Hello:

What did Barry Goldwater say?? ".. extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! ...moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue!"

Dude! He's da man! Uhhhh. Isn't he the father of the modern right wing?? I think so.

Besides, one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter. Did the Vietnam war end sooner because of the Weathermen? Was even ONE life saved by their actions?? Maybe.

Do I support civil disobedience - even NON civil disobedience to make my point? I do. In fact, I view dissent as the highest form of patriotism. But, that's just me (and our founders, of course).

Was Liddy's crime high minded?? No, he was CHEATING!!

excon

Quote:

---

Was even ONE life saved by their actions??

---

Don't know of any lives saved .I do know that Brian V. McDonnell a police officer was killed by their bombing and and Robert Fogarty another officer was severely wounded including loss of vision.

I know they plotted to put a terror nail bomb designed to kill and maim at a Fort Dix event . That blew up in their faces. 3 of them died in that explosion.

I do know that they attacked Brinks Guards close to where I live killing two police officers, Edward O'Grady and Waverly Brown, and a Brinks guard, Peter Paige.

So no ;I don't think they saved any lives . They were terrorist murderers or attempted murderers... no different than Klansmen torching black churches or abortion clinic bombers .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello:

What did Barry Goldwater say???? ".. extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! ...moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue!"

Dude! He's da man! Uhhhh. Isn't he the father of the modern right wing??? I think so.

Besides, one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter. Did the Vietnam war end sooner because of the Weathermen? Was even ONE life saved by their actions??? Maybe.

Do I support civil disobedience - even NON civil disobedience to make my point? I do. In fact, I view dissent as the highest form of patriotism. But, that's just me (and our founders, of course).

Was Liddy's crime high minded???? No, he was CHEATING!!!!

excon

---

Ex.. thank you for saying this. I couldn't agree with you more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

They were terrorist murderers or attempted murderers....no different than Klansmen torching black churches or abortion clinic bombers .

---

Hello again, tom:

Yeah, war is hell... People get hurt...

However, if you put the Weathermen's actions in the context of the Vietnam war, you might reach a different conclusion.

You speak of 3 or 4 dead people... Yes, that's tragic... But you, of course, don't mention the 58,000 boys who got hurt in Vietnam - no, who got KILLED and DIDN'T come home. Then there were the 150,000 who got maimed! Did you know any of those boys?

This was a needless war, carried on for political purposes. I remember. Day after day they would show on TV, the dead Americans on the battlefield. Then they'd show our government trying to decide what shape the table should be at the peace talks??

WHAT SHAPE THE TABLE SHOULD BE, WHILE AMERICAN BOYS DIED?? God Bless the Weathermen.

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Merris

Like I said before. Isolationist.

---

LOL, how does that make me "isolationist?" You guys like to throw labels like that around with no basis, and it’s especially funny after hearing the left scream, rant, rage and ramble on throughout the Bush administration about us meddling in the affairs of other nations. But I get it, when the left isn’t busy intimidating others with their intolerant views, changing the law and social landscape by judicial fiat and trying to silence conservatives they’re busy looking for validation and approval of their guilt-driven ideology. I don’t need the approval of a bunch of “progressive” Europeans to boost my ego. That makes me independent, not isolationist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

You guys like to throw labels like that around with no basis

---

Who's throwing out labels with no basis such as "socialist" or "terrorist" or "Arab" or have even yelled "kill him"??

Btw, Adam Smith who wrote the bible of modern capitalism (The Wealth of Nations) said this: "It is reasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense not only in proportion to their revenue, but in something more than that proportion."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

Who's throwing out labels with no basis such as "socialist" or "terrorist" or "Arab" or have even yelled "kill him"??

---

Wondergirl, the lady that called Obama and “Arab” was rebuffed by McCain. There is NO evidence that anyone ever yelled “kill him” at a McCain rally and the Secret Service investigation concluded it never happened. As for someone yelling “terrorist,” the outraged crowds can’t seem to pinpoint that one either. Where’s the proof?

As for the “socialist” charge, what else would you call Obama’s plan to redistribute wealth, what else should we call the vision Obama has been working on his “entire adult life to help build an America where economic justice is being served?” What else should we call Obama’s plan for health care, universal national service and "restoring fairness to the economy?" It sounds a hell of a lot like socialism to me. And for that matter, what about his now reportedly confirmed membership in the socialist New Party?

Quote:

---

Btw, Adam Smith who wrote the bible of modern capitalism (The Wealth of Nations) said this: "It is reasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense not only in proportion to their revenue, but in something more than that proportion."

---

As if that’s not the case now?

But of course Smith was being very specific about for which the rich should pay... in this case it was house-rents:
Adam Smith - An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations - The Adam Smith Institute

Quote:

---

As for the “socialist” charge, what else would you call Obama's plan to redistribute wealth, what else should we call the vision Obama has been working on his “entire adult life to help build an America where economic justice is being served?” What else should we call Obama's plan for health care, universal national service and "restoring fairness to the economy?" It sounds a hell of a lot like socialism to me. And for that matter, what about his now reportedly confirmed membership in the socialist New Party?

---

He also has a more radical left voting record then the only confirmed admitted socialist member of the Senate... Bernie Sanders (Vt.)(so does Biden for that matter . )

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

There is NO evidence that anyone ever yelled “kill him” at a McCain rally and the Secret Service investigation concluded it never happened.

---

Yes, McCain had the integrity to tell her Obama is not an Arab. She said in some confusion, "No? He's not?" and when McCain said no, the crowd booed. The other happened at a Palin rally and the cry from the same guy was first "terrorist" and then "kill him." Both are available on film. McCain finally realized that he and his buddy were whipping up the crowds into getting the wrong idea about Obama. McCain stopped, but Palin has not.

Quote:

---

what else would you call Obama's plan to redistribute wealth

---

All taxation is wealth redistribution. Whether it's a conservative that does it or a liberal that does it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

but of course Smith was being very specific about for which the rich should pay....in this case it was house-rents

---

Yeah, interpretation. Just like the 2nd Amendment speaks of a well-armed militia, not unorganized individuals owning guns.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

As for the “socialist” charge, what else would you call Obama’s plan to redistribute wealth, what else should we call the vision Obama has been working on his “entire adult life to help build an America where economic justice is being served?” What else should we call Obama’s plan for health care, universal national service and "restoring fairness to the economy?" It sounds a hell of a lot like socialism to me. And for that matter, what about his now reportedly

---

So what do you call a republican who gives major tax breaks to the ultra-wealthy? Is this by your own definition socialism for the very wealthy? See how ridiculous this accusation is? He and Palin chose this word because it is a hot button for white males between the ages of 45 and 60.

As for healthcare let's just call it what it is... a compassionate investment. Oh but wait, you don't know what compassion is. When someone can't pay their medical bills guess what... they are bankrupt and don't pay ANY of their lenders. So the populace not only absorbs this in higher physicians fees but in higher costs for goods all around.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

All taxation is wealth redistribution. Whether it's a conservative that does it or a liberal that does it.

---

Huh? What’s your definition of redistribution of wealth? Is building roads, schools, paying for public safety, defense, the justice system and representation “redistribution of wealth?”

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

Huh? What’s your definition of redistribution of wealth? Is building roads, schools, paying for public safety, defense, the justice system and representation “redistribution of wealth?”

---

Of course! Not everyone uses all these services equally. People who cannot afford cars do not benefit from beautifully paved roads. People who live 20 minutes from the fire house do not benefit as much from the fire department as people only 3 minutes away. The rich do not benefit from food stamps. The poor do not benefit from lowered capital gains taxes.

Whatever you do to change the tax structure is just a DIFFERENT redistribution of wealth, which was Powell's point and a good one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Merris

So what do you call a republican who gives major tax breaks to the ultra-wealthy? Is this by your own definition socialism for the very wealthy? See how ridiculous this accusation is? He and Palin chose this word because it is a hot button for white males between the ages of 45 and 60.

---

What do you call a top rate of 94 percent, fair? The top rate was 70 percent from 1964 to 1981 when it was lowered to 50 percent. How in God’s name can anyone justify stealing over half of someone’s income, let alone 94 percent? And why is it that you Obama supporters keep playing the race card? You guys have a funny way of showing you aren’t racist.

Quote:

---

As for healthcare let's just call it what it is... a compassionate investment. Oh but wait, you don't know what compassion is. When someone can't pay their medical bills guess what... they are bankrupt and don't pay ANY of their lenders. So the populace not only absorbs this in higher physicians fees but in higher costs for goods all around.

---

Have you taken over for Babram with the insults and personal attacks? Compassion involves helping someone of my own free will, not taking my money to give to someone else. You don't know a darn thing about how compassionate I am so go attack someone else.

Obama had to know Ayers if Obama was the distributing the money. - ineffectively I might add.

Quote:

---

2003 CAC final report on the effectiveness of the Annenberg grant compared test scores in so-called Annenberg schools, which had received the benefit of some $150 million in outside grant money, to test scores in comparable schools. It concluded:

“There were no statistically significant differences in student achievement between Annenberg schools and demographically similar non-Annenberg schools. This indicates that there was no Annenberg effect on achievement.

---

I cannot fathom those of you who justify the bombings of the weatherunderground.

What's next? Justifying suicide bombing or head chopping?


----------------------------------------------------

OBAMA TAX CUT 'REFUNDS' THOSE WHO DON'T PAY | National Center for Policy Analysis

THE RICH PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE | National Center for Policy Analysis

Do us from the right waste our time pointing out the FACTS, only to lose you liberals to the EMOTIONAL APPEALS of the Obama campaign?

----------------------------------------------------

You see, because I rely on the where Obama stands on the issues , when he does not flip flop,


Weapons of Mass Discussion: Collection of Obama Flip-Flops

It does not matter if Colin Powell or President Bush himself, endorses Obama. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

And why is it that you Obama supporters keep playing the race card? You guys have a funny way of showing you aren’t racist.

---

Racist... :rolleyes:. I was merely pointing out who McCain's target demographic is. Nothing more and nothing less.

As for a personal attack, I'm sorry I offended you. You're right, I don't know you and it wasn't fair to judge your compassion. Some dude has been riding through our neighborhood stealing all the Obama signs and I'm not feeling very compassionate myself... So can we call it even? :)

After much discussion with you and other conservatives, I'm beginning to see the distinct differences. Conservatives have a more individualistic view and they seem to see America as an entity alone and independent from the world and each individual's position in the nation based on his or her own merits. While this certainly seems like a convenient way to live, i.e. whatever you make for yourself, you keep for yourself and the belief that one should have no obligation to help anyone else except himself, there are problems with this view. You sort of need to see the forest for the trees. We are not a bunch of individuals-- we are a nation. We are dependent on one another, a good analogy is the human body. It's great to have a healthy heart, but if the liver goes bad so does the heart. We can't keep up some parts of the nation while letting other parts fall into grievous disrepair. It weakens the strength of the whole nation.

Unfortunately not all states are created economically equal. Some of them have a lot of money. Some of them have very little. Some have large populations and some are sparsely populated. And so taxes work to even it all out. And that seems to be what this argument is about. No?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inthebox

it does not matter if Colin Powell or President Bush himself, endorses Obama.

---

Actually you are correct there. Even if Jesus the Son of God himself endorsed Obama the republicans would still find a way to smear and discredit it. To be so narrow minded is a waste of a lifetime.

Quote:

---

Unfortunately not all states are created economically equal. Some of them have a lot of money. Some of them have very little. Some have large populations and some are sparsely populated. And so taxes work to even it all out. And that seems to be what this argument is about. No?

---

You hit on an important point here. Before the 16th amendment taxes indeed were constitutionally mandated to be proportional .

The amendment reads :

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.

Before that the Constitution in Article 1 sec 8 was very clear on the subject :

Section 8: The Congress shall have power
To lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

This is in my view when taxation drifted away from the common good to target specific social engineering projects paid for by specific targeted citizens. The U.S. Constitution allows the Congress to collect taxes to pay debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States.It's the use and abuse of tax law, and the power of that amendment, that allows Congress to legislate theft. They made it worse during WWII when they began mandatory withholding instead of a pay as you go system. I guarantee if everyone had to cut a quarterly check for their share of the income tax obligation the system would change rapidly.

Obama and you I guess broadly interprets "the general welfare " as a means for "Redistributing Wealth" or "Spreading the Wealth Around."

However, the ability of Congress to levy income taxes was never meant to be a tool for the "Redistribution of Wealth." This concept is an abuse of power.Even worse cynically the tax code is reduced to being a tool to use to win elections.
This idea that you can give a tax rebate to someone who doesn't pay taxes is an abuse also .This is a play on words and if Obama had the integrity to call it what it is ; another welfare plan he would not be fooling so many people into buying into his program.

Let Obama spread his own wealth around. There is no virtue in charity if it is compulsory .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

Actually you are correct there. Even if Jesus the Son of God himself endorsed Obama the republicans would still find a way to smear and discredit it. To be so narrow minded is a waste of a lifetime.

---

Very good point here!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Merris

Racist... :rolleyes:. I was merely pointing out who McCain's target demographic is. Nothing more and nothing less.

---

I beg to differ of course. One of the things Bush has gotten little or no credit for is the racial diversity of his administration. When minorities don’t fall in line with the liberal ideology they tend to be attacked by the left, think Miguel Estrada, Michael Steele, Condi Rice – and Colin Powell before he endorsed Obama. McCain has a female running mate for crying out loud. We don’t need talk of “white male” target demographics, it does not reflect mine, McCain’s or the Republican party’s philosophy and it feeds unnecessary tensions.

