What is a "real" conservative or "real" liberal?
- Thread starter Jericho9mm
- Start date
***Pointer's Political Profile:***
Overall: 80% Conservative, 20% Liberal
Social Issues: 75% Conservative, 25% Liberal
Personal Responsibility: 75% Conservative, 25% Liberal
Fiscal Issues: 100% Conservative, 0% Liberal
Ethics: 50% Conservative, 50% Liberal
Defense and Crime: 100% Conservative, 0% Liberal
NOTE: I don't think the quiz properly defines a liberal who is not honest with his answers.
Re-read the whole thread... The liberals are evasive, as always...
Overall: 80% Conservative, 20% Liberal
Social Issues: 75% Conservative, 25% Liberal
Personal Responsibility: 75% Conservative, 25% Liberal
Fiscal Issues: 100% Conservative, 0% Liberal
Ethics: 50% Conservative, 50% Liberal
Defense and Crime: 100% Conservative, 0% Liberal
NOTE: I don't think the quiz properly defines a liberal who is not honest with his answers.
Re-read the whole thread... The liberals are evasive, as always...
My answers, as a quasi conservative libertarian with an eye toward the future:
Protecting the environment is a primary social responsibility we have, regardless of how it effects businesses.
Not exactly
True
The environment is where we live. The question is only HOW to protect the environment, not SHOULD we protect it. True.
Immigration policies
Should be less strict. Immigrants enhance this country.
Should be more strict. Too many people enter illegally.
The policies do not allow illegal entry. The policies DEFINE illegal entry. Legal immigrants are good for this country and have an incredible amount of BS to deal with. Illegals are illegal and our policies should be enforced in regards to them. So: the policies should be less strict, while the ENFORCEMENT more strict. A.
Gay marriage
Should be legal and given the same rights as heterosexual marriage.
Should not be legal. Marriage is between a man and a woman.
Marriage is between a man and woman, but that doesn't mean that property law has to have anything to do with it. If the Fed is going to offer special treatment to one sort of family, they have to offer it to all "families". That's equal protection under the law. Don't like that? Abolish all marriage related law.
Public education could be improved by
Having a voucher system
Revoking No Child Left Behind
The Fed doesn't need to fund any more special interests than it does now. Nor does "No Child" achieve much. No to both.
Affirmative action
Gives minorities and women a level playing field
Is unfair, outdated, and hurts those with the most merit
Why is merit any more "fair" than any other way? Affirmative action is aggregious, obnoxious and unfair, but does it get people off welfare and address the severe inequalities this country was founded under? I don't know the answer, so I'm not voting.
Carrying a gun is:
Taking responsibility for one's own defense, and admirable
Dangerous and sketchy
It isn't necessarily admirable, but it is a good idea.
Some people have less luck than others
False
True
Some people are unlucky. Does it matter?
Social Security:
Is simply a transfer payment that should be replaced by personal accounts
Can easily be fixed by making the rich and employers pay more
Neither. It can be fixed by proper management.
Taxes should be...
Cut to stimulate the economy and give people more of their money back.
Something the rich pay more of. They can afforded.
Neither. US citizens have the biggest defense budget on earth and some of the lowest taxes per person of any first world country. Leave the taxes alone.
It's more important for our country
Reduce the deficit and national debt
To help the poor and helpless
Our government, or our country? The government should be working on deficit and debt. You and I should be taking care of the needy in our communities.
The Fed should be more concerned with
Controllling unemployment
Controlling inflation
They can't directly control employment. So inflation, I guess.
The only social responsibility of a company should be to deliver a profit to its shareholders.
False
True
That isn't social responsibility. Love Canal, Emron; or companies that want to exist past the CEO's retirement? False.
Everyone has a right to health care, even if they can't afford it
False
True
The Hypocratic Oath means that OUR medical community cannot simply ignore the sick. It isn't a right, but it is a social responsibility that ensures public hygenie.
All authority, by its nature, should be questioned
False
True
Of course. That is the basis of our country.
Abortion should be...
Completely legal and available
Restricted, discouraged, or illegal
I'm legislatively conservative, and this is such an undecided conflict in the public mind that it is a moral issue. I don't support legislating morality. Legal, but discouraged.
