• 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
I am a definite Conservative. I believe in strong moral values, doing what's right over what's expedient, and our government upholding the rule of law and supporting our fine American traditions.

What baffles me is how ptsdkid (or anyone) can associate those traits with the Republican Party.
 
Korimyr the Rat said:
I am a definite Conservative. I believe in strong moral values, doing what's right over what's expedient, and our government upholding the rule of law and supporting our fine American traditions.

What baffles me is how ptsdkid (or anyone) can associate those traits with the Republican Party.


***You'll notice that I didn't mention Republicans in the thread. I am not exactly happy with many Bush's policies either, but I do support him wholeheartedly on this war. I'll have to really look over the candidates in 2008,because Pat Buchanan would be my man if he were to run. Oh how we could use the master (Ronald Reagan) again.
 
Hoo boy here we go :roll:


ptsdkid said:
I find it amusing that some here use the term ‘Radical Right’. The term ‘Radical Right’ is the perfect definition of an oxymoron.

Extremists come in all shapes and sizes.

CONSERVATIVE: preservative, maintaining existing views, conditions, institutions…traditional.

Here's the real definitions from Merriam Webster.

conservatism
One entry found for conservatism.


Main Entry: con·ser·va·tism
Pronunciation: k&n-'s&r-v&-"ti-z&m
Function: noun
1 capitalized a : the principles and policies of a Conservative party b : the Conservative party
2 a : disposition in politics to preserve what is established b : a political philosophy based on tradition and social stability, stressing established institutions, and preferring gradual development to abrupt change
3 : the tendency to prefer an existing or traditional situation to change

Main Entry: 1con·ser·va·tive
Pronunciation: k&n-'s&r-v&-tiv
Function: adjective
1 : PRESERVATIVE
2 a : of or relating to a philosophy of conservatism b capitalized : of or constituting a political party professing the principles of conservatism : as (1) : of or constituting a party of the United Kingdom advocating support of established institutions (2) : PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE

Main Entry: Progressive Conservative
Function: adjective
: of or relating to a major political party in Canada traditionally advocating economic nationalism and close ties with the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth of Nations

Yet you guys claim to want to put an end to the U.N., you don't like Canada because of their socialised medicine and you love to take credit for the revolutionary war which made this country what it is today when really you love the U.K.

RADICAL: extremist, a partisan of the political left…leftist.

This is totally false and just pure hyperbole.

Main Entry: 1rad·i·cal
Pronunciation: 'ra-di-k&l
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Late Latin radicalis, from Latin radic-, radix root -- more at ROOT
1 : of, relating to, or proceeding from a root: as a (1) : of or growing from the root of a plant <radical tubers> (2) : growing from the base of a stem, from a rootlike stem, or from a stem that does not rise above the ground <radical leaves> b : of, relating to, or constituting a linguistic root c : of or relating to a mathematical root d : designed to remove the root of a disease or all diseased tissue <radical surgery>
2 : of or relating to the origin : FUNDAMENTAL
3 a : marked by a considerable departure from the usual or traditional : EXTREME b : tending or disposed to make extreme changes in existing views, habits, conditions, or institutions c : of, relating to, or constituting a political group associated with views, practices, and policies of extreme change d : advocating extreme measures to retain or restore a political state of affairs <the radical right>4 slang : EXCELLENT, COOL

This definition explains radical's true meaning.



#1. Conservative…..Defends our traditions/institutions like our Constitution, and defends America from foreign invasion.

Yet wants to allow the UAE to control American shipping ports.

#1. Radical…..Legislates and proposes to change the Constitution to appease the nuances of political correctness and multiculturalism; and protests every war, thus further eroding the chances to defend and protect our people and our country.

Like your conservative cronies do in turning over Roe vs Wade.

#2. Conservative…..Upholds and maintains America’s traditional Christian dogma, by celebrating the birth of Christ every December 25th and in our daily prayers.

Yet you elect officials that give money to terrorist supporting governments like Saudi Arabia.

#2. Radical…..Anyone acting like or supporting the A.C.L.U. in its tiresome effort to eradicate God from our coinage, plaques and institutions, and Christ from the nativity scenes, and prayer from our public schools.

More hyperbole

#3. Conservative…..Strong supporters of Christian clergy that aims to spread the word of God across the world in hopes of acquiring a loving and peaceful harmony.

:rofl Yeah right!

#3. Radical…..Indirect and direct supporters of an Islamic Fascist protocol that calls for a worldwide jihad to eliminate Christianity.

Again conservatives want Islamic countries to control American shipping ports, to give money to terrorist nations like Saudi Arabia and love a president that has a long family history of business with the Bin Laden family.

