Conservative views that do not make much sense

reply to post by projectvxn


Globalist club? You have got to get off the website for awhile. Go outside and get some fresh air. You are believing your own conspiracies.

How about some middle ground? How about recognizing those are problems and not sticking your head in the sand and saying maybe they will go away! The solutions are all dark and scary so I won't even attempt to address them. Come on. Rational is not just a word.

[edit on 15-7-2010 by rusethorcain]

reply to post by hotpinkurinalmint


just thought i'd mention that social security is not theirs to cut. it was originally enacted on the premise that they would extract money from people's paychecks for it... et al, social security was an old age insurance policy, paid for by the people. how do you cut what people are paying to you? make them still pay but not give them their insurance they paid and are paying for? dunno about you, but to me, that sounds like theft.

[edit on 15-7-2010 by undo]

reply to post by rusethorcain


I'm quite fine thank you. It doesn't take a conspiracy theorist to tell anyone that global governance is a real agenda. Our "leaders" tell us about it all the time.
I recommend actually listening to and read what these people are saying.

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by rusethorcain

 

We don't have scarce resources because we have too many people, we have scarce resources because too few people are being given control over them...

I have tried to find the sense in this statement because you seem otherwise a reasonably bright person. This makes no sense. The answer to water shortages and deforestation is...allowing corporate interests and local communities a free hand to continue the staus quo. Yes...in our natural system this will be a "natural" form of population control as wars for resources and starvation escalate...but is this the option you advocate?

Originally posted by projectvxn
Curbing global warming? Sorry, but if that means a tax scheme to enrich a few climate-pushing billionaires count me out.

It doesn't. Enough said.. I know the rhetoric well on both sides. It is my opinion that while there is a very small amount of truth to the idea that capitalistic and admittedly greedy forces are involved, the campaign to portray AGW policy as a conspiracy to shift power and wealth to a few interested powers is nothing more than just that Propaganda...the Koch brothers are the largest known funders of the Propaganda campaign...not conspiracy...memos and money outlining exactly what they want folks to believe and exactly what you have echoed.

Originally posted by projectvxn
Conserving fossil fuels? This isn't for government to do. This is for us to do. We haven't decided to yet. But something you should know about fossil fuels: Nearly everything around you has oil in it at some stage of production, if not every stage, and the majority of components of those products are oil based as well. You tell me, how do you conserve in a situation like that without crashing the economy or creating artificial price spikes forcing even the poorest among us to pay more for their goods?

Innovation and returning the cost of polluting to the balance sheet of those that are polluting. Those energy production companies pollute for free, it is an unfair advantage. Taxpaying citizens subsidize those polluters in the form of Medical bills, EPA clean-ups, superfund sites etc. etc. The energy companies are being subsidized. You are for the free market right? Well remove the government subsidies for polluters, make them carry the full cost of production for that energy that they sell and make a hefty profit from and let the market operate properly...then we can let innovative technologies compete fairly.

Originally posted by projectvxn
An 80,000 page tax code is not helping

Lord...I agree here. We might be the most advanced nation on earth, but we have one of the most complicated tax systems on the planet. Dumb and a result of pure politics. The gov needs money and the tax code is a convoluted mess of political posturing, lobbyist maneuvering and corporate interests.




[edit on 15-7-2010 by maybereal11]

[edit on 15-7-2010 by maybereal11]

reply to post by maybereal11


Resource wars are started and fought by governments who are bought and paid for by corporations. I think that you and many others who read what I posted know full well that is not at all what I mean. You've spent enough time on this site and have seen enough of my posts to know I don't advocate this kind of thing at all.

We let our government get bought by corporations and then when they hoard resources they blame the people. People then assume what we need is less people when what we actually need is is more decentralization.

Let's try to be intellectually honest here ok?

[edit on 15-7-2010 by projectvxn]

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by maybereal11

 

You've spent enough time on this site and have seen enough of my posts to know I don't advocate this kind of thing at all.

Let's try to be intellectually honest here ok?

[edit on 15-7-2010 by projectvxn]

Evidentelly we do not know eachother as I am unfamiliar with the nuances of your views with regards to "resource wars" and you seem to be unaware of my always striving toward intellectual honesty...I do faulter occassionally when I get heated, but usually own up to it.

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by maybereal11

 

Resource wars are started and fought by governments who are bought and paid for by corporations.
[edit on 15-7-2010 by projectvxn]

Oil? Minerals? High profit resources that can be transported and sold...most times yes. Corporate interests play a big role.

Agricultural land (food)? Water? not so much. Local, mostly non corporate conflicts.

At least IMO

reply to post by maybereal11


Understandable on the hot debate thing. I hold nothing against you.

One thing I think both of us can agree on is the influence of corporations on the government. What I don't like about modern conservatism is the penchant to defend indefensible practices by private industry. While I am a free market proponent, I do recognize that so long as their is corporate influence in government corruption will be the name of the game.

Money talks in Washington.

On the point of agriculture, private industry and government have created a cornered Market there as well. We are now hearing of shortages and other disparities in food supplies. This is mismanagement for profit and it is an all too common practice.

[edit on 15-7-2010 by projectvxn]

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by maybereal11

 

Understandable on the hot debate thing. I hold nothing against you.

One thing I think both of us can agree on is the influence of corporations on the government. What I don't like about modern conservatism is the penchant to defend indefensible practices by private industry. While I am a free market proponent, I do recognize that so long as their is corporate influence in government corruption will be the name of the game.

I am for smaller government...think special forces...government only acting where it is needed, forget the rest. Since I have learned to own the lables of "Liberal" and "Progressive" that are bandied about in rhetoric, my ideas of where and where not government is needed might differ from yours, but smaller gov? agreed.

Basically I'd be on board with the conservative principle of smaller government if the current conservatives weren't perpetually back-filling the void with corporate influence.

For modern conservatives it is not small gov vs. large gov, though that is what they claim....it is rather public interest vs. corporate interests....with the actual size of "authority" unchanged or growing.

The GOP backed "Citizens United" overturned the key legislation of thier own Presidential Nominee....McCain-Feingold. Giving corporations equal standing the political process as citizens.

This of course is not exclusive to the GOP...there are corrupt Dems as well, but the GOP have pretty much included corporate interests in thier political platform, they don't even deny it anymore.

reply to post by maybereal11


Indeed they don't. They've managed to convince many people that unchecked corporatism is a good thing by spinning it into "freedom loving". I don't trust corporations, I don't trust government, and I certainly don't trust corporate government.

You'd be surprised the kinds of policies I would advocate as a Constitutionalist. I would LOVE to see universal health care...At the STATE level. I don't believe blanket ordinances from the Feds does service to individual states as no two state economies are the same. Heath care reform should be done at the state level as more local governments have a better idea of the needs of their people than a far away federal government.

I support private and individual state education, but the DOE has got to go. They haven't done jack in the 50 or so years they've been around. We have the worlds worst ranked education system and every day we see examples of it's failures.

Right now the only thing standing in the way of positive reforms at state level is the Federal government and their penchant to overstep their enumerated powers. Once the National government is restored to within Constitutional boundaries we can then work to pay down debt and get some of these badly needed reforms pushed through.

As far as globalism is concerned(as a typical left wing stance would be), no thanks. We know the UN is corrupt. The only people who are promoting one world currency and governance are the same people who screwed the current system...it would be silly and eventually dangerous to let them take the reigns of the whole world.

We need American solutions to American problems. But I'm not fooled into believing that ALL progressives and liberals are the same as their higher up political counterparts. Indeed, just like Conservatives you meet everyday, your typical liberal isn't corrupt or blind to the realities of what is happening in this country. I learned that from my experience opposing the Bush administration. back then MY ONLY allies were liberals. Many have left my side, as they don't understand why I'm not happy with the new guy, or the party he hails from.

The only thing I want is my rights to be respected as much as yours. Equal Protection Under the Law.

I want to speak freely and I wants others to as well, especially the ones who offend me. I want to own whatever guns or other means of self defense that I so choose. I want to be secure in the knowledge that some government goon isn't listening to my phone conversations or reading my e-mails. I don't want to be taxed to death by a war mongering government. I don't want corruption in the guise of 2000 page "reform" legislation shoved down my throat. I don't need government to tell me what to believe, how to eat, what to put into or take out of my body, and I don't want them to have a say in how my INDIVIDUAL health is managed. I don't want government stooges reinterpreting what rights are and aren't. Right are rights, not subject to negotiation.

That, in a nutshell, is how I see things.

[edit on 15-7-2010 by projectvxn]

Originally posted by projectvxn


You'd be surprised the kinds of policies I would advocate as a Constitutionalist. I would LOVE to see universal health care...At the STATE level.

I'd be good with that.

Originally posted by projectvxn

I support private and individual state education, but the DOE has got to go. They haven't done jack in the 50 or so years they've been around. We have the worlds worst ranked education system and every day we see examples of it's failures.

Yep. The DOE sucks and the DOE under President Obama...still sucks.

Originally posted by projectvxn

As far as globalism is concerned(as a typical left wing stance would be), no thanks.

Not sure Globalism can be hung around the necks of the left? Are you confusing cultural tolerance, respect for other cultures etc with a call for one world currency, unfailing support for the UN etc.?

I think the UN is broken and have no interest in a one world currency etc.?

Originally posted by projectvxn

I want to speak freely and I wants others to as well, especially the ones who offend me.

I want to own whatever guns or other means of self defense that I so choose.

I want to be secure in the knowledge that some government goon isn't listening to my phone conversations or reading my e-mails.

I don't want to be taxed to death by a war mongering government.

All of the above I agree with.

Originally posted by projectvxn

I don't want corruption in the guise of 2000 page "reform" legislation shoved down my throat. [edit on 15-7-2010 by projectvxn]

How to describe my feelings on the bill....hmmm.

Like going to my favorite restaurant absolutely starving and ordering a Steak, plus side of sauteed mushrooms, Horseradish sauce, baked potatoe and a beer.

Then the waiter comes and brings me all the side items, but no steak along with 5 or 6 other dishes that I didn't order and a glass of chocolate milk instead of a beer.

I ask WTF and am told sorry, it's the best we could do. I want to get really, really angry, but then again I am famished.

reply to post by maybereal11


Globalism in this country is pushed by many on the left. Not so much on the right, at least not overtly.

The institutions that have been created to facilitate globalism are made up of mostly dictatorships from around the world. Are we really going to give credence to these organizations to define liberty and what laws Americans should live by? I think not. The sovereignty of the United States is paramount, in my opinion.

I wasn't even talking about the HC bill. That's not HC that's an insurance give away. And while we may get some crumbs from it, we will NEVER see steak, or even the loaf the crumbs came from.

[edit on 15-7-2010 by projectvxn]