The most critical difference between the political right and the political left is...

[rightwinger]

The Right protects the wealthy from the masses
The Left protects the masses from the wealthy

The right does that? Please give us an example of how they do that. And when have the wealthy ever attacked anybody in which people would need protection?

Let’s see...

Reducing their tax burden
Reducing environmental regulations
Killing unions
Relaxing labor laws
Holding down the minimum wage

 

[rightwinger]

The Left is driven by hate.
The Right is driven by freedom.

Freedoms just another word for nothing left to lose

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

The Left is driven by hate.
The Right is driven by freedom.

Freedoms just another word for nothing left to lose

Degenerates tend to hide behind freedom.

Besides, this idea that Republicans are for freedom is absurd.

So, Republicans are for freedom to not pay for a bigger bloated military?

So, Republicans are for freedom for abortion?

So, Republicans are for freedom for hiring Illegal Immigrants?

So, Republicans are for freedom to not have our taxdollars go to prop up the Zion?

Freedom for Gender change operations, Gay Marriages, Prostitutes, and Drug dealers?

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

The Right protects the wealthy from the masses
The Left protects the masses from the wealthy

The right does that? Please give us an example of how they do that. And when have the wealthy ever attacke
d anybody in which people would need protection?

Let’s see...

Reducing their tax burden
Reducing environmental regulations
Killing unions
Relaxing labor laws
Holding down the minimum wage

Republicans are just a party of Capitalist big business interests, pretending to give 2 sh(ts about the votes of Nationalists, and the Religious Right.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Which is why Afghanistan was over in a day.

If they could resist with stick and stones, no problem for Americans with high powered guns. All you need to do is to cause enough havoc in a big city and the tyrant is history with all legitimacy disappearing.

It was a different day when the Constitution was written. We could never defend ourselves without a standing military in place. Hell, somebody could shoot a rocket at us half way around the world and we'd only have minutes to say goodbye to each other. Our warplanes in the future will all be drones. Not only would they save lives,but would also be able to fly at top speeds since the there is no pilot to pass out.

Switzerland historically hardly has had a standing military, they seemed to avoid being invaded pretty well.... They also avoided a lot of their own being killed in war, or wasting a ton of funds on military.

Now, I understand the USA deterred Russia, still the USA spent a few years back more than Russia, China, India, Britain, Brazil, Pakistan and yada yada combined.

Switzerland is not a world power. And if something terrible would happen to them, who do you think they would call for help?

A lot of countries have a weak military because we are there. Being the world police is not a job created for Americans. It's just a job that was formed. And if we don't want to be the world police any longer, then think of who comes close to our strength that will take that job.

So we do spend a lot on military power. It's something other countries don't do, which is why they can afford things like socialized healthcare, and various other social goodies we don't have.

Now this is one joke of a position considering under the "greatest military" America is getting invaded like no other country.

I believe the best soldiers who ever graced this earth are out to win for America. In fact, they have a long line of people who handed down to them a system that has saved more lives than it has taken. Thanks be to God that we have a good military that loves America and a leader who acts in their behalf, and therefore in the behalf of peace on earth. Strength and rightness truly do bring peace to places where there was none before. We have international friends who know this and help us when our soldiers have to go sort out hostilities promoted by myopic regimes.

Best armed due to a bloated military budget.

Not so sure about the best soldiers.

The USA mostly picks on little countries.

The USA is no Sparta, Alexander the Great, Genghiz Khan, Jan III Sobieski, or Boleslaw the Brave.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Which is why Afghanistan was over in a day.

If they could resist with stick and stones, no problem for Americans with high powered guns. All you need to do is to cause enough havoc in a big city and the tyrant is history with all legitimacy disappearing.

It was a different day when the Constitution was written. We could never defend ourselves without a standing military in place. Hell, somebody could shoot a rocket at us half way around the world and we'd only have minutes to say goodbye to each other. Our warplanes in the future will all be drones. Not only would they save lives,but would also be able to fly at top speeds since the there is no pilot to pass out.

Switzerland historically hardly has had a standing military, they seemed to avoid being invaded pretty well.... They also avoided a lot of their own being killed in war, or wasting a ton of funds on military.

Now, I understand the USA deterred Russia, still the USA spent a few years back more than Russia, China, India, Britain, Brazil, Pakistan and yada yada combined.

Switzerland is not a world power. And if something terrible would happen to them, who do you think they would call for help?

A lot of countries have a weak military because we are there. Being the world police is not a job created for Americans. It's just a job that was formed. And if we don't want to be the world police any longer, then think of who comes close to our strength that will take that job.

So we do spend a lot on military power. It's something other countries don't do, which is why they can afford things like socialized healthcare, and various other social goodies we don't have.

Now this is one joke of a position considering under the "greatest military" America is getting invaded like no other country.

Well, the only thing that could defeat a military as strong as ours is liberalism unfortunately. Liberalism is worse than cancer. The Communists wrote long ago that they will take over this military strength called the USA. But they will do so without one bullet being fired. They will takeover from within. It's what we are witnessing today.

Indeed, Leon Trotsky warned the revolution would come to America.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Protecting America being invaded by immigrants?
Or protect a certain country that shall remain nameless.

I'm sure 48% of the entire World's military budget is enough.

If we lose our country, its because of a Civil War, or Immigrants.

PS.
Thomas Jefferson was initially against a standing army, and is commonly quoted by Republicans / Libertarians.

I think Jefferson would not hold that view today. War back in his days were people grab their guns and go out to shoot each other. Today, many strategies have to be learned, you need to be physically fit, you need to understand and learn how to use technology to fight a war. Therefore a standing army is a necessity.

Which is why Afghanistan was over in a day.

If they could resist with stick and stones, no problem for Americans with high powered guns. All you need to do is to cause enough havoc in a big city and the tyrant is history with all legitimacy disappearing.

It was a different day when the Constitution was written. We could never defend ourselves without a standing military in place. Hell, somebody could shoot a rocket at us half way around the world and we'd only have minutes to say goodbye to each other. Our warplanes in the future will all be drones. Not only would they save lives,but would also be able to fly at top speeds since the there is no pilot to pass out.

Switzerland historically hardly has had a standing military, they seemed to avoid being invaded pretty well.... They also avoided a lot of their own being killed in war, or wasting a ton of funds on military.

Now, I understand the USA deterred Russia, still the USA spent a few years back more than Russia, China, India, Britain, Brazil, Pakistan and yada yada combined.

Switzerland is not a world power. And if something terrible would happen to them, who do you think they would call for help?

A lot of countries have a weak military because we are there. Being the world police is not a job created for Americans. It's just a job that was formed. And if we don't want to be the world police any longer, then think of who comes close to our strength that will take that job.

So we do spend a lot on military power. It's something other countries don't do, which is why they can afford things like socialized healthcare, and various other social goodies we don't have.

The USA has Universal healthcare, just the worst form of it, where the Government foots ER tabs.

Everybody can go to the ER, and have these top rates paid for by our government.

But, people still end up paying out of pocket.

People end up going bankrupt.

That's the problem, we have the most dumb healthcare system in the World.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

…what they believe with regard to the size and scope of government. To me, that is what defines one as being either right or left wing. Do you agree? If not, then what is it?

I do not agree at all. The only difference is what they want to spend money they do not have on.

Look at the slew of bills passed in the last two weeks and happily signed by the President and try and tell me there is a difference.

The only real difference between right and left today is their stance on abortion and gay people.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The Right protects the wealthy from the masses
The Left protects the masses from the wealthy

The right does that? Please give us an example of how they do that. And when have the wealthy ever attacked anybody in which people would need protection?

Let’s see...

Reducing their tax burden
Reducing environmental regulations
Killing unions
Relaxing labor laws
Holding down the minimum wage

So how do any of these benefit the Republican party? I know you live under this myth that all industry is in the Republican pockets, but did you ever ask where all that Democrat money comes in from during elation time?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

If you haven't figured it out by now, Einstein, let me help. Both parties are in favor of bigger government. Sheesh, is she 8 years old?

Having said that, protecting our country, land, sea, air, and now space....is what our government was supposed to do.
Sorry that you're not equipped to understand that.

Protecting America being invaded by immigrants?
Or protect a certain country that shall remain nameless.

I'm sure 48% of the entire World's military budget is enough.

If we lose our country, its because of a Civil War, or Immigrants.

PS.
Thomas Jefferson was initially against a standing army, and is commonly quoted by Republicans / Libertarians.

I think Jefferson would not hold that view today. War back in his days were people grab their guns and go out to shoot each other. Today, many strategies have to be learned, you need to be physically fit, you need to understand and learn how to use technology to fight a war. Therefore a standing army is a necessity.

War is increasingly changing to proxies, and upheaval from within.

Actually, Poles played a leading role in this.

Polish Solidarity, Polish Ryszard Kuklinski & Polish Brzezinski played an enormous role in these proxies & upheaval from within.

