hello. what is the liberal / conservative ratio here?

You are not in the minority when conservatives far out number liberals on this forum.

 

Another tantrum from a liberal who can't stand being in the minority, here. Flee to your own forum where everyone thinks like you!

 

Were conservatives in the minority back when Bush was President?

There seems to be more conservatives now because the country has gone to hell under this Administration. Watch the liberal/conservative ratio when Romney becomes Pres.

 

I am not addressing your citizenship Ostap!! No matter what country you are from, you are a true American!!!

 

Reformed liberal here as well, since finding Jesus Christ.

I am now a Constitutionalist. Federally I support Minarchism and let the states reign. My ideal state would be very Socially and economically conservative.

 

I would agree with this because the vast majority of self-proclaimed "conservatives" here are "social conservatives" that seek to impose authoritarian tyrannical government predominately based upon their religious beliefs.

A perfect example of this is those "conservatives" that oppose same-gender marriage. The denial of same-gender marriage is not about the protection of anyone inalienable Rights and neither adversely or positively affect opposite-gender marriage. It is invidious discrimination based upon religious intolerance and true "conservatives" oppose the prohibitions against opposite-gender marriage. I believe the "conservative" argument addressing "gay" marriage was best captured by the following quotation by U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron:

http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2011/...cameron-supports-marriage-equality/?mobile=nc



True conservatives oppose religious intolerance that is highly reflected by the "social conservatives" that impose invidious discrimination based upon their religious beliefs when they create the laws denying equality in marriage to same-gender couples. True conservatives seek to protect the inalienable Rights of all people and can only justify laws that protect the inalienable Rights of the People. Prohibitions against same-gender marriage are not about protecting anyone's Rights but instead are about violating the Rights of the People and a true conservative opposes these violations.

So the statement is true because there are very few "true conservatives" here on Political Forum.

 

exactly. very few true fiscal conservatives here.... they're nearly all the Bible thumping variety.

 

The Conservatives here on this Forum are doing the same thing Conservatives are doing all over the country ... Limit the Number of Liberals.

Once they get all the Liberals and Progressives Banned ... then they will have have good chance of winning a debate among themselves.


Welcome to the Circle ...

 

Nope. Pretty happy so far. I'm getting in line for seconds.

 

Think about what you just said. YOU are here, aren't you? So, if there are no intelligent posters here.........what does it mean that you are here? Could it be that you are intelligent AND abide by the rules?

AND BTW, we have no way of knowing the IQ of anyone who posts here. It would be pretty arrogant to even suggest that we do. The common thread here is an interest in politics....and in what is happening to our country and around the world.

 

The reason some believe it's far right now is because we have a Democrat president. I can remember when it seemed to be a lot of liberals here.....when they were around to beat up President Bush. Now, they are in the position of having to defend the guy they voted for....and that's not nearly as much fun.

 

So....are you telling us that Pres. Bill Clinton who signed DOMA in 1996 and the VAST majority of Democrats in BOTH houses voted FOR it are really conservatives???

 

This is juxtaposed to what I stated. Virtually all Republicans and Democrats support authoritarian government and there is no difference between them in this regard. They do it for different reasons but they are still authoritarian.

DOMA was passed by a Republican Controlled Congress in 1996 and at that time same-sex marriage was not permitted by any State. Massachusetts became the first state to grant marriage licenses to same-sex couples in 2004. This law was an "election" year Republican law intended to stop the State of Hawaii from adopting same-gender marriage which is was considering. It was invidious from it's inception intended solely to deny the rights of individuals and to intervene in state legislative authority. Republicans had enough votes in both the House and Senate to pass the law without any Democrats support although one Republican did vote against the legislation. Former President Clinton signed the law because it was an election year and he was first and foremost a politician and both Democrats and Republicans have long shown they're more interested in being elected than in doing what's best for America.

DOMA has since been ruled unconstitutional by the Boston Federal Court because it violates the 10th Amendment (the definition of marriage is a matter of State law that the federal government cannot infringe upon) and roughly 1,100 documented instances of denial of equal protection in violation of the 14th Amendment. On April 4, 2012, the Federal Appeals Panel heard arguments on DOMA and in that hearing the DOJ stated that based upon a review of the law DOMA could not be defended upon any legal basis as it was clearly unconstitutional. 133 House Democrats had filed an amicus brief in support of the plaintiffs in Gill and Massachusetts, asserting their belief that Section 3 of DOMA was unconstitutional. Included among the members of Congress signing the brief were 14 members who had voted for the bill in 1996. Seventy major employers have also filed an amicus brief supporting the plaintiffs. Council for the "social conservative" House Republicans did present arguments in support of DOMA but their arguments were limited to stating that the Federal government was intentionally intervening in the legislative authority of the States which, ironically, is why DOMA was declared unconstitutional in the first place.

DOMA and the prohibitions against same-gender marriage are invidious discrimination that "true" conservatives oppose as "true" conservatives oppose the discrimination against people that violates their Constitutionally protected Rights.

 

Welcome FreshAir. I really like the user name.

When I was gone for approximately 2 months, I came back to this new format. I should know how to better navigate but I feel totally retarded...lol.

Have fun and stick around. I think we lost quite a few members for a minute. They will be back because P.F. is addicting.

OH AND FRODLEY DEAR...Didn't you miss me at all? I know I am not the sharpest pencil in the box but I don't bite. I must be a tarte by now????

 

Of course y'all got it all wrong, dontchaknow.
What we see here is a cross section of the sentiment reflecting a current administration.
Just as engaged as liberals were when GW was in office, we now find engaged conservatives being very critical of the BO admin.
This too, in time, will change, right along with the ever developing and more accessible internet.
Oh, and don't forget, in the background, we find those fueling the fires while loading their bank accounts. Garaffalo vs Limbaugh...etc etc etc.
What we mustn't fail to realize is this. We are sitting in the same boat, and our combined interest should focus on NOT letting it sink, no matter who mans the helm.
That's why we should discuss, not attack, no matter which side of the aisle we find ourselves on, and should praise each other for worthwhile thoughts, instead of aimlessly finger pointing, day in, and day out.
JMVHO.

 

My point was that "true conservatives" don't support "social conservatism" which is authoritarian. Today most Republicans are "social conservatives" advocating authoritarian government and are not true conservatives. "True conservatives" support the protections of the inalienable Rights of the People but prohibitions against same-gender marriage and restrictions on abortions violate the inalienable Rights of Persons and cannot be supported by a true conservative. Only "social conservatives" support these laws which violate the US Constitution and they do so to impose "Biblical theocratic" control of America.

 

My point was that "true conservatives" don't support "social conservatism" which is authoritarian. Today most Republicans are "social conservatives" advocating authoritarian government and are not true conservatives. "True conservatives" support the protections of the inalienable Rights of the People but prohibitions against same-gender marriage and restrictions on abortions violate the inalienable Rights of Persons and cannot be supported by a true conservative. Only "social conservatives" support these laws which violate the US Constitution and they do so to impose "Biblical theocratic" control of America.

 

We have lots of different types here. Both parties are so similar outside of social issues that one person will be your ally on a topic and your adversary on the next. Your not the only one who got taken for a ride by Obama, I think most who consider themselves independent and are sick of the status quo feel the same. If Romney gets the nomination I don't think I'll vote at all. Every time we pick from two guys who are practically the same we validate the rigged system. But always good to see a new poster around here.

 

Hence the problem. There's no such thing as a fiscal conservative anymore. The Republican Party (and this forum) have been taken over by the extreme right...those that don't want the government to impose upon them unless they're the ones doing the imposing. Take a look at the Tea Party candidates voted into office in 2010. They're now comfortably in the hands of big business (not small) and the banks, basking in donations after donations. Using the treasure chests of anonymous political donations, they are now pursuing the agenda of the far right evangelical social movement with little regard to fiscal policies.

Once Obama was elected, the backlash from the above-mentioned group, fueled by racist hatred towards a black man elected president who was educated, intelligent, personable and caring, evolved into the internet being flooded with countless extreme blogs and websites created just to overwhelm the intelligence of those who know better with hatred, racism, bigotry, and ignorance. Citing each other for ridiculous claims and formulating lies rather than being an honest parameter of today's society became the norm for these groups; who meanwhile wouldn't understand the truth if it slapped them in the face knocking the tri-cornered hat off their head.

Although I'm fairly new here, there is already a contingent of your fellow mods and admins who would like nothing better than to see me gone. Yet there is a small group of liberals who understand my mission here as one of exposing the idiocy for what it is.

See what I mean? Brewskier...not everyone thinks like me on my forum. And since when is pointing out the obivous a "tantrum"? As far as "being in the minority", that has little to do with anything. There was a question asked and I answered it. Funny thing is, and I've pointed it out before, a long-time conservative participant of my forum left last year because he was called a name, came back a few months later and then left again in a huff because he couldn't call others names! Years ago, when conservatives were normal, this person would never have acted this way, was vocal in his opposition of overmoderating forums, deleting of entire threads, banning members or use of spurious sources to back an equally spurious claim. This same individual, another victim of Obama Derangement Syndrome, found a new home here. That's called irony.

On my forum, we're individuals who can actually think and formulate an opinion without having the ghost of Breitbart and the smarm of Drudge behind our backs telling us what to say. We're also a fairly new political forum; one that evolved from a mutual love of a television show (LOST) to, as my signature says, intelligent discourse of political issues. It's certainly not a replacement for PF as it's apparent some of the participants here just don't have the intelligence to join us, so I'm happy enjoining you and your friends in my attempts to educate you.

 

Your sales pitch needs a bit of work. I can comfortably say I've learned nothing from your hyper partisan posts here on PF — not sure why you'd think your Lost/politics forum would offer anything of value. Not interested.

 

That is true , but the Lib Mods have the control .

Yep , about all the old GOP hardliners are gone .


Funny thing...lil Mike left my forum because he didn't like the liberals "patting each other on the back" and came over here to do exactly the same thing with his fellow conservatives!!!!

Lil Mike is ok by me , he makes good posts , and , unlike you , he seeks discussion rather than derision. . . if your Forum is so great , why are you here on PF ?

You should have taken care of lil mike on your own Forum , don't come here and try to bad mouth someone for something that happened on another Forum , understand ? .


I'm gone. Anyone that would like to discuss politics and entertainment like adults, there's a link to my forum below.[/QUOTE]

Bye , don't leave mad , just leave ... Bye Bye ...

JP5 , some comments by idiots just don't deserve a reply , but I'm glad you decided to weigh in and put this nut-job in their place .

I know I missed you , Jiyuu

 

I love (most of) the staff and forum. However sad to say its not my primary go to site as of this week due to a disagreement between I and a mod. My preference has nothing (or very VERY little) to do with the new format or the tech issues. I can not be specific because its forbidden to speak about moderator actions. However suffice to say this site is beginning a full blown, out of control slide to kissing the back side of the usual suspects (sorry again that is as close as I can make reference or risk infraction). I don't know any other way to say it.

The liberal/leftist/Marxist/socialist (whew!) embracing comments along with their apologist (meaning agreeing with) paradigm of anything Islamic including radical Islam and the worst aspects of sharia law are almost never infracted, deleted or moved nor are the instigators often diciplined. The conservative christian (or agnostic or atheist) etc member is left walking on eggshells, lest being infracted for defending himself or his world view while the usual suspects run amuck insulting belittling and flaming at will. Well, I am tired of it, and this last incident was the straw that broke the camels back. So that is the reason I have began posting on another more balanced site that treats both sides equally, using it as my go to site. At one time this site was like that and it saddens (yes and angers) me that this site has lost so much so fast. If it ever returns to its old fair self It will again be my go to site, and the site that I support financially and in other ways.

God bless the staff and others who have worked on the technical aspects that have plagued this site, maybe with that out of the way, the moderators that defend the 'other' PF members ie conservative/Christian/ProIsrael/anti RADICAL Islam (as I have said more than I can count I love my MODERATE Muslim friends) and will return the balance that used to be the foundation of PF.

reva

 

Welcome back Hillbilly you were missed ~

I wondered and asked why another member could advertise in this forum for his own forum, it seemed weird, apparently its not against the rules. Well dont get me wrong I still like this forum, most of the members almost all of the mods and the content etc. Maybe everything will turn out for the best, I always have a prayer in my god queue for that wish. Still this forum is my second go to forum...Again, welcome back hillbilly!


reva

 

Thanks RevA , I appreciate the kind words.

What was the name of that web-site you're on ?