What does the Right stand for?

[rdean]

I believe I know what they oppose:
No to Federal regulations--or yes to deregulation
No to gun controls--or yes to gun ownership;
No to taxes--or yes to low taxes;
No to abortion--or yes for life;
No to gay/lesbian marriage--or yes to religious definition of marriage;
No to single payer universal health care--or yes to private insurance
No to stem cell research--yes to ethics in science;
No to deficit spending--yes to balanced budget;
No to campaign finance restrictions--yes to private campaigns finances
No to sex education at any age--yes to abstinence programs;
No to welfare--yes to personal responsibilty;
No to Medicare--yes for healthcare saving accounts;
No to Social Security--yes to private savings account;
No to the Democratic Party--yes to Conservative princples;
No to the Republican Party--yes to Conservative candidates..

If this is an accuate description of the new right, what do they support? And, what would our society look like if they prevailed?

It is only a matter of changing a "No" to a "Yes" to understand what the Conservatives support.

I'm not going to go through all these, but for a few, the anti Americanism and the lack of compassion are standouts.

religious definition - what if you have no mystical or supernatural beliefs. Why should you have to suffer other's "fantasies"?

abstinence programs - Should we stick to something that doesn't work? Why? Isn't that the definition of "stupid"?

private savings account - what if someone is incapicitated? So what? What if a man spends his money on his family and his kids die? Then he has nothing in his old age? Should be go homeless?

See, for conservatives, they just don't care about others. It's all about ideology.

 

[WillowTree]

I believe I know what they oppose:
No to Federal regulations--or yes to deregulation
No to gun controls--or yes to gun ownership;
No to taxes--or yes to low taxes;
No to abortion--or yes for life;
No to gay/lesbian marriage--or yes to religious definition of marriage;
No to single payer universal health care--or yes to private insurance
No to stem cell research--yes to ethics in science;
No to deficit spending--yes to balanced budget;
No to campaign finance restrictions--yes to private campaigns finances
No to sex education at any age--yes to abstinence programs;
No to welfare--yes to personal responsibilty;
No to Medicare--yes for healthcare saving accounts;
No to Social Security--yes to private savings account;
No to the Democratic Party--yes to Conservative princples;
No to the Republican Party--yes to Conservative candidates..

If this is an accuate description of the new right, what do they support? And, what would our society look like if they prevailed?

It is only a matter of changing a "No" to a "Yes" to understand what the Conservatives support.

I'm not going to go through all these, but for a few, the anti Americanism and the lack of compassion are standouts.

religious definition - why if you have no mystical or supernatural beliefs. Why should you have to suffer other's "fantasies"?

abstinence programs - Should we stick to something that doesn't work? Why? Isn't that the definition of "stupid"?

private savings account - what if someone is incapicitated? So what? What if a man spends his money on his family and his kids die? Then he has nothing in his old age? Should be go homeless?

See, for conservatives, they just don't care about others. It's all about ideology.

well hey buddy, i don't see San Francisco cleaning up it's homeless mess do you? If libtards are so fucking compassionate why are there homeless people in libtard cities??? huh? oh that's right libtards don't want to spend their money, they want to spend other people's money on their "compassion" see, that's what makes you libtards dishonest fucks.

 

[amrchaos]

I believe I know what they oppose:
No to Federal regulations--or yes to deregulation
No to gun controls--or yes to gun ownership;
No to taxes--or yes to low taxes;
No to abortion--or yes for life;
No to gay/lesbian marriage--or yes to religious definition of marriage;
No to single payer universal health care--or yes to private insurance
No to stem cell research--yes to ethics in science;
No to deficit spending--yes to balanced budget;
No to campaign finance restrictions--yes to private campaigns finances
No to sex education at any age--yes to abstinence programs;
No to welfare--yes to personal responsibilty;
No to Medicare--yes for healthcare saving accounts;
No to Social Security--yes to private savings account;
No to the Democratic Party--yes to Conservative princples;
No to the Republican Party--yes to Conservative candidates..

If this is an accuate description of the new right, what do they support? And, what would our society look like if they prevailed?

It is only a matter of changing a "No" to a "Yes" to understand what the Conservatives support.

I'm not going to go through all these, but for a few, the anti Americanism and the lack of compassion are standouts.

religious definition - why if you have no mystical or supernatural beliefs. Why should you have to suffer other's "fantasies"?

abstinence programs - Should we stick to something that doesn't work? Why? Isn't that the definition of "stupid"?

private savings account - what if someone is incapicitated? So what? What if a man spends his money on his family and his kids die? Then he has nothing in his old age? Should be go homeless?

See, for conservatives, they just don't care about others. It's all about ideology.

