Of course you are, KGBman :) Although, it would be nice from you, from time to time, to post a couple of little paragraphs instead of cryptic sentences that you always like to put on the forum to express your opinion :)

---

Evgeny,  I can't agree with your analysis of convservatism and it's timing and origins.  The conservative movement became a reality back in the mid 90's with Newt Gingrich's contract with America campaign.  Clinton was president then.  The conservative movement found it's original cause in Hillary Clinton's first attempt to socialize medicine, which they stopped.  As a direct result of this proposal, the Republicans swept to power in the 1994 election cycle.  They held power until 2006, When the Democrats again became the dominant party.  So, the Conservative movement didn't start with the election of Obama.  It's been around for far longer.   

That said, the Tea Party movement started after Obama's election.  Why?  Because the conservatives learned that the Republican Party counldn't be truly trusted to carry the Conservative banner any more.  Having given the Republicans 12 years to fix the government, Conservatism realized they failed in this task.  Therefore, they have splintered away.  The only true statement about the Tea Party which can be made is that they really don't trust either party any more with the very important task of NOT bankrupting this country.  They really believe we must elect a whole new set of representatives and senators to right the ship. 

You bring up the charge of racism in the Tea party.  Every party has it's extremist elements.  Yes, even the precious Democrats. (Especially the Democrats).  I would venture to say that every single member of the Black Panther Party, the NAACP, the SCLC, and Farrakan's groups votes Democratic.  Let us not forget the Environazis who all want us living in Teepee's, the communists, the socialists... etc...  They all vote Democratic.  But I digress.  Therefore, the charge that the Tea Party is exclusively allowing racism within it's ranks or has "extremist" groups within it's ranks  is very hypocritical of the Democrats to even utter..

When (and I'll be dead from holding my breath when this finally happens) the Democratic party condemns and disowns the extremist groups within it's OWN ranks, I'll give them a little credibility for what they utter about the Tea Party.

Look at the Tea Party's agenda sometime.  It's a common sense, return to fiscal responsibility and sanity, platform.  Nothing extreme about it at all.  The left-leaning media just wants to make you hate them in advance.  You should be asking yourself why is that true?

---

Make each day count to improve yourself and those around you

An informed, convincing case can be made that this nation is in decline.  Or this civilization.  Or this planet.  Its just not being made on this forum

And it can be made always.  For the US, it can be made every 10 years we have a recession, every time we elect a liberal, every time we elect a conservative, every time the deficit grows by $1, every time gasoline goes up by $.01, every time we have a hurricane, every time the trade deficit goes up, every time our education system graduates another future Georgia gubernatorial candidate, etc.

In my 5 or so years on this forum, I have seen many of these, often with due dates that (whew!!) are now in the past.  But this does not compare with how many I see in the russian media, the little of it that I have time to digest.

I just wish there was a 3 strike rule, like in baseball.  Someone struck out 3 times, nice try, thank you "Nostradamus", but no more predictions from you!

 

---

"The trouble with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money" -Margaret Thatcher

Eugeny - those things are so obvious to me it pains me to explain...

 

Egor - Even 10 years ago or whenever we started this forum I have said the same things. US is a dying country, Human civilization in general has reached its peak and its only downhill from here,  gene-engineering revolution might help, so there is still a chance, but most likely it'll all be useless in the end...  I gave US 50 years - 40 is left, we'll see who was right. 

Human beings need ideology and goals - consumerism has become dominant ideology and that's a dead end.... 

---

- Независимость - это когда в 20-й раз наступаешь на одни и те же грабли, а русские уже ни при чем....

ok, so 2050-2060 timeframe?  I am bookmarking this topic and setting a reminder in my outlook.  We'll see then

Any previews, how exactly it will go down?

---

"The trouble with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money" -Margaret Thatcher

Evgeny:

Anton… I can't believe what I am reading! What are pleasant surprise. I am glad you now belong to independent ones like me. Maybe we should open our new section on the forum with a title 'the independents club'. Just kidding :)

But on a serious note, it is sad that conservatives disappear so rapidly from the political arena (and the forum too). They probably have run out of ideas on how to be conservative and objective.

I am of the opinion that a perfect society should have both liberals and conservatives … and maybe independents too.

i agree with you in terms of the republican party. As of now, it continues to dissolve conservative movement. 

Conservatism ended up being one of those ideologies that exists just for the sake of being a promoted idelogy. It is not practiced, just copyrighted. Conservatives were firmly in charge under Bush (the retard) Junior, yet as long as conservatives could graft their share of "action", they would care less what else was taking place.

