# Bye, bye, Christie.



## Flanders (Oct 2, 2012)

*NJ&#8217;s Governor Christie stood up to the teachers&#8217; unions to be sure, but there were other things he said and did that should have raised a signal flag for conservatives: * 







*B Bravo = I am taking on or discharging explosives*​
*This is one more warning: *



> In an interview on ABC&#8217;s &#8220;This Week,&#8221; New Jersey Gov. Christie was asked whether Missouri Rep. and GOP Senate nominee Todd Akin should have the support of the Republican Party despite his controversial statement about &#8220;legitimate rape.&#8221;
> 
> &#8220;No,&#8221; Christie replied, vigorously and without hesitation.
> 
> ...



Christie says GOP should not support Missouri&#8217;s Akin
By: John Gizzi
10/1/2012 09:31 AM

Christie says GOP should not support Missouri's Akin - Conservative News

*Christie is an establishment Republican with little to suggest he is committed to conservative ideals. Should Akin lose, and his loss affects Senate votes in the years ahead, Christie&#8217;s support for a Democrat over a conservative Republican should be remembered by Tea Partiers if and when he runs for higher office.*


----------



## whitehall (Oct 2, 2012)

Nobody ever said that Christie was a die-hard Tea Party Conservative. The Republican party is a big tent. What democrat would dare to criticize his own party? Maybe Lieberman but we remember what happened to him.


----------



## Flanders (Oct 2, 2012)

whitehall said:


> Nobody ever said that Christie was a die-hard Tea Party Conservative. The Republican party is a big tent. What democrat would dare to criticize his own party? Maybe Lieberman but we remember what happened to him.



*To whitehall: So youre advocating the same old crap. Conservatives should vote for the Republican because he is better than the Democrat. That scam went out with John McCain and it aint coming back with Romney simply because this election is touted as the most important election in history. In order for that to be true Democrat scum will no longer get elected when Hussein is defeated. I see nothing that guarantees that result when Romney wins. Democrat scum got elected before Hussein came along, and they will get elected after he is gone. More than likely the sewer rats Hussein brought into government with him will remain after he leaves.

In any event, the Senate is far more important than is the presidency in this election. Enough conservative senators can block anything whether the president is an establishment Republican or a Democrat. 

Dumping a system where senators work for the president is the real goal in this election. Senators not treating the president as though he can fire them will spread to governors and state legislators. In plain English screw the president and you screw the federal government as well. 

One thing coming out of this election supports my view. The media is less trusted than ever before. That lost trust is gone forever. In practical terms that means that in the future senators, governors, congressmen, etc. need not beg for support from the media, nor fear media displeasure. Better still, media scare tactics designed to pass garbage like bailouts, stimulus packages, tax increases to prevent economic Armageddon, and oppressive legislation will not work either. Going from wising up to media manipulation in elections to wising up to media legislation that impoverishes is only a small step.    *


----------



## whitehall (Oct 3, 2012)

Flanders said:


> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> > Nobody ever said that Christie was a die-hard Tea Party Conservative. The Republican party is a big tent. What democrat would dare to criticize his own party? Maybe Lieberman but we remember what happened to him.
> ...



Damn Flanders, do you always look for a guarantee when you pull the lever in November? You must get disappointed a lot.


----------



## Kevin_Kennedy (Oct 3, 2012)

That he's willing to buck the party is a plus, as far as I'm concerned.


----------



## Flanders (Oct 3, 2012)

> whitehall;6098779
> 
> Damn Flanders, do you always look for a guarantee when you pull the lever in November?



*To whitehall: No. Im just too experienced to pull the level for the same old crap.* 



> whitehall;6098779
> 
> You must get disappointed a lot.



*To whitehall: Not any more. I used to be every time I voted for the Republican because he was the lesser of the two evils. Now, no matter which lying sneak gets in there I will take pleasure in knowing I did not vote for him.*



Kevin_Kennedy said:


> That he's willing to buck the party is a plus, as far as a I'm concerned.



*To Kevin_Kennedy: Thank you. But just to be clear, I am  a conservative not an establishment Republican. As soon as viable conservative party forms Im there.*


----------



## whitehall (Oct 3, 2012)

My guess, Flanders, is that you are a dirty trickster democrat trying to subdue republican turnout or you are a quirky Ron Paul libertarian. Most conservatives try to get the best qualified republicans and when they can't they support the party that is closest to the standards they set for themselves. Democrats have drifted so far to the left that it is incomprehensible that an alleged "conservative" would be hyper-critical of a statement made by a moderate republican governor unless the motivation was to suppress republican turnout.


----------



## Toro (Oct 3, 2012)

Flanders said:


> *NJs Governor Christie stood up to the teachers unions to be sure, but there were other things he said and did that should have raised a signal flag for conservatives: *
> 
> 
> 
> ...



If David Duke were the candidate, you'd support him based on your logic.


----------



## Flanders (Oct 4, 2012)

whitehall said:


> My guess, Flanders, is that you are a dirty trickster democrat trying to subdue republican turnout or you are a quirky Ron Paul libertarian. Most conservatives try to get the best qualified republicans and when they can't they support the party that is closest to the standards they set for themselves. Democrats have drifted so far to the left that it is incomprehensible that an alleged "conservative" would be hyper-critical of a statement made by a moderate republican governor unless the motivation was to suppress republican turnout.



