Conservatives v. Liberals/Liberals v. Conservatives

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • spartan933

    Expert
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Aug 21, 2008
    1,157
    36
    Porter County
    So, here is my political rant. I am sure that everyone who reads this will probably disapprove. But, here it goes. I think "Liberals" and "Conservatives" are almost the same people.

    It has become apparent to me in the last 9 years, that when President Bush was in office, "Liberals and/or Democrats" (Same thing to some people here) hated everything Bush did because he was the one doing it.

    Now, we have President Obama in office, and "Conservatives and/or Republicans" (Same thing?) hate everything he does because he is the one doing it.

    Think about it. Both sides really secretly love each other because it gives them something to talk about. No one really researches anything. No one reads or tries to understand both sides of an argument. Conservatives quote Limbaugh and Hannity as the greatest sources alive. And, Liberals quote CNN and MSNBC as reputable news outlets.

    And the worst part of this entire situation is that a large majority of people on both sides of any argument HATE each other and are completely immovable in their beliefs.

    Democrats/Liberals forgot about all the crap that Clinton did when he was President once Bush was elected. And Republicans/Conservatives forgot about all the crap that Bush did once Obama was elected.

    So, when Obama is done after 8 years, will the vicious cycle continue? I think so, but I hope not. Seriously, I think we are screwed.

    Have a good Saturday, I hope I didn't ruin it. I am going to go and get drunk now. :40oz:
     

    melensdad

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 94.7%
    18   1   0
    Apr 2, 2008
    23,984
    77
    Far West Suburban Lowellabama
    The problem with your rant is that Bush was never really a true conservative. His daddy was as bad/worse. But the son was a "neo-Con" not a true conservative. He pissed of the fiscally conservative wing of the party, he pissed off the small government wing of the party too. He was a religious conservative, but that hardly counts as a true conservative.

    Want a real conservative, look to Bob Barr or better yet Ron Paul. Huckabee is not too bad either. But all democrats are not liberals and all republican are not conservatives (take a look at Dick Lugar for a liberal Republican).
     

    CarmelHP

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 14, 2008
    7,633
    48
    Carmel
    The problem with your rant is that Bush was never really a true conservative. His daddy was as bad/worse. But the son was a "neo-Con" not a true conservative. He pissed of the fiscally conservative wing of the party, he pissed off the small government wing of the party too. He was a religious conservative, but that hardly counts as a true conservative.

    Want a real conservative, look to Bob Barr or better yet Ron Paul. Huckabee is not too bad either. But all democrats are not liberals and all republican are not conservatives (take a look at Dick Lugar for a liberal Republican).

    What Bush had going for him was that he wasn't as bad as Gore or Kerry. After Bush I, I said that I would never vote for another Bush and would have withheld my vote, but the Dems nominated foaming at mouth socialists.
     

    msmith103

    Shooter
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Dec 17, 2008
    133
    16
    Hendricks County
    I agree with melensdad. The problem with Obama, and his poll numbers support this, is that he ran a campaign that does not follow how he really is. Liberals are not fiscally responsible but Obama has taken it to the point where even when his VP Bumsky Biden claims that the status quo is unsustainable Obama goes on to push for more spending. Bush was not responsible either with money but no where near the extent that Obama is. Bush kept this country safe after 9/11. Bush treated terrorist like terrorist and not misguided teenagers who need a second chance. There is nothing more disrespectful in my eyes than our president giving constitutional rights to someone who would love to see America as we know it burn to the ground. (The Terrorist) There is plenty more to say but me beating a dead horse will just anger me more than I already get when thinking about the mess this country has gotten itself into.
    :ingo:
     

    Hoosier8

    Master
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    24   0   1
    Jul 3, 2008
    4,961
    113
    Indianapolis
    For both sides you have the true believers, the faithful, the thoughtful, and the angry. The true believers will adhere to their party, no matter what the facts are. The faithful will give the benefit of the doubt until the evidence becomes overwhelming. The thoughtful will weight all issues and come down on what they believe to be true, no matter what the party, and the angry will be against the other party in a very competitive way.

