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.


**Important Message to ALL my fellow Conservatives** (please read)

page: 7
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in


posted on Nov, 6 2008 @ 11:27 PM

Originally posted by Areal51
reply to post by Gateway

As much as you tried to lay out who is to blame, you ended up running the same old tired line. "It's the liberals fault that we are in this mess." "Neoconservatives are really liberals in disguise." Riiiiiiiight.

No, I didn't say the Democrats are responsible for the financial distress and un-popular war. I said the republicans are culpable, more specifically I blamed the Neoconservative wing of the republican party, I laid the blame on them. However, now that I've laid the blame on their FALSE conservative doctrine, i.e. the rejection of "conservative", hence they put a "Neo" to empahsize the new meaning of what conservativism means to them, it can only signify that they REJECT Old Conservative values. What are these values; no foreign entanglements, minimal government, and low taxes.

Obviously these NEO or New consrvative must have come from somewhere else since they dislike or found fault in the old conservative movement. As I've stated before they came from the Democratic Troskyist Left. So I don't blame the Democrats I blame Leftist Ideology which has infected a Rightist political movement. Please re-read.

You deny that Obama is going to make a difference by saying that he really is a neoconservative in disguise.
Let's see, he voted for the Patriot Act which was a Neoco idea, he doesn't want to pull-out of Iraq immidiately which again Necons also argue the same rhetoric, he voted for the Wall Street bail-out which all the Neocons were in favor.

No, Please tell me how he is not a Neocon? Keep in mind that the origins of the Neocons are from the left so, how is this guy going to be any different than the snakes that have slithered into the conservative party?

And so you and others voice your fears and openly pray for his demise. Riiiiiiiiight.
I don't voice it, I know it will happen. His policies and his rhetoric point to that fact. You'll see that for yourself in the first couple of years.

My point is that your post represents the same old, tired conservative political rhetoric: "The liberals are what's wrong with the world, but we, at least the 'real' conservatives, are the answer." The tale you tell is the same story given a new cover.
I have no idea of what you are talking about, as I've said our problems began long ago in the Nixon regime, then on into Reagan, Bush I, and then Bush II. This was a slow growing infestation of Neoconservatives who were marginally found withing these previous administrations, the W. administration is when they took full control.

The way that neoconservatives flourished in the GOP is by taking advantage of ignorance within the GOP and conservative base.
Again they never really flourished they were a group of people that waited patiently for their day in the sun. Just like the full blown commies that reside within the the Democrats, waiting their turn.

A small group of highly educated, smart, clever, and organized individuals realized that the conservative party presented an opportunity for their hegemonic ideals. All they had to do was present themselves as being conservatives, stoke fears and false patriotism, and take advantage of the built-in "them against us" ethos that existed in the conservative base.
I agree, this is a very sneaky, underhanded, and dirty manipulation played by "Trotskyist". Then again the left has always played these types deceitful coups, it's "old hat" to them.

The neoconservatives were smart enough to know that a major percentage of the conservative base were xenophobic, prejudiced, racist, and held fundamentalist religious views. In other words, many people in the conservative base saw themselves as being threatened, as victims, or both.
Talk about victimization. Isn't the left always saying that they are poor because of someone else? Isn't someone else being the racist or sexist and they couldn't go to that certain school or get that certain job, because of another group of people who may have been more qualified. No problem...have the government through forceful coercion THREATEN companies to make bad loans through the "Community Reinvestment Act" enforce or regulate quotas and affirmative action on private businesses. Make people do this, make people do that. Man talk about a history of MAKING people and or businesses do what YOU guys think they should do.

So the neoconservatives borrowed a page from the Reagan administration's playbook and invented the "War On Terror". Then they demonized Arabs and Muslims. Then they demonized the real and true American patriots who questioned and challenged their authority and motives. Then they demonized higher education and those who benefited from it; which the neocons had to do because the budgets for their foreign policies decimated the US public school system. And so anti-intellectualism flourished. All of this combined led to liberals being demonized.
Let me know when you are going to start DISAGREEING with my original post. Buddy, I'm no neocon...never have been. That's a left wing monster that I saw coming decades ago.

Which was easy to do because liberals value public education and higher education.
You value it, up to the point that someone else pays for it. If you value education so much don't you think there is a personal incentive to save for it and pay it yourself? Na, its much better when you go to college on someone else's dime...

More like you value it, up to the point when it is FREE.

