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.

 

The Difference Between Neocons and Conservatives (AKA Wake Up people.)

page: 2
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 02:17 PM
link   
reply to post by jjkenobi
 


I'm not wrong, that's exactly what he ran on. A traditional conservative platform is exactly the bait he used to win that voting majority. You don't remember the "Compassionate Conservative" moniker he was using the whole campaign, because I do.

The second election turned into "I am this, you are that!" Which not only divided the people, but intensified the false left/right dichotomy. Battle lines were drawn and the Republican and Democrats ramped up their efforts of corporate/bank protectionism, while all the little derelicts were so passionately yelling at one another with no resolve.

I don't think it's a matter of conservatives voting or not voting, but the citizens of this country to put an end to the "tit for tat" trade off's between their pathetic little ideological battle lines.

Right now most conservatives believe that we have a president who is the opposite of his predecessor. He's even the opposite color. Where as they're so "against" him, he's carrying the torch passed by George W. Bush - a self proclaimed conservative.




posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 02:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by mental modulator
reply to post by DeadFlagBlues
 


Further more the DEM/GOP split represents the values and views of the populace.

It might not be effective for real change or governance but what you are talking about has been in existence for all of history, literally.

The right just needs to REFLECT and REDEFINE what is represents - IN PRACTICE and DEED



There is no "right" and "left."

The right and left are the nail and hammer in our coffin of a republic right now. One is not combating the other for our good! If anything, their is a chaotic reliance on one another, where even the most serious issues are worked on cohesively. There is no two sides, but ONE, and it's coordination has proved itself at the detriment of you and I time and time again.

[edit on 10-6-2009 by DeadFlagBlues]



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 02:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by mental modulator

Well if you haven't noticed by now it is the constant back and forth of conservatism and liberalism that keeps this country going...

Heck was Ronald Reagan a conservative???

Was he?

Well he filled his ranks with "NEOCONS" that he hired on

Just look at all the GOP presidents since Nixon = plenty of these so called not conservative staffers working for GOP presidents- shaping CONSERVATIVE foreign and domestic policy...

and I disagree the ideologies couldn't be different

the implication and "friends" may be the same - BUT do not be fooled into thinking
both ideas and thoughts that motivate the ideas are the same- that is a mistake...


The back and forth isn't what's keeping this country going! That's exactly what is driving this country apart all the while the right and the left collectively take measures to protect their wealthy relationships, harbor the people that brought this recession/depression into frutation, and successfully make people more reliant on the government. This is their motive, and they have done it hand in hand! If anything, it's those idiots who dare call themselves Republican or Democrat who are ensuring our current fate to enclose exponentially faster.

Do not stereotype me. Reagan was a set up. He was an actor, which made him more than qualified for his role as president. Just based on his "No More Cancer Act" you'd have to know he was a total enabler. His actions were most like every other president's actions, where the true intent of their actions were justified by their peers and only people from the outside could see the true intentions of what seemed to be handed onto him, not something he came up with himself. A stooge.



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 02:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by DeadFlagBlues

Originally posted by mental modulator
reply to post by DeadFlagBlues
 


Further more the DEM/GOP split represents the values and views of the populace.

It might not be effective for real change or governance but what you are talking about has been in existence for all of history, literally.

The right just needs to REFLECT and REDEFINE what is represents - IN PRACTICE and DEED



There is no "right" and "left."

The right and left are the nail and hammer in our coffin of a republic right now. One is not combating the other for our good! If anything, their is a chaotic reliance on one another, where even the most serious issues are worked on cohesively. There is no two sides, but ONE, and it's coordination has proved itself at the detriment of you and I time and time again.

[edit on 10-6-2009 by DeadFlagBlues]


I agree it is a detriment but its REALITY is apparent...

Throughout mankind's history humans have been co-opted into TWO groups

And these two groups are a natural occurrence.

Protestant/catholic in 1500-1600 - England

Separatist / loyalist - Early America

Pro slave anti slave - 1800's

Segregationists / civil rights movement

Pro gun / anti gun

Pro life / anti choice

We can venture to any point in history, any country and see this same pattern.

I will ask you some questions

Do you believe the United states government should provide financial assistance to its citizens if the person is unable to find work?

Do you believe everyone should be taxed at the same rate?

Do you believe healthcare is a right of for CITIZENS to enjoy?

simple questions,

for me

YES

NO

YES

if you answered ANY different then we see things very differently and further prove that there is such a thing as RIGHT and LEFT.

