Conservatives

[AnnECUCherry]

I'll trade Lebron's poverty and homelessness for my aristocratic upbringing in a heartbeat.

Lebron may have grown up in poverty and homelessness but he also grew up to be very tall and athletic -- the result, as I said, of the situation into which he was born.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Total BS.

You're saying that people who are born black "made bad life choices"?

THAT is total BS. If anything the playing field has tilted in the black's favor. Oh woe is me I was born a poor black child? Crap, take advantage of what's offered, man up and make something of yourself already. Many deserving people have been passed over due to affirmative action.

It's incredibly false to state that "the playing field has been tilted in the black's favor."

It hasn't? You have no idea what you are blabbering about..........again. I think what you are trying to assert is that blacks are at a disadvantage from the get go because they are black. THAT is "incredibily" false.

And this "many deserving people have been passed over due to affirmative action" is just more whining BS from people who don't understand -- or more likely, just don't want to recognize -- why a niche must be created for people who don't enjoy the benefits of the 'old boy network.'

Like the US Navy? You have no idea how many deserving people were passed over for promotion due to quotas and I have set in many meetings where those quotas were discussed in the very companies I have worked for. As for creating a niche? Thank you for proving my point.

As I posted on another thread, a lot of truth lies in the comment about people being born on third base and thinking they've hit a triple.

And there is the problem, if they work hard take advantage of what is offered they can get home........you can get home from first base also.

Too many advantaged people don't even acknowledge their advantage and try to pretend that their success is due to their "harrrd werrrk," without admitting that it is a result of the situation into which they were born.[/QUOTE]

Too many advantaged people? This is about those that are born into a situation where they have to work to get ahead but instead people like you want to just hand it to them w/o them working for it because of race. There is nothing stopping them from accomplishing that if they set their minds to it. Doesn't matter if they are black, white, red or purple.

 

[mash107]

...But your FEMA argument is the most senseless...the only thing it PROVES is Bush was incompetent...

There's always a valid argument for less government and improved efficiency...but there is no valid argument for incompetent government...

Exactly. There was nothing incompetent about FEMA under James Lee Witt. The problems with FEMA during and after Katrina can be laid squarely on Bush's having appointed a person with zero emergency management experience as its head.

And the election of 2008 wasn't a referendum on "big government" versus "small government." It was a repudiation of government that didn't work.

FEMA is characteristic of how the entire government operates. It's the norm, not the exception, hence why I brought it up.

Lew Rockwell: Katrina and Socialist Central Planning

Moreover, 2008 was absolutely not a repudiation of government. Instead it was the opposite. A total embrace of the power and size and scope of government-- the same government that brought on this crisis. Government can never work, no matter which political party is in power. By nature, it is incapable of solving crisis or making lives better.

I didn't say that 2008 was a repudiation of government. I said it was a repudiation of government that didn't work.

And, of course, government can work. Government is not authority. Government is organization.

Government, by nature, simply can never work. It is why the Politburo was unsuccessful in everything they tried to do. You can not command and control human behavior from an armchair. If you watched that video, you'd hear testimony of the rescue effort in Katrina being impeded by the government.

Name me on department of the federal government that is working. Treasury? Look at our economy. Energy? Market is being impeded. We could have had clean energy by now, but bureaucrats picked coal. Education? lol. Transportation? Amtrak....

Name me on crisis that wasn't made worse because of government.

 

[tathagata]

I'll trade Lebron's poverty and homelessness for my aristocratic upbringing in a heartbeat.

If your upbringing was aristocratic, then you yourself are the strongest argument for affirmative action.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

I'll trade Lebron's poverty and homelessness for my aristocratic upbringing in a heartbeat.

If your upbringing was aristocratic, then you yourself are the strongest argument for affirmative action.

For some odd reason I can't picture Gezz as an aristocrat.

 

[amrchaos]

So who wanted to nuke Iran again???

The Libs! Yep, that's the ticket. Conservatives wanted to tell us that there were no need to bomb them right away. First diplomacy and see if we could find an agreement first.

If you want to rewrite everything in order to get away from the impression of being viewed as a lunatic, then you must stop acting like lunatics first!!

 

[Avatar4321]

Seriously, I think I'm in Bizarro world now... Someday, I hope you guys wake up from this fantasy you're creating.

 

[DiveCon]

Notice how the empirical validity of the study continues to be ignored, with opponents instead choosing to engage in attacks that border on ad hominem logical fallacies.

You mean the responses to those who have addressed engaging the "facts" of the study continue to be ignored. Its not our fault if the libs on this board would rather attack conservatives then address serious flaws with the study.