*To whitehall: My guess is that you are dirty trickster pulling the same old scam: Vote for the Republican because he is better than the Democrat. Either that, or you simply do not see that Republicans are just as guilty as the Democrats for everything that went wrong in this country since LBJ. If you do understand every establishment Republican candidate then you obviously want more of the same. 

Ronald Reagan was the only one who ever stood up to them and they hate him for it. Proof: They&#8217;ve been trying to undo everything RR accomplished; including reversing the result of the Cold War. Hussein&#8217;s open mic blunder to Russia&#8217;s President Medvedev was an impeachable offense, but have you heard Romney mention it in any context.    

Incidentally, I&#8217;ll wager that you cannot tell me what Romney would do about any one of the following: 

1.  Global government.

2.  Foreign aid to known enemies.

3.  US membership in the UN.

4.  Repealing the XVI & XVII Amendments.

5.  Full-fledged amnesty for illegal aliens.

6.  Securing America&#8217;s borders. 

7.  Funding the education industry.

8.  Hussein&#8217;s destructive executive orders.

9.   Fighting Peace Without Victory wars.

10.  Bipartisan legislation.

11. Unnecessary bureaucracies.

12. Bureaucratic mandates and regulations. (Think EPA and Department of Education for starters.) 

13. Bailouts, raising the debt ceiling again and again, stimulus packages. 

There is a lot more that is unknown about both Romney and Christie. The only thing that is known for certain is that they are governors from liberal Northeast states.* 




Toro said:


> If David Duke were the candidate, you'd support him based on your logic.



*To Toro: Your accusation is nonsensical as well as inaccurate. You cannot know how David Duke would govern. Romneycare is a clue as to how Romney will govern. You should know Hussein is infinitely worse than anything David Duke could possibly be, yet Duke is the archvillain in your world. It is your logic that is faulty. *


----------



## editec (Oct 4, 2012)

I can definitely understand why many boys here are disappointed with Christie


Christie would not sign on to the *Woman are Nothing but Breed Animals* plank of their misogynist wing of the GOP.


----------



## Flanders (Oct 4, 2012)

editec said:


> I can definitely understand why many boys here are disappointed with Christie
> 
> 
> Christie would not sign on to the *Woman are Nothing but Breed Animals* plank of their misogynist wing of the GOP.



*To editec: Even allowing for poetic license, there is nothing in the Republican platform even close to your characterization. 

Being an establishment Republican it is more than likely Christie is a defender of women in government irrespective of their agenda; that includes Husseins women. Not even the Soviet Union or Communist China empowered such a collection of detestable females in their halls of power as foul as Husseins females. Christies  indirect support for Clair McCaskill who was at least elected directly supports unelected women like Janet Napolitano. What Republican in his right mind would support somebody like Napolitano:*



> Based on this investigative report alone, it is apparent that the Department of Homeland Security is mismanaged at the highest levels to the point of threatening the civil liberties of every American citizen while failing to uncover any domestic terror threat or plot.



Explosive findings about DHS operations in congressional report
Doug Hagmann & Joseph Hagmann  Thursday, October 4, 2012 

Explosive findings about DHS operations in congressional report

*I will be a lot happier with Christie when he takes on a few of Husseins spawn by name instead of covering himself in broad generalizations. He certainly had no problem dumping on conservative Todd Akin. 

Incidentally:*



> Akin, left for dead, rebounds
> Poll shows him beating Missouri Sen. McCaskill
> 
> Akin, left for dead, rebounds


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Oct 7, 2012)

> Bye, bye, Christie.



Shown here with his famous invisible Cristie Creme donut -






And, here, the night the lights went out on Christie






Wow ... Just think of the hungry and DESERVING AMERICANS we could feed if he were really gone ...


----------



## Flanders (Oct 31, 2012)

The Get Along to Git-Along Buoys of New Jersey
Judi McLeod
Wednesday, October 31, 2012

The Get Along to Git-Along Buoys of New Jersey

*Good lord, its more than bye, bye. *



> Leaving on a jet plane- peter, paul and mary - YouTube


----------



## martybegan (Oct 31, 2012)

luddly.neddite said:


> > Bye, bye, Christie.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



FOAD asshole.


----------



## R.D. (Oct 31, 2012)

Kevin_Kennedy said:


> That he's willing to buck the party is a plus, as far as I'm concerned.



This is NJ, he's not bucking the party so much as playing to half of the voters at any given turn


----------



## YoungRepublican (Dec 22, 2012)

The Get Along to Git-Along Buoys of New Jersey
Judi McLeod
Wednesday, October 31, 2012





Damn Chris Christie and his paling around with the prepsident. I mean are you kidding me how could you find middle ground just because of a little devastation! in all seriousness, I live in New Jersey and I was affected by Sandy and any person who dares to politicize this tradgedy is a shameful person. My governer did what he was supposed to do, show the President of the United States why we need aid. This isny politics you fool, its humanity. I mean we say Tod Akin is critisized too heavily because he said that women cant get pregnant as a result of rape, yet what Governor Christie did was traitorus.. What world are you people living in?


----------



## Flanders (Dec 22, 2012)

YoungRepublican said:


> The Get Along to Git-Along Buoys of New Jersey
> Judi McLeod
> Wednesday, October 31, 2012
> 
> Damn Chris Christie and his paling around with the prepsident. I mean are you kidding me how could you find middle ground just because of a little devastation! in all seriousness, I live in New Jersey and I was affected by Sandy and any person who dares to politicize this tradgedy is a shameful person. My governer did what he was supposed to do, show the President of the United States why we need aid. This isny politics you fool, its humanity. I mean we say Tod Akin is critisized too heavily because he said that women cant get pregnant as a result of rape, yet what Governor Christie did was traitorus.. What world are you people living in?



