Raider5678

Yes, yes they do. Your picture of conservatives being demons and liberals being angels is seriously biased.

You can't point to the U.S. having slavers in the 1860s and claim that's what separates them from everyone else in comparison to their own conservative/liberal views. Britain had colonies until World War 2, where many basically were slaves. Paid ridiculously small amounts, to do a job. That'd be considered capitalism, however, they also didn't have a choice to not work. South Africa, Indonesia, India, etc. All of these places were British colonies. I'm not comparing the United States to Britain or saying the United States is better, I am not saying slavery is alright. However, many countries have a history of slavery, Jim Crow laws, and etc, and you can't solely say that only the U.S. had problems with that. Tradition doesn't define conservatives, and the status quo can change massively in less than a decade. Comparing it to things that happened decades ago and using it isn't all that accurate.

For someone who said it's far more complex than that, you sure summed it up in another simplistic manner.

When the list comes up for the least smartest members with over 1000 posts, you're not on it. Just saying.

Took my dog for a walk. Does that count? But regardless, I afforded respect to those who did the same to me. I didn't curse, I didn't generalize everyone, I didn't massively attack anyone, I didn't insinuate anyone was part of a conspiracy, I didn't insinuate anyone was racist or bigoted, I didn't call people anarchists, and I didn't say he's an extremist. I called him an idiot who needs to calm down. Read the things he's said from my point of view. I tried to keep it peaceful and rational. I didn't want it to turn into a slugfest about who's evil. I wanted to discuss virtues of conservatives. I'm not the smartest person on this forum. I often make stupid arguments, I make ridiculous statements. I'll be the first to admit that. However this time I did nothing to warrant a response like that. This time it's not me who needs to calm down.

Strawman. I never said liberals are communists. Strawman. I never said liberals want to take our guns. Strawman. I just said I disagreed with abortion. Strawman. I never said liberals have no morals. Another note. I just love to see those lovely obscenities on what's supposed to be a rational debate forum.

From what I've read from this thread, you're the only one who has seen it like this. I made it very clear that I did not claim a label without any caveats. So before you make an even bigger idiot out of yourself, read what I have said. So. Claim one more time that I am fulling backing one party. That I'm a blind sheep who doesn't think for himself. Claim one more time that I'm blind for not realizing both parties have faults. Claim one more time that I'm blind for not realizing neither party is perfect. Say how much of an idiot I am for not realizing I need to stand in the middle ground. Correct me on the error of my ways. OR HOW ABOUT ACTUALLY READING MY POSTS?

Get two people to agree that I started this thread with an "insane rant" I dare you.

I would like to point out that Moontanman, in his own admission, identifies as 100% liberal. You haven't addressed anything I've said. This thread is devolving. I'm out.

Did I say I blindly follow conservatives? Where are you getting this from? Hear this Phi? We're Anarchists now. Because be both think being pragmatic is good. You're clearly delusional. Have you ever heard of SpaceX? They're an example of a private sector, which was heavily fought against because they thought it was going to increase the price and lower the quality, that proved this theory wrong dead in it's track. There are examples where the government does better, but by god how can you say "always"? There are many examples against this. So, to quote you, bullshit. No. I'm not. I didn't mention Hitler. Additionally, I was saying Communism failed in general. It succeeded in some areas, credit where credit is due. But it failed in so many more. And no, I don't like kool aid. So apparently following EITHER side(your quote by the way) entirely, is a really stupid idea. Unless you're following the liberal side? Since conservatives are on the wrong side of EVERYTHING, then liberals must be on the right side? Did you even read it? Did it say 100/100 are bad ideas? Really? Are you that blind with anger at this point you didn't even read it all? Which by the way, I'd like to point out, your post is filled with very angry irrational words. You had a knee-jerk reaction, and it's showing. That was more of an American centric ideal. Additionally, since you seem to be arguing from an American centric side anyways, you'd be hard-pressed to prove to me that a majority of conservatives want guns to have absolutely no regulation. You're assuming that we're secretly colluding about what we actually think about guns or something? Stop equating people with different views than you as racist. I am a minority, what am I? Racist against myself? I'll say it. There are racist conservatives. There are also liberal murderers. Shall we play a childish round of the pointing game? At this point you're clearly talking about Republicans, however, you've simply replaced the word with conservatives. So I'm not saying anything. Yes. Because we all know I report to my oligarch boss every morning to get my thoughts. Just like you do. My owners? What are you even talking about now? You've been brainwashed more then I have. That's all I can say. Quick. Run to the antichristian rants. That's the way to prove you're knowledgeable. The same way Hitler was a Christians, and we secretly support him?(Yeah. I checked out your youtube channel. Not really a fan.) Yes. I'm a sheep for saying it after I said it the first time, which was at the beginning of the post. Forgive me, oh Moontanman, for forcing you to read and reply to my post before you read the entire thing. Yes. Because this is about Republicans. Not conservatives to you. It's clear from what you've typed. Your post was an illogical rant, that you posted before even reading everything I read. You've made claims that are ludicrous. You've called me an idiot for blindly following one side and conforming to everything about them. Then called me out for not conforming 100% to them. Then said that 100% of them is wrong and that liberals are on the right side of everything. This post made me literally sigh. I expect this type of thing from emotionally driven people who've been indoctrinated into whatever being challenged. Not you. But, I've been wrong before, and I was wrong. Got rid of Slavery. Founded NASA. Passed laws preventing discrimination. Supported the civil rights movements across the world. Helped Capitalism. Helped destroy the system of living under kings. Helped create democracy. I could carry on, but it's late.

