interesting assertion - can't be fiscally conservative and socially liberal

Originally Posted by evolved

Your original post was better.

lol...i figured that was a litlle too much as i was talking to you and you're usually pretty calm when it comes to debating online.

Originally Posted by NOVAbimmer

Just looking at the title, it sounds like a republican who's sick of seeing other republicans with that view point vote for a non-republican because of social views.

Watch the vid, he's a Christian beating the drum of god-given rights but putting a money spin on it. It's drivel.

Originally Posted by NFRs2000nyc

Thats the point of his video. Once you legalize abortion to the level liberals want, the next step is having it paid for. Medical weed becomes a "prescription drug" and Sandra Fluke needs it paid for. Everything the liberals want costs money. Now, most of the "social rights" ie gay marriage, abortion, drugs, etc I am for, but I am NOT for their fallout, and there lies the problem.

If you don't agree with the video, you are just delusional.

If you can't see that the video is simplistic, narrow-minded, biased and dogmatic, you are just delusional.

Marijuana is getting paid for one way or another. Legitimizing it and moving the money path out of the shadows and into the light doesn't mean that the govt is going to "make you pay" for someone else's weed.

The religious conservatives in this country know their influence is slipping away. One of their tactics to get what they want is to try to align themselves with fiscal conservatives. If they can't get you to oppose abortion for religious reasons, they'll settle for getting you to oppose it for financial ones.

"Liberal" and "conservative" are broad, often useless labels that are most effective in creating an "us vs them" mentality. And there are plenty of mindless sheep that simply toe the party line.

But in the real world, people often aren't that simple.

Govt: I think there are things the govt is good at, and things that simply have to be done by govt. But I generally think smaller govt is better. More should be done by the private sector.

Taxes: Taxes should be minimized in line with smaller, more efficient, more accountable and results-oriented govt. Redistribution of wealth shouldn't happen. Financial success shouldn't be penalized.

Religion: I believe strongly in the total separation of church and state, and think politicians religious views should be excluded from their decision making.

Welfare: I favor less (but not no) govt welfare, more accountability/higher expectations of able bodied/minded people receiving it, and an increase in private sector help for people in need.

Abortion: I don't believe life begins at conception, so I'm generally pro-choice.

Gay marriage: I think preventing it is discrimination and a civil rights travesty, pure and simple.

Guns: I'd love to get rid of all guns, right after we get rid of all bad people. Until we do, they're here and we have to deal with them rationally, not emotionally.

You can run through the entire list of subjects and you'd find me falling on different "sides" of each. I am "conservative" on some issues, "liberal" on others. Maybe I need my own label, but "delusional" doesn't quite fit.

Originally Posted by mistrzmiasta

lol...i figured that was a litlle too much as i was talking to you and you're usually pretty calm when it comes to debating online.

lol, no worries.

Originally Posted by Xcelratr

Watch the vid, he's a Christian beating the drum of god-given rights but putting a money spin on it. It's drivel.



If you can't see that the video is simplistic, narrow-minded, biased and dogmatic, you are just delusional.

Marijuana is getting paid for one way or another. Legitimizing it and moving the money path out of the shadows and into the light doesn't mean that the govt is going to "make you pay" for someone else's weed.

The religious conservatives in this country know their influence is slipping away. One of their tactics to get what they want is to try to align themselves with fiscal conservatives. If they can't get you to oppose abortion for religious reasons, they'll settle for getting you to oppose it for financial ones.

"Liberal" and "conservative" are broad, often useless labels that are most effective in creating an "us vs them" mentality. And there are plenty of mindless sheep that simply toe the party line.

But in the real world, people often aren't that simple.

Govt: I think there are things the govt is good at, and things that simply have to be done by govt. But I generally think smaller govt is better. More should be done by the private sector.

Taxes: Taxes should be minimized in line with smaller, more efficient, more accountable and results-oriented govt. Redistribution of wealth shouldn't happen. Financial success shouldn't be penalized.

Religion: I believe strongly in the total separation of church and state, and think politicians religious views should be excluded from their decision making.

Welfare: I favor less (but not no) govt welfare, more accountability/higher expectations of able bodied/minded people receiving it, and an increase in private sector help for people in need.

Abortion: I don't believe life begins at conception, so I'm generally pro-choice.

Gay marriage: I think preventing it is discrimination and a civil rights travesty, pure and simple.

Guns: I'd love to get rid of all guns, right after we get rid of all bad people. Until we do, they're here and we have to deal with them rationally, not emotionally.

You can run through the entire list of subjects and you'd find me falling on different "sides" of each. I am "conservative" on some issues, "liberal" on others. Maybe I need my own label, but "delusional" doesn't quite fit.

Thumbs up to all of this. Big time.

Originally Posted by NFRs2000nyc

For example? What social rights?

Originally Posted by Xcelratr

Watch the vid, he's a Christian beating the drum of god-given rights but putting a money spin on it. It's drivel.



If you can't see that the video is simplistic, narrow-minded, biased and dogmatic, you are just delusional.

Marijuana is getting paid for one way or another. Legitimizing it and moving the money path out of the shadows and into the light doesn't mean that the govt is going to "make you pay" for someone else's weed.

