It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


The Bill of no-Rights

page: 2
<< 1    3 >>

log in


posted on Oct, 31 2002 @ 05:07 PM
Yup, that's wh ythe "ilk" such as Coulter, Hannity, Limbaugh and Malkin have best-selling books. That's why Rush rules the airwaves, and Michael Savage is quickly spreading all over the nation.

Moderate is a cute little term for "I'm wishy-washy, I have no thoughts on my own, Dan Rather, will you tell me what to think?" It may be displeasing to you, but there are more Americans out there with good morals, a sense of decency and the inherent understanding of what is right and what is a load of crap. This is indicated by the way Fox News is blowing the doors of of CNN. People are sick of the liberal-leaning brainwashing tactics.

posted on Nov, 1 2002 @ 10:41 AM
...please define your terms.

A conservative American is:_______

A Liberal American is:______

And please tell me how one groups is in exclusive ownership of key attributes. For example, let's take someone who was described as the most Liberal Senator in Congress, Paul Wellstone. Was he without decency, good morals, a good work ethic and a lack of understanding of right/wrong?
I'm not being flip, but trying to understand your terms and how, in your eyes, they exist at such polar opposites and don't cover the common ground of morality/a strong America/safe healthy children, ect.
Because I see the 'camps' on the American landscape like I see martial arts: I studied GoJu Ryu and Tae Kwan Do - they both teach defense & offensive victory, just diffrent manners to get there.

posted on Nov, 1 2002 @ 12:06 PM
As I've said before, I respected Wellstone because he appeared to me to be a genuine liberal and not one that was about gaining power at all costs and without regard to law. Does that mean that I believe his moral standards were as the traditional, conservative standards that made this nation once strong? No.

Take one example; abortion. Was he pro-abortion? Yes. What moral standard is it that declares open season on the weakest and most innocent of humans? Just because I feel someone is genuine and I respect them for that doesn't mean that they are of sound, moral character. I can respect, or did respect Madana because she said she knew she was going to Hell and did not care. Now, I don't think she understands the full ramifications of that choice, and I certainly hope she repents and seeks forgiveness from her Creator, but I can respect someone who at least takes that stand. However, she and those like her are bad for the nation and its social and spiritual fabric, and that I oppose.

I believe you understand the differences between the liberal agenda and the conservative agenda. I believe you understand that the liberal agenda's goal is to remove the traditional moral standard from the face of this nation, and, as much as possible, wherever it may be in the rest of the world. I also believe that you know that the liberal's economic agenda is one that would make this a socialistic nation even more than it already is.

The liberals feel that we are too stupid to make the right decisions for our lives and families so they feel the government should control it and they, the liberals, should be the ones to control the government. Whether is the rearing of our children to what is done with the money that we earn, they want control. This mindset is sensed by the majority of Americans, and that, once again, is why it is the conservative pundits that make best-selling books even when ignored or bashed by the "professional book critics", and have the fastest growing syndicated radio talk show on the airwaves, no matter how much the liberal crowd attempts to demonize and demean them and their listeners.
The liberals have been about the business of revising history, controlling the public schools and the media for decades, and they still ahve not been able to deceive the majority of the population. Don't worry, though, B-T, give them a couple more generations at most and their campaign against social decency and economic independence will have taken a toll and the original intent of the Founding Fathers will be not even a memory.

posted on Nov, 1 2002 @ 06:14 PM
I still didn't get my definitions!
Throw out the abortion question for a minute. Understand that there are as many God fearing hard working folks who are on the opposite side of the argument from you.
The idea that any elected official in Congress is moving the country to a socialist model, because they are Liberal, is just foolish.
Put the rubber to the road, man! Test drive your theory. Liberal Americans in Congress does not equel Socialist or Communist. I don't know everyone in the body, but I'd bet they all have a prior profession and societal level of achievement before becoming a Congressional member.
CNN beat FoxNews, but they're both Corporate Propaganda outlets. These 'authors' you mention: McDonalds is alwas going to outsell my favorite steak house.
You don't seem to have looked into economic theory too closely: the one that you favor by default of you political patronage has lost 2 million jobs since installing their budget, and 5000 more jobs were lost in Oct. for the second month in a row.
Here's a small example: in the NJ race, the GOP candidate is for repeal of the SuperFund surcharge tax on Chemical & Refining companies. Basically, they made the toxic waste sites, they should clean them up. Repeal of the tax means it get past on to US. Not good theory, at least for it's lack of benefit to you & me.
Ignoring Social programs like funding to schools, lack of on the street police and repeal of pollution restrictions on companies are very bad economic moves, besides eroding society. We cut it now, we pay later.

posted on Nov, 2 2002 @ 05:12 AM
Nobody said you were going to get definitions. You're a grown man that doesn't like conservatism but does like liberalism. Mister, if you can't come up with your own definitions of the two, or what they stand for, then why are you even trying to speak with any kind of authority?