Don't lump me up with those morons who can't see the study is biased.

anyone with at least half a functioning brain can see it is biased

 

[CueUp]

Stalin, Mao LIBERALS??? WOW...

I kinda thought it might come as a surprise to you. You can thank me in private for contributing thusly to your education.

While not all conservatives are authoritarians, all highly authoritarian personalities are political conservatives.


I guess this "concept" falls into the right wing dogma syndrome...

You're a "Tory", you just don't know it...LOL


Conservatives born in Germany in the 1920's supported Hitler
Conservatives born in Russia in the 1930's supported Stalin
Conservatives born in America in the 1750's supported King George III

You're quite simply wrong. Facism has its roots in socialism, which is a liberal construct. Not liberal in its original meaning, but liberal as it has come to mean; i.e. "statist".

Here's a bit from a piece by Daniel Pipes which (apparently) I can't link having not yet made my requisite 15 posts (what an odd rule!):

Liberal fascism sounds like an oxymoron – or a term for conservatives to insult liberals. Actually, it was coined by a socialist writer, none other than the respected and influential left-winger H.G. Wells, who in 1931 called on fellow progressives to become "liberal fascists" and "enlightened Nazis." Really.

His words, indeed, fit a much larger pattern of fusing socialism with fascism: Mussolini was a leading socialist figure who, during World War I, turned away from internationalism in favor of Italian nationalism and called the blend Fascism. Likewise, Hitler headed the National Socialist German Workers Party.

<snip>

A statist ideology, fascism uses politics as the tool to transform society from atomized individuals into an organic whole. It does so by exalting the state over the individual, expert knowledge over democracy, enforced consensus over debate, and socialism over capitalism. It is totalitarian in Mussolini's original meaning of the term, of "Everything in the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State." Fascism's message boils down to "Enough talk, more action!" Its lasting appeal is getting things done.

In contrast, conservatism calls for limited government, individualism, democratic debate, and capitalism. Its appeal is liberty and leaving citizens alone.

 

[CueUp]

If you are poor, in the United States, and of sound mind and body, you DESERVE your fate. They are "poor" because they made bad life choices, attained no marketable skills or engaged in criminal or addictive behavior. Piss on them, they deserve their lot in life.

Total BS.

You're saying that people who are born black "made bad life choices"?

If they did not pursue education or vocational schools for marketable skills, dropped out of school, took illegal drugs, engaged in criminal activity, refused to improve themselves......then,yes, they did. Most, didn't

And here, in the attempt at sarcasm suggesting that people born black "made bad life choices" we can clearly see the sort of racism embedded in liberalism and which they simply cannot seem to see, themselves. Liberals cannot seem to separate being black from being a victim; consequently, if one is black, one's choices in life have nothing to do with how one turns out. After all, they can't help what color they are and race determines EVERYTHING in this country, doesn't it?

Leave it to liberals to be the first to introduce the color of someone's skin, his nationality, or sexual orientation, for to these people the surface things are all that matters.

 

[edthecynic]

I kinda thought it might come as a surprise to you. You can thank me in private for contributing thusly to your education.

While not all conservatives are authoritarians, all highly authoritarian personalities are political conservatives.


I guess this "concept" falls into the right wing dogma syndrome...

You're a "Tory", you just don't know it...LOL


Conservatives born in Germany in the 1920's supported Hitler
Conservatives born in Russia in the 1930's supported Stalin
Conservatives born in America in the 1750's supported King George III

You're quite simply wrong. Facism has its roots in socialism, which is a liberal construct. Not liberal in its original meaning, but liberal as it has come to mean; i.e. "statist".

Here's a bit from a piece by Daniel Pipes which (apparently) I can't link having not yet made my requisite 15 posts (what an odd rule!):

Liberal fascism sounds like an oxymoron – or a term for conservatives to insult liberals. Actually, it was coined by a socialist writer, none other than the respected and influential left-winger H.G. Wells, who in 1931 called on fellow progressives to become "liberal fascists" and "enlightened Nazis." Really.

His words, indeed, fit a much larger pattern of fusing socialism with fascism: Mussolini was a leading socialist figure who, during World War I, turned away from internationalism in favor of Italian nationalism and called the blend Fascism. Likewise, Hitler headed the National Socialist German Workers Party.[/u][/color]

Hitler, the Messiah of CON$ervatism, HATED Liberals and scapgoated Libs along with the Jews for Germany's problems.

