Its a figure of speech. And it's a joke...lighten up.
Last edited:
Have you always had the political beliefs you have now?
- Thread starter Billy000
- Start date
Its a figure of speech. And it's a joke...lighten up.
Delta4Embassy
Gold Member
No, I've become much more conservative as I've gotten older. Still 100% a-political, but I have positions on various things. My position on abortion did a 180 though from being pro-choice early on. But once ya see a baby in the womb it's hard to call it anything else and be ok about abortion. Always been conservative on legal matters. Still liberal about drug legalization though. Making something illegal simply creates criminal enterprises who'll supply it. Given how powerful drug cartels are, could eliminate much of that power by simply making drugs legal. As a law enforcement issue that's the obvious thing to do.
Bfgrn
Gold Member
- Apr 4, 2009
- 16,829
- 2,496
- 245
"The debt explosion has resulted not from big spending by the Democrats, but instead the Republican Party's embrace, about three decades ago, of the insidious doctrine that deficits don't matter if they result from tax cuts."
David Stockman - Director of the Office of Management and Budget for U.S. President Ronald Reagan.
BULLSHIT. Reagan was the biggest 'socialist' in American history. He transferred at least $3 trillion of wealth from the poor and the middle class to the opulent. And he was a REAL welfare queen. Instead of PAYING for what he spent he BORROWED for what he spent. He put America on the Beijing credit card.
Reagan: The great American Socialist
LetÂ’s go back to the early 1980Â’s. In 1981, Reagan signed a law that sharply reduced the income tax for the wealthiest Americans and corporations.
The president asserted his program would create jobs, purge inflation and, get this, trim the budget deficit.
However, following the tax cut, the deficit soared from 2.5 percent of GDP to over 6 percent, alarming financial markets, sending interest rates sky high, and culminating in the worst recession since the 1930Â’s.
INTEREST RATES
Soon the president realized he needed new revenues to trim the deficit, bring down interest rates and improve his chances for reelection. He would not rescind the income tax cut, but other taxes were acceptable.
In 1982, taxes were raised on gasoline and cigarettes, but the deficit hardly budged. In 1983, the president signed the biggest tax rise on payrolls, promising to create a surplus in the Social Security system, while knowing all along that the new revenue would be used to finance the deficit.
The retirement system was looted from the first day the Social Security surplus came into being, because the legislation itself gave the president a free hand to spend the surplus in any way he liked.
Thus began a massive transfer of wealth from the poor and the middle class, especially the self-employed small businessman, to the wealthy. The self-employment tax jumped as much as 66 percent.
In 1986, Reagan slashed the top tax rate further. His redistributionist obsession led to a perversity in the law. The wealthiest faced a 28 percent tax rate, while those with lower incomes faced a 33 percent rate; in addition, the bottom rate climbed from 11 percent to 15 percent.
For the first time in history, the top rate fell and the bottom rate rose simultaneously. Even unemployment compensation was not spared. The jobless had to pay income tax on their benefits.
A year later, the man who would not spare unemployment compensation from taxation called for a cut in the capital gains tax.
Thus, Reagan was a staunch socialist, totally committed to his cause of wealth redistribution towards the affluent.How much wealth transfer has occurred through ReaganÂ’s policies? At least $3 trillion.
Thus, Reagan was the first Republican socialist - and a great one, because his wealth transfer occurred on a massive scale. His accomplishment dwarfs even FDRÂ’s, and if today the small businessman suffers a crippling tax burden, he must thank Reagan the redistributionist.
However, FDR took pains to help the poor, while Reagan took pains to help the wealthiest like himself.
ReaganÂ’s measures were similar to those that the Republicans adopted during the 1920s, which were followed by the catastrophic depression.
Bfgrn
Gold Member
- Apr 4, 2009
- 16,829
- 2,496
- 245
Well we agree...it is a joke.
BlackSand
Nobody
- Oct 23, 2013
- 23,348
- 13,666
- 1,435
"Show me a young Conservative and I'll show you someone with no heart. Show me an old Liberal and I'll show you someone with no brains.” ~ Winston Churchill
I agree with it so that means Churchill, Rocko (although thinks it is a joke) and me are part of the "they" you are asking about ... And anyone else can join if "they" so choose.
.