    Many people fell for the promise of ice cream from Obama and many of the people that are often on the fence are already disillusioned. These would be the thoughtful and faithful. Same with Bush. Many conservatives were the true believers, who still defend Bushes every decision, and the faithful, who find themselves uncomfortable with his administrations socialistic bent. The thoughtful weighed everything he did and either supported some decisions and did not support others. The angry just hated him with a vengence.

    For Obama, it is the same, except for one thing. There are fewer angry and more true believers and faithful.

    I tend to go between thoughtful and faithful. I tend to be conservative so tend to more fully support a conservative candidate. I also try to look behind the propaganda. That is one of the things that the Bush's opposition did not react very well too, or in other words, very poor propaganda. Obama's team is much better at it. For a thoughtful voter, there was not much of a choice this last election. You had to choose from bad or worse, both of which you could not be sure which way they would truely govern. Both were political animals, one too long in Washington, where you have to sell your soul to stay, and the other, born from the putrid system of Chicago politics, now brought to the White House.

    Hopefully we will have some kind of a defined choice this next election.

    So in summary, you are only talking about the true believers and not addressing everyone else.
     

    flatlander

    Master
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    18   0   0
    May 30, 2009
    4,184
    113
    Noblesville
    The problem with your rant is that Bush was never really a true conservative. His daddy was as bad/worse. But the son was a "neo-Con" not a true conservative. He pissed of the fiscally conservative wing of the party, he pissed off the small government wing of the party too. He was a religious conservative, but that hardly counts as a true conservative.

    Want a real conservative, look to Bob Barr or better yet Ron Paul. Huckabee is not too bad either. But all democrats are not liberals and all republican are not conservatives (take a look at Dick Lugar for a liberal Republican).
    You pretty much hit all the reasons why the current bunch are so demonized by not only the media but each other. Another reason for not voting a straight ticket no matter what.
    Bob
     

    antsi

    Expert
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Nov 6, 2008
    1,427
    38
    You need a third category: I am mad at Obama and Bush for the same reasons.

    Bush was the worst spendaholic president in the history of the United States. Obama is projected to be worse. Between the two of them, they have essentially bankrupted the country.

    I do agree that one of the major barriers to addressing this problem is the entrenched party faithful on both sides. They are both so addicted to their own dogma and their self-righteous anger they can no longer think - even to do simple math like the national debt. All they care about is winning petty victories over the other party.

    I have been a Republican for most of my voting life. They kept saying that deep down they were committed to fiscal responsibility, and like a battered wife letting her lowlife husband come back one more time, I kept believing them.
     

    redneckmedic

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    16   0   0
    Jan 20, 2009
    8,429
    48
    Greenfield
    When IGW and I went on our Roadtrip to Texas we had XM radio and actually listened to The American LEFT station to try to listen to there side of the views... it actually made us angry and for safety reasons we turned it back to the Laugh USA and other talks radio. The views were so ridiculous and so far out there on the warm touch feely BS that we couldn't stand it. With that experiance alone, I disagree. And BTW, I do the research I watch FOX listen to Rush and debate on INGO, thats enough info for me.... ;)
     

    SavageEagle

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Apr 27, 2008
    19,568
    38
    Since I'm drinking I don't feel like reading every post so I will just answer the OP with my own :twocents:. My response in BLUE.

    So, here is my political rant. I am sure that everyone who reads this will probably disapprove. But, here it goes. I think "Liberals" and "Conservatives" are almost the same people.
    Some yes, all, no.