*To YoungRepublican: I began this thread on Oct. 2, 2012.  You picked up on it after Sandy struck ---- almost a full month later. Getting money for New Jersey has nothing to do with what Christie was before Sandy.   *


----------



## YoungRepublican (Dec 23, 2012)

Flanders said:


> YoungRepublican said:
> 
> 
> > The Get Along to Git-Along Buoys of New Jersey
> ...



So your issue is with him dumping Akin.. I didnt know that actual people supported Akin.. Is there a reason to support him after what he said? mistakes happen, granted, but I want no affiliation with a man who 1. entertained that notion as even remotely correct b. had the gaul to verbalize it


----------



## Flanders (Dec 24, 2012)

YoungRepublican said:


> So your issue is with him dumping Akin.. I didnt know that actual people supported Akin.. Is there a reason to support him after what he said? mistakes happen, granted, but I want no affiliation with a man who 1. entertained that notion as even remotely correct b. had the gaul to verbalize it



*To YoungRepublican: My issue is Christie opening his mouth at all. How many other Republican governors felt compelled to torpedo Akin because of one poorly-stated position. Im willing to bet that Christie would not have said a word had Akin been a well-known RINO. 

And I find it odd that a young Republican assumes the moral high ground knowing a Senate seat went to the party of infanticide, perverts, degenerates, and Bill Clinton. *


----------



## BallsBrunswick (Dec 24, 2012)

The Republicans actually get a decent politician who the majority of Americans would support with him common sense no-nonsense approach to politics and they're going to run him out the party because he doesn't kneel before the utter retardation that comes out of the GOP machine. Completely idiotic but in a way beautiful because this is exactly why the GOP is dying.

And I can't believe the dumb fucks in this thread are actually defending rape. Are you people fucking stupid? Jesus, Republicans are just pathetic.


----------



## Votto (Dec 24, 2012)

Kevin_Kennedy said:


> That he's willing to buck the party is a plus, as far as I'm concerned.



With America in love with Obama, all  he has to do is flash those pictures of them both embracing after hurricane Sandy while the rest of the GOP will be demonized as hate filled bigots.  That could help his presidential bid, assuming he wishes to run.  However, in that part of the country this image is a must.  After all, most in New Jersey lean left, so he does what he has to do in order to survive.


----------



## Votto (Dec 24, 2012)

BallsBrunswick said:


> The Republicans actually get a decent politician who the majority of Americans would support with him common sense no-nonsense approach to politics and they're going to run him out the party because he doesn't kneel before the utter retardation that comes out of the GOP machine. Completely idiotic but in a way beautiful because this is exactly why the GOP is dying.
> 
> And I can't believe the dumb fucks in this thread are actually defending rape. Are you people fucking stupid? Jesus, Republicans are just pathetic.



I think the GOP needs to die.  I mean, what has the GOP ever done to significantly tackle the ever increasing scope and power of the federal government?

Screw'em.

I do see in Christie the possible ability to tackle some of this government power due to his ability to get in peoples faces and articulate that position to voters.  In this regard he is special.


----------



## Votto (Dec 24, 2012)

YoungRepublican said:


> The Get Along to Git-Along Buoys of New Jersey
> Judi McLeod
> Wednesday, October 31, 2012
> 
> ...



Get off your high horse kiddo.  EVERYTHING is politicized in politics today.  That is what makes them all so repulsive.  Having said that, I think Christie was shrewed in his paling around with the president, especially with lefty voters in New Jersey and the rest of the nation seemingly in love with Barak.


----------



## Flanders (Dec 24, 2012)

> BallsBrunswick;6545626
> 
> The Republicans actually get a decent politician who the majority of Americans would support with him common sense no-nonsense approach to politics and they're going to run him out the party because he doesn't kneel before the utter retardation that comes out of the GOP machine.



*To BallsBrunswick: The fact that liberals and the MSM love Christie is warning enough for every American who is sick of the federal government. 

And next time you speak for a majority of Americans try to remember that every poll shows conservatives far outnumber liberals.  The main problem liberals have when they speak for the majority is remembering that approximately 50 % of eligible voters do not vote. Give them a real choice and they will vote for true conservatism every time. For decades, the MSM, and the leaders of both major political parties, have devoted most of their time and resources preventing such a choice from getting on the ballot. Their choice is Republican, Democrat, or the highway.

Incidentally, liberalism and all of its offshoots make up approximately 20 percent of ALL Americans. Had it not been for stolen elections, illegal immigration, and the federal courts liberalism would be nearly extinct today.* 



> BallsBrunswick;6545626
> 
> And I can't believe the dumb fucks in this thread are actually defending rape. Are you people fucking stupid? Jesus, Republicans are just pathetic.



*To BallsBrunswick: Akin did not defend rape, nor does anyone else defend rape except Democrats. Akin said this:*



> I think there should be some punishment, but the punishment ought to be of the rapist, and not attacking the child.



*Had Juanita Broaddrick become pregnant when Bill Clinton raped her he would have been punished. That is why Democrats and RINO jumped all over Akin. Their presidents can do no wrong.*



Votto said:


> I think the GOP needs to die.  I mean, what has the GOP ever done to significantly tackle the ever increasing scope and power of the federal government?



