Maybe there is hope?

[midcan5]

BTW: those who claim the modern title of "conservative" in the United States are, in actuality, of the liberal philosophy that formed this nation. Mindless driveling shitheaps such as yourself have corrupted the term liberal so badly there is no alternative left but for us to label ourselves differently.

I love this one more than your other delusions or illusions, depending on how we want to view them. If everyone were a conservative we'd still be living in caves howling at the moon, and marriage was for the propagation of humankind and while a form of religious like belief was a part of primitive societies, modern societies are not primitive any longer. Wake up.

http://www.conceptualguerilla.com/?q=node/393

Why do all you conservatives need to curse? It doesn't make a bad argument relevant if you use vulgar language.

Please, if you believe in freedom then act as if you believe in freedom, don't tell me topics are controversial when many are only controversial to you. You are simply engaging in the fascist's control of others by defining terms as you please.

http://www.oldamericancentury.org/14pts.htm.


"Believe it or not, this is a short list. A historian could make a career out of cataloguing all of the many and varied ways cheap-labor conservatives have stood in the way of the American values of equality, democracy, social justice and environment sustainability. The next time a cheap-labor conservative waves the flag, boasts of his “patriotism”, and brays about “American values”, show him this list."

 

[DigitalDave]

WHY are they for it? That dream of theirs is, in actuality, a hellhole. We'd all be far worse off if left by society to the predators of the market. The fact is, it's all just utopian nonsense. If you leave people to their own devices they don't just hold hands, sing, and share, like the communists though. And same thing for the libertarians - leave people to their own devices, and you simply have a hellhole, not a happy utopia where blacks children get shot for stealing a candybar and white libertarians horde up in their holes while they talk about their fanciful theories online.

Yes, instead of singing Kumbaya, like we libertarians want, we have governments run by businesses. Much better plan, and gets rid of those stupid hippies.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

Connecticut voters voted in favor of gay marriage, they voted no on question 1 which if yes prevailed, would have triggered a state convention on the topic to repeal gay marriage here. However no won, so we don't have to deal with it.

I can see points on both sides especially on gay marriage and abortion, but i think everyone should be respectful of everyone's view points. I think states should decide with gay marriage and that's what their doing.

I don't think that marriage should dictate what rights people get though however and their are many more rights afforded to hetero's who are married than those in a civil partnership. I think that's where the problem comes in if you made gave gays the same rights as those who get married, and called it partnered i don't think you'd see such the backlashing you are seeing now.

and it totally is a civil rights issue, its like ellen said, the government with civil unions is basically saying you can sit there.... just not there.

Dawg! Where you been hiding? Good to see you back! What you been up to? How's your dog doin?

 

[DigitalDave]

Connecticut voters voted in favor of gay marriage, they voted no on question 1 which if yes prevailed, would have triggered a state convention on the topic to repeal gay marriage here. However no won, so we don't have to deal with it.

I can see points on both sides especially on gay marriage and abortion, but i think everyone should be respectful of everyone's view points. I think states should decide with gay marriage and that's what their doing.

I don't think that marriage should dictate what rights people get though however and their are many more rights afforded to hetero's who are married than those in a civil partnership. I think that's where the problem comes in if you made gave gays the same rights as those who get married, and called it partnered i don't think you'd see such the backlashing you are seeing now.

and it totally is a civil rights issue, its like ellen said, the government with civil unions is basically saying you can sit there.... just not there.

Rob, you can get ON the bus, just like everyone else, you just can't choose the seat. Get to the back, shut your mouth, and know your role!

 

[zappasguitar]

LOL. What a list of pure unadulterated bullshit.

Marriage: first of all, there have always been, and always will be limitations on who people are allowed to marry. Or do you propose allowing men to marry their own daughters? Of course you don't want that kind of thing going on. But you pull this kind of broad label because you have nothing else but lies to support your arguments.

Also, marriage was a RELIGIOUS institution LONG before there was anything even remotely resembling modern government. Religions have every right to define their own institutions, while government has ZERO business telling religion what they must accept..

So if Marriage is a RELIGIOUS institution, then why are so many state GOVERNMENTS telling us who can and cannot marry?

You yourself just said Government has ZERO business telling religion what they must accept.