Liberals believe that all Americans should benefit from education, and that government should play a central role in ensuring that it happens. Liberals believe that all Americans should receive proper health care when needed, and that government should play a central role in ensuring that it happens. These are good values. It clearly represents government by the people for the people. An educated and healthy people are a more productive and prosperous people.
I'm not arguing that. Of course a healthy and educated society is beneficial. But how you democrats argue on how to get to is completely idiotic. You can't lay the egg without the chicken. You first need a robust economy which will yield higher productivity which in turn will reduce prices for goods and services, which then will make society better off by prices for all thing more affordable including health care and education.

Instead you want to tax to the point where education and health care are paid for by tax dollars by taxing people and industry, thereby hurting the industries and consumers that could have yielded better productivity and consumed, till finally productivity is reduced and the tax base you initially are taxing to pay for the programs self implodes.

How the hell are you going to generate an efficient and educated society when there is not enough jobs to go around?

[edit on 6-11-2008 by Gateway]

posted on Nov, 6 2008 @ 11:27 PM
reply to post by Areal51

And these worthy goals were demonized by the neocons as being Marxist and Stalinist. Yet more them against us ethos.
No, most Necons supported and still do the no child left behind, in fact university loans Stafford loans have increased during the Bush doctrine. So contrary to what you think, the Neocons are with their leftist buddies, and want to further expand the department of education not get rid of it.

Then Barack Hussein Obama came along, and we know what happened next. He too was demonized. He was demonized because he embodied every type of fear that the neoconservative-exploited conservative base held. (I won't bother with a list because we all know what I'm talking about.) And his views on foreign diplomacy are especially threatening to those whose mentality has been crippled by the neoconservatives. Why would Osama Bin Hussein Obama Barack Laden-Ayres want to sit down and talk to all those "evil" people? More symptoms of them against us. A person's mind, health, and liberty represents a person's real and true wealth. Yet Obama's "Spread the Wealth" slogan, and his foreign policy that seeks to ensure the prosperity and liberty of Americans and our global neighbors has been demonized. Them against us. That's the subscription. Your position that you know better than those who supported and voted for Obama represents the typical small-mindedness that the neoconservatives fed upon. And so all any politician who wants to gain your support has to do is appeal to your sense of self-righteousness. You are wide open for exploitation.
Now this rant I don't understand at all.

Now, are you lecturing me here…

Again I’m no Neocon, buddy. Never have been, in fact I didn't vote for either daddy Bush or his son.

Perceiving yourself and your party as a victim is not the way to clear your conscience or to understand what has happened to your cherished ideology. If you want to help change things then promote what you believe in, and live it. But don't play the victim, because then you will become the victim -- all over again.

Victim? I pointed out what happened, and how the republican party was led astray. How’s that victimizing? If someone ran across the street and got hit by a car, shouldn’t someone explain to the poor SOB sitting in the hospital why he got hit by a bus? Or should no one say word in order not to hurt his feelings or make him feel like a victim?

Nice try…now go back to chanting, CHANGE, CHANGE, CHANGE…to your heart’s desire…we’ll see how much CHANGE we’ll get.

[edit on 7-11-2008 by Gateway]

posted on Nov, 6 2008 @ 11:50 PM

reply to post by dariousg Although I want to agree with you I must simply make this point. You are doing exactly what you are claiming the 'neocons' are doing. You are blaming the democrats! That is completely ridiculous!

Oh boy, go re-read the post. I blame LEFTIST ideology for the BIG-GOVERNMENT the Neocons have brought. I don't blame the Democrats. They can continue to be the Big-Government party all they want. I blame the REPUBLICANS for adopting this platform. It never suited real conservative ideology to begin with. Hence, I suggest that those that still want BIG-Government can go to the Big-Government party, where they belong.

You are saying that they sent spies in to corrupt the GOP.
Doesn't anyone read anymore? The Neocons came from the left. See here and here Google the research yourself.

Well, if that is true then it is also true that the GOP has done the same to the other side. That's politics. But for you to simply state that it was the democrats after all is pretty lame.
I said they left the democrats, and brought there BIG-Government type of Conservative over to the Republicans.

I agree, the conservative movement needs to be revamped. It needs to be rebuilt from the ground up. I left the conservative 'party' because I realized it no longer was such. Yes, it became a war mongering corporate loving corrupt party. That is why I left. Does that make me a democrat? I don't think so. It makes me a human being with morales that were being challenged by the action of our so-called leaders. Bring back the true conservative party and I'm right there. But don't put the blame on the democrats. Because in essence, it's not democrats or republicans the pulled this coup off. FOLLOW THE MONEY!

Everything else you wrote, I agree with.

[edit on 6-11-2008 by Gateway]

posted on Nov, 7 2008 @ 12:04 AM
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

I think the Republicans of the modern age are nothing but a bunch of faux-Christian hawk democrats.