I think to assume it does not exist is not wise - it has existed for time and memorial

The smart thing to do for is to acknowledge this and go from there...

I like Ron Paul - BUT, I think many of his views are not compatible with THE modern day super power.

This DEM/GOP struggle exists because most questions can be answered with a yes or no -

= 2 options

= two parties reflecting those options

Am I left of right?

easy, and real as my computer

I also think the "left/right" dynamic is what this country depends on for survival.

If the "other side" did not exist we would have an even greater problem-

The extremes would take hold in either case- the sides are built in, natural and IMHO
understood by the founding fathers.

A constant struggle assures life and ability to change/shift which is a nasty climate for
absolute tyranny....



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 03:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by DeadFlagBlues

Originally posted by mental modulator

Well if you haven't noticed by now it is the constant back and forth of conservatism and liberalism that keeps this country going...

Heck was Ronald Reagan a conservative???

Was he?

Well he filled his ranks with "NEOCONS" that he hired on

Just look at all the GOP presidents since Nixon = plenty of these so called not conservative staffers working for GOP presidents- shaping CONSERVATIVE foreign and domestic policy...

and I disagree the ideologies couldn't be different

the implication and "friends" may be the same - BUT do not be fooled into thinking
both ideas and thoughts that motivate the ideas are the same- that is a mistake...


The back and forth isn't what's keeping this country going! That's exactly what is driving this country apart all the while the right and the left collectively take measures to protect their wealthy relationships, harbor the people that brought this recession/depression into frutation, and successfully make people more reliant on the government. This is their motive, and they have done it hand in hand! If anything, it's those idiots who dare call themselves Republican or Democrat who are ensuring our current fate to enclose exponentially faster.

Do not stereotype me. Reagan was a set up. He was an actor, which made him more than qualified for his role as president. Just based on his "No More Cancer Act" you'd have to know he was a total enabler. His actions were most like every other president's actions, where the true intent of their actions were justified by their peers and only people from the outside could see the true intentions of what seemed to be handed onto him, not something he came up with himself. A stooge.



well pardon for stereotyping you, it was foolish on my part.

However I cannot cite one period in history where the entire populace was
in consensus in regards to most issue be it, domestic or international?

I am not saying that I like having someone in office who is against my core values,
but I understand that government is "reborn" ( should be :lol

with each election.

A republic or democracy needs to be in constant flux or tyranny ( soviet Russia Nazi style) results....

This country is always being torn apart.

What about the 60's?

20's

80's

???

same thing different landscape

I can agree that both are beholden to the same entities

which is NOT the same as proclaiming that a simple split in the populace is not the norm.



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 03:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by mental modulator

I will ask you some questions

Do you believe the United states government should provide financial assistance to its citizens if the person is unable to find work?


Yes, but only to the extent the federal government had "secured" from my own pay throughout my employment. No freebies. I believe this to be a very crude and corrupt form of reprisal, but this is what it is right now and that's what I feel is fair considering the circumstances. You can only take if you've put in.


Do you believe everyone should be taxed at the same rate?


I do not believe in a flat tax, but there are many ways to avoid unnecessary taxation that are not black and white. As I adhere to no one ideology, I would like to see federal tax across the board dissolved and state's find more innovative and fair ways to compensate for their specific needs.


Do you believe healthcare is a right of for CITIZENS to enjoy?


No, I do not. Not when I have to consider that by "right" you mean federally funded and enforced. I do not want my healthcare to be determined by the corporate protectionists and lobbying powers. I could only imagine what healthcare in America would look like if ran by the dog-chasing-tail beauracrats in Washington D.C. Just as I don't believe that the current form of corporate (insurance) protectionists keep the people broke and big business paid. We already have a considerable health epidemic in this country and the federal government is only going to make that worse.



simple questions,


But not nearly that "simple." Simple for you because you have no issue with being critical of both sides of the spectrum. Realistically, nobody should answer these with such confidence considering what could happen if a Yes or No answer was given. And what happened to free will and choice? To you, it's either one or the other. There's a million variables to be considered and you've decided out of two given to you by people who have gone to considerable lengths to work against you. Look up Hillary Clinton's Universal Health Coverage debacle. I'm sure you'll find that interesting.



if you answered ANY different then we see things very differently and further prove that there is such a thing as RIGHT and LEFT.


