Liberals vs conservatives

[NRA_guy]

We all know the basic difference between liberals and conservatives is that liberals believe in making rules for "other people", but not for themselves.

I have been thinking about the impact of that for some time:

Conservative folks tend to be law abiding people. We generally trust the government and we depend upon it to do the right thing (well, at least until recently and even now conservatives are trying to figure out legal ways around Obamacare).

Conservatives follow laws that we loathe.

Liberals, on the other hand, believe that the end justifies the means and they have less reluctance to ignore law and regulations that they dislike.

That makes for an unfair fight because more often than not, one can get away with violating a law or regulation.

That ultimately means that conservatives lose in a head-to-head battle with liberals.

Of course, conservatives COULD win in a real gun fight, but we don't. Conservatives are not the ones who assassinate opponents, vote illegally, intimidate opposing voters, etc. Heck, we don't even organize well.

And we never will---until it's too late. Very soon it will be too late.

[gvw3]

There are two types of laws: just law and unjust law. Every individual in a society has a responsibility to obey just law and, even more importantly, to disobey and resist unjust laws.

This is the concept of our founding fathers.

[carver]

Originally Posted by NRA_guy

We all know the basic difference between liberals and conservatives is that liberals believe in making rules for "other people", but not for themselves.

I have been thinking about the impact of that for some time:

Conservative folks tend to be law abiding people. We generally trust the government and we depend upon it to do the right thing (well, at least until recently and even now conservatives are trying to figure out legal ways around Obamacare).

Conservatives follow laws that we loathe.

Liberals, on the other hand, believe that the end justifies the means and they have less reluctance to ignore law and regulations that they dislike.

That makes for an unfair fight because more often than not, one can get away with violating a law or regulation.

That ultimately means that conservatives lose in a head-to-head battle with liberals.

Of course, conservatives COULD win in a real gun fight, but we don't. Conservatives are not the ones who assassinate opponents, vote illegally, intimidate opposing voters, etc. Heck, we don't even organize well.

And we never will---until it's too late. Very soon it will be too late.

I believe it's already to late!

[jack404]

well we been getting some liberals here , lets see how they go

post unwanted highly incorrect info in a prayer request

abuse the members second post in

post outright lies and then when caught never respond

from this can you say you can draw a pattern?

beside them being rude and ignorant ??

[Appliancedude]

Originally Posted by gvw3

There are two types of laws: just law and unjust law. Every individual in a society has a responsibility to obey just law and, even more importantly, to disobey and resist unjust laws.

This is the concept of our founding fathers.

And the law that just passed was unjust and unconstitutional. I don't give a damn what Roberts says. Impose the fine, I'm not buying healthcare. Now just for the principal of it. I wont pay the fine either.

[Gun Geezer]

I don't care what the government says, I'm not eating broccoli.

[RunningOnMT]

I'll eat all the broccoli if you'll eat all the brussel sprouts.

[tcox4freedom]

Originally Posted by RunningOnMT

I'll eat all the broccoli if you'll eat all the brussel sprouts.

I like to eat both. So pass them here.

[raven818]

NRA guy:
the end justifies the means

Seig Heil.

[22to12gauge]

Originally Posted by gvw3

There are two types of laws: just law and unjust law. Every individual in a society has a responsibility to obey just law and, even more importantly, to disobey and resist unjust laws.

This is the concept of our founding fathers.

spoken like a modern day Henry David Thoreau

there are generally two different mind sets in regard to obeying and disobeying laws..

The Thoreau - obligation to disobey unjust laws
and the Socrates - obligation to obey all laws, unjust or not.


I can understand both viewpoints, but I definitely side more with Thoreau. One must respect the rule of law (Socrates) but we are also obligated to respect the laws of higher powers and our own conscience.


"the end justifies the means" is a politcal philosophy made popular by Machiavelli which I deeply disagree with. I could rob a grandma for money and I would be justified because I obtained the money. I could harm, kill, or intimidate my opponents to get my way, and if I got my way, I would be justified. It is certainly not a life of morality. I would much rather be able to convince people to help me, get them to agree with me, etc. without force.

Machiavelli would say it's okay to murder millions of people in order to obtain peace.. the means completely undermine his goals.

[jack404]

"the end justifies the means" is a politcal philosophy made popular by Machiavelli which I deeply disagree with.

or i could create long term suffering in a nation by alllowing unchecked or fettered immigration and by providing a welfare state

by supporting the least able and ensuring a mass drain of work ethic , long term suffering is ensured for the remaining workers ..

[22to12gauge]

Originally Posted by jack404

or i could create long term suffering in a nation by alllowing unchecked or fettered immigration and by providing a welfare state

by supporting the least able and ensuring a mass drain of work ethic , long term suffering is ensured for the remaining workers ..

Those are the means, now what would be the ends?

Homogenous global governance instituted by the Committee of 300?

Why would you want to do that?

