Citizenship vs. Liberalism

[PoliticalChic]

What is so absolutely asinine about this thread is the OP thinks they have more right to exist in this country and those that disagree with their personal ideology should leave.
Then on the next breath the makes statements about individuality.
How collectively idiotic when you make both statements and they try to prove their point by making both statements.

"...those that disagree with their personal ideology should leave."

I'd like to see you provide where I said that.

 

[PoliticalChic]

And where's the better model? That is, a country that doesn't help its poor people at all, and as a consequence has a better socio-economic condition than we do?

"...That is, a country that doesn't help its poor people at all,...."

It requires a certain kind of fool to suggest that Liberal policies have helped the poor.

What was the percentage in poverty when LBJ began the "war on poverty"?

What is the percentage in poverty today?

You don't work. Someone else puts a roof over your head and pays your keep. Would you be better off without that?

Would that get you out of the hammock and out looking for work? Are you made lazy by the safety net you're provided?

First....it's none of your business what I do.

Disgusting, low-life, slime like you will do anything, say anything, to change the subject.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The Loyalists, also called the Tories, were the Conservatives in America at the time of the revolution.

Wrong. Conservatives believe in smaller government, less central control, freedom in the marketplace and an armed population to overthrow tyranny. You are 180 degrees out of phase with reality.

So Liberalism in the 18th century England is best exemplified by a loyalty to the absolute rule of the King?

lol, next you'll be telling us that the Liberalism of czarist Russia was best exemplified by a loyalty to the absolute power of the Csar,

and that conservatives like Lenin carried out the Russian Revolution.

 

[Edgetho]

"...That is, a country that doesn't help its poor people at all,...."

It requires a certain kind of fool to suggest that Liberal policies have helped the poor.

What was the percentage in poverty when LBJ began the "war on poverty"?

What is the percentage in poverty today?

I said name the country. What country has ever made itself better by doing nothing for the Poor?

I asked you for the two percentages.

We both know why you wouldn't provide them.

From memory, I think they're almost identical.

In terms of sheer numbers, there are FAR more people in poverty today.

**** the poor people; do you have any clue of how many dimocrap scum have gotten rich claiming they wanted to help them?

Kinda like Algore (aka; ManBearPig) made $250,000,000 (Two Hundred Fifty Two Million Dollars) on the Global warming scam.

dimocraps are the scum of the Earth.

the higher up ones get stinking rich by convincing the worshiping masses beneath them to vote for them on the promise that they're going to actually change them from the loser ***** they are into something worthwhile.

Impossible. dimocraps were born losers and they're going to die losers.

They're no different that the crowds of other losers out in force to worship the Emperor or the King, begging for a handout, hoping for a grant or a behest.

Without them to worship, without Kings and Emperors to worship, dimcrap scum turn to worshiping political douchebags, athletes, actors, actresses... Whatever.

It's what you can expect from people who have the genetic memory of ancestors who spent the last five thousand years on their knees.

We offer them the chance to stand up, to be somebody, to right the past, to be personally accountable, to take charge of their lives and what do they do?

They immediately fall to their ******* knees worshiping some ******* douche, asking for a handout.

dimocraps are just pathetic

 

[NYcarbineer]

"...That is, a country that doesn't help its poor people at all,...."

It requires a certain kind of fool to suggest that Liberal policies have helped the poor.

What was the percentage in poverty when LBJ began the "war on poverty"?

What is the percentage in poverty today?

You don't work. Someone else puts a roof over your head and pays your keep. Would you be better off without that?

Would that get you out of the hammock and out looking for work? Are you made lazy by the safety net you're provided?

First....it's none of your business what I do.

Disgusting, low-life, slime like you will do anything, say anything, to change the subject.

The subject was how the poor are harmed by getting help. Are you harmed, or do you work?

 

[Edgetho]

"...That is, a country that doesn't help its poor people at all,...."

It requires a certain kind of fool to suggest that Liberal policies have helped the poor.

What was the percentage in poverty when LBJ began the "war on poverty"?

What is the percentage in poverty today?

You don't work. Someone else puts a roof over your head and pays your keep. Would you be better off without that?

Would that get you out of the hammock and out looking for work? Are you made lazy by the safety net you're provided?

First....it's none of your business what I do.

Disgusting, low-life, slime like you will do anything, say anything, to change the subject.

Nah. He wants to start a flame war. It's all they know.

And it's what they're good at.

Never fight a pig on his own terms. You'll end up in the mud, get dirty as hell and the pig will enjoy it

 

[Edgetho]

The Loyalists, also called the Tories, were the Conservatives in America at the time of the revolution.

Wrong. Conservatives believe in smaller government, less central control, freedom in the marketplace and an armed population to overthrow tyranny. You are 180 degrees out of phase with reality.

So Liberalism in the 18th century England is best exemplified by a loyalty to the absolute rule of the King?

lol, next you'll be telling us that the Liberalism of czarist Russia was best exemplified by a loyalty to the absolute power of the Csar,

and that conservatives like Lenin carried out the Russian Revolution.

You are truly a stupid human being.