Military action that defies international law is sometimes justified.
True
False
If it is justified, the court will find for us.
The war in Iraq is justified
True
False
Justified? No. A good idea? Maybe.
The problem with the US justice system is:
Too many plea bargains and loose interpretations of law
Not enough rehabilitation and prisoner's rights
Both. If you propose to eventually let people out of jail, they should be worth making into somewhat useful people, instead of even worse criminals.
The death penalty
Is appropriate in select cases
Is a violation of human rights
Until we stop executing innocent people, it is a violation of THEIR rights.
Protecting the environment is a primary social responsibility we have, regardless of how it effects businesses.
Not exactly
True
The environment is where we live. The question is only HOW to protect the environment, not SHOULD we protect it. True.
Immigration policies
Should be less strict. Immigrants enhance this country.
Should be more strict. Too many people enter illegally.
The policies do not allow illegal entry. The policies DEFINE illegal entry. Legal immigrants are good for this country and have an incredible amount of BS to deal with. Illegals are illegal and our policies should be enforced in regards to them. So: the policies should be less strict, while the ENFORCEMENT more strict. A.
Gay marriage
Should be legal and given the same rights as heterosexual marriage.
Should not be legal. Marriage is between a man and a woman.
Marriage is between a man and woman, but that doesn't mean that property law has to have anything to do with it. If the Fed is going to offer special treatment to one sort of family, they have to offer it to all "families". That's equal protection under the law. Don't like that? Abolish all marriage related law.
Public education could be improved by
Having a voucher system
Revoking No Child Left Behind
The Fed doesn't need to fund any more special interests than it does now. Nor does "No Child" achieve much. No to both.
Affirmative action
Gives minorities and women a level playing field
Is unfair, outdated, and hurts those with the most merit
Why is merit any more "fair" than any other way? Affirmative action is aggregious, obnoxious and unfair, but does it get people off welfare and address the severe inequalities this country was founded under? I don't know the answer, so I'm not voting.
Carrying a gun is:
Taking responsibility for one's own defense, and admirable
Dangerous and sketchy
It isn't necessarily admirable, but it is a good idea.
Some people have less luck than others
False
True
Some people are unlucky. Does it matter?
Social Security:
Is simply a transfer payment that should be replaced by personal accounts
Can easily be fixed by making the rich and employers pay more
Neither. It can be fixed by proper management.
Taxes should be...
Cut to stimulate the economy and give people more of their money back.
Something the rich pay more of. They can afforded.
Neither. US citizens have the biggest defense budget on earth and some of the lowest taxes per person of any first world country. Leave the taxes alone.
It's more important for our country
Reduce the deficit and national debt
To help the poor and helpless
Our government, or our country? The government should be working on deficit and debt. You and I should be taking care of the needy in our communities.
The Fed should be more concerned with
Controllling unemployment
Controlling inflation
They can't directly control employment. So inflation, I guess.
The only social responsibility of a company should be to deliver a profit to its shareholders.
False
True
That isn't social responsibility. Love Canal, Emron; or companies that want to exist past the CEO's retirement? False.
Everyone has a right to health care, even if they can't afford it
False
True
The Hypocratic Oath means that OUR medical community cannot simply ignore the sick. It isn't a right, but it is a social responsibility that ensures public hygenie.
All authority, by its nature, should be questioned
False
True
Of course. That is the basis of our country.
Abortion should be...
Completely legal and available
Restricted, discouraged, or illegal
I'm legislatively conservative, and this is such an undecided conflict in the public mind that it is a moral issue. I don't support legislating morality. Legal, but discouraged.
Military action that defies international law is sometimes justified.
True
False
If it is justified, the court will find for us.
The war in Iraq is justified
True
False
Justified? No. A good idea? Maybe.
The problem with the US justice system is:
Too many plea bargains and loose interpretations of law
Not enough rehabilitation and prisoner's rights
Both. If you propose to eventually let people out of jail, they should be worth making into somewhat useful people, instead of even worse criminals.
