Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 25 to 28 of 28
  1. #25
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Blog Entries

    Re: Moscow Bans Gay Pride...for 100 years.

    Maybe we should do the same thing here.

    Look at what they did in this photo. Even the
    WH was upset.

  2. #26
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Mt. Arrogance in the middle of the .11 rolling acres of The Windbag Estates

    Re: Moscow Bans Gay Pride...for 100 years.

    Sure, moderate conservatives are more liberal than "severe conservatives" like Mitt Romney on SOME issues - especially when compared to a guy who lived 50 years ago (which by the way probably says more about the merits and/or poularity of progressive ideology than I presume you'd be willing to admit).
    Romney a "severe conservative"? The guy gave this country its first version of universal healthcare. He is a moderate (using today's ridiculoous standards) like the Bushs who have endorsed him. I am an extreme conservative (libertarian, actually) and I know what one looks like. There are none on the national stage, save Paul.

    What this movement over the years in political descriptions says it our eductional system sucks except at progressive indoctrination.

    Of course, if you were to look at the current President's record on gun control, I'd argue he is to the right of every Democratic President in the history of this country. By contrast, how "conservative" would Ronald Reagan - who raised the debt ceiling 18 times during his Presidency - appear to be in the context of today's neo-conservative political ideology. He'd suddenly be pretty unpopular. Or maybe not. I can't keep up sometimes...
    Reagan didn't raise the debt celing, the Democrats in Congress did. If Reagan's budgets had been passed as written, or at least only spent the money he proposed he would have left office with a surplus. That is a mathematical fact.

    What's more important to the discussion in my view is that the power center of the Republican party - the group of voters, politicians and corporations driving the party's policy and rhetoric - is to the right of the the previous Republican Presidential nominee John McCain, and to the right of their most recent President George W. Bush.
    Finally. Bush and McCain are big government types (I would call them liberals). If the Republicans are run by big government types who is to stand for smaller, limited government; for liberty and freedom? It sure as hell ain't the Democrats.

    Most reasonable people agree that the historical American conservatism you likely aspire to (maybe represented by a guy like Ron Paul for instance) is far different than today's neo-conservatism that has become the dominant force in Republican politics. I had to chuckle when you said "today's moderate Republican". I know they are out there, but they aren't exactly being represented so far as I can tell.
    The moderate Republicans ARE the neo-cons. They expand government just like Democrats. Paleo-conservatives are the ones who are true conservatives. And the neo-conservatives are the Bushs, they have been running the party since Reagan. The "right wing radicals" are the Tea Party folks who want limited government. They just want government placed back into its constitutional role. It has far exceeded those barriors thanks to Woodrow Wilson and FDR.

    As for most "reasonable" people, the veiled insult was noted. They might be "reasonable" but they are not politically astute.

    Most important to this THREAD however, you failed to address my overarching point in your attempt to minimize my argument. Russia, the country
    Mitt Romney coined "our number one geopolitical foe", and American conservatives actually agree that rights for non-heterosexual human beings should be removed by the state. It's not a connection I care to delve into too deeply into as it's in many ways redundant around here. But I do think it's fascinating whenever American conservatives, Russian Communists and Muslim Fundamentalists all find themselves in each others company on virtually any issue

    What? Conservaties do not believe rights should be removed for anybody not convicted of a crime. We just believe that we should all share the same rights and that special rights should not be created for some people. No consevative wants to ban gay pride whatever. I just don't believe people should be walking down the street naked or committing sex acts or dressing 3 year olds up is sado-massochist garb, REGARDLESS OF THEIR SEXUAL ORIENTATION.

  3. #27

    Re: Moscow Bans Gay Pride...for 100 years.

    Looks like the ruskies have us beat on at least one front.

  4. #28

    Re: Moscow Bans Gay Pride...for 100 years.

    Quote Originally Posted by NCRAVEN View Post
    This is awesome, now you're rewriting history to frame your arguments. That my friend is disgraceful.

    You need to go back and read the thread Galen started about BHO announced support of Gay Marriage where I said I voted against the amendment.
    I remember reading your comments in that thread, but clearly remembered your vote incorrectly. I apologize for that.

    That legislation was and still is disgraceful. We seem to agree on that much.


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Russell Street Report Website Design by D3Corp Ocean City Maryland