I consider myself a conservative and the 'modern' Republican party makes me ashamed.

The idols of the modern conservative base are so un-conservative it's shocking. When did the Republicans accept the fact that they are now the party of international interventionism and big government?


It's a ridiculous transformation, and one that has made me a staunch independent when it comes to the polls. The libertarians are much closer to the traditional conservative ideology...

When will a real Republican candidate return, like King Richard the Lionheart, and save us from the scheming steward(s) who've hijacked the throne? When will we once again be able say with pride "I belong to the Republican Party" - and not have people laugh in our faces?


If you look back over the last few Republican presidents they have spent more money individually than their predecessors did combined, they intervened in overseas conflicts over and over again (mostly for personal gain and corporate enrichment), they tarnished the reputation of the country and the party, and they did it all while being C students, bad actors, and anti-diplomatic in every conceivable way.

When did the Republican party become such an unbelievable farce?

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.

posted on Nov, 7 2008 @ 12:10 AM
I would love for the John McCain's of the world, flying the flag of the Republican Party to go ahead, and shift parties where they belong.

We need a party named the Conservative Party, where true conservatives, embracing true conservative values can thrive. No way the "Conservative" Party would allow a John McCain in it. And the first time he greased up and grabbed his ankles for liberal opponents, he could have been "kicked out."

Too many pretenders. Too many fakes. Too many moderate liberals who jumped onto the "Republican" bandwagon after the success of the Reagan years.

In international law, anytime you find an enemy dressed in your uniform, you're taken out and shot.

Not really a bad idea.

posted on Nov, 7 2008 @ 12:21 AM

Originally posted by GeneralLee
Gate, I have a thought and a question....

If you really want to (I hate this word) change the conservative party then you have to take out the scalpel and operate. We did it in my district by sucking up and voting out congressmen Rick Keller and Tom Feeny. What did we get for it? Two liberals that are probably much worse. The point is we did it! Those two will no longer be examples of the conservative way and hopefully we sent a message to any future hopefuls .

Now my question is many of you thought the same way but when you got to the polls you just couldn't pull that lever, hang that chad or fill in that oval for a democrat? And by voting the party line didn't you perpetuate the same old same old?
Well I have to be honest here. I'm an old conservative type. Always have been. Let me put it to you this way, I didn't vote for Bush I, or his son. In fact I don't hold Reagan as a fine example of conservativsm either. He expanded government and ran up deficits, none of which are conservative values. In fact people now would call me Libertarian more than a conservative, but get this I haven't changed, more like the party slowly changed into something else.

The reason for my post, is to appeal to those that still have some semblance of conservativism running in their veins to see the light. To let them know that they've been taken, they have been lied to, they've been duped. If this revelation changes the party to re-adopt its original roots, (by the way this is currently the discussions going on behind closed doors) then it's to the better. Even if the Republican party still "Stupidly" decides to not change, and continue to promote this "Neoconservative" movement, then at least the line has been drawn. Then those that know the Necon origins and continue to accept its promotion of Big-Government will know where they stand and move from there. If it means leaving the Republican party, well then so be it. Good for you.

But this also reveals the TRUTH about what your beliefs are TOO. And if you blindly adopt this NECONSERVATIVE beliefs, then you are not a conservative to begin with, but rather a socially conservative but Left-leaning Big-government spender.

The neocons don't realize that the real paradox is that having a big-government to begin is a contradiction to being socially conservative. How can you be a conservative in how you live your life, yet still support BIG-Government which by its very nature dictates with regulation how and what people should do.

You begin with grassroots and work your way up. A message needs to be sent and the only ammunition we have is our voice and our vote. True conservatives are eagerly awaiting our call, all we have to do is make that call loud and clear.

Well, to be honest, the republican party will have to jump through hurdles to ever win me back, short of punching Kristol in the face (just kidding) would not be enough.

I think my post reflects what is going on behind closed doors. Republicans are going to have to reject the necons or go back to the paleoconservatives, if they choose to keep the course, then they are finished.

[edit on 7-11-2008 by Gateway]

posted on Nov, 7 2008 @ 12:34 AM

Originally posted by HunkaHunka

Originally posted by Gateway
This defeat is not so-much of an embrace of Obama and what he has to offer, but rather a defeat of the platform WE as conservatives have been told that REPRESENTS our Conservative values.

Uhm... are you sure?

This looks like an embrace to me...