The great filter approaches. Get your ass moving Elon. Actually, it wouldn't. For one, lets assume they tried to bomb the United States. They'd have to use several hundred nuclear bombs....... Just to inconvenience a few people, and possibly kill extremely vulnerable people. https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a25883/north-korea-cant-kill-ninety-percent-of-americans/

Potentially, however, I now suspect not. My reasoning is as follows: Premise 1: Two countries that enter a nuclear war using large-scale nuclear weapons results in Mutually Assured Destruction(MAD). Premise 2: The threat of MAD currently deters countries from entering a nuclear war. Premise 3: Two countries that enter a small-scale nuclear war will use their nuclear weapons on strategic enemy targets. Premise 4: The destruction of all strategic positions in a country will be equated with assured destruction. Premise 5: A country faced with assured destruction will then resort to guaranteeing assured destruction for the enemy through large-scale nuclear weapons. Premise 6: Two countries attempting to guarantee assured destruction for the enemy will result in MAD. Conclusion: Small-scale nuclear weapons will still lead to MAD should they be used between two nuclear capable countries assuming both countries have large-scale nuclear weapons. I'm trying to use Premise/conclusion so my arguments are more organized. I'm not sure if it's helpful or not but there.

I'd rather surgical strikes with nuclear bombs rather than total nuclear destruction with nuclear warheads. That being said, I believe smaller nukes would remove some of the fear of using these destructive weapons. So smaller ones might act as a catalyze of making it easier for fear of using nuclear weapons to correspond with the want to use them.

This is fascinating.

I didn't realize that dictators were conservatives. I also didn't realize they were liberals. Especially since both conservatives and liberals are pretty much against dictatorships. But hey. Dammit. Let's be unreasonable and assume that by conservative views worldwide, I meant that anyone who's resistant to change is a conservative. You're being a moron. Downvote away but it's the truth and I'm going to go back to ignoring you.

We could just start another thread and ask everyone to list what they're conservative on and what they're liberal on.

1-6 were fairly vague and could be applied to pretty much anywhere in the world. Pragmatic, being questionable to change, not exactly believing human nature allows perfect utopian futures, that's all very vague, as Phi pointed out. It's a general concept of being resistant to change. You can be resistant to change in some areas and not resistant to change in others. That's how it is. The rest of the points excluding 12 were just to clear up some common misconceptions, much as iNow did with saying he didn't want to take away all guns, etc. 1-6 were global. And I KNEW before I even posted it someone like you would come along and start associating it with Republicans / Democrats. So I wanted to point out some things just so that it would hopefully deter people like you from trying to turn it into an attack on Republicans. Hence 7-11. But clearly, I underestimated how determined you can be to turn this thread into an attack on Republicans. Kudos. I know. I said I wouldn't respond to people trying to turn this into Republican/Democrat purposefully, but I can't avoid it so there.

When I was a toddler, my parents would show me pictures if I couldn't understand the words.

Not pointing fingers or anything. But, sometimes a blockhead requires bold print and I'm okay with that.

Hence the reason I pointed out I'm not going to bother responding to things pointed at Republicans/Democrat. Edit: 3 minutes after this post, looked like I failed to keep Republicans and Democrats out of it.

Number 1 I mentioned it's just what it personally seems to me. Number 2 the quote doesn't really make much sense without a little bit of context. Two of the other ones are a direct quote from someone else, and I felt it inappropriate to cherry pick which parts of the view I would be quoting to make it seem...... less offensive. Additionally, short of those, the majority of it is about Conservative Views.

Can't imagine why......

Figured it'd be better to just start another thread then go so far off topic.