I was only showing that the "negatives" that were stated can be reconstrued as "positives" and therefore can be argued as needing support.

Do not yell at me--just showing you the propaganda that is to label Republicans as the Party of no can easily become a rallying call for Republicans to call themselves as the party of Yes.

In other words, it is not my fault that Democrats insist on using such WEAK propaganda against their opponents. No wonder this administration is going down in Flames!!

 

[Truthmatters]

Darkwing do you NOT know the answer to the questiion?

I know it. You think it is the SCOTUS. But the SCOTUS can be overridden by the People though the House of Representatives. Remember, the judical branch is really just an extension of the Congress, even with the Marshall ruling.

The People have the final say in this country.

Nope its the Scotus.

Yes the people have power over the scotus through the houses of congress but that would be the majority of the people and not just you and your friends.

There is nothing unconstitutional because you dont like it.

 

[WillowTree]

It is only a matter of changing a "No" to a "Yes" to understand what the Conservatives support.

I'm not going to go through all these, but for a few, the anti Americanism and the lack of compassion are standouts.

religious definition - why if you have no mystical or supernatural beliefs. Why should you have to suffer other's "fantasies"?

abstinence programs - Should we stick to something that doesn't work? Why? Isn't that the definition of "stupid"?

private savings account - what if someone is incapicitated? So what? What if a man spends his money on his family and his kids die? Then he has nothing in his old age? Should be go homeless?

See, for conservatives, they just don't care about others. It's all about ideology.

I was only showing that the "negatives" that were stated can be reconstrued as "positives" and therefore can be argued as needing support.

Do not yell at me--just showing you the propaganda that is to label Republicans as the Party of no can easily become a rallying call for Republicans to call themselves as the party of Yes.

In other words, it is not my fault that Democrats insist on using such WEAK propaganda against their opponents. No wonder this administration is going down in Flames!!

all you have managed to show is that you libtards are all mouth and no action. If libtards had compassion for the homeless there would be no homeless in libtard cities.. and San Fran is rife with homeless.

 

[rdean]

It is only a matter of changing a "No" to a "Yes" to understand what the Conservatives support.

I'm not going to go through all these, but for a few, the anti Americanism and the lack of compassion are standouts.

religious definition - why if you have no mystical or supernatural beliefs. Why should you have to suffer other's "fantasies"?

abstinence programs - Should we stick to something that doesn't work? Why? Isn't that the definition of "stupid"?

private savings account - what if someone is incapicitated? So what? What if a man spends his money on his family and his kids die? Then he has nothing in his old age? Should be go homeless?

See, for conservatives, they just don't care about others. It's all about ideology.

well hey buddy, i don't see San Francisco cleaning up it's homeless mess do you? If libtards are so fucking compassionate why are there homeless people in libtard cities??? huh? oh that's right libtards don't want to spend their money, they want to spend other people's money on their "compassion" see, that's what makes you libtards dishonest fucks.

Liberals don't "pretend" to be the party of God and then laugh at others because they haven't done enough. Once again, where is "conservative compassion"? Is that simply an "oxymoron"?

 

[Truthmatters]

OK darkwing, saying things you dont like are unconstitutional simply because you dont agree with the scotus decisions that decided wether they are constitutional or not is stupidity.

You can agrue the individual decisions and how you would have liked them to be desided but CLAIMING they are outrightly uncontitutional is stupidity.

Now why do you insist on being stupid?

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Thank you!

Then tell us what you stand FOR.

Not what you are against , what you are for.

I can tell you what i'm for, but i may not be representative of "The new right"

1) Small government with only the powers granted in the constitution
Small is not a very discipitive word , could you discribe the areas that you feel the government should stay out of? We already follow the constitution.
Sure i'll give some examples. The government should not be forcing me to buy any product, such as health insurance. The government should not be subjecting the citizens to the application of foreign countries powers on our citizenry (cap/trade, koyoto treaty which we didn't sign but that kind of thing).

2) Fiscally responsible government.
I think we all agree on this one, now define what that means to you.
To me that means the governmnet spends less tax revenue than it takes it. It also means that we streamline or even cancel government programs/agencies that aren't performing well (i know thats like all of them). In addition it does not mean that to do so its ok to raise taxes, no, they must spend less to achieve no debt spending, if that means i dont get social security when i retire or we dont continue fighting in afghanistan so be it.