Aahh yes...downtown Chicago, thousands of hardcore-Obamanites truly represents all 300 million people in this country.

posted on Nov, 7 2008 @ 12:47 AM

Originally posted by romanmel
reply to post by Gateway

Hi Gateway...I wasn't sure if I should read this thread or not. ie: "fellow Conservatives" I certainly live in a frugal/conservative manner, but I don't associate myself to the facist goons who have ruled this country for the last eight years. The Bush/Cheney brand of "socialism" includes the bailing out of corrupt corporate kingpins to the tune of trillions of our dollars in future earnings.

So, while I agree with almost all you say, I disagree on your definition of socialism. When we can throw our future earnings into the laps of looser fat-cats in the banks, why is it such a crime to throw a little to the unemployed, poor and destitute American citizens amongst us.
It's certainly not a crime, but its redistribution of wealth anyway you slice it. It's simple you either like welfare or not, and if you do then it's difficult to make the argument that they can't have it but they can. You need consistency here. Welfare is bad because it takes my and your income and gives it to others, whether the others are poor people (and yes I would rather give it to them, but out of my own pocket, i.e. I'll reach into my pocket and donate as much as possible) or corporations is a moot point the money was taken.

You said you have wealthy friends ready to stash their cash off shore. My that's certainly patriotic of them, isn't it. Maybe you should reevaluate your list of "friends".
Here you are making the arguments that Neocons make when they say it is unpatriotic when people don't support the war. I don't support the war because it kills people; Americans and Iraqis.

If people want to protect their income (AGAIN THEIR INCOME) should they not have that right? Or are you making the case that it is un-American for people to do so, that their hard work was do to something the government did, hence THEIR income belongs to the government.

It is very patriotic to support people who want to maintain ownership of their property (which includes income in this definition) on the other hand it is unpatriotic to take others property by threat of jail or at gun point and give it to those some bureaucrat has deemed worthy. To me this is far more UN-AMERICAN.

Look, it doesn't really matter who is in office, they all take their "marching orders" from the true power behind the empire, Bilderbergers, Trilateralists, CFR, etc. They (the hidden government) love it when we spend our time blaming each other for our demise. They can then proceed to rape us financially and laugh as we cry foul to the liberal or conservative movement (take your pick). As long as they keep us busy name calling at each other, they can go ahead with their agenda of creating the NWO, which will take away what is left of our rights and enslave us completely. Wake up's not conservative/liberal, red or blue, Dem. or Rep. we should be concerned with. It's our survival as a nation that is at stake here. Educate yourself, arm yourself and prepare yourself.

I have no problem with the rest of your post. But I do hope you see the distinction that I mention above.

posted on Nov, 7 2008 @ 12:55 AM
The election doesn't matter. What matters is results. If Obama fixes what Bush did to our country then he has my full support. I even voted for him. If the garbage keeps piling up on us for 4 years then its time to burn this country to the ground and start over. I got the matches and the gas. So Obama better be on his best behavior or he is gonna have WWIII in his own backyard because the revolution is coming if we don't see the change he promised.

posted on Nov, 7 2008 @ 01:00 AM

Originally posted by Gateway

Gateway, I'm a strong Obama supporter, but neither a Republican nor Democrat, and I agree with and appreciate a lot of what you said. Just a few points I'd like to make:

1.) This election was an embrace of Obama. You'll be doing yourself and your party a disservice if you deny that. Granted the embrace was heightened because of the comparison of him to the last 8 years, but he is very much embraced by the people of this country.
I think embrace is a bit too harsh of term to use. If people have two options, between Satan and Beelzebub, and Beelzebub was chosen I would hardly equate that with an embrace of ALL that is Beelzebub. If you catch my drift.

2.) I think I can fairly safely say that the Democrats don't want the Neoconservatives, either. They can form their own party, but I don't think Democrats will allow them to hijack the Democratic party after what they've seen Neocons do to yours.

Damn!!! I was hoping somebody could take them off our hands!! Why can't someone adopt these guys? Green party, are you guys interested?

3.) You may be surprised where Obama will take this country. You may be right about him, but I will cast judgment on his performance after he has actually given it. Not before.

To be honest here, I do hope so. He can probably be a little better as far as civil liberties go. It's the economy that I'm worried about. Yes I know that it was Bush's fiscal and the Greenspan's monetary that did us in, but further government interference will not help. I hope Obama fills his cabinet with intelligent people rather than partisan ideological ones.

I wish the Republican party good luck and good will in reclaiming their ideals and taking the GOP back from the extremists who have hijacked it.

I hope so, for its sake. They lost me decades ago, and they may lose more people if they don't change.

[edit on 7-11-2008 by Gateway]

[edit on 7-11-2008 by Gateway]

posted on Nov, 7 2008 @ 01:10 AM
reply to post by bubbabuddha

Not that I don't agree. I do.. I think you made some good points. I just think that having that kind of mentality is so inevitably negative though. I'm not even saying you are wrong. I don't think ALL conservative christian fundamentalists go around forcing their values on others and I don't think all East coast atheists go around forcing their views on others either. I was in the Air Force for 6 years and while I was in noone would normally talk about any religious or faith-based views at all unless asked first.. And even then it would be considered off-limits, especially if we were on duty. It is a personal thing..

For years I worked around a guy who believed the earth was 12,000 years old and that the dinosaurs didn't ever exist. One day I found out because we were talking about science/astronomy and the discussion somehow spread into the big-bang.. That's when he shared his views..I know some great folks that are atheists though and some great folks that are Christian and none of them, that I know, go around forcing their views on other people. At least not around me.. I am not an atheist, I am not religious, I am not a registered Republican or Democrat, I am generally neutral on many political issues and willing to listen to both sides before forming an opinion.

Some people are so devout in what they think and believe that they are unwilling to waver on ANY issue that contradicts their beliefs (whether it involves god or not). This closed minded world view inevitably acts as a social roadblock that prevents us from moving forward as a society and as a country. It is the entire reason our country is still so politically, racially, and religiously polarized.. Some might even say that having a party system like we have in America is self-defeating, pointless, and counter-productive. But it wouldn't be a democracy if we weren't all allowed to have different opinions, ideas, and beliefs.

What I'm saying is that the political system does have it's pitfalls.. But what system doesn't? And there wouldn't be anything productive being done in American politics if people didn't work together toward a common goal despite closely held religious or anti-religious views. Over the last 8 years we've had a very unique situation in America (at least I hope it proves to be unique) and what we really needed was someone like Obama to rekindle people's hope for a better future under a president that can actually speak English, articulate, and hopefully prove to the rest of the world that America isn't the international demon people thought it was. I think alot of people like you have pretty much lost all hope and faith in politics altogether because of what has occurred over the last 8 years and it is no secret that the Bush administration has helped to demonize the Republican party. But people like me, we're hopeful for the future of our kids and we are concerned about all these pressing issues that only political unity will solve because we have regained some of that faith and hope in America since Obama became president elect. Religious fundametalists and atheists aside.. That crap is secondary to the problems facing us and our kids right now.


posted on Nov, 7 2008 @ 01:20 AM

Originally posted by mybigunit
Gateway this is why you are on my friends list and would be at the top if that option was given
You are correct 100%. This is not about Obama. This is all about how the Republican party has lost its way. Everything they promised in 2000 they went completely the opposite direction and in 2006 and now 2008 they paid for it. The Republicans have some serious soul searching they need to do and according to inside sources they are having this search tonight in a meeting in the mountains. All the peeps are meeting to tweak the platform. The fact is the same people who created their neocon platform are the same ones doing the meeting. People like Ron Paul were not invited. Ron Paul has been calling so much and even called the downfall of the Republicans but they still will not listen. I think the idea the Republicans will change back to their roots is t farce. IT WILL NOT HAPPEN. I think the Libertarians will soon be the new Republican party.
Thanks for your kind words. I guess we are birds of a feather mybig.

BTW all the names you mentioned as the corruptors are great. Sums it up well. One sect you left out and that is the religious right. I dont see where you mentioned them. They too are a big part of the Republicans losing their way. They try to ram this legislative morality down peoples throats and start wars for "holy" purposes in the middle east. Puhhlleaasse.
Well, I sort-of mentioned them briefly, the evangelicals are notorious supporters of the "Neocons". The original Taft conservative wing of the party marginalized religious rhetoric from effecting political least before Nixon's regime, and even back when Nixon was around he kept them at bay to a degree. The current republican party have the Neocons dictating the foreign and domestic policy, while the religious right sets the "moral" agenda. Yep, there is a lot of house cleaning to be done. With both groups entrenched, it will be an uphill fight to loosen their grip on the party. And to be honest it doesn't look good for us old conservatives.

But a step in the right direction, is pointing out what went wrong, how did "Conservativism" become "Neoconservatism" and who changed it...and why? From least from the standpoint of seeing the root cause of the problem, maybe the party can re-built. I'm optimistic, but also realistic. It's a tough one.

[edit on 7-11-2008 by Gateway]

posted on Nov, 7 2008 @ 02:00 AM
dont forget the evangelical christians. not only have they helped fund, but have cast a huge shadow over the entire party.

I think much of America looks at these fanatic/ extremist judeo christian views and are turned away from it.

if the gop could seperate itself from these extremists (rush limbaugh for example) it would be better off.

look at how much attention Ron Paul garnered. True fiscal concervative with real Christian values.

posted on Nov, 7 2008 @ 04:08 AM
The answer to who changed the republican party is easy to see. Whose face is on the neocon banner.

If Reagan didn't come to mind immediately, then you are not looking in the right direction. Reagan preached small government, but he increased government tremendously through military spending and the war on drugs. Reagan brought the moral majority to power, because by establishing morality laws, the government is more capable of expanding its control over the people.

Yes, we need to restrict welfare to the truly needy, and for a limited amount of time. That is a part of reducing government, but we also need to stop being the worlds police, which really amounts to protecting the foriegn assets of our international corporations, the better to enable them to export out jobs. What the neocons do is take the wages away from the middle class, and the future wages away from the middle class, and use the money to send their jobs overseas. What jobs can't be sent overseas are watered down by opening a flood gate to legal and illegal immigration. Then build up a police state by waging morality wars like the war on drugs, which is self perpetuating. Legalize drugs and you will eliminate the crime, just like when alcohol was illegal.

But lets not ignore the obvious, the liberal elites, which are not any more liberals than the neocons are conservative, do the exact same things as the neocons, and Obama will not change anything but where the money is being sent, although the money will still wind up going to the same people, and doing the same things.

Obama might offer some relief to the middle class, but it won't be much.

A true liberal is not for big government, not the liberalism on which this nation was founded. Niether the liberals nor the conservatives are being served by their parties.

I might add, Obama bought this election. Considering how much more money Obama had to spend than McCain, it would have been a miracle if McCain had pulled out a victory. The big mystery is where did Obama's money come from, I don't buy the small donor claim. Sorry, not that much money.

posted on Nov, 7 2008 @ 05:30 AM

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
reply to post by dawnstar

Hey..Conservatiists...You have forgot that Mr Joe Biden is precisely behind Obama, and he has declare himself another man in favour of the NEW WORLD ORDER the same crap sold by Bush and this Nightmare of America or USA has not finished yet....the same people who be pretended to be out of Government is still Inside of the Next Government...!

I think USA got No future at All.

Plinius the Younger

the way the media jumped onto the Obama bandwagon, I am inclined to say....
He's the chosen one!!
No, I ain't saying that he's the anti-christ or in any way chosen by God to do anything, although, my husband says this...
but, of those who ran, he is the one that the powers that be chose to be president and shifted their resources to support.

maybe I am wrong...but well....
we are actually starting to discuss which country looks to be the friendliest to us.. ya know, checking with the different immigration laws and such.
we're just your average working class, we don't make enough to live comfortably, but we don't make so little that the gov't would be willing to bail us out. as far as I am concerned, this election was just about which way I would prefer to be screwed the next four year....screw to the right, give my money to the rich...screw to the left, give my money to the poor... We get very little benefit either way, and neither does the country really....

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by dawnstar

I agree with the OP 100%, The Republican party is the Democratic party of a few decades ago ... what are we supposed to do with two socialist regimes?..

A New Conservative Party needs to be formed, designed specifically to destroy the existing Republican Party. Seeing as they no longer represent the Republic, and how sad it is that so many straight ticket imbeciles are voting for them are voting for them because they feel option A or B is their only choice..

When ever in history an old party goes defunct, a new one took it's place. Republicans are the old guard, and we need a new plan.

I think it's time our younger generations took control of this country!

can't argue with much of what you said here. but, well, got to tell ya, I was one of those who voted to carter, but then when reagan came along, I jump to him, and I've been jumping from one to the other since. I supported bush...."the compassionate conservative" but then when he proved he was neither, I jumped, and well.......ya, kerry, this was the first election that I really didn't support either...
although, of the two, kerry was less frightening to me...
I think most of the people tend to lean conservative in some areas and liberal in others, and well...they tend to even jump in those areas, because, well, we tend to get too far in one direction and have to push ourselves back to the center.
I just disagree that it's just the "liberals" faults and the conservatives had nothing to do with this mess at all....
heck, if I bothered to go back on these boards a few years, I bet I would find that some of those one these boards with this idea are the same ones that were telling us that they were the majority and the majority rules, and all that crap that I posted in a earlier post.

Originally posted by sigung86

Takimng my money or your money to give to someone else... Swinging to the far right? ZHe's going where Bush already has been?

Please. Quit trying to justify yourself. You are on stage now, and rather than sit at a keyboard and argue with me... Get out and do something to make it work!

Sorry... I'm not a conservative, but I do not trust him, do not believe in him, and question what he knows about much of anything. He did, however, promise two of my three chickens in everyone else's pot. So go get 'em Dawnstar... We'll talk in 6 -8 months. I gotta go earn some more chickens to put in your pot.