    It has become apparent to me in the last 9 years, that when President Bush was in office, "Liberals and/or Democrats" (Same thing to some people here) hated everything Bush did because he was the one doing it.
    Uh, no. We free people's (I.E. Conservatives, Independents, Constutionalists, etc) were very much opposed to the things Bush and the liberal controlled Congress were doing and we were pretty vocal, albeit unorganized, about it. Also recognize that a lot of the bills and laws and such instituted under Bush were the doings of CONGRESS more than Bush. Did I agree with Operation Iraqi Freedom? Yes. Did I agree with the Patriot Act? No. I LOVED what John Bolton did for us in the UN. (Bush appointee) I also believe Bush appointed a good SCOTUS Judge. I very much was vocal about his handling of Katrina too.

    Now, we have President Obama in office, and "Conservatives and/or Republicans" (Same thing?) hate everything he does because he is the one doing it.
    He's not the only one doing it. You make it sound like it's all about obamatard and it's not. They are ALL to blame and you need to understand that. The Bailouts, the government intrusion into the free market, the Fed's overstepping their legal obligations, the fact that the people appointed to the UN are disregarding US Sovernty in favor of a One World Governing body.... These are the things we are opposed to. Regardless who's in office.

    Think about it. Both sides really secretly love each other because it gives them something to talk about. No one really researches anything. No one reads or tries to understand both sides of an argument. Conservatives quote Limbaugh and Hannity as the greatest sources alive. And, Liberals quote CNN and MSNBC as reputable news outlets.
    I think we do plenty of research and when we're wrong someone does research to correct us. So I'm not sure where you came up with that at. Also, I personally do try to understand the other side of things. Unfortunately, when you can't find truth or fact to uphold the other's arguement, it's easy to dismiss. I don't quote Limbaugh or Hannity or Beck or whoever for anything. Sorry, they are not MY voice. I am my own voice. Period. Apparently those scum-sucking douche bags in Washington aren't speaking for me neither...

    And the worst part of this entire situation is that a large majority of people on both sides of any argument HATE each other and are completely immovable in their beliefs.
    I don't hate anyone. It's their right to be stupid and I respect that. :) Seriously though, I do hate anyone trying to enslave me and the one's I love. That is something I will not tolerate and trust in God to teach me to forgive them because I don't think I can.

    Democrats/Liberals forgot about all the crap that Clinton did when he was President once Bush was elected. And Republicans/Conservatives forgot about all the crap that Bush did once Obama was elected.
    I haven't forgotten any of the :bs: they have done and I never will. Even if Bush had been the perfect President except signing the Patriot Act into law, I'd still hated his guts.

    So, when Obama is done after 8 years, will the vicious cycle continue? I think so, but I hope not. Seriously, I think we are screwed.
    See below.

    Have a good Saturday, I hope I didn't ruin it. I am going to go and get drunk now. :40oz:
    I too shall go back to drinking my Miller Chill ASAP. :cheers:

    Well. I agree with the "we're screwed " part.

    Yes, we are all screwed. :+1: Unless the People wake up to the tyranny they have been living with all their lives. That is, IF people can be unindoctrinated....:twocents:
     

    spartan933

    Expert
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Aug 21, 2008
    1,157
    36
    Porter County
    ..........Want a real conservative, look to Bob Barr or better yet Ron Paul. Huckabee is not too bad either. But all democrats are not liberals and all republican are not conservatives (take a look at Dick Lugar for a liberal Republican).

    I don't disagree with you on Huckabee. I don't agree with him on everything, but he has a way about discussing various issues that is respectful and he seems to consider all parties views. I like that about him. He's a good guy.
     

    spartan933

    Expert
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Aug 21, 2008
    1,157
    36
    Porter County
    When IGW and I went on our Roadtrip to Texas we had XM radio and actually listened to The American LEFT station to try to listen to there side of the views... it actually made us angry and for safety reasons we turned it back to the Laugh USA and other talks radio. The views were so ridiculous and so far out there on the warm touch feely BS that we couldn't stand it. With that experiance alone, I disagree. And BTW, I do the research I watch FOX listen to Rush and debate on INGO, thats enough info for me.... ;)

    There are left leaning stations in this country? I live right by Chicago and the closest I can get to left leaning is NPR. Besides, I listen to WLS most of the time. Mancow and Roe Conn.

