for_liberty

There are a number of real conservatives that want to take their party back. I always read one writer in the US Justin Raimondo who is great. He is the editor for antiwar.com

"Seek and ye shall find." I think you see a lot of religious conservatives because that's what you want to see. There are plenty of religious types who support the Liberals, the NDP, and the Democrats too. Besides, what is a conservative? It has generally become a bi-word for people who oppose socialist policies (and that is it's de facto modern political meaning, as I take it), but a conservative is someone who opposes change in favour of the status quo. In this light, the Liberal Party of Canada is one of the most conservative organizations on Earth. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I agree with you I just think right now it seems that the conservatives have taken over by the religiuos right, particulary in the US.

Thank you for not attacking. I am not like other people and say that it is not happening, what i said was we should be careful and take precautions. I was always find it funny that people assume if someone says they are not sure about global warming it is asssumeed you are in big businesses pocket. What about the other way if you say it is happening you must be in big goverment's pocket. Did you ever notice the only time scientists get money from the goverment to do research is when it is something negative and the only solution is for big government to get bigger by regulating and taxing.

Only the really crappy conservatives. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> There seems to be alot of them going around today.

The commision on 911 would have been a farce either way. They always are.

I can't believe O'Reilly said that, what a fool. I haven't seen O'Relly show much but what i see i dont like. He always cuts people off and raises his voice with someone that doesn't agree with him. But there was one interview I saw with Arnold Swarzeneeger that i liked. I thought for sure it would be a fluff peace because he's a Republican, but he asked him how he can call himself a Govenor for the envioroment when he drives a Hummer? It was classic.

Not if you think you have to wait until the next election. The idea that the government dictates our interests to us between votes is a dangerous proposal at best. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> thank you I don't think i could of said it any better. Why do people thinkit is ok for a majority to rule a minority? Some how it makes them feel good to force me to live how they think everyone should live. It kind of sounds like George Bush. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Liberals see it as "justifiable force". <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I agree with you but on the other side conservatives think they are doing gods work.

Economic left\right 7.13 Social libertarian\authoratarian -6.97 No surprise for me i already knew that economicaly i am very conservative and socially very liberal.

Now err what do you mean "put people first". Do you mean someone who will come in and impose their ideals on you. The only time people are happy with politcians is when there ideal are being imposed. How i see it is no matter what party comes in they all impose their ideals by force. If they want to implement a program i don't agree with well it is to bad i must pay for it or risk going to jail. Government programs are force and I for one don't like any of them. I don't want to force any of my ideals on anyone, I am not sure you can say the same.

I don't know if global warming is happening or not, but i do think we should all pitch in a little. I know the enviromentalists always say that all scientests agree that it is happening but when was the last time all scientests agreed on something. I remember i read a while ago that one of the professor's that wrote the IGCC report said he found it funny that all the politicians was so sure that global warming was happening but the scientists themselves did not.

Not if you think you have to wait until the next election. The idea that the government dictates our interests to us between votes is a dangerous proposal at best. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> thank you I don't think i could of said it any better. Why do people thinkit is ok for a majority to rule a minority? Some how it makes them feel good to force me to live how they think everyone should live. It kind of sounds like George Bush.

And is that what we want? I know I don't.

So really with a 100% death tax the government is forcing you to spend it all or they will take it away from you. It doesn't matter that you want to hold onto it untill your death and then transfer it to whom ever you like. Wow what a great system. I work my whole life and the government taxes me and then tells me what to do with my money. Is this the kind of government people want? A goverment so big and powerfull they do as they please.

Since when did social services become a right that could not be taken away? The same people who cry murder anytime the religious right tries to impose their ideals cry murder when we don't follow their ideals. When you have a goverment that can take money by force to fund these programs will one day turn around and do something in the future that you don't like. It sets a precendent. I know the argument is "majoraty rules" in a democracy, but since when is it right for a majority to rule the minoraty? In the 40's segregation laws where popular and probably won a majoraty vote, is that right or just? The problem is we have a goverment that is big enough to give us everything and also big enought to take it all away. Is that the government you want? Sorry if there are any spelling mistakes, i couldn't find the spell check.

I liked the comment that someone in this thread said about "free" trade. I do think free trade is a good thing, but not the way it was set up. How can it be free trade if you have beaurorats controling it. I think the whole thing is set up for a world government (i know, i know get out the tin hats). The same thing is being set up in Europe, it started off with "free" trade and on to a common currency and then to a constitution. In my opinion all but a small group International bankers and politicians lose. What we need is smaller government and more control handed back to local governments from the federalies. The federal government should be there as a mediator for provincial disputes and to represnt and defens us Internationaly. Anyways that is my 2 cents. Hope some people agree with me.