Ridiculous. Three questions are supposed to divide and differentiate me from you? That's not how the universe works, that is how kindergarteners work. If I am not with you does not mean I am against you. We may see things differently, but to object to one another instead of exploring the endless possibilities would be "not wise" as you keep saying. I'm not here to be hearded by federal government officials that act as a good willed shepard. I refuse to pick A and B because I feel as though I have to. I'm no robot and I, like you am a complex person and a complex mind. I feel like you're doing yourself a disservice for being so submissive in thought. A shame..


The smart thing to do for is to acknowledge this and go from there...


That's the opposite of what I should acknowledge. Realistically, we are being forced to choose something that we may not fully agree with. If we are letting them shape our own will between two choices, what does that say about us as free willed people? I am my own man, with my own reservations about what is right and just, and very few of them have been passed down by public opinion or by government officials.


I like Ron Paul - BUT, I think many of his views are not compatible with THE modern day super power.


Super power? You swing left, but you want to classify us as a superpower? What happened to contentment? Where have the right/left led us equally? Into the poor house where credit is what sustains us. We have no savings! We don't own our houses! We don't own our cars! Most of us don't even officially own our education! Did either party stop the creditors/bankers from completely controlling our quality of life? No, neither of them did. Some people from BOTH sides tried to rally against it, but both parties succesfully granted the fate of the people they served to multi-billion dollar conglomerates.

I don't even want to consider more war, universal healthcare, or whatever bull# ideology these politicans are talking about. I want to our country to become grounded! You can't build anything if it does not first have a viable, strong and consistent platform! That goes with politics as well! The problem with all of these federal programs that are driving our dick in the dirt is the advancement of these unsound policies being built upon unsound policies, which were built upon another unsound policy.

Dr. Paul and I couldn't be more different in life and politics, but I agree whole heartedly with what he is trying to do. His ideas aren't "dated" they're infallible! They're not "old," they're everlasting.

It reminds me of the neighbor across the street who finances an Escalade, a boat, a sports car. His kids have the nicest bikes, baseball gloves, clothes, his wife fake breasts, cologon injections, plastic smile. Then the next thing you notice the repo man is taking everything they own and their house is foreclosed because they lived outside their means.

Where as Ron Paul would be the old guy across the street with a nice truck, paid off, decent car for his wife, paid off. Put all his kids through college, but he made them work for it and never relied on credit. The house had been paid for 20 years and they can reap all the equity they've accumulated because they were diligent in their finances. They have money for retirement, but still work because that's what they know.

It's the difference between bull# and contentment. We need to revert back to the basics.

Strong national defense, stable production economy, domestic small business employing Americans, strong industrial exports, and a real estate market that is not based on sneaky accounting, but of financial responsibility.

Those aren't dated principles. That's sound policy!

Our lack of contentment created and enabled by the Federal Reserve and other banking institutions have single handedly forced this country into a nose dive that may take decades to correct.

I like the guy, because realistically he wants what is best for us. A lot of us aren't looking for 13 extra dollars every week that we'll have to pay interest on later on, we're looking for our out of control federal government to correct itself, even if that means wiping the slate clean and begining a new with sound principles.





This DEM/GOP struggle exists because most questions can be answered with a yes or no -

= 2 options

= two parties reflecting those options

Am I left of right?

easy, and real as my computer


Fundamentally, they shouldn't be answered with a yes or no. Anything yes or no is injustice! You cannot express the complications of anything with a yes or no answer and especially when there is ONLY 2 answers given for you to choose from. Then you wonder why there's so much misunderstanding. It's not because the majority agreed on the wrong answer, but because that answer was a black or white one and didn't encompass any of the grey area which is where 99% of life involves itself in. Such a simplistic, non-critical train of thinking that has gotten and will continue to get us nowhere.



A constant struggle assures life and ability to change/shift which is a nasty climate for
absolute tyranny....



Exactly, and this is where we evolve.



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 04:06 PM
link   
reply to post by mental modulator
 


And it will always be like that! We in turn our enabling the exact same reality of which we disagree with. If you use the same formula, there can be no true "change."

1+1 always = 2.

It's as simple as taking a personal protest against the very way we think. There is no 50/50. There is no true majority. Most voters say "I had to vote for the lesser of two evils!" That statement, in it's essence shines light on how people feel about the very concept of voting. They don't agree with either, but feel they are forced to vote for one or the other. Well, what if both choices were predetermined to behave a certain way regardless of which "concept" people decided to elect?

That means the concept is corrupt and controlled to always have a single solitary outcome, making the voting process theatrics, but leaves people mentally/physically/philosophically divided.

