It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

North Korea Is A Liberal Utopia

page: 4
30
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 5 2015 @ 10:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66


Why even start with that idiot...they are a birther....that should tell you plenty about them..




posted on Mar, 5 2015 @ 10:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: beezzer
What would YOU change?

Haven't really given it much thought.

My country has gone through five constitutions in less than a century and to be honest I don't know if any of them made things better or worse. I find the belief that a set of rules that are bent, skirted and amended as needed, offer any kind of security to be a bit naive.


edit on 5-3-2015 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2015 @ 10:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: FalcoFan
a reply to: Annee

Does it not go both ways?



No, it doesn't.

Like I said I was a Rep for 40 years. I spent about 6 years in a "no holds barred" political forum, starting just prior to the Bush/Gore mess. I originally went in as a Bush supporter.

Bill O'Reilly is probably the best example of how most of the Republicans behaved in that forum. They are "bullies". They didn't debate, they brow beat. Sure, there's a few moderate Reps, very few.

I am a social liberal in equality and major supporter of secularism, but do not consider myself a political liberal.


(post by th3dudeabides removed for a manners violation)

posted on Mar, 5 2015 @ 10:46 PM
link   
the ancient egyptians had a religious + secular state for 4000 years. they never once, as far as i know, tried to forcibly stop people from being religious or secular, although there was that one pharaoh who outlawed all religions except worship of the sun disk. didn't last long though. for quite awhile there, americans were basically worshipping/not worshipping whatever they wanted, and everything was hunky dory, then the crap hit the fan, and suddenly everyone is in panic mode. it sucks, really.
edit on 5-3-2015 by undo because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2015 @ 10:54 PM
link   
I appreciate all of the responses.

I am not religious or a Republican. I just find Democrats to be slightly more ridiculous.



posted on Mar, 5 2015 @ 11:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus
I appreciate all of the responses.

I am not religious or a Republican. I just find Democrats to be slightly more ridiculous.


In what area?



posted on Mar, 5 2015 @ 11:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: xuenchen

What modern American President started the deficit?

Was that Republican Presdient Ronald Reagan? Why yes, yes it was.

Who's the last President under which there has been a budget surplus?

Was that Democratic President Bill Clinton? Why yes, yes it was.

What modern American President saw the economy collapse and very nearly fall into Depression?

Was that Republcian GW Bush? Why yes, yes it was.

Who's the only President in the last decade to show reductions in the US deficit?

Was that Democrat Barack Obama? Why yes,

Yes it was.





Bazinga.

Gryphon, clearly the King of debate techniques.


Just reading along, admiring the wit blended with factual data...


Thank you Sir, for the entertainment & educational value in this thread.




posted on Mar, 6 2015 @ 12:13 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

Most presidents have added to the national debt.

Obama however takes the blue ribbon because he has added the most by far.

Much much more than Kim Jong Un could ever dream of.

Much much more than any world leader could.




posted on Mar, 6 2015 @ 12:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: Gryphon66

Most presidents have added to the national debt.

Obama however takes the blue ribbon because he has added the most by far.

Much much more than Kim Jong Un could ever dream of.

Much much more than any world leader could.





Maybe the expense of war should have been added to Bush's expenditures.

Why wasn't it?

Instead, Obama gets docked for trying to recover from it.

Strange math.
edit on 6-3-2015 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 6 2015 @ 12:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: Annee
Maybe the expense of war should have been added to Bush's expenditures.

Why wasn't it?

Munitions and young men's souls must have been taking up valuable storage space.

Strange math indeed.



posted on Mar, 6 2015 @ 12:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: Annee
Maybe the expense of war should have been added to Bush's expenditures.

Why wasn't it?

Munitions and young men's souls must have been taking up valuable storage space.

Strange math indeed.


AND . . .




The President doesn't really have much control over the debt added during his first year in office. That's because the budget for that fiscal year was already set by the previous President. useconomy.about.com...


Obama added a 53% increase.
Bush added a 101% increase.
Reagan added a 186% increase.
edit on 6-3-2015 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 6 2015 @ 12:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Annee

But you still get a vocal group asking, "Who's in office now'"
edit on 6-3-2015 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 6 2015 @ 01:19 AM
link   
a reply to: Annee

Percentage is meaningless.

It's the actual amounts that count the most.

And the actual amounts are included in the "Bush" numbers.




posted on Mar, 6 2015 @ 01:34 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Swing and a miss.

The current deficit has the Republicans' names all over it. They own it.

"Reagan proved that deficits don't matter." (Dark Lord of the Sith, and US Vice President Dick Cheney)


edit on 1Fri, 06 Mar 2015 01:45:18 -060015p012015366 by Gryphon66 because: Deleted nickname



posted on Mar, 6 2015 @ 01:56 AM
link   
Actually North Korea is a totalitarian paradise, a political system that the right wing is not immune to. Never in modern history has there ever been a true liberal "paradise", and I don't think there ever will be. Most industrialized nations rely on a mixture of both conservative policies and liberal policies. Too much of one thing is always bad.

But I guess if we're going to extremes then we can compare the Islamic state and ISIS as a conservative right wing paradise.

Although the U.S. is one of the most right wing countries in the industrialized world, the massive growth of the middle class during the middle part of the last century can be attributed to various social programs and higher taxation both of those things are widely considered "liberal".



I'm still trying to think of a conservative policy that has benefited the middle class instead of corporations and millionaires.
edit on 3/6/2015 by muse7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 6 2015 @ 02:30 AM
link   
a reply to: muse7




I'm still trying to think of a conservative policy that has benefited the middle class instead of corporations and millionaires.

Believe it or not the EPA or the environmental Protection Agency
Consumer Protection Act and alot more stuff,done during the ,Nixon years,even the Health Care act was based largely off Conservative ideas.



posted on Mar, 6 2015 @ 06:04 AM
link   
a reply to: Spider879

Republican ideas before the Southern Dixiecrats and the Christian Fundamentalists changed conservatism forever?

Yep.




I'm frankly sick and tired of the political preachers across this country telling me as a citizen that if I want to be a moral person, I must believe in "A," "B," "C" and "D." Just who do they think they are? And from where do they presume to claim the right to dictate their moral beliefs to me?

And I am even more angry as a legislator who must endure the threats of every religious group who thinks it has some God-granted right to control my vote on every roll call in the Senate. I am warning them today: I will fight them every step of the way if they try to dictate their moral convictions to all Americans in the name of "conservatism."


and ...




Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them.



Are you wondering what happened to the Party of Lincoln, the Grand Old Party?

Just ask Barry Goldwater (source for quotes above).
edit on 6Fri, 06 Mar 2015 06:12:57 -060015p062015366 by Gryphon66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 6 2015 @ 06:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: Spider879

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: Metallicus

I wonder what the US would look like if the progressive element of the DNC ruled supreme.

I donno maybe the U.S would look like a bigger version of Denmark Norway and Switzerland??


Could the same/identical US Constitution be applied then?

Why would they want the US constitution.

They would want there own constitution that works for THEM.

Americas way of doing thing does not suite everyone everywhere.



posted on Mar, 6 2015 @ 06:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: beezzer


But that includes the Bill of Rights.



If we are talking that I think Norway and Finland pretty much cover it. Freedom of speech, gun rights, right to a trial ect




top topics



 
30
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join