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.

 

Do most American Conservatives actually hate America? I'm convinced they do.

page: 6
38
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 12:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: aethertek
a reply to: enlightenedservant
So is the word "regressive" a word they actually use to refer to themselves? I'm curious because while I'm progressive, I'm only liberal on some stuff. I believe all people should have equal rights & opportunities. But I don't think it's government's business (or my business) what consenting adults do at home.

"Reactionary" would be their descriptor & "regressive" would be their beliefs.

For the rest of your comment, (two sides of the same coin really) "liberal" "progressive", six of one half dozen of the other.

K~


Ah ok. I always looked at "progressive" as political policies, like infrastructure, social safety net, green technology, diplomacy over war, etc. I thought "liberal" was more for social issues. I'm liberal as far as wanting all people globally to have access to the same rights, protections & opportunities (which I thought was the point). However I'm pretty religious so I can't identify with some liberal ideas (though my beliefs say no oppression & that we're all equals in God's eyes). So I kind of leave it at that.




posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 12:40 AM
link   
a reply to: enlightenedservant

You'd probably identify more with Libertarians, to be honest. Though, for whatever reason, you choose to ignore the qualities you have in common.



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 12:50 AM
link   
I think of myself as someone with mostly Conservative views.

I love the differences between everyone....which is precisely why I feel the opposite of what you suggest. I like that there are people different than me. Where else but do wonderful conversations come from, but when two entirely different souls get together and bounce ideas off of one another. The friendships I have valued more than any others are with people unlike me. Our differences offer more to learn. I deeply respect the rights of everyone to hold their own thoughts and opinions on all matters. Race means nothing to me. Your religion means nothing to me. Graduate or drop out, rich or poor, none of that means anything to me.

I find that mostly the people who I see so much hate from are those who veer to the far left. I see and hear many (not all, mind you) saying that we are not entitled to our own thoughts and feelings. If someone thinks differently than them they are affronted. If they are Christian or white, then they are automatically loathed before they even get a word out. I see hate on the Conservative side too, but much, much more intolerance from the left.

I do not hate the government. I love our Constitution, and I love freedom. I do not love the loss of freedom though. Take that for what you will.

I love this land and our earth, perhaps more than you. I too take trips out into it, to take pictures of beauty where I can find it, to get lost in the woods is perhaps where I love to be the most. So don't assume the earth is of only importance to you and yours.

I do not offer up support to the KKK, nor the Black Panthers or any other enemies other than recognizing their right to assemble and to have their own thoughts and their own opinions as other free thinking individuals should have. Our individual minds are ours alone, to try and control hate with hate, only breeds more hate.

Conservatives want freedom...what's so wrong with that?
edit on 5-4-2015 by brandiwine14 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 12:50 AM
link   
a reply to: enlightenedservant

That's actually a fair distinction but how does one separate social issues from the rest, unless "social issues" means for you purely personal behavior. Wink wink nudge nudge



K~



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 12:56 AM
link   
a reply to: STTesc



Though, for whatever reason, you choose to ignore the qualities you have in common.


Not sure why you assumed that because I agree with Libertarians almost entirely on foreign policy matters. No interventionist wars, no military bases globally, staying out of other countries' business. That & what some of them claim about central banking (down with the Fed!)

But no way do I agree with them on domestic social issues. I want a strong social safety net so no American has to worry about healthcare, access to an education, basic food to eat, or a basic roof over their heads (as well as the equal rights & protections I listed earlier). Most other stuff, you can work to get.



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 01:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: aethertek
a reply to: enlightenedservant

That's actually a fair distinction but how does one separate social issues from the rest, unless "social issues" means for you purely personal behavior. Wink wink nudge nudge



K~


That's what I thought it meant lol That's why I said it's none of my business or a govt's business what consenting adults do in their homes lol. I mean, how would they even enforce that stuff? Putting cameras in everyone's rooms & having some paid employee keep watch? How's that "small government"?

And while I don't do intoxicants of any kind, I understand the War on Drugs is a sham. And it's destroying waaaay too many lives. So as long as people aren't hurting other people, I don't care what things they do to themselves. Plus life is short, so if someone needs a crutch to get by, I have no objections. I always kinda figured that's what "liberal" was more about lol



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 01:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: STTesc



Though, for whatever reason, you choose to ignore the qualities you have in common.


Not sure why you assumed that because I agree with Libertarians almost entirely on foreign policy matters. No interventionist wars, no military bases globally, staying out of other countries' business. That & what some of them claim about central banking (down with the Fed!)

