Kewl.I am not upset, my friend.
Its the Internet.
Kewl.I am not upset, my friend.
Its the Internet.
Example?
It is also far from the truth to perceive the right as being for your rights as a responsible human. I do believe it was the former Republican president who signed the USA PATRIOT act into law. I'm not going to try and say that the Democrats didn't go along with it, only that you can't have a one-sided argument about lessening of personal freedoms without pointing fingers at both parties. New Yorkers, the people most directly affected by the 9/11/01 attacks, overwhelmingly disagreed with much of the response to that event--including the USA PATRIOT act.You clueless folks need to realize that any party that backs the taking or lessening of our personal freedoms, in any form, is our enemy. You only have the perception that the left is for your rights as a responsible human, but that is far from the truth.
Save for maybe Barney Frank, who already has a security risk since he was popped for a 1/4lb when they raided his home for being a gay brothel.
How is abandonment of their own values not a true disgrace? I mean, I agree with you, but how is that not a disgrace?I have to agree that the Republican party has abandoned conservative values, but the true disgrace is on the other side of the aisle.
Silly and unfounded. You will find this in many aspects of debate or opposition. It exists in every statement claiming Barack Obama to be a socialist. It exists in every attempt to paint Sarah Palin as dumb. (She's not dumb, so much as uninformed and ineffective. She is also a hypocrite, who rallies against the same ear-mark spending she wantonly accepted at every offer during her term as Alaska's governor. That is one of many contradictions in her rhetoric. She is the reason I did not vote for John McCain.)Demonizing ones opponent is a typical leftist maneuver.
CBG, you'll an idea when you've made a point with hoosierdaddy. He'll respond with something like:
"I shit bigger than you, junior."
I'd quote this for posterity but apparently his worthless contributions are being moderated.
The repeated negative reps aren't far behind that.
Gramps, a lot of what you are saying is based on your opinion alone.
So, can I consider you a neo-conservative, since you obviously have your own view of what a "true" conservative is? Do a little research on what the definition of a "true conservative" is, and you will have to admit that you are doing what you are claiming Sarah Palin is doing. BTW, do you know what she thinks true conservatism is? Have you seen where she states these things so you knew?
See where I'm going here?
Who has stated this and gave you this impression? Could it possibly be that your loathe for religion, and in particular Christianity, influence your thoughts on this? DO you have any evidence of a so called "neo-conservative" actually doing this blatantly, or is this another example of you just having this perception?
I'd really be interested if you could point out a known conservative that states this philosophy.
No, unless you continue the sentence to read; ...having any control or influence in the issues of government.
The only institution that our founders were against was the church of england, and/or any that would try to impose church values and doctrine on the congress.
Our founders did not have the loathe for religion that you seem to have.
I have to agree that the Republican party has abandoned conservative values, but the true disgrace is on the other side of the aisle.
I don't believe in giving negative reps in non-cannabis horticulture-related discussion threads, but it is clear that he gets just as many of his ideas from the media as some of the other people here in this thread. It is just media which props up any given person's ideals and beliefs. Mostly, that sort of information can only project half-truths, or are only partly correct. It isn't that they are necessarily wrong, just underinformed, and emotional.
This is icing on the cake to me. The left at least stands up for what they believe. Conservatism died long time ago due to apathy. That's is much more of a disgrace than standing up for what you believe in.
Twisting words to control the perception of populations is indoctrination.
Yeah, kind of like that idiot woman currently serving Obama calling terrorists for "man-caused disasters". That's straight out of 1984 and only ignorant fools would fall for that.
Yeah, kind of like that idiot woman currently serving Obama calling terrorists for "man-caused disasters". That's straight out of 1984 and only ignorant fools would fall for that.
However, jumping on the big money wagon is not progressive IMO. It's just using a corrupt money machine to get elected. And when progress is actually legislated, it's often watered down by big money interests.
Now here's a dumbed down perspective. You either don't know the proper name of the official you reject or you prefer pejorative over information.
And your 1984 reference is equally narrow. One can easily make the argument that any industry that prizes profit over ecology is an environmental terrorist. That's what a terrorist does, exploit issues for gain of some type. Even if the official didn't make the verbal distinction, (which I suspect they did, lol) then it's up to the narrow mind to remove the context and wave the manufactured point like a victory flag.
When liberals advocate stiff government control and regulation on a plethora of issues, they no longer are liberal and are in fact Totalitarian.
The Democratic party is Totalitarian. As well as the Republican party.
Our country was founded as a Democratic Republic. To pick one or the other is to accept the shackles fascism.
Votes can be bought, and a Republic is hard to maintain.
Maintain vigilance.
Barack Obama has been vocally critical of it.
I know exactly who the dumb broad is, her name is Janet Napolitano.
Democrats are way soft on terrorism, and they're not fooling anybody. Democrats are a threat to national security, and that is what I believe.
Of course he is. He lied out of his ass when he was campaigning and promised/pledged to take public financing, before he broke his promise which removed the cap on how much money he could raise.
He's a flat out liar, and a proven hypocrite when it comes to campaign financing.