• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Are You Radical or Conservative?

Are you a Radical or Conservative

  • A definite Radical

    Votes: 14 56.0%

  • A definite Conservative

    Votes: 11 44.0%
  • Total voters
    25
Moderate?
--
I wish my grass was emo, that way it would cut itself.
 
ptsdkid said:
Your humanitarian concern for world hunger is very touching.
Click to expand...

Thank you. I think we should help people even they don't widen our oil market.

Do you have as much concern and compassion for the thousands of murdered people at the hand of a tyrant like Saddam? If so, how would 'you' propose we help the people in a nation like that, that live in constant fear of being slaughtered by their own president's henchmen?
Click to expand...

I have much compassion and hope Stalin, Hitler, and Saddam a million horrible deaths for what they have done. However military action that cost me more than a thousand dollars (More like 100,00 in deficeit) was not the solution. There are many tyrants out there and it shouldn't be up to us to take them all out we should deal with it diplomatically, seek a actual coalition...etc... The point is that it wasn't the most impostant thing for us to deal with at the moment. SS is in shambles and 40 million people don'
t have health insurance.

Anyhow now that we're in this mess and thousands of doldiers have died, it's to late to turn back yet it's taken to long. My solution, split the country into three parts one for each group. since the Shiites are the biggest they;ll get the most land followed by the sunnis. The countries will be democratic and the insurgeency will stop because every group has its own nation and own laws. And the best part, our troops will be able to come home!
 
ptsdkid said:
***Who are you to say "as if your race needs sticking up for"? I study policy and political science every day. The liberal onslaught in America started in the 60's and has reached epidemic proportions today. Multiculturalism, political correctness, bloated welfare system, destructive unions, sympathy for criminal illegals, attack on Christianity, sodomizing our culture, ACLU hacks, and the constant attack on our founding fathers and today's European white male is real. My view is that the aforementioned more readily ascribe to this racist term--than would I.
Click to expand...

I believe that I am at least as qualified as you to pass judgement on issues of race, in this case that of the Caucasian race. Throughout history, the Caucasian race has been the most violent, murderous, and dangerous. They continue this wicked tradition to this day. European white males in particular, I might point out. I don't think we have to worry about them all to much. However, Conservatives such as yourself love to play the victim's part, so you blather about the horrendous attacks to your race, although it is in power and in control.

ptsdkid said:
***You have a very narrow minded and factually inaccurate view on foreign affairs. There is no such thing as murder during war missions. We kill people, yes, but we don't murder them. Do you consider all the civilians that lost their lives during the Ngasaki and Horishima bomb droppings to have been murdered? Were the American military personnel at Pearl Harbor considered to have been murdered? The fact that you use the word murder to define deaths during wartime suggests that you do consider our troops to be terrorists. You need to see what colors our flag has before you attempt to salute it again.
Click to expand...

I did not say that our troops were terrorists. I did not imply that our troops were terrorists. I do not think that our troops are terrorists. Also, I did not say that our troops were terrorists. Do I make myself clear, or should I expect you to keep saying that I think our troops are terrorists?

Bringing up thinks like Hiroshima and Pearl Harbor is all nice and good, but they are by no means similar to what is happening in Iraq:

"But the details of what happended on that morning in Haditha are mor disturbing, disputed and horrific that the military initially reported. According to eyewitnesses and local officials interviewed over the past 10 weeks, the civilans wo died in Haditha on Nov. 19 were killed not by a roadside bomb but by the Marines themselves, who went on a rampage in the villiage after the attack, willing 15 unarmed Iraqis in their homes, including seven women and three children.....'I couldn't see their faces well-only their guns. I watched them shoot my grandfather in the chest and in the head'".--Time Magazine, March 27, Page 34.

These are not wartime casualties such as those in WWII. These are not bombing deaths like those in Vietnam and the first Gulf War. These are murders. This is intentional killing of unarmed civilians, murder. These were not AK-47 toting men. These were old men, unarmed men, women, and children. These were not simply "deaths during wartime", these were murderous attacks on the civilan population in Iraq, incomparable to unintentional casualties in other wars and battles

I suggest you read about this in Time, it is a very informative article, or search the Internet for it.