Quote:

---

As for a personal attack, I'm sorry I offended you. You're right, I don't know you and it wasn't fair to judge your compassion. Some dude has been riding through our neighborhood stealing all the Obama signs and I'm not feeling very compassionate myself... So can we call it even? :)

---

Fair enough. :)

Quote:

---

After much discussion with you and other conservatives, I'm beginning to see the distinct differences. Conservatives have a more individualistic view and they seem to see America as an entity alone and independent from the world and each individual's position in the nation based on his or her own merits. While this certainly seems like a convenient way to live, i.e. whatever you make for yourself, you keep for yourself and the belief that one should have no obligation to help anyone else except himself, there are problems with this view. You sort of need to see the forest for the trees. We are not a bunch of individuals-- we are a nation. We are dependent on one another, a good analogy is the human body. It's great to have a healthy heart, but if the liver goes bad so does the heart. We can't keep up some parts of the nation while letting other parts fall into grievous disrepair. It weakens the strength of the whole nation.

---

Nice analogies but still off base. Why in the world (no pun intended) would Republicans push for free trade agreements if we were comfortable being “an entity alone?” How many Christian conservative dollars do you suppose go to help people in other nations? We certainly see the need to be engaged with the rest of the world and to help where needed, but we also believe in helping others help themselves wherever possible so they too can be productive, responsible contributors to society. It’s an empowerment that brings freedom and self-respect as opposed to an “empowerment” that leads to dependence.

One of the defining concepts of this country is independence, but independence does not equal isolationism. As a conservative Republican I’m not willing to cede our independence, personally or nationally - particularly for such a lame reason as worrying about what the rest of the world (especially Europe) thinks about us. That’s silly in my opinion, and it belies the left’s mantra of diversity and tolerance of others different from ourselves. I appreciate and celebrate the individual, it would be a dull placed if everyone thought, spoke and acted the same, so why would anyone that claims to appreciate diversity and tolerance want to be more like European countries instead of being the United States of America, and additionally give up some of our sovereign rights in the process?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

Actually you are correct there. Even if Jesus the Son of God himself endorsed Obama the republicans would still find a way to smear and discredit it. To be so narrow minded is a waste of a lifetime.

---

There you go again, showing us your narrow mindedness while criticizing the alleged narrow minded.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

I beg to differ of course. One of the things Bush has gotten little or no credit for is the racial diversity of his administration.

---

I was happy to see minorities in Bush's cabinet. They just had a leader making very bad decisions and in over his head.

Oh and McCain's female running mate? Don't even get me started. She is an embarrassment and Mr. McCain committed an act of sexism whether he sees his own blunder or not. He impulsively chose the Alaskan beauty queen with no brains and this perpetuates the stereotype that women are only picked over for their looks and when they are unable to fulfill the demands of the position it makes all women look bad and impedes their progress. So thanks John McCain.. the man who will do anything foolish just to try to win. For him apparently it's not how you get there... as long as you just get there. The American people aren't buying it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

How many Christian conservative dollars do you suppose go to help people in other nations? We certainly see the need to be engaged with the rest of the world and to help where needed, but we also believe in helping others help themselves wherever possible so they too can be productive, responsible contributors to society.

---

Oh lots... with strings attached. I originally wrote something here... but have decided against getting into it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

As a conservative Republican I'm not willing to cede our independence, personally or nationally - particularly for such a lame reason as worrying about what the rest of the world (especially Europe) thinks about us.

---

What they think is only a small part of it. It also matters to realize that our own actions have a global impact. We can't act completely independently because as the global financial crisis shows us, the decisions we make here affects people all across the globe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

It's an empowerment that brings freedom and self-respect as opposed to an “empowerment” that leads to dependence.

---

I've mentioned Obama's idea of students volunteering and doing community service for college tuition. This is in no way making anyone dependent. In fact quite the opposite. McCain, on the other hand, hasn't offered any ideas.

Seems that some wouldn't know a good thing if it came up and hit them smack in the face. It's a shame.

p.s. the dude stealing the Obama signs in our neighborhood was apprehended. He was drunk and sending his 8 year old daughter into peoples yards to bring them back to him... classy!

I don't have time to address all of this right now so I'll leave it at this one:

Quote:

---

Oh lots... with strings attached. I originally wrote something here... but have decided against getting into it.

---

Like what, an accounting of where our dollars go? I know I like to get an update once in a while on the girls we sponsor in El Salvador and east Africa. Maybe a short letter, a picture to put on our refrigerator to remind us to pray for them or especially a crayon scribbled drawing. Or in other words, we like to know we're making a difference in their lives.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

Actually you are correct there. Even if Jesus the Son of God himself endorsed Obama the republicans would still find a way to smear and discredit it. To be so narrow minded is a waste of a lifetime.