 

[Good Luck]

I love this one more than your other delusions or illusions, depending on how we want to view them. If everyone were a conservative we'd still be living in caves howling at the moon, and marriage was for the propagation of humankind and while a form of religious like belief was a part of primitive societies, modern societies are not primitive any longer. Wake up.

http://www.conceptualguerilla.com/?q=node/393

Why do all you conservatives need to curse? It doesn't make a bad argument relevant if you use vulgar language.

Please, if you believe in freedom then act as if you believe in freedom, don't tell me topics are controversial when many are only controversial to you. You are simply engaging in the fascist's control of others by defining terms as you please.

http://www.oldamericancentury.org/14pts.htm.


"Believe it or not, this is a short list. A historian could make a career out of cataloguing all of the many and varied ways cheap-labor conservatives have stood in the way of the American values of equality, democracy, social justice and environment sustainability. The next time a cheap-labor conservative waves the flag, boasts of his “patriotism”, and brays about “American values”, show him this list."

Oh, goody. The braindead pustule finds other idiots who hold to the same nonsensical drivel.

First point: the modern American conservative is, in actuality, FAR closer to the LIBERALS that founded this nation, in the political and moral philosophy they hold to, that are those who claim the title of liberal today. Therefore your little mindless discharge about conservatives keeping mankind in the trees is irrelevant. If you people who call yourselves "liberal" were actually HONEST about the philosophy you support (which will never happen) you would find a different label for your political philosophy. You have fully and completely corrupted what it means to be a Liberal in America. I am a liberal, and have always called myself a liberal. I just disagree with the modern liberal twits who haven't a foggy clue what the ideals of personal liberty, responsibility, and freedom mean.

You can belittle all you want. The fact is marriage was a religious practice long before government became involved. If you don't LIKE religion or believe in God, too bad for you - but you are free to engage in any belief system you wish. But there is no reason the religious should "wake up" (ie: change their ways to please you) because you do not hold to their beliefs.

As I said, you want to practice what ever sexual practices you find your jollies with, go right ahead. You want a LEGAL relationship with the person or thing you are getting your rocks off with, go ahead. All it takes is both partners signing an unexempted bilateral power of attorney, and a "By Law" will and they have the exact same legal relationship as a married couple. The claim that gays cannot enjoy the same (legal) rights as a married couple is just one more of the multitude of tired lies told by you liberals to advance your totalitarian agenda. But marriage itself is a religious practice and should remain a religious practice. The state only adds a legal aspect to the relationship for convenience - a legal aspect which can be easily duplicated as already described.

 

[Good Luck]

14 points of fascism is almost comic except I know you pathetic twits are serious.

1) We had a VERY strong sense of nationalism during WWII - yet somehow we managed to stomp fascism into the ground, not join it. Only ignorant pseudo-intellectual twits believe nationalism leads to totalitarianism.

2) Torture is wrong. Period. Is it unique to a fascist state? No. Torture as a means to and end is not even unique to totalitarian states.

3) Uh huh. Talk about the kettle calling the pot. And what exactly do you call your "conservatives are bad" rants that permeate every thing you say? You can't even define the stance of libertarians on issues correctly, but demonize them anyway. And are you ignorant of the DHS memo that literally named anyone who opposes current WH policies as potential terrorists? But I'll bet you have some kind of excuse for them, don't you?

4) There is a BIG difference between supporting a strong military, and giving those who serve their due respect, and what is lied about in your posted article.

But I ask you who is actually using the military in a way that leads to a totalitarian state? Since Obama has been in power, all of a sudden we see military personnel running around with law enforcement - a clear violation of posse comitatus. http://www.carrollspaper.com/main.as...SectionID=&S=1
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/nphotos/US-...town-area.html
http://www.blacklistednews.com/news-4097-0-22-22--.html
We did NOT see such abuses under the previous administration.

Additionally, under which party leadership did law enforcement and nation guardsmen go around illegally confiscating firearms from the citizenry after Katrina. (Hint: the orders did NOT come from the WH or DHS - they came from the state and city governments.)

5) Now that one is possibly the biggest laugh of the bunch. Who was it that criticized Palin for running for President while having children at home?