Duke
 
Navy Pride said:
I have a flash for you..I was paying SS taxes before you were born........so no thank you.......
Click to expand...

So was my father who died at 68 when I was 13. His social security benefits sure helped my mom raise a kid while she ran the family business by herself.
 
ChristopherHall said:
Where would I fit? On social issues I am right of center, on economic and domestic issues I am left of center.
Click to expand...

This makes you Moderate and too mature for the likes of me, NavyPride and ptsdkid.
 
Iriemon said:
I was thinking about that (not you personally, but whether I hate someone or something). I guess it depends upon how you define hate. I'm not generally a hateful person; I can't think of anyone I really hate on an intense level. There are people I don't particularly like and avoid. I'd guess it is possible someone could do something to me or my family or friends that would cause that reaction.
Click to expand...

Well, I did use "hate" as an over statement. Let's try "dislike". That's a softer term that could very well apply even to you. There has to be SOMETHING you dislike or disapprove of. Like, maybe this smiley: :lol: see how stupid it looks? What is it doing with its upper lip? Actually, I hate it with a passion. Who ever put it on here ought to be slapped with a size 12 and a half boot under a first quarter moon. Oh yeah, I just went there. BRING IT ON VAUGE! I KNOW YOU DID THIS TO ME!!!!!!!!! :mrgreen:
 
Last edited:
Donkey1499 said:
Well, I did use "hate" as an over statement. Let's try "dislike". That's a softer term that could very well apply even to you. There has to be SOMETHING you dislike or disapprove of. Like, maybe this smiley: :lol: see how stupid it looks? What is it doing with its upper lip? Actually, I hate it with a passion. Who ever put it on here ought to be slapped with a size 12 and a half boot under a first quarter moon. Oh yeah, I just went there. BRING IT ON VAUGE! I KNOW YOU DID THIS TO ME!!!!!!!!! :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

LOL, OK I'll admit there are a number of things I dislike. Including the stupid little smiley. OK, I admit it! I HATE the f******g thing!
 
Duke said:
I believe that I am at least as qualified as you to pass judgement on issues of race, in this case that of the Caucasian race. Throughout history, the Caucasian race has been the most violent, murderous, and dangerous. They continue this wicked tradition to this day. European white males in particular, I might point out. I don't think we have to worry about them all to much. However, Conservatives such as yourself love to play the victim's part, so you blather about the horrendous attacks to your race, although it is in power and in control.



I did not say that our troops were terrorists. I did not imply that our troops were terrorists. I do not think that our troops are terrorists. Also, I did not say that our troops were terrorists. Do I make myself clear, or should I expect you to keep saying that I think our troops are terrorists?

Bringing up thinks like Hiroshima and Pearl Harbor is all nice and good, but they are by no means similar to what is happening in Iraq:

"But the details of what happended on that morning in Haditha are mor disturbing, disputed and horrific that the military initially reported. According to eyewitnesses and local officials interviewed over the past 10 weeks, the civilans wo died in Haditha on Nov. 19 were killed not by a roadside bomb but by the Marines themselves, who went on a rampage in the villiage after the attack, willing 15 unarmed Iraqis in their homes, including seven women and three children.....'I couldn't see their faces well-only their guns. I watched them shoot my grandfather in the chest and in the head'".--Time Magazine, March 27, Page 34.

These are not wartime casualties such as those in WWII. These are not bombing deaths like those in Vietnam and the first Gulf War. These are murders. This is intentional killing of unarmed civilians, murder. These were not AK-47 toting men. These were old men, unarmed men, women, and children. These were not simply "deaths during wartime", these were murderous attacks on the civilan population in Iraq, incomparable to unintentional casualties in other wars and battles

I suggest you read about this in Time, it is a very informative article, or search the Internet for it.


Duke
Click to expand...


Man, You gotta give props to my cracka cuzzins and dawgz out therr, bro! Don't be dissin, man. Dat ain't tight, fo sho. We all ain't like dat! Shiz, eyes a gangsta, but eyes ain't dangerus. anyway, don't be hatin' on whitey! :mrgreen:
 
Iriemon said:
LOL, OK I'll admit there are a number of things I dislike. Including the stupid little smiley. OK, I admit it! I HATE the f******g thing!
Click to expand...

