Are right-wingers like the people they call enemy?

Question

HOW AMERICAN "CONSERVATIVES" ARE THE BOBBSEY TWINS OF ISLAMIC EXTREMISTS:

1) Both reject the idea that government and religion should be kept separate. Government should enforce THEIR religion.

2) Both are highly offended by sexual freedom, and demand that sexuality be purged from society.

3) Both despise Liberalism.

4) Both resent dissent from their views and policies, which are the oly acceptable ones.

5) Both are harsh, punitive, and vindictive.

It is not ironic that American "conservatives" have made an enemy out of Isalmic extremists. In looking at them, they see a reflection of themselves, so they understand well what they're dealing with: Tyrants much like themselves.

I am not backed or funded by anyone. I represent myself. Sorry if I give you rightists something new to think about that may be uncomfortable.

False allegations about Bush?? FACT: He was a lousy student, a drunk, a coke sniffer, thrice arrested, a business failure who did illegal insider trading , and he was AWOL from his National Guard obligation, which was a draft dodge. It was Clinton who was hounded with Whitewater nonsense, and when that didn't pan out to impeach him, they used a sex scandal that should not have been looked into! The media gave Bush a free pass in 200 while they harped continually on Gore,a nd as for false allegations, there was the Swift Boating of Kerry. Even Bush said Kerry served with honor. Was Bush lying here?

Answer 1

Indeed, they are like evil twin brothers who were separted as children and hate each other, and maybe themselves.

They both worship the same judgmental and human hating rape-torture-kill God. They both seek the destruction of the US Constitution and the secular country based on it. They both want everyone to worship their evil God – or else. And, conservative Christians can whack-off heads with best of them.

Conservative Christians want the political power that Islamic terrorists enjoy so they can have just as much fun, They are sick people who get pleasure from the pain and suffering of others.

This is hardly the first time Christians have tried to undermine the government and overthrow the country. In 1864, 1874, 1896 and 1911, they tried to pass amendments that would rewrite the Constitution to include references to God. Furthermore, there has never been a time in the history of Christianity when it had political power and did not use it for evil purposes.

And today’s Christian terrorists wish America harm as well. On 9/11 both Falwell And Robertson said that God had brought down the trade towers and killed 3,000 because he was angry with America and that we deserved it because we had brought it on ourselves. Of course, on 9/12 they began denying it when it became clear that most Americans were not in the mood for that kind of talk.

We will never know if Adams was right when he wrote,” This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it!”, because we likely we never find out.

But we do know that if the Christian religious-right gains control of America, then only terrorists will control the world. How can deal with Islamic terrorists abroad when we have Christian terrorist traitors at home?

JOHN ADAMS: “How has it happened that millions of myths, fables, legends and tales have been blended with Jewish and Christian fables and myths and have made them the most bloody religion that has ever existed? Filled with the sordid and detestable purposes of superstition and fraud?” (Letters to F.A. Van Der Kamp 1809-1816)

THOMAS JEFFERSON: “I have recently been examining all the known superstitions of the world, and do not find in our particular superstition [Christianity] one redeeming feature. They are all alike, founded upon fables and mythologies.”

Answer 2

You are WAY off.
1) Most conservatives simply believe that MORALITY should be taught to our students in schools, and that although our government cannot legislate religion, they CAN legislate MORALITY.
2) Since when? Conservatives believe that people shouldn't walk around naked, except in designated areas, and that sex has been turned into something CHEAP. I see nothing wrong with that.
3) Not true. Conservatives don't have a problem with liberalism, unless you're speaking of the FAR-right having a problem with the FAR-left.
4) BS. Have you ever watched the proceedings of Congress on CSPAN? The LIBERAL DEMOCRATS are the ones who won't let the conservative Republicans speak, not the other way around.
AND if the conservatives have a point, they're still racist, stupid bigots.
5) The same could be said for many liberals. They can be JUST as harsh, punitive, and vindictive.
As a matter of fact, your whole "question" is harsh, punitive, and vindictive.

It isn't just the American "conservatives" that have "made an enemy out of Isalmic extremists." It's Americans, PERIOD. You don't think they wouldn't hesitate to chop off a liberal's head? Please.

Answer 3

Sheriff Joe- Do you even understand the definition of 'third international us of a'? maximum illegals interior the U.S. are from Mexico which isn't particularly on the point as third international. there's a brilliant difference between Mexico and Nigeria, in the beginning Mexico has extra billionaires than the continent of Africa to no longer point out the international richest guy. edit: idiots call Brazil a third international us of a while they are power independant and function despatched human beings to area.........does not sound very third international to me. learn the definition of issues formerly you employ it.

Answer 4

1. Ludicrous idea, unsupported by any fact. You twits may believe this, but it has no basis in reality.

2. Again, an unsupported and stupid idea on your part. We are not offended by sexual freedom or sexuality. But we are against the too explicit sexualization of society and its negative impacts on children - a concept supported by numerous psychological studies.

3. We don't 'despise' Liberalism. We despise socialism and communism and other forms of leftism (like fascism). These systems are living crimes against human nature and generally lead to totalitarianism. Classic liberalism is NOT wrong in the least - it is the concept of minimal government and maximum personal liberty and PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. We call you leftists "liberal", but you really have no connection with real classic liberalism.