"The national government will maintain and defend the foundations on which the power of our nation rests. It will offer strong protection to Christianity as the very basis of our collective morality.
Today Christians stand at the head of our country.
We want to fill our culture again with the Christian spirit.
We want to burn out all the recent immoral developments in literature, in the theatre, and in the press-- in short, we want to burn out the poison of immorality which has entered into our whole life and culture as a result of LIBERAL excess during the past years."
[The Speeches of Adolph Hitler, 1922-1939, Vol. 1 (London, Oxford University Press, 1942), pg. 871-872]

 

[KittenKoder]

While not all conservatives are authoritarians, all highly authoritarian personalities are political conservatives.


I guess this "concept" falls into the right wing dogma syndrome...

You're a "Tory", you just don't know it...LOL


Conservatives born in Germany in the 1920's supported Hitler
Conservatives born in Russia in the 1930's supported Stalin
Conservatives born in America in the 1750's supported King George III

You're quite simply wrong. Facism has its roots in socialism, which is a liberal construct. Not liberal in its original meaning, but liberal as it has come to mean; i.e. "statist".

Here's a bit from a piece by Daniel Pipes which (apparently) I can't link having not yet made my requisite 15 posts (what an odd rule!):

Liberal fascism sounds like an oxymoron – or a term for conservatives to insult liberals. Actually, it was coined by a socialist writer, none other than the respected and influential left-winger H.G. Wells, who in 1931 called on fellow progressives to become "liberal fascists" and "enlightened Nazis." Really.

His words, indeed, fit a much larger pattern of fusing socialism with fascism: Mussolini was a leading socialist figure who, during World War I, turned away from internationalism in favor of Italian nationalism and called the blend Fascism. Likewise, Hitler headed the National Socialist German Workers Party.[/u][/color]

Hitler, the Messiah of CON$ervatism, HATED Liberals and scapgoated Libs along with the Jews for Germany's problems.

"The national government will maintain and defend the foundations on which the power of our nation rests. It will offer strong protection to Christianity as the very basis of our collective morality.
Today Christians stand at the head of our country.
We want to fill our culture again with the Christian spirit.
We want to burn out all the recent immoral developments in literature, in the theatre, and in the press-- in short, we want to burn out the poison of immorality which has entered into our whole life and culture as a result of LIBERAL excess during the past years."
[The Speeches of Adolph Hitler, 1922-1939, Vol. 1 (London, Oxford University Press, 1942), pg. 871-872]

I'm sorry, but wrong. Hitler didn't give a rats ass about the political leanings any of the people he had slaughtered. He wanted power and went after anything that threatened it, adding us Jews to the list as revenge because he was the most well known "self hating Jew". The word was not used in that speech as a political affiliation but as an adjective, the word means "excess".

 

[CueUp]

>>> You make some sense between your senselessness...LOL

I'm a Liberal, but in almost 60 years I've never met another Liberal that looks at Stalin as anything but an oppressive totalitatian.

The Boston Tea Party was as much a rebellion against corporations as against government

But your FEMA argument is the most senseless...the only thing it PROVES is Bush was incompetent...

There's always a valid argument for less government and improved efficiency...but there is no valid argument for incompetent government...

IMO...Bush took Reagan's "government is the problem" to mean government needs to be castrated, sabotaged and undermined...

President Obama hit the nail right on the head in his Inaugural Address:
"The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works - whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified. Where the answer is yes, we intend to move forward. Where the answer is no, programs will end. And those of us who manage the public's dollars will be held to account - to spend wisely, reform bad habits, and do our business in the light of day - because only then can we restore the vital trust between a people and their government."

...But your FEMA argument is the most senseless...the only thing it PROVES is Bush was incompetent...

There's always a valid argument for less government and improved efficiency...but there is no valid argument for incompetent government...

Exactly. There was nothing incompetent about FEMA under James Lee Witt. The problems with FEMA during and after Katrina can be laid squarely on Bush's having appointed a person with zero emergency management experience as its head.

And the election of 2008 wasn't a referendum on "big government" versus "small government." It was a repudiation of government that didn't work.

FEMA is characteristic of how the entire government operates. It's the norm, not the exception, hence why I brought it up.



Moreover, 2008 was absolutely not a repudiation of government. Instead it was the opposite. A total embrace of the power and size and scope of government-- the same government that brought on this crisis. Government can never work, no matter which political party is in power. By nature, it is incapable of solving crisis or making lives better.

