Political Demographic split of CE&P

[LaloGS]

So, where do the log cabin crew fit into all of this?

Obviously they are self hating fags, who are so confused about their own agenda they promote a lunatic administration as the only way to go.

Remember the SS recruited Jews to help convince other Jews to turn themselves in for shipment to the camps. When all the Jews in hiding were gone to the camps, the SS then sent the Jews who had helped them accomplish their goal.

 

[iman]

iman, if you look at how he spins things, under the guise of authoritarianism, and then how he rewords things to show what he had spun, all while giving a backhanded criticism of liberalism, then one can see how the counter-argument could go. The only reason I would have to wait a long time is because no one on her defense team around here can argue worth a shit; is that the case?

He doesn't spin things, he just makes them up. Absurd assertions are not worth arguing about, it simply lends credibility to the assertions.

Perhaps the poster could argue on behalf of his beliefs; maybe guns for everybody, drugs for everybody, no taxes for anybody or no government spending for anything except national defense, then there might be something to discuss.

 

[PER4MER]

Obviously they are self hating fags, who are so confused about their own agenda they promote a lunatic administration as the only way to go.

You took that right from the LCR's masthead, didn't you?

 

[Sausy]

I was fully awake, sir.

Well,touchy!If I wanted to be popular here I'd vote liberal outright...but i really do not subscribe to either the liberal wing or conservative wing.You certainly are no conservative in your postings.Neither is Mattie.Am I to believe you'll be casting your vote for Giuliani or Romney,who won't be getting mine?I was trying to be humorous,not sarcastic or spiteful...but I apologize if you took it the wrong way.

 

[RandomAccess]

I can't vote. I'm fiscally conservative and socially liberal. I don't quite fit.

Yeah. . . you're almost as liberal as GWB. I think you're relatively safe checking "conservative."

 

[Centexfarmer]

But coward Bush isn't a conservative, he's a reactionary authoritarian who deserted (having walked off the field of battle in time of war), and he spent the nation dry with his insane wars and tax cuts for the hyper-wealthy. AFAIK, that's not classic conservatism. Maybe you need a "wingnut extremist" option, which I suspect, if posters here were honest (HA HA!!!), would be the dominant stripe. And while many of the so-called "conservatives" around here tropt out their bone fides of "fiscal conservative," neither their political choices nor their political views support that claim. I mean, they an "claim" to be conservative, but they can also "claim" to be Mary Poppins -- claiming doesn't make it true. Indeed, I would consider myself "conservative" because I favor a balanced budget and ruthlessly disciplined spending.

 

[star-warrior]

That was a hoot!

So, which was Jack?

 

[letme]

LMAO Cent,,,you are so mean & funny

 

[RandomAccess]

I still wonder if Alfie is supposed to be Crawford or Davis!

 

[Centexfarmer]

Me thinks Davis.

 

[NickCole]

Well,touchy!If I wanted to be popular here I'd vote liberal outright...

Wow, so you're really courageous not voting liberal outright.

Very impressive.

but i really do not subscribe to either the liberal wing or conservative wing.

The OP question isn't which wing we subscribe to, it asks if we are conservative or liberal.

Liberal and conservative are not wings, they're one's principles, philosophy.

But being a follower is typical of Americans today. So of course almost everybody in this thread answered as if the question was which Party do you follow. I've never been any good at following.

My political philosophy, my principles, are not defined by the Republican Party or the Democratic Party or by a distorted propagandistic definition of conservative or liberal that suits Karl Rove's political agenda and campaign strategy. You can conform yourself to that if you want; it's not for me. I use a classic definition and consider my own principles, not those of a current Party platform.

You certainly are no conservative in your postings.

Why? Because I criticize BushRepublicans?

BushRepublicans are not conservative.

As for me, in college I was a liberal. Today I tend to be conservative.

Am I to believe you'll be casting your vote for Giuliani or Romney,who won't be getting mine?

Neither Giuliani nor Romney are conservative.

In fact of any Republican you could choose to name they're especially bizarre. They're both all over the map. Their records as Mayor and Governor do not align with what they say they stand for now that they're running for President. Both Giuliani and Romney are utterly unprincipled men.

I was trying to be humorous,not sarcastic or spiteful...but I apologize if you took it the wrong way.

Why would you apologize if I took it the wrong way?

 

[lancelva]

When the poll uses "liberal," shouldwe infer that as the classical definition of liberalism? Or is it the contemporary definition?

 

[Sausy]

When the poll uses "liberal," shouldwe infer that as the classical definition of liberalism? Or is it the contemporary definition?

I would think Random Access meant contemporary liberal,but then again,I had it wrong in this thread before,apparently.

 

[Centexfarmer]

When the poll uses "liberal," shouldwe infer that as the classical definition of liberalism? Or is it the contemporary definition?

I would hope that it's the classical definition.

 

[chance1]

I can't vote. I'm fiscally conservative and socially liberal. I don't quite fit.

no

u don't fit at all

here anyway

 

[chance1]

Wow, so you're really courageous not voting liberal outright.

Very impressive.




The OP question isn't which wing we subscribe to, it asks if we are conservative or liberal.

Liberal and conservative are not wings, they're one's principles, philosophy.

But being a follower is typical of Americans today. So of course almost everybody in this thread answered as if the question was which Party do you follow. I've never been any good at following.

My political philosophy, my principles, are not defined by the Republican Party or the Democratic Party or by a distorted propagandistic definition of conservative or liberal that suits Karl Rove's political agenda and campaign strategy. You can conform yourself to that if you want; it's not for me. I use a classic definition and consider my own principles, not those of a current Party platform.




Why? Because I criticize BushRepublicans?

BushRepublicans are not conservative.

As for me, in college I was a liberal. Today I tend to be conservative.




Neither Giuliani nor Romney are conservative.

In fact of any Republican you could choose to name they're especially bizarre. They're both all over the map. Their records as Mayor and Governor do not align with what they say they stand for now that they're running for President. Both Giuliani and Romney are utterly unprincipled men.





Why would you apologize if I took it the wrong way?

r u really suggesting ur conservative?

really?



and for ur info, Karl Rove is gonzo

gone

 

[Centexfarmer]

For the record, I voted Liberal because there weren't any other choices.

I really like to think of myself as a "Progressive."

I feel that "social conservatives" are an impediment to progress every where, but I also feel that "social liberals" can be just as dangerous.

I do believe in "less government," while at the same time believe that there should be a certain degree of protections from those who would exploit those who are "less amongst us."

Government IS NOT the answer to all of problems, any more than privatization, and corporate welfare is the answer to a free democracy.

Perhaps one day I'll come out of the closet and announce that I'm a Liberal or Conservative Libertarian.

 

[Centexfarmer]

 

[RandomAccess]

When the poll uses "liberal," shouldwe infer that as the classical definition of liberalism? Or is it the contemporary definition?

Go with your heart, honey.

 

[Kulindahr]

^If you are waiting for someone to argue that Clinton really approves of prostitution, wants to legalize drugs, is opposed to children's health care and is opposed to capitalism, you will wait for a long time.

By the way, "expanding government" translates to "helping poor (black) people" in reactionary speak.

She is opposed to capitalism; she favors what used to be called "industrial policy", i.e. setting a goal and deciding which industries are to be encouraged to flourish and which to fail in pursuit of that. Rather than organize the economy around the idea of free choice, or even prosperity, she's suggested it be organized around "climate change".

Your bigoted insult's naked arrogance needs no reply; pointing out what it is will do.