#4. Conservative…..Believes that social programs like Social Security should be eliminated, or to have the recipient dictate (by controlling his own money) how much money goes to whatever vehicle he chooses to invest in. Privatizing just 6% of their SS monies in the stock market (over SS’s lifetime) would net the recipient 7.5% interest in his investment.

Also belives that the American economy is strong despite the fact that we are trillions of dollars in debt and spending even more. Meanwhile China has billions of dollars at it's disposale and if they should call in their loans to the U.S. I suppose you'll blame liberals for your presidents decision to borrow money from them in the first place.

#4. Radical…..Takes the stubborn stance on all government sponsored programs. He is content to keep Social Security at it’s status quo. He is happy watching tax paying Social Security recipients shovel their monies into a nearly defunct system, that over it’s lifetime would net the recipient -1% on his investment (if it hadn’t gone belly up by then).

Sounds like they want to keep with TRADITION to me.

#5. Conservative…..Believes in a traditional marriage between a man and a woman, in which having offspring can be a reality, in fact, having children would be favored by God himself.

Actually just having a faithful marriage is enough. But you radical fundies would have us believe otherwise.

#5. Radical…..Pushes for legislation that would honor the marriage between two men, between two women, and between a man and his prize pink-eyed blue ribbon sheep. Alternative lifestyles are vogue, as acceptance for polygamy becomes the standard.

Gay marriage is not a special right. If it were legal you'd have the right to marry a man. I think you've got something repressed and are desperate to keep it that way.

#6. Conservative…..Believes that the birthing of human babies is God’s precious gift to mankind.

A gift shared by all the other animals on earth as well. The preciouse gift of God is that of 'free will', though also shared by all that live, the greatest portion was given to man. And if that man or woman chooses to live in 'sin' then there is nothing a christian can do about it but love the sinner and pray for him or her.

#6. Radical…..Believes that God doesn’t exist, and that the psychological makeup of the pregnant woman by choosing to rid herself of an unwanted non-viable piece of flesh and blood…should far outweigh any logical, reasonable, loving, compassionate, or God chosen gift to produce human life itself.

Abortion has been legal for 33 years and practised for 1000's. Even Cannon law condoned 2nd trimester abortion in the 12th century. If that's not tradition I don't know what is.

Main Entry: hyp·o·crite
Pronunciation: 'hi-p&-"krit
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English ypocrite, from Old French, from Late Latin hypocrita, from Greek hypokritEs actor, hypocrite, from hypokrinesthai
: a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion

See also, ptsdkid.
 
If the Right wing doesn't have it's own radicals, does that mean that the KKK would be considered "main stream" and a good representation of conservative values?
 
millsy said:
If the Right wing doesn't have it's own radicals, does that mean that the KKK would be considered "main stream" and a good representation of conservative values?

You're confusing "extremist" with "radical".
 
I seem to get in trouble with both sides, depending on what we're discussing.

In fact I tend to get in trouble with both sides on almost any issue in terms of not taking a strong enough stand anwhere.

I'm a gray thinker........the absolutes of black/white escape me most of the time lol

So I didn't vote :)
 
Goobieman said:
You're confusing "extremist" with "radical".



Naw, seems fair to me.
 
afr0byte said:
Nah, you tow the party line too much to be considered a radical.

Which party line is that?:confused: I belong to no party.........
 
Korimyr the Rat said:
I am a definite Conservative. I believe in strong moral values, doing what's right over what's expedient, and our government upholding the rule of law and supporting our fine American traditions.

What baffles me is how ptsdkid (or anyone) can associate those traits with the Republican Party.

I can tell you those traits are a hell of a lot closer to the Republican party then they are the Democratic Party..........
 
Navy Pride said:
I can tell you those traits are a hell of a lot closer to the Republican party then they are the Democratic Party..........

Yes, the Republicans uphold those fine American traditions of attacking countries that didn't threaten us; locking people away without a trial or hearing; and borrowing away our future.
 
Iriemon said:
Yes, the Republicans uphold those fine American traditions of attacking countries that didn't threaten us; locking people away without a trial or hearing; and borrowing away our future.

Yeah we could wait until Saddam pulled off a terrorist attack here like Clinton did with Bin laden and Afghanistan.....No thanks..........
 
Iriemon said:
Yes, the Republicans uphold those fine American traditions of attacking countries that didn't threaten us;
Like in "Operation Desert Fox", December 1998?

locking people away without a trial or hearing;
Since when do POWs get a trial or a hearing?

and borrowing away our future.
This just kills me
Liberals didnt give a hoot in hell about deficits until it gave them something to talk about politically.
 
Navy Pride said:
Yeah we could wait until Saddam pulled off a terrorist attack here like Clinton did with Bin laden and Afghanistan.....No thanks..........

Hahaha, perhaps it's the FoxNews party line you're towing.
 
Goobieman said:
Since when do POWs get a trial or a hearing?