YES! I got a liberal to agree with me!!! I guess the world ain't so fell afterall! :mrgreen:
 
Donkey1499 said:
Alright alright, man. I won't joke about your age anymore. Sheesh. I meant no harm. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

I know you were not born then but as the great Ronald Reagan said in a presidential debate with Walter Mondale in 1980 when age came up and I paraphrase.......I won't hold your youth against you.....:lol:

I guess I am getting older......that seems like yesterday...;)

A thought comes to mind when I think of my youth though:

Youth is a wonderful time, to bad its wasted on the young........

I bet a lot of middle aged and old geezers like me agree with that statement......
.
 
Last edited:
Navy Pride said:
I know you were not born then but as the great Ronald Reagan said in a presidential debate with Walter Mondale in 1980 when age came up and I paraphrase.......I won't hold your youth against you.....:lol:
Click to expand...

Ronald Reagan was a great man. Better than that sleazy Clinton guy. With Reagan we had eight years of greatness; with Clinton we had 8 years of a presidential porn show. :mrgreen:
 
Donkey1499 said:
Ronald Reagan was a great man. Better than that sleazy Clinton guy. With Reagan we had eight years of greatness; with Clinton we had 8 years of a presidential porn show. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

Don't forget the 10s of millions of jobs created under Clinton.
 
Donkey1499 said:
Ronald Reagan was a great man. Better than that sleazy Clinton guy. With Reagan we had eight years of greatness; with Clinton we had 8 years of a presidential porn show. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

The point I was trying to make you my young friend is being and old geezer is not necessarily a bad thing.........That is the point RR was trying to make......
 
afr0byte said:
Don't forget the 10s of millions of jobs created under Clinton.
Click to expand...

Yeah, thanks to the Dot.com boom which created thousands of jobs which "Slick Willie" had nothing to do with except to try and prosecute Bill Gates and Microsoft.............

And I might add when Clinton left office the recession had already started and the dot.com boom was breaking......
 
Navy Pride said:
The point I was trying to make you my young friend is being and old geezer is not necessarily a bad thing.........That is the point RR was trying to make......
Click to expand...

I wasn't saying it is a bad thing. I was playing jokes, you know, hardy har har. :mrgreen:
 
Navy Pride said:
Yeah, thanks to the Dot.com boom which created thousands of jobs which "Slick Willie" had nothing to do with except to try and prosecute Bill Gates and Microsoft.............

And I might add when Clinton left office the recession had already started and the dot.com boom was breaking......
Click to expand...

Well, according to to this site, the recession began in late 2001.

http://money.cnn.com/2001/11/26/economy/recession/
 
Well the last figure I saw was unemployment was at 4.9% the lowest in 40 years so somebody is doing something right.......
 
Navy Pride said:
Well the last figure I saw was unemployment was at 4.9% the lowest in 40 years so somebody is doing something right.......
Click to expand...

Perhaps, but would it be that low if it weren't for Clinton?
 
afr0byte said:
Perhaps, but would it be that low if it weren't for Clinton?
Click to expand...


Your going to have to explain to us why Clinton gets credit for the low unemployment rate in 2006....:confused:
 
Navy Pride said:
Your going to have to explain to us why Clinton gets credit for the low unemployment rate in 2006....:confused:
Click to expand...

The point is/was that Bush may have lowered it some, but the lowering of the unemployment rate done by Clinton was necessary for Bush to have gotten the rate this low.
 
afr0byte said:
The point is/was that Bush may have lowered it some, but the lowering of the unemployment rate done by Clinton was necessary for Bush to have gotten the rate this low.
Click to expand...

When Bush took office the unemployment rate was 5.8%.He inherited that from your boy......The dot.com boom had burst..........Bush enacted tax cuts that stimulated the economy and lowered the rate to the lowest in 40 years........

Again Clinton had nothing to do with the dot.com boom in the nineties.....It just happened on his watch...
 
Navy Pride said:
He inherited that from your boy......
Click to expand...

Why do you classify him as my boy? He was, in my opinion, a better president than Dubya is. However, I don't think I've ever said he was the best president ever or anything.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom