• 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!

Conservatives Are Often Right

MrVicchio said:
Except the progressive end game is always the same. Centralized command ruled by an "enlightenned elite few" who make the "right choices" for everyone in a society where freedom and liberty are reduced in favor "security". The illusion of equal outcomes paves the way for reality, all but the chosen few live the same equally restrained and the elite stay on top as is thier due.
Click to expand...

There is no end game . Life will continue to evolve there is no defined end point . Progressive as in happening or developing gradually or in stages; proceeding step by step. Going forward as opposed to backward is none of what you described
 
US Conservative said:
Last I checked the war on drugs has failed, but its nothing new (going back to at least prohibition really) and pushed by both sides. It should be dropped.

I dont want to get in anybodies bedroom, and support gay marriage.
Click to expand...

You apparently missed the thick sarcasm when I talked about the success of the drug war.

And you may not want to get in anybody's bedroom, but enough Republicans surely do.

Democrats want to control my wallet and Republicans want to control my personal life. I say no thanks to both.
 
Un biased said:
There is no end game . Life will continue to evolve there is no defined end point . Progressive as in happening or developing gradually or in stages; proceeding step by step. Going forward as opposed to backward is none of what you described
Click to expand...

Regardless of fair weather intent the reality is you have no idea where you are going and history shows the destination is the same.
 
MrVicchio said:
Regardless of fair weather intent the reality is you have no idea where you are going and history shows the destination is the same.
Click to expand...

You learn from history to improve the future. That is the purpose of learning it. Destination is the same if you keep going in the same pattern instead of changing it.
 
Un biased said:
There is no end game . Life will continue to evolve there is no defined end point . Progressive as in happening or developing gradually or in stages; proceeding step by step. Going forward as opposed to backward is none of what you described
Click to expand...

Really?
 
Un biased said:
You learn from history to improve the future. That is the purpose of learning it. Destination is the same if you keep going in the same pattern instead of changing it.
Click to expand...

Tell that to the Progressive statist on the left..They do not see history something to learn from but rather ideas to he out done.

Much of the social history of the Western world over the past three decades has involved replacing what worked with what sounded good. In area after area - crime, education, housing, race relations - the situation has gotten worse after the bright new theories were put into operation. The amazing thing is that this history of failure and disaster has neither discouraged the social engineers nor discredited them.
 
roguenuke said:
Obviously you have no idea how I lean because you make assumptions of all a persons leans on any position based off of one single one.

I didn't support either candidate last presidential election, but voted for McCain in 2008. And I support limited legal immigration to how much we can reasonably sustain.
Click to expand...

Who are you planning on supporting in the 2016?
 
AmericanSpartan said:
Tell that to the Progressive statist on the left..They do not see history something to learn from but rather ideas to he out done.

Much of the social history of the Western world over the past three decades has involved replacing what worked with what sounded good. In area after area - crime, education, housing, race relations - the situation has gotten worse after the bright new theories were put into operation. The amazing thing is that this history of failure and disaster has neither discouraged the social engineers nor discredited them.
Click to expand...


You seem to group together progressive with those who blindly try to change by using the same failed systems over and over again in a stagnate limbo . History is one of the greatest tools shame some might not use it .
 
Un biased said:
You seem to group together progressive with those who blindly try to change by using the same failed systems over and over again in a stagnate limbo . History is one of the greatest tools shame some might not use it .
Click to expand...

They do not see history as something to learn from, they see it as something to out do.

They call themselves "progressive" which is true, they are progressive statists.
 
polgara said:
we have too much debt and yet the spending continues. Everyone screams if it is even hinted that their program might be trimmed a little.
Click to expand...

Polgara,

I do agree spending needs to be reduced overall. My problem is with the hypocrisy coming from the conservatives. If a proposal to cut military funding or aid to countries like Israel are mentioned then the cons scream bloody murder. They speak nonstop about how much welfare goes to the poor but on corporate welfare? Crickets. And you might as well be talking to a brick wall when discussing fiscal waste related to the Drug War and death penalty. Truth is, it is difficult to take Republicans seriously on the issue of debt, especially after the free-for-all-spending we experienced under the Reagan and Bush Administrations.
 
Last edited:
tres borrachos said:
You've been around this board long enough to know that you have to prove what you claim when your claim is contested. The fact that you can't post a single link to back up the claim that you made about Barack Obama having anything to do with the private sector job growth rate proves that your claim was a lie.
Click to expand...

There's SCORES of freaking sites - from both sides of the political spectrum - telling you how many jobs Obama created. Why don't you do something different and explore for yourself to see if you're wrong. Why am I telling you to do this instead of spoon-feeding you with links? Because there's something called "confirmation bias" wherein a person who has a preconceived notion that one side is right and the other is wrong...will give greater weight to data that confirms what he or she already believes, but gives little or no weight at all to contradictory data from the other side. The simple act of me giving you that data - regardless of which side it comes from - already colors that data in your eyes.

So the only viable solution is for you to type "Obama created jobs" in the Google box and spend even just a few minutes researching the matter for yourself so it won't be colored by the fact that it comes from me.

Also, you might be thinking that "confirmation bias" isn't a big deal, or that it somehow doesn't apply to you...but almost everyone is affected by it at least to some degree (particularly when it comes to religion and politics)...and it takes real effort (and not a little courage) to resist the impulse to listen to one's on confirmation bias.
 
LeoVlaming said:
So according to you the US economy is completely government controlled and the President is responsible for the jobs created as well as for unemployment?
Click to expand...

Where did I ever say that the economy's completely government controlled? Please don't put words in my mouth.

NO, the economy is not "completely government controlled"...but the president IS responsible for how well the nation does or does not do during his presidency. If you've had the good fortune to spend a career in the Navy as I have, you'd understand instinctively why it is that a captain is responsible for every doggone thing that goes on while he's the captain even if he's on leave on the other side of the planet. A ship's captain gets ALL the blame for everything that goes wrong on his ship...and he gets ALL the credit for what goes right on his ship while he is the captain. All the blame, and all the credit...and that's the way it is, the way it MUST be. For instance, if a junior sailor decides to screw up a piece of machinery because he's ticked off at the command (and yes, sabotage like this DOES happen), yeah, if that sailor's caught, he's going to be hating life for a long, long time...but at the SAME time, the admiral will hold the ship's captain responsible for not ensuring proper morale and discipline on the ship, for not ensuring machinery is secure.

Likewise, the president - as captain of the ship of state - gets ALL the credit and ALL the blame for what goes on during his or her presidency. Sure, he or she is rightly cut a bit of slack for the first several months...but after that, it's all on him or her. Yes, it's different - the president can't order civilians around - but it's also the same, because he or she certainly DOES have command authority over the cabinet and the executive branch, and DOES have a heck of a lot of influence on much of the rest of the government and even on the private sector (which is why presidents get involved in getting other nations to agree in trade deals).

The president is the captain of the ship of state, and deserves all the blame - and all the credit - for what happens during his or her tenure.
 
Geoist said:
Polgara,

I do agree spending needs to be reduced overall. My problem is with the hypocrisy coming from the conservatives. If a proposal to cut military funding or aid to countries like Israel are mentioned then the cons scream bloody murder. They speak nonstop about how much welfare goes to the poor but on corporate welfare? Crickets. And you might as well be talking to a brick wall when discussing fiscal waste related to the Drug War and death penalty. Truth is, it is difficult to take Republicans seriously on the issue of debt, especially after the free-for-all-spending we experienced under the Reagan and Bush Administrations.
Click to expand...

In truth, both parties spent us into this mess over the years, and we now have a debt that exceeds $18 trillion dollars and climbing! I hope they work together to straighten it out, for all our sakes, because we have borrowed trillions from other countries and they expect to be repaid! This problem has been years in the making, but I really don't think we have years to correct It. We can't even agree on passing a balanced budget amendment, for God's sake! Unfortunately, it will be corrected, probably by circumstances, but I don't think we're going to like the results! :shock:
 
Glen Contrarian said:
There's SCORES of freaking sites - from both sides of the political spectrum - telling you how many jobs Obama created. Why don't you do something different and explore for yourself to see if you're wrong. Why am I telling you to do this instead of spoon-feeding you with links? Because there's something called "confirmation bias" wherein a person who has a preconceived notion that one side is right and the other is wrong...will give greater weight to data that confirms what he or she already believes, but gives little or no weight at all to contradictory data from the other side. The simple act of me giving you that data - regardless of which side it comes from - already colors that data in your eyes.

So the only viable solution is for you to type "Obama created jobs" in the Google box and spend even just a few minutes researching the matter for yourself so it won't be colored by the fact that it comes from me.

Also, you might be thinking that "confirmation bias" isn't a big deal, or that it somehow doesn't apply to you...but almost everyone is affected by it at least to some degree (particularly when it comes to religion and politics)...and it takes real effort (and not a little courage) to resist the impulse to listen to one's on confirmation bias.
Click to expand...

You still have no proof of your claims. Got it. You could have just posted "I can't back my claims up" and saved yourself a lot of wear and tear on your fingers.
 
US Conservative said:
Poverty was dropping at a rate of 1% a year until the war on poverty, than it stopped.

Another failed big govt solution intended to keep people dependent for votes. Did you know that originally welfare was touted as a form of reparations?
Click to expand...

Yeah...uh... no

poverty_age.webp

Critics note that the official poverty rate, as calculated by the Census Bureau, has fallen only modestly, from 19% in 1964 to 15% in 2012 (the most recent year available). But other analysts, citing shortcomings in the official poverty measure, focus on a supplemental measure (also produced by the Census Bureau) to argue that more progress has been made. A team of researchers from Columbia University, for example, calculated an “anchored” supplemental measure — essentially the 2012 measure carried back through time and adjusted for historical inflation — and found that it fell from about 26% in 1967 to 16% in 2012.​

Source is the PEW research center.
 
poweRob said:
Yeah...uh... no

View attachment 67184003

Critics note that the official poverty rate, as calculated by the Census Bureau, has fallen only modestly, from 19% in 1964 to 15% in 2012 (the most recent year available). But other analysts, citing shortcomings in the official poverty measure, focus on a supplemental measure (also produced by the Census Bureau) to argue that more progress has been made. A team of researchers from Columbia University, for example, calculated an “anchored” supplemental measure — essentially the 2012 measure carried back through time and adjusted for historical inflation — and found that it fell from about 26% in 1967 to 16% in 2012.​

Source is the PEW research center.
Click to expand...

Lolz, hey buddy its interesting where you decided to start your little graph. Heres a more contextual one for you.
[video]http://www.economicsjunkie.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/poverty-rate-historical1.png[/video]
 
poweRob said:
Yeah...uh... no

View attachment 67184003

Critics note that the official poverty rate, as calculated by the Census Bureau, has fallen only modestly, from 19% in 1964 to 15% in 2012 (the most recent year available). But other analysts, citing shortcomings in the official poverty measure, focus on a supplemental measure (also produced by the Census Bureau) to argue that more progress has been made. A team of researchers from Columbia University, for example, calculated an “anchored” supplemental measure — essentially the 2012 measure carried back through time and adjusted for historical inflation — and found that it fell from about 26% in 1967 to 16% in 2012.​

Source is the PEW research center.
Click to expand...

How many of those kids are illegals? or born to illegals?
 
US Conservative said:
Lolz, hey buddy its interesting where you decided to start your little graph. Heres a more contextual one for you.
[video]http://www.economicsjunkie.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/poverty-rate-historical1.png[/video]
Click to expand...

Yeah... I'm gonna go with Pew over a Ron Paul for prez site. I dunno... it's just me.
 
Geoist said:
Polgara,

I do agree spending needs to be reduced overall. My problem is with the hypocrisy coming from the conservatives. If a proposal to cut military funding or aid to countries like Israel are mentioned then the cons scream bloody murder. They speak nonstop about how much welfare goes to the poor but on corporate welfare? Crickets. And you might as well be talking to a brick wall when discussing fiscal waste related to the Drug War and death penalty. Truth is, it is difficult to take Republicans seriously on the issue of debt, especially after the free-for-all-spending we experienced under the Reagan and Bush Administrations.
Click to expand...


All Aid to all nations to be ended.

Secure the border, deport the illegals, end birthright ciztenship, and limit legal immigration that would save at least 150,000,000,000 a year.

End the Drug War

End the war on the 2nd Amendment

End all hand outs to Cooperate America within 10 years.
 
AmericanSpartan said:
So a quip, nothing more..
Click to expand...

Just do your own homework and bring it to the thread instead of asking me to do it for you. That is all. I'm not going to waste my time hunting down your theories.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom