Any non-partisan conservatives here?

[Soggy in NOLA]

If by "non-partisan" you mean willing to bend over and have a Marxist agenda shoved our collective asses.... uh, probably not so much. BTW.. when's the last time anyone of you leftists compromised on anything? It's full bore Marxist ideology or "**** YOU YOU RACIST PIGS".

 

[VaYank5150]

Said it many times on this board.

If Hillary won the Primary and her opponenet was McCain, this conservative was voting for Hillary.

She very well may have my vote in 2012.

Isn't it funny....HAD Hillary made the ticket, I have a hunch, Palin would still not be known outisde of Alaska, and McCain could have chosen a real VP candidate. Since I can't stand Hillary Clinton, I may very well have voted for McCain.

 

[VaYank5150]

If by "non-partisan" you mean willing to bend over and have a Marxist agenda shoved our collective asses.... uh, probably not so much. BTW.. when's the last time anyone of you leftists compromised on anything? It's full bore Marxist ideology or "**** YOU YOU RACIST PIGS".

War funding comes to mind, quickly. Your turn.

 

[ConHog]

Just curious.
(I never see any in my area.)

They say they are moderate but they really are partisan hacks. Even the Libertarians lean way right. We have a few that could be considered Independent but they're even questionable.

You should seriously just be what you are claiming and assume the rest of us are what we claim to be. Decide later.

I am, and I do. I am a conservative American who is sick of people who lie for some imaginary political gain. I am sick of stupid people who think "their side" is the only side that will ever have any good ideas and that anything "the other side" comes up with has to be bad. I am sick of people who love to scream racism but find it acceptable if the target is a white person, preferably a white christian male.

I am sick of people who have no honor, no shame, and no morals.

I am NOT a moderate. I am a conservative who believes in the COTUS , BUT also tempers that with compassion. IE I push my conservative and constitutional concerns aside to accept that things like welfare are a GOOD thing, when not abused. I reject those fools who say that our nation should not provide basic help for those who need it. I likewise reject those fools who want to expand that basic help into every facet of life. Both sides are idiots who need to realize that compromise is the only thing that will keep us together. That one issue is of course just an example of many.

I reject the bot parties for the exact same reason. All they care about is getting votes. Need to tell a million lies, and whitewash a guy's character to get him elected? No problem. Need to make a million campaign promises that you will never have neither the ability or desire to keep? Hey no problem. Currently, have to scream racism every time your guy looks like a buffoon ? No problem, hey let's get some Hollywood wackos to help us out there.

But most of all, I reject people like you sarah, who have allowed these parties to become what they have become. have you EVER said "hey what the hell is going on in the White House on this issue?" Of course you haven't, even though it is clear that they have screwed the pooch on nearly everything they have touched you can't find it in your person to be honest enough to admit so even to a message board of complete strangers. And you are of course but one example of left wing idiots who do so. before the right get's too much snickering in, well let me use CrusaderFrank as an example. Last night he claimed that Obama would nuke someone because of his pride. What kind of stupid statement is that? Obama isn't going to go crazy and nuke anyone, we all know that. But did Frank care? Nope he simply used that as a tool to further his OWN agenda. And fo course Frank is also but one example of right wing fools on this board

And of course if you get enough Sarah like fools on one side and frank like fools on the other, and the result is the current Democratic and Republican parties.

And so I say **** you two idiots (and all your cohorts) and your incessant partisan babbling, and **** the parties that represent you.

 

[ConHog]

If by "non-partisan" you mean willing to bend over and have a Marxist agenda shoved our collective asses.... uh, probably not so much. BTW.. when's the last time anyone of you leftists compromised on anything? It's full bore Marxist ideology or "**** YOU YOU RACIST PIGS".

STOP IT!!!! Obama is not a ******* Marxist, neither is anyone in Congress.

God damned all the lies!!!!!!!!

 

[Misty]

I hate everyone equally.

I am for smaller government lower taxes

I don't give a crap about others.

I only care about myself and those I love

 

[Flopper]

Depending on how you define conservative, I think you will find there are democrats that have some very conservative ideas. On the other hand, I think you would have to look awful hard to find a Republican with liberal ideas.

In the classic sense of the words, today liberals are really conservative. They don't want change. They want to keep the country going in the direction it's going now. Conservative however, want major change. They want to turn the country around and go a different direction.

 

[jillian]

im conservative, and dont care for the dems, the reps, the tea party, or any other party. They are all crap.

