Real talk, I wish there were more "serious" conservative posters here

[Mr. Somebody]

A true right winger by definition has to not care about his fellow man. Whoever gets to the top economically deserves to be there because they have earned it through their business ventures. Monopoly or not. If you are unable to do this its because you did not apply yourself and should be given no special favor to elevate yourself beyond being a cog in the wheel. Their solution to problems is to incarcerate/kill people who break the order. They have a very clinical way of addressing problems. Its hard to be honest about these thoughts in a world where there are people who care.

 

[Berniewood Hogan]

Can you prove Mitt Romney inherited his wealth? He came from a rich family,

 

[No1]

Uh, if you're gonna keep typing these blustery, high-on-sanctimonious rhetoric, low on facts essays from your high horse, you could at least not be a hypocrite and defend your claims. You leveled leveled a critique of my initial post that was wholly erroneous. I addressed it and you won't even respond. Practice what you're preaching.

Practice what I'm preaching, I'm ignoring you purposefully because I don't care about what you have to say. There is nothing novel to anything that you have to say. I didn't even read your post. I looked up, saw it was you in my notifications, the master of misrepresenting everything I say, just like you did in this past, and I ignored you. So why then, are you surprised, when I continue to ignore you now? I just said in this very thread, reading the same repetitive shyt is boring. Your entire steeze bores me. Go ahead and attempt to psychoanalyze me again.

Better yet, tell me one thing about my post to tru mac that wasn't factual relating to the media conglomerates of today. I'll wait until you finish your google search.

And since when are you of all people the gatekeeper of debating ettiquette? You seem angry and uptight as fukk every time you argue and you constantly cuss people out for not dikkriding Jay-Z like you or saying something you don't like about the Lakers or the Patriots. I remember I was making fun of your comments overrating the Lakers and Ramon Sessions during the NBA playoffs not too long ago and you got all furious and started talking about how I look. All of a sudden you're the paragon of tact and respectful debating? fukk outta here.

Further, this is why I don't argue with you. Call this arrogance. I'll admit this is arrogance. You are not capable of EVER beating me in a debate straight up. You never have without lying. Maybe, that's why you quote my posts and then wait around for my response that isn't coming. But I'll address your lying once again.

First and foremost, this is HL, I clown on people in every other forum, but where is your example of me going at people's heads in HL? If you're so cool with the sound of the discussion in the HL then I suggest we start telling people to forget how to use that report abuse button every time Mowgli says something, or Hussain, or anyone else that they don't fukk with. Where is your example of me being upset at people for any debate in HL aside from me getting annoyed with TUH implying that me being black had something to do with my position on something. I straight up said Maybe you can't tell the difference between and

Aside from that, I just type fast and as always in corny, vindictive, hypocritical, search past post history VVD procedure, (but with an inability to ever do it to BarNone/Non-Chalant1 accurately because that BS doesn't exist)....you resort to calling me angry in some capacity and a camel jocker. You try to fit me into the same petty box that you reside in. Except, there is clear evidence in your case and none in mine.

You yourself said you didn't realize how old I was until like a month and a half ago, so what is your basis for claiming you know anything about me as a poster when that has been know since I left AHH for SOHH in 2008? It was well known in the seum.

You might find me say "what the fukk" or "clown"or "idgaf" and if people don't usually use profanity around you, I'm sorry. But I'm debating the same here, the way I did on SOHH and nobody called me mad then....except when the Patriots were losing That's just second nature to me in casual setting. Find one quote "in context" of me "cussing" (actually cussing) anyone out over anything Jay related. Seriously, go find it. You couldn't do it last time. And I know you have the time to do it. You've shown that over the years. Finally, I never overrated Ramon Sessions, you're lying again. I was the main one calling him a coward during the stretch into and during the playoffs. In fact, my biggest post in the Lakers "renovation era" thread is me blasting CantStop for the dumb shyt he does like the overhyping last year. There's a case of me being genuinely annoyed with someone.

But it's aight, yo had mad heart yo. You're a liar or "misremembering", but you got mad heart yo. There's your response, I need those 5 minutes back.

I'll wait for you to point out my lack of facts in regards to media conglomerates.

