PDA

View Full Version : Beginning to convert



CaughtintheMiddle1990
09-29-2010, 11:42 AM
I think I really am turning into something of both a social and fiscal conservative.

-I no longer support gay marriage. Not on any biblical ground, but on the grounds of practicality--I do believe the slippery slope argument is valid with this issue. Legalize gay marriage, and than polygaists will be banging on the door wanting their rights. I'm a little conflicted on this though, since we do allow first cousins to get married in over 40 of our states.

-I no longer support repealing DADT--It's a fine policy as it is. Repealing it will just weaken our military and the morale of our soldiers, and again, it brings in issues of practicality--where should gay/lesbian soldiers be housed, etc.

-I still am and always have been a staunch proponent of the 2nd amendment. That remains unchanged.

-I feel we should eventually wean ourselves off of entitlment programs but assure that there is some state or local system in place--non Federal--so that those who do need are taken care of at the voluntary choice of state and local people. States had their own individual welfare and pension programs before the New Deal, and I believe with today's technology it will be much better than it was than.

-I feel corporate and small business taxes should be lowered significantly, and maybe tax credits given to small business owners.

- I agree with a cutting of taxes in general ONLY if the taxes cut are equal to the spending cut.

-I feel spending cuts are needed all around and that some agencies will definitely have to go. Get rid of a lot of the redundant agencies. Make the USPS private, for example. Some can stay, but in limited forms. The EPA, OSHA and VA are three I would keep.

-I support the bringing back of HUACC.

-I believe in allowing people to smoke outdoors, and that no restrictions should be put on it in terms of where you can smoke (I'm not a smoker, but still...)

-A balance should be made between our traditional culture, and multiculturalism. There has to be some middle ground.

-I am against the GZ0 Mosque. Always have been.

-I agree with pulling out of NAFTA.

Where I disagree with conservatives:

-I believe in public education, it just needs reformation and a weeding out of anti-American teachers. Education I believe is a key to our future, and it should be available to those who don't have.

-I believe programs such as NASA, and all forms of scientific research bodies should be uplifted and funded moreso than they are.

- I believe some industries need regulation--I don't want a return of Laissez-Faire. But I also don't agree with over regulation either.

-I believe prostitution should become legalized and should be a regulated industry. This is in the interest of both taking a racket away from the crooks, and for the betterment of those working women and their customers. I believe it could be beneficial all around.

-I believe Pot should remain illegal but should be decriminalized, and perhaps slowly over time made legal.

I don't believe any of the big changes--such as major cuts or elimination(s) to programs--should occur until our economy is sound. You can't put thousands out of work overnight. It has to be a slow processs since many of these programs themselves were installed gradually. I think an important facet of this is that it be made as painless as possible. We don't want riots.

linda22003
09-29-2010, 11:47 AM
-I support the bringing back of HUACC.



Your list establishes that sometimes you're conservative, sometimes libertarian, and sometimes, as above, un-American. That committee accomplished nothing but to bureaucratize paranoia the first time; why are you so nostalgic for that?

CaughtintheMiddle1990
09-29-2010, 11:51 AM
Your list establishes that sometimes you're conservative, sometimes libertarian, and sometimes, as above, un-American. That committee accomplished nothing but to bureaucratize paranoia the first time; why are you so nostalgic for that?

Because I believe there are more un-American people here and now than ever before.

Apache
09-29-2010, 12:11 PM
Because I believe there are more un-American people here and now than ever before.

YOu mean Anti- American?

linda22003
09-29-2010, 12:12 PM
:rolleyes:
Because I believe there are more un-American people here and now than ever before.

Who decides this? And how will it be prosecuted? Good luck with that. Are your jack-boots on order yet?

CaughtintheMiddle1990
09-29-2010, 12:15 PM
:rolleyes:

Who decides this? And how will it be prosecuted? Good luck with that. Are your jack-boots on order yet?

Well, perhaps I should refine my statement. Not a new HUACC, but perhaps a new McCarthy. More tactful.
You don't believe there are subversives in our institutions?

linda22003
09-29-2010, 12:18 PM
Perhaps you have a future in politics, as the new senator John Yerkes Iselin. Remember him? ;)

linda22003
09-29-2010, 12:25 PM
Well, perhaps I should refine my statement. Not a new HUACC, but perhaps a new McCarthy. More tactful.
You don't believe there are subversives in our institutions?

Oh, yes. McCarthy was such a knight in shining armor. "Subversives"? You mean "Fifty-seven card carrying Communists....?"

Gingersnap
09-29-2010, 12:38 PM
You might want to read Levin's Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto. It's an interesting starting point for any discussion of conservative values.

Like Linda Numbers, I have no interest in politicians determining who is, and who is not, a patriotic American. While McCarthy has demonized far beyond his actual endeavors, he is no role model for Washington. ;)

Zeus
09-29-2010, 12:40 PM
I think I really am turning into something of both a social and fiscal conservative. I
no longer support gay marriage. Not on any biblical ground, but on the grounds of practicality--I do believe the slippery slope argument is valid with this issue. Legalize gay marriage, and than polygaists will be banging on the door wanting their rights. I'm a little conflicted on this though, since we do allow first cousins to get married in over 40 of our states..

Yeppers


I-I no longer support repealing DADT--It's a fine policy as it is. Repealing it will just weaken our military and the morale of our soldiers, and again, it brings in issues of practicality--where should gay/lesbian soldiers be housed, etc..

Yeppers


I-I still am and always have been a staunch proponent of the 2nd amendment. That remains unchanged..

The right to bear arms is unquestionable. Laws dealing with penalties for crimes committed with the use of firearms should be harsh.



I-I feel we should eventually wean ourselves off of entitlment programs but assure that there is some state or local system in place--non Federal--so that those who do need are taken care of at the voluntary choice of state and local people. States had their own individual welfare and pension programs before the New Deal, and I believe with today's technology it will be much better than it was than..

10Th amendment baby. Bring it back Jack


I-I feel corporate and small business taxes should be lowered significantly, and maybe tax credits given to small business owners. .

