TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Colin Powell Endorses Obama
Pages (7): « 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 »
| quote: |
| Originally posted by The17sss I agree with you to a point about something here... I am NOT a fan of Bush, and I hate how he has gone against everything conservative. I'm not in the least bit supportive of his massive expanision and spending tactics... he's part of the problem. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by The17sss Too stupid huh? lol... again with the personal attacks. I never said conservativism was the driving force behind the republican party anymore... my point is that's the problem; those that are defecting are not true conservatives. You're not reading between the lines... the GOP is watered down BECAUSE it was trying to be all inclusive and that's not how conservatism works. Conservatism is what it is. It doesn't need to be moderated. It doesn't need to be redefined. It doesn't need to be upgraded. Liberal Democrats have gotten away so long as being the caring party; they're the party that cares about the downtrodden. Liberalism has created the downtrodden and the unhappy and the miserable, and then the liberals set themselves up as their champions, say, "Only we can fix them because only we care." They don't care. Real compassion is conservatism, which promotes the individual and allows them to be the maters of their own destiny. Real conservatism wants every individual to be the best he or she can be, with nobody standing in the way. Let a person use what their god-given talents are, combined with their ambition and their desire and their dreams, and get out of their way. We want people to amount to the most they want to be and can be. That's a much better recipe for success than massive government sponsored entitlement programs. Now,for those who have a legitimate problem that prevents them from succeeding, we (conservatives) are all for taking care of those people. But we do not want to take normal, healthy Americans and turn them into wards of the state or dependents. We don't want to look at them with arrogant condescension and say, "You're not part of the smart group... you need us to tell you where your money is going to go, where your kids can go to school, how your mortgage will be set, what you can and can't do... etc." We just don't look at people that way. You talk about hope? We hope for this country to be the best country it can be and you need the best individuals for that to happen. Time and time again, it's proven in the private sector with innovation and much more success than the govt. can do. Conservatism is about the individual. Liberalism doesn't care about the individual, just the groups... get it strait. Like I'm going to let some brainwashed liberal loser convince me, a conservative, that I don't understand what conservatism means. I actually feel sorry for you that you believe so religiously in liberalism. When you're all growns up and have real responsibility to face in life, like running a business and signing the front of the check, maybe you're childish perspective will change. Or maybe it won't... I wouldn't bet on it. |
| quote: |
| "Once the war against Saddam Hussein begins, we expect every American to support our military, and if you can't do that, just shut up. Americans, and indeed our foreign allies who actively work against our military once the war is underway, will be considered enemies of the state by me." -- Bill O'Reilly, The O'Reilly Factor, 2/26/03 |
...Who is it defending civil liberties against authoritarians within our government. It sure ain't the Republicans...
...A "true conservative", in the context your using it, follows orders like a good Republican. Doesn't question authority. Always believes they are under attack. No wonder the Republican Party is disintegrating in front of our very eyes. Frankly, as a registered Republican, I'm glad. If they can't stick to their fundamental principles, low taxes WITH low expenditures, then to hell with them.
I feel sorry for all these frustrated liberals... that at the end if Obama wins, their president is going to careless about them.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by MisterOpus1 Excellent. I look forward to hearing your voice joining mine and many others in voicing dissent with this Administration (and admittedly, with the capitulation of the Congressional Democrats) for illegally wiretapping Americans. I also look forward to hearing your voice for a woman's right to choose what she can and cannot do with her body. Oh wait, just not some individual freedoms, I guess, like those, right? How funny of you to even hint at how Reagan ran his government below when you state this. Small-state my ass. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by The17sss Too stupid huh? lol... again with the personal attacks. I never said conservativism was the driving force behind the republican party anymore... my point is that's the problem; those that are defecting are not true conservatives. You're not reading between the lines... the GOP is watered down BECAUSE it was trying to be all inclusive and that's not how conservatism works. Conservatism is what it is. It doesn't need to be moderated. It doesn't need to be redefined. It doesn't need to be upgraded. Liberal Democrats have gotten away so long as being the caring party; they're the party that cares about the downtrodden. Liberalism has created the downtrodden and the unhappy and the miserable, and then the liberals set themselves up as their champions, say, "Only we can fix them because only we care." They don't care. Real compassion is conservatism, which promotes the individual and allows them to be the maters of their own destiny. Real conservatism wants every individual to be the best he or she can be, with nobody standing in the way. Let a person use what their god-given talents are, combined with their ambition and their desire and their dreams, and get out of their way. We want people to amount to the most they want to be and can be. That's a much better recipe for success than massive government sponsored entitlement programs. Now,for those who have a legitimate problem that prevents them from succeeding, we (conservatives) are all for taking care of those people. But we do not want to take normal, healthy Americans and turn them into wards of the state or dependents. We don't want to look at them with arrogant condescension and say, "You're not part of the smart group... you need us to tell you where your money is going to go, where your kids can go to school, how your mortgage will be set, what you can and can't do... etc." We just don't look at people that way. You talk about hope? We hope for this country to be the best country it can be and you need the best individuals for that to happen. Time and time again, it's proven in the private sector with innovation and much more success than the govt. can do. Conservatism is about the individual. Liberalism doesn't care about the individual, just the groups... get it strait. Like I'm going to let some brainwashed liberal loser convince me, a conservative, that I don't understand what conservatism means. I actually feel sorry for you that you believe so religiously in liberalism. When you're all growns up and have real responsibility to face in life, like running a business and signing the front of the check, maybe you're childish perspective will change. Or maybe it won't... I wouldn't bet on it. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Fir3start3r THIS!!  I was beginning to believe that I was the only one this board that actually had these values... |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Groundhog Boy Calling a spade a spade is not a personal attack. Stop crying like a little bitch. I'm far past trying to convince you. I'm just pointing out to everyone else how idiotic most of your rants are and expressing my complete lack of respect for any of your ideas. I mean, for one thing, you consider me to be this extremist liberal who supports a complete nanny state, which couldn't be further from the truth. |