6) Controlled media? Which party has the habit of bringing up the possibility/desirability of "fairness" broadcasting laws? And why is it the media is always reporting how loved Obama is, but somehow fail to report their own polls showing otherwise?
http://www.newsvine.com/_question/2...-economic-team-are-turning-the-economy-around
http://www.newsvine.com/_question/2...formance-so-far-what-grade-would-you-give-him

7) Since when is national security an "obsession" after 9/11 showed us we are vulnerable? You people will stoop well below the gutter to make your lies, won't you?

8) Another example of the pure bullstuff people like you spout. You talk about fear mongering out of one side of your mouth, them fear monger yourself, demonizing people of faith. Not only are your type pathological; liars, you are the world's biggest hypocrites, too.

9) Another big chuckler out of that one. How many TRILLIONS has the Obama administration thrown to the corporations? Also, it shows a complete lack of understanding of fascism, since fascism, while allowing indusgtry to remian in private hands, subjugates industry to the will and needs of government. Now, who is it that made the firing of certain automaker CEOs government policy?

10) Another indication that the writer is an ignorant fool. There are many reasons for opposing unions - few of them have to do with a totalitarian state. Free market for wages is one, and free market principles are antithetical to fascism.

11) Yea, I know how the ignorant feel good pseudo-intellectuals love their arts. But if you like them, you pay for what you like. I happen to be a big fan of art. I also happen to be willing to pay for what I like. I don't demand the state support the artists I like - I do it myself. But doing things yourself isn't exactly high on your list, is it?

12) Well what can ya say. The mindless liberals pass laws that let convicted murderers back on the streets in 6 years, and then wonder why we have ridiculously high crime rates. We tried the "let's all hold hands and express our disappointments with society" (while blaming guns for violent crime) method of crime control. Guess what? It didn't work. When a society has the levels of crime that we have, focusing on it as a serious problem is NOT "obsession". Again the writer takes a valid concern and blows it up with careful, deliberately misleading words. (ie: lies.)

13) Yea, look at Obama's picks, as well as Clintons, Bush 41, Reagan, Carter, Ford, Nixon, LBJ, etc. etc. etc. Cronyism, while wrong, is HARDLY the earmark of "fascism". (except to lying fools who are trying to push their own brand of totalitarianism through to protect us from the "fascists")

14) How many of those conspiracy theory articles have actual proven facts? None. "they stole the 2004 elections!" you twits have had 4+ years to prove your allegations. It's crap. You know it's crap. You just cannot admit that a self possessed doddering fool like Bush could beat your self possessed doddering fool.

 

[midcan5]

Oh, goody. The braindead pustule finds other idiots who hold to the same nonsensical drivel.

First point: the modern American conservative is, in actuality, FAR closer to the LIBERALS that founded this nation, in the political and moral philosophy they hold to, that are those who claim the title of liberal today. Therefore your little mindless discharge about conservatives keeping mankind in the trees is irrelevant. If you people who call yourselves "liberal" were actually HONEST about the philosophy you support (which will never happen) you would find a different label for your political philosophy. You have fully and completely corrupted what it means to be a Liberal in America. I am a liberal, and have always called myself a liberal. I just disagree with the modern liberal twits who haven't a foggy clue what the ideals of personal liberty, responsibility, and freedom mean.

Egads, a liberal who only believes in freedom for themselves, you do realize that makes you a conservative. "[P]ersonal liberty, responsibility, and freedom are words, again it is what happens not your imagination that counts in the political world. And conservatism since Hoover/Reagan has been a failure. A defining quality of L is the movement forward, your weird adulation of the past is again consistent with C. It is very hard for people to be honest with themselves, give it a try.

"Liberals demand that the social order should in principle be capable of explaining itself at the tribunal of each person's understanding." Jeremy Waldron

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Egads, a liberal who only believes in freedom for themselves, you do realize that makes you a conservative. "[P]ersonal liberty, responsibility, and freedom are words, again it is what happens not your imagination that counts in the political world. And conservatism since Hoover/Reagan has been a failure. A defining quality of L is the movement forward, your weird adulation of the past is again consistent with C. It is very hard for people to be honest with themselves, give it a try.

"Liberals demand that the social order should in principle be capable of explaining itself at the tribunal of each person's understanding." Jeremy Waldron

I'm totally amazed at the strength and dedication you imbeciles pour in to still believing the BS you spout. kudos.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

I think you prove my original contention splendidly.

