PDA

View Full Version : The Totalitarians Among Us



JackDaniels
09-23-2007, 01:44 AM
The Totalitarians Among Us

by Thomas J. DiLorenzo

One of the most insidious effects of the neocon takeover of the Republican Party is that years and years of neocon propaganda from talk radio, neocon publications, the Faux News Channel and elsewhere, seem to have created a large, critical mass of totalitarian-minded, blind followers that comprise a large part of the Republican Party "base." The bloodthirsty "evangelicals" are one important example, but some recent events suggest that it is more widespread than that. There was, for example, the loud booing of Congressman Ron Paul at the GOP "values debate" by hundreds of Republican "evangelicals" when he mentioned the fact that Jesus was known as The Prince of Peace.

At that same debate, as was recently noted on the LewRockwell.com blog, there were loud murmurings from the audience of things like, "Did he (Ron Paul) really say that homosexuals had rights?!" It was just unbelievable to some of those Republican "values voters" that anyone would think that homosexuals should have the same constitutional rights as everyone else.

A former undergraduate student of mine, who is now a Ph.D. candidate at a prestigious east coast university, recently emailed me some responses he got when he ventured onto the "Fred Thompson Forum" online and wrote an article there arguing that Thompson is not really a "Ronald Reagan conservative," as some have been arguing, but just another neocon. (The pro-war Thompson has been pro-abortion, for example, and has refused to take a pledge not to raise taxes if elected president).

The responses to the article completely ignored the substance of the arguments that were made by my former student. Instead, the "Fredheads," as this group of Thompson supporters calls themselves, responded with statements like these: "[Student’s Name] = GITMO." "You are an international terrorist, hater of freedom and liberty." "Homeland Security should also be made aware of his plans to overthrow the United States government." "Your ass better be on a plan back to New Delhi . . . or you’ll be on a one way ticket to Gitmo." (The student is an American citizen who has an ethnic European surname and is not from India).

Sending critics of Republican politicians to "GITMO" seems to be a major theme of the "Fredheads." Browsing the web site, one finds additional comments such as these: "Fight Terrorism: Send Fred Thompson to the White House and Ron Paul to GITMO." "Keep the brilliant Bush legacy alive," and vote for Fred Thompson. "Anyone touting civil liberties all over the place simply doesn’t realize that it’s a new world after 9/11." This of course is a constant refrain of the talking heads on the Faux News Channel, Rush Limbaugh, and the rest of the neocon electronic megaphone network.

Then there is, "We can’t have civil liberties right now because we’re at war," and "Civil liberties are Government GRANTED rights. All your rights come from the state, thus, the state has a right to take them away." Hitler and Stalin could not have said it better.

"Liberty is the freedom to taser loudmouth traitors," said another Fredhead. Another theme of the Fredheads is that anyone who disagrees with "the brilliant Bush legacy" is a "traitor." This of course was the opinion of Lincoln during his regime, which is why his administration imprisoned (without due process) tens of thousands of Northern political dissenters. Not surprisingly, the web site also includes talk of how Abe Lincoln would be a Fredhead if he were alive today. The Fredhead site is probably a parody, but the only thing that makes parodies work is that they possess a large grain of truth. All of these things have been said in one form or another by various neocons.

We have no way of knowing how many totalitarian-minded knaves like this have become blind followers of the neocon/GOP crusade for "national greatness" that is on display today in Iraq (and coming soon to Iran, if they have their way). The predominance of this mindset at the GOP-sponsored "values debate," and the perpetual refrain of "kill, kill, kill, bomb, bomb, bomb," that comes from the "evangelicals," whose numbers are in the millions, suggest that it is a very large number.

Creeping Totalitarianism

In his famous 1944 book, The Road to Serfdom, Nobel laureate economist Friedrich Hayek warned of how creeping totalitarianism could find its way into democratic societies. First, there must be the wish on the part of political "leaders" to "unite" the entire country behind some plan for "national greatness" or "national glory," such as the one the "National Greatness Conservatives" (a phrase coined by Bill Kristol) have in mind for us. As the great 19th century economist Frédéric Bastiat wrote in his masterpiece, The Law, democracy can be just as dictatorial as genuine dictatorship if it enforces laws that compel national uniformity to a sufficient degree.

Since there is never anything like unanimity of agreement over one plan for the entire society, the