But no way do I agree with them on domestic social issues. I want a strong social safety net so no American has to worry about healthcare, access to an education, basic food to eat, or a basic roof over their heads (as well as the equal rights & protections I listed earlier). Most other stuff, you can work to get.


So you want freedom and liberty but you want handouts too? Don't we all. Sadly, you can't have your cake and eat it too. Nothing is given freely in this world.



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 01:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: brandiwine14
I think of myself as someone with mostly Conservative views.

I love the differences between everyone....which is precisely why I feel the opposite of what you suggest. I like that there are people different than me. Where else but do wonderful conversations come from, but when two entirely different souls get together and bounce ideas off of one another. The friendships I have valued more than any others are with people unlike me. Our differences offer more to learn. I deeply respect the rights of everyone to hold their own thoughts and opinions on all matters. Race means nothing to me. Your religion means nothing to me. Graduate or drop out, rich or poor, none of that means anything to me.

I find that mostly the people who I see so much hate from are those who veer to the far left. I see and hear many (not all, mind you) saying that we are not entitled to our own thoughts and feelings. If someone thinks differently than them they are affronted. If they are Christian or white, then they are automatically loathed before they even get a word out. I see hate on the Conservative side too, but much, much more intolerance from the left.

I do not hate the government. I love our Constitution, and I love freedom. I do not love the loss of freedom though. Take that for what you will.

I love this land and our earth, perhaps more than you. I too take trips out into it, to take pictures of beauty where I can find it, to get lost in the woods is perhaps where I love to be the most. So don't assume the earth is of only importance to you and yours.

I do not offer up support to the KKK, nor the Black Panthers or any other enemies other than recognizing their right to assemble and to have their own thoughts and their own opinions as other free thinking individuals should have. Our individual minds are ours alone, to try and control hate with hate, only breeds more hate, which is what you do...right?

Conservatives want freedom...what's so wrong with that?


That's a very sensible response. Thanks. And I hope I didn't offend you (though I admit that probably sounds rather "strange" from me considering the thread).

I was actually hoping for more responses like this because I've known a lot of different types of conservatives, and I've personally seen both sides of the things I've mentioned in the OP. I've seen some who seemed happy to cut environmental protections (& mock me for being a treehugger), but others who were big on camping, hiking, & hunting. And they absolutely hated when people would litter in the woods. But when I'd ask about companies "littering" with chemicals, sometimes they wouldn't see the connection.

That's just one example (and it's admittedly a weak one). But I've been seeing so much of what I stated in the OP that I started thinking the "compassionate conservatives" were an exception, not the rule.



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 01:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: STTesc

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: STTesc



Though, for whatever reason, you choose to ignore the qualities you have in common.


Not sure why you assumed that because I agree with Libertarians almost entirely on foreign policy matters. No interventionist wars, no military bases globally, staying out of other countries' business. That & what some of them claim about central banking (down with the Fed!)

But no way do I agree with them on domestic social issues. I want a strong social safety net so no American has to worry about healthcare, access to an education, basic food to eat, or a basic roof over their heads (as well as the equal rights & protections I listed earlier). Most other stuff, you can work to get.


So you want freedom and liberty but you want handouts too? Don't we all. Sadly, you can't have your cake and eat it too. Nothing is given freely in this world.


Call it what you want. But I'd rather my taxes help save American lives than go to some greedy corporation or pay for more weapons to kill people. And I see no problem whatsoever in a region's resources being used to help all of its citizens, instead of just a few (whoever that few may be).



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 01:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: STTesc

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: STTesc



Though, for whatever reason, you choose to ignore the qualities you have in common.


Not sure why you assumed that because I agree with Libertarians almost entirely on foreign policy matters. No interventionist wars, no military bases globally, staying out of other countries' business. That & what some of them claim about central banking (down with the Fed!)

But no way do I agree with them on domestic social issues. I want a strong social safety net so no American has to worry about healthcare, access to an education, basic food to eat, or a basic roof over their heads (as well as the equal rights & protections I listed earlier). Most other stuff, you can work to get.


So you want freedom and liberty but you want handouts too? Don't we all. Sadly, you can't have your cake and eat it too. Nothing is given freely in this world.


Call it what you want. But I'd rather my taxes help save American lives than go to some greedy corporation or pay for more weapons to kill people. And I see no problem whatsoever in a region's resources being used to help all of its citizens, instead of just a few (whoever that few may be).


Yet isn't it better that people learn to earn these resources on their own? I mean, I'm all about helping people down on their luck, a helping hand is needed at times, but what's the incentive to work when the Government pays you to sit on your ass? The whole thing about handing a man a fish or a rod. You want to help these people? Then give them access to programs and education to promotes healthy employment, not food stamps and housing.