The death penalty
Is appropriate in select cases
Is a violation of human rights
Until we stop executing innocent people, it is a violation of THEIR rights.
Last edited:
Chaingunner
New member
on the compass, I'm between Ghandi and Stalin (just left and north of center. leftist authoritarian, basically). On the quiz, it pegs me as a 50/50 kinda guy (tho my overall is 65 conservative, 35 liberal).
I don't know if I agree with either.
As far as real world politics go, I tend to agree more often with the Right, but sometimes I find myself siding with the Left. So far I've only voted Republican.
I hate politics.
edit: on social security: I've read it was supposed to be a temporary measure. Time to cancel it, perhaps?
I don't know if I agree with either.
As far as real world politics go, I tend to agree more often with the Right, but sometimes I find myself siding with the Left. So far I've only voted Republican.
I hate politics.
edit: on social security: I've read it was supposed to be a temporary measure. Time to cancel it, perhaps?
The problem with this thread so far (as I see it), is that no one has used the word "radical" and there are radical people out there, both politicians and people who aren't politicains.
Furthermore, I also think the political scale of conservative to liberal, or the other way round, left to right, is not necessarily a realistic way to see things. That is, the scale is not a straight line with the left or liberal side at one end and the conservative side at the right. Instead, think of it as horseshoe shaped, or better yet, a horseshoe magnet. The two ends that are exactly the opposite are actually close together. Their methods usually end up being the same.
This may or may not still be true but it seems to me that in the past the radical right or fascist element came from street thugs while the radical left came from the intelligentsia, while they both grew in very different environments, though neither sprang from environments in which the common people were well off. None of this has anything to do with guns.
Of course, I may have it all wrong.
Furthermore, I also think the political scale of conservative to liberal, or the other way round, left to right, is not necessarily a realistic way to see things. That is, the scale is not a straight line with the left or liberal side at one end and the conservative side at the right. Instead, think of it as horseshoe shaped, or better yet, a horseshoe magnet. The two ends that are exactly the opposite are actually close together. Their methods usually end up being the same.
This may or may not still be true but it seems to me that in the past the radical right or fascist element came from street thugs while the radical left came from the intelligentsia, while they both grew in very different environments, though neither sprang from environments in which the common people were well off. None of this has anything to do with guns.
Of course, I may have it all wrong.
MeekAndMild
New member
Handy I knew you'd have a different perspective. 
Looking at the orginal title to this
I know for sure I'm a real liberal. I believe folks should be allowed to do what ever the hell the want as long as it doesn't hurt someone else.
I'm extremly radical about this.
I also think the terms liberal and conservative just like Rebublican and Democrat were made so that we could choose sides .... it makes the sheeple comfortable to have 'them' to complain about. As in: we are right and they are what's wrong with everything. It ain't black and white.... no matter how hard 'they' try to convince you of it.
I know for sure I'm a real liberal. I believe folks should be allowed to do what ever the hell the want as long as it doesn't hurt someone else.
I'm extremly radical about this.
I also think the terms liberal and conservative just like Rebublican and Democrat were made so that we could choose sides .... it makes the sheeple comfortable to have 'them' to complain about. As in: we are right and they are what's wrong with everything. It ain't black and white.... no matter how hard 'they' try to convince you of it.
Ohio Annie
New member
A "real" liberal or conservative or handgunner or postage stamp collector is whatever you are. The other guy is the one who isn't the "real" one. this is especially true of postage stamp collectors.
Typical liberal cop-out propaganda.
This is a Conservative principle to which the leaders of the general mass of Liberals NEVER adhere. Witness Ted Kennedy, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Ms. Rodham-Clinton and Diane Feinstein who carries a gun but wants them outlawed... for you and me!
NONE OF THESE PEOPLE HAVE ANY SORT OF PULSE ON THE GENERAL MASSES OF SUFFERING PEOPLE...They just want you to believe they do...
The Conservative has very firm and clear principles that remain strong because they are firmly held inviolate...
The Liberal has lots, and lots, of conflicting "one-size-fits-all" principles that are forever adjustable to any form of "situationitis".
Last edited:
Pointer,
You are one of the specific people I was referencing with your post.