You define ideologies so they fit your perspective. Libertarian (L) thought is about the self and thinking only of the self is not Christ-like. L is not capitalism either. All systems of thought are constructions and L has clear ideas that if we were to look for an analogy, would be closer to social Darwinism used in the pejorative or dog eat dog sense.

I am just sharing the fact this conservative unlike most recognizes the real world as opposed to the imaginary.

'In Matthew 25:31-46, Jesus proclaims that how you treat the hungry, the thirsty, the sick and other "least of these," is how you treat Jesus himself. And if you fail to help the "least of these," Jesus promises, he will send you to Hell.' The argument then becomes about what ought you to do.

"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." Gandhi

So tell us.... where did Jesus say that the only way to help someone was through the government?

Oh, thats right... he didn't. Libertarians are charitable moron. They just don't want to be FORCED by the government to fund things they do not support. They want the government out of their lives as much as possible.

Libertarians want to be free of government intervention.

 

[Good Luck]

Egads, a liberal who only believes in freedom for themselves, you do realize that makes you a conservative. "[P]ersonal liberty, responsibility, and freedom are words, again it is what happens not your imagination that counts in the political world. And conservatism since Hoover/Reagan has been a failure. A defining quality of L is the movement forward, your weird adulation of the past is again consistent with C. It is very hard for people to be honest with themselves, give it a try.

"Liberals demand that the social order should in principle be capable of explaining itself at the tribunal of each person's understanding." Jeremy Waldron

Amazing how one can delude themselves so completely as to preclude any room left for rational thought.

Your are quite correct that I believe in freedom for myself, because I believe men should be free. I also believe in, and spent 40 years professionally defending the Constitution of the United States of America, the purpose of which is to protect the liberties of ALL people. Your diatribe about "freedom only for themselves" is just another convenient demonizing lies you tell yourself to justify enslaving society "for their own good and the benefit of all".

I defended through my actions, and now that I am retired, through my words, the freedoms of all people. But I cannot and will never claim to take responsibility for the freedom of anyone except myself, for taking responsibility for the freedom of another is not possible.

What you brain dead clown cannot comprehend is the FACT that a person cannot be FREE unless that person is willing to accept responsibility for their freedom. You cannot, under any circumstances, place that load on society. If you try, you will have irresponsible people dragging the whole of society down - as we can see with the repeated failed attempts through modern history. Additionally, the attempt to make society responsible for the freedom of the individual results in an elite class assuming power and further repressing the people under the lie of "leveling the playing field" when in fact they are repressing everyone except themselves. Again, we see this in multiple examples of modern history.

You say defining quality of life is the move forward - but how do you define quality of life? Seems to me your definition of quality of life is heavily, if not entirely, dependent on materialism. The poor of this nation today are richer than the middle class of most other countries, yet that is not good enough for you. What is?

For myself, focusing on materialism is an anchor to quality of life, not a measure.

 

[zappasguitar]

So if Marriage is a RELIGIOUS institution, then why are so many state GOVERNMENTS telling us who can and cannot marry?

You yourself just said Government has ZERO business telling religion what they must accept.

Gee. I thought it was a simple question...I guess I was wrong.

 

[Good Luck]

Gee. I thought it was a simple question...I guess I was wrong.

Ask a question that makes sense. Government recognizes the institution of marriage and adds a legal package to the deal for the sake of convenience in matters of survivor powers of attorney, inheritance, etc. Religion decided long ago what marriage is, not government. The fact that government recognized a legal aspect in no way changes the definition of marriage, or alters the origins of the institution.

People come along and ask for a redefinition. Government who know their place say "no" because it is not their place to redefine a religious practice. That would be interfering with religion.

Governments that do not know their place stomp all over the Constitution all the time, so this issue is no different.

 

[NOVA]

Conservatives love freedom but:

They want to tell people who they can marry
they want to control your bedroom activities
They want to keep medicine away from you
They want to stop scientific investigation
They want to stop you from controlling your own life
They want to stop you from forming a union
They want to teach their religion in schools
They want to invade other countries to make them like them
and on and on....

They wouldn't know freedom if they fell over over it.

wow...thats astounding...8 wrong out of 8.....

You don't even have a clue what being Conservative is all about...
You might want to change your name to "clueless"...it so fits...