Are You Radical or Conservative?

[Saboteur]

Which party line is that? I belong to no party.........

Are you sure you're not a Sunni?

You and Saddam sure miss Ronald Reagan.

 

[Saboteur]

Wow. Talk about a strawman.

That's all you got for me?

Do I need to post the charter from the Geniva Convention, again?????

You can't have it both ways.... The people we take into custody are either POW's or criminals.

If they're POW's then they are not to be harmed or coerced in any way nor is revenge to be taken on them.

I know you think that holding someone upside down so their head is submerged in water until they almost die, depriving someone of sleep and making someone kneel on a concrete floor for hours or days on end are frat house hazing rituals but it's also considered torture.

Also, if they're criminals then they are entitled to the basic human rights granted to them by international law and should get a trial.

 

[Goobieman]

That's all you got for me?

That's all I need.

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

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

I will grant you that readily. I only vote for the Democrats because I think they'll generally do less damage.

That, and a lot of the "moral values" being promoted by the Republicans are the wrong values.

Since when do POWs get a trial or a hearing?

That would be a good point if the Administration would declare them POWs and begin treating them in the fashion required by the Geneva Convention.

The government is currently detaining these people illegally and treating these people illegally-- they are being denied the rights of either POWs or criminals, and the Administration is justifying this by claiming that they are members of some nebulous group with no legal definition.

 

[F41]

Is that a yes?

Well… Being married, and that I love my wife very much, I would say no. But speaking as though I was single and looking, you being hard left and me being hard right, things could get pretty hot... I could very well be tempted to explore that possibility. :mrgreen:

 

[zymurgy]

Strange poll. I view myself as a radical and a conservative.

This country has strayed so far from what I view as true conservatism that I wouldn't even know where to begin complaining. It would require radical actions to return to that level of government.

So yes, I'm a radical conservative.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

That's all you got for me?

Do I need to post the charter from the Geniva Convention, again?????

You can't have it both ways.... The people we take into custody are either POW's or criminals.

.

Nope they're Unlawful Combatants "war criminals," who are not protected by the Geneva and are subject only to a military tribunal.

 

[afr0byte]

Nope they're Unlawful Combatants "war criminals," who are not protected by the Geneva and are subject only to a military tribunal.

Well, at least that's what they're being defined as so that they can be deprived of rights.

 

[Iriemon]

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

You're avoiding the point.
POWs dont get trials. Never have.

You can make up whatever semantic argument you want. I am aware of American history. IMO, it is un-American to take people and lock them away for years incommunicado, without being charged, hearings, trials, or even the slightest due process.

That is something they do in two-bit dictatorships, like Iraq under Hussein. Not in the "shining light on the hill." IMO.

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

You could sure fool me looking at the last three Conservative administrations. Wasn't it Cheney who said deficits don't matter?

I see you like to revise and simplify history.

What did I say that was not accurate?

No, tax cuts were not the problem. Out of control spending in Washington is.

No, the problem is that the Govt's tax revenues have been (woefully) insufficient to cover Govt expenditures. You can blame that on the failure of the conservatives to cut spending if you want. The truth is that revenues fell by hundreds of billions of dollars after the Bush tax cuts, err, deferrments.

Cutting taxes is easy and popular. Who doesn't like less taxes? If you are going to do that, and still be fiscally responsible, what takes courage is cutting spending. Which the Conservatives don't have the guts to do. So they borrow. That is the Conservative way.

And last year the interest on the Conservative's $8 trillion debt was $350 billion; about $200 billion paid to private debtholders like our pals China, Japan and Saudi Arabia. The rest is stolen from our SS trust fund account, which the Conservatives have raped and pilliaged with their deficits.

That is $200 billion every year in interest our Govt spends for the Conservative's debt. And growing rapidly. Thank you Ron, George and George -- the leaders of the Conservative pass-the-buck generation.

 

[MSgt]

Is "Radical" supposed to mean "Liberal" in the poll? If so, one should recognize that Global Radicalism generally, if not usually, always comes from the conservative side of politics and religions.

For example...

Radical Islam = extreme conservative.

Fundamental Christians = extreme conservative.

Buddhist = extreme conservatives.

 

[Iriemon]

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.

Hmmm, that's funny. They had to deal with those same entitlements during the Clinton administration, and magically managed to run a responsible budget.

 

[Saboteur]

That's all I need.

I think I've stifled you

 

[The Real McCoy]

You could sure fool me looking at the last three Conservative administrations. Wasn't it Cheney who said deficits don't matter?

The last three conservative administrations? We haven't had a fiscally conservative president for decades... centuries even.

What did I say that was not accurate?

It's what you didn't say. You shine the spotlight on democrats and leave republican initiatives in the dark when the results are positive and vice versa when things aren't going well.

No, the problem is that the Govt's tax revenues have been (woefully) insufficient to cover Govt expenditures.

Exactly. Gov't spending needs to be slashed.

You can blame that on the failure of the conservatives to cut spending if you want. The truth is that revenues fell by hundreds of billions of dollars after the Bush tax cuts, err, deferrments.

Initially, yes.

Cutting taxes is easy and popular. Who doesn't like less taxes?

Those who aren't paying them.

If you are going to do that, and still be fiscally responsible, what takes courage is cutting spending. Which the Conservatives don't have the guts to do. So they borrow. That is the Conservative way.

It may be the way for those who call themselves conservatives or who are called conservatives by others but it's not the true conservative way.