*To Votto: I agree. Unfortunately, establishment Republicans controlling the Republican party will never die; they will combine with the Democrat party the minute a real SECOND PARTY opposed to totalitarian government forms.  

Conservatism has been taking a beating at the hands of Republicans for decades.  Its time for conservatives to reject the false hope the Republican party offered through all of those downhill years.

There is no doubt that the minute a serious alternative party threatens business as usual Democrats and Republicans will combine forces and become one political party. Thats inevitable. It is also the major problem facing a third party.  

Ross Perot started a third party and got 19 percent of the votes cast in 1992. Yet the two major parties did not join forces.  Why? Answer: Because Perot did not draw equally from Democrats and Republicans. In short: Perot was never a threat to the two party myth. 

In the past Third Parties meant electing the president. That is the wrong way to go. A third party must first win enough seats in Congress to back up a truly conservative president. 

A Conservative party with a clearly stated commitment to basic principles will attract rank and file voters in large numbers from both parties more effectively than trying to attract them to one man à la Ross Perot, etc. It is important to note that electing a president with no clout in Congress wont accomplish a thing.

Right now conservatism is piecemeal, catch-as-catch-can so to speak. Example: Liberals and Republicans both claim they are fiscal conservatives and social liberals. Thats crap. The size of the federal government, the welfare state, are proof that no such person ever existed. No individual can be both at the same time yet conservatives vote for individuals who make that claim. 

No new party stands a chance of success in the current system of one party rule unless it can draw tens of millions of voters away from the Democrat/Republican party. *


----------



## BallsBrunswick (Dec 24, 2012)

Flanders said:


> > BallsBrunswick;6545626
> >
> > The Republicans actually get a decent politician who the majority of Americans would support with him common sense no-nonsense approach to politics and they're going to run him out the party because he doesn't kneel before the utter retardation that comes out of the GOP machine.
> 
> ...



Wow, you are a sick fuck. I don't feel the need to disprove your bullshit claims as they're so ridiculous anyone with half a brain knows you're fucked in the head. I'm just going to post two things then I'm going to tell you to go fuck yourself. 












Now go fuck yourself.


----------



## Sallow (Dec 24, 2012)

BallsBrunswick said:


> The Republicans actually get a decent politician who the majority of Americans would support with him common sense no-nonsense approach to politics and they're going to run him out the party because he doesn't kneel before the utter retardation that comes out of the GOP machine. Completely idiotic but in a way beautiful because this is exactly why the GOP is dying.
> 
> And I can't believe the dumb fucks in this thread are actually defending rape. Are you people fucking stupid? Jesus, Republicans are just pathetic.



Basically.

Yeah.


----------



## YoungRepublican (Dec 24, 2012)

Republicans, democrats, libertarians etc. there will always be an instince of disgusting acts and intollerable stupidity. The key is to respond without bias to these acts. If Todd Akin was a moderate or as Flanders refer to them as RINO's because he cant accept opposing opinions I would hope he would have responded the same. It was a stupid and unforgivable comment, no matter what party Akin belonged to and thats the moral high ground i choose to take my stand on.


----------



## Sallow (Dec 24, 2012)

Flanders said:


> And next time you speak for a majority of Americans try to remember that every poll shows conservatives far outnumber liberals.


No they don't.

Which is why conservatives are bending over backwards to suppress the popular vote.


----------



## jillian (Dec 24, 2012)

Christie has something like a 70% approval rating.

thread fail.


----------



## Flanders (Dec 25, 2012)

BallsBrunswick said:


> Wow, you are a sick fuck. I don't feel the need to disprove your bullshit claims as they're so ridiculous anyone with half a brain knows you're fucked in the head. I'm just going to post two things then I'm going to tell you to go fuck yourself.
> 
> Now go fuck yourself.



*To BallsBrunswick: Ah, the Profanity Denial. The favorite defense of people with nothing to say and a vocabulary to match.* 



jillian said:


> Christie has something like a 70% approval rating.



*To jillian: Thats a whole lot of approval from liberals. That should tell conservatives all they need to know about Christie. *


----------



## jillian (Dec 25, 2012)

Flanders said:


> BallsBrunswick said:
> 
> 
> > Wow, you are a sick fuck. I don't feel the need to disprove your bullshit claims as they're so ridiculous anyone with half a brain knows you're fucked in the head. I'm just going to post two things then I'm going to tell you to go fuck yourself.
> ...



no... it means, all things being equal, that he's going to be re-elected..... which means your thread is a fail.

but i'm sure you have a credible link to prove who supports him, right?

p.s. it's also a whole lot of approval from republicans... which is EXACTLY what it should be. This idea that you have to be a hack who is so extreme only one side of the aisle can possibly support you is going to be the death of the GOP if it isn't fixed.

they need to cut you loons loose.


----------



## Bfgrn (Dec 25, 2012)

whitehall said:


> Nobody ever said that Christie was a die-hard Tea Party Conservative. The Republican party is a big tent. What democrat would dare to criticize his own party? *Maybe Lieberman but we remember what happened to him.*



Yea! Lieberman continued to caucus with the Democrats and even retained his chairmanship of the Senate Homeland Security Committee...mean old Democrats!


----------



## Flanders (Dec 25, 2012)

jillian said:


> but i'm sure you have a credible link to prove who supports him, right?
> 
> p.s. it's also a whole lot of approval from republicans... which is EXACTLY what it should be. This idea that you have to be a hack who is so extreme only one side of the aisle can possibly support you is going to be the death of the GOP if it isn't fixed.