[jack404]

actually just comparing your avitars declarations ..

the stuff on their web page is correct aint it ???

or there some mistake there ?

[jack404]

3.4 Free Trade and Migration

We support the removal of governmental impediments to free trade. Political freedom and escape from tyranny demand that individuals not be unreasonably constrained by government in the crossing of political boundaries. Economic freedom demands the unrestricted movement of human as well as financial capital across national borders. However, we support control over the entry into our country of foreign nationals who pose a credible threat to security, health or property.

http://www.lp.org/platform

question how do you do the second part if the government cant check folks coming across the border as in the first part ??

[22to12gauge]

Originally Posted by jack404

http://www.lp.org/platform

question how do you do the second part if the government cant check folks coming across the border as in the first part ??

We can check people at the border. It says unreasonably constrained by government in the crossing of political boundaries. Which is open to interpretation but I believe checking people at the US border is not unreasonabbly constraining. and a politcal boundary can be states or cities too and I believe Americans should be free to move within the country without border checks and all that.

And it says the LP supports control over entry into the US by foreign nationals, albeit with some conditions, but they are rather ambiguous and would constitute checking all foreign nationals upon entering the US.


"We support the removal of governmental impediments to free trade. Political freedom and escape from tyranny demand that individuals not be unreasonably constrained by government in the crossing of political boundaries. Economic freedom demands the unrestricted movement of human as well as financial capital across national borders. However, we support control over the entry into our country of foreign nationals who pose a credible threat to security, health or property."

[jack404]

i thought it a cut and paste out of chapter 4 section 4 b of NAFTA

silly me ..

[gvw3]

I thought free trade is one of the things that got us in this mess in the 1st place. Am I wrong?

[Zhurh]

I have liberal friends that I won't even talk politics with, want to stay friends with them. Their entire world view is opposite with mine. They can't understand how I see things and their vision of the future is so unrealistic and wrought with failure & pain; I don't want to even think about their's. Our country has a history of the pendulum swinging back and forth; I figure it will continue to do so too. Reason is because people always vote their wallet; once bad times hit; things will change no matter who is in power.

[jack404]

Zhurh its called socialism its sorta like a cross between being blind and drunk

only real hassle is no matter how basic a fact orf truth , if it aint on their side its a lie , not possible , or a plot to scam them .. funny folks .

[Twicepop]

Liberalism....a debilitating disorder that sometimes completely paralyzes it's victims above the shoulders. They also are sometimes prone to fits of "political correctness" and are known to spew inacurate and incoherent oppinions on a variety of issues. Someone close to you may be suffering from this malady. Please do what you can to stop the spread of this horrible affliction.

those who beat their guns into plowshares, will plow for those who didn't

[22to12gauge]

let's just get this straight, because communication is vital.. and I am sometimes guilty of using the term "liberal" when a better word could be used.

Liberalism is, in itself, not bad.. Whether you like it or not, you are a "liberal" for simply being in support of gun rights.

I think you guys mean to bash on "progressives" or "social liberals".. or being liberal (adj.) in regards to fiscal policy.


Classical Liberalism is what the United States was founded upon. Definition: "A political belief in which primary emphasis is placed on securing the freedom of the individual by limiting the power of the state. In its economic form, it advocates a respect for private property and free markets."



don't let the progressives steal words and change meanings like we live in an Orwellian dystopia (oh wait, we do)

I think Jack nearly has it right by simply calling them socialist... although that is almost a compliment for brain-dead authoritarian progressives.

[jack404]

liberalism is the product of Igor tomis vladimir Cosvonyenko and a bunch more

vlad's better known as he went on to develop Nurolinguistic programming , or how to nullify anyone else speaking with bull S deep stuff .. its taught in managment training to dodge customers who have valid complaints

ever complained to the clerk and they state they dont have to deal with you cause your agresive or loud and you aint ?

thank vlad .. and norm thomas for bringing him to the US i quote Mr Thomas below ( first quote from when he was head of the Communist party of the USA)

anyway they ran a place called america town ,

in the soviet union

thats where liberalism was born

“The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But under the name of Liberalism, they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program until one day America will be a socialist nation without knowing how it happened.”
Norman Thomas

" In October 1917 we parted with the old world rejecting it once and for all. We are moving toward a new world, the world of communism. We shall never turn off that road."

Gentlemen, comrades, do not be concerned about all you hear about Glasnost and Perestroika and democracy in the coming years. They are primarily for outward consumption. There will be no significant internal changes in the Soviet Union, other than for cosmetic purposes. Our purpose is to disarm the Americans and let them fall asleep.

Mikhail Gorbachev Currently Sino Soviet advisor to the Buildeberg Group and Atlata assets, the Soros funding machine for far east russian gas systems and development And senior Consulting adviser , various UN projects

[jack404]

liberal being for gun rights ? ok ...

[Hugh357]

There are a lot more people riding in the wagon than pulling it. It will be up to the few to take back this country like what happened back in 1776. I am ready.