Clinton was also a deuschebag. He signed some of the most damaging legislaton in recent history: The repeal of Glass-Steagall and the Telecommunications Act.

Conservative/Liberal does not exist. It is an artificial construct, aimed at smothering one's world views. However, once you achieve certain educational level, it becomes quite apparent and easy to reject. We all hold values that can be called liberal and/or conservative on glanular level. I am socially liberal and fiscally conservative, for instance. But the whole Republicans/Democrat/Tebagger divide is for ignorant tools.

---

Sic semper tyrannis
~War is Peace~Freedom is Slavery~Ignorance is Strength~ George Orwell "1984"

dude how old is kgbman now?  he's like 40, right?  or more....he was like 40 10 yrs ago....so in 2050-2060 kgb is gonna be 80-90 yrs old..

 

---

Egor:

few quick points..

1)I am disillusioned with people being disillusined and rewarding the rest of us first with Bush, then with Obama. Why victimize such a great country?  What happened to just watching the weather channel or ESPN if you are disillusioned?

Victimizing a country would be voting for the shills, promoted on TV (like Bush or Obama). The politics here at the same level of intelligence as junk food industry. Do you want fries with that?

2)While its not hard to find non-liberals who jumped on the Obama bandwagon, this is the first time i've heard of in a while of one of these people who will vote for him agan.. What did it for you, Anton? Which of the numerous resounding successes?

One of his successes was getting all the white trash rednecks, ingoramuses and racists to form an opposition. Now at least I know what the retards are rooting for.

3)On the Tea Party, while I don't necessarily sympathise with everything i hear them talking about, they are simply "nature's cure" to what both parties have created.  You are a rare gem, Anton, who is disillusioned with only one of the two parties.  While in reality there is no dysfunction that republicans are responsible for that the democrats have any hope, even theoretically, of resolving.  And, of course, vice versa.  Democracy cures these periods in US history with phenomena like the Tea Party.  Its not the first time.  The Tea party may not succeed as a political entity, however that block of voters will be available for decades to whatever group chooses to carry them.  And together with the base vote of that group, they create a supermajority that will have a historical role of undoing the bush/obama era, and giving us back our country..  So its just this political system working like its supposed to. 

Tea Party is a sign of times. It shows you the knee-jerk instant gratification nature of the "common" American voters. Since a black dude was elected President, they all gathered in opposition to "big government" spending. AFTER we started 2 unpaid-for wars and were already trillions in the hole.

---

Sic semper tyrannis
~War is Peace~Freedom is Slavery~Ignorance is Strength~ George Orwell "1984"

You dudes need to read this here:

 http://www.wallstreetwatch.org/reports/sold_out.pdf

It lays out everything is great detail and can be easily understood.

---

Sic semper tyrannis
~War is Peace~Freedom is Slavery~Ignorance is Strength~ George Orwell "1984"

AHTOH:

Victimizing a country would be voting for the shills, promoted on TV (like Bush or Obama). The politics here at the same level of intelligence as junk food industry. Do you want fries with that?

One of his successes was getting all the white trash rednecks, ingoramuses and racists to form an opposition. Now at least I know what the retards are rooting for.

Tea Party is a sign of times. It shows you the knee-jerk instant gratification nature of the "common" American voters. Since a black dude was elected President, they all gathered in opposition to "big government" spending. AFTER we started 2 unpaid-for wars and were already trillions in the hole.

Wait, so on one hand voting for Obama is intelligence of junkfood industry, on the other, voting against him is rednecks, ignoramuses, and racists.  So what's a girl to do?  That's right - start a tea party.  You have rationalized it yourself.

And looking at history of the US, temporary insurgence of a 3rd party is a repeating scenario, which is a counterargument to the "sign of the times" notion.

---

"The trouble with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money" -Margaret Thatcher

I still disagree.

When it always comes down to choosing between a dousche and a turd sandwich (pardon my South Park reference), the system is wrong. It means that good candidates are either discouraged to run or can't make it to the primaries, for some reason. The reason being $$$$$$$$$$$$.

When $$$$$ enter the election process, the democracy loses. With the recent Supreme Court no-cap decision in mind, the politics are only going to get worse.

---

Sic semper tyrannis
~War is Peace~Freedom is Slavery~Ignorance is Strength~ George Orwell "1984"

IntensityInsanity:

dude how old is kgbman now?  he's like 40, right?  or more....he was like 40 10 yrs ago....so in 2050-2060 kgb is gonna be 80-90 yrs old..

 

 

jealous, aren't ya ?  

 

Egor - you do that and no, no specific scenarios. I just hope mothafookers won't nuke someone in the process...

---

- Независимость - это когда в 20-й раз наступаешь на одни и те же грабли, а русские уже ни при чем....