3) Low Taxes (that means lower than what they are now by at least 25%)
what are you willing to give up to get there?
The governmnet really doesnt do much for me personally. All the government does for me right now is build roads to drive on, inspect my food, and provide emergency services. I know for many other people the government also provides education and keeps planes from crashing along with other things i'm leaving out. Personally get rid of welfare, make it an unemployment only program and if you dont get a job your done....social security, if made solvent, could take care of the disabled. (Disclaimer I know above I said we can get rid of social security, but its unlikely so I can still use it here )

4) Personal Liberty (that means if I want an abortion I can get one and If I dont wanna wear a helmet on my bicycle thats ok too)
This abortion stance in niot in line with most other Rs, the helmet laws are there to protect the person who would have to pay to give you medical care due to your negligence. Vehicles are not a right and you must follow the laws to get the privledge to use them.
Not if they, like me, have health insurance. Than Me and my company pay for it . I agree that driving is a privelege not a right such as a motorcycle but a bicycle? Come on.

5) NO DEFECIT SPENDING. No more debt, stop adding and start paying it down.
Again what are you willing give up to get there?
The only thing i'm not willing to give up is more of my personal income in the form of taxes in order to acheive this.

6) Spending freezes to acheive debt reduction. Sorry world no more aid money, sorry countries with US bases we are closing them and coming home.
This again is not in line with most Rs.

7) (This was an add in) Enforce our Immigration Laws. This means go after the employers hiring illegal immigrants to help take the motivation for people to break our immigration laws away. This means going after those who are here illegally so our legal immigrants and uneducated workers have more job opportunity. And this means taking those same soldiers I said to bring home from overseas bases and stationing them on the northern and southern borders. (at least building a base here or spending money on them patrolling here goes into our local economies)


I'm sure i have more.

Thank you for answering

oh now i'm gonna get confused i'll put my answers in blue since you took conservative red already


I added #7

 

[WillowTree]

I'm not going to go through all these, but for a few, the anti Americanism and the lack of compassion are standouts.

religious definition - why if you have no mystical or supernatural beliefs. Why should you have to suffer other's "fantasies"?

abstinence programs - Should we stick to something that doesn't work? Why? Isn't that the definition of "stupid"?

private savings account - what if someone is incapicitated? So what? What if a man spends his money on his family and his kids die? Then he has nothing in his old age? Should be go homeless?

See, for conservatives, they just don't care about others. It's all about ideology.

well hey buddy, i don't see San Francisco cleaning up it's homeless mess do you? If libtards are so fucking compassionate why are there homeless people in libtard cities??? huh? oh that's right libtards don't want to spend their money, they want to spend other people's money on their "compassion" see, that's what makes you libtards dishonest fucks.

Liberals don't "pretend" to be the party of God and then laugh at others because they haven't done enough. Once again, where is "conservative compassion"? Is that simply an "oxymoron"?

you "pretend" that you have compassion for the homeless? Why are there homeless people in San Fran? How about NYC? Isn't that inhabited by about 98% libtards?/ and yet you walk right past the homeless and leave them homeless.. so you are a lying uncompassionate libtard aren't you?

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

man my post is hard to read...i got to edit it a little

 

[Darkwind]

Darkwing do you NOT know the answer to the questiion?

I know it. You think it is the SCOTUS. But the SCOTUS can be overridden by the People though the House of Representatives. Remember, the judical branch is really just an extension of the Congress, even with the Marshall ruling.

The People have the final say in this country.

Nope its the Scotus.

Yes the people have power over the scotus through the houses of congress but that would be the majority of the people and not just you and your friends.

There is nothing unconstitutional because you dont like it.

You just negated your own position.


The people, through the House of Representatives can over ride the SCOTUS. Therefore, the SCOTUS is not the final arbitrator. The People are.

Look. It is real simple. If something is a moral imperative (like freeing the slaves) then the clarity of your position will win the debate and an Amendment to the Constitution will happen. Guess what?

The SCOTUS cannot touch an Amendment to the Constitution.

So, My position is still unassailable. I support the Constitution of the United States as it is written.

Have a good day. My car is being worked on and they are almost done with it so I'm out of here.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

The people can decide the Constitution doesn't apply at all. It's called a revolution.

The masses are always the final arbiter.

 

[Darkwind]

OK darkwing, saying things you dont like are unconstitutional simply because you dont agree with the scotus decisions that decided wether they are constitutional or not is stupidity.

You can agrue the individual decisions and how you would have liked them to be desided but CLAIMING they are outrightly uncontitutional is stupidity.

Now why do you insist on being stupid?

No it is not. The SCOTUS can be overruled through the people. If the SCOTUS were to rule against the current healthcare bill that is going to committee, the Congress could overrule them since they have all the numbers they need to do so.

And I make My stands and beliefs on what I know and how I understand things. It is all that any of us do.

It is also My right.

 

[Darkwind]

The people can decide the Constitution doesn't apply at all. It's called a revolution.

The masses are always the final arbiter.