4. We accept dissent. Witness Clinton's tirades against any attempt to hang his failures on him, versus Bush's calm tackling of even the most lie-filled vicious questions posed to him in a calm and serious demeanor. After the OK City bombing, Clinton even blamed right wing radio for the incident and floated the idea of somehow limiting their free-speech rights.

We are free to react as we choose. We generally think most of the opposition dissent is stupid, ignorant, mean-spirited and full of lies and falsehoods. Like your stupid rant question here.

5. Harsh, punitive, vindictive. Prove this assertion. You spew this like it is fact. But let's look at the last Democrat president - Clinton and his politics of personal destruction. Clinton harassed his opponents with the IRS. Liberal media attacked Kenneth Starr without cease during his investigations. Liberal media attacked Bush with fake allegations, but ignored true issues with Kerry and Gore.
---
As usual, baseless attacks and complete lies and false arguments based on delusions. Any reality-based Democrats out there?
----------
"He was a lousy student" - but still got better grades than Kerry or Gore, who flunked out of divinity school
"a drunk" - he has admitted that he WAS an alcoholic
"a coke sniffer" - unproven, where's the evidence?
"illegal insider trading" - unproven
"he was AWOL from his National Guard obligation" - this has been disproven so many times - the first time he was accused was by Ann Richards. If this is 'proven' why did Rather need a fake document?
"Whitewater nonsense" - with many many people convicted of fraud, bribery, etc.
"and as for false allegations, there was the Swift Boating of Kerry." These have never been contested or proven false. I have never seen any refutation of the allegations by dozens of people that served with him.

So, most of your 'claims' are in fact unsupported by any evidence or proof. Again, BS by the bucketful.

Answer 5

Actually, you are precisely right. This is a huge discussion that I don't really have time to go into right now. But basically, the jist is that conservative and liberal represent levels of consciousness of a developmental spectrum, which is why we only find liberalism in any widespread form in modernized countries. Modernized countries, being more developed and educated, lead to more advanced forms of consciousness and ways of relating to world around them. Liberalism actually didn't show up on the map of history until relatively recently, several hundred years ago, when literacy rates sky rocketed due to the printing press.

The reason for this is that liberalism essentially uses the formal operational mind, which is capable of taking on the perspective of others to a much more advanced degree than is the rule/role mind of conservatism. Being able to take on perspectives, placing yourself in others' shoes so to speak, is a capacity that is greatly strengthened by reading, because reading places you in the shoes of others unlike yourself. Television has also had this effect to a degree, which is in part why the United States underwent such radical liberal changes over the past 100 years, changes that would have been unheard of historically, such as civil rights and equality among the genders.

Conservatism in the United States still remains strong for many reasons, one of which is the widespread existence of the pre-conservative mind underlying much of the crime and violence we experience in this country. Liberalism isn't really equipt or designed to deal with the "barbaric" mind which hasn't even yet learned to see the world conceptually enough to understand things like right from wrong, hard work ethics, etc. So the predominance of this lower level problem keeps much of the population locked into conservatism which is meant to address this level. We don't see this problem nearly as much in Europe where crime is greatly lessened, and so the people there tend to be even more liberal than in the United States because the need for conservatism is lessened. (Developement follows a hierarchy of needs, when the needs of food and shelter are met, psychology can advance to worrying about "higher" things like relationships, careers, etc. As long as crime is widespeard, it becomes more difficult for people to move beyond conservatism.)

But a conservative in the United States is essentially the same as a conservative anywhere else in the world, that is in terms of their fundamental psychology (ethnocentric, seeing the world in black and white and fixed terms, punitive, distrustful of science, unable to relate to others unlike themselves, highly ethical/moral in terms of fixed codes, communal, etc). Conservatism anywhere takes the present dogma of a society and absorbs that as the "rule" of how things should be, and those who follow that rule are a superior people, those who do not inferior. So conservatives in the United States believe in Democracy, even though that system of governance would never have developed in the first place had it been left to the rule/role mind. But though the set of rules they have absorbed will be different from the conservative in Kuwait, for example, the mindset remains essentially the same.

The conservative psychology is a problem for the long term prospects of human survival. It served its purpose to get us to where we are now, and in many less developed nations still serves its purpose. But in a nuclear age facing increased environmental concerns, the ethnocentric/nationalistic mentality simply cannot insure the survival of the race any longer, and so with time we will see a slow, but inevitable decline in conservatism in the more advanced nations such as our own. One hundred years from now, conservatives will represent a small minority in this country.

But in the meantime, you are quite right, conservatives are conservatives, whether they American or Iraqi. Of course, this won't fly very far in the mind of the conservative, who tends to see "opposite" people as the "other". Conservatives in this country view Muslim conservatives as void of solid ethical grounding, and guess what . . . those Muslim see us exactly the same way. Conservative nations have been waging war against one another for as long as we can remember. But from a liberal's point of view, the irony is that all these people fighting against one another are more alike than they are different.

Answer 6

This is not a question it is an rant--take it to a liberal blog you idiot.

Answer 7

who funds you? is there a club/organization... ? please answer.