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 01:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Aazadan




The KKK however ignorant, misguided, and bigoted they are, are Americans.


So what about that BIGOTRY for bankers,rich,gun owners, ceo's, christian's,jews, and wait for it....

CONSERVATIVES ?

Oh my bad only the LEFT is allowed to be bigots.


It's not bigotry towards bankers. The banks have earned every little bit of ire they get. Oddly enough, if you look at places like the local credit union there is very little hatred towards them. Instead it's aimed at places like Goldman Sachs, and not out of a blind hatred for their profession but for their actions.

The rich are also not hated as a group, there are many rich folks on the left that liberals love. What they dislike are people like the Kochs that have purchased so much influence that the Republicans will close the Senate for the day in order to not be late to a meeting with them.

The real problem the left has with those who are rich, is in the disproportionate benefit wealth brings. Wealth makes one more comfortable but it shouldn't set a person up to pay a lower percent in taxes, take jobs away from others, and create family dynasties that lock future people out from becoming wealthy.

The others on your list I happen to agree with, the left does go out of their way to target them, though it does irk me when a CEO gets a huge paycheck after running a company into the ground, then cuts worker wages while giving themselves a bonus. That's just bad business and an example of treating people poorly. Not that either of those things should be illegal, but it does explain where workers rights and collective bargaining can beneficially enter the picture. Then again, the right has their groups they blindly hate too.



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 01:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
That's what I thought it meant lol That's why I said it's none of my business or a govt's business what consenting adults do in their homes lol. I mean, how would they even enforce that stuff? Putting cameras in everyone's rooms & having some paid employee keep watch? How's that "small government"? And while I don't do intoxicants of any kind, I understand the War on Drugs is a sham. And it's destroying waaaay too many lives. So as long as people aren't hurting other people, I don't care what things they do to themselves. Plus life is short, so if someone needs a crutch to get by, I have no objections. I always kinda figured that's what "liberal" was more about lol


Well you have the right way of looking at things. Far too many people are hung up on what other people do that doesn't effect them personally.
Which is why I was so terse & dismissive earlier regarding current "social issues".

Pfft, Nixons War on Drugs, what a monumental fleecing of American tax dollars that has been, all so the owners can enforce more control while making huge profits through clandestine importation, money laundering & the always popular prison industry. Yes the hush hush side of our government has been in the drug trade for decades. Notice that after we invaded Afghanistan poppy production went through the roof.

Did you know that in the early days of our Republic hemp was grown all over the country because of it ease of growth & superior fiber structure vs average wood pulp.
Makes looooong lasting clothes, paper & fiber products & the oils can be used in place of petroleum in some of the chemical & plastics industry
Then the owners of the west coast logging industry in collusion with the Hearst dynasty got it outlawed, yay more profit for them less freedom for us.

K~


edit on 5-4-2015 by aethertek because: Justcuz



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 01:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: STTesc

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: STTesc

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: STTesc



Though, for whatever reason, you choose to ignore the qualities you have in common.


Not sure why you assumed that because I agree with Libertarians almost entirely on foreign policy matters. No interventionist wars, no military bases globally, staying out of other countries' business. That & what some of them claim about central banking (down with the Fed!)

But no way do I agree with them on domestic social issues. I want a strong social safety net so no American has to worry about healthcare, access to an education, basic food to eat, or a basic roof over their heads (as well as the equal rights & protections I listed earlier). Most other stuff, you can work to get.


So you want freedom and liberty but you want handouts too? Don't we all. Sadly, you can't have your cake and eat it too. Nothing is given freely in this world.


Call it what you want. But I'd rather my taxes help save American lives than go to some greedy corporation or pay for more weapons to kill people. And I see no problem whatsoever in a region's resources being used to help all of its citizens, instead of just a few (whoever that few may be).


Yet isn't it better that people learn to earn these resources on their own? I mean, I'm all about helping people down on their luck, a helping hand is needed at times, but what's the incentive to work when the Government pays you to sit on your ass? The whole thing about handing a man a fish or a rod. You want to help these people? Then give them access to programs and education to promotes healthy employment, not food stamps and housing.


Why can't we have both? Schools that actually teach people how to survive & thrive in this world. And a strong social safety net so they try to reach their dreams without ever having to worry about where their next meal is coming from?

I can't speak for anyone else but in my religion, we fast 30 days straight, once a year, from sun up to sundown. No snacks, no water, no nothing. The last few years it's been in the summer, so we'd fast 16-18hrs in the sweltering heat. And as much as it sucks (yes I admit it, it sucks lol), I still knew I had meals coming to me at sundown. But the poor don't even have that.