*To jillian: Simply saying "New Jersey" is the best link possible. 

And Im volunteering for pallbearer when the Republican party dies. *


----------



## YoungRepublican (Dec 26, 2012)

Flanders said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> > but i'm sure you have a credible link to prove who supports him, right?
> ...



I am from New Jersey and Christie has done more for this state than any gov. then I can think of. Parties change over the course of history. They adapt to the time we live in, if they dont they die. you can be the pallbearer. ill gladly be the guy who goes to jail for killing the guy who broke into my house.


----------



## Flanders (Dec 27, 2012)

YoungRepublican said:


> Parties change over the course of history. They adapt to the time we live in, if they dont they die.



*To YoungRepublican: My point exactly. The Rockefeller Republican party is just as responsible for todays mess as is the Democrat party. Democrats will never change. Either the Republican party adopts a conservatism that truly opposes big government collectivism, open borders, global government, the welfare state and so on, or it gets washed away by the course of history. *


----------



## Truthmatters (Dec 27, 2012)

Flanders said:


> > whitehall;6098779
> >
> > Damn Flanders, do you always look for a guarantee when you pull the lever in November?
> 
> ...



and until you have the guts to stand alone you will tear the republican party down?

gee great thinking


----------



## RightNorLeft (Dec 27, 2012)

YoungRepublican said:


> Flanders said:
> 
> 
> > jillian said:
> ...




  Explain what christie has done for New Jersey other than screw govt workers which the teaparty loves him for.
  Fact: New Jerseys unemployment is higher than when Chrispy Chreme took office
  Fact: After vilifying all state and municipal workers and blaming them for all of New Jerseys fiscal woes...Christie has one town hall meeting after another telling everyone If the democrat legistlature lets me screw all state and govt workers I can balance the budget and property taxs will go down.
  Christies own budget is 500,000,000 in the hole and climbing and property taxs went up not down.


----------



## YoungRepublican (Dec 27, 2012)

yada said:


> YoungRepublican said:
> 
> 
> > Flanders said:
> ...



If you knew anything about this state you would know that property taxes are the greatest concern for the majority of our citizens. The New Jersey teachers union has successfully hijacked this state and its tax payers by forcing their demands down our throats in the form of tenure, benefits, and the overpaying of teachers and principals. These freaking state workers think that they are impenetrable from this poor economy. Gov. Christie merely came in and said guess what, you arent. I dont get why state workers feel that sense of self entitlement.


----------



## YoungRepublican (Dec 27, 2012)

Flanders said:


> YoungRepublican said:
> 
> 
> > Parties change over the course of history. They adapt to the time we live in, if they dont they die.
> ...



I think we just have different views of where the party should go. I believe that if we dont adapt the ideas of social liberity, effective governemt programs and conservative spending we will be washed away.


----------



## Flanders (Dec 28, 2012)

YoungRepublican said:


> I think we just have different views of where the party should go. I believe that if we dont adapt the ideas of social liberity, effective governemt programs and conservative spending we will be washed away.



*To YoungRepublican: Excerpt from #24 permalink:*



> Right now conservatism is piecemeal, catch-as-catch-can so to speak. Example: Liberals and Republicans both claim they are fiscal conservatives and social liberals. Thats crap. The size of the federal government, the welfare state, are proof that no such person ever existed. No individual can be both at the same time yet conservatives vote for individuals who make that claim.



*You appear to be advocating the favorite lie of politicians looking to get votes from both sides: I am a social liberal and a fiscal conservative.  

You must be a Democrat at heart because social liberalism cannot exist without oppressive taxation paying for everything. Hillarycare II is the most liberty-destroying, destructive, expensive, liberal program ever rammed down the countrys throat by Democrat perverts and parasites dictating behavior. You can easily discredit my view by explaining how Hillarycare II is fiscally conservative. *


----------



## YoungRepublican (Dec 28, 2012)

Flanders said:


> YoungRepublican said:
> 
> 
> > I think we just have different views of where the party should go. I believe that if we dont adapt the ideas of social liberity, effective governemt programs and conservative spending we will be washed away.
> ...



Not true at all sir. Just because I dont care if gays get married or evolution is taught in schools does not make me a democrat.  I believe in a small effective government that knows its role. I do not pretend to advocate hard line conservative ideals, but a smart effective moderate conservative one. What I see as the problem here is that if conservatives dont check down on every Grover Norquist conservative opinion, you are either a RINO or a Democrat. Not every Republican is asking for the anarchy that you have been spitting out on these message boards


----------



## Toro (Dec 28, 2012)

Flanders said:


> YoungRepublican said:
> 
> 
> > I think we just have different views of where the party should go. I believe that if we dont adapt the ideas of social liberity, effective governemt programs and conservative spending we will be washed away.
> ...



Fiscal conservatism married with social liberalism is often called "libertarian" or "classical liberalism."

The idea that you have to be a social conservative - believe in God, oppose abortion, criminalize drugs, oppose gay marriage, etc. - to believe in free markets and liberty is utter nonsense.


----------



## Flanders (Dec 28, 2012)

> YoungRepublican;6564740
> 
> Not true at all sir. Just because I dont care if gays get married or evolution is taught in schools does not make me a democrat.



*To YoungRepublican: It does not make you a conservative either.

Im curious. Do you care about being forced to associate with gays or anybody else? Fire a homosexual because you do not want to have anything to do with him and you get hit with a lawsuit. Gays getting married is a smokescreen. 