I rather doubt that most people here who identify themsevles as conservatives really understand what conservatism really is.

It's an approach to problem solving...not a grocery list of things one must believe.

I have the same complaint about most self indentifying liberals.

People seem to confuse supporting the Dems with being a liberal, and supporting the Reps as being consevative.

I don't think either party lives up to being either conservative or liberal.

Parties tend to operate pragmatically, not idealistically.
Their rhetoric might be idealistic, but their actions are mired in the real world.

The hi-lited part is the problem with the parties. They just can't seem to figure out that the "grocery list" eliminates many from their "tent".

Just as an example: Abortion. If you are a Conservative, it seems to me, you should be in favor of privately funded abortion when needed. Without the Abortion option, a whole slew of programs are needed to support unwed mothers, subsidize child rearing expenses, Child Care assistance programs for working single mothers, Child support payment enforcement... In short, the government must become larger if abortion is illegal.

If you are a Liberal, believing that it takes a village and so forth, you should oppose or at least harbor no strong feelings about abortion and yet the litmus test for most Liberals involves support of the "right" to have an abortion.

Liberals can find this "right" in the Constitution, but the "right" to bear arms somehow eludes them in the same document.

Conservatives routinely want to reduce spending, but don't really see the problem with maintaining Super Carriers. What's wrong with this picture?

To my way of thinking, which is admittedly a bit skewed, the party affilliation and the political philosophy routinely force contraditions that the party hacks rationalize away.

Being a true Liberal or Conservative almost demands that you be in conflict with both parties.

Being a true believer from either party demands that you suspend the need for rational thought.

i don't see being pragmatic as a problem. it is easy to be an idealogue and get nothing done, tilt at windmills and bemoan the evils of the enemy.

actually doing anything is difficult and requires that people actually talk to each other instead of playing the 'i hope the other guy fails' game.

 

[007]

Just curious.
(I never see any in my area.)

If you were completely non partisan, you wouldn't be a conservative, or a liberal, or anything else. That's what partisan is.

 

[ConHog]

I rather doubt that most people here who identify themsevles as conservatives really understand what conservatism really is.

It's an approach to problem solving...not a grocery list of things one must believe.

I have the same complaint about most self indentifying liberals.

People seem to confuse supporting the Dems with being a liberal, and supporting the Reps as being consevative.

I don't think either party lives up to being either conservative or liberal.

Parties tend to operate pragmatically, not idealistically.
Their rhetoric might be idealistic, but their actions are mired in the real world.

The hi-lited part is the problem with the parties. They just can't seem to figure out that the "grocery list" eliminates many from their "tent".

Just as an example: Abortion. If you are a Conservative, it seems to me, you should be in favor of privately funded abortion when needed. Without the Abortion option, a whole slew of programs are needed to support unwed mothers, subsidize child rearing expenses, Child Care assistance programs for working single mothers, Child support payment enforcement... In short, the government must become larger if abortion is illegal.

If you are a Liberal, believing that it takes a village and so forth, you should oppose or at least harbor no strong feelings about abortion and yet the litmus test for most Liberals involves support of the "right" to have an abortion.

Liberals can find this "right" in the Constitution, but the "right" to bear arms somehow eludes them in the same document.

Conservatives routinely want to reduce spending, but don't really see the problem with maintaining Super Carriers. What's wrong with this picture?

To my way of thinking, which is admittedly a bit skewed, the party affilliation and the political philosophy routinely force contraditions that the party hacks rationalize away.

Being a true Liberal or Conservative almost demands that you be in conflict with both parties.

Being a true believer from either party demands that you suspend the need for rational thought.

i don't see being pragmatic as a problem. it is easy to be an idealogue and get nothing done, tilt at windmills and bemoan the evils of the enemy.

actually doing anything is difficult and requires that people actually talk to each other instead of playing the 'i hope the other guy fails' game.

All that is needed for evil to triumph is for good men to stand idly by and do nothing


and of course by man, and I mean mankind, not just men. And of course that isn't my quote so I don't want anyone acting like I'm claiming it is

Why can't some of yall look at some of the crazy posts on this board from people who you might agree with and say "hey that's a lie?" I give Art and ATL mad props for doing so last night in threads about Sharrod where fools kept saying FoxNews broke the video and claimed she was a racist before she got fired. They took a stand against people who ideologically they agree with, but in that instance, they KNEW they were lying.