The issue or debate wasn't what Fox News or CNN was, such as your claim that they are corporate propaganda outlets, the issue is that conservatism is a minority, we aren't. If that were the case, then all the liberal programs would come into the country through the front door of Congress instead of the backdoor of courts playing law-makers.

To say that conservatives want to defund schools, not pay cops and throw out pollution control measures is propaganda from the left. However, it is fair to say that conservatives want to give people a choice of where they send their kids and what they learn. I'd rather my child go to a Christian school in the area where he learns alot more of the subjects he should be learning and not the social reengineering garbage that is emphasized in the public education today. Those who are "pro-choice" should have no problem with that, right?

The idea that any elected offical in Congress (more aptly put, any congressman) who is trying to move the country to a socialist model just because he is a liberalis foolish? I don't think so as that economic model is the one they find more suited to their portrait of the world. I suppose any congressman couldn't do that if any was only one. Problem is they don't just come in onesies.

posted on Nov, 2 2002 @ 06:32 AM
Rep or Dem doesn't matter...Both parties in the government *use* those labels to keep the citizens "divided & conquered" so that no one thinks to unite & oppose the *government as a whole* that continues to oppress & supress more of our Constitutional Rights.

Haven't you guys seen that happening yet?

posted on Nov, 2 2002 @ 10:45 AM
Once again, M-D, you have cut the fat off the hide and exposed the bone for all to see. "They" own both horses in the race, so either way "they" win.

posted on Nov, 2 2002 @ 11:20 PM
Why do you think I chose that particular nick/avatar/title?

Just like the ninja, sneak up & take out the opposition in one swift stroke!

BTW, I chose "Professional Assassin" for the title because it doesn't refer to assassinating *people*...It refers to assassinating falsehood & cutting away the layers of lies.

[Edited on 3-11-2002 by MidnightDStroyer]

posted on Nov, 3 2002 @ 10:47 AM
But just wanted, via definitions, that to hoist onto the opposing party, Thomas, allegations of socialism is absurd: they are Americans working within the Unique American Model, regardless if you or I agree with them.
"To say that conservatives want to defund schools, not pay cops and throw out pollution control measures is propaganda from the left." -Thomas

Nope, it's not. The only Local Senate Race is in NJ. Doug Forrester's platform includes school vouchers - after review, it diverts federal funds from public schools. Cuts in funding to municipalities - it cuts police payroll, among other things. Pollution - repeal of the toxic SuperFund tax on oil/refining companies shifts the burden to the tax payer - it still has to be cleaned up, just under that plan the ones responsible get a free pass.
Yeah, like my heading states, I agree that it's all control and the appearance of choice is a farce. But, I also suggest that maybe it's a matter of degrees - shift groups in and out of prosperity to keep them at each others throats ( guess we're in the 'austere period' now, huh?)

[Edited on 3-11-2002 by Bout Time]

posted on Nov, 3 2002 @ 09:47 PM
Occasionally, these endless issues (which are all too often doomed to disappear) remind me of the elaborate rituals of conjurers designed to distract the audience from the moment the actual sleight of hand is done.
One never sees a real plan: increasing school funding can mean almost anything. Fighting pollution can mean "my brother has a cleaning company".
If 1% of what politicians promise before they have any responsibilty were ever achieved, the West would be a paradise by now.

posted on Nov, 3 2002 @ 09:57 PM
and the finance is always fudged: there are two possibilities: take more of your money; take the same money and take away something that used to be given.
It is never -manage the money better.

posted on Nov, 5 2002 @ 05:59 AM
So, allowing people to take their money and children out of mismanaged schools that are too interested in social engineering and less interested in teaching the real subjects and putting them into private schools that teach the real subjects and are more efficient would destroy the community?
They have turned you into a brainwashed zombie, haven't they?

posted on Nov, 5 2002 @ 08:46 AM

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
So, allowing people to take their money and children out of mismanaged schools that are too interested in social engineering and less interested in teaching the real subjects and putting them into private schools that teach the real subjects and are more efficient would destroy the community?
They have turned you into a brainwashed zombie, haven't they?

Thomas, you're an idiot! I mean that in a nice way, though!

