V-Twin Forum banner

1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
886 Posts
Discussion Starter #1

On one of these posts someone said that with the exception of 1) Supporting the troops, and 2) Pro-life, they did not know what else it means when someone states that they are a 'Conservative.' I doubt that I am a typical conservative, but would hope to start a dialog, state some of my positions and possibly start meaningful, mature dialog.

I have said before that I am a 'Constitutional Conservative'. Now, what does that mean, right? To me:
1) The Constitution of the United States and Bill of Rights says it all. It is a living document, but that does not mean that its words should be perverted to advance either of the present political parties agendas.

2) Limited Government: IMO, half the things the government is currently involved in domestically are things that are a waste of taxpayer dollars. Programs that are worthless. Case in point: Do you know there is Helium farm maintained in Texas at the cost of millions of dollars per year. It was created back in the 1920's or 1930's when the US was involved in using zeppelins for military applications. Why is it still maintained? Are there that many people who want to talk like Daffy Duck? Limited government involves alot more, as in the abuse of power, such as its recent eniment domain ruling.

3) Support of the military: In the Constitution, government is suppose to provide for the "common defense", i.e. military. I have supported the military all my life. I am the son of a vet (R.I.P. Dad), I served, and my wife also served in the military. I do not care what the party affiliation is of the P.O.T.U.S., I support our military and candidates who also push for better equipment, facilities, and benefits for the members of the military.

4) Pro-life: Yes, I can say that I am. I would have to address this on two levels. A) How the Supreme Court in 1973 found this as a 'right' in the Constitution. B) How it is used as the extreme form of contraception. Was this the original intent of Roe vs Wade?
Like nuclear weapons, it is a genie that is out of the bottle, and will not put back in. I do believe that there should be limits placed on its use, i.e. the ban on the partial-birth abortion procedure.

5) The sovereignty of America: I am outraged at how porous our borders are, the flood of illegal aliens, the crimes they are allowed to commit without being deported, the sanctuary cities, and the speciai interest groups who's agendas are detrimental to the U.S. maintaining its sovereignty. Part of Section 8 of the Constitution states, To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions. No one can deny that the illegal alien problem is an invasion, nor can they deny that any group (including businesses) which support illegals coming to the US or working here could be considered insurrectionists.
Lack of enforcement of current immigration laws is a violation of the U.S. Constitution.

6) Low taxes: Along with limited (smaller) government, taxes should be low. There is too much waste in the government and we all know it. What to lower the deficit? One step would be to cut 'foreign aid' by 50% if not more. Tens of billions of dollars are sent overseas and wasted by them. Domestic programs that have shown they fail; end them. Currently government's answer is to throw more money at those failed programs.

I could state some other points, but these points presented are enough to start a debate/dialog.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,069 Posts
I think if our government is going to tax anything, it should be toilet paper. Quit taxing my beer! :beer4u:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
171 Posts
I think liberals should pay taxes and conservatives should not.
Now the question is which one do you want to be?

This story reminds me of the biggest difference--

A young woman was about to finish her first year of college. Like so many others her age, she considered herself to be a very liberal Democrat, and was very much in favor of 'the redistribution of wealth.'

She was deeply ashamed that her father was a rather staunch Republican, a feeling she openly expressed. Based on the lectures that she had participated in, and the occasional chat with a professor, she felt that her father had for years harbored an evil, selfish desire to keep what he thought should be his.

One day she was challenging her father on his opposition to higher taxes on the rich and the addition of more government welfare programs. The self-professed objectivity proclaimed by her professors had to be the truth and she indicated so to her father. He responded by asking how she was doing in school.

Taken aback, she answered rather haughtily that she had a 4.0 GPA, and let him know that it was tough to maintain, insisting that she was taking a very difficult course load and was constantly studying, which left her no time to go out and party like other people she knew. She didn't even have time for a boyfriend, and didn't really have many college friends because she spent all her time studying.