Realizing that affected me so much spiritually that I actually push for ending hunger & homelessness before I do religion. What good is giving someone a lecture on faith (or how to fish) when their child is crying from hunger? So I'd gladly throw away most of those other political goals or stances if I can ensure food security for all people.



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 01:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: STTesc

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: STTesc

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: STTesc



Though, for whatever reason, you choose to ignore the qualities you have in common.


Not sure why you assumed that because I agree with Libertarians almost entirely on foreign policy matters. No interventionist wars, no military bases globally, staying out of other countries' business. That & what some of them claim about central banking (down with the Fed!)

But no way do I agree with them on domestic social issues. I want a strong social safety net so no American has to worry about healthcare, access to an education, basic food to eat, or a basic roof over their heads (as well as the equal rights & protections I listed earlier). Most other stuff, you can work to get.


So you want freedom and liberty but you want handouts too? Don't we all. Sadly, you can't have your cake and eat it too. Nothing is given freely in this world.


Call it what you want. But I'd rather my taxes help save American lives than go to some greedy corporation or pay for more weapons to kill people. And I see no problem whatsoever in a region's resources being used to help all of its citizens, instead of just a few (whoever that few may be).


Yet isn't it better that people learn to earn these resources on their own? I mean, I'm all about helping people down on their luck, a helping hand is needed at times, but what's the incentive to work when the Government pays you to sit on your ass? The whole thing about handing a man a fish or a rod. You want to help these people? Then give them access to programs and education to promotes healthy employment, not food stamps and housing.


Why can't we have both? Schools that actually teach people how to survive & thrive in this world. And a strong social safety net so they try to reach their dreams without ever having to worry about where their next meal is coming from?

I can't speak for anyone else but in my religion, we fast 30 days straight, once a year, from sun up to sundown. No snacks, no water, no nothing. The last few years it's been in the summer, so we'd fast 16-18hrs in the sweltering heat. And as much as it sucks (yes I admit it, it sucks lol), I still knew I had meals coming to me at sundown. But the poor don't even have that.

Realizing that affected me so much spiritually that I actually push for ending hunger & homelessness before I do religion. What good is giving someone a lecture on faith (or how to fish) when their child is crying from hunger? So I'd gladly throw away most of those other political goals or stances if I can ensure food security for all people.


And I agree with you (mostly). The problem is that when you hand people enough to survive on, they lose all incentive to work. I'd love to see a world where everyone is fed and the poor are taken care of. The problem is, humanity simply isn't ready for that. There are major holes in the theory. But, to be honest, it's very hard to actually go hungry in America. There are things to eat. Everywhere. There are ways to eat without money. I'm not saying that's the best solution, simply that knowledge is more powerful than anything else you can hand someone.

You know what bothers me the most in this world? Corruption. And I absolutely hate people that sit in their mansions, driving their private jet around the world while people starve to death. It boils my blood. But such is the human condition, it can't be changed until we as a species are ready to change. The road to hell and all that. Good intentions.



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 01:51 AM
link   
a reply to: aethertek

Yep. And I forget which one, but one of our important American historical documents was written on hemp paper. And the Taliban had completely shutdown opium production before we'd invaded Afghanistan. I know that's not the only reason we invaded, but opium production rebounded within a year after we did. And the US uses something like 80% of opiates globally (those stats may be old now, though).

I think in the next 20 years most of the War on Drugs will be abolished. Medical marijuana will obviously be first (it's made huge strides already). But I think the biggest problem will actually be law enforcement (federal, state, and local). They get so much funding from the War on Drugs, asset seizures & auctions, etc that I don't think they'll be able to sustain themselves if it dropped instantly. And that's not even mentioning the for-profit prison system & contracted security guards.



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 02:10 AM
link   
a reply to: enlightenedservant

Yes & Civil asset forfeiture has been in the news recently as well so perhaps that (literally highway robbery) will be nullified soon.

Oh the fasting... Stop that, at least stop doing it that way. An overall lowering of caloric intake can be beneficial but fasting for that duration & rhythm will break your metabolism down in negative ways.
I eat very little, I'm over 50 years old, no disease or ailments of any kind, still strong, the only problems I have are physical damage that one normally accumulates from a lifetime of stupid decisions.

K~



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 02:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: STTesc

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: STTesc

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: STTesc

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: STTesc



Though, for whatever reason, you choose to ignore the qualities you have in common.


Not sure why you assumed that because I agree with Libertarians almost entirely on foreign policy matters. No interventionist wars, no military bases globally, staying out of other countries' business. That & what some of them claim about central banking (down with the Fed!)