It lead to the collapse of Soviets, with the help from America.

Still, now Putin's Russia seems to be playing the same game.

I think the West is falling apart, the EU is teetering on the edge, and the USA is on the edge of a potential civil war.... If you ask me.

No, I don't foresee a civil war of any kind. A separation of the country would come first. In fact I support having two countries at this point. I'm so irritated with liberalism I wouldn't mind living with my own political kind.

Eh, expect riots to grow by 500X in 2020, regardless of who wins.

Don't say I didn't warn you.

In 2020 the big question becomes if people bring guns to their riots, (I tend to think so)
or if the riots
become big enough for the military's need to squash.
If so
it could easily escalate, and even tear apart the Military as well into factions.

If you are going to concern yourself with anything, do so with realistic matters. There are not going to be any riots.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Protecting America being invaded by immigrants?
Or protect a certain country that shall remain nameless.

I'm sure 48% of the entire World's military budget is enough.

If we lose our country, its because of a Civil War, or Immigrants.

PS.
Thomas Jefferson was initially against a standing army, and is commonly quoted by Republicans / Libertarians.

I think Jefferson would not hold that view today. War back in his days were people grab their guns and go out to shoot each other. Today, many strategies have to be learned, you need to be physically fit, you need to understand and learn how to use technology to fight a war. Therefore a standing army is a necessity.

War is increasingly changing to proxies, and upheaval from within.

Actually, Poles played a leading role in this.

Polish Solidarity, Polish Ryszard Kuklinski & Polish Brzezinski played an enormous role in these proxies & upheaval from within.

It lead to the collapse of Soviets, with the help from America.

Still, now Putin's Russia seems to be playing the same game.

I think the West is falling apart, the EU is teetering on the edge, and the USA is on the edge of a potential civil war.... If you ask me.

No, I don't foresee a civil war of any kind. A separation of the country would come first. In fact I support having two countries at this point. I'm so irritated with liberalism I wouldn't mind living with my own political kind.

Eh, expect riots to grow by 500X in 2020, regardless of who wins.

Don't say I didn't warn you.

In 2020 the big question becomes if people bring guns to their riots, (I tend to think so)
or if the riots
become big enough for the military's need to squash.
If so
it could easily escalate, and even tear apart the Military as well into factions.

If you are going to concern yourself with anything, do so with realistic matters. There are not going to be any riots.

No riots?
Now who's being unrealistic?

Look at riots & brawls already happening ANTIFA, BLM vs Proud boys & White Nationalists.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

The Right protects the wealthy from the masses
The Left protects the masses from the wealthy

The right does that? Please give us an example of how they do that. And when have the wealthy ever attacked anybody in which people would need protection?

Let’s see...

Reducing their tax burden
Reducing environmental regulations
Killing unions
Relaxing labor laws
Holding down the minimum wage

So how do any of these benefit the Republican party? I know you live under this myth that all industry is in the Republican pockets, but did you ever ask where all that Democrat money comes in from during elation time?

Basically Capitalist British origins Republicans
vs Capitalist Synagogue of Satan Globalists.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

In our system of government, the military is irrelevant since they really can't be used for our border.

I see no good reason why not.

Defending the borders of this nation against foreign invasion ought to be the primary duty and purpose of our military. We should be giving higher priority to putting our soldiers and equipment along our southern border, to stop the invading foreign criminals, than to sending them overseas to fight other countries' wars.

I agree, but a good solid border such as a wall or fence can do most of that for us. Our military can't shoot or kill a pregnant woman with three kids crossing our border. a border wall would stop them. So it's a matter of using our money the most productively to accomplish our goals.

Not as much as you think.

Between VISAS, tunnels, boats, ladders & airplanes....

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I think Jefferson would not hold that view today. War back in his days were people grab their guns and go out to shoot each other. Today, many strategies have to be learned, you need to be physically fit, you need to understand and learn how to use technology to fight a war. Therefore a standing army is a necessity.

War is increasingly changing to proxies, and upheaval from within.

Actually, Poles played a leading role in this.

Polish Solidarity, Polish Ryszard Kuklinski & Polish Brzezinski played an enormous role in these proxies & upheaval from within.

It lead to the collapse of Soviets, with the help from America.

Still, now Putin's Russia seems to be playing the same game.

I think the West is falling apart, the EU is teetering on the edge, and the USA is on the edge of a potential civil war.... If you ask me.

No, I don't foresee a civil war of any kind. A separation of the country would come first. In fact I support having two countries at this point. I'm so irritated with liberalism I wouldn't mind living with my own political kind.