Teaching the three Rs should be the extent of state and local governments involvement in education. The federal government has no business in education.  Anything after the three Rs is up to the parents. *



> YoungRepublican;6564740
> 
> I believe in a small effective government that knows its role.



*To YoungRepublican: If thats the case the only thing you have to say is I believe the government can only do  that which is clearly enumerated in the Constitution.  Your previous call for effective government programs indicates you do not believe in small effective government.

Incidentally, I cant count the number of politicians that ran on a promise of efficient government  efficient being a synonym for effective. In fact, I think Romney spouted that very line. Conversely, promising the country efficient government is the one thing Democrats cannot lie about. Even they know the public will not buy efficient coming from a tax and spend crook.   

In the same vein reforming this or that is another standard much favored by politicians looking to get elected. Politicians running for reelection do not often call for reform because the public might point out that they made the mess that needs reforming. In short: Whenever the public hears the words reform, efficient, or effective coming out of a politicians mouth they should hide the family silver.*



> YoungRepublican;6564740
> 
> I do not pretend to advocate hard line conservative ideals, but a smart effective moderate conservative one.



*To YoungRepublican: Good grief. Now its effective moderate. So far, Ive not heard you say anything effective or moderate about day to day government. *



> YoungRepublican;6564740
> 
> What I see as the problem here is that if conservatives dont check down on every Grover Norquist conservative opinion, you are either a RINO or a Democrat. Not every Republican is asking for the anarchy that you have been spitting out on these message boards



*To YoungRepublican: Let me enlighten you. 

Totalitarian government is one extreme. Anarchy is the other extreme. Limited government is the permanent center; it never moves. At least it is not supposed to move.

In reality, Democrats have been nudging the center to the Left since LBJ declared war on poverty. Democrats repeatedly established new centers by moving the existing center to the Left and all while swearing they govern from the center. Example: Bill Clinton moved the center he inherited much further Left than it was when he took office. Hussein took the center he inherited so far to the Left there is serious doubt it can ever be moved back to Clintons center. LBJs center is so far gone few Americans remember what it was.  

So-called moderates trying to show how politically sophisticated they are readily accept every new center. One day they will wake up in a work camp and swear that totalitarian government is moderate rather than admit they did not know what the hell they stood for all of their lives.

Incidentally, in my long life the center never moved to the Right. At best, it stopped moving Left for brief periods. 

Finally, why has socialisms incrementalism  worked so well for Democrats? Answer: Because every generation produces an overabundance of fools who believe that a benign totalitarian government is possible.* 



> Toro;6564747
> 
> Fiscal conservatism married with social liberalism is often called "libertarian" or "classical liberalism."



*To Toro: Ill assume you dont know the meaning of incompatible:*

incompatible (_adjective_)

*1.* Incapable of associating or blending or of being associated or blended because of disharmony, incongruity, or antagonism: _incompatible views on religion._

*2.* Impossible to be held simultaneously by one person:_ the incompatible offices of prosecutor and judge._

*3.* Logic. That cannot be simultaneously true; mutually exclusive. See synonyms at inconsistent.

*4.* Medicine. *a.* Producing an undesirable effect when used in combination with a particular substance: _a medication that is incompatible with alcohol_.* b.* Not immunologically compatible:_ incompatible blood types._




> Toro;6564747
> 
> The idea that you have to be a social conservative - believe in God, oppose abortion, criminalize drugs, oppose gay marriage, etc. - to believe in free markets and liberty is utter nonsense.



*To Toro: You are mixing oranges and apples. I dont give a rats ass what anyone believes so long as they do not force their beliefs on me, or demand that I fund those beliefs with tax dollars. 

As far as behavior goes, Socialists  not conservatives  insist on dictating behavior. The worst of it is their sick attempts to legislate love. *


----------



## YoungRepublican (Dec 28, 2012)

Flanders said:


> > YoungRepublican;6564740
> >
> > Not true at all sir. Just because I dont care if gays get married or evolution is taught in schools does not make me a democrat.
> 
> ...



No I dont care about associating with homosexuals because it isnt a contagous disease, its a lifestyle choice. You should be sued if you fire a person because of their sexual orientation, thats what soemone in the real world would call discrimination. Yes I want evolution taught to my children, just like I want them to know who won World War II. We teach facts in public schools, not fairy tales.
           My ideas on government spending do not specifically align staight down the line, they are complex. I believe We need to empower small bussiness with tax cuts, lower the corporate tax rate, lower cap gains taxes and increase unfustructure spending. The majority of which are conservative ideals. Do you suggest we not reform Social Security, medicare, pensions, etc. to reflect the changing landscape of the country? We need to increase age one is granted these things because people are living longer and we can no longer afford to keep citizens on these programs for 20 years. Its the kind of idea, that being progressive in your thinking is a bad thing that will doom our country. N o ones going to wake up in a work camp. 
        I guess its easier to be an older person in this country today. You have luxuries that I wont even get the oppertunity to dream of. You have the luxury to sit there and say dont touch my medicare! Well we cant opperate like that because the harsh reality of life is, all of you medicare people are going to be moving on and leaving my generation to deal with your mess because you didnt want anyone touching your entitlements.


----------



## Flanders (Dec 29, 2012)

> YoungRepublican;6567185
> 
> No I dont care about associating with homosexuals because it isnt a contagous disease, its a lifestyle choice. You should be sued if you fire a person because of their sexual orientation,



*To YoungRepublican: Who you associate with is none of my business. Associate to your hearts content. Just dont use laws to force me to be like you. 