 

[ExodusNirvana]

A true right winger by definition has to not care about his fellow man. Whoever gets to the top economically deserves to be there because they have earned it through their business ventures. Monopoly or not. If you are unable to do this its because you did not apply yourself and should be given no special favor to elevate yourself beyond being a cog in the wheel. Their solution to problems is to incarcerate/kill people who break the order. They have a very clinical way of addressing problems. Its hard to be honest about these thoughts in a world where there are people who care.

Basically.

You want us to be sympathetic to the people who by definition are not supposed to give a fukk about us?

In terms of history, minorities only recently gained certain rights that whites had. The 1940's as a long time ago but not THAT long.

Cops giving random frisks to minorities over policies that...wait for it...UNFAIRLY TARGET MINORITIES.

You think it's a coencidence that big business favors the GOP? That prisons (filled with....?), the military, military contractors and big oil favor GOP policies?

nikkas need to get real...conservatives for the most part can go fukk themselves. Because at the end of the day all you have to do is ask them a few simple questions about various topics that affect this country and its people and you'll see that they don't give a fukk about you, your plight as a result of their profit and policies, and whether or not their views affect your way of life.

Go ahead and try it. Social, Economic, Foreign Policy. You might not like VVDs delivery but it is what it is. The truth hurts.

 

[Mr. Somebody]

Basically.

You want us to be sympathetic to the people who by definition are not supposed to give a fukk about us?

In terms of history, minorities only recently gained certain rights that whites had. The 1940's as a long time ago but not THAT long.

Cops giving random frisks to minorities over policies that...wait for it...UNFAIRLY TARGET MINORITIES.

You think it's a coencidence that big business favors the GOP? That prisons (filled with....?), the military, military contractors and big oil favor GOP policies?

nikkas need to get real...conservatives for the most part can go fukk themselves. Because at the end of the day all you have to do is ask them a few simple questions about various topics that affect this country and its people and you'll see that they don't give a fukk about you, your plight as a result of their profit and policies, and whether or not their views affect your way of life.

Go ahead and try it. Social, Economic, Foreign Policy. You might not like VVDs delivery but it is what it is. The truth hurts.

Its sad because they hide behind the teachings of Christ which show another brand of conservatism that they dont want to really apply to their lives. I guess its an image to pave over their satanic symboled streets with golden pavement. Its so demonic, friends.

 

[No1]

@ExodusNirvana you're better than that and you know what I'm getting at. More so than most of these guys. You think that it's only conservatives that push for those policies that target minorities predominantly? You think every liberal has your back? How quick did black people get called the n-word when they didn't back up the gay rights movement in California?

It's not even about whether or not I agree with VVD. You're being short-sighted. There are conservative ideas that have worked, conservative thinkers that are genuine. Some of the most chill people I've ever known are conservative. Hell, my conservative friends in the Peace Corps right now out there in Africa have probably done more to help poor people than anyone in this thread. But that's not even the point. The point is simple, the way in which people debate on here changes nothing, that's not how your foster discussion and that's not how you get things changed. President Obama's approach to engaging Republicans was the right one initially and anyone who is ever involved in negotiations or debates or discussions knows that. His failure was in acquiescing once it became clear that he could not get their cooperation. He did not challenge them to defend their opinions and put them to the fire. He legitimized their intransigence. I'm not saying to do that.

I'm saying that you prove nothing at all, nothing, by sitting there and refusing to engage in any sort of dialogue, the few peoples mind that you could change will just look at you as another part of the problem. Furthermore, you encourage the dehumanizing of the other side. How many people in that conservative base know absolutely nothing about minorities outside of bigoted views and stereotypes? How many of them have bought into their entitlement? How many of them vote against their own interests? Isolation breeds ignorance, we're a very segregated society. I know that you have friends that are more conservative than you are. You don't get that you're reinforcing the reason why people say "don't talk politics in the workplace." It's because people can't do it without flying off the handle. I assumed we were better than that.

You're disappointing me right now my guy. Particularly because the wealthy back both parties and it's really about which party benefits their interests as opposed to uniformly adhering to one party's ideology. Just like how the US' biggest Sugar producers had Clinton's back even though we would've had lower prices if we allowed imports and it was the poor people in the Caribbean that lost out because of it. It's not that cut and dry.

 

[ExodusNirvana]

@ExodusNirvana you're better than that and you know what I'm getting at. More so than most of these guys. You think that it's only conservatives that push for those policies that target minorities predominantly? You think every liberal has your back? How quick did black people get called the n-word when they didn't back up the gay rights movement in California?

It's not even about whether or not I agree with VVD. You're being short-sighted. There are conservative ideas that have worked, conservative thinkers that are genuine. Some of the most chill people I've ever known are conservative. Hell, my conservative friends in the Peace Corps right now out there in Africa have probably done more to help poor people than anyone in this thread. But that's not even the point. The point is simple, the way in which people debate on here changes nothing, that's not how your foster discussion and that's not how you get things changed. President Obama's approach to engaging Republicans was the right one initially and anyone who is ever involved in negotiations or debates or discussions knows that. His failure was in acquiescing once it became clear that he could not get their cooperation. He did not challenge them to defend their opinions and put them to the fire. He legitimized their intransigence. I'm not saying to do that.

I'm saying that you prove nothing at all, nothing, by sitting there and refusing to engage in any sort of dialogue, the few peoples mind that you could change will just look at you as another part of the problem. Furthermore, you encourage the dehumanizing of the other side. How many people in that conservative base know absolutely nothing about minorities outside of bigoted views and stereotypes? How many of them have bought into their entitlement? How many of them vote against their own interests? Isolation breeds ignorance, we're a very segregated society. I know that you have friends that are more conservative than you are. You don't get that you're reinforcing the reason why people say "don't talk politics in the workplace." It's because people can't do it without flying off the handle. I assumed we were better than that.

You're disappointing me right now my guy. Particularly because the wealthy back both parties and it's really about which party benefits their interests as opposed to uniformly adhering to one party's ideology. Just like how the US' biggest Sugar producers had Clinton's back even though we would've had lower prices if we allowed imports and it was the poor people in the Caribbean that lost out because of it. It's not that cut and dry.

Aight.

Two questions:


1. What is conservative ideology?

2. What are the current stances of the GOP (the de facto conservative party of the US)?

 

[No1]

Aight.

Two questions:


1. What is conservative ideology?

2. What is the current stances of the GOP (the de facto conservative party of the US)?

1. Classic or present?

2. The leadership which is appeasing the vocal but significant minority or the people with ideas that I like? I.E. Chaffee who just won RI governor as an independent, but was a Republican Senator, just like how he father was a popular Republican. Or the people who are young and are not universally as mean-spirited as their predecessors? That's who we should be trying to engage, and that's the message board audience.

People like by boys who are still more moderate but have switched to becoming Democrats. That's who you reach through communication. As far as older people? I hate to say it, but as a certain point, someone is who they are. But beating them systematically, structurally and from an argumentative standpoint is much more impressive.

 

[ExodusNirvana]

1. Classic or present?

2. The leadership which is appeasing the vocal but significant minority or the people with ideas that I like? I.E. Chaffee who just won RI governor as an independent, but was a Republican Senator, just like how he father was a popular Republican. Or the people who are young and are not universally as mean-spirited as their predecessors? That's who we should be trying to engage, and that's the message board audience.

People like by boys who are still more moderate but have switched to becoming Democrats. That's who you reach through communication. As far as older people? I hate to say it, but as a certain point, someone is who they are. But beating them systematically, structurally and from an argumentative standpoint is much more impressive.

1. Modern Conservatism in the US...because as I understand it, conservatism here is different from the rest of the world.

2. The GOP is the GOP. I mean what are the official stances of the party. A few bad eggs don't ruin the bunch, but a few speckled eggs don't mean that they are different either.

 

[Brown_Pride]

i really think we (HL) are really trying to simplify something that is decidedly not simple--what it means to be conservative, liberal, white, black...

For instance you can't really classify a "conservative" and then just blanket apply that to everyone, that umbrella covers to many people and ideas, hell i'm conservative in a lot of ways, also liberal in a lot of ways though, so what would i be classified as?

How can you have a convo with someone if immediately you assume you know everything about their stance (speaking in general and not HL members). The problem with HL, like i said, is that WE DO KNOW the stances of most people. Hell Bar, you flat out said you ain't even read VVD's comment at one point because you already knew...i'm not faulting you because i think we all do that.

Ideally it would be nice to have some of these discussions with people of a different political view and i believe it is possible just not here in this venue, at least not how it is now.

for starters the ideals of the people on this board are relatively similar. As a group we tend to be more "liberal" so of course a conservative is going to have issues here.

 

[Mr. Somebody]

But beating them systematically, structurally and from an argumentative standpoint is much more impressive.

Are you sure about that? Even when you know at the ideology is typically a mask for racism/elitism

 

[Brown_Pride]

1. Modern Conservatism in the US...because as I understand it, conservatism here is different from the rest of the world.

2. The GOP is the GOP. I mean what are the official stances of the party. A few bad eggs don't ruin the bunch, but a few speckled eggs don't mean that they are different either.

You can't really do that though. Again the term "conservatism" covers to wide a spectrum of ideals, as does the GOP.

Now the GOP might represent a particular platform but look at the responses people give when you ask things on an individual issue level.

the gop and democratic party are both amalgamations of larger fractured groups...BUT they are played up as two monolithic groups with set ideologies.

I'll look again for the polls that i've seen this happen but there are a few common threads in conservatism but even there most people vote for them based on 1 or two reasons, not their entire platform (which is just sad)

Same thing can be said of the democratic party as well.

 

[Dusty Bake Activate]

Practice what I'm preaching, I'm ignoring you purposefully because I don't care about what you have to say. There is nothing novel to anything that you have to say. I didn't even read your post. I looked up, saw it was you in my notifications, the master of misrepresenting everything I say, just like you did in this past, and I ignored you. So why then, are you surprised, when I continue to ignore you now? I just said in this very thread, reading the same repetitive shyt is boring. Your entire steeze bores me. Go ahead and attempt to psychoanalyze me again.

Further, this is why I don't argue with you. Call this arrogance. I'll admit this is arrogance. You are not capable of EVER beating me in a debate straight up. You never have without lying. Maybe, that's why you quote my posts and then wait around for my response that isn't coming. But I'll address your lying once again.

My god. This guy is so full of shyt it's spilling out of his ears right now.

Let's get this straight...

1. You enter a thread pointing me out personally as an example of someone who is off-putting to conservatives and who insults them and doesn't respect their arguments while debating. And you completely butchered my argument, and claimed I equated conservatism to the Republican party when I was really saying the opposite.

2. I respond and respectfully, clarify my argument and correct you.

3. You ignore it, and keep on distorting my argument meanwhile hypocritically attempting to preach civility and the proper way to debate.

4. I call out your hypocrisy on ignoring the legitimate claims I made about your distortion of my argument and your own visible and well-documented lack of civility in debating.

5. You reply with basically "Na nanny boo boo I didn't read your posts! You can't beat me in a debate!"

Pathetic. You should relinquish your mod duties after this embarrassing display. I might address some more of that pitiful essay you typed later. It was a smorgasbord of contradictions from beginning to end. Just sad.

 

[ExodusNirvana]

You can't really do that though. Again the term "conservatism" covers to wide a spectrum of ideals, as does the GOP.

Now the GOP might represent a particular platform but look at the responses people give when you ask things on an individual issue level.

the gop and democratic party are both amalgamations of larger fractured groups...BUT they are played up as two monolithic groups with set ideologies.

I'll look again for the polls that i've seen this happen but there are a few common threads in conservatism but even there most people vote for them based on 1 or two reasons, not their entire platform (which is just sad)

Same thing can be said of the democratic party as well.

I disagree. There are concrete, recognizable attributes of conservative ideology past and present.

If you do not agree with those ideals, then you're NOT conservative, you're something else either liberal or moderate/centrist.

 

[Brown_Pride]

I disagree. There are concrete, recognizable attributes of conservative ideology past and present.

If you do not agree with those ideals, then you're NOT conservative, you're something else either liberal or moderate/centrist.

ok what are those then? Taxes? gays? Abortion? Welfare? Guns?