Eh, expect riots to grow by 500X in 2020, regardless of who wins.

Don't say I didn't warn you.

In 2020 the big question becomes if people bring guns to their riots, (I tend to think so)
or if the riots
become big enough for the military's need to squash.
If so
it could easily escalate, and even tear apart the Military as well into factions.

If you are going to concern yourself with anything, do so with realistic matters. There are not going to be any riots.

No riots?
Now who's being unrealistic?

Look at riots & brawls already happening ANTIFA, BLM vs Proud boys & White Nationalists.

Those are localized, isolated, and not really a riot in the sense that you're speaking of. Of course, they will happen from time to time; they always have and likely always will. It's nothing the police can't handle.

 

[g5000]

…what they believe with regard to the size and scope of government. To me, that is what defines one as being either right or left wing. Do you agree? If not, then what is it?

That depends on how one defines big government. I for one don't think big government is the amount of people working in it as it is how intrusive they are in your life. When government tells me what I must purchase, causes me to lose benefits at work, costs me money I really didn't want to spend, that's big government to me.

Big government is telling me what size drinks I'm permitted to buy. What kind of bags I'm allowed to use to bring my groceries home. What kind of firearms I'm allowed to use, or how many rounds I'm allowed to have in that firearm. Big government is when they say boys in dresses must be permitted in the locker room or showers with my daughter in school. Big government is restricting their choices when it comes to what they eat for lunch. Big government is forcing my restaurant to post calorie count on every item they sell. Big government is taking over school loans, or telling insurance companies what business model they are allowed to have.

To me, that's big government.

Who you're allowed to marry?

Government should never be in the marriage business in the first place. Do you think it's okay for brother and sister to marry? How about man and dog? If not, then you too have restrictions you approve when it comes to marriage.

The government is involved in our marriages far more deeply than saying who is allowed to marry who.

The government showers cash and prizes on marriages in about a thousand different ways, and you can be sure that pseudoconservatives would scream bloody murder if all that was taken away.

 

[g5000]

The Left is driven by hate.
The Right is driven by freedom.

The Right is driven by freedom...unless you're a Muslim or black or gay or transgender or Mexican or...

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The Left is driven by hate.
The Right is driven by freedom.

The Right is driven by freedom...unless you're a Muslim or black or gay or transgender or Mexican or...

 

[g5000]

The Left is driven by hate.
The Right is driven by freedom.

The Right is driven by freedom...unless you're a Muslim or black or gay or transgender or Mexican or...

View attachment 296899

Unlike you, I never pretended one party hated and the other doesn't.

Tu quoque FAIL.

 

[g5000]

The Left is driven by hate.
The Right is driven by freedom.

We see nothing but hate from the pseudo-Right every single day.

Do you even read this forum? Do you even read your own posts!?!

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

…what they believe with regard to the size and scope of government. To me, that is what defines one as being either right or left wing. Do you agree? If not, then what is it?

That depends on how one defines big government. I for one don't think big government is the amount of people working in it as it is how intrusive they are in your life. When government tells me what I must purchase, causes me to lose benefits at work, costs me money I really didn't want to spend, that's big government to me.

Big government is telling me what size drinks I'm permitted to buy. What kind of bags I'm allowed to use to bring my groceries home. What kind of firearms I'm allowed to use, or how many rounds I'm allowed to have in that firearm. Big government is when they say boys in dresses must be permitted in the locker room or showers with my daughter in school. Big government is restricting their choices when it comes to what they eat for lunch. Big government is forcing my restaurant to post calorie count on every item they sell. Big government is taking over school loans, or telling insurance companies what business model they are allowed to have.

To me, that's big government.

Who you're allowed to marry?

Government should never be in the marriage business in the first place. Do you think it's okay for brother and sister to marry? How about man and dog? If not, then you too have restrictions you approve when it comes to marriage.

The government is involved in our marriages far more deeply than saying who is allowed to marry who.

The government showers cash and prizes on marriages in about a thousand different ways, and you can be sure that pseudoconservatives would scream bloody murder if all that was taken away.

You mean tax returns and Social Security. I can't think of anything else. But it's really less about that. It's more of being rejected that caused them to take on the issue.

If the court ruled that all government goodies should not be part of marriage, the gays would have still been upset and kept fighting to get married. They feel they can force society to accept their lifestyle and feel more normal about themselves.

After all, where did the most complaints come from? That's right, California, where they had civil unions for quite some time before the court ruling.