Last edited:
Iceweasel
Diamond Member
...yawn. And Obama is the great fiscal conservative? Reagan's spending had much to do with defeating communism, something leftist will NEVER forgive.
Right. And the democrat spending made us rich. What a pile of shit.
Last edited:
I was once an uber liberal. I belonged to NOW and the ACLU. I worked with Planned Parenthood and was a clinic defender during anti abortion protests. I voted straight democrat. Then my son had a serious political talk with me and pointed out exactly what the liberals were doing. That's when I woke up.
JakeStarkey
Diamond Member
- Aug 10, 2009
- 168,037
- 16,541
- 2,165
- Banned
- #68
Have you always had the political beliefs you have now?
I have been pretty much a Gerald Ford Republican for forty years.
The resurrection of the ding a ling far right was expected, as that is a cyclical expression in our party, if not looked forward to.
I have been pretty much a Gerald Ford Republican for forty years.
The resurrection of the ding a ling far right was expected, as that is a cyclical expression in our party, if not looked forward to.
JoeB131
Diamond Member
I was very right wing in the 1980's, but at the time I was in the military and everyone was.
By the early 1990's, when Bush Sr. had us going to war with Iraq to protect his oil buddies, I started to reconsider it. Then the Democrats nominated Clinton.
I think I stayed conservative through the 1990's and the early Oughts because Clinton was such a sleazy character on a personal level that I really didn't see the guy was kind of right on the economic issues.
It really took the crash of 2008 to get me to see that the GOP has either no idea of what it is doing or simply doesn't care about working folks like me as long as their rich friends are getting over.
Bfgrn
Gold Member
- Apr 4, 2009
- 16,829
- 2,496
- 245
Churchill, the father of the British welfare state, never said that...
NOW what?
Quotes Falsely Attributed
Avorysuds
Gold Member
I grew up thinking I was or would be Liberal/Democrat.
All I knew is it felt good to be a Liberal/Democrat.
As I got older I realized that there are generally 2 different kinds of liberals. The popular or "common" liberals usually base everything off of a religious like, faith based system where "facts" are built on a foundation on feelings rather than reality. Example would be trying to remove human greed from all situations rather than logically include it seeing as it's impossible to remove.
The secondary and far more rare version of Liberal is strongly fiscally conservative, limiting their ideas about what Governments role in our lives are due to understanding there is a bill associated with. They also are aware that human greed must be included in policy.
I never felt I needed to control other peoples lives, like tell someone being gay is good or bad, or that their skin color makes them stupid or a better athlete. So naturally i couldn't be a Democrat and naturally i couldn't be a Republican.
Republicans/Conservatives understand economics far better than Liberals/Democrats who believe in faith based economics. But Republicans believe in legislating morality because of their faith based system, the bible...
I guess i just fell into being a Libertarian seeing as it's the second type of conservative/republican. Understanding economics for what it is not what I would really really reeeeaallly like it to be. But also understanding human sexuality for what it is rather than what I'd really reallly reeeaallly like it to be. And then of course not being an ass backwards, hypocritical religious nutter who believes they are above judging others only to judge more than any other being on the planet... I mean, why do they need God when they already know who is going to hell and that their soul is saved?
All I knew is it felt good to be a Liberal/Democrat.
As I got older I realized that there are generally 2 different kinds of liberals. The popular or "common" liberals usually base everything off of a religious like, faith based system where "facts" are built on a foundation on feelings rather than reality. Example would be trying to remove human greed from all situations rather than logically include it seeing as it's impossible to remove.
The secondary and far more rare version of Liberal is strongly fiscally conservative, limiting their ideas about what Governments role in our lives are due to understanding there is a bill associated with. They also are aware that human greed must be included in policy.
I never felt I needed to control other peoples lives, like tell someone being gay is good or bad, or that their skin color makes them stupid or a better athlete. So naturally i couldn't be a Democrat and naturally i couldn't be a Republican.
Republicans/Conservatives understand economics far better than Liberals/Democrats who believe in faith based economics. But Republicans believe in legislating morality because of their faith based system, the bible...
I guess i just fell into being a Libertarian seeing as it's the second type of conservative/republican. Understanding economics for what it is not what I would really really reeeeaallly like it to be. But also understanding human sexuality for what it is rather than what I'd really reallly reeeaallly like it to be. And then of course not being an ass backwards, hypocritical religious nutter who believes they are above judging others only to judge more than any other being on the planet... I mean, why do they need God when they already know who is going to hell and that their soul is saved?