---

You prove my point.

I rely on facts.

You rely on emotion and personal attacks.

I know you don't believe in God, so it is disingenuous to state what you said in your second sentence.

You see, Colin Powell or Oprah or Madonna or Hamas can endorse Obama,
Power Line - Hamas Endorses Obama
It will not change my mind because I THINK FOR MYSELF - quite the contrary of being swayed by endorsements.

The fact that Obama believes in increasing taxes, in abortion, in government having more powers in making decisions in our lives is what I am against. Colin Powell's endorsement does not change my mind.

By the way, just because you don't see things like I do, does not lead me to the conclusion that you are narrow minded - just that you disagree. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inthebox

it will not change my mind because I THINK FOR MYSELF ...
The fact that Obama believes in increasing taxes, in abortion, in government having more powers in making decisions in our lives is what I am against.

---

You are against it because a book tells you it's wrong hence you do not think for yourself.

Also you have misrepresented the candidates position. For 95% of people in the US their taxes will go down with Obama as president. He does not believe ib abortion, he believes in a woman's choice, Bush gave the government more powers to infiltrate your life than any president could ever do afterward.

Tell me, NK - how can ones taxes be cut when they don't even pay taxes

The Tax Foundation - Number of Americans Paying Zero Federal Income Tax Grows to 43.4 Million


The only way this could be accomplished is by credits and refunds.

So from the same pie, remember Obama does not discuss how to grow the pie, more is taken from those who pay taxes to be redistributed to those who don't pay taxes.

Remember that there are other taxes - AMT, state, local, sales, property taxes that have to paid. Have you looked at a cell phone or cable bill and noticed all the taxes and fees?

You can insult me all you want, you can insult the Bible all you want, but the facts are the facts.

Again, another case of countering emotional and personal attacks with facts and logic. ;):D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inthebox

So from the same pie, remember Obama does not discuss how to grow the pie,

---

Yes, he does. Haven't you been listening?

Quote:

---

more is taken from those who pay taxes to be redistributed to those who don't pay taxes

---

IF one makes more than $250,000 per year. Do you? I don't, and never have even with my husband working and my working two jobs.

Quote:

---

Remember that there are other taxes - AMT, state, local, sales, property taxes that have to paid. Have you looked at a cell phone or cable bill and noticed all the taxes and fees?

---

And there are ways, even now, to make those taxes less.

Obama is using the Clintoon canard. He campaigned on a promise of tax cuts for everyone to be paid for by a surtax on the top 2%.

His first economic speech after he was elected announced the largest tax increase in US history.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

We certainly see the need to be engaged with the rest of the world and to help where needed, but we also believe in helping others help themselves wherever possible so they too can be productive, responsible contributors to society. It’s an empowerment that brings freedom and self-respect as opposed to an “empowerment” that leads to dependence.

One of the defining concepts of this country is independence, but independence does not equal isolationism. As a conservative Republican I’m not willing to cede our independence, personally or nationally - particularly for such a lame reason as worrying about what the rest of the world (especially Europe) thinks about us. That’s silly in my opinion, and it belies the left’s mantra of diversity and tolerance of others different from ourselves. I appreciate and celebrate the individual, it would be a dull placed if everyone thought, spoke and acted the same, so why would anyone that claims to appreciate diversity and tolerance want to be more like European countries instead of being the United States of America, and additionally give up some of our sovereign rights in the process?

---

This all sounds great and I couldn't agree with it more. Who could object to any of this? And if this was what the Republican Party had been advocating and doing for the last 8 years, I think we'd all feel proud of the current administration. But these grand thoughts have not translated into grand actions and have, I think, turned out to be a cover for a lot of rather despiccable actions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by asking

This all sounds great and I couldn't agree with it more. Who could object to any of this? And if this was what the Republican Party had been advocating and doing for the last 8 years, I think we'd all feel proud of the current administration. But these grand thoughts have not translated into grand actions and have, I think, turned out to be a cover for a lot of rather despiccable actions.

---

First asking, this was a response to Merris' comment "After much discussion with you and other conservatives," so this was a personal perspective. But yes, the Republican party has failed in many ways to let's say, agree with my perspective. With that said, I still think they're way closer to being true to my view than the Democrats are in executing their "mantra of diversity and tolerance."

speechlesstx, sorry if I didn't follow the thread closely. I thought you were speaking for neo conservative Republicans.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by asking

speechlesstx, sorry if i didn't follow the thread closely. I thought you were speaking for neo conservative Republicans.

---

No prob. :)