Yeppers. It just makes strong economic sense as those taxes are just pass through taxes making goods and services more expensive for consumers


I- I agree with a cutting of taxes in general ONLY if the taxes cut are equal to the spending cut..

Yes & no. Some if not all taxcuts "pay" for themselves in high revenues realized.


I-I feel spending cuts are needed all around and that some agencies will definitely have to go. Get rid of a lot of the redundant agencies. Make the USPS private, for example. Some can stay, but in limited forms. The EPA, OSHA and VA are three I would keep..

In general agreement. I think a lot of fed agencies should rightfully be dealt with on the state level.


I-I support the bringing back of HUACC..

No sirree. that would open the door for more witch hunts than already done through Use of special prosecutors.


I-I believe in allowing people to smoke outdoors, and that no restrictions should be put on it in terms of where you can smoke (I'm not a smoker, but still...).

that should be a right of ownership/doing business.


I-A balance should be made between our traditional culture, and multiculturalism. There has to be some middle ground..

agreed


I-I am against the GZ0 Mosque. Always have been..

Not the Mosque but the location.


I-I agree with pulling out of NAFTA..

Disagree. Overall NAFTA has be a success for the 3 countries involved. It does need periodic renegotiation's/treakin'

Where I disagree with conservatives:


I-I believe in public education, it just needs reformation and a weeding out of anti-American teachers. Education I believe is a key to our future, and it should be available to those who don't have. .

Another issue that should be dealt with on a state and local level. Perhaps unified standards established on a federal level but left to the state/local level as to how to implement and achieve those standards


I-I believe programs such as NASA, and all forms of scientific research bodies should be uplifted and funded more so than they are..

Yessir. Investments in NASA the space programs have immensely impacted to the positive our lives in the last 50 yrs.


I- I believe some industries need regulation--I don't want a return of Laissez-Faire. But I also don't agree with over regulation either..

yes sir over regulation has stifled economic growth & innovation


I-I believe prostitution should become legalized and should be a regulated industry. This is in the interest of both taking a racket away from the crooks, and for the betterment of those working women and their customers. I believe it could be beneficial all around..

Again a state & local call


I-I believe Pot should remain illegal but should be decriminalized, and perhaps slowly over time made legal..

no problem here.


II don't believe any of the big changes--such as major cuts or elimination(s) to programs--should occur until our economy is sound. You can't put thousands out of work overnight. It has to be a slow processs since many of these programs themselves were installed gradually. I think an important facet of this is that it be made as painless as possible. We don't want riots.

yeppers

Bailey
09-29-2010, 12:41 PM
Oh, yes. McCarthy was such a knight in shining armor. "Subversives"? You mean "Fifty-seven card carrying Communists....?"

Ya there were no communists in the state dept. :rolleyes:


On edit: google "the venona project" looks like McCarthy was on the low side when he said 57

Articulate_Ape
09-29-2010, 12:44 PM
You might want to read Levin's Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto. It's an interesting starting point for any discussion of conservative values.

Hear, hear!

Wei Wu Wei
09-29-2010, 12:46 PM
I think I really am turning into something of both a social and fiscal conservative.

-I no longer support gay marriage. Not on any biblical ground, but on the grounds of practicality--I do believe the slippery slope argument is valid with this issue. Legalize gay marriage, and than polygaists will be banging on the door wanting their rights. I'm a little conflicted on this though, since we do allow first cousins to get married in over 40 of our states.

Practicality? do you think we are in some desperate need to increase our population?

Slippery slope arguments are the worst, they can be used in every argument for any position it's just arguing a strawman.




-I no longer support repealing DADT--It's a fine policy as it is. Repealing it will just weaken our military

How exactly will letting our gay troops be honest weaken our military?


and the morale of our soldiers, and again, it brings in issues of practicality--where should gay/lesbian soldiers be housed, etc.

It brings an issue? What about the issue of quality soldiers not being able to serve because some people care about what they get off to?



-I feel we should eventually wean ourselves off of entitlment programs but assure that there is some state or local system in place--non Federal--so that those who do need are taken care of at the voluntary choice of state and local people. States had their own individual welfare and pension programs before the New Deal, and I believe with today's technology it will be much better than it was than.

Please explain your implication that Federal is bad. also good luck convincing any group to give up their social security benefits or medicare.



-I feel corporate and small business taxes should be lowered significantly, and maybe tax credits given to small business owners.

Why should they be lowered for large businesses? Consider our tax rates are currently at a historic low looking at the last century.




-A balance should be made between our traditional culture, and multiculturalism. There has to be some middle ground.

Culture warrior right here lol



-I am against the GZ0 Mosque. Always have been.

You're against a Mosque being built in Manhattan because in the relative proximity (several blocks) there was a terrorist attack?



Where I disagree with conservatives:

-I believe in public education, it just needs reformation and a weeding out of anti-American teachers. Education I believe is a key to our future, and it should be available to those who don't have.

lmao what is an "anti-American" teacher? Why would an "anti-American" want to educate America's children? Why would someone who was anti-American want to participate in one of the fundamental aspects of America's prosperity? Or do you believe the secret infiltrating muslim communist theories?




-I believe prostitution should become legalized and should be a regulated industry. This is in the interest of both taking a racket away from the crooks, and for the betterment of those working women and their customers. I believe it could be beneficial all around.

-I believe Pot should remain illegal but should be decriminalized, and perhaps slowly over time made legal.

Why over time? California may do it this year. You seem to realize how taking a market away out of the underground benefits society and hurts criminals, it's a no-brainer with pot. heh.

linda22003
09-29-2010, 12:46 PM
Ya there were no communists in the state dept. :rolleyes:

That was actually a quote from the famous senator I mentioned before, Johnny Iselin. I assume you get the reference.

Bailey
09-29-2010, 12:50 PM
That was actually a quote from the famous senator I mentioned before, Johnny Iselin. I assume you get the reference.

No idea nor do I care who he is, but the state dept was riddled with spies and communists (well one in the same). In my heart McCarthy was a patriot and he didn't deserve his fate, but his sacrifice pointed out to the country was scumbag progressives and liberals are.

linda22003
09-29-2010, 12:54 PM
Of course you don't know about Iselin. McCarthy was a self-aggrandizing drunk, and the Senate finally found enough balls, belatedly, to censure him.

Bailey
09-29-2010, 12:57 PM
Of course you don't know about Iselin. McCarthy was a self-aggrandizing drunk, and the Senate finally found enough balls, belatedly, to censure him.


Yes but was he right? (McCarthy)

linda22003
09-29-2010, 01:00 PM
Yes but was he right? (McCarthy)

Well, I'd say yes, he was pretty Far right.

Bailey
09-29-2010, 01:02 PM
Well, I'd say yes, he was pretty Far right.


So you don't think there was spies and communists in some levels of the Government? (mainly the State dept)

Bailey
09-29-2010, 01:09 PM
I love it, look it up and you'll find the people who the left hate the most McCarthy, J Hover, Nixon etc were all RABID anti communists. Wonder why? :confused:

linda22003
09-29-2010, 01:13 PM
So you don't think there was spies and communists in some levels of the Government? (mainly the State dept)

Despite the grammatical horror of your question, I believe that Hiss and a few others don't pass the "smell test" in the light of history. The real question is what methodology should be used to deal with those who should not be in our government agencies. Should it be done by someone who's grandstanding to build his own career?

McCarthy accused George Catlett Marshall of treason. Do you believe he was treasonous? Or a more appropriate question: do you have the remotest idea who George Catlett Marshall was? :o

linda22003
09-29-2010, 01:14 PM
I love it, look it up and you'll find the people who the left hate the most McCarthy, J Hover, Nixon etc were all RABID anti communists. Wonder why? :confused:

I give up. Who's "J Hover"?

Bailey
09-29-2010, 01:15 PM
I give up. Who's "J Hover"?

You're smart you figure it out.

linda22003
09-29-2010, 01:21 PM
You're smart you figure it out.

You couldn't.

Bailey
09-29-2010, 01:22 PM
Despite the grammatical horror of your question, I believe that Hiss and a few others don't pass the "smell test" in the light of history. The real question is what methodology should be used to deal with those who should not be in our government agencies. Should it be done by someone who's grandstanding to build his own career?

McCarthy accused George Catlett Marshall of treason. Do you believe he was treasonous? Or a more appropriate question: do you have the remotest idea who George Catlett Marshall was? :o



Well since GCM gave us the UN and was against the foundation of Israel AND approved of soviet block countries receiving money from the US government (Marshall plan) Stuff like that wouldn't make him a spy but it sure didn't make him a patriot either. I dont think he accused him of being a spy it was more of ineptitude then spying.


Goggle: "Venona (sp)? project" McCarthy didn't see how bad this government was riddled with soviet spies.

Bailey
09-29-2010, 01:23 PM
You couldn't.

No I am busy working and posting so I am sorry if I am not up to your standard ATM. (At the moment, if you dont know what that means)

linda22003
09-29-2010, 01:28 PM
Your interpretation of the Marshall Plan is certainly a novel one, with which I am not familiar. I am also surprised to see that you're at work; I would have guessed you were still in school. May I ask your age?

Bailey
09-29-2010, 01:40 PM
Your interpretation of the Marshall Plan is certainly a novel one, with which I am not familiar. I am also surprised to see that you're at work; I would have guessed you were still in school. May I ask your age?


I will admit you probably knew GCM and Joe McCarty being that you were an adult back then. You keep focusing on minor spelling errors and not answering my questions. Ann Coulter had a line from a speech he gave on the subject. (please don't give a snarky comment on Ann, I am sure if she were wrong on that speech people like you would've ripped her a new one)




And my age is none of your business.

Bailey
09-29-2010, 01:44 PM
GCM was a true American Hero :rolleyes:

"When Marshall was sent to China with secret State Department orders, the Communists at that time were bottled up in two areas and were fighting a losing battle, but that because of those orders the situation was radically changed in favor of the Communists. Under those orders, as we know, Marshall embargoed all arms and ammunition to our allies in China. He forced the opening of the Nationalist-held Kalgan Mountain pass into Manchuria, to the end that the Chinese Communists gained access to the mountains of captured Japanese equipment. No need to tell the country about how Marshall tried to force Chiang Kai-shek to form a partnership government with the Communists"

linda22003
09-29-2010, 01:45 PM
I was two years old when Senator McCarthy drank himself to death. I merely wondered, since you seem very young.

Bailey
09-29-2010, 01:46 PM
"The reconstruction plan, developed at a meeting of the participating European states, was established on June 5, 1947. It offered the same aid to the USSR and its allies, but they did not accept it.[2][3] The plan was in operation for four years beginning in April 1948. During that period some US $13 billion in economic and technical assistance were given to help the recovery of the European countries that had joined in the Organization for European Economic Co-operation. This $13 billion was in the context of a U.S. GDP of $258 billion in 1948, and was on top of $12 billion in American aid to Europe between the end of the war and the start of the Plan that is counted separately from the Marshall Plan"


More proof that he was a upstanding American. :confused::rolleyes:

Bailey
09-29-2010, 01:47 PM
I was two years old when Senator McCarthy drank himself to death. I merely wondered, since you seem very young.

Wouldn't be the first time a women lied about her age. :p



Well if the Rabid left wing press was after you as much as him you'd probably drink yourself to death also.

linda22003
09-29-2010, 01:55 PM
You're quoting something with no citation to what it is. It's even footnoted, but what those citations are footnoting is also a mystery.
I have no reason to lie about my age, or any interest in doing so. Thinking you can get a rise out of me by making age-related comments is also a non-starter; I have no problem with being the age I am. It's given me time to read more than you have, that's for sure. ;)

Bailey
09-29-2010, 01:59 PM
You're quoting something with no citation to what it is. It's even footnoted, but what those citations are footnoting is also a mystery.
I have no reason to lie about my age, or any interest in doing so. Thinking you can get a rise out of me by making age-related comments is also a non-starter; I have no problem with being the age I am. It's given me time to read more than you have, that's for sure. ;)

Not my job to prove it true/false to you sweet cheeks. I believe its true so you can either believe or not. (I was not alive when this stuff happened so I have to take what others have wrote)


Well you have been alive a lot longer then me so I guess you shouldve read more.

Gingersnap
09-29-2010, 02:00 PM
Are you guys still at this?

*shakes head*

linda22003
09-29-2010, 02:05 PM
Oh, it's just fun batting him around a little. He's obviously quite young. Since you agreed with me on the first page of the thread, it's just another indication that I'm on solid ground.

Bailey
09-29-2010, 02:06 PM
Linda just answer the questions


1. Was GCM for the UN?

2. Was the plan named after him offered to the USSR and its satellites?

3. Was he for or against the creation of Israel?

Not to mention how his State Dept helped the commies in China, so IMHO it didnt seem he had our best intrests at heart.

linda22003
09-29-2010, 02:26 PM
[QUOTE=Bailey;318369]Linda just answer the questions


1. Was GCM for the UN?
I would suppose he was, along with the majority at the time.

2. Was the plan named after him offered to the USSR and its satellites?
It was offered, as to other countries, in the hope that quicker recovery would lead to greater stability. Since Moscow rejected the assistance, it doesn't matter in any case.

3. Was he for or against the creation of Israel?
I'd have to read up on this again - it's been a long time - but I recall that he wanted to delay recognition because he (and most of the State Department) were against partition, which Truman favored (presumably because they remembered how the British Mandate in the region turned out, but that's just my guess).


[QUOTE]

Bailey
09-29-2010, 02:29 PM
[QUOTE=Bailey;318369]Linda just answer the questions


1. Was GCM for the UN?
I would suppose he was, along with the majority at the time.

2. Was the plan named after him offered to the USSR and its satellites?
It was offered, as to other countries, in the hope that quicker recovery would lead to greater stability. Since Moscow rejected the assistance, it doesn't matter in any case.

3. Was he for or against the creation of Israel?
I'd have to read up on this again - it's been a long time - but I recall that he wanted to delay recognition because he (and most of the State Department) were against partition, which Truman favored (presumably because they remembered how the British Mandate in the region turned out, but that's just my guess).


[QUOTE]

Did his State dept help or hurt the cause of freedom in China? This question I am not asking for snark purposes. I have a read a little on the subject and it seems after WW2 we all but aided the Chicoms in taking power.

linda22003
09-29-2010, 02:33 PM
Did his State dept help or hurt the cause of freedom in China? This question I am not asking for snark purposes. I have a read a little on the subject and it seems after WW2 we all but aided the Chicoms in taking power.

Also without snark, I won't attempt to answer that because I know very little about it. I know there was finger pointing about who "lost" China after the war, but it's not an area in which I'm informed, so I won't comment. This may be an unprecedented action on CU, or perhaps on any internet discussion board.

Bailey
09-29-2010, 02:50 PM
Also without snark, I won't attempt to answer that because I know very little about it. I know there was finger pointing about who "lost" China after the war, but it's not an area in which I'm informed, so I won't comment. This may be an unprecedented action on CU, or perhaps on any internet discussion board.

OMG I stumped the spelling guru. I should get a couple of awards :)
for this.

linda22003
09-29-2010, 03:00 PM
Well, I'll give you an award for weighing in on a figure in American history you never heard of until about two hours ago. :)

Joe Inflate
09-29-2010, 03:06 PM
Your list establishes that sometimes you're conservative, sometimes libertarian, and sometimes, as above, un-American. That committee accomplished nothing but to bureaucratize paranoia the first time; why are you so nostalgic for that?

Tsk. You fell for the propaganda. Way too many well-meaning people fall for that particular lie, sadly. It hurts me to see long-term commie propaganda victories like that. Thank God, they're few.

Do research on that matter. And by research, I mean avoid liberal propaganda. "Treason" by Ann Coulter is a good start.

Bailey
09-29-2010, 03:08 PM
Well, I'll give you an award for weighing in on a figure in American history you never heard of until about two hours ago. :)

Well your opinion of American History, sorry but I believe McCarthy devoted his life to exposing spies/security risks in the highest reaches of the Government. GCM I have read about mainly pertaining to McCarthy history. Why do you have to be smart ass? Yes I will admit you probably know more then I do but in my defense you have been on this earth a bit longer. ;):D

Bailey
09-29-2010, 03:11 PM
Tsk. You fell for the propaganda. Way too many well-meaning people fall for that particular lie, sadly. It hurts me to see long-term commie propaganda victories like that. Thank God, they're few.

Do research on that matter. And by research, I mean avoid liberal propaganda. "Treason" by Ann Coulter is a good start.

Yes a very good start, that book helped me get over the indoctrination I received from "public education" and people like lindanumbers on the subject of Joe McCarthy.

Bailey
09-29-2010, 03:12 PM
A little tidbit Tailgunner joe was never a member of Huacc even though the MSM makes it out to be the case.

Odysseus
09-29-2010, 03:25 PM
I'm going to go back to the original thread subject and congratulate CITM on coming around to the dark side, as Sarasota Republican likes to call it. :D

A few quotes to sustain you through the grief that your liberal friends and acquaintances will subject you to in the coming months:


Don't be afraid to see what you see.

Ronald Reagan
Facts are stubborn things.

Ronald Reagan
I always cheer up immensely if an attack is particularly wounding because I think, well, if they attack one personally, it means they have not a single political argument left.

Margaret Thatcher
If you want to cut your own throat, don't come to me for a bandage.

Margaret Thatcher
It pays to know the enemy - not least because at some time you may have the opportunity to turn him into a friend.

Margaret Thatcher
Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfils the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things.

Winston Churchill
However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results.

Winston Churchill

linda22003
09-29-2010, 03:32 PM
A little tidbit Tailgunner joe was never a member of Huacc even though the MSM makes it out to be the case.

How could he have been? That was a House committee, and McCarthy was in the Senate. What MSM says he was in the House?

linda22003
09-29-2010, 03:33 PM
Well your opinion of American History, sorry but I believe McCarthy devoted his life to exposing spies/security risks in the highest reaches of the Government. GCM I have read about mainly pertaining to McCarthy history. Why do you have to be smart ass? Yes I will admit you probably know more then I do but in my defense you have been on this earth a bit longer. ;):D

I was referring to Marshall.

Bailey
09-29-2010, 03:41 PM
How could he have been? That was a House committee, and McCarthy was in the Senate. What MSM says he was in the House?

Well the NYT had a crossword puzzle that said the McCarthy was a member of this group, they answer was Huac. They changed it after the firestorm that followed to "McCarthy beliefs were akin to this group" (or to the effect).

KhrushchevsShoe
09-29-2010, 03:42 PM
Tsk. You fell for the propaganda. Way too many well-meaning people fall for that particular lie, sadly. It hurts me to see long-term commie propaganda victories like that. Thank God, they're few.

Do research on that matter. And by research, I mean avoid liberal propaganda. "Treason" by Ann Coulter is a good start.

Jesus christ CITM, dont read Ann Coulter to wane yourself off propaganda. That's like siding with Stalin because you dont like Hitler.

Bailey
09-29-2010, 03:42 PM
I was referring to Marshall.

I knew who Marshall was long before I knew of you. Sorry I dont hold the same opinion of him as you do. :(

Odysseus
09-29-2010, 03:57 PM
Jesus christ CITM, dont read Ann Coulter to wane yourself off propaganda. That's like siding with Stalin because you dont like Hitler.

If it was good enough for Churchill...

linda22003
09-29-2010, 03:57 PM
Well the NYT had a crossword puzzle that said the McCarthy was a member of this group, they answer was Huac. They changed it after the firestorm that followed to "McCarthy beliefs were akin to this group" (or to the effect).

The crossword puzzle - a hotbed of MSM influence! :p

Odysseus
09-29-2010, 03:59 PM
How could he have been? That was a House committee, and McCarthy was in the Senate. What MSM says he was in the House?

In all fairness, this is a common misconception. A lot of lefties associate HUAC with McCarthy, but HUAC was originally formed to go after Nazi and other foreign fifth columns just before WWII.

KhrushchevsShoe
09-29-2010, 04:01 PM
If it was good enough for Churchill...

Yea but it wasn't.

Odysseus
09-29-2010, 04:08 PM
Yea but it wasn't.

Yeah, actually, it was. Churchill was perfectly willing to ally Britain and the USSR, although he had no illusions about what Stalin was. He simply recognized that they shared a common enemy and that the survival of Britain required the survival of the Soviet Union. It was in response to a surprised comment by one of his supporters regarding his praise of the Soviets defending against the Nazi invasion that he said this:

If Hitler invaded hell I would make at least a favorable reference to the devil in the House of Commons.

--Winston Churchill

Bailey
09-29-2010, 04:21 PM
In all fairness, this is a common misconception. A lot of lefties associate HUAC with McCarthy, but HUAC was originally formed to go after Nazi and other foreign fifth columns just before WWII.

Funny thing the commies were in favor of Huac, as long as it went after Nazi's but as soon as it went after them then the left starting hating them. Funny aint it? :rolleyes:

Bailey
09-29-2010, 04:23 PM
Nixon wouldve been a centrist Republican but for the Hiss affair, the left never forgave him for that and watergate was payback for it.

Bailey
09-29-2010, 04:24 PM
The crossword puzzle - a hotbed of MSM influence! :p

Well a lot of people do the crosswords in the NYT you wish for them to be mislead?

Odysseus
09-29-2010, 04:56 PM
Funny thing the commies were in favor of Huac, as long as it went after Nazi's but as soon as it went after them then the left starting hating them. Funny aint it? :rolleyes:
This is true. It was originally a Democratic initiative, and it was supported by, among others, FDR, his Vice President, Wallace, and pretty much the entire Democratic caucus in the house. Of course, back then, there was bipartisan agreement that undermining the government of the United States on behalf of an enemy state was a bad thing.

Nixon wouldve been a centrist Republican but for the Hiss affair, the left never forgave him for that and watergate was payback for it.
That, and for the Helen Douglas campaign. She was a far-left Democrat who ran for senate as a moderate, but Nixon publicized her voting record and nicknamed her the "Pink Lady," and the left never forgave him for running a campaign that actually >gasp< quoted them.

Well a lot of people do the crosswords in the NYT you wish for them to be mislead?
If they are reading the NY Times, they are already being mis-led.

Zeus
09-29-2010, 04:57 PM
Joe McCarthy Was Right (http://www.spongobongo.com/em/em9820.htm)
(http://www.spongobongo.com/em/em9820.htm)



From 1943 until 1980, unbeknownst to virtually everyone, the National Security Agency intercepted every Soviet message going from or to the United States. It was not until 1994 that their existence was even acknowledged, and 1995 when the first 1,400 of 240,000 intercepts were released to the public. Their content was damning and supportive of the contentions of not only McCarthy but Whittaker Chambers, Elizabeth Bentley, Hoover, and others.

The collapse of Communism opened files of not only internal Soviet spy documents but also gave the FBI, CIA, and American scholars access to the files of the American Communist Party that had been hidden in a Russian warehouse since 1950. The cat was out of the clichéd bag.

Just who was exposed by these documents. Alger Hiss who had been the number three man at State behind Dean Acheson and Dean Rusk, and who, most assuredly, at some point, would have eventually been Secretary of State. Harry Dexter White, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, who purposely withheld allocated funding for the Chinese Nationalists, during their Civil War, that destroyed their currency and, thus, their efforts against Mao's Communists.

Julius and Ethel Rosenberg had been conduits for even more damaging information than the atom bomb, for which they were executed. Lauchlin Currie, Special Assistant to F.D.R. Samuel Dickstein, member of the House of Representatives from Brooklyn.

William and Martha Dodd, son and daughter of the U.S. ambassador to Germany in the 1930's. Lawrence Duggan, State Department Director of Latin American Affairs. Harold Ickes, Sr., father of Clinton's impeachment flack, who was Secretary of the Interior. Finally, William Weisband, U.S. Army Signal Security Agency. This is just a very few, the most prominent or household names one might say.

Was Robert Oppenheimer, the Director of the Atom Bomb Project at Los Alamos, New Mexico, a member of the Communist Party? Quite emphatically, no! His wife was. His brother was. His mistress was. As were many of his closest associates at the University of California. In addition, Oppenheimer was one of those scientists in the 40's who thought that all scientific information should be shared universally for the good of mankind.

Were any of the aforementioned exposed by McCarthy? Not one. He'd been too late at the spy discovery game. After all, Alger Hiss got Richard Nixon the Vice-Presidency. White had been shifted to that historical ashbin where failures are allowed to "resign" to, the International Monetary Fund.

Hiss, unquestionably the most brilliant of the rising stars at State at the age of 43, in 1947 became the head of the Carnegie E0ndowment for Peace; a position usually held by a senior citizen with insufficient retirement funds. Lawrence Duggan, as the FBI closed in on him, had the presence of mind and good sense to jump from a window and commit suicide. Of course, he was considered a "victim" of a non-existent "Red Scare".

Just how many did McCarthy catch? Darn few. Of the 10,000 government employees who were exposed as Communists, security risks, or of questionable loyalty and lost their jobs, at the least, only forty can be attributed to McCarthy.

Any of the major players? None, as most had either been moved laterally by Truman or snared by the FBI.

Bailey
09-29-2010, 05:04 PM
Joe McCarthy Was Right (http://www.spongobongo.com/em/em9820.htm)
(http://www.spongobongo.com/em/em9820.htm)


LINDA THIS IS WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT, McCarthy was RIGHT. We can quibble over his methods but any argument has to begin with the statement "he was right all along"

FeebMaster
09-29-2010, 05:09 PM
McCarthy and the HUAC. 2nd and 3rd only to Reagan for hearing the crazy from Conservatives.

Bailey
09-29-2010, 05:12 PM
McCarthy and the HUAC. 2nd and 3rd only to Reagan for hearing the crazy from Conservatives.

Sorry I dont speak douche, so please speak english.

FeebMaster
09-29-2010, 05:29 PM
Sorry I dont speak douche, so please speak english.

Terribly sorry.

Conservative support for Joe McCarthy, and for the House Committee on Un-American Activities makes Conservatives look almost as crazy as their Reagan worship.

Odysseus
09-29-2010, 05:35 PM
Terribly sorry.

Conservative support for Joe McCarthy, and for the House Committee on Un-American Activities makes Conservatives look almost as crazy as their Reagan worship.

You're still speaking douche. Allow me to translate:

Joe McCarthy believed that there were communists in the US government. Since there have never been any communists, anywhere, ever, except possibly for Lenin, and even that is debatable, McCarthy must have therefore been wrong. Wrong! Wrong! Wrong! So there! How's that for incredible reasoning and debating skills? Really zinged you there, didn't I? Bwaaahaahaahaaaaaa... I will now take the opportunity to gratuitously bash Reagan.

Bailey
09-29-2010, 05:38 PM
You're still speaking douche. Allow me to translate:

Joe McCarthy believed that there were communists in the US government. Since there have never been any communists, anywhere, ever, except possibly for Lenin, and even that is debatable, McCarthy must have therefore been wrong. Wrong! Wrong! Wrong! So there! How's that for incredible reasoning and debating skills? Really zinged you there, didn't I? Bwaaahaahaahaaaaaa... I will now take the opportunity to gratuitously bash Reagan.

LOL

You nailed him.

Bailey
09-29-2010, 05:39 PM
Terribly sorry.

Conservative support for Joe McCarthy, and for the House Committee on Un-American Activities makes Conservatives look almost as crazy as their Reagan worship.

Now thats just crazy talk

FeebMaster
09-29-2010, 05:40 PM
You're still speaking douche. Allow me to translate:

Joe McCarthy believed that there were communists in the US government. Since there have never been any communists, anywhere, ever, except possibly for Lenin, and even that is debatable, McCarthy must have therefore been wrong. Wrong! Wrong! Wrong! So there! How's that for incredible reasoning and debating skills? Really zinged you there, didn't I? Bwaaahaahaahaaaaaa... I will now take the opportunity to gratuitously bash Reagan.


Who said there weren't communists in the US government? Hell, McCarthy was pretty pink himself.

It just seems a little out there to love a guy for going after communists when you vote for guys who support at least half the planks in the communist manifesto. Know what I mean?

Bailey
09-29-2010, 05:44 PM
Who said there weren't communists in the US government? Hell, McCarthy was pretty pink himself.

It just seems a little out there to love a guy for going after communists when you vote for guys who support at least half the planks in the communist manifesto. Know what I mean?

Got proof or are you speaking douche again?

FeebMaster
09-29-2010, 06:18 PM
Got proof or are you speaking douche again?

Sorry. My translator is union and has reached his quota for the month.

Wei Wu Wei
09-29-2010, 06:38 PM
Jesus christ CITM, dont read Ann Coulter to wane yourself off propaganda. That's like siding with Stalin because you dont like Hitler.

http://b-29s-over-korea.com/God_Bless_America/images/Yalta-Conference1945-Churchill-Roosevelt-Stalin-Wikipedia.jpg

Bailey
09-29-2010, 07:00 PM
Sorry. My translator is union and has reached his quota for the month.

So in other words you are talking out your ass again

Constitutionally Speaking
09-29-2010, 07:21 PM
How could he have been? That was a House committee, and McCarthy was in the Senate. What MSM says he was in the House?


Believe it or not the common belief out there is that McCarthy actually HEADED the House committee.

Chalk one up for our public education system :rolleyes:

CaughtintheMiddle1990
09-29-2010, 09:15 PM
Who said there weren't communists in the US government? Hell, McCarthy was pretty pink himself.

It just seems a little out there to love a guy for going after communists when you vote for guys who support at least half the planks in the communist manifesto. Know what I mean?


How was McCarthy a little "pink" himself?

I'm in bad company, my political heroes are J. Edgar Hoover, Richard Nixon, John Kenendy (Kennedy was a friend of McCarthy and was the only senator not to vote yes or no on censuring him. He also dated one of the Kennedy's sisters and was the godfather to one of Bobby's kids), Gerald Ford (not because he was that great or anything, but because of how he handled the situation he was given).

Gingersnap
09-29-2010, 09:21 PM
You're getting sidetracked by this stuff. Ready Levin's book. Seriously. Then tell us what you think of it. ;)

NJCardFan
09-29-2010, 11:06 PM
No you're not converting. You're mocking.

Rockntractor
09-29-2010, 11:14 PM
No you're not converting. You're mocking.

I don't think he is, we use this website to promote the conservative way of thinking and then when someone starts agreeing with us we push them away?:confused:

CaughtintheMiddle1990
09-30-2010, 01:15 AM
No you're not converting. You're mocking.

No, sorry, I'm not.

Sonnabend
09-30-2010, 03:27 AM
-I believe in public education, it just needs reformation and a weeding out of anti-American teachers. Education I believe is a key to our future, and it should be available to those who don't have. Agreed.

"Black armband" education is indoctrination. Nothing less. One of the issues in this is this idiotiuc liberal browbeating over the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki., We Aussies are all too well aware of the atrocities committed by the Japanese, the Kempetai, the generals.

War is hell.
War is death.
War is destruction and waste.

No one argues that.I live for the day when war is a memory and nothing more.

But..until then..

The two bombs were necessary, to stop a war they started. And btw, the two cities were legitimate military targets..Hiroshima a shipping port, Nagasaki an industrial centre.

Yes, thousands died..millions more were saved on both sides. Teachers like the morons at Berkeley castigate the US for using them, claiming "war crimes", yet they ignore this very real truth.

I live in a nation that was a whisker close to invasion, whose soldiers fought and bled and died to keep us free, and to protect our US brothers in this global war.

No one says the US is perfect, I sure as hell don't..but this kind of perversion of history is an obscenity.


-I believe programs such as NASA, and all forms of scientific research (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_research) bodies should be uplifted and funded moreso than they are.Damned straight. Get us OFF this rock and into the stars.


- I believe some industries need regulation--I don't want a return of Laissez-Faire. But I also don't agree with over regulation either.Correct.


-I believe prostitution should become legalized and should be a regulated industry. This is in the interest of both taking a racket away from the crooks, and for the betterment of those working women and their customers. I believe it could be beneficial all around.Hm..well, I can see both sides here, in this country we DO have legal brothels, and prostitution is prosecutable..only no one bothers. moral "crusaders" have been trying to stamp it out since Biblical times.

And failed.


-I believe Pot should remain illegal but should be decriminalized, and perhaps slowly over time made legal.Sorry, disagree on this one.


I don't believe any of the big changes--such as major cuts or elimination(s) to programs--should occur until our economy is sound. You can't put thousands out of work overnight. It has to be a slow processs since many of these programs themselves were installed gradually. I think an important facet (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facet) of this is that it be made as painless as possible. We don't want riots.Allow business and free enterprise to succeed, encourage small business and investment, increase employment

More employment = prosperity

And the handmaiden of prosperity is...peace.

Hm


J. Edgar HooverUh,no, the man was an egomaniac and an abuser of power. His COINTELPRO and massive illegal wiretapping, along with his crimes against civil liberties make him a fool, not a hero. A blackmailer makes a poor role model.

Look, CITM, the main principle of a conservative is to be left the hell alone to live their lives as they see fit. No overreaching government, no nanny state. Personal liberty, freedom and responsiblity are the cornerstones of who and what we are.

Sonnabend
09-30-2010, 03:32 AM
No you're not converting. You're mocking.

No, he isn't

CITM, try not to die of shock. I am listening to what you have to say and when I reply, will try and add to it as best I could.

No one expects you to "convert"..as an individual, as a free person, you have the right to think and believe as you see fit. Another conservative value: personal freedom.

Sonnabend
09-30-2010, 03:38 AM
-I no longer support gay marriage. Not on any biblical ground, but on the grounds of practicality--I do believe the slippery slope argument is valid with this issue. Legalize gay marriage, and than polygaists will be banging on the door wanting their rights. I'm a little conflicted on this though, since we do allow first cousins to get married in over 40 of our states.

*sigh*

No one cares what they do in their bedrooms, as long the RSPCA isnt involved. What gets people angry is when this agenda is shoved in their faces, whether they want it or not.


-I still am and always have been a staunch proponent of the 2nd amendment. That remains unchanged.

Lucky you. Protect that right with all your soul. Trust me on this, you do not want what we have. Ever.


-I support the bringing back of HUACC.

No.

No one should ever be told to either incriminate themselves in violation of their Constitutional rights or "name others"...that's insanity.


-I am against the GZ0 Mosque. Always have been.

Agree 1000%


-A balance should be made between our traditional culture, and multiculturalism. There has to be some middle ground.

Correct.

Odysseus
09-30-2010, 02:09 PM
Who said there weren't communists in the US government? Hell, McCarthy was pretty pink himself.

It just seems a little out there to love a guy for going after communists when you vote for guys who support at least half the planks in the communist manifesto. Know what I mean?
Now that is a valid point. Who are you and what have you done with the real Feeb?

How was McCarthy a little "pink" himself?

I'm in bad company, my political heroes are J. Edgar Hoover, Richard Nixon, John Kenendy (Kennedy was a friend of McCarthy and was the only senator not to vote yes or no on censuring him. He also dated one of the Kennedy's sisters and was the godfather to one of Bobby's kids), Gerald Ford (not because he was that great or anything, but because of how he handled the situation he was given).
McCarthy was a Wisconsin Republican, in the style of Robert LaFollette, another progressive. He was left of center on a number of key economic issues. Back then, there was an anti-communist left, and that was where McCarthy came from.

-A balance should be made between our traditional culture, and multiculturalism. There has to be some middle ground.
I'm going to concentrate on the areas where I disagree with you, not because I'm trying to bust your chops, but because there's not much to say beyond that I agree. In this case, real multiculturalism, the study and understanding of other cultures and the ability to make judgements of their values, strengths and weaknesses, doesn't conflict with the values of our culture. The problem is that multiculturalism, as taught by leftist academics, isn't concerned with the actual facts about other cultures, but is only concerned with trashing ours by creating a moral equivalence and an atmosphere in which honest discussion of different cultures is impossible because of political correctness. The GZ Mosque is a perfect example of this. Those who know the culture of Islam understand the implications of the name "Cordoba House" and the location. We understand the intent of it in the context of Dawa and Jihad, and oppose it on those grounds. To a liberal, these arguments, which cite the Qur'an, Hadiths and Sunna, are simply manifestations of ignorance of their enlightened attitudes, which are based on wishful thinking about Islam, rather than its realtiy.


-I agree with pulling out of NAFTA.
The problem with free trade is that your most expensive commodity has to compete with places where it is cheaper. Our most expensive commodity is labor, which is far cheaper in Mexico. By regulating our labor market, setting floors for wages and mandating benefits, we have driven up the cost of labor, which creates incentives for exporting jobs or importing illegals. Reduce the regulatory costs of hiring and you reduce the incentives to evade the system.


Where I disagree with conservatives:

-I believe in public education, it just needs reformation and a weeding out of anti-American teachers. Education I believe is a key to our future, and it should be available to those who don't have.
Public education is problematical. We used to have a robust private education system in the US, that was gradually supplanted by the public system. The public system drove out the private system by being cheaper, rather than better, until it was the only system left except for pockets of elite schools. This, BTW, is almost exactly what you have in Britain with their health system. The NHS drove out the middle range of providers, leaving patients with a choice of crappy public facilities or expensive/elite private ones. Subsidies polarize markets, and the public education system is a perfect example of it.


-I believe programs such as NASA, and all forms of scientific research bodies should be uplifted and funded moreso than they are.
NASA has become a parody of itself. It needs to be folded into the DOD, which has demonstrated that it can do the mission more cheaply. The federal government also needs to elminate the restrictions on private space ventures, which give NASA a monopoly. Government funding of science corrupts science. The perfect example is Global Warming, where grants go to those who give the government the answer that it wants, which is that more government is needed to solve a problem that doesn't exist. The incentive to manipulate and falsify data becomes huge, as we're seeing with the e-mails from the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit.

Molon Labe
09-30-2010, 04:34 PM
It just seems a little out there to love a guy for going after communists when you vote for guys who support at least half the planks in the communist manifesto. Know what I mean?

Blasphemy! :p

You know NO ONE could ever have an "R" by their name and support such a thing.

CaughtintheMiddle1990
10-01-2010, 06:41 PM
I have to say, on the entitlement issue I changed my mind. I think a lot of the Great Society (besides the entitelements) should remain and be expanded upon in the long run.

I still think though that some departments, like the USPS (which is shit) should be privatized.

Everything else in the OP remains the same.

Sonnabend
10-01-2010, 07:34 PM
CITM On McCarthy: I'd like you to comment on this

No one should ever be told to either incriminate themselves in violation of their Constitutional rights or "name others"...that's insanity.

Does, or does not, the Constitution grant the right to not be forced to incriminate yourself? is this not the Fifth Amendment?And would McCarthy style "hearings" not be a violation of that right?


"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.[1 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution# cite_note-Bill_of_Rights_from_Cornell_University_Law_School-0)

Why do you support something that is a direct violation of the rights laid down in the Constitution? If this was extended to the states, we AGAIN have the 10th amendment, and their rights to govern their own citizens under state law also applies.

IMO you need to rethink this.

CaughtintheMiddle1990
10-01-2010, 07:47 PM
CITM On McCarthy: I'd like you to comment on this

No one should ever be told to either incriminate themselves in violation of their Constitutional rights or "name others"...that's insanity.

Does, or does not, the Constitution grant the right to not be forced to incriminate yourself? is this not the Fifth Amendment?And would McCarthy style "hearings" not be a violation of that right?


Why do you support something that is a direct violation of the rights laid down in the Constitution? If this was extended to the states, we AGAIN have the 10th amendment, and their rights to govern their own citizens under state law also applies.

IMO you need to rethink this.

Well, his methodology was wrong, but I think his motives were good. He just went about it the wrong way. At the time, people who were communist or USSR sympathizers were essentially public enemy number one, and if these people were in the government it was important that it be known and dealt with. It'd be like if you had possibly hundreds of Al Qaeda supporters in the government today--Same sort of thing, different era. His methodology might have been unconstitutional, but his motives were patriotic I would say.

Sonnabend
10-01-2010, 07:49 PM
Well, his methodology was wrong, but I think his motives were good. He just went about it the wrong way. At the time, people who were communist or USSR sympathizers were essentially public enemy number one, and if these people were in the government it was important that it be known and dealt with. It'd be like if you had possibly hundreds of Al Qaeda supporters in the government today--Same sort of thing, different era. His methodology might have been unconstitutional, but his motives were patriotic I would say.

CITM, my young friend, there is an old saying about what the road to hell is paved with...

CaughtintheMiddle1990
10-01-2010, 07:52 PM
CITM On McCarthy: I'd like you to comment on this

No one should ever be told to either incriminate themselves in violation of their Constitutional rights or "name others"...that's insanity.

Does, or does not, the Constitution grant the right to not be forced to incriminate yourself? is this not the Fifth Amendment?And would McCarthy style "hearings" not be a violation of that right?


Why do you support something that is a direct violation of the rights laid down in the Constitution? If this was extended to the states, we AGAIN have the 10th amendment, and their rights to govern their own citizens under state law also applies.

IMO you need to rethink this.


CITM, my young friend, there is an old saying about what the road to hell is paved with...

I know. But he was doing what FDR, Truman and Ike had failed to do: Dealing with an inside enemy head on. He went overboard saying that Ike, Truman and FDR were guilty of treason, but I just think his zeal against communists is commendable.

Sonnabend
10-01-2010, 07:55 PM
: Dealing with an inside enemy head on. He went overboard saying that Ike, Truman and FDR were guilty of treason

"Better that one gullty man go free than a hundred innocents suffer". You need to read "The Crucible"- and think long and hard about how it was that Salem made its way to Washington.