[edit on 6-11-2008 by sigung86]

I ain't on stage, I didn't suport obama, or mc was mickey mouse remember? I won't support anyone who lies to me, and all the candidates lost on that one issue alone! the most important election in the history of our country, and well...everyone is lying so danged badly...well, I ain't got the time or the energy to figure out where the lies stop and the truth, well....what can I say.
my suggestion, is to start a new party that has truth as one of it's main issues and values.....I got a feeling you would have quite a bit of success if you did this.

and, I got my own chicken in my freezer waiting for me to get up the gumption to cook...don't need yours thank you...
but, I didn't really appreciate the gov't borrowing money in my name and sending me that $600 check either...if I wanted that $600 loan bad enough, I would have gotten it on my own thank you!!

you can redefine the republicans running the show, the meaning of the word "liberal" and "conservative" all you want....
doesn't change the fact...
we are in one heck of a mess, if Obama fails at straightening it out, well, we are gonna be all hurting, and well.....
have fun standing on the sidelines plotting your next move I guess...
I ain't got the time or energy to play this game either.

Got to pack up and move.....
Brazil seems to be an interesting place, what ya all think?

posted on Nov, 7 2008 @ 06:25 AM

Originally posted by Gateway

But a step in the right direction, is pointing out what went wrong, how did "Conservativism" become "Neoconservatism" and who changed it...and why? From least from the standpoint of seeing the root cause of the problem, maybe the party can re-built. I'm optimistic, but also realistic. It's a tough one.

You want to know who started it? Ronald Regan. He started this whole notion of big government and no taxes which has lead to the KILLING of our national debt. Heres the proof

The Republican Neo Cons Regan, Bush, and Bush II have managed to add over 8 trillion dollars of debt between the 3 of them. That is 80% of our national debt and they call themselves conservatives? Disgusting. Meanwhile Executive pay has gone from 60x their average employee in 1980 to 600x I mean what the hell. You want big government then raise taxes. But the Republicans are sneaky. They put it on the charge card. This way people think they are getting a lot of big government for free. Hey lets vote Republican they give us all sorts of stuff and we dont have to pay for it. Where as the democrats give you big government and make you pay for it.

posted on Nov, 7 2008 @ 06:48 AM

Originally posted by mybigunit
reply to post by Rockpuck

They need the media. Face it if the media paid as much attention to a guy like Ron Paul as they did Obama then RP would be your president right now. Hes not the greatest speaker unlike Obama who speaks very well but the message that he gives beats all. The Republicans are a lost cause and I will be focusing on getting the Libertarian name out there. Bob Barr was a bad choice however for their ticket.

Very true.. then perhaps what we need is a new Main Stream Media outlet? One not afraid to focus their attention on people like RP...

I agree as well, barr was a bad choice. I actually ended up voting for Baldwin when I got to the polls.

I think when it comes down to the word "NEOCON" it is a party within parties.. a group of ideologist that infest both major parties. You will have the true Democracts, and the True Republicans, but on both parties there seems to be a core group that coincide with eachother.. Like Obama and McCain, I am sorry, aside from taxes, there is NO difference what so ever.

They are both Neocons.

The thing that I see most prevalent in this thread is that Liberals don't like it when this Neocon monster, which they accused of being conservative all along, is actually a Liberal movement all in it's own.

Sorry to tell you, deniers but Neocon's are Socialist.. I prefer to call them Fascist, but really there is seldom differences.

And I don't believe that this is a bunch of Republicans blaming Democrats for ruining their party.. Honestly I don't think many of us here will ever again consider our selves Republican, or some never have.. And I believe this Fascist Neocon movement has infected both parties, not just the Republican.

posted on Nov, 7 2008 @ 06:52 AM

Originally posted by TheAgentNineteen
I agree with much of what you said, except for the part about the War. This IS a just war, and a just campaign which we are currently waging against Dictators, Terrorists, and any various number of Enemy elements. Time and time again, Isolationism has proven to be the greatest failing of any Foreign Policy Strategy ever put forth in this Modern Era. President Clinton believed that he could practice such a Policy, and in doing so we awoke one morning to 3,000 Dead Americans, and thus the Greatest Loss of Life on American soil from an outside Enemy Attack, since Pearl Harbor. We need to reach out and strike first, and this is why Pre-Emptive OPS have become a basic Law of Modern State Security.

Dude, I really hope that you aren't serious. Just war? Or do you mean that that is the new slogan for the new republican party (not the conservative party but the neocons) as in "JUST WAR BABY!"

