo etc., of your favorite team. Hence, when you purport to discuss them, its like you're a cheerleader, chanting go my team go ! ! !

I've been telling you for years now, labels are useless. I am probably as conservative on many issues as you will ever be. I support candidates that support my views, whether they be republican, democratic or independent. But one thing you will NOT see me do is wave the banners, flags and wear the pendants and colors of ANY of them. Frankly, I think this party shit is extremely misleading and is used, in many, many cases to capture the hearts, minds and support of party-loyalist; those who are unwilling or unable to think for themselves; and <FONT SIZE="3">Cheerleaders.</FONT SIZE>

QueEx

Ok I guess I have to ask the question, what are some conservative views YOU have?

I think the mistake you are making is that you believe I see the right in a "can't do anything wrong" way. The whole "right vs. left" debate is based of the overall belief each side holds. Of course no one for both sides will be 100% conservative, or 100% liberal. However, labels are needed to understand the overall philosophy of a party. Keyword OVERALL!

 

[QueEx]

. . . labels are needed to understand the overall philosophy of a party. Keyword OVERALL!

No. They are crutches. They just help you walk through the bullshit. You tell me how in the fuck can the mere word "conservative" or "liberal" help one to "understand" the nuances of party politics ???

You, my friend, use those terms almost exclusively to mean republican and democrat. Yet, there are republicans and democrats of liberal and conservative stripes. You see, this alone tends to refute your simplistic idea that "labels are needed to understand the overall philosophy of a party." Unless you analyze politicians and their philosophies (and people too, for that matter) individually, you're fooling yourself when you try to group them into your simplistic categories.

QueEx

 

[QueEx]

Ok I guess I have to ask the question, what are some conservative views YOU have?

Why don't YOU TELL ME why you put me into whichever category that you have.

The way I see it, I don't have to prove I that am anything, since I haven't labeled myself. YOU, on the other hand, have labeled me so I think the burden is on you to justify your label.

Sabe ?

QueEx

 

[actinanass]

Why don't YOU TELL ME why you put me into whichever category that you have.

The way I see it, I don't have to prove I that am anything, since I haven't labeled myself. YOU, on the other hand, have labeled me so I think the burden is on you to justify your label.

Sabe ?

QueEx

I'm going by what you have said about certain issues. I have nothing else to go by.

Oh yea, you the one said "I've been telling you for years now, labels are useless. I am probably as conservative on many issues as you will ever be." Thus, why I ask the question. What conservative views do you hold. Now you wanna say "I DON'T NEED TO PROVE ANYTHING"? Really Que?

We're not going to be the same. It's ok to believe differently than I do. Don't get mad because I see you to the left of me. Plus, I don't have to prove shit because I'm going by everything you say thus far. So what it seems like I labeled you. Hell, I get labeled all the damn time. Being defensive only makes me feel that my analysis was the correct one. It's ok to let me be right ONE time isn't it?

 

[actinanass]

No. They are crutches. They just help you walk through the bullshit. You tell me how in the fuck can the mere word "conservative" or "liberal" help one to "understand" the nuances of party politics ???

You, my friend, use those terms almost exclusively to mean republican and democrat. Yet, there are republicans and democrats of liberal and conservative stripes. You see, this alone tends to refute your simplistic idea that "labels are needed to understand the overall philosophy of a party." Unless you analyze politicians and their philosophies (and people too, for that matter) individually, you're fooling yourself when you try to group them into your simplistic categories.

QueEx

1. It's not about just the words "liberal", and "conservative". It's what they mean on a certain issue.

2. You not understanding. I view my political views as mostly conservative. Thus, I look for candidates that has the same views as me on the most part. Thus, I put every candidate through my own political lens, and then vote on the best candidate that matches my beliefs. In other words, we are doing the same thing. The problem you have is that I'm honest about what I am. I don't care if someone labels me anything. If I was really ASSuming anything, I could ASSume that you are scared to be on the wrong end of the argument socially. Thus, why you have the dislike of labels so much.