If you exclude all the conspiracy theories, which political side would you be on???

a reply to: JoshuaCox

again, you arent rectifying anything, you just blame conservatives.

where do any of your follow ups support the premise of your op?

Vast majority of people are middle of the road, some lean left some lean right.

My political leanings were independent till recently now I am constitutional rather than right or left.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

Yeah, I know. Republicans started it but Democrats also embraced it, instead of fighting it. The long game would be to over turn that ruling, stop saying money equals free speech and corporations are people. Once that is gone and the old guard dies out or retires and we get new blood in, we’ll see what the new game has to offer the American people.

This, of course, is just a pipe dream at the moment.

Libertarian for me, great parties and conventions with lots of drinking, dancing and raising hell. They realize that it's all just a silly game not to be taken seriously.

You don't really need to pick a side.
The only side has already been perfectly laid out in the Constitution and Bill of Rights, still to this day the greatest collection of thoughts put to paper on how a society should shape itself and how representatives of the people should manage themselves.
If you just stick to that, you are not going to go far wrong - you just align with the people who shape their ideologies off those writings.
Elections should always be about which party/person will best represent those ideals.

Anyone deviating without proper process is a traitor to the country, seeking to introduce a cancer into the country to destroy it - knowingly or unknowingly.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

A) conservatives have always been the more Hawkins party..

Debatable democrats have been running things in more than a couple boondoggle conflicts in our history.

B) no one wants to ban all the guns..

Several democrats at the state and federal level are have been caught on microphone saying they want all guns banned.

TextC) no one wants to repeal the first or second amendments..

Of course not if they tried to ban it outright they would face resistance, thats why we have things like the patriot act and other assorted laws that pick away at the integrity of the amendments.

D) when have the republicans lessened government??? Lol

When have the democrats, what you fail to see over and over again is that neither party ever manages to actually do anything in favor of us peons.

Vietnam-Kennedy
Vietnam- Johnson
Korea-Truman
A democrat dropped the bomb on Japan
WW1- wilson
WW2- Roosevelt
Bay of Pigs- kennedy
Libya- Obama

originally posted by: Metallicus
I am a Conservative person so I would always be Conservative. Small Government, less taxes and no wars. Also, I will always be pro-1st and pro 2nd amendment and Leftists don't support those two amendments to the Constitution or if they do they do so selectively where I support both without reserve.

Same, and I am not up on making it easy to kill babies.

I am not against free birth control for those who want it. Much less cost.

originally posted by: MountainLaurel
The sooner we change the 2 party illusion the better !!

I'd add a line to that. "If you're not a Moderate Independent by age 60, you stopped maturing at age 40."

Oddly enough I was a long haired, Hippie type at 20, naively believing that the Peace Movement, meant something.
At 40, yes I had evolved into a Conservative and a business owner.
At over 60, I've rejected both extremes, both parties and adopted a moderate viewpoint unique to me. No more following a crowd or letting party leadership dictate to me what I'm for, doing the thinking for me.

I don't think I'm that unusual.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

I am firmly a social anarchist, fiscal conservative. Which side would represent me the most? Neither from where i stand.

originally posted by: olaru12
Libertarian for me, great parties and conventions with lots of drinking, dancing and raising hell. They realize that it's all just a silly game not to be taken seriously.

I get the feeling ypu and i see eye to eye on a whole lot more than we dont.

a reply to: Swills

But it is not in the democrats PARTY PLATFORM..


Man, I don’t know if you get what I’m saying..


Democrats HAVE TO LIE about supporting it republicans DO NOT HAVE TO LIE about supporting it.

It is a corner stone of the right. They are pretending it is a good thing!!!

The democrats admit there is a problem. Then some get paid off to ignore that problem..

The republicans pretend there isn’t a problem in the first place....


I know it doesn’t feel like there is a choice there, but there ABSOLUTELY IS..

It is a choice between dealing with corruption and addressing the problem and a willful ignorance.

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: Swills

Sold...


Good luck doing that when only one side even remotely has a problem with it...

The democrats admit that is a major problem , but some get paid off to keep it that way.

Money in politics IS THE GOP PARTY PLATFORM..

Citizens United was a conservative policy.. that was only supported by conservatives..

Why make up a bunch of hypothetical nonsense just in order to bash conservatives? Do you see a pattern in how each of your threads with hypothetical questions just turns into you doing this?

The Monster Raving Loony Party.
At least they admit they are nuts.

www.omrlp.com...

a reply to: JoshuaCox

Well...if the democrats didnt lug their own detestable luggage around this exercise might help.

But the gist of it is comparing turds. That white speck on top of a pile of bird poop is still bird poop, even if it lools cleaner.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

So you make a "why can't we get along" thread so you can use the thread to tear down the ideology you don't personally believe in. Justifying your own.

In other words, we can all just get along, as long as we all believe what you do.

Persons such as yourself is why I cannot be a liberal.

I mean honestly... read back what you've done in this thread.

Who would want to be a part of THAT?

The side that's for the people

a reply to: JoshuaCox

Well, most certainly it would not be the party of warpigs or the party of libtards - too much deceptive conduct and too much negative history tainting both pathetic institutions.

Like most, I would be for the Libertarian party:
-Harm no-one in your pursuit of liberty and happiness.
-Impose none of your personal views onto anyone, live & let live.
-Maximum individual freedoms.
-Absolute minimum government - expressive term limits for every person that wanted to 'serve the public'.
-Safety and Security of the community is limited to DOMESTIC security only.
-Make it illegal to warpig in other countries who are not a threat.
-Make it illegal to lobby for special interests.
-Immediately disband the CIA, NSA, DHS and FBI and all other covert agencies and reconstruct a single, limited in capability, entity to fulfil the role of overseeing and managing domestic safety & security.

Just FYI, conservative != Republican and liberal != Democrat

You might want to remove political parties from your argument.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

Well, contrary to what you posted in the OP, it's crystal clear you are all in for one side. Why ask the questions in the OP? Are you waking up slowly and having trouble getting the sleep boogers out of your eyes?

Libertarian. It's a pretty simple thing. Government is for infrastructure and military. Everything else is up to the states to decide.

Laws are based on common sense. Do whatever you want unless it harms someone or infringes on someone elses rights. And personal property EXISTS, deal with it.

I'm sure you'd pick the one that calls for globalism and jail time or execution for anyone whom doesn't agree with your ideals tho, Joshua. Oh, and Christians should be outlawed, especially white ones, right Joshua?