Her father listened and then asked, 'How is your friend Audrey doing?'

She replied, 'Audrey is barely getting by. All she takes are easy classes, she never studies, and she barely has a 2.0 GPA. She is so popular on campus; college for her is a blast. She's always invited to all the parties, and lots of times she doesn't even show up for c lasses because she's too hung over.'

Her wise father asked his daughter, 'Why don't you go to the Dean's office and ask him to deduct a 1.0 off your GPA and give it to your friend who only has a 2.0. That way you will both have a 3.0 GPA and certainly that would be a fair and equal distribution of GPA.'

The daughter, visibly shocked by her father's suggestion, angrily fired back, 'That wouldn't be fair! I have worked really hard for my grades! I've invested a lot of time, and a lot of hard work! Audrey has done next to nothing toward her degree. She played while I worked my tail off!'

The father slowly smiled, winked and said gently,

'Welcome to the Republican party.'
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,037 Posts
ok lets have a go at it!

Timmy_D said:

On one of these posts someone said that with the exception of 1) Supporting the troops, and 2) Pro-life, they did not know what else it means when someone states that they are a 'Conservative.' I doubt that I am a typical conservative, but would hope to start a dialog, state some of my positions and possibly start meaningful, mature dialog.

I have said before that I am a 'Constitutional Conservative'. Now, what does that mean, right? To me:
1) The Constitution of the United States and Bill of Rights says it all. It is a living document, but that does not mean that its words should be perverted to advance either of the present political parties agendas. SO WE AGREE FREEDOM OF THE PRESS DOESN'T INCLUDE STEALING DOCUMENTS AND/OR PAYING OTHERS TO STEAL DOCUMENTS AND THEN PUBLISH THEM HIDING BEHIND THE 1ST. AMENDMENT? ALSO DOESN'T INCLUDE THE "RIGHT" TO PUBLISH MILITARY PLANS PUTTING THE TROOPS IN DANGER. ALSO DOESN'T INCLUDE KNOWING WHERE A CRIMINAL IS BUT SAYING YOU WON'T SAY BECAUSE YOU ARE A REPORTER. BTW IF AND NON REPORTER PULLED ANY OF THESE THINGS THEY WOULD BE IN JAIL FOR A LONG TIME.

2) Limited Government: IMO, half the things the government is currently involved in domestically are things that are a waste of taxpayer dollars. Programs that are worthless. Case in point: Do you know there is Helium farm maintained in Texas at the cost of millions of dollars per year. It was created back in the 1920's or 1930's when the US was involved in using zeppelins for military applications. Why is it still maintained? Are there that many people who want to talk like Daffy Duck? Limited government involves alot more, as in the abuse of power, such as its recent eminent domain ruling. AGREE THERE IS A TON OF PORK BARREL WASTE FROM BOTH PARTIES. I FAVOR A "LINE ITEM VETO" SO ANY PRESIDENT REP OR DEM CAN "X" OUT THE CRAP AND GET BACK TO THE BILL.

3) Support of the military: In the Constitution, government is suppose to provide for the "common defense", i.e. military. I have supported the military all my life. I am the son of a vet (R.I.P. Dad), I served, and my wife also served in the military. I do not care what the party affiliation is of the P.O.T.U.S., I support our military and candidates who also push for better equipment, facilities, and benefits for the members of the military. WHAT HAPPENED TO THE IRAQ SOLDIERS SENDING THEM TO IRAQ WITH HUMVEES THAT HAD NO ARMOR WAS CRIMINAL, AND THE LACK OF BODY ARMOR WAS CRIMINAL. BUSH'S MAIN BIG BIG MISTAKE WAS NOT LISTENING TO MCCAIN AND GETTING RID OF RUMSFELD. JOE BIDEN WHO I DON'T CARE FOR AND WHO WOULD LIKE US OUT OF THERE IS A STAUNCH SUPPORTER OF GIVING THE TROOPS THE BEST OF THE BEST WHILE THEY ARE THERE. THE NEW COUGAR ARMORED VEHICLE CAN RESIST 5 TIMES THE ATTACK THAT A ARMORED HUMVEE CAN.

4) Pro-life: Yes, I can say that I am. I would have to address this on two levels. A) How the Supreme Court in 1973 found this as a 'right' in the Constitution. B) How it is used as the extreme form of contraception. Was this the original intent of Roe vs Wade?
Like nuclear weapons, it is a genie that is out of the bottle, and will not put back in. I do believe that there should be limits placed on its use, i.e. the ban on the partial-birth abortion procedure. REGARDLESS OT YOUR OR MY POSITION ROE V WADE WAS A BAD LAW/RULING. THERE IS NOTHING IN THE CONSTITUTION EVEN REMOTELY SAYING YOU HAVE THIS PARTICULAR RIGHT OF PRIVACY.

5) The sovereignty of America: I am outraged at how porous our borders are, the flood of illegal aliens, the crimes they are allowed to commit without being deported, the sanctuary cities, and the special interest groups who's agendas are detrimental to the U.S. maintaining its sovereignty. Part of Section 8 of the Constitution states, To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions. No one can deny that the illegal alien problem is an invasion, nor can they deny that any group (including businesses) which support illegals coming to the US or working here could be considered insurrectionists.
Lack of enforcement of current immigration laws is a violation of the U.S. Constitution. THIS IS A HOT SPOT FOR ME. I TOTALLY AGREE THAT THIS IS A PROBLEM BUT I DISAGREE WITH MOST ON HOW TO SOLVE IT. SIMPLY ROUNDING UP 15 MILLION PEOPLE IS IMPOSSIBLE, IF FOR AN ADMISSION OF GUILT, A FINE, 5 YEARS OF STRICT PROBATION, PAYING SOME BACK TAXES AND THEN SOME SORT OR LEGAL STATUS. I MEAN REAL DRUG DEALERS OFTEN GET A MUCH BETTER DEAL THAN THAT. I ALSO FIND ID AMUSING THAT EVERYONE IS OH SO CONCERNED ABOUT MEXICAN ILLEGALS BUT NEVER EVEN MENTIONS CANADIAN ILLEGALS. THEY ARE HERE ALSO SO WHAT'S DIFFERENT........THEIR SKIN TONE? I'M A FORMER CANADIAN BTW.

6) Low taxes: Along with limited (smaller) government, taxes should be low. There is too much waste in the government and we all know it. What to lower the deficit? One step would be to cut 'foreign aid' by 50% if not more. Tens of billions of dollars are sent overseas and wasted by them. Domestic programs that have shown they fail; end them. Currently government's answer is to throw more money at those failed programs. GOVERNMENT SHOULD SPEND LESS AND TAX LESS, THIS PROMOTES GROWTH WHICH ACTUALLY MAKES MORE TAXES BECAUSE WHEN BUSINESS GROWS THEY MAKE MORE MONEY AND PAY MORE TAXES.

I could state some other points, but these points presented are enough to start a debate/dialog.

HOW DID I DO?

BTW THE CAPS ARE NOT ME SHOUTING JUST ME SEPARATING MINE FROM YOURS.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
17,245 Posts
sniper said:
I think liberals should pay taxes and conservatives should not.
Now the question is which one do you want to be?

This story reminds me of the biggest difference--

A young woman was about to finish her first year of college. Like so many others her age, she considered herself to be a very liberal Democrat, and was very much in favor of 'the redistribution of wealth.'

She was deeply ashamed that her father was a rather staunch Republican, a feeling she openly expressed. Based on the lectures that she had participated in, and the occasional chat with a professor, she felt that her father had for years harbored an evil, selfish desire to keep what he thought should be his.

One day she was challenging her father on his opposition to higher taxes on the rich and the addition of more government welfare programs. The self-professed objectivity proclaimed by her professors had to be the truth and she indicated so to her father. He responded by asking how she was doing in school.