    I am glad you do the research. But, I would guess that the majority of people that watch either CNN, MSNBC, or FOXNEWS, don't research or check things out. My problem is with both sides. As it was cited previously, the FAITHFUL, not the THOUGHTFUL. I can deal with the THOUGHTFUL.
     

    photoshooter

    Expert
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Jul 6, 2009
    933
    16
    Indianapolis
    Just to throw this discussing into a 90 degree turn... combine three things: Glenn Beck, the Fourth Turning, and a smiley face with little black mustache.

    (Liberals are really "Progressives" ... but what is a progressive?)

    1. Watch or listen to Glenn Beck for a while... we have people in power in our govt - both sides of the aisle - who are trying to transform this country's govt and economy into a more progressive vision. Becks on it... he's a bit too close to the "wacky conspiracy" angle - but he's barking up the right trees.

    2. The Fourth Turning is a history book... if you get it, skip the middle (Part 2 of the book - it's dry & boring history). Definitely read parts One and Three. The authors examine a pattern of great strife in history. They focus primarily on US history, but they do draw parallels throughout world history.

    Basically, there are four waves in history, constantly repeating.

    A High or Rebuilding
    An Awakening
    An Unraveling or decline
    A Crisis or strife

    According to the pattern the Crisis or the fourth turnings in US History have been the Revolutionary War... The Civil War... WWII and now this mess. Look back at history, and you can see the pattern - they're spaced in a fairly similar time frame as well.

    Basically Bush to Obama is the switch over from third turning (Unraveling) to fourth turning (Crisis). According to the authors we have some major stuff ahead of us in our country that will probably reshape it in a major way.

    3. That smiley face... it's on the cover of Jonah Goldberg's Liberal Fascism. It's a great read. As I read through the first few chapters, I kept drawing parallels between the fascists of Mussolini's rise to power and Obama.



    Problem is, Goldberg wrote the book when Hillary was the soon to be Dem Nominee. Obama was barely on the radar when the book was in process. But, don't worry, Goldberg added a chapter on him in the paperback version. :)

    Liberal Fascism is scholarly, but still a great read. It's out in large paperback and worth the dollars it costs to showcase how far from the Constitution the political system in our country has moved.

    It showcases how the progressives (like Hillary declared herself to be) have adopted the main ideas of the fascist movement as embodied by Il Duce (based largely on Marxism - and then corrupted by the nazi's)... as George Carlin said, they've put a "happy face" on Fascism.

    My lib friends are rebelling at this new label of fascist (they thought they had moved the fascist label far over to cover the right), but the parallels are plain when you compare them to Mussolini's brand of fascism and skip Hitler (he corrupted fascism with insanity). The progressives of today just have a new spin machine going... putting a new happy face on it.

    Problem is, the repubs started to adopt their own version of Happy Face Fascism under both Bush presidents... sort of "progressive light" in 43's "compassionate conservative plans." The Repubs adopted a "nanny state" mentality as well ... but theirs was smaller than the progressives' version on the other side.

    So, where do we go from here? IMO - and this is only my opinion -- don't count on this getting solved like it was with Clinton. We probably won't get a whopping switch in the Congress - and have our current president just sit back and coast. Obama is NOT Clinton. He's a fighter, and we'll have to keep fighting at the ballot box to keep the progressives in check.

    We need to start getting good constitutionalists into seats in the House and the Senate... don't worry about party affiliation. If they are constitutionalists, and willing to filter all laws through the Constitution as it is written, I'll vote for - and work my tail off for any candidate - no matter what side of the aisle.

    On this forum, it's easy to find a common constitutional thread... and the 2A debate is easily wrapped up in a constitional approach. We have to avoid falling into traps on the other hot button moral issues... That's the tough part. I know too many Right to Lifers that will not vote FOR the best candidate, because that candidate isn't hardcore RtL on all votes. So the stay home or don't vote in that race.