HenryBHough
Diamond Member
As you consider this review all the recent confirmations that Democrats always lie.
Stephanie
Diamond Member
- Jul 11, 2004
- 70,230
- 10,874
- 2,040
wow, you were never a Republican so cut the bs
You are just out of this world and reality
BlackSand
Nobody
- Oct 23, 2013
- 23,348
- 13,666
- 1,435
Oh how Harry Reid of you ... 500 sources indicating Churchill said it and one fool professor saying he didn't.
When are you Liberals going to understand that you cannot accuse everyone else of lying because it suits your needs?
.
You voted for torturers, mass murderers and a Mormon who wears magic underwear, and then talk about Conservative wisdom?
healthmyths
Diamond Member
- Sep 19, 2011
- 30,375
- 11,938
- 1,400
When I was young I was liberal, which showed that I had heart.
As I grew older I became conservative, which showed that I had brains." Churchill..
I too was a juvenile in college on the fringe of the Students for Democratic Society/Weathermen.. as were some fellow journalism classmates that as Evan Thomas has said have grown into mid-level paper editors and headline writer/TV producers that now protect Obama at the expense of journalism integrity.
So it is no wonder that mentally challenged people get ALL their information from sources that as this quote:
1,160 (85%) of the Senior executives, on-air personalities, producers, reporters, editors, writers and other self-identifying employees of ABC, CBS and NBC contributed more than $1 million to Democrats candidates and campaign committees in 2008, according to an analysis by The Examiner of data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics.
Obama, Democrats got 88 percent of 2008 contributions by TV network execs, writers, reporters | The Daily Caller
Or for those mentally challenged think about this: if 85% of the above news people gave to Democrats.. do you think they'd be so stupid as to throw their
money away by sharing ALL the stories/news that showed negative aspects about Obama/Democrats?
If these people donated money they surely don't produce stories that would put Obama/democrats in a bad light now would they?
In fact..
Another study found that ABC News had aired 55 positive stories on Obama's health-care policy compared to just 18 negative stories. (Source: Business and Media Institute - Jun 2009)
and when you have the Editor of NewsWeek saying... I mean in a way Obama’s standing above the country, above – above the world, he’s sort of God." Evan Thomas on Hardball, June 5, 2009. Newsweek?s Evan Thomas: Obama Is ?Sort of God? | NewsBusters
So I certainly can understand how mentally challenged who get ONLY their information from MSM and do not have ANY critical thinking skills would be like you.
Fortunately for you at 27 you will grow out of it I guarantee it!
I just hope there will be this last refuge of Freedom i.e. the USA.. to let you grow more aware (but I am fearful because the USA is now
U.S. Plummets in Global Press Freedom Rankings
According to a new report from Reporters Without Borders, there was a profound erosion of press freedom in the United States in 2013.
After a year of attacks on whistleblowers and digital journalists and revelations about mass surveillance, the United States plunged 13 spots
in the group's global press freedom rankings to number 46.
U.S. Plummets in Global Press Freedom Rankings*|*Josh Stearns
Now here is what Obama promised:
In his first full day at the White House almost 14 months ago,
President Obama declared openness and transparency to be touchstones of his administration, and he ordered federal agencies to make it easier
for the public to get information on the workings of government.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/15/us/politics/15open.html
Now how do you resolve the following dichotomy...
Jan 20,2009
In his first full day President Obama declared openness and transparency to be touchstones of his administration,
Feb 11,2014
profound erosion of press freedom in the United States in 2013. Puts USA at 46th in the world .
Iceweasel
Diamond Member
Now we look at your source. He didn't originate it but who knows if he ever said it. BUT your link says he was a liberal. Really?
https://www.gov.uk/government/history/past-prime-ministers/winston-churchill
Sir Winston Churchill Conservative 1940 to 1945, 1951 to 1955
Winston Churchill was an inspirational statesman, writer, orator and leader who led Britain to victory in the Second World War. He served as Conservative Prime Minister twice - from 1940 to 1945 (before being defeated in the 1945 general election by the Labour leader Clement Attlee) and from 1951 to 1955.