As to Conservatives being in favor of "letting people do whatever they want", you're making a joke, right? Show me the conservatives who don't care who gets "married". Show me the conservatives that supported getting rid of sodomy laws.
You are ridiculous.
You are one of the specific people I was referencing with your post.
As to Conservatives being in favor of "letting people do whatever they want", you're making a joke, right? Show me the conservatives who don't care who gets "married". Show me the conservatives that supported getting rid of sodomy laws.
You are ridiculous.
MeekAndMild
New member
Actually, Handy, the sodomy laws were written by the 'progressives' of the time. They might have been religious fanatics from our perspective, but if we look at the source of modern liberalism we find it came as an offshoot of yankee congregationalist religious practice long before it absorbed marxism.
That is the problem in general with liberal politicians. They go to great lengths to lay out a course of direction for society and a list of things they want to achieve. Trouble is that times change and goals change so we're stuck with a whole lot of redundant laws. In the end a good lazzez-faire form of conservativism is a lot less invasive of rights.
Answering your challenge I'm a conservative but sure I'll go along if Mrs. Meek wants to hold a "marriage" ceremony for our dogs; it still isn't marriage but we can pretend can't we?
Those nasty conservatives are preventing us from getting S.S.I for the dogs even though neither one of them has worked a day in their lives!
That is the problem in general with liberal politicians. They go to great lengths to lay out a course of direction for society and a list of things they want to achieve. Trouble is that times change and goals change so we're stuck with a whole lot of redundant laws. In the end a good lazzez-faire form of conservativism is a lot less invasive of rights.
Answering your challenge I'm a conservative but sure I'll go along if Mrs. Meek wants to hold a "marriage" ceremony for our dogs; it still isn't marriage but we can pretend can't we?
Those nasty conservatives are preventing us from getting S.S.I for the dogs even though neither one of them has worked a day in their lives!
Last edited:
Osborn F. Enready
Moderator
I am most closely associated to libertarian ideals, but I am not a partisan.
I believe our government has been overtaken by a bi-partisan collusion, of criminal intent, leading us away from our Constitution, our states rights, and our individual rights. This bi-partisan collusion I call the bi-partisan conspiracy, and has been going on since at least 1913, though I would say more like since the late 1800's.
Republicans and Democrats have adopted Professor Quigleys view on politics, and instead of being American, they have become globalists selling out our nation, our industry, our lands and our resources including labor as well as our gold, hoping to force an economic depression on the United States so hard, that we will be forced to lower our standard of living, our liberty, and our freedom of speech and association.
Quigleys Book:
http://www.alpheus.org/html/reviews/parapolitics/rev_tragedy_hope.html
I think everyone needs to realize this "stage show" for what it is, and the time for action is growing nearer everyday as we watch our nation degrade to the likes of third world country on an increasing decline.
This isn't Bush's fault, nor Clintons, nor Bush Sr's, nor Reagans, or any other "person" specifically. They are all guilty, as are the corrupt parties that have whittled down and provided the selection for our leadership for the last 156 years and counting. They failed to take their oath seriously, and put Constitution before partisan agenda, and they all suffered from the "ills of party line loyalty", that our first and probably greatest President warned of in his farewell address.
Washingtons Farewell Address:
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/washing.htm
If you read Washingtons farewell address today, you can clearly see that every warning he gave, our leaders ignored once the rights of incorporation were changed, and government/corporate corruption became the most lucrative job in America.
Their first test of power, was prohibition. The second was the creation of the Federal Reserve. The third was the creation of the DEA, OSS (CIA), and the fourth and final grab was the New Deal, coupled with the War and Emergency Powers Act.
There are no more checks and balances, nor any schooling of accurate government history, actions or steps to our current weakened state where states rights are being ignored or outright denied, individual liberties have been removed via the Patriot Act I and II, as well as Executive Order (hence the burgeoning anti-smoking crusade started by Clinton as one small example).
Do any of you even have a clue to how many political parties there even ARE in this country? Most think only two, though some may say six or seven. In actuality, there are over 50.
http://www.politics1.com/parties.htm
So, in summation, I am most affiliated with the largest "third party" option, which is the Libertarians. To me, they are the only political party who addresses American issues first, and foreign policy second. They address our true problems, and though they fall short of representation in past years, they are growing everyday.