For instance, the biggest issue the past election was the bail-out. Even though McCain champions himself as somewhat of a fiscal conservative and relies on his "no pork" rhetoric to appeal to other fiscal conservatives. Obama champions himself as a man of the people and a defender against aggressive corporate interests. These people ideologically are in their own words "worlds apart." Separated by what people believe to be the end all be all! A Democrat and Republican, both have the same "intentions" but just different ways about going about them, but what did we see when the peole weren't buying a 4 page bailout drawn up (probably with crayons) by Bernenke?

We saw two men! Completely different stances on the economy come together to convince people of 1 common goal, even though it didn't align with either of their ideologies. What does that tell you about the validity of the right/left - Democrat/Republic dichotomy?

It's false.

And tearing people down with petty bull# because they're not on your "team" does nothing for us and allows the government to waltz us right into destruction.



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 04:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Tentickles
 


Excellent thread Tentickles, and long overdue. That's been one of my pet peeves the past year here at ATS. In general, I'm sick of the labels..... most often the basis of a strawman logical fallacy: Identify a person as a label, and then denigrate that label. Pretty common, and unworthy as a debate element.

i]reply to post by Next_Heap_With
 


actually..... conservatives want LESS government. They don't necessarily have utopian fairy dreams, the just have the view that the government should work for the people, not the other way around.

________________________________________



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 04:19 PM
link   
reply to post by DeadFlagBlues
 



You round about called me a kindergartner


Look... I do not like the goings on... But I do hold firm in stating that the left/right
situation has been a constant phenomena throughout human history.

IT may have be called by different names, had different details, but I will ask you again
please point out one country, time period where a whole nation has not been plagued
with yes or no - right or left - pro - anti???

You will find that in though rare periods where one conciseness exist so does absolute tyranny.

Motherland/Fatherland

I understand that reality is much more nuanced than yes or no - however
BALLOTS generally have 2 options?

Prop 8 - yes or no

measure -B yes or no

prop 57 -yes or no

In regards to healthcare...

My father takes 60 pills valued at......


$30,000.00

YES - and this under Corporate Health...

what is the other option?

Government -

correct?

So does that make only TWO options?

I guess we could treat our own stroke, cancer - but ---- NO. So that still leave two
meta options correct?

SO right there we have a fundamental difference...

What I feel is a better solution is hell for you.

Mean while my father is paying 60,000 a month on medicine.

Medication that costs $400 in some countries with socialized medicine.

So on this point we are at odds, this reflects the simple duality of man.

As far as the effectiveness of this system, I can't say.

The ballot is not reflective of the dynamic world we live in, sadly.

PS don't make this personal... You assume to much about me, just as I have with you



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 04:26 PM
link   
You know what...I'm sick of this nonsense.

What does everyone want?

Freedom.

What does everyone want?

Peace.

What does everyone want?

Prosperity.


Now any who are bickering tell me how any of you are different in this regard.

Quit bickering amongst yourselves damnit...the country is going DOWN THE DAMN TUBES.

Can't we just freaking stop it for awhile?

We are ONE IN THE FREAKING SAME.

It's US against THEM...not YOU against ME.




[edit on 10-6-2009 by David9176]



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 04:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by DeadFlagBlues
reply to post by mental modulator
 


And it will always be like that! We in turn our enabling the exact same reality of which we disagree with. If you use the same formula, there can be no true "change."

1+1 always = 2.

It's as simple as taking a personal protest against the very way we think. There is no 50/50. There is no true majority. Most voters say "I had to vote for the lesser of two evils!" That statement, in it's essence shines light on how people feel about the very concept of voting. They don't agree with either, but feel they are forced to vote for one or the other. Well, what if both choices were predetermined to behave a certain way regardless of which "concept" people decided to elect?

That means the concept is corrupt and controlled to always have a single solitary outcome, making the voting process theatrics, but leaves people mentally/physically/philosophically divided.

For instance, the biggest issue the past election was the bail-out. Even though McCain champions himself as somewhat of a fiscal conservative and relies on his "no pork" rhetoric to appeal to other fiscal conservatives. Obama champions himself as a man of the people and a defender against aggressive corporate interests. These people ideologically are in their own words "worlds apart." Separated by what people believe to be the end all be all! A Democrat and Republican, both have the same "intentions" but just different ways about going about them, but what did we see when the peole weren't buying a 4 page bailout drawn up (probably with crayons) by Bernenke?

We saw two men! Completely different stances on the economy come together to convince people of 1 common goal, even though it didn't align with either of their ideologies. What does that tell you about the validity of the right/left - Democrat/Republic dichotomy?

It's false.

And tearing people down with petty bull# because they're not on your "team" does nothing for us and allows the government to waltz us right into destruction.


I agree... My point is to underscore that this division has always been used to keep power in place. This same struggle is what people 100- 200 - 3,000 years back have been enduring. The details and landscape is different, but at the core sits a simple thing.Grey areas are infinite - but in order to operate a single entity which represents many, things ultimately boil down to yes or no.

Do you like pizza?
Have you ever had a headache?

its yes or no right?

This is a tool for power, but it is also a component of human existence

I just feel that progress has to work with in the frame work of reality and mankind's
societal invention.

IMHO



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 04:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by David9176
You know what...I'm sick of this nonsense.

What does everyone want?

Freedom.

What does everyone want?

Peace.

What does everyone want?

Prosperity.


Now any who are bickering tell me how any of you are different in this regard.

Quit bickering amongst yourselves damnit...the country is going DOWN THE DAMN TUBES.

Can't we just freaking stop it for awhile?

You are ONE IN THE FREAKING SAME.

It's US against THEM...not YOU against ME.



[edit on 10-6-2009 by David9176]


when has anything been as easy D?

We arrived at this point from day one of this country.

but in my world, my family cannot be at peace or be prosperous when they are paying

A YEARS SALARY EVERY MONTH on pills.

We are bickering because we see things different - if he has his way (healthcare) my family will still endure the SAME lack of peace and prosperity.



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 04:46 PM
link   
reply to post by mental modulator
 





A YEARS SALARY EVERY MONTH on pills.


I understand man! I know it needs to be fixed. The health care system is horrible.

They say we have great healthcare on tv....but only for those who can afford it.

I don't think CEO's should be making billions of dollars off of NOT giving people healthcare. That's crazy...and everyone with common sense should agree with that.

I'd like to see it run by non profit organizations. Health care should not be profitable...insurance companies should NOT profit either.

Health care organizations have a stranglehold on both parties...another reason why I don't trust the government to run it.

I'm just tired of the bickering man.

People should start coming together instead of constantly dividing ourselves in every single issue.

We all have a common goal. We need to work toward it.


BTW...my original post was regarding to the Neo-con argument..not health care.

[edit on 10-6-2009 by David9176]



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 04:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by David9176
reply to post by mental modulator
 





A YEARS SALARY EVERY MONTH on pills.


I understand man! I know it needs to be fixed. The health care system is horrible.

They say we have great healthcare on tv....but only for those who can afford it.

I don't think CEO's should be making billions of dollars off of NOT giving people healthcare. That's crazy...and everyone with common sense should agree with that.

I'd like to see it run by non profit organizations. Health care should not be profitable...insurance companies should NOT profit either.

Health care organizations have a stranglehold on both parties...another reason why I don't trust the government to run it.

I'm just tired of the bickering man.

People should start coming together instead of constantly dividing ourselves in every single issue.

We all have a common goal. We need to work toward it.


BTW...my original post was regarding to the Neo-con argument..not health care.

[edit on 10-6-2009 by David9176]


I likey the non profit idea


there is the rest of things we can profit on, EVERYTHING else.

But the question of existence should not be FOR PROFIT, never!

We do need to work toward it.

Got you on your comment.



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 05:03 PM
link   
reply to post by mental modulator
 





I likey the non profit idea


I do too. IT should have never been profitable in the first place. I know that people are for big government or big business...I think both are the problem.

We definitely need something to change. I went to the ER a few months ago and got a 5000 dollar bill and was at the hospital for 5 hours and had a quick procedure done.

Insurance covered 3500 and now I'm stuck with a 1500 bill which is freakin BS. I've never made a single claim on health insurance and this is the reward I get?

Psst. The system has to change. I'm all for it to change.

It seems like nothing works right anymore. Everything is broken..on all levels and all areas.



posted on Jun, 11 2009 @ 12:24 AM
link   
reply to post by David9176
 


If only it could be that simple for everyone David, then the world would be a better place.



posted on Jun, 12 2009 @ 12:08 AM
link   
My question is, why did the "conservatives" support the neocons and their war for 8 years and call anyone that disagreed with the war traitors and terrorist supporters? It is still happening today. There in lies the divisiveness we still see.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join