I believe you have some research to do on some of the elements you are claiming. The Bush administration had intel about the events about to take place. Did they prevent it? Nope. And it sure as hell played right into their hands too. They benefitted from it by now waging the pre-emptive wars against nations that never attacked us. What a joke.

And who are we to say that other countries CAN'T have dictators as leaders? Also, what is your definition of a terrorist? Would you place many of the civilian Iraqi's who now fight against us because of the atrocities some of our soldiers have performed against their people in the terrorist category? Personally, I would put Bush in that category for his 'pre-emptive' wars against these people.

Now we are again doing 'pre-emptive' strikes into yet another sovergn nation and I bet you are 100% behind them.

Well my friend, when you wake up one day to 10 million dead Americans because of all of this 'JUST WAR' attitude by these terrible leaders then where will you turn? I'm sure you will simply say "Those bastards, let's get them back' when in fact that was exactly what they were doing to us. Just getting us back for all of the terror and death we brought down on their people without any solid justification.

Okay, off my soap box for now. I just love to see the militaristic attitudes prevail here. No true logic behind them, just a bunch of testosterone and limited thinking.

posted on Nov, 7 2008 @ 08:04 AM

Originally posted by treemanx
It surprizes me that so many people are so critical of Bush. I may not agree with everything hes done while in office, but I also understand that it takes more than your everyday average joe to be the President of the United States. I highly doubt that any of the people who are extremely critical of the Bush Admin. could walk even a step in his shoes as President. Imagine what a huge burden of responsibility it would be to be the ruler of the free world. Every decision you make will never make everyone happy, and what you decide to do at one time, in retrospect, may not have been the right one. On top of that, I can tell you that the information we get on choices made by Bush, are effected by more variables then any of us are aware of. I think it's reasonable to to say that Bush hasnt always made the right choice on issues, but unreasonable to verbally abuse him when we dont even know a shadow of the incredible burden placed on a President.

With that said, I will say this: I have sat and read posts on this website for a couple of months now, and only today have joined ATS. This seems like an awesome forum for contemplation of non-mainstream ideas. Thanks for providing us this venue, ATS!

As far as our newly elected President Barak Obama is concerned, I will say this: watch for the news headlines that theres been an assasination attempt, where he is wounded to the head, and recovers from the grevious wound quickly. Could it be a sign that he is the antichrist? You tell me...


OMG surely you arent serious? Bushwad has (its been said) the LOWEST IQ of any sitting President! Average Joe indeed! And what burden did he really have? He came into his Presidency with a balanced budget for the first time in the past CENTURY! Give me a break! As for the "war on terror," I submit to you that it was a "war" entirely of his own making so, please dont boo hoo about what a "burden" THAT was! Or the financial mess...please! he virtually gave the green light to greedy corporations to continue to rape the man on the street, via draconian credit punishing schemes, via fraudulent lending practices, via NO OVERSIGHT at all, via HUGE profits for Gas Giants Exxon, Mobile, etc........oh NO, I do NOT feel sorry for HIM at all. The person I feel sorry for is Obama.

posted on Nov, 7 2008 @ 08:09 AM

Originally posted by mybigunit

Originally posted by Gateway

But a step in the right direction, is pointing out what went wrong, how did "Conservativism" become "Neoconservatism" and who changed it...and why? From least from the standpoint of seeing the root cause of the problem, maybe the party can re-built. I'm optimistic, but also realistic. It's a tough one.

You want to know who started it? Ronald Regan. He started this whole notion of big government and no taxes which has lead to the KILLING of our national debt. Heres the proof

The Republican Neo Cons Regan, Bush, and Bush II have managed to add over 8 trillion dollars of debt between the 3 of them. That is 80% of our national debt and they call themselves conservatives? Disgusting. Meanwhile Executive pay has gone from 60x their average employee in 1980 to 600x I mean what the hell. You want big government then raise taxes. But the Republicans are sneaky. They put it on the charge card. This way people think they are getting a lot of big government for free. Hey lets vote Republican they give us all sorts of stuff and we dont have to pay for it. Where as the democrats give you big government and make you pay for it.

precisely my point several pages back. Although, I would suggest that the seeds actually began with Nixon, but got interrupted by Carter's administration. However, Reagan hit the ground running with all his cuts to social programs and arts and sciences, and major fundage to the Military and removing the oversight and regulations that Corporations previously had to operate under. If Obama is smart, he will repeal all of Bush's deregulation laws, and the draconian credit penalties, and slap huge fines on ANY corporation that does not abide by the RULES. If I were him, I'd also tax the HELL out of any corporation that chooses to outsource, and charge a fee to sell their goods back in the US and make sure that they DONT pass that cost back onto the consumer....Man, I think I should write that man!

new topics

top topics

<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in