Republicans....I'm Calling You Out!

So "Socialism" as a means of running our country is ok?You endorse,or excuse socialism as a way to operate?...Im afraid I dont understand your argument?..Or,are you attacking my semantics to avoid answering that question?...That mr o is taking us down a road to ruin and you are fighting for him any way you can?

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by SpectreDC

 

did thomas paine every use the word community?

Thomas Paine argued for a concept that is more or less what social security is. I'd need to go to the book for the exact verbiage but to paraphrase you ultimately suggested society needs some "safety net" for the disabled and old. I'm almost sure he uses the word "taxation" when he suggests the idea. I even think before saying this he straight out says he's usually against the concept.

But yes, one of the founding fathers ultimately supported taxation. Hell, several did. So unless you're really going to grab your 10 mile wide paint brush and make a massive stroke calling anyone who supports taxation a progressive, I think you should actually put some thought into what you're suggesting. Else this country is founded by progressives, which I don't believe to be the case at all even tough several people supported taxation.

Mind you, this is coming from someone who generally hates taxes and taxation as well. But I'm not going to stand by and watch someone say something stupid. That would be in itself stupid and disingenuous.

Click here for more information.

reply to post by SpectreDC


i sincerely doubt if he and they were alive today and they have seen what the government, social security and taxation has become they would have a thing or two to say about it.

and not all of it would be good.

anything the government gives can be taken away at the political party in powers whims.

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by SpectreDC

 

i sincerely doubt if he and they were alive today and they have seen what the government, social security and taxation has become they would have a thing or two to say about it.

Well that's because for at least the past 30 years (arguably longer) the governments been taken over by those with corporate interests or simply the interests not in line with the people of the country, with both parties doing everything they can to destroy what this country actually stands for, and using the people of the country as a battery through taxation to fuel illegal wars.

Just like with our constitution and what the government should be, if social security was left alone and never dipped into the concept would have worked. Philosophically I'm against it but pragmatically if it works and achieves something good, all the more power to it I say. Taxation too; if the country wasn't burdened with countless unconstitutional institutions the state supports we wouldn't even NEED 90% of the taxes we have today. And taxation too in principle is not necessarily an evil thing, it's just easy to take advantage of.

Neither worries with social security of taxation would be a problem if our government was trustworthy and not nearly as corrupt as it is. Unfortunately, that's what happens when you become fascists.

Mind you philosophically I don't agree with these things. I really don't. I'm arguing because in my eyes the arguments you guys are making are bad; I'm just picky like that.

**ATTENTION**

This thread is being watched closely by the staff and any off-topic, rude or inflamatory remarks will be removed. We ask that you please review the following threads:

Mod Note: Terms & Conditions of Use – Please Review This Link.

Mod Note: Courtesy is Mandatory – Please Review Link.

The End of Political Baiting and Sniping on ATS (was ALL MEMBERS READ)
YOU are responsible for your own posts.

No other warnings will be given before removal of posts and potential loss of posting privileges occurs.

Thank You

ATS Staff

Thank You Mods

reply to post by DarkKnight76

I agree. The simple words we use to communicate are now tools used against us for political separation.

I am willing to admit that the sweet spot is somewhere in the middle, and we cannot be blinded by a "my team only" mentality.

reply to post by neo96

I disagree.

Call it socialism if you want, but I call it a responsibility to the society in which we live.

We all have to chip in for the roads we drive on.

We all have to chip in police and fire protection.

I could go on, but you get the point. There is going to be a little "socialism" mixed in with any sort of civilized society. Otherwise it is an "each man for himself" situation and that only leads to barbarity and collapse of the society.

So we must give a little of ourselves, there is no way around it.

reply to post by sheepslayer247


yeah we are going to disagree and thats fine

"social conservative" whatever label.

and no give

earn

thats what a "True Conservative" believes

at least in my opinion

to each their own.

Originally posted by sheepslayer247
reply to post by neo96

 

I disagree.

Call it socialism if you want, but I call it a responsibility to the society in which we live.

We all have to chip in for the roads we drive on.

We all have to chip in police and fire protection.

I could go on, but you get the point. There is going to be a little "socialism" mixed in with any sort of civilized society. Otherwise it is an "each man for himself" situation and that only leads to barbarity and collapse of the society.

So we must give a little of ourselves, there is no way around it.I agree...especially with the "little bit ouf ourselves"...but not over 50% of my income,which is what I give now...especially when the ones who benefit most are drones who dont contribute anything but a vote every two years

Originally posted by Homedawg
So "Socialism" as a means of running our country is ok?You endorse,or excuse socialism as a way to operate?...Im afraid I dont understand your argument?..Or,are you attacking my semantics to avoid answering that question?...That mr o is taking us down a road to ruin and you are fighting for him any way you can?

Your bound to have a little socialism in any society, as I states in a previous post. We need to get past the stigma of the buzzword "socialism" and come to the table with an intelligent, level head to solve our governmental issues. We have to compromise! Otherwise we are just unreasonable bullies with only one acceptable outcome....total domination.

Obama is taking us down the wrong road! I agree, but for different reasons. I disagree with the actions he is taking, the same way I felt about Bush, and hes not running as tight a ship as I think he should.

I'm not disagreeing with him because of Republican propaganda speech about "Marxism, socialism, Kenyan-born...ahhhhhhh terrorist!" I refuse to get sucked into that black-hole that separates us based on unsubstantiated differences, rather than the ideology in which we uphold.

There's a big difference!

reply to post by neo96

to each their own.

Can you honestly believe that this is the "true conservative" view? A world full of people and we must live and die by ourselves, never leaning on those around us for any assistance in times of need?

If that's the definition of "true conservative" then I gladly accept whatever label my views demand. The world is not that black and white, and when we legislate laws with that blind a view then we are bound to fail.

reply to post by sheepslayer247


what i believe is you can do whatever you want with your money as i am free to do with whatever i want with my money.

holding a gun to my head and forcing your idealism over mine is what i have problems with and thats where your social values lead to case in point this country today.

the world is black and white and you can not and should not legislate morality or success.

if your a believer of a smaller limited government then your a conservative you you beleive that people should be forced into doing things that takes from their livelyhoods because a sense of morality is where i have problems.


the simple fact people seem to be forgetting that word charity versus the word "entitlement"

and the biggest fact there is the government does not earn their cash WE DO so it should fall to the individual for make the choice.

and another fact remians conseratives ie republicans give more to charity than the democrats and there socialist utopian dreams.

by their own choice something that your idealism does not "give".

reply to post by neo96

That line of thinking is fine and dandy until you need police or fire services....or you have to drive on roads you're not allowed to because someone else payed to build the road, but you didn't.

No one is held at gunpoint to live in civilized society. You are more than welcome to go where you want and live in which way you deem worthy, but to live in a modern system the fact is your going to have to chip in. There is no way around it.

That's not "entitlement", that's personal responsibility!

Side note: In a way, you are proving my point. Your posts contain many of the buzzwords or phrases that I refer to in my OP.

to each their own......

forcing your idealism....

social values.....

the world is black and white .....

entitlement.....

socialist utopian dreams.....

When popular political mantra becomes part of your very way of thinking....that's called brainwashed!

Repubs and Dems, conservatives and progressives lawl, your all owned by the banks.

reply to post by sheepslayer247

It is Time that people Wake up and Stand up for what they believe in.Do not stand up and do nothing ! Make your voices heard as a united peoples demand. The forces are behind you to deal with them should they abuse their powers.

reply to post by 1Starman


What force is that Starman?

Perhaps I missed something.

Labels. Progressive this, liberal that, conservative here, commie there. . . . .
We are at a turning point. Label it how you want, color it how ever you want to color it.
The two sides to this issue are these.
1. Folks who want more government control over their lives.
2. Folks who want less government control over their lives.

The folks that want more government control, more government intrusion, a bigger government come in all shapes and sizes. Progressive, liberal, democrat, republican. They think that by labeling themselves a certain way they can push their program through. In the ad world this is called "product branding" or "packaging".

A person calling themselves a "conservative republican" can get a bill, a law pushed through with support of their base just by selling the idea that it is a "conservative" notion.

I'm an Independent.
The left (progressive liberal democrat) side wants more government. They don't think that we can take care of ourselves. They don't think we can make our own decisions.
The right (progressive conservative republican) side wants more government. They just package it differently.

I want less government. Period. I want less spending, less departments of "whatever" less intrusion, less control, less red-tape in our lives. I see myself as a true conservative, and will support a party once they have a platform that I agree on. Right now, it's the Tea Party. But if they start adopting larger government programs, then I'll have to look elsewhere.

Forgive the long-winded rant, carry on,
Regards,
Beezzer