Comment by Tim Brooks on March 8, 2011 at 1:52am

You are confused sir, this happens sometimes.  You are actually not for almost any of the actual republican economic views.  You are however for how they represent them, which is never as it seems. 

 

Republicans started a war that costs 500 million a day to run.

Republicans are for tax cuts to the top 5%

Republicans are only for smaller government to afford bigger military

 

Republicans are right on Gun-Control, and it would be a lot further if they would argue why less guns equals more crime instead of trying to argue that you are a person therefore you deserve a gun.

 

I used to think similarly to you.  Honestly.  But then I started getting more into the subject, and learning more about the issues that I thought democrats were wrong on.  After the proper studies were performed a good portion of dems including obama have switched their position on gun control. 

 

And here you go wanting to put the dumb guy in office, if most of the smartest people are atheists, and you cant be an atheist to get into office, so, to get elected you have to be an idiot or a liar

 

Obama is not an Idiot.  He learned how to play polotics Chicago.  This is not a secret.  The alternative wasnt better we tried it. 

 

Republicans are the idiots, and Democrats are liars, niether are good, one is worse.

Comment by Alejandro M on March 8, 2011 at 1:58am

Thanks Tim. My intention with this post is not to start a debate on Obama here, but to see if there are atheists with conservative economic views. Clearly, you are not one of them :-)

For the record, I am for realpolitik = pragmatic approach. US is the de-facto world superpower. And I BELIEVE (in capitals) that the only way to maintain is economic power is to show the world that you mean business, even with wars (which I support, especially against extremist Islam). If not, why else would people all over the world amass dollars like they are going out of fashion?

But hey, these are my views. If the Libertarian Party did not exist, I would certainly vote conservative...

Comment by Brandon Bourassa on March 8, 2011 at 2:03am

I'm not a Democrat or a Republican. I am a Voluntaryist. Since I just joined, nobody has had time to argue with me yet. And since I am now going to sleep, I will be avoiding getting into any arguments for now. Anyway, just think for yourself and forget about party affiliation. For more information on Voluntaryism, visit www.youtube.com/stefbot.

Comment by Heather Spoonheim on March 8, 2011 at 2:12am

My political affiliation is with a big reset button.  I think it's time to try an entirely new form of government and there isn't nearly enough room here for me to suggest all the ideas I have.  The core, though, is that we should first debate what government is, what it should be, and how to best implement it - regardless of all my other ideas.  I get tired sometimes of people talking about 'government' like it's an extra-terrestrial entity that has assumed control of our planet.  'Government' is a system or rules which we collectively submit to, not some alien super force.

Comment by Tim Brooks on March 8, 2011 at 2:17am

Wars could probably be useful if they were fought by scientists and thought out years in advance.

 

The way we fight wars right now is a joke.  The military should not be used until it is necessary to deliver a blow that will leave a scar on our species, intentionally.  War is the broad edge of a sword that should be used to wipe a large problem clean.  Politics, Discussions, Embargoes, Trade Agreements, CIA, Special Forces, Spies, these are just some of the scalpels we have to cut out small problems.

 

But im for alternative tactics to handling problems like Islam.  We got 3 million people in Prison, why not take the million that would do it, and let them go to iran, smuggle them in, give them a gun and a bible and let nature take its course, i mean seriously, a million people out for a western lifestyle, armed with a 9mm and a holy book, somethings gonna give.

 

Your right, in that some countries do right because we want them to.  But to say that the methods we have used so far were the right ones is a different story altogether.

Comment by Ryan on March 8, 2011 at 3:58am

There are certainly libertarian atheists out there. Take Penn Jillette for example.

That aside, I would say that libertarians take a "liberal economic stance", not a "conservative economic stance". In theory, the Democrats (left-wing) are socially liberal and economically conservative while Republicans (right-wing) are socially conservative and economically liberal. Libertarians are both socially liberal and economically liberal. The confusion comes from the fact that the american media uses the labels "Liberal" and "Conservative" as synonyms for "Democrats" and "Republicans" respectively. In practice, this makes it close to impossible to determine what anyone stands for anymore. Politicians running on being "fiscally conservative" turn out to be fiscally liberal, and politicians claiming to be "for small government" turn out to be in favor of big government when it comes to social issues.

Personally, I think this two-party system needs to go for us to establish a real democracy. There's so much more to the political spectrum than just "left and right".

Comment by Alejandro M on March 8, 2011 at 4:18am

You are right, Ryan. Only in the US "liberal" is synonym for "socialist". In the rest of the world, "liberal" means "libertarian".

 

So in the non-US definition, I consider myself a classic liberal. 

 

Thanks!

Comment by x on March 8, 2011 at 6:51am

Classic liberal is a good description and I resemble that.  I think Michal Shermer is one also.

Comment by Shine on March 8, 2011 at 8:21am

I feel like Obama-bashing is just the cool thing to do in political discussions these days. Can you explain why you personally think that he is one of the worst presidents? I'm not being snarky or trying to trap you; I really don't even follow politics nor have any vested opinion.

I'm just always curious to find out the specifics behind the general antipathy towards Obama. How is he that different than his recent predecessors?

Comment by Terry Crow on March 8, 2011 at 9:32am

'Liberal' in the UK means capitalist, especially now the Liberal Democrats are part of a Conservative led government, and their popularity has plummeted.  The American 'Democrats' are capitalist - socialism doesn't figure, no matter the rhetoric of the Republicans.  Obama is for 'free enterprise' and is never going to challenge that system because he has made it clear he believes in it.

 

Personally, I am a socialist of the Marxist variety but the problem with saying that is that it conjures up all sorts of false ideas like extremism and Stalin.  I am extremely moderate!  What is extreme is hedge fund managers receiving billions in bonuses, whilst at the other end of the spectrum people struggle to survive on next to nothing.  

 

Social ownership of big industry with a plan drawn up through a thoroughly democratic process and preferably on an international basis is my goal - a very moderate and human approach.  Imperialistic intervention by the USA (and UK) all over the World is extreme and inhuman and in tune with capitalist values.

 

I support the uprisings in the Middle East and North Africa, though the revolutions there have a long way to go if they are to rid themselves of all exploitation, which of course includes capitalist exploitation.  But the biggest joke I've seen in a long time is Glenn Beck's interpretation of what's going on - he clearly doesn't live on this planet. 

Comment

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next ›
• Page