Anton, I've read through all your stuff but I really still don't get why you had this big change of heart.  You said you voted for Obama and would vote for him again.  What did you like about Obama to begin with?  Was it his vast political experience, or perhaps the many positions he has taken as a senator by his votes?  Or perhaps were you impressed with the great people he surrounded himself with in his life?  Ok, so now that he's been prez for a while, what has he done that made you say you would vote for him again?  Are you impressed with all his apologies all over the world?  Maybe two very impressive supreme court judges he has nominated?  Or maybe all the cabinet positions he has assigned?  Like Geitner, head of IRS?  Perhaps you're impressed with his handling of the oil spill in the gulf?

 

You said you are fiscally conservative and socially liberal.  Now, I know that you take a more liberal stand on immigration.  Fine, but what about all the other social issues?  Let's see how liberal you are:

 

1) do you still think that racism is rampant and affirmative action is necessary?  To which extreme do you take this?  Do you agree with Cynthia McKiney that we are racist because we don't have enough hurricane names with the name 'Jamal' or 'Lakesha'?

2) Do you feel that a great injustice is being done toward gays and that by not allowing them to get married we are treating them like blacks in the 20's or 30's?

3) I know you have two beautiful kids.  Do you want them learning sex ed in 2nd or 3rd grade?  Do you want them being taught that a normal family isn't necessarily mommy + daddy + kids but can just as legitimately be daddy + daddy + kids?

 

Truth is, Bush was a shitty president (for the most part) and was fiscally liberal, started questionable wars (If you saw the Oliver Stone movie, "W", I think it provides an interesting reason as to Bush's mistake with Iraq).  So your response seems to be a knee-jerk reaction but I figured you for someone more stable than that.  Has Travales maybe been brainwashing you?  He is the best liberal/democrat mouthpiece I've ever talked to.  Far better then Snake or any other liberals I've ever talked to.

 

Seriously, do me a favor:  really answer all of my points directly.  I know that turning into a liberal means never responding to direct arguments and all, but I hope you're better than that.

 

And honestly, I'm disappointed that you mentioned that not voting for Obama or being opposed to him is racial.  Seriously?  You're really on that bandwagon?  You really honestly think that a guy like me doesn't like Obama even partially because he's a black guy?  Coming from you, Anton, it's said to hear that you think this.

 

---

mkgilstrap:

Evgeny,  I can't agree with your analysis of convservatism and it's timing and origins.  The conservative movement became a reality back in the mid 90's with Newt Gingrich's contract with America campaign.  Clinton was president then.  The conservative movement found it's original cause in Hillary Clinton's first attempt to socialize medicine, which they stopped.  As a direct result of this proposal, the Republicans swept to power in the 1994 election cycle.  They held power until 2006, When the Democrats again became the dominant party.  So, the Conservative movement didn't start with the election of Obama.  It's been around for far longer.   

That said, the Tea Party movement started after Obama's election.  Why?  Because the conservatives learned that the Republican Party counldn't be truly trusted to carry the Conservative banner any more.  Having given the Republicans 12 years to fix the government, Conservatism realized they failed in this task.  Therefore, they have splintered away.  The only true statement about the Tea Party which can be made is that they really don't trust either party any more with the very important task of NOT bankrupting this country.  They really believe we must elect a whole new set of representatives and senators to right the ship. 

You bring up the charge of racism in the Tea party.  Every party has it's extremist elements.  Yes, even the precious Democrats. (Especially the Democrats).  I would venture to say that every single member of the Black Panther Party, the NAACP, the SCLC, and Farrakan's groups votes Democratic.  Let us not forget the Environazis who all want us living in Teepee's, the communists, the socialists... etc...  They all vote Democratic.  But I digress.  Therefore, the charge that the Tea Party is exclusively allowing racism within it's ranks or has "extremist" groups within it's ranks  is very hypocritical of the Democrats to even utter..

When (and I'll be dead from holding my breath when this finally happens) the Democratic party condemns and disowns the extremist groups within it's OWN ranks, I'll give them a little credibility for what they utter about the Tea Party.

Look at the Tea Party's agenda sometime.  It's a common sense, return to fiscal responsibility and sanity, platform.  Nothing extreme about it at all.  The left-leaning media just wants to make you hate them in advance.  You should be asking yourself why is that true?