I doubt I need to point out what made me decide to post this. And another note, I don't consider Republicans as very accurate representations of conservatives. This is virtually copied word for word from what others have told me. But this is why I don't have a problem being half conservative. 1. I'm pragmatic. At its heart, politics should be about making the lives of people better. If an education system sounds good but doesn't help kids learn, what good is it? No matter how good an economic policy sounds today if it turns your city into Detroit over the long term, what good is it? If your stimulus program just adds to the deficit and doesn't actually stimulate the economy, what good is it? To me, it seems like many liberal policies are based on the fact it makes them feel good or bad, rather than if it actually works or not. 2. I believe everyone has great potential. Not everyone can be Einstein, steve jobs, or Babe Ruth, but everyone can be good at something. Abraham Maslow said: "If you plan on being anything less than you are capable of being, you will probably be unhappy the rest of your life." Encouraging people to be their best matters on more than just a human level but as a society. I believe everyone regardless of their sex, religion, or race, has potential to be something special. On the other hand, it seems to me liberalism is encouraging people to fail. So much of modern liberalism is created around teaching people to see themselves as victims, to be dependant on government, and to nurse a sense of grievance against the rest of society because life is unfair. If you're waiting for the government to solve your problems you're going to be waiting a very long time. 3. I don't trust the government. Whether you view government as a "necessary evil" or a "good" will make all the difference in the world on the policies you support. Our government does very few things better than a regulated private sector. It takes longer, it spends more, it's dumber, provides terrible customer service, is difficult to deal with, and for some reason seems to constantly praise bureaucrats for mediocre performances. 4. I'm a student of human nature. I enjoy figuring out what makes people tick. However, it doesn't take Sigmund Freud to conclude that people will work harder for themselves than someone across the country, that people respond to economic incentives, that morals MATTER, and that self-reliance is better than dependency. A utopian future sounds amazing, but if you have to rewrite human nature in order for it to work, I don't believe it will work. Communism wouldn't have worked if different people were in charge of it. Human nature basically says one day someone will take over, and they won't care about the people they're in charge of. 5. I love history. And this quote basically sums it up: " If you crack open a history book once in a while, it's amazing how much you'll learn. If you do, it'll quickly become apparent that capitalism far outstrips every other economic system known to man. You'll also find that as a general rule, the more power that's concentrated in the hands of the government, the worse off the people inevitably seem to be. You'll see that corruption and degeneracy rots societies from within, war will be ever present and most importantly, that freedom, democracy, and prosperity are rare in human history and that wise people should never take those things for granted. The wheels of history turn very slowly, but they do grind civilizations that don't pay attention to their lessons into a very bloody pulp." 6. I believe in the collective wisdom of those who came before me. "Thomas Sowell also spoke for me when he said, "Out of every hundred new ideas ninety-nine or more will probably be inferior to the traditional responses which they propose to replace. No one man, however brilliant or well-informed, can come in one lifetime to such fullness of understanding as to safely judge and dismiss the customs or institutions of his society, for those are the wisdom of generations after centuries of experiment in the laboratory of history." Liberals are heedless, careless and foolish with the past. They call for the overturning of traditions and doctrine that have served us well for hundreds of years based on nothing more than feelings and just shrug off the almost incalculable damage their policies cause. Like an alcoholic who thinks about nothing but where his next drink is coming from, liberals think about nothing other than their feelings in the moment without considering the consequences of their actions." These are the core reasons. Some more points I'd like to point out to correct some common misconceptions. 7. I do not believe I should give every idiot with two hands a gun. I have no problem with guns being regulated from mentally insane people, and there being laws requiring you to register your gun, have a background check, etc. But I also believe in being allowed to have a gun and to use it as I see fit(Target shooting, hunting, etc.) as long as it's legal and moral. That's all I want. 8. I do not hate everyone who is different from me. I have no problem with them. I do however hate it when others are blamed for my own problems. 9. I do not hate immigrants. I have no problem with immigrants. I just think they should do it legally. 10. I do not believe poor people shouldn't be given health coverage. Nor do I believe everyone should have to pay their own health coverage. I have no problem using my taxes to help pay for someone who can't afford this basic thing. However, I do not believe health insurance should be handled by the government. It should be regulated, not owned, by the government. 11. I am not a fascist. I don't believe in having a dictatorship anymore then I believe in communism. And a personal one, for my own personal reason. 12. I am a Christian. I oppose what I consider immoral practices that infringe upon other peoples rights. I don't expect you to have to live under my religion. I don't expect you to have to live under my rules. But I do believe abortion is wrong. And Liberalism is very much against this. There are many things that I like about conservatives and liberals. They each have their own virtues and their own faults. Neither is perfect. We need a combination of advancing in society(liberalism) and not going into something before thinking about it(conservatives). And as a final note, once again, don't even bother arguing against these with "Republicans did this! Republicans did that!" because I will ignore it. Not because I refuse to see the "error of my ways" but because I am not discussing republicans or democrats, I'm discussing liberalism and conservatism.

The memo alleges that the Russia investigation was kickstarted based off of illegally obtained evidence given to the FBI by Democrats. Which is essentially the same thing he's being investigated for. Attempted political sabotage. Additionally, if you say it matters so little, that it's simply an opinion with no actual legal power or point, then why is it such a large controversy over whether to release it or not? If it didn't actually point to anything, prove anything, or really do anything, there'd be very little reason to not release it. The classified things that are in the memo are all related to the source of the investigation of the Russia investigation. I.E. who supplied it, how they obtained it, etc. Those things are classified because they ARE true. They are an actual part of the investigation, meaning that it's not just a written opinion but something that can be used in legal proceedings. Now I don't think it's going to convict anyone or anything like that, but it will seriously undermine the Russia investigation and I don't think it should be released. If the FBI is proven to have used illegally obtained evidence to start a federal investigation the whole thing could go downhill. Trump might as well have a get out of jail free card. So while you may not care if it's released or not, I do. If the Democrats did illegal things I really don't care. It's nothing new to me and Republicans do literally the same thing. However, I would like to see the Russia investigation played out instead of ended based on a legal loophole.