Yep. This is the thing that liberals never seem to grasp. The FEMA clusterf*ck should have been all the convincing needed that government does NOTHING very well and, therefore, should be kept out of the business of everyday life (including most major disasters) as much as possible. A people who depend upon government to rescue them not just from life's major calamities, but from all of its smaller ones, as well, wind up being let down (as happened in New Orleans). Note however that in North Dakota, rrecently, the citizens took their fate into their own hands and fought the rising river without waiting for FEMA to step in. Is not the comparison/contrast rather striking?

 

[Yukon]

Let me define a "modern" CONSERVATIVE for you: ...stingy, miserly, reactionary, regressive, bigoted, prejudiced, biased, narrow-minded and more.

Considering that conservatives were anti-women voting, anti-blacks voting, pro-segregation, pro-Vietnam War, anti-Head Start, etc. etc. etc. you can see why I'd be embarrassed and indeed ashamed to call myself a conservative.

 

[DiveCon]

...But your FEMA argument is the most senseless...the only thing it PROVES is Bush was incompetent...

There's always a valid argument for less government and improved efficiency...but there is no valid argument for incompetent government...

Exactly. There was nothing incompetent about FEMA under James Lee Witt. The problems with FEMA during and after Katrina can be laid squarely on Bush's having appointed a person with zero emergency management experience as its head.

And the election of 2008 wasn't a referendum on "big government" versus "small government." It was a repudiation of government that didn't work.

FEMA is characteristic of how the entire government operates. It's the norm, not the exception, hence why I brought it up.



Moreover, 2008 was absolutely not a repudiation of government. Instead it was the opposite. A total embrace of the power and size and scope of government-- the same government that brought on this crisis. Government can never work, no matter which political party is in power. By nature, it is incapable of solving crisis or making lives better.

Yep. This is the thing that liberals never seem to grasp. The FEMA clusterf*ck should have been all the convincing needed that government does NOTHING very well and, therefore, should be kept out of the business of everyday life (including most major disasters) as much as possible. A people who depend upon government to rescue them not just from life's major calamities, but from all of its smaller ones, as well, wind up being let down (as happened in New Orleans). Note however that in North Dakota, rrecently, the citizens took their fate into their own hands and fought the rising river without waiting for FEMA to step in. Is not the comparison/contrast rather striking?

come on Deb, FEMA wasnt the clusterfuck that the libs made it out to be
seems the only place that was was the state of LA
didnt have that mess in AL, MS, or FL, and all 3 were hit just as hard if not harder than LA

 

[KittenKoder]

Let me define a "modern" CONSERVATIVE for you: ...stingy, miserly, reactionary, regressive, bigoted, prejudiced, biased, narrow-minded and more.

Considering that conservatives were anti-women voting, anti-blacks voting, pro-segregation, pro-Vietnam War, anti-Head Start, etc. etc. etc. you can see why I'd be embarrassed and indeed ashamed to call myself a conservative.

Coming from someone who thinks pedos are all gay, that only your religion is right, etc. ... you described yourself much better than a conservative.

 

[edthecynic]

You're quite simply wrong. Facism has its roots in socialism, which is a liberal construct. Not liberal in its original meaning, but liberal as it has come to mean; i.e. "statist".

Here's a bit from a piece by Daniel Pipes which (apparently) I can't link having not yet made my requisite 15 posts (what an odd rule!):

Liberal fascism sounds like an oxymoron – or a term for conservatives to insult liberals. Actually, it was coined by a socialist writer, none other than the respected and influential left-winger H.G. Wells, who in 1931 called on fellow progressives to become "liberal fascists" and "enlightened Nazis." Really.

His words, indeed, fit a much larger pattern of fusing socialism with fascism: Mussolini was a leading socialist figure who, during World War I, turned away from internationalism in favor of Italian nationalism and called the blend Fascism. Likewise, Hitler headed the National Socialist German Workers Party.[/u][/color]

Hitler, the Messiah of CON$ervatism, HATED Liberals and scapgoated Libs along with the Jews for Germany's problems.

"The national government will maintain and defend the foundations on which the power of our nation rests. It will offer strong protection to Christianity as the very basis of our collective morality.
Today Christians stand at the head of our country.
We want to fill our culture again with the Christian spirit.
We want to burn out all the recent immoral developments in literature, in the theatre, and in the press-- in short, we want to burn out the poison of immorality which has entered into our whole life and culture as a result of LIBERAL excess during the past years."
[The Speeches of Adolph Hitler, 1922-1939, Vol. 1 (London, Oxford University Press, 1942), pg. 871-872]

I'm sorry, but wrong. Hitler didn't give a rats ass about the political leanings any of the people he had slaughtered. He wanted power and went after anything that threatened it, adding us Jews to the list as revenge because he was the most well known "self hating Jew". The word was not used in that speech as a political affiliation but as an adjective, the word means "excess".