Excuse me, MS, have I ever given to you my analysis on that matter? I am an imaginative dude sometimes, but you take the cake. As I recall from my past posts, I praised them all (conservatives and liberals), regardless of the timing and origin. The conservative movement excited long before the 90's and so was the liberals. So if you want to go into the history, just say so. Newt Gingrich was lucky to win that lottery right on the time, and you know it. Yes, Clinton was something, and it is because of him btw that the dialogue has begun… with Clinton in the end to win and leave his office with the economy in good shape. Newt was his 'peshka'. Where is he now btw, Newt, I mean? Another word, where are the people like him now and what are they up to anyhow? Having a democrat, Clinton, with the republican majority and do some wonderful stuff regardless (I exclude Levinsky's scandal here, bc it is irrelevant), you, ms, must admit, it is something. Bush had it all, the majority and his presidency, and what fruitful deeds has he achieved? Shouldn't you, MS, be critical of that? I think you do at some extent, but not good enough.

Why couldn't the conservatives have learnt that lesson during the Bush presidency and start right then, not after? And then, in your post, you are talking like me … exactly "they couldn't be truly trusted". It's you, MS, talking. I am not taking your words out of the context. They, conservatives, hadn't 'splintered away' as you say, they have stopped to give anything else except the remorse and their feelings at what is developing without any idea and thoughts what to do next… and many of them before Obama was elected. How about that? So before you say we must elect 'a whole new set of representatives' think again, because they might be the same ones .. and history will repeat itself again :)

I… I bring the charge of racism in the tea party??? They, part of them actually, bring it themselves. Have you followed the latest news about that black lady who was forced to resign even before the FOX news had picked up the story, and then apologies from Bill O'Reilly (God bless him for his courage to say so.. Obama did too but that's like ok). So what are you talking about? Yes, I now am convinced that there are racists among your tea party or the tea party sympathizers. Incidentally, I don't know who is who in all that 'movement'… MS, I am not fond of liberals, and I know there are a bunch of them just being loony, and that is in your regard about Black Panthers, Communist idiots and Econazies as you call them. Although, you should be careful about the environment thing now… otherwise I will start ask you questions about that recent BP sh..t :)

MS, it's so much easier to be a liberal then a conservative, and it is so much harder to be objective no matter whether you are a democrat or a republican. I know it doesn't make much sense to you. try to understand it sometime… :)

 

---

IntensityInsanity:

Anton, I've read through all your stuff but I really still don't get why you had this big change of heart.  You said you voted for Obama and would vote for him again.  What did you like about Obama to begin with?  Was it his vast political experience, or perhaps the many positions he has taken as a senator by his votes?  Or perhaps were you impressed with the great people he surrounded himself with in his life?  Ok, so now that he's been prez for a while, what has he done that made you say you would vote for him again?  Are you impressed with all his apologies all over the world?  Maybe two very impressive supreme court judges he has nominated?  Or maybe all the cabinet positions he has assigned?  Like Geitner, head of IRS?  Perhaps you're impressed with his handling of the oil spill in the gulf?

 

You said you are fiscally conservative and socially liberal.  Now, I know that you take a more liberal stand on immigration.  Fine, but what about all the other social issues?  Let's see how liberal you are:

 

1) do you still think that racism is rampant and affirmative action is necessary?  To which extreme do you take this?  Do you agree with Cynthia McKiney that we are racist because we don't have enough hurricane names with the name 'Jamal' or 'Lakesha'?

2) Do you feel that a great injustice is being done toward gays and that by not allowing them to get married we are treating them like blacks in the 20's or 30's?

3) I know you have two beautiful kids.  Do you want them learning sex ed in 2nd or 3rd grade?  Do you want them being taught that a normal family isn't necessarily mommy + daddy + kids but can just as legitimately be daddy + daddy + kids?

 

Truth is, Bush was a shitty president (for the most part) and was fiscally liberal, started questionable wars (If you saw the Oliver Stone movie, "W", I think it provides an interesting reason as to Bush's mistake with Iraq).  So your response seems to be a knee-jerk reaction but I figured you for someone more stable than that.  Has Travales maybe been brainwashing you?  He is the best liberal/democrat mouthpiece I've ever talked to.  Far better then Snake or any other liberals I've ever talked to.

 

Seriously, do me a favor:  really answer all of my points directly.  I know that turning into a liberal means never responding to direct arguments and all, but I hope you're better than that.

 

And honestly, I'm disappointed that you mentioned that not voting for Obama or being opposed to him is racial.  Seriously?  You're really on that bandwagon?  You really honestly think that a guy like me doesn't like Obama even partially because he's a black guy?  Coming from you, Anton, it's said to hear that you think this.

 

II, you should've been more vocal in Bush's last term and say some of your thoughts before Obama had made a checkmate to republicans. Obama is a far left liberal and that is what people wanted after suffering the Bush idiocy. Ups and downs are part of our life.

---