StarDestroyer.Net BBS

http://www.spofga.org/Updates/august/i_ ... ive_by.htm

Found this on one of my boards...well worth reading........

****************************************************

At one time, I was proud to call myself a conservative. No more.
I would even argue that conservatives are as much responsible
for the political and cultural deterioration of our country as liberals.

That means Republicans share as much blame for the downward
spiral of our nation as Democrats. People who believe they are
voting for a substantive change of direction by voting for either
major party are kidding themselves. Both liberals and
conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, are heading in
the same direction.

The pattern goes something like this: Democrats (liberals) use
the power of political office to spearhead socialist, internationalist
policies. This is accomplished over the vocal objections of
grassroots conservatives. The resulting dissatisfaction with the
liberal agenda usually translates into Republicans being elected
to public office.

Once Republicans (conservatives) are in office, however, they do
nothing to reverse the socialist policies that the liberals instituted.
Instead, they set about to normalize or legitimize those policies.
After all, Republicans are all about conserving the status quo;
and for the past 40 years, the status quo has been incessant,
burgeoning socialism. Therefore, instead of instituting a radical
return to constitutional governance, conservatives actually harden
the cement of socialism that has been laid by liberals.

Unfortunately, rank and file conservatives seem more than
willing to accept an increase of socialism, internationalism, and
liberalism as long as Republicans are overseeing it. Conservatives
seem totally oblivious to the ominous direction of the country
when Republicans are in charge. As a result, conservatives and
liberals, Democrats and Republicans, are working together to
take America further and further down the road of socialism.

With little distinction from Democrats in the actual governing
policy of Republicans, liberals are soon reinstalled to public
office, and the cycle repeats itself. This has been the redundant
pattern in our country for the past half century.

Therefore, as someone who stands foursquare on the principles
laid down in our founding documents, I refuse to be identified
as a conservative any longer. Instead, call me a constitutionalist.
I am convinced that the only chance that freedom and
independence have of surviving the next 50 years is by a radical
return to constitutional government. The status quo must go!

Only an awakened electorate who are fed up with the constant
capitulation of constitutional principles by the two major parties
and who are willing to courageously crusade for genuine change
will be capable of actually preserving this republic for their posterity.

Anything short of this will only result in a continued drift toward
socialism and globalism.

Part of the lack of change is because if the Republicans do anything to change the US policy, it is rejected by Democrats. Bush could inagurate new justices, but they're all being blocked by Daschale. Bush could have apssed a tax cut, but it would be rejected by congress and the liberal media. Bush could reject a U.N. treaty, but the Europeans would spend months burning flags and using leaps of logic to declare the U.S. evil. I think part of it is peer pressure. Am I right? I'm not 100% sure.

Liberalism vs Conservatism is an example of the "complex question fallacy".

Do you think taxes are too high? Then you're a Conservative, and that must also mean that you're a white, rich, right-wing Christian bigot who hates gays and immigrants, advocates heavy military spending (but no actual use for all this firepower, since you're an isolationist), promote the NRA, let big companies do whatever they want regardless of the pain inflicted upon the consumer or the environment, and join the church and state.

Do you care about racial/sexual/religious equality and global issues? Then you're a liberal, and that must also mean that you're a left-wing peacenik who wants to interfere in other countries' affairs (but without the weapons to make this interference possible, since you oppose the military), ban all guns of all kinds, destroy all private enterprise in favour of Marxism, penalize success by attacking wealthy people/companies at every turn simply for being successful, and drive people from their homes in order to protect spotted owls.

Amazingly enough, no one seems to notice that this kind of artificial polarization makes it impossible for any reasonable person to be either "liberal" or "conservative". Even in the article that Shep quoted, the person quietly merged "socialism and globalism" into a conjoined concept, as if it is impossible to be both capitalist and globalist (what the fuck happened to free trade?)

It's no longer about being totally liberal or being totally conservative. It's about moderation and extremism.

Durandal wrote:It's no longer about being totally liberal or being totally conservative. It's about moderation and extremism.

No it isn't, Durandal.

It's all about CONTROL.

Why do we have to show photo IDs to fly on an airplane now, instead of
taking the simple commonsense measure of putting a loaded 9mm into
the cockpit for the crew to use, and reinforcing the cockpit doors?

Control my friend, CONTROL.

Too many Republicans don't mind doing the same kind of stuff they
villify the Democrats for as long as they're the one's in control.

Example:

Delaware police compile database of future suspects
Associated Press

WILMINGTON, Del. -- Police in Delaware are trying to get a head-start on cracking crimes before they happen by setting up a database that contains a list of people who officers believe are likely to break the law.

Defense attorneys and the American Civil Liberties Union oppose the database, which lists names, addresses and photographs of the potential suspects -- many of whom have clean slates.

The precise grounds for putting a person on the list aren't clear. But since the system was introduced in Wilmington in June, most of the 200 people included in the file have been minorities from poor, high-crime neighborhoods.

State and federal prosecutors say the tactic is legal, but defense lawyers object to the practice.

"We should enforce the existing laws, but not violate them, to catch the bad guys," said Theo Gregory, City Councilman and public defender. "We've become the bad guys, and that's not right."

Mayor James Baker called the criticism "asinine and intellectually bankrupt."

"I don't care what anyone but a court of law thinks," he said. "Until a court says otherwise, if I say it's constitutional, it's constitutional."

The pictures are being taken by two Wilmington police squads created in June to arrest drug dealers. The units are known in some neighborhoods as "jump-out squads" because they jump out of cars and make quick arrests.

Many of the people whose photos have been taken for the file were stopped briefly for loitering and let go.

And the noose tightens.

Neither party wants to actually change anything all they want is Control, as Shep said.

But it will all change once I assume power.

Mr. B wrote:Neither party wants to actually change anything all they want is Control, as Shep said.

Social Security is a prime point.

It's a giant PONZI scheme that worked as long as there were more young
people than old people.......

Oh yeah, Congress has it's own pension plan. They don't pay into
Social Security......Gee, I wonder what THEY know that WE dont....

No it isn't, Durandal.

It's all about CONTROL.

It's always about control. We're just being specific.

Why do we have to show photo IDs to fly on an airplane now, instead of taking the simple commonsense measure of putting a loaded 9mm into the cockpit for the crew to use, and reinforcing the cockpit doors?

No, the common sense measure would be to have an armed federal marshall or two on every flight. Simply giving the crew a gun wouldn't do it. What if they can't handle themselves under pressure, and they shoot out a window?

Control my friend, CONTROL.

Too many Republicans don't mind doing the same kind of stuff they
villify the Democrats for as long as they're the one's in control.

Surprisingly enough, I actually agree. I hate the idea of airport security measures. Every time you walk into an airport, you're forced to sacrifice your basic right to protection from search and seizure. The government tells you, "We think you're a terrorist, so you have to submit to strip searches or whatever other security measures we demand in order to prove your innocence." Police officers can't get away with simply strip searching people on the street, so why is it different when you're in an airport?

And, honestly, how many bombs have been found by virtue of these ridiculous security measures? Zero.

That's not the vision that the founding fathers had. Thomas Jefferson said, "Those who sacrifice freedom for security deserve neither." That's paraphrased, by the way. It's not just the Republicans or Democrats; it's Americans in general. Everyone wants to gleefully give up their civil rights in order to feel secure. Granted, that's the individual's prerogative, but it just shows how complacent a country we are when it comes to our basic freedoms.

If a plane gets blown up as a result of someone taking a bomb on board, the people that died are martyrs to freedom. That's the price. The military routinely sends soldiers off to die for our freedoms. The founding fathers were willing to die for them. Freedom is a higher cause.

*clapclapclapclap*

*Shakes head* Sad, it is really America is screwed over forever, and sooner or later it will end up like a outdated dinosaur just like Communism and the USSR. I have offically announced myself to be an Imperialist, and I now strive to conquer the US and maybe, eventully the World.

I have offically announced myself to be an Imperialist, and I now strive to conquer the US and maybe, eventully the World.

To whicn I reply

Get in Line

Yesterady it came to me, When the world @%@% itself over the best place to be?

Switzerland
Its Neutral? And has enough Guns to keep it that way

Do you think taxes are too high? Then you're a Conservative, and that must also mean that you're a white, rich, right-wing Christian bigot who hates gays and immigrants, advocates heavy military spending (but no actual use for all this firepower, since you're an isolationist), promote the NRA, let big companies do whatever they want regardless of the pain inflicted upon the consumer or the environment, and join the church and state.

I would just like to point out that there are virtually no mainstream conservatives these days who advocate isolationism, especially in the wake of 9/11. You could bring up Buchanan's name, but his influence in recent years has been quite marginal.[/i]

IMO there aren't any more terrorist attacks because they are afraid to try and screw with us. What would happen if there was a terrorist who tried to bomb a plane? We bomb his country! He kills three hundred people? We kill three million people! See, it all works out in our favor at the end. Just kidding, btw.

Mr Bean wrote:

I have offically announced myself to be an Imperialist, and I now strive to conquer the US and maybe, eventully the World.

To whicn I reply

Get in Line

Yesterady it came to me, When the world @%@% itself over the best place to be?

Switzerland
Its Neutral? And has enough Guns to keep it that way

Yeah, I mean, besides the guns they got Swiss Army Knives besides killing everyone, they would just not sell them and leave the World's Armies in shambles. I propose we ally.*Be's Vader like* Join me and together we can rule the Earth by hlding Swiss Army Knives.

Not to mention Swiss Watchs, Damn I want one

Features
*Quartz Movement
*Chronograph
*Altitude (4,000 ft below sea level to 30,000 ft above)
*Alarm
*2nd Time Zone
*Barmometric Pressure
*Temperature (-4 Degrees F to 122 Degrees F)
*Aluminum Case
*Back with Screws
*Tritium Dial and Hands
*Mineral Crystal
*Water resistant to 3 ATM (30m-100FT)
*Synthetic Strap
*Battery life of 24 months

Damn thing is NICE as hell, A friend got one showing it off somone brought up a Rollex(Real one) and he was in the oh yeah type?

Well my friend said oh yeah? And Precded to Toss it HARD on the Ground, Damn thing looked like to bounce and its skided a good five, ten feet he picked it up, NOT a strach on the glass(We where in a Concrete Parking lot to) and you could not tell it had been thrown at all(Finish still gleamed no dents or anything)

Then my friend asked he could see if the Rollex could do as well, Needless to say the guy turned him down

And, honestly, how many bombs have been found by virtue of these ridiculous security measures? Zero.

While they have not found any bombs, they do find guns from time to time.
What's scary though, it how many they miss.

As for showing picture ID, they keeps moron A from saying he is TrailerParkJawa and flying in my spot. At least I would hope so.

One thing that has certainly changed, is we dont here about people throwing temper tantrums anymore. Anyone acting like a crazy on the plane, will get beat down by the other passengers.

look I am a conservative. I am an isolationist. But when people fuck with my country I believe in breaking a huge can of whipass and spray iot all over the world.

Many conservatives feel the same world. The world is a hgell hole, and we are waiting for aliens to pick us up so we can get the hell out of here

I believe in capitalism. I believe against abortion, but I am an atheist completely in Wong's camp. I believe in Reagan-era military spending but also in actual "force projection" (i.e., USE IT, DAMNIT!). I believe intervention is necessary, but I don't think I am a jingoist. I try to model my beliefs after Wong's as much as possible because I think he is God

Everyone from Spacebattles and other message boards know I am a conservative. Both in a fiscal sense, government, and a moral sense.

I consider the current crop of Republicans on the Hill to be a bunch of pussy ass RINOs who cater to the liberals every whim. Your modern day Republican can't change anything, they will be branded everything negative by the liberal news media elite.

I completley agree with the article that Republicans only promote socialism if it is under their watch, which is totally absurd. Republicans should be reversing socialist policies of the left and lessening the role of government in our lives.

We don't need the government to tell us how to spend our money, only the stupid need that. Less socialist policy would mean more freedom. When a person has more money to spend they are more free, they are not financially tied to the State.

I wish I were in a position to do something, I'd reverse almost all the social policies that have come about this century. Social Security would be first. Taxes would be cut nearly in half. The only thing government would concern itself with is defense, some funding of education, and very limited social programs.

Oh, Bean, I have a Swiss Army watch, though it is not as nice as those. It's a nice one though, very cool.

Darth Wong wrote:Do you care about racial/sexual/religious equality and global issues? Then you're a liberal, and that must also mean that you're a left-wing peacenik who wants to interfere in other countries' affairs (but without the weapons to make this interference possible, since you oppose the military), ban all guns of all kinds, destroy all private enterprise in favour of Marxism, penalize success by attacking wealthy people/companies at every turn simply for being successful, and drive people from their homes in order to protect spotted owls.

Why are liberals necessary left-winged?? Liberalism is actually an ideology which places emphasis on individual rights, as opposed to the collectivism which is a fundamental part of Marxism and its variants. (anarcho-communism, leninism, maoism, stalinism, etc.)

By the way, why should communists vote against gun control?? If it's easier for them to accumulate weapons, it's also easier them to launch a revolution and take power. (history has shown us that violent revolution is the most efficient way to establish a socialist state - the only democratically elected Communist government, Salvador Allende, was overthrown quickly after the election by Pinochet)

It's possible that socialists might prohibit personal weapons after seizing power, but they would benefit from it under a capitalist regime.

It's also quite a myth that all marxists are globalists. North Korea, for example, is extremely isolationist. (Red China was also isolationist for a period)

Simon H.Johansen wrote: the only democratically elected Communist government, Salvador Allende, was overthrown quickly after the election by Pinochet)

The only democratically-elected communist government was rapidly overthrown in a CIA-backed coup. It doesn't take a raving paranoid lunatic to realize that the Americans decided to make an example out of Allende for the sake of making sure that no communists got elected elsewhere.

Mr Bean wrote:Not to mention Swiss Watchs, Damn I want one

Features
*Quartz Movement
*Chronograph
*Altitude (4,000 ft below sea level to 30,000 ft above)
*Alarm
*2nd Time Zone
*Barmometric Pressure
*Temperature (-4 Degrees F to 122 Degrees F)
*Aluminum Case
*Back with Screws
*Tritium Dial and Hands
*Mineral Crystal
*Water resistant to 3 ATM (30m-100FT)
*Synthetic Strap
*Battery life of 24 months

Damn thing is NICE as hell, A friend got one showing it off somone brought up a Rollex(Real one) and he was in the oh yeah type?

Well my friend said oh yeah? And Precded to Toss it HARD on the Ground, Damn thing looked like to bounce and its skided a good five, ten feet he picked it up, NOT a strach on the glass(We where in a Concrete Parking lot to) and you could not tell it had been thrown at all(Finish still gleamed no dents or anything)

Then my friend asked he could see if the Rollex could do as well, Needless to say the guy turned him down

How much did the Swiss pay you?

I would disagree with this part of the article...

Once Republicans (conservatives) are in office, however, they do
nothing to reverse the socialist policies that the liberals instituted.

Obviously, the author doesn't remember the big hullaballoo surrounding Bush's reversal of a lot of Clinton's policies, such as the Kyoto treaty or the ABM treaty.