Mertex
Cat Lady =^..^=
- Apr 27, 2013
- 26,532
- 13,992
- 1,445
The quote has been repeated in different ways, usually including an "age" which would totally go against Churchill ever having said it.
There is no record of anyone hearing Churchill say this.
"If you aren't a liberal by the time you're 20 you don't have a heart If you aren't a conservative by the time you're 30 you don't have a brain"
Did Winston churchill say If you aren't a liberal by the time you're 20 you don't have a heart If you aren't a conservative by the time you're 30 you don't have a brain
It also would behoove you to do some research before posting such an arrogant statement.
Churchill crossed over to Liberalism when he was 30, and was still a liberal at 35, so for him to make such a stupid statement would undermine his intelligence. He didn't return to the conservative party until he was 50, so it would make no sense that he would utter such a stupid statement.
In 1900 he entered the House of Commons as a Conservative but crossed the floor within four years to join the Liberals on the issue of free trade. Returned as a Liberal at the next election, he gained his first ministerial experience under Campbell-Bannerman as under-secretary for the colonies. Asquith brought him into the cabinet at the age of 33 as president of the Board of Trade (1908) and moved him to the Home Office before he had reached the age of 35 (1910). By now Churchill had married Clementine Hozier (1908)—to whom he proposed four times before he won acceptance. She provided him with a stable emotional base for the rest of his life. Meanwhile, along with Lloyd George, he played a major part in laying the foundations of the welfare state by establishing labour exchanges and social insurance. His tenure of the Home Office, on the other hand, is remembered for the myth that he sent troops to Wales to crush the striking miners of Tonypandy (1910) and for his appearance at the siege of Sidney Street (1911).
Returning to the Commons in October 1924, he was offered the chancellorship of the Exchequer by Baldwin and rejoined the Conservative Party.
http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/Winston_Churchill.aspx
And so, in the next two decades, from 1905 to 1923, Churchill held a dizzying array of portfolios as a Liberal minister - President of the Board of Trade; Home Secretary; First Lord of the Admiralty; Minister of Munitions; Secretary of State for War and Air; and Secretary of State for the Colonies.
Churchill as Liberal
Bfgrn
Gold Member
- Apr 4, 2009
- 16,829
- 2,496
- 245
Misattributed
If you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain.
According to research by Mark T. Shirey, citing Nice Guys Finish Seventh: False Phrases, Spurious Sayings, and Familiar Misquotations by Ralph Keyes, 1992, this quote was first uttered by mid-nineteenth century French historian and statesman François Guizot when he observed, Not to be a republican at 20 is proof of want of heart; to be one at 30 is proof of want of head. (N'être pas républicain à vingt ans est preuve d'un manque de cœur ; l'être après trente ans est preuve d'un manque de tête.) This quote has been attributed variously to George Bernard Shaw, Benjamin Disraeli, Otto von Bismarck, and others.
Furthermore, the Churchill Centre, on its Falsely Attributed Quotations page, states "there is no record of anyone hearing Churchill say this." Paul Addison of Edinburgh University is quoted as stating: "Surely Churchill can't have used the words attributed to him. He'd been a Conservative at 15 and a Liberal at 35! And would he have talked so disrespectfully of Clemmie, who is generally thought to have been a lifelong Liberal?"
Variants: Any man who is under 30, and is not a liberal, has no heart; and any man who is over 30, and is not a conservative, has no brains.
Show me a young conservative and I'll show you someone with no heart. Show me an old liberal and I'll show you someone with no brains.
If you are not a socialist by the time you are 25, you have no heart. If you are still a socialist by the time you are 35, you have no head
The Churchill Centre and Churchill Museum at the Cabinet War Rooms was founded in 1968 to educate new generations on the leadership, statesmanship, vision, courage and boldness of Sir Winston Churchill. Thousands of members around the world work together to impress the record Churchill's life and deeds on the 21st century. The Centre's exhibits are located at the Churchill War Rooms.
NOW WHAT???
Similar threads
New Topics
-
US clears flying taxis for limited use as FAA launches nationwide pilot program
- Started by Doc7505
- Replies: 1
-
Beyond the Headlines: Why Smart Money Watches SEC Form 4 Insider Trading- Started by BellaJones
- Replies: 0
-
-
-