I am calling out EACH and EVERY ONE of you to follow their examples, and start calling out the blatant lies even by those who's ideology you agree with. Honesty is our ONLY hope, and we can't depend on politicians from ANY part to bring it to us.

 

[jillian]

Sometimes 'truth' is colored by perception.

 

[ConHog]

Just curious.
(I never see any in my area.)

If you were completely non partisan, you wouldn't be a conservative, or a liberal, or anything else. That's what partisan is.

You are looking at it backwards. Ideology is where we should stand, not party. Partisan means for a certain party, has nothing to do with conservative or liberal. As I said, I am conservative , but with compassion. So when I'm choosing candidates, I look for someone who fits my ideology best, not some imaginary party line.

 

[Mr. Peepers]

Are there any non partisan Liberals on this board? Just asking.

What's a liberal? I'm an independent. I don't adhere to any party, so that would make me automatically non-partisan. All independents are non-partisan.

 

[ConHog]

Sometimes 'truth' is colored by perception.

Nice try to hedge, but in most instances on this board it is not.

You damned well know that there are people on this board who present LIES as factual truths. That is not perception, that is a lie.

Looks like ConHog gets disappointed by his fellow posters yet again..........

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

If by "non-partisan" you mean willing to bend over and have a Marxist agenda shoved our collective asses.... uh, probably not so much. BTW.. when's the last time anyone of you leftists compromised on anything? It's full bore Marxist ideology or "**** YOU YOU RACIST PIGS".

War funding comes to mind, quickly. Your turn.

Quick as I could... I was off to lunch.

War funding? Uh.... come again? The left compromised by funding a war they voted to start?

How decent of them.

 

[code1211]

Depending on how you define conservative, I think you will find there are democrats that have some very conservative ideas. On the other hand, I think you would have to look awful hard to find a Republican with liberal ideas.

In the classic sense of the words, today liberals are really conservative. They don't want change. They want to keep the country going in the direction it's going now. Conservative however, want major change. They want to turn the country around and go a different direction.

I consider myself a Conservative because I don't think that I should have my pocket picked every time some jack ass decides he needs another vote so he builds a bridge to nowhere.

On the other hand, if I don't need to pay for it and it does me no harm, I don't care what anybody else wants to do. If some hairbrain wants to marry his nephew, get him a sex change operation and abort 20 babies in the 3rd trimester, go for it. As long as it makes them both happy and it costs me nothing, why should I care?

I only have problems with Liberals and Conservatives when they have evolved into the Evangelist types. Do what you want and pay for it with your own money and I'll do the same. Try to reduce my freedoms or my cash and I'll question what you're up to.

If everyone would just concentrate on their own affairs and leave me the heck alone, I'd be pleased to afford them the same courtesy.

 

[code1211]

Just curious.
(I never see any in my area.)

If you were completely non partisan, you wouldn't be a conservative, or a liberal, or anything else. That's what partisan is.

With both Parties harboring positions that are traded between them depending on which one proposed the idea at that point in time, being a Liberal or a Conservative means very little in terms of being partisan or not.

Clinton proposed a fix for social security and so did Bush. There wasn't much to differentiate the proposals except that when Clinton proposed it it was a budget buster and when Bush proposed it it was a draconian attack on the elderly.

I would say that if you ARE a principled Liberal or a principled Conservative, it is impossible to be a member of a political party. If you are a member of either political party, it is impossible to have principles.

Of course, I could be wrong.

 

[Palin Rider]

Just curious.
(I never see any in my area.)

If you were completely non partisan, you wouldn't be a conservative, or a liberal, or anything else. That's what partisan is.

I'm curious as to why you define it that way. I always thought that partisanship meant loyalty to a political party, be it Rep, Dem, Green, or whichever. And that conservatism and liberalism had to do only with approaches to how government should work.

To me, anyone who has no problem crossing party lines when they vote is automatically non-partisan.

 

[Mr. Peepers]

Palin rider, my work keyboard just got sprayed with coffee when I saw your moniker. Thanks a lot. Now my keys will stick come monday...

 

[The Infidel]

There's no such thing as a non-partisan conservative.

I would bet ya on that, but you would probably try to get some one else to pay your bet for ya.


I could give a rats ass about the Repubs, and I am conservative as you can get.

KILL EM ALL & LET GOD SORT EM OUT!

Oh and I am all for legalizing weed.... wow, bet ya didnt see that coming did ya?