Libertarian Party:
http://www.lp.org/
At this time in our nations history, we are more ripe and primed for a third party to take power in the upcoming elections..... my only question is will the people be informed enough to make a truly COMPETENT decision, which means KNOWING ALL YOU CAN ABOUT WHO THERE IS TO VOTE FOR.
Even some fellow officers in the Military, and Sheriffs and Police Organizations agree:
http://www.patriotamerica.com/JackMcLamb/
My hopes are high, but my expectations low. Hopefully, Americans will suprise me.
I believe our government has been overtaken by a bi-partisan collusion, of criminal intent, leading us away from our Constitution, our states rights, and our individual rights. This bi-partisan collusion I call the bi-partisan conspiracy, and has been going on since at least 1913, though I would say more like since the late 1800's.
Republicans and Democrats have adopted Professor Quigleys view on politics, and instead of being American, they have become globalists selling out our nation, our industry, our lands and our resources including labor as well as our gold, hoping to force an economic depression on the United States so hard, that we will be forced to lower our standard of living, our liberty, and our freedom of speech and association.
Quigleys Book:
http://www.alpheus.org/html/reviews/parapolitics/rev_tragedy_hope.html
I think everyone needs to realize this "stage show" for what it is, and the time for action is growing nearer everyday as we watch our nation degrade to the likes of third world country on an increasing decline.
This isn't Bush's fault, nor Clintons, nor Bush Sr's, nor Reagans, or any other "person" specifically. They are all guilty, as are the corrupt parties that have whittled down and provided the selection for our leadership for the last 156 years and counting. They failed to take their oath seriously, and put Constitution before partisan agenda, and they all suffered from the "ills of party line loyalty", that our first and probably greatest President warned of in his farewell address.
Washingtons Farewell Address:
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/washing.htm
If you read Washingtons farewell address today, you can clearly see that every warning he gave, our leaders ignored once the rights of incorporation were changed, and government/corporate corruption became the most lucrative job in America.
Their first test of power, was prohibition. The second was the creation of the Federal Reserve. The third was the creation of the DEA, OSS (CIA), and the fourth and final grab was the New Deal, coupled with the War and Emergency Powers Act.
There are no more checks and balances, nor any schooling of accurate government history, actions or steps to our current weakened state where states rights are being ignored or outright denied, individual liberties have been removed via the Patriot Act I and II, as well as Executive Order (hence the burgeoning anti-smoking crusade started by Clinton as one small example).
Do any of you even have a clue to how many political parties there even ARE in this country? Most think only two, though some may say six or seven. In actuality, there are over 50.
http://www.politics1.com/parties.htm
So, in summation, I am most affiliated with the largest "third party" option, which is the Libertarians. To me, they are the only political party who addresses American issues first, and foreign policy second. They address our true problems, and though they fall short of representation in past years, they are growing everyday.
Libertarian Party:
http://www.lp.org/
At this time in our nations history, we are more ripe and primed for a third party to take power in the upcoming elections..... my only question is will the people be informed enough to make a truly COMPETENT decision, which means KNOWING ALL YOU CAN ABOUT WHO THERE IS TO VOTE FOR.
Even some fellow officers in the Military, and Sheriffs and Police Organizations agree:
http://www.patriotamerica.com/JackMcLamb/
My hopes are high, but my expectations low. Hopefully, Americans will suprise me.
This brings us to a new low...
Until now, I had held you on a slightly higher plain.
In response, I'll explain myself a little better...
Conservatives ASBSOLUTELY do not care what you do behind closed doors.
Conservatives could care less if you want to take a same-sex partner for a night or for the rest of your life.
JUST DON"T BE "IN YOUR FACE" ABOUT IT!
This had "always" been a conservative principle.
"Swing your fist all you want, but your right to do so ends where my nose begins." Actually, it ends when your fist enters my personal space, or imposes itself on my vision or into my thoughts.