I am curious about one thing. Should an employer be sued if he fires a convicted child molester? Should parents with young children be forced to associate with known child molesters that served their time for past crimes?  After all, molesting children is nothing more than a lifestyle choice.* 



> YoungRepublican;6567185
> 
> thats what soemone in the real world would call discrimination.



*To YoungRepublican: Thats what dirty little moralists call forcing their behavior on others.* 



> YoungRepublican;6567185
> 
> Yes I want evolution taught to my children, just like I want them to know who won World War II.



*To YoungRepublican: Who won WWII can be taught in one sentence. It is the propaganda teachers attach to historical fact that causes the problems.*



> YoungRepublican;6567185
> 
> We teach facts in public schools, not fairy tales.



*To YoungRepublican: The public schools do not teach facts teachers unions object to. The public schools indoctrinate children into the joys of socialism. Teaching kids manufactured facts about environmental garbage is one of those joys. In short: Theres never been a government or a religion that did not brainwash children with facts. *



> YoungRepublican;6567185
> 
> My ideas on government spending do not specifically align staight down the line, they are complex. I believe We need to empower small bussiness with tax cuts, lower the corporate tax rate, lower cap gains taxes and increase unfustructure spending. The majority of which are conservative ideals.



*To YoungRepublican: Your ideas are not complex at all. You would make the wealth creators more dependant on government. Apparently you know very little about this:* 

laissez faire also laisser faire  (_noun_)

*1.* An economic doctrine that opposes governmental regulation of or interference in commerce beyond the minimum necessary for a free-enterprise system to operate according to its own economic laws.

*2.* Noninterference in the affairs of others.

*I guess your wonderful history teacher never taught you that laissez faire made this country the greatest country in the history of the world with more freedoms for the most people, and it was all done before a tax on income began destroying individual liberties. *



> YoungRepublican;6567185
> 
> Do you suggest we not reform Social Security, medicare, pensions, etc. to reflect the changing landscape of the country? We need to increase age one is granted these things because people are living longer and we can no longer afford to keep citizens on these programs for 20 years.



*To YoungRepublican: Social Security is funded by labor. It should have been setup as a voluntary pension plan rather than a mandatory insurance program. 

If you want to reform anything start with the parasite class who live on the labors of others. You might want to look at the age an unnecessary government parasite retires. More importantly, research the amount of money the average Social Security recipient receives for a lifetime of labor, then compare it to the amount of money a parasite receives for a lifetime of feeding at the public trough. The spread will shock you.* 



> YoungRepublican;6567185
> 
> Its the kind of idea, that being progressive in your thinking is a bad thing that will doom our country. N o ones going to wake up in a work camp.



*To YoungRepublican: The income tax has you living in one right now. Barbed wire fences is the only thing that is missing. *



> YoungRepublican;6567185
> 
> I guess its easier to be an older person in this country today. You have luxuries that I wont even get the oppertunity to dream of. You have the luxury to sit there and say dont touch my medicare! Well we cant opperate like that because the harsh reality of life is, all of you medicare people are going to be moving on and leaving my generation to deal with your mess because you didnt want anyone touching your entitlements.



*To YoungRepublican: Are you serious! Have you ever heard of the Affordable Care Act? If anything is going bury future generations it will be socialized medicine. 

Incidentally, your generation should get stuck with the entitlements millions of illegal immigrants are receiving since younger Americans obviously agree with the politicians who authorize those benefits. 

Finally, it is obvious that you are not going to say anything that will interest me. Ive responded many times to people who believe as you believe. You can research my messages if you are interested in more details. I have not the patience to repeat my views time after time.*


----------



## YoungRepublican (Dec 29, 2012)

Flanders said:


> > YoungRepublican;6567185
> >
> > No I dont care about associating with homosexuals because it isnt a contagous disease, its a lifestyle choice. You should be sued if you fire a person because of their sexual orientation,
> 
> ...



Your comparison of homosexuals to child molestors automaticall discounts any of your opinions on the matter. No one thinks like that and with the ever pending passing of people who think like that will go those beliefs. Youre just on the wrong side of history and will be remembered that way. 
      I know high school was a long time ago and im guessing you didnt attend college so I'm going to make it really simple. No one brought up the unions, stick to the discussion. Evolution is a fact and I want my children taught it that way.
         SS wasnt set up that way so its a moot point. Its set up the way its set up and ill pay into it the rest of my life and never see a dime of it unless we reform the age of those recieving it. Once again stay on topic.
       Your views are distorted and the reason so many people disagree with you is because you are just plain wrong. I dont really need to respond because if my age indicator is correct, your opinions on the matters of government spending just dont have any bussiness in the modern world.


----------



## Flanders (Dec 29, 2012)

> YoungRepublican;6569531
> 
> Your comparison of homosexuals to child molestors automaticall discounts any of your opinions on the matter. No one thinks like that and with the ever pending passing of people who think like that will go those beliefs. Youre just on the wrong side of history and will be remembered that way.



*To YoungRepublican: I was wrong. You did say some things that caught my interest.

Wise up. Sexual conduct, not the law, is a moral objection most people have to both.* 



> YoungRepublican;6569531
> 
> I know high school was a long time ago and im guessing you didnt attend college so I'm going to make it really simple. No one brought up the unions, stick to the discussion. Evolution is a fact and I want my children taught it that way.



*To YoungRepublican: Then send your kids to a private school, or teach creationism in the public schools with the tax dollars paid by people who believe in it.*



> YoungRepublican;6569531
> 
> SS wasnt set up that way so its a moot point. Its set up the way its set up and ill pay into it the rest of my life and never see a dime of it unless we reform the age of those recieving it.



*To YoungRepublican: Do some research.  SS is still an involuntary insurance program. It was originally referred to as an old age insurance program, or social insurance.  It was an alternative to private pensions. In addition, SS always operated like an insurance program.* 



> YoungRepublican;6569531
> 
> Once again stay on topic.



*To YoungRepublican: Its my thread. Anything I say is on topic.  You dont decide. Dont respond if you cant handle it, or start your own thread. *



> YoungRepublican;6569531
> 
> Your views are distorted and the reason so many people disagree with you is because you are just plain wrong. I dont really need to respond because if my age indicator is correct, your opinions on the matters of government spending just dont have any bussiness in the modern world.



*To YoungRepublican: Spoken like a true parasite. 

Mankind has been plagued by parasites throughout history. What makes you think the modern world is any different.  Now you and your kind are doing to America the same things parasites always do. The only difference I can see is that todays parasites brag about it.  

See this thread for details: * 



> http://www.usmessageboard.com/tea-party/262051-idiot-light-implants.html


----------



## YoungRepublican (Dec 30, 2012)

Flanders said:


> > YoungRepublican;6569531
> >
> > Your comparison of homosexuals to child molestors automaticall discounts any of your opinions on the matter. No one thinks like that and with the ever pending passing of people who think like that will go those beliefs. Youre just on the wrong side of history and will be remembered that way.
> 
> ...



No, most people dont have an objection to it. That is why its widely accepted by those outside of Middle America and on its way to being totally legal in every state. The point is you are on the wrong side of history on this one.
            SS isnt involuntary though, I have to pay into it. Its a Ponzi scheme for my generation and an insurance plan for yours. My parents who are 45 and 50 respectively have no business collecting SS at 67 or whatever the age is, because they are going to, God willing, live well into their 80's, something that wasnt the norm when it was set up.
Mankind has been plagued by people like you throughout history. You are the modern equivalent to those who opposed civil rights in the 60's.. Just another out of touch citizen who thinks the world can go back to being the way it was in the good ol day's.. Every generation will experience those attempting to impede progress, but those people are always lost into the history books. It seems that is the side you have chosen to be on, your choice, but never misunderstand there were always people like you and they have always been silenced by people like me.


----------



## Flanders (Dec 30, 2012)

> YoungRepublican;6572255
> 
> No, most people dont have an objection to it. That is why its widely accepted by those outside of Middle America and on its way to being totally legal in every state. The point is you are on the wrong side of history on this one.



*To YoungRepublican: Does that include child molesting!*



> YoungRepublican;6572255
> 
> SS isnt involuntary though, I have to pay into it. Its a Ponzi scheme for my generation and an insurance plan for yours. My parents who are 45 and 50 respectively have no business collecting SS at 67 or whatever the age is, because they are going to, God willing, live well into their 80's,



*To YoungRepublican: Of course its involuntary. Try telling the government you are got going to pay.

As to your parents and everybody already collecting SS, they never had a chance to opt out. Since they were forced to pay into the system they deserve everything they get.* 



> YoungRepublican;6572255
> 
> something that wasnt the norm when it was set up.



*To YoungRepublican: Nor was there a welfare state in 1935, or an education industry that is bleeding states and local communities dry with property taxes. Nor were there government employee unions accumulating the nations wealth faster than any other entity, nor were there bloated and unnecessary bureaucracies providing welfare jobs for the educated parasite class. Nor did hundreds of billions of tax dollars go in foreign aid to foreign parasites, yet you only complain about the people whose labors actually paid for their SS. *



> YoungRepublican;6572255
> 
> Mankind has been plagued by people like you throughout history. You are the modern equivalent to those who opposed civil rights in the 60's.. Just another out of touch citizen who thinks the world can go back to being the way it was in the good ol day's.. Every generation will experience those attempting to impede progress, but those people are always lost into the history books. It seems that is the side you have chosen to be on, your choice, but never misunderstand there were always people like you and they have always been silenced by people like me.



*To YoungRepublican: As usual you have it ass-backwards. 

The Internet and talk radio broke the media monopoly parasites enjoyed since the day television began dictating public policy. The Fairness Doctrine (1949) was their primary tool. In fact, they are still trying to bring back the F.D.  

Parasites effectively silenced critics from the late forties until RR abolished the F.D. in 1987. At about the same time the Internet rose up and challenged the parasite class. Now, you foolishly claim you and your kind are silencing your opponents with the strength of your arguments. Were that true your kind would have won the debate when they had their media monopoly and the Fairness Doctrine going for them. The very fact that they needed the F.D. proved the weakness in their political philosophy without a word said against it in the electronic media.  

As to history, thanks to the Internet its beginning to look like there is a chance that parasites will fail to bring America down as theyve done to so many nations and empires. If it happens as I predict it will be the first time in history that parasites were defeated.  More importantly, that first defeat will set a precedent  parasites will never again wield the destructive power they exercised throughout history.  

On top of everything else you are an insult to logical thinking. It is you that wants to go back to the way the world was before Americas Founders codified limited government. It is you that yearns for all-powerful government  then you turn it around and accuse your opponents of wanting to go back in time. 

Finally, its obvious why you want America to return to discredited totalitarian government. Limited government is the one form of government that disallows parasites in every way. *


----------