Please.... Never procreate. The gene pool would appreciate it

 

[NYcarbineer]

"...That is, a country that doesn't help its poor people at all,...."

It requires a certain kind of fool to suggest that Liberal policies have helped the poor.

What was the percentage in poverty when LBJ began the "war on poverty"?

What is the percentage in poverty today?

I said name the country. What country has ever made itself better by doing nothing for the Poor?

I asked you for the two percentages.

We both know why you wouldn't provide them.

I've already won that argument dozens of times.

Now you tell us, how many poor people would be better off if we took away their Medicaid, their public schooling, their food stamps, and any housing assistance they get?

How many would magically rise out of poverty?

Because that's YOUR solution. Explain to us, in detail, how YOUR solution works better...

...and to go back to my original point, name the countries where that works.

 

[Edgetho]

I said name the country. What country has ever made itself better by doing nothing for the Poor?

I asked you for the two percentages.

We both know why you wouldn't provide them.

I've already won that argument dozens of times.

Now you tell us, how many poor people would be better off if we took away their Medicaid, their public schooling, their food stamps, and any housing assistance they get?

How many would magically rise out of poverty?

Because that's YOUR solution. Explain to us, in detail, how YOUR solution works better...

...and to go back to my original point, name the countries where that works.

Lying as usual, huh fuckwad?

Where did any of us, including PC, ever state that we wanted to ELIMINATE those programs?

You're just a lying ****. You really and honestly are.

scumbag

 

[norwegen]

Conservatives founded the US?!?! LOL...Now I've heard everything.

Ignore the very definition of conservative! Instead listen to the chopped up musings of someone with sentence or paragraph dyslexia. If she talks enough it will become true. Stupid Websters with their "definitions" smh

George Washington was the wealthiest President we've ever had.

The Revolutionary leaders were almost exclusively wealthy, educated men.

Most were landowners. Most were married. Most were successful.

They were Conservatives.

Now the French? The French Revolution?

They were scum -- Like you.

The French Revolution is where you get your ideas from. But you're not bright enough to know that and you're too lazy to study it and figure it out.

The French Revolution was the libturd Revolution. The American Revolution was the Conservative Revolution.

Republicans follow the lead of Washington, Jefferson and Hamilton.

The scum of the Earth -- You. Follow the lead of Robespierre.

Just a fact.

The Loyalists, also called the Tories, were the Conservatives in America at the time of the revolution.

Tories emigrated before and during the war; they're allegiance was to the state (conservative idea, right?). The patriots, on the other hand - the founders and, indeed, most Americans at the time - espoused the individualism and natural law principles that conservatives today espouse.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I said name the country. What country has ever made itself better by doing nothing for the Poor?

I asked you for the two percentages.

We both know why you wouldn't provide them.

I've already won that argument dozens of times.

Now you tell us, how many poor people would be better off if we took away their Medicaid, their public schooling, their food stamps, and any housing assistance they get?

How many would magically rise out of poverty?

Because that's YOUR solution. Explain to us, in detail, how YOUR solution works better...

...and to go back to my original point, name the countries where that works.

"I've already won that argument dozens of times."

Really?

What argument would that be?

And why are you so afraid of providing the two percentages?

 

[norwegen]

The Loyalists, also called the Tories, were the Conservatives in America at the time of the revolution.

Was Stalin a Conservative?

How about Hitler? A Conservative?

Is Castro a Conservative or a liberal scumbag like you?

How about Kim Jong Un? How about Mao?

What is a Conservative?

You're a lying scumbag that only sees things the way he wants to see them.

All you understand is if you agree with it, it's good and if you don't, it's bad.

You're a self-deluding piece of shit.

In 18th Century terms, George Washington might have been a liberal. In today's terms, he was certainly a Conservative.

This idiot just denied that the founding fathers were liberal on another page while calling everyone stupid. Then he admits they were on a new page and still think everyone else is the dummy

Allying with the Federalists, George Washington was not averse to some semblance of the British monarchy in America's new government, particularly in the executive branch.

Beginning with the Jefferson Administration, the Republicans reversed some of the Federalist policies of Washington, Hamilton, and Adams, reducing the size of the federal government.

 

[norwegen]

The Founding Fathers were Liberals?

I don't think so.

I'm quite ready to believe that the Founding Fathers were Radicals.

Some of them Liberal Radicals.

Some of them Conservative Radicals.

Some of them Egalitarian and even Abolitionist in nature.

Some of them Wealthy and well-Propertied and some even Slaveholders to boot.

All of them being forced to morph into the first Americans by the events of the times.

They found a Middle Ground, in fostering Egalitarianism - amongst White Folk, anyway.

It fell to another generation to pay the ultimate price for that Founding Compromise between Liberal and Conservative positions of the Founding Times.

In short, they were radical Whigs. The Whigs reemerged in the 1850s to ally with the abolitionists and establish the modern Republican Party, the party that would eventually attract conservatives.

 

[Edgetho]

George Washington was the wealthiest President we've ever had.

The Revolutionary leaders were almost exclusively wealthy, educated men.

Most were landowners. Most were married. Most were successful.

They were Conservatives.

Now the French? The French Revolution?

They were scum -- Like you.

The French Revolution is where you get your ideas from. But you're not bright enough to know that and you're too lazy to study it and figure it out.

The French Revolution was the libturd Revolution. The American Revolution was the Conservative Revolution.

Republicans follow the lead of Washington, Jefferson and Hamilton.

The scum of the Earth -- You. Follow the lead of Robespierre.

Just a fact.

The Loyalists, also called the Tories, were the Conservatives in America at the time of the revolution.

Tories emigrated before and during the war; they're allegiance was to the state (conservative idea, right?). The patriots, on the other hand - the founders and, indeed, most Americans at the time - espoused the individualism and natural law principles that conservatives today espouse.

This is an absurd argument.

The terms 'Conservative' and 'liberal' have no meaning except in the here and the now.

The terms are so incredibly subjective and chained to the time in which they were applied, even IF they were applied, that it is intellectual dishonest and, frankly, deceptive and juvenile to try to give past historical acts and figures labels from today's culture and politics.

It's part of the liberals' attempts to perennial control of the conversation by inserting meaningless terms.

Only they know what they mean.

 

[NYcarbineer]

George Washington was the wealthiest President we've ever had.

The Revolutionary leaders were almost exclusively wealthy, educated men.

Most were landowners. Most were married. Most were successful.

They were Conservatives.

Now the French? The French Revolution?

They were scum -- Like you.

The French Revolution is where you get your ideas from. But you're not bright enough to know that and you're too lazy to study it and figure it out.

The French Revolution was the libturd Revolution. The American Revolution was the Conservative Revolution.

Republicans follow the lead of Washington, Jefferson and Hamilton.

The scum of the Earth -- You. Follow the lead of Robespierre.

Just a fact.

The Loyalists, also called the Tories, were the Conservatives in America at the time of the revolution.

Tories emigrated before and during the war; they're allegiance was to the state (conservative idea, right?). The patriots, on the other hand - the founders and, indeed, most Americans at the time - espoused the individualism and natural law principles that conservatives today espouse.

Conservatives today want the government to get out of the way so the Corporations and the Christian churches can run the country.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I asked you for the two percentages.

We both know why you wouldn't provide them.

I've already won that argument dozens of times.

Now you tell us, how many poor people would be better off if we took away their Medicaid, their public schooling, their food stamps, and any housing assistance they get?

How many would magically rise out of poverty?

Because that's YOUR solution. Explain to us, in detail, how YOUR solution works better...

...and to go back to my original point, name the countries where that works.

Lying as usual, huh fuckwad?

Where did any of us, including PC, ever state that we wanted to ELIMINATE those programs?

You're just a lying ****. You really and honestly are.

scumbag

Seriously,

how can you claim simultaneously that you think the programs HURT the POOR, and then turn around and claim you don't want to get rid of those programs?

How do you put those two positions together without looking irrational?

 

[norwegen]

The Loyalists, also called the Tories, were the Conservatives in America at the time of the revolution.

Tories emigrated before and during the war; they're allegiance was to the state (conservative idea, right?). The patriots, on the other hand - the founders and, indeed, most Americans at the time - espoused the individualism and natural law principles that conservatives today espouse.

Conservatives today want the government to get out of the way so the Corporations and the Christian churches can run the country.

Okay, you've cracked our code. When we call for a return to constitutional government, that is exactly what we mean.

Your mom was right; you're a genius.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I asked you for the two percentages.

We both know why you wouldn't provide them.

I've already won that argument dozens of times.

Now you tell us, how many poor people would be better off if we took away their Medicaid, their public schooling, their food stamps, and any housing assistance they get?

How many would magically rise out of poverty?

Because that's YOUR solution. Explain to us, in detail, how YOUR solution works better...

...and to go back to my original point, name the countries where that works.

"I've already won that argument dozens of times."

Really?

What argument would that be?

And why are you so afraid of providing the two percentages?

Do you measure a family's poverty level with or without the government assistance they receive?

 

[Edgetho]

The Loyalists, also called the Tories, were the Conservatives in America at the time of the revolution.

Tories emigrated before and during the war; they're allegiance was to the state (conservative idea, right?). The patriots, on the other hand - the founders and, indeed, most Americans at the time - espoused the individualism and natural law principles that conservatives today espouse.

Conservatives today want the government to get out of the way so the Corporations and the Christian churches can run the country.

How many people died at the hands of Corporations and Churches in the 20th Century?

None that I know of. At least, there were no cases of Institutionalized murder, rape, torture and genocide by those two that I know of.

At least 150,000,000 (One Hundred Fifty Million) people died at the hands of government.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Tories emigrated before and during the war; they're allegiance was to the state (conservative idea, right?). The patriots, on the other hand - the founders and, indeed, most Americans at the time - espoused the individualism and natural law principles that conservatives today espouse.

Conservatives today want the government to get out of the way so the Corporations and the Christian churches can run the country.

Okay, you've cracked our code. When we call for a return to constitutional government, that is exactly what we mean.

Your mom was right; you're a genius.

Ok, which if any of these statements does not apply, in general or as a consensus, to the modern American conservative?

1. They want less regulation of business.

2. America is a Christian Nation