| quote: | ||
Originally posted by Fir3start3r
I think this is something we can all agree with - Bush is an anomaly... |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by josh4 Then why is your camp only now coming out with this? None of you on this board have actively gone out of your way to condemn Bush as much as you have to apologize for him. Bush doesn't hold up to many of the conservative perspectives outlined by The17sss but there everyone was, marching in lockstep with his administration. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Krypton No wonder the Republican Party is disintegrating in front of our very eyes. Frankly, as a registered Republican, I'm glad. If they can't stick to their fundamental principles, low taxes WITH low expenditures, then to hell with them. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by LatinLover Your lack of intelligence is the best proof of the Obama indoctrination. Save yourself.... changing to the GOP is your only salvation. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Fir3start3r 'my camp' as you so succinctly put it (even though technically I'm not even in that camp being Canadian and all) has been pretty clear about Bush's ballooning government not being a good thing... Why is 'your camp' only figuring this out now? |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Fir3start3r Bush's ballooning government not being a good thing... |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by The17sss That's a lot to get into, and you have some good points. You can't forget about the disaster Regan walked into... 12% inflation, 21% interest rates. Put your 10% unemployment rate figure in perspective please... it peaked in 1982 during that recession, but quickly changed and went down throughout the next 6 years. Inflation significantly decreased, and his administration created between 16-20 million jobs while he was in office. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by The17sss I agree with you to a point about something here... I am NOT a fan of Bush, and I hate how he has gone against everything conservative. I'm not in the least bit supportive of his massive expanision and spending tactics... he's part of the problem. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by The17sss That's a lot to get into, and you have some good points. You can't forget about the disaster Regan walked into... 12% inflation, 21% interest rates. Put your 10% unemployment rate figure in perspective please... it peaked in 1982 during that recession, but quickly changed and went down throughout the next 6 years. Inflation significantly decreased, and his administration created between 16-20 million jobs while he was in office. |
| quote: |
| BTW, I'm all for voicing dissention towards things done during the Bush administration. No problem. The issue about abortion, for me personally, is the one thing I buck the trend on... because I do support the woman's right to choose. But to make the point from the conservative side, the reasoning is simple and can also be respected: as I said before, conservatism stands for "life, liberty, pursuit of happiness." Without life, there is nothing else here, and if we're going to sit around indiscriminately deciding who lives and who dies based on our own convenience, that's not conservative. The essence of innocence is a child in the womb who has no choice over what happens to it. If conservatives don't stand up for that person, if the government won't, then nobody will. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Groundhog Boy Calling a spade a spade is not a personal attack. Stop crying like a little bitch. I'm far past trying to convince you. I'm just pointing out to everyone else how idiotic most of your rants are and expressing my complete lack of respect for any of your ideas. I mean, for one thing, you consider me to be this extremist liberal who supports a complete nanny state, which couldn't be further from the truth. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by MisterOpus1 I concede that point. However those jobs created was at the expense of the biggest government expansion in history at that time, not to mention borrowing $ out the ass, creating a gigantic deficit and putting us all into debt for years to come, which resulted in a lovely recession in it's own in 1990-91. And that's why I don't toot the horn of the great economic expansion under Reagan so much - when it comes at the expense of creating a giant deficit and trade debt, how wonderful is it really? I understand the viewpoint of conservatives, just as I do for liberals. As I've stated numerous times in the past, I tend to be a fence-sitter on this one, if not lean slightly more into the pro-life camp. My point, however, was simply pointing out the potential irony of standing up for all liberties, as some Conservatives claim, yet often times end up picking and choosing those which are most convenient. This wasn't the case for you in this specific instance, however, so I'll let it go. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by The17sss where's the incentive if you're success is going to be punished by "spreading the wealth around"? |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by The17sss Obama's policies will depress investment in businesses and innovation, and the creation of new jobs if he's saying once you get to that $250K plateau, your tax burden will increase even more; where's the incentive if you're success is going to be punished by "spreading the wealth around"? I don't know about you, but I don't know anybody who ever got a job from a poor person. |
I'm already looking forward to the next Republican excuse for this one:
| quote: |
| I've considered myself less of a partisan than an ideologue. I cared about conservative principles, and still do, instead of caring about the GOP. Granted, McCain's views are closer to mine than Obama's. But I've learned over this Bush era to value competence along with ideology. Otherwise, our ideology gets discredited, as it has so disastrously over the past eight years. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov Ask Adam Smith: "The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. . . . The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. . . . It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion." |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Krypton No they won't. Look at history. Clinton presided over one of the best boom economies we've ever had and Obama's tax rates for high income earners would match Clinton's. Additionally, the wealthy pay a less % of their income in taxes than a middle income earner. You know, there's something called fairness, and right now, the high income earners have NOTHING to complain about. They won't be taxed into poverty. They will just have to pay their fair share. |
Adam Smith didn't think a flat tax was fair. Go ahead and call him a socialist.
Also I'm not sure where you learned mathematics, but the lowest tax bracket right now is %10 on earnings of 0-8,025 so I don't see how 33% of people aren't paying taxes unless they are dirt poor students like myself with NEGATIVE income.
If 33% of people really make less than $8000 a year then we have some serious problems in this country.
Who are those two wild and crazy guys?
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.