Except he already used the word "excess" so you are saying the CON$ervative hero said "as a result of "EXCESS" excess during the last few years."
ROFLMAO LMAO LMAO LMAO

 

[CueUp]

While not all conservatives are authoritarians, all highly authoritarian personalities are political conservatives.


I guess this "concept" falls into the right wing dogma syndrome...

You're a "Tory", you just don't know it...LOL


Conservatives born in Germany in the 1920's supported Hitler
Conservatives born in Russia in the 1930's supported Stalin
Conservatives born in America in the 1750's supported King George III

You're quite simply wrong. Facism has its roots in socialism, which is a liberal construct. Not liberal in its original meaning, but liberal as it has come to mean; i.e. "statist".

Here's a bit from a piece by Daniel Pipes which (apparently) I can't link having not yet made my requisite 15 posts (what an odd rule!):

Liberal fascism sounds like an oxymoron – or a term for conservatives to insult liberals. Actually, it was coined by a socialist writer, none other than the respected and influential left-winger H.G. Wells, who in 1931 called on fellow progressives to become "liberal fascists" and "enlightened Nazis." Really.

His words, indeed, fit a much larger pattern of fusing socialism with fascism: Mussolini was a leading socialist figure who, during World War I, turned away from internationalism in favor of Italian nationalism and called the blend Fascism. Likewise, Hitler headed the National Socialist German Workers Party.[/u][/color]

Hitler, the Messiah of CON$ervatism, HATED Liberals and scapgoated Libs along with the Jews for Germany's problems.

"The national government will maintain and defend the foundations on which the power of our nation rests. It will offer strong protection to Christianity as the very basis of our collective morality.
Today Christians stand at the head of our country.
We want to fill our culture again with the Christian spirit.
We want to burn out all the recent immoral developments in literature, in the theatre, and in the press-- in short, we want to burn out the poison of immorality which has entered into our whole life and culture as a result of LIBERAL excess during the past years."
[The Speeches of Adolph Hitler, 1922-1939, Vol. 1 (London, Oxford University Press, 1942), pg. 871-872]

You really don't have a clue, do you? Hitler's movement was liberal as in "progressive" as in what we now see liberals adhering to today

 

[mash107]

I kinda thought it might come as a surprise to you. You can thank me in private for contributing thusly to your education.

While not all conservatives are authoritarians, all highly authoritarian personalities are political conservatives.


I guess this "concept" falls into the right wing dogma syndrome...

You're a "Tory", you just don't know it...LOL


Conservatives born in Germany in the 1920's supported Hitler
Conservatives born in Russia in the 1930's supported Stalin
Conservatives born in America in the 1750's supported King George III

You're quite simply wrong. Facism has its roots in socialism, which is a liberal construct. Not liberal in its original meaning, but liberal as it has come to mean; i.e. "statist".

Here's a bit from a piece by Daniel Pipes which (apparently) I can't link having not yet made my requisite 15 posts (what an odd rule!):

Liberal fascism sounds like an oxymoron – or a term for conservatives to insult liberals. Actually, it was coined by a socialist writer, none other than the respected and influential left-winger H.G. Wells, who in 1931 called on fellow progressives to become "liberal fascists" and "enlightened Nazis." Really.

His words, indeed, fit a much larger pattern of fusing socialism with fascism: Mussolini was a leading socialist figure who, during World War I, turned away from internationalism in favor of Italian nationalism and called the blend Fascism. Likewise, Hitler headed the National Socialist German Workers Party.

<snip>

A statist ideology, fascism uses politics as the tool to transform society from atomized individuals into an organic whole. It does so by exalting the state over the individual, expert knowledge over democracy, enforced consensus over debate, and socialism over capitalism. It is totalitarian in Mussolini's original meaning of the term, of "Everything in the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State." Fascism's message boils down to "Enough talk, more action!" Its lasting appeal is getting things done.

In contrast, conservatism calls for limited government, individualism, democratic debate, and capitalism. Its appeal is liberty and leaving citizens alone.

Does anyone dispute socialism is a type of fascism/statism?

 

[Yukon]

Coming from someone who thinks pedos are all gay, that only your religion is right, etc. ... you described yourself much better than a conservative.

Pedophiles aren't gay they are queer !The Roman Catholic religion is the true Christian religion, all others are simply wannabe's.