They're criminals, not POWs.

Goobieman said:
This just kills me
Liberals didnt give a hoot in hell about deficits until it gave them something to talk about politically.

Well, I definitely don't like deficits caused by unnecessary wars.
 
Goobieman said:
Like in "Operation Desert Fox", December 1998?

Fair enough; I did say attack

Since when do POWs get a trial or a hearing?

Right, why the hell should they get a trial? A trial? That's not the American way, is it?

Yours is the the Republican view.

This just kills me. Liberals didnt give a hoot in hell about deficits until it gave them something to talk about politically.

Not this liberal. Not liberals I have known for the last 25 years. Liberals believe in fiscal responsibility. The last time the Dems were in power in Congress, in 1993, they had the courage to vote for a tax increase to reverse the massive deficits and debt from the two previous Administrations, The tax increase, opposed by every fiscally irresponsible conservative Republican, raised revenues and ultimately balanced the budget. The Dems paid for their courage -- the Republicans won the Congress back in 1994.

The conservatives took full control back in 2000 and within months went to their spend and borrow ways by passing massive tax cuts. Popular? Sure. But the took a surplus budget and the Govt is now $2.5 trillion more in debt (so far in 5 years) thanks to the pandering conservative gutless wonders, who clearly place a popular tax cut (deferrment) above being fiscally responsible.
 
Right, why the hell should they get a trial? A trial? That's not the American way, is it?
You're avoiding the point.
POWs dont get trials. Never have.

Yours is the the Republican view.
And the view of every administration, GOP or Dem, that ever took a POW.

Not this liberal. Not liberals I have known for the last 25 years. Liberals believe in fiscal responsibility.

OMFG. You did NOT just say that.
 
Goobieman said:
You're avoiding the point.
POWs dont get trials. Never have.

That's fine, but they're not POWs. The GWB whitehouse is simply calling it a war on terror so they can deny the prisoners their rights.
 
Iriemon said:
Right, why the hell should they get a trial? A trial? That's not the American way, is it?

POWs are not Americans. You act like not giving them trials is something concocted by the Bush administration.




Iriemon said:
Not this liberal. Not liberals I have known for the last 25 years. Liberals believe in fiscal responsibility.

Then in that respect, they're not liberals because that's fiscal conservatism.


Iriemon said:
The last time the Dems were in power in Congress, in 1993, they had the courage to vote for a tax increase to reverse the massive deficits and debt from the two previous Administrations, The tax increase, opposed by every fiscally irresponsible conservative Republican, raised revenues and ultimately balanced the budget. The Dems paid for their courage -- the Republicans won the Congress back in 1994.

I see you like to revise and simplify history.


Iriemon said:
The conservatives took full control back in 2000 and within months went to their spend and borrow ways by passing massive tax cuts. Popular? Sure. But the took a surplus budget and the Govt is now $2.5 trillion more in debt (so far in 5 years) thanks to the pandering conservative gutless wonders, who clearly place a popular tax cut (deferrment) above being fiscally responsible.

No, tax cuts were not the problem. Out of control spending in Washington is.
 
The Real McCoy said:
POWs are not Americans. You act like not giving them trials is something concocted by the Bush administration.

Under international law, criminals have the right to a trial.

The Real McCoy said:
No, tax cuts were not the problem. Out of control spending in Washington is.

What do you define as out of control?
 
afr0byte said:
That's fine, but they're not POWs. The GWB whitehouse is simply calling it a war on terror so they can deny the prisoners their rights.

The people we catch fighting us on the battlefield in Afghanistan and/or Iraq are very much POWs.
 
Goobieman said:
The people we catch fighting us on the battlefield in Afghanistan and/or Iraq are very much POWs.
Maybe those are, but we also have people in Gitmo that they took from Pakistan and other countries.
 
afr0byte said:
Under international law, criminals have the right to a trial.

These people were/are captured in combat and as such are combatants, not criminals. They are being treated exactly as their combatant status necessitates.
 
The Real McCoy said:
No, tax cuts were not the problem. Out of control spending in Washington is.

Exacly.
The large majority of federal spending goes to Entitlement and other Mandatory Spending programs that are not directly addresses in the budget each year - their groth is defined by the number of people drawing what benifit rather than a budgeted amount.

The growth of entitlements has FAR more to do with the growth of the deficits and debt than discretionary spending ever could.

Entitlements are, almost exclusively, the darling of the left.
 
Goobieman said:
The people we catch fighting us on the battlefield in Afghanistan and/or Iraq are very much POWs.

Then why is it okay to torture them? By your rational the President and his administration along with the U.S. military is guilty of war crimes. You sound like you want the terrorists to win.
 
Saboteur said:
Then why is it okay to torture them?
Wow. Talk about a strawman.
 
Back
Top Bottom