who is more dangerous to the country?

who is more dangerous

  • neocons

    Votes: 8 50.0%
  • "no war ever" liberals

    Votes: 8 50.0%

  • Total voters
    16
Those who are passive are the most dangerous.




All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.

Better be despised for too anxious apprehensions, than ruined by too confident security.

He who wrestles with us strengthens our nerves and sharpens our skill. Our antagonist is our helper.

No one could make a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could do only a little.

The wise determine from the gravity of the case; the irritable, from sensibility to oppression; the high minded, from disdain and indignation at abusive power in unworthy hands.

No passion so effectually robs the mind of all its powers of acting and reasoning as fear.




Edmund Burke's wise words are applicable once again in our day.

They should be applicable to anyone that values Liberty and their individualism.

Good post.
 
I voted for the Neo-Conservatives. Every time I think of this particular group of individuals, I am reminded of Bob Dylan's song "Masters of War".
 
The problem is that the squeakiest wheel always gets the most news coverage - and the most mindless followers.

Both the liberals and the conservative extremists have the loudest voices - they are the most self assured and attract the least free thinking to their opinion.

Meanwhile, the news media, for reasons of sensationalism, gives them the most coverage.

Then to top that off, they get additional attention, because the opposition ALWAYS like to use the most extreme to build a stereotype which they can easily attack - thereby justifying their own opinion (somehow).

Hey, I'm a diehard liberal (though not an extremist), and I'm ALWAYS focusing on the Rush Limbaughs and Sarah Palins of the Conservative movement. I know that there are moderate conservatives, but they just don't give me enough amunition.

Sooo, I guess our political system is just hopelessly screwed up.

I guess this poll should have included an option for people who think that we should provide enough military fiorce in Afganistan to completely destry Al Queda, while supressing the Taliban long enough for the Afgen Government to build a stable defense force - then get out.

But that wasn't one of the choices.
 
I voted for the Neo-Conservatives. Every time I think of this particular group of individuals, I am reminded of Bob Dylan's song "Masters of War".


Another moron that doesn't understand the term. NO surprise.

Please enlighten me on what you think the term means. Because I was under the impression it was a New form of Conservative that supported Corporatism, Militarism, and Unconstitutional acts in the name of security.
 
I voted for the Neo-Conservatives. Every time I think of this particular group of individuals, I am reminded of Bob Dylan's song "Masters of War".


Another moron that doesn't understand the term. NO surprise.

Please enlighten me on what you think the term means. Because I was under the impression it was a New form of Conservative that supported Corporatism, Militarism, and Unconstitutional acts in the name of security.

Your impression was wrong.

In a nutshell, neoconservatism is the philosophy of using the power of the government to bring about international and social change, ie: expanding the power of the government. Whereas classic conservatives look to reduce the power of the government.

Has nothing to do with unconstitutional acts, unless you consider simply the idea of expanding the power of the government itself unconstitutional.

But ya knew that. You were just looking to get in some sort of partisan dig.
 
Another moron that doesn't understand the term. NO surprise.

Please enlighten me on what you think the term means. Because I was under the impression it was a New form of Conservative that supported Corporatism, Militarism, and Unconstitutional acts in the name of security.

Your impression was wrong.

In a nutshell, neoconservatism is the philosophy of using the power of the government to bring about international and social change, ie: expanding the power of the government. Whereas classic conservatives look to reduce the power of the government.

Has nothing to do with unconstitutional acts, unless you consider simply the idea of expanding the power of the government itself unconstitutional.

But ya knew that. You were just looking to get in some sort of partisan dig.

Well I can't say I disagree with that analysis... but what the f*ck is with that last sentence!? I guess you like getting in personal digs. :talktothehand:
 
Please enlighten me on what you think the term means. Because I was under the impression it was a New form of Conservative that supported Corporatism, Militarism, and Unconstitutional acts in the name of security.

Your impression was wrong.

In a nutshell, neoconservatism is the philosophy of using the power of the government to bring about international and social change, ie: expanding the power of the government. Whereas classic conservatives look to reduce the power of the government.

Has nothing to do with unconstitutional acts, unless you consider simply the idea of expanding the power of the government itself unconstitutional.

But ya knew that. You were just looking to get in some sort of partisan dig.

Well I can't say I disagree with that analysis... but what the f*ck is with that last sentence!? I guess you like getting in personal digs. :talktothehand:

So I guess the only other option is that you didn't know it? Which means, I guess, that yer either not the swiftest person around intellectually, or that you enjoy throwing around terms that you have no idea what they mean?

The corner you've painted yerself into. See it. Love it.
 
Your impression was wrong.

In a nutshell, neoconservatism is the philosophy of using the power of the government to bring about international and social change, ie: expanding the power of the government. Whereas classic conservatives look to reduce the power of the government.

Has nothing to do with unconstitutional acts, unless you consider simply the idea of expanding the power of the government itself unconstitutional.

But ya knew that. You were just looking to get in some sort of partisan dig.

Well I can't say I disagree with that analysis... but what the f*ck is with that last sentence!? I guess you like getting in personal digs. :talktothehand:

So I guess the only other option is that you didn't know it? Which means, I guess, that yer either not the swiftest person around intellectually, or that you enjoy throwing around terms that you have no idea what they mean?

The corner you've painted yerself into. See it. Love it.

My definition wasn't that far off from your definition... I ain't in no corner... it's wide open space behind me... but you don't see me running.
 
Well I can't say I disagree with that analysis... but what the f*ck is with that last sentence!? I guess you like getting in personal digs. :talktothehand:

So I guess the only other option is that you didn't know it? Which means, I guess, that yer either not the swiftest person around intellectually, or that you enjoy throwing around terms that you have no idea what they mean?

The corner you've painted yerself into. See it. Love it.

My definition wasn't that far off from your definition

Actually, its light years away from what I said.

Corner. Yer still in it.
 
Who is more dangerous to the USA:

neocons who want to nuke any country who doesn't bow to us
or
liberals who wouldn't fight back even if 9/11 happened ten times over

People who ask questions based on the extremities of ideological difference.
 
I'm doing a write in because I'm neither far left nor far right and follow no party.....

Who is more dangerous....

We, the People.

When we concentrate on smacking each other for disagreeing and not smacking our politicians who - regardless of party - are playing us all for fools.
 
So I guess the only other option is that you didn't know it? Which means, I guess, that yer either not the swiftest person around intellectually, or that you enjoy throwing around terms that you have no idea what they mean?

The corner you've painted yerself into. See it. Love it.

My definition wasn't that far off from your definition

Actually, its light years away from what I said.

Corner. Yer still in it.

I said Neo-Cons were supportive of Corporatism, Militarism, and Unconstitutional abuses of power against our civil liberties... You said it meant they were conservatives who believed in expanding Government.
Are you telling me that Corporatism, Militarism, and abuses of power isn't an expansion of government?
 

Forum List

Back
Top