And last year the interest on the Conservative's $8 trillion debt was $350 billion; about $200 billion paid to private debtholders like our pals China, Japan and Saudi Arabia.

The conservative's $8 trillion dollar debt? I wasn't aware conservatives devised massive, unsustainable entitlement programs like SS and Medicare.

The rest is stolen from our SS trust fund account, which the Conservatives have raped and pilliaged with their deficits.

We have LBJ to thank for unlocking the SS trust fund.

That is $200 billion every year in interest our Govt spends for the Conservative's debt. And growing rapidly. Thank you Ron, George and George -- the leaders of the Conservative pass-the-buck generation.

I got a deal for ya. You stop calling it the "conservative's debt" and I'll start taking you seriously.

 

[Saboteur]

Nope they're Unlawful Combatants "war criminals," who are not protected by the Geneva and are subject only to a military tribunal.

Whatever they are they're human beings who deserve basic human rights and a trial by military or world court.

They are not animals that deserve to be sodomized by some sick-o in a Marine uniform.

 

[The Real McCoy]

Hmmm, that's funny. They had to deal with those same entitlements during the Clinton administration, and magically managed to run a responsible budget.

...by pillaging the SS surplus.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Whatever they are they're human beings who deserve basic human rights and a trial by military or world court.

They are not animals that deserve to be sodomized by some sick-o in a Marine uniform.

No I believe by every definition of the word members of Al-Qaeda are animals, but they deserve their military tribunal, and then they deserve the firing squad.

 

[Saboteur]

No I believe by every definition of the word members of Al-Qaeda are animals, but they deserve their military tribunal, and then they deserve the firing squad.

Then you are no better than those who call Americans 'pigs' and 'infidels'. In fact you are exactly the same as those people.... Animal.

Oh yeah and help an injured soldier.... ENLIST!

 

[Saboteur]

...by pillaging the SS surplus.

Reaganomics.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Then you are no better than those who call Americans 'pigs' and 'infidels'. In fact you are exactly the same as those people.... Animal.

Oh yeah and help an injured soldier.... ENLIST!

LMFAO, good to see that you want all of those terrorists running around, I say give them their trial when they're found guilty put a bullet in their head, you support the real animals that makes you no better than them in my book.

 

[Iriemon]

The last three conservative administrations? We haven't had a fiscally conservative president for decades... centuries even.

I don't remember Ron George or George callint themselves liberals, do you?

It's what you didn't say. You shine the spotlight on democrats and leave republican initiatives in the dark when the results are positive and vice versa when things aren't going well.

I used to give the Republicans some credit on the grounds they had helped control spending, but they have showed their true colors since '00 when they got a sympathetic president who isn't aware that he can veto legislation.

Exactly. Gov't spending needs to be slashed.

Only if taxes are slashed.

Initially, yes.

Adusted for inflation, revenues are still lower than they were 5 years ago, in 2000, even tho the GDP has grown by 13%, adjusted for inflation.

Those who aren't paying them.

LOL - that's probably true.

It may be the way for those who call themselves conservatives or who are called conservatives by others but it's not the true conservative way.

It has certainly been the way when conservatives had the power.

The conservative's $8 trillion dollar debt? I wasn't aware conservatives devised massive, unsustainable entitlement programs like SS and Medicare.

They didn't. The Conservatives slashed taxes needed to pay for these and other expenditures, without cutting these programs or other expenditures. That is why we have $8 trillion debt.

We have LBJ to thank for unlocking the SS trust fund.

We have the conservatives to thank for stealing the assets to fund their deficits.

I got a deal for ya. You stop calling it the "conservative's debt" and I'll start taking you seriously.

I could really care less if you take me seriously or not.

It is fact that when conservatives have had the power, they have slashed taxes and revenues fell; and have not slashed spending. Deficits soared after the Reagan tax cuts, and didn't start coming down until after the Liberals passed a tax increase in 1993. Conservatives got power again in '00, after the budget had been balanced, falsely promising they could slash taxes and still pay down the debt. Instead, we have debt increasing 1/2 trillion annually. It is perfectly reasonable to call it the "conservative's debt" IMO.

The bottom line is, to conservatives, slashing taxes is more of a priority than balancing the budget.

 

[Iriemon]

...by pillaging the SS surplus.

Like this administration is not? It is pillaging away and still can't come within hundreds of billions of balancing its budget.

Actually, the budget was balanced during the Clinton administration, even excluding SS surplus revenues. The total debt was paid down $100 billion in CY 2000, and the debt owed to private debtholders was paid down hundreds of billions of dollars.

Even with those same entitlements you are trying to use to excuse this current conservative administration.

 

[Navy Pride]

Hmmm, that's funny. They had to deal with those same entitlements during the Clinton administration, and magically managed to run a responsible budget.

How quickly you liberals forget about 9/11/01, two wars and the greatest natural disaster to ever hit this country..........I have a flash for you...........Those things cost money........

 

[Iriemon]

How quickly you liberals forget about 9/11/01, two wars and the greatest natural disaster to ever hit this country..........I have a flash for you...........Those things cost money........

No kidding.

 

[afr0byte]

Buddhist = extreme conservatives.

Extreme conservatives? Huh? What?

 

[afr0byte]

How quickly you liberals forget about 9/11/01, two wars and the greatest natural disaster to ever hit this country..........I have a flash for you...........Those things cost money........

The deficit was already getting up there before Katrina. Also, the most expensive war was unnecessary.