The religious conservatives in this country know their influence is slipping away. One of their tactics to get what they want is to try to align themselves with fiscal conservatives. If they can't get you to oppose abortion for religious reasons, they'll settle for getting you to oppose it for financial ones.

"Liberal" and "conservative" are broad, often useless labels that are most effective in creating an "us vs them" mentality. And there are plenty of mindless sheep that simply toe the party line.

But in the real world, people often aren't that simple.

Govt: I think there are things the govt is good at, and things that simply have to be done by govt. But I generally think smaller govt is better. More should be done by the private sector.

Taxes: Taxes should be minimized in line with smaller, more efficient, more accountable and results-oriented govt. Redistribution of wealth shouldn't happen. Financial success shouldn't be penalized.

Religion: I believe strongly in the total separation of church and state, and think politicians religious views should be excluded from their decision making.

Welfare: I favor less (but not no) govt welfare, more accountability/higher expectations of able bodied/minded people receiving it, and an increase in private sector help for people in need.

Abortion: I don't believe life begins at conception, so I'm generally pro-choice.

Gay marriage: I think preventing it is discrimination and a civil rights travesty, pure and simple.

Guns: I'd love to get rid of all guns, right after we get rid of all bad people. Until we do, they're here and we have to deal with them rationally, not emotionally.

You can run through the entire list of subjects and you'd find me falling on different "sides" of each. I am "conservative" on some issues, "liberal" on others. Maybe I need my own label, but "delusional" doesn't quite fit.

I agree with most of this except for the gun opinion. I'm an avid hunter and when possible I enjoy trap/skeet shooting. If you eliminate bad people then why the need to eliminate guns? That's like eliminating bad and drunk drivers and then saying okay eliminate cars. I smell fear (perhaps ignorance?) of a harmless and inanimate object.

I think his point was that it makes as much sense to make all guns illegal as it does to make all bad people illegal.

Originally Posted by VaderDave

I think his point was that it makes as much sense to make all guns illegal as it does to make all bad people illegal.

that's what i think also. anyways i agree with him as well.

Originally Posted by bimmerfan08

I agree with most of this except for the gun opinion. I'm an avid hunter and when possible I enjoy trap/skeet shooting. If you eliminate bad people then why the need to eliminate guns? That's like eliminating bad and drunk drivers and then saying okay eliminate cars. I smell fear (perhaps ignorance?) of a harmless and inanimate object.

I almost didn't mention guns because I knew someone would fixate on that one point and this discussion would get completely off track.

This is not a gun thread and I'm not going to turn it into one. We're not exactly short on those.

I listed all that crap just to illustrate myself as an example of a person that doesn't fit neatly into a conservative or liberal bucket. If you and I only disagree on that one point, I'd say you're the same.

That's what this thread is about.

This guy is full of sh*t.

Originally Posted by NFRs2000nyc

Yea, and I just split the atom. The guy who advocates for unions is fiscally conservative.

Look at you - totally missing the point.

Again.

Some really good posts and discussion in this thread. OT, I am proud.

His broad statement about liberalism and conservatism is accurate. However, for example if the legalization of marijuana when added costs of government oversight cost the tax payers less than the war on marijuana than it would be fiscally conservative to actually have marijuana legalized.

Where life begins aside, if abortions help population control and for "entertainment purposes only" we assume the majority of people getting abortions are uneducated and/or people who are currently unfit for the role of parenthood we can only assume it would be less harsh on the tax payers to NOT have another mouth on the government t!t.

Fiscally conservative in my mind should always equal less taxes on the American people.

Lastly, I don't think him talking about abortions has anything to do with his religion, one can easily not have a religion but believe life starts at conception.

Damn I got rolled big time.

Originally Posted by 'busa

This guy is full of sh*t.

OF COURSE he is.....

Originally Posted by Green_Shine

His broad statement about liberalism and conservatism is accurate. However, for example if the legalization of marijuana when added costs of government oversight cost the tax payers less than the war on marijuana than it would be fiscally conservative to actually have marijuana legalized.

Where life begins aside, if abortions help population control and for "entertainment purposes only" we assume the majority of people getting abortions are uneducated and/or people who are currently unfit for the role of parenthood we can only assume it would be less harsh on the tax payers to NOT have another mouth on the government t!t.

Fiscally conservative in my mind should always equal less taxes on the American people.

Lastly, I don't think him talking about abortions has anything to do with his religion, one can easily not have a religion but believe life starts at conception.

Agreed on all points, drug taxes will be huge. Most abortions are from would-be unfit mothers. I'm all for abortion, but I do believe that "life" begins at conception...I'm not religious in the slightest but I see "life" as a scientific event.

Originally Posted by Green_Shine

Lastly, I don't think him talking about abortions has anything to do with his religion, one can easily not have a religion but believe life starts at conception.

I can understand how you'd think that, if you stopped watching at 2:05 or 2:39.

Originally Posted by bimmerfan08

Damn I got rolled big time.

Originally Posted by Act of God

Agreed on all points, drug taxes will be huge. Most abortions are from would-be unfit mothers. I'm all for abortion, but I do believe that "life" begins at conception...I'm not religious in the slightest but I see "life" as a scientific event.

Can you cite a source for that claim? Or is it just your impression?

can't, or wont?

I never met anyone who claimed to be a fiscal liberal. Stupid labels are stupid.