Taken aback, she answered rather haughtily that she had a 4.0 GPA, and let him know that it was tough to maintain, insisting that she was taking a very difficult course load and was constantly studying, which left her no time to go out and party like other people she knew. She didn't even have time for a boyfriend, and didn't really have many college friends because she spent all her time studying.

Her father listened and then asked, 'How is your friend Audrey doing?'

She replied, 'Audrey is barely getting by. All she takes are easy classes, she never studies, and she barely has a 2.0 GPA. She is so popular on campus; college for her is a blast. She's always invited to all the parties, and lots of times she doesn't even show up for c lasses because she's too hung over.'

Her wise father asked his daughter, 'Why don't you go to the Dean's office and ask him to deduct a 1.0 off your GPA and give it to your friend who only has a 2.0. That way you will both have a 3.0 GPA and certainly that would be a fair and equal distribution of GPA.'

The daughter, visibly shocked by her father's suggestion, angrily fired back, 'That wouldn't be fair! I have worked really hard for my grades! I've invested a lot of time, and a lot of hard work! Audrey has done next to nothing toward her degree. She played while I worked my tail off!'

The father slowly smiled, winked and said gently,

'Welcome to the Republican party.'

I worked my way through college with some help from my parents. I tend to vote mostly Democratic. Allthough I wouldn't normally vote for Ted Kennedy for prez I would still pick him over Georgie the Moron. Hell, I'd vote for Capt. Kangaroo over Bush.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,710 Posts
more

TimmyD,

How about expanding on point #5. As in not singning bad(nafta/gat, security prosperity partnership) trade agreements.



Not being subject to rulings of the world court,etc., etc.



Come on Smokey, nows your chance to champion the liberal/commies~!Awesome!
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
17,245 Posts
"__________________
and the whole world will be a burning ball of fire
polar bears drown drown as the sea gets higher"

heard on the news the other day that the famed Northwest Passage is finally opening up due to arctic melting. That certainly would cut traffic through the Panama Canal.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,710 Posts
Fred1369 said:
"__________________
and the whole world will be a burning ball of fire
polar bears drown drown as the sea gets higher"

heard on the news the other day that the famed Northwest Passage is finally opening up due to arctic melting. That certainly would cut traffic through the Panama Canal.
Perhaps, for how long. Let me guess, "When we stop driving petro burning vechicles and stop heating our homes." riighht
Then the NW passage will freeze over again.

BTW on the history channel they showed examples of the "mini ice age" during the dark ages and around our revolutionary war.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
17,245 Posts
I've seen that History Channel Mini-Iceage show. When is the next one due to cycle around? (the mini-iceage, not the show)
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,710 Posts
Fred1369 said:
I've seen that History Channel Mini-Iceage show. When is the next one due to cycle around? (the mini-iceage, not the show)


In about five minutes, put your ear to the rail:roflback:

All kidding aside, we can't let phonies like Al Goracle try to dictate our lives uncessarilly.

Enviormental whackos can ruin a nice day.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,609 Posts
Timmy_D said:
Do you know there is Helium farm maintained in Texas at the cost of millions of dollars per year. It was created back in the 1920's or 1930's when the US was involved in using zeppelins for military applications. Why is it still maintained? Are there that many people who want to talk like Daffy Duck?
Where in Texas????????


“Ridicule is the Burden of Genius.”
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,064 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timmy_D
AGREE THERE IS A TON OF PORK BARREL WASTE FROM BOTH PARTIES. I FAVOR A "LINE ITEM VETO" SO ANY PRESIDENT REP OR DEM CAN "X" OUT THE CRAP AND GET BACK TO THE BILL.

I ALSO FIND ID AMUSING THAT EVERYONE IS OH SO CONCERNED ABOUT MEXICAN ILLEGALS BUT NEVER EVEN MENTIONS CANADIAN ILLEGALS. THEY ARE HERE ALSO SO WHAT'S DIFFERENT........THEIR SKIN TONE? I'M A FORMER CANADIAN BTW.


roofeditor said:
HOW DID I DO?