This is in fact a very serious conservative principle and if one does not hold with it he is not an Amercian Conservative... He could be any number of things, a fanatic or a despot or and idiot... but he is not a conservative.
And how he votes doesn't automatically qualify him to say he is conservative.
Wanting to conserve a traditional way of life, principles, convention and mores, comes a whole lot closer to a conservative mentality.
I hope that properly clarifies my opinion, and beliefs, and understanding...
That's the best I can do, and if you still think me ridiculous... then so be it.
Clear as mud.
Pointer, when the two gay men were arrested and prosecuted just a few years ago for what they were doing in private, are you saying that no "conservatives" were involved?
When they were found guilty and sentenced, which "conservatives" contributed to their appeals process?
And when the Supreme Court judged that the men were innocent because sodomy laws were an unConstitutional breach of privacy, which "conservative" group hailed this decision as a win for conservative ideals?
You'll pardon me if I find your exciting new definition of social conservatism unfamiliar. I'm sure you have simple answers to the above questions.
Pointer, when the two gay men were arrested and prosecuted just a few years ago for what they were doing in private, are you saying that no "conservatives" were involved?
When they were found guilty and sentenced, which "conservatives" contributed to their appeals process?
And when the Supreme Court judged that the men were innocent because sodomy laws were an unConstitutional breach of privacy, which "conservative" group hailed this decision as a win for conservative ideals?
You'll pardon me if I find your exciting new definition of social conservatism unfamiliar. I'm sure you have simple answers to the above questions.
Weather you like it or not, the mainstream of America really does not want to be bothered with homosexuality. Yet the liberals just love to jam it into everyones faces because of that very reason.
All but one state that has been allowed to vote on gay marriage voted NO.
In Minnesota the DEMOCRATS took away or right to vote it down too, cause they new we would. So who takes whos rights away, seems that works both ways.
Im not afraid to say I don't want it in my church or community, and keep it away from my family! I owe no apology. Gay issues are driven by the liberal media and started by small radical fringe groups anyway.
The democrats have also voted other referendums out from under the people, such as taxes, oh no the dems/liberals don't want the people to have any say in taxes.
The dems/libs have messed up public education so bad in Minneapolis they have 38% drop out rate, but the kids are learning about sexual diversity at least.
The dems have us flying down hill and out of control as far as social welfare programs. You folks think we have a deficit now? HAAAAAA
Wait a little longer, the piper is just gettin ready. Our yearly operating debt is NOTHING compared to all the social DEPENDANCY cases comming in the next 20 years.
It kills me every time a bleeding heart liberal cries about how need illegal aliens to do the work, when city after city is full of stupid and lazy people collecting a free pay check. Oh and they better health care and housing to boot!
That will be the real DEBT!
Thanks to the liberal establishment we no longer pay into a retirment system, its gone. Welfare slops are the order of the day and growing, hell have the kids in California dont have a simple high school diploma.
All but one state that has been allowed to vote on gay marriage voted NO.
In Minnesota the DEMOCRATS took away or right to vote it down too, cause they new we would. So who takes whos rights away, seems that works both ways.
Im not afraid to say I don't want it in my church or community, and keep it away from my family! I owe no apology. Gay issues are driven by the liberal media and started by small radical fringe groups anyway.
The democrats have also voted other referendums out from under the people, such as taxes, oh no the dems/liberals don't want the people to have any say in taxes.
The dems/libs have messed up public education so bad in Minneapolis they have 38% drop out rate, but the kids are learning about sexual diversity at least.
The dems have us flying down hill and out of control as far as social welfare programs. You folks think we have a deficit now? HAAAAAA
Wait a little longer, the piper is just gettin ready. Our yearly operating debt is NOTHING compared to all the social DEPENDANCY cases comming in the next 20 years.
It kills me every time a bleeding heart liberal cries about how need illegal aliens to do the work, when city after city is full of stupid and lazy people collecting a free pay check. Oh and they better health care and housing to boot!
That will be the real DEBT!
Thanks to the liberal establishment we no longer pay into a retirment system, its gone. Welfare slops are the order of the day and growing, hell have the kids in California dont have a simple high school diploma.
Last edited: