The second American Revolution!!!!

[IEATV8S]

YouTube Video

[Black Power]

Good video. Welcome back BTW, the liberals tried to organize a caucus while you were gone

[henschman]

how do you think this monolithic American culture should be achieved and maintained?

if it's something everyone accepts voluntarily because they see value in it, then I'm fine with it. the only way a certain culture, or way of doing things, should be spread is the same way religion should spread: by living as a good example; vigourously advocating it through free speech; converting other people to your views, teaching them, and sending them out to do the same; and bringing your kids up the right way. Different cultures should compete freely in the free market of ideas, and hopefully the best one should win.

culture, views, or religion should never be spread through force, and therefore never through the power of the state. you don't have the right for someone to speak to you in a certain language or to do much of anything else for you, except to leave you alone and respect your own rights to speak whatever language you want and live your life however you want. And you owe everybody else that same duty.

we need a free marketplace of ideas/cultures/lifestyles as well as a free marketplace of capital and labor. that's as good a definition of freedom as any. force and government have no place but the defense of rights.

[Red Regal T]

Originally Posted by henschman

how do you think this monolithic American culture should be achieved and maintained?

if it's something everyone accepts voluntarily because they see value in it, then I'm fine with it. the only way a certain culture, or way of doing things, should be spread is the same way religion should spread: by living as a good example; vigourously advocating it through free speech; converting other people to your views, teaching them, and sending them out to do the same; and bringing your kids up the right way. Different cultures should compete freely in the free market of ideas, and hopefully the best one should win.

culture, views, or religion should never be spread through force, and therefore never through the power of the state. you don't have the right for someone to speak to you in a certain language or to do much of anything else for you, except to leave you alone and respect your own rights to speak whatever language you want and live your life however you want. And you owe everybody else that same duty.

we need a free marketplace of ideas/cultures/lifestyles as well as a free marketplace of capital and labor. that's as good a definition of freedom as any. force and government have no place but the defense of rights.

Every American did see value in American traditionalism until the 60s. America was a great nation. Liberals have pushed their way on to the American scene since then and given us PC and multiculturalism. America has it's own distinct culture and if we want it to continue to exist, we need for that culture to continue. America is in decline, thank you very much, because of PC and multiculturalism. Why do these people want to come to America if all they want to do is pretend they're still living in their third world countries and indeed, impose their backward cultures on America? It's not alright and should not be their choice. They are to come here and assimilate into the majority culture, the American culture, and therefore SPEAK ENGLISH.

Liberal's ruling principles of tolerance and non-discrimination is sheer, is at the bottom of our problems. Liberalism is the systematic destruction of everything that is. They are using their ruling principle of non-discrimination to break down every institution and dissolve the identity of our nation by forbidding everyone to point out bad behavior by minorities and alien groups. Liberals are about the business of tearing down our superior Western culture simply because it is superior to other cultures. To liberals, it's not fair to have anything superior to anything. They are sickos. For example, they raise up the blacks, the illegals, the Muslims, the homosexuals, because they are the designated victims and they must be made equal. Liberals take our ordered, structured, society, and drag down the good, because it is better than the bad, just as they would eliminate the beautiful because it's superior to ugliness, and so on, so as to ultimately muddle our superior culture and bring all groups down to the dismal same level. Non-discrimination is destruction of our society, plain and simple. Liberal non-discrimination is destroying Western society. Liberals are neither principled or rational, so why do we listen to them?

[henschman]

both groups (proponents of traditional Anglo-American culture as well as liberal promoters of non-discrimination) have gone too far and crossed the line of using force to promote their ideas of about what everybody's culture should be.

when they were in power, the traditionalists used the power of the state to enforce their ideas, such as that you have to be a christian to hold public office; schools have to teach certain religious doctrines; people with different melanin levels shouldn't get married; homos shouldn't be able to do each other IDB, and so on.

when the liberals got in power, they also used the power of the state to enforce their cultural ideals, such as denying business owners their right to free contract by telling them they can't refuse business to people for certain reasons even if they don't want to serve them (involuntary servitude); requiring the government and anyone that gets its funding to hire/accept a certain amount of people with a specified melanin level (affirmative action); and, in pursuance of their cultural idea that everybody should be the same, requiring people to contribute to redistribution-of-wealth schemes even if people don't agree with the premise, goal, or method of such programs (socialism).

the solution to all this is Limited Government -- that is, a government that stays in its proper place of protecting everybody's rights from everybody else, instead of being the agent of whatever group elects more people to office; as happens in any form of democratic government (such as a Republic) when the government's powers are not limited by a Constitution and checks/balances.

under such a system, various cultural ideas are free to compete, and people can pick which values they choose to live by based on which ones they think have the most value, or whatever criteria they want. You can promote your cultural ideas of homogeniety and traditionalism, but you can't impose them through force or the state. the libs can promote their culture of everybody being treated as equal even if they are not and people with more money giving it to those with less, but they can't force people to act that way or give their money to such causes. Everybody can promote their culture however they want as long as it doesn't involve the initiation of force, and may the best ideas win!

[Red Regal T]

Originally Posted by henschman

both groups (proponents of traditional Anglo-American culture as well as liberal promoters of non-discrimination) have gone too far and crossed the line of using force to promote their ideas of about what everybody's culture should be.

when they were in power, the traditionalists used the power of the state to enforce their ideas, such as that you have to be a christian to hold public office; schools have to teach certain religious doctrines; people with different melanin levels shouldn't get married; homos shouldn't be able to do each other IDB, and so on.

True, but times have changed. Nobody is advocating the things your saying. Today, they have the right to destroy their lives by the bad choices they make, and they still would, but maybe there wouldn't be so much bad example. You'd be able to talk about the bad behavior anywhere you wanted to without some bonehead saying your a racist.

when the liberals got in power, they also used the power of the state to enforce their cultural ideals, such as denying business owners their right to free contract by telling them they can't refuse business to people for certain reasons even if they don't want to serve them (involuntary servitude); requiring the government and anyone that gets its funding to hire/accept a certain amount of people with a specified melanin level (affirmative action); and, in pursuance of their cultural idea that everybody should be the same, requiring people to contribute to redistribution-of-wealth schemes even if people don't agree with the premise, goal, or method of such programs (socialism).

Well, these are the things that are destroying America. Even those things you mentioned in relation to traditionalism would hardly destroy the country. There's no comparison. These things above are the things that need to be returned to th way they were. No special treatment for anybody, and the freedom to make any choice you want as an American. Not telling me who I must hire or who I must rent to.

the solution to all this is Limited Government -- that is, a government that stays in its proper place of protecting everybody's rights from everybody else, instead of being the agent of whatever group elects more people to office; as happens in any form of democratic government (such as a Republic) when the government's powers are not limited by a Constitution and checks/balances.

under such a system, various cultural ideas are free to compete, and people can pick which values they choose to live by based on which ones they think have the most value, or whatever criteria they want. You can promote your cultural ideas of homogeniety and traditionalism, but you can't impose them through force or the state. the libs can promote their culture of everybody being treated as equal even if they are not and people with more money giving it to those with less, but they can't force people to act that way or give their money to such causes. Everybody can promote their culture however they want as long as it doesn't involve the initiation of force, and may the best ideas win!

Sounds good to me!

[Squeelr]

Todays conservative is yesterdays liberals.

You should do a little research and realize there were liberals back in John Adams' day. They were called REPUBLICANS!!

The conservatives of the day were of the Federalist party.

Were did we get a lot of the influence for the writing of our Constitution? Yep...France. Where John Adams, Thom Jefferson & Ben Franklin spent a lot of time understanding the LIBERAL movement, The Enlightenment period.

Maybe some of you neanderthals should take a moment and study a little of this time period. You might find out that you're actually closet liberals. Or neanderthals living in the wrong country.

[Red Regal T]

So, how would you classify today's liberals?

[Squeelr]

Originally Posted by Red Regal T

So, how would you classify today's liberals?

The same as the ones that started this country.

We love our country and arenot afraid to fight for it either here or overseas (if thats what it takes).

Hey! John! Did you hear the latest?

Your most favorite liberal/gay talk show host over on that radio syndacate that doesnt exist anymore (Air America) just got a TV show on CNBC!!

Rachael Maddow!!

[Squeelr]

Samuel Adams was once called a radical liberal.

Go figure.

[Red Regal T]

Originally Posted by Squeelr

The same as the ones that started this country.

Well, then you don't have a clue. You just proved you're not willing to be honest.

[8t7gn]

Your most favorite liberal/gay talk show host over on that radio syndacate that doesnt exist anymore (Air America) just got a TV show on CNBC!!

That's going to last long. baaaaahhhhh

[IEATV8S]

Originally Posted by 8t7gn

Your most favorite liberal/gay talk show host over on that radio syndacate that doesnt exist anymore (Air America) just got a TV show on CNBC!!

That's going to last long. baaaaahhhhh

Hey, she's HOT, and her gay lover thinks so also!

[Squeelr]

Originally Posted by Red Regal T

Well, then you don't have a clue. You just proved you're not willing to be honest.

Nope. You're just too unaware to "get it".

Things change over time John. Get with the program. Were not going to stay stuck in the stone age with you just because you want to take us back a few hundred years to the Puritain period.

Next thing ya know you're going to want to take away womens right to vote and segregate everybody again.

Those were the good ol' days...right John?

[8t7gn]

Next thing ya know you're going to want to take away womens right to vote and segregate everybody again.

When was it that we want to take women's right to vote away and segregate everybody? A little common sense here, please. Again, like a true lib, you are running on emotions again.

[Red Regal T]

Originally Posted by Squeelr

Nope. You're just too unaware to "get it".

Things change over time John. Get with the program. Were not going to stay stuck in the stone age with you just because you want to take us back a few hundred years to the Puritain period.

Next thing ya know you're going to want to take away womens right to vote and segregate everybody again.

Those were the good ol' days...right John?

You talk nonsense. Like I said before, you're a provocateur. I see now, you're on an even keel with weeser. Putting words in my mouth will win no argument. You don't know what you're talking about. It's all about your feeeelings. Typical effeminent lib.

[henschman]

Originally Posted by Squeelr

Todays conservative is yesterdays liberals.

You should do a little research and realize there were liberals back in John Adams' day. They were called REPUBLICANS!!

The conservatives of the day were of the Federalist party.

Were did we get a lot of the influence for the writing of our Constitution? Yep...France. Where John Adams, Thom Jefferson & Ben Franklin spent a lot of time understanding the LIBERAL movement, The Enlightenment period.

Maybe some of you neanderthals should take a moment and study a little of this time period. You might find out that you're actually closet liberals. Or neanderthals living in the wrong country.

this is why i don't put much stock in labels like "liberal" or "conservative." those are highly relative terms. just going by their dictionary definitions, a conservative is just someone who supports old traditions and/or the status quo, and a liberal is someone who is for change. you're right -- in 1776, the ideas of natural rights, individual liberty, and limited government were liberal -- those ideas were a radical change from the way things were everywhere else in the world at that time. back then, the "conservatives" advocated for the status quo -- monarchy, aristocracy, and authoritarian, centralized government. Eventually those ideals carried the day, and they culminated in the lassez-faire days of the late 19th Century, when a new political movement started to emerge.

back when the ideas of redistribution of wealth and the regulatory state were first postulated, those really were new ideas, and those who supported them were aptly called liberal. the name stuck, and that's why people who are for not so much economic freedom but lots of social freedom are still called liberals, even though those are pretty old ideas nowadays. I suppose the name might still be appropriate since they are still for expanding such policies though.

Back in those days, Conservatives were the ones who stood for free markets and individual responsibility (as opposed to the nanny state of the liberals), and it was mainly the Republican party who supported those policies. nowadays though, the Republican party has largely embraced Big Government as a solution for most problems, although they might use it to enforce slightly different social policies than democrats. They no longer seem to stand for any real principles. You know, compared to other political factions in this country, it seems to me that perhaps the agenda of the so-called "neo-conservatives" that are in charge of the GOP these days represents the biggest change from traditional American ways such as national sovereignty, restrained executive power, and a humble foreign policy; so in a lot of ways, the neo-cons are probably the biggest "liberals" of all.

So a person like me, who is for less government in ALL areas of our lives, would be a Liberal by 18th Century standards; a Conservative by last century's standards, and a whacko fringe lunatic enemy combatant anarchist by today's standards, where only a small minority question the legitimacy of the government's claim that there is no limit to what it can control. see what i mean by relative terms?