As always, my Rabid Right Wing propagandist, do the FREAKIN' MATH!!!!
I'll go slow, since I know that you're ideologically challenged when it comes to math: the tax voucher that families can deduct is an on paper accounting mechanism, meaning that when tuition is to be paid at the beginning of the year, in real funds, it's not there to be applied. Second, the vouchers in discussion have about a $2500 ceiling per child.Third, Tuition, books, uniforms, and busing to go to a good private school is going to come out in the $6000 - $8000 range per year.
So, lets tabulate, shall we?
A family in a poor to bad neighborhood ( but they're God fearing Church go'ers, and Republicans and white, OK?
) with three kids and a household income of $40,000 would pay $18,000 - $24,000 to send their children to private school and in return, receive a $7500 tax credit at year end. Oh yeah, tuition is also not paid in pre tax dollars, so figure that $40,000 after taxes to be $30,000.
Now you tell me, what income bracket is this REALLY designed to give relief to? Certainly not the ones that are being trumpeted as the beneficiaries, that's for sure.
And what is 'social engineering' to you? Teaching Evolution as fact over Creationism? Voiding all cross culture education in favor of the Pilgrim story?
My solution? Bring Corporate sponsorship into the most challenged schools. Let them subsidize and in return, based on the school's recovery status, let them receive a tax break on a sliding scale. In my industry, Information Technology, I know corporation rotate computers out of use about every three years. As an added deduction, companies getting rid of there older version computing can practically put a computer lab in every classroom of a school. Even more deductions can be earned by having employees tutor & teach on a volunteer basis, in real world subjects that are going to make the kids more prepared for the job market.
This way you have corporate America earning their tax break, instead of throwing money at political candidates.

posted on Nov, 5 2002 @ 02:26 PM
Yeah, whatever it takes to ensure that the public schooling scene, with its inept management and lousy cirrculum is kept intact. Just as long as the social engineers are allowed to teach their brand of garbage and not what schooling is all about, huh?
It may surprise you to know that there are alot of minorities that want school vouchers so that their kids can afford the decent education that only those with good jobs can afford. Get in touch with the majority instead of dreaming about what you wish was the majority!

posted on Nov, 5 2002 @ 02:55 PM
Maybe I should upgrade(downgrade?) the 'Idiot' assessment to Mad Monk!

Thomas, it's a bag of potato chips: All Air! Once you put the numbers into play, it doesn't work. Everyone was for the idea until they did the math.
"A Straw Man argument: unimportant issue or person: an issue or person of little importance or relevance, brought up to be shown as an easily defeatable idea or adversary."
I list the dictionary definition of the device you so frequently apply, and in this case, as a complete avoidance of what you swore was true, after seeing the light of reason, proven to be false. Like anyone wants crap schools, sheesh!

Next Definition

"Projection:unconscious transfer of inner mental life: the unconscious ascription of a personal thought, feeling, or impulse to somebody else, especially a thought or feeling considered undesirable"

No you're not in the majority, but feel free to stay in that place where you think you are. Be Jeebus knows we don't want your kind blowing up anymore Federal buildings or starting another militia in the 'Bama woods!

What is Social Engineering as you define it, I ask again, O Drinker of Fine Ale? ( had two Bass Ales with lunch today myself!)

[Edited on 5-11-2002 by Bout Time]

posted on Nov, 5 2002 @ 03:06 PM
To Bass ales? I envy you. I'm on strike and am now only able to afford two Miller Lites today! Pity me!

You insolent little twit, you have no idea how hard you are towing the liberal line when you claim that a Christian Conservative-type had anything to do with blowing up the federal building.
Just another pathetic attempt by the liberal agenda to demonize the conservative majority of this nation.

And face it, as with everything else, the left despises the thoughts of citizens having a choice in schools. They just want us to blindly hand over the money and leave the "education" to them. We are too stupid to make good decisions, only they are allowed to decide.
Bah! How disgusting.

posted on Nov, 5 2002 @ 03:30 PM
Life is too short to drink cheap wine & bad beer! Miller is the only thing worse than Clydesdale Piss(aka Budweiser!)
Hey, straw man, what the hell? Tim Mcveigh was probably a first cousin of yours on your daddy's side!

School choice is great, everyone should have it. I just don't see it like you, where the poor get screwed to service the affluent.
As a Christian, does that mean you favor teaching Creationism in lieu of Evolution? Is that the definition of social engineering?

[Edited on 5-11-2002 by Bout Time]

posted on Nov, 5 2002 @ 04:25 PM
In the founding of the nation, yes, Christianity in a general basic manner was part of the studies, making sure that particular "sects" were not favored over the other. Our society was intended to be a Christian one, contrary to the revised teaching of today.
Personally, I think that should be the job of the parents, and at the same time, the social engineering that goes on in the classrooms that is contrary to these views, such as moral relativity (the umbrella that covers all the other garbage) should be ousted. This includes teaching evolution as a fact, or even a theory, for that matter. What needs to be stressed is topics such as english, mathematics, chemistry, biology, and the non-revised history. The NEA's attempts to control what my child thinks, to tell my child how he should feel about issues that is not their job to do, these are the things that anger me. Readin' writin' and arithmetic, not to mention hard sciences, that is there job.
Why is that idea so offensive?

posted on Nov, 5 2002 @ 05:04 PM
Simple. Evolution is Hard Science. Teaching that the world was made in six days and all of humanity sprang forth from Eve's loins is fantasy.

posted on Nov, 5 2002 @ 05:07 PM
So, you don't know what hard science is, huh?

new topics

top topics

<< 1    3 >>

log in