It will never come to that. The government has had control of the schools for far to long for that to ever happen.

Now, I REALLY am out of here.

 

[Titanic Sailor]

It's funny Wry said "No to Social Security". He was a California government worker who never paid into Social Security while employed there. Had his own pension no kid will ever see.

How can any Democrat who NEVER paid into the system have the gall to accuse others of not supporting Social Security?

One fourth of all public employees from numerous states have never, and will never pay into the Social Security system.

I believe all Americans should pay into the system, but Democrats will not make a significant chunk of their voter base share that burden.

 

[Truthmatters]

Thank you!

The government should not be forcing me to buy any product, such as health insurance. The government should not be subjecting the citizens to the application of foreign countries powers on our citizenry (cap/trade, koyoto treaty which we didn't sign but that kind of thing).[/color]The whole reason this has been implemented is an attempt to spread the cost over the population who will all need medical care. In our current system many get care and never pay a dime and others end up paying for it through medical procedure costs. If one is allowed to pay nothing yet get care in such a way as to trransfer the cost to everyone else how is that fair? You elect representatives and by doing so you have given them the legal right to make treaties that you are then beholden to. If you dont like that then it means you dont like the government your founders designed. Why would you then call yourself a "republican" if you hate the republic style of democracy?


To me that means the governmnet spends less tax revenue than it takes it. It also means that we streamline or even cancel government programs/agencies that aren't performing well (i know thats like all of them). In addition it does not mean that to do so its ok to raise taxes, no, they must spend less to achieve no debt spending, if that means i dont get social security when i retire or we dont continue fighting in afghanistan so be it.[/color]It would be very easy to achieve if we cut military spending huh?


The governmnet really doesnt do much for me personally. All the government does for me right now is build roads to drive on, inspect my food, and provide emergency services. I know for many other people the government also provides education and keeps planes from crashing along with other things i'm leaving out. Personally get rid of welfare, make it an unemployment only program and if you dont get a job your done....social security, if made solvent, could take care of the disabled. (Disclaimer I know above I said we can get rid of social security, but its unlikely so I can still use it here )[/color]Wether you have children or not education benifits you as well as wellfare. You see they keep the society moving forward and viable in a world market. If you really think making the US a third world country would improve our international standing economically you have not thought much of this through


[/COLOR] The only thing i'm not willing to give up is more of my personal income in the form of taxes in order to acheive this.fine then lets cut the military to a level that gets us there,. You dont seem to think it protects you anyway from your answer above.


6) Spending freezes to acheive debt reduction. Sorry world no more aid money, sorry countries with US bases we are closing them and coming home.This again is not in line with most Rs. You never answered this one.


7) (This was an add in) Enforce our Immigration Laws. This means go after the employers hiring illegal immigrants to help take the motivation for people to break our immigration laws away. I agree with this . This means going after those who are here illegally so our legal immigrants and uneducated workers have more job opportunity. And this means taking those same soldiers I said to bring home from overseas bases and stationing them on the northern and southern borders. (at least building a base here or spending money on them patrolling here goes into our local economies)

thanks again

 

[Truthmatters]

OK darkwing, saying things you dont like are unconstitutional simply because you dont agree with the scotus decisions that decided wether they are constitutional or not is stupidity.

You can agrue the individual decisions and how you would have liked them to be desided but CLAIMING they are outrightly uncontitutional is stupidity.

Now why do you insist on being stupid?

No it is not. The SCOTUS can be overruled through the people. If the SCOTUS were to rule against the current healthcare bill that is going to committee, the Congress could overrule them since they have all the numbers they need to do so.

And I make My stands and beliefs on what I know and how I understand things. It is all that any of us do.

It is also My right.

The scotus can be overruled by the people. Their decisions are constitutional until that is the case.

You dont get to decide they are unconstiitutional by yourself. By saying they are unconstiututional all on your own you are making a false statement.

You are not the majority of the people now are you?

 

[Truthmatters]

You see screaming unconstitutionality for decisions you dont like IS counter to the constitutional design.

the truth really hurts sometimes huh?

 

[Truthmatters]

The people can decide the Constitution doesn't apply at all. It's called a revolution.

The masses are always the final arbiter.

It will never come to that. The government has had control of the schools for far to long for that to ever happen.

Now, I REALLY am out of here.

are you out there?

 

[Liability]

Darkwind , you dont get to deside the definative interpitation of the constitution.

Sorry but your name is not written in the original as the final arbitor.

Spelling sometimes matters, too.

But putting that aside, while it is true that Darkwind's interpitation doesn't get to disside the matter -- it is also true that YOU don't get to decide that he is wrong merely because you happen not to like his view.