    We can't do that any more. We have to vote for the BEST candidate... not just the one who agrees 100% with the hot button issues.

    No more "vote for the third party" cause I don't like so and so's record on my pet issue. I'm going full tilt for whichever candidate is most likely to win who has the strongest record on constitutional issues.

    We'll probably have some tight election cycles... trading a few seats back and forth. If the Fourth turning guys are right, we've either got a major world changing event ahead - or we're going to be fighting politically for about a generation.
     
    Last edited:

    SavageEagle

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Apr 27, 2008
    19,568
    38
    I'll have to check those out. Thanks for piling on more research for me to do! :p If anyone's got a copy I could borrow, I'll trade my "The Truth About Self-Protection" by Massad Ayoob for you to read! :D
     

    photoshooter

    Expert
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Jul 6, 2009
    933
    16
    Indianapolis
    Sorry... I'm still working through Goldberg's book. I'm underlining and making notes, so I'm going slow.

    PS: Library cards still work. :) <---- No Mustache on that smiley!
     

    photoshooter

    Expert
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Jul 6, 2009
    933
    16
    Indianapolis
    I just went back and re-read the end of the Fourth Turning (written in 1997) that explains the likely roles in the coming challenges that the various generation now face.

    I'm in my mid forties... I'm just past the tail end of where the Fourth Turning authors cut off the generation of the Boomers.

    The boomers and the millennials, according to the authors will be the driving forces behind the current unraveling. Sounds familiar, doesn't it!?

    For our generation (in between the boomers and the millennials - basically anyone in their late twenties to mid forties) the authors have this advice:

    {We} must step forward as the {world's} repair generator, the one stuck with fixing all of the messes and cleaning up the debris left by others... {our} gravest responsibility will be to ensure that there can indeed be a new high/rebuilding...

    From now on, through the end of the fourth turning, {we} will constantly rise in power... {and} will be largest potential voting block...

    If {we} play our script weakly, old boomers could wreak a horrible apocalypse, and {our} demagogues could impose a mind numbing authoritarianism ... if {we} play our script cleverly, but safely, however, a new golden age will be {our} hard won reward.

    This darn book is one of those historical predictors. It's got enough vagueness to be taken with a grain of salt, but enough investigation into historical patterns that I can see the unfolding of the pattern again.

    I need to go through this book again...
     

    El Cazador

    Expert
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 17, 2009
    1,100
    36
    NW Hendricks CO
    I'll certainly agree the Republicans running the party have decided that the power that came from supporting a "lite progressive" agenda has a very nice taste, and are very reticent towards giving up the power. Which doomed them in the 04 to 08 years. The old quote about "absolute power" corrupting absolutely is plainly shown to be true. Conservatives (ones true to Conservative values, as defined by Reagan and others) would put the Rule of Law, including the Constitution, back into the forefront of governing. At least that's what the people out in front are saying, and I'm optimistic enough to believe them.

    I am curious what a "constitutional Democrat" is. Do they believe in the Constitution, or what they envision it could be, if they could change it to suit their ideals? The moniker "constitutional Democrat" almost seems like an oxymoron, as they have been promoting a "progressive" (Socialist/Marxist/Maoist/Communist/Collectivist) ideal since they've been a viable political force. (I like Mark Levin's term of Statist, since it encompasses all of the Collectivist ideologies in a simple definition), and none of their agenda has much to do with the Constitution.

    The originator of this thread also identified Bob Barr and Ron Paul as Conservatives. I beg to differ, they are Libertarians. While Conservatives and Libertarians share a number of "planks" in their ideology, they differ considerably in a greater number of the "planks". Do not confuse them, please.

    Savage Eagle, PM me your phone number and next time I'm in Plainfield, I'll loan you my copy of Levin's Liberty and Tyranny, a Conservative Manifesto to read, if you wish. It's a concise book, well written by a true Constitutional lawyer, with footnotes and citations throughout the book.
     
    Top Bottom