But no way do I agree with them on domestic social issues. I want a strong social safety net so no American has to worry about healthcare, access to an education, basic food to eat, or a basic roof over their heads (as well as the equal rights & protections I listed earlier). Most other stuff, you can work to get.


So you want freedom and liberty but you want handouts too? Don't we all. Sadly, you can't have your cake and eat it too. Nothing is given freely in this world.


Call it what you want. But I'd rather my taxes help save American lives than go to some greedy corporation or pay for more weapons to kill people. And I see no problem whatsoever in a region's resources being used to help all of its citizens, instead of just a few (whoever that few may be).


Yet isn't it better that people learn to earn these resources on their own? I mean, I'm all about helping people down on their luck, a helping hand is needed at times, but what's the incentive to work when the Government pays you to sit on your ass? The whole thing about handing a man a fish or a rod. You want to help these people? Then give them access to programs and education to promotes healthy employment, not food stamps and housing.


Why can't we have both? Schools that actually teach people how to survive & thrive in this world. And a strong social safety net so they try to reach their dreams without ever having to worry about where their next meal is coming from?

I can't speak for anyone else but in my religion, we fast 30 days straight, once a year, from sun up to sundown. No snacks, no water, no nothing. The last few years it's been in the summer, so we'd fast 16-18hrs in the sweltering heat. And as much as it sucks (yes I admit it, it sucks lol), I still knew I had meals coming to me at sundown. But the poor don't even have that.

Realizing that affected me so much spiritually that I actually push for ending hunger & homelessness before I do religion. What good is giving someone a lecture on faith (or how to fish) when their child is crying from hunger? So I'd gladly throw away most of those other political goals or stances if I can ensure food security for all people.


And I agree with you (mostly). The problem is that when you hand people enough to survive on, they lose all incentive to work. I'd love to see a world where everyone is fed and the poor are taken care of. The problem is, humanity simply isn't ready for that. There are major holes in the theory. But, to be honest, it's very hard to actually go hungry in America. There are things to eat. Everywhere. There are ways to eat without money. I'm not saying that's the best solution, simply that knowledge is more powerful than anything else you can hand someone.

You know what bothers me the most in this world? Corruption. And I absolutely hate people that sit in their mansions, driving their private jet around the world while people starve to death. It boils my blood. But such is the human condition, it can't be changed until we as a species are ready to change. The road to hell and all that. Good intentions.


If it really bothers you the most, then stand against it. As Gandhi said "You must become the change you want to see".



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 07:45 AM
link   
I Couldn't even make it through the first sentence of the thread, just too ignorant.



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 07:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: Greathouse
a reply to: enlightenedservant

I'm a conservative American and I don't hate nearly as much as you do.

I agree with most of the points you made. But a blanket hate filled statement like yours shows who the haters truly are.


The first several replies go a lot like this one and I agree. There are so-called conservative politicians who push many of these beliefs. It just happens that those politicians can easily sway (or have drawn to them) an ignorant minority of people who would identify themselves as Republican or conservative.

Most conservatives I know are actually bigger on environmentalism than most progressives I know. They just do it themselves, and don't want the government imposing restrictions on anyone, especially alleged job creators. They're also generally not racist. I happen to NOT associate with imbeciles though, so even the Republicans I know tend to be intelligent Paleoconservatives, not imbecilic, waste-of-flesh neocon anti-Constitutionalists.



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 12:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: dogstar23

originally posted by: Greathouse
a reply to: enlightenedservant

I'm a conservative American and I don't hate nearly as much as you do.

I agree with most of the points you made. But a blanket hate filled statement like yours shows who the haters truly are.


The first several replies go a lot like this one and I agree. There are so-called conservative politicians who push many of these beliefs. It just happens that those politicians can easily sway (or have drawn to them) an ignorant minority of people who would identify themselves as Republican or conservative.

Most conservatives I know are actually bigger on environmentalism than most progressives I know. They just do it themselves, and don't want the government imposing restrictions on anyone, especially alleged job creators. They're also generally not racist. I happen to NOT associate with imbeciles though, so even the Republicans I know tend to be intelligent Paleoconservatives, not imbecilic, waste-of-flesh neocon anti-Constitutionalists.


Thanks for the response. I mentioned the environmental part in one of the many responses in this thread. This is actually my "sister" thread to the other thread "What's wrong with Liberals?" and the responses in it. Both of these threads got pretty heated, as you can guess. But some good dialogue & misunderstandings were addressed in each.




top topics



 
38
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join