BTW THE CAPS ARE NOT ME SHOUTING JUST ME SEPARATING MINE FROM YOURS.


A line item veto would just make the president even more powerful. We need to trim some of that power so that we really do have a "balance of Power" in this country.

What is different about Canadians coming into this country is that most of the Canadians that do come here already have most of the values that U.S. citizens do. When they come here to emigrate, they don't fly a Maple leaf and demostrate how thay are "taking back" "thier" country. They are will to assimulate, even the Canadian citizens who came from other countries.

It has nothing to do with skin color. True Mexican Americans respect the US flag and do not fly the Mexican flag. They have respect for thier heritage, but thier loyality is to the US.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,064 Posts
swmnkdinthervr said:
I do Donald Duck well...don't need no stinkin' helium!!!
Just tell that to the people who have jobs watching that helium. Many of them have voted Republican all of thier lives.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,609 Posts
roofeditor said:
I ALSO FIND ID AMUSING THAT EVERYONE IS OH SO CONCERNED ABOUT MEXICAN ILLEGALS BUT NEVER EVEN MENTIONS CANADIAN ILLEGALS. THEY ARE HERE ALSO SO WHAT'S DIFFERENT........THEIR SKIN TONE? I'M A FORMER CANADIAN BTW.
I will try and put this in perspective. First of all I think all illegal immigrants should be dealt with but maybe this is why people focus on the Mexican issue and do not pay to much attention to others. Take a look at the numbers.

In March 2006 the Pew Hispanic Center estimated the undocumented population ranged from 11.5 to 12 million individuals, a number supported by the US Government Accountability Office (GOA). Pew estimated that 57% of this population comes from Mexico; 24% from Central America and, to a lesser extent, South America; 9% from Asia; 6% from Europe, and the remaining 4% from elsewhere.

So do the math on illegal immigrants:

Mexicans: 6,840,000
Central America: 2,880,000
South America: 1,080,000

The Canadians would be in the 4% from elsewhere. Lets just figure they are 3/4 of that 4%. It is probably less but for the sake of debate.

Illegal Canadians: 360,000 or 1/3 of South America.

So I ask you while agreeing that all immigrants should be here legally where does the real problem exist that has the potential to really change things here in US and change things for the worse.

We have a government of politicians that keep insisting that a new law needs to be written to address a problem that was supposedly addressed by the 86 law. That law had employer sanctions and required employers to be responsible for checking and only hiring legal workers. Companies started complaining (to government leaders) that this was just to much work. So enforcing the law that is still in effect today, was and is still ignored by way to many. But this possible new law will really do the job..........yea right, it gets the people off the politicians back until the next load needs to be dealt with.

Say you received two cuts somehow. A minor one on your left shoulder that was bleeding but not to bad and a severe one on your right leg that was bleeding profusely. The paramedic arrives and she stands there looking at your wounds. You say “hey, you need to take care of my right leg...look at it, it's really bad”. She says....I find it interesting how you are only worried about your leg and you are ignoring your shoulder.

Have a good one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,992 Posts
dtroll said:
ISo do the math on illegal immigrants:

Illegal Canadians: 360,000 or 1/3 of South America.
Yeah but thats Canadian so its really what, about 3 or 4 right?:roflback:
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
9,436 Posts
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservatism#Schools_of_conservatism

The above link goes to a Wikipedia selection discussing various aspects of conservatism, cultural, fiscal and religious.

I believe that these aspects have always been a part of conservatism in America, but that they once worked in concert. The republican party's wooing of the religious conservative movement in the 80's has resulted in placing the harmony of these three facets out of whack in the GOP. For examples, fiscal conservatives like Fred Thompson and Newt run aground on the shoals of family values while big spenders in social (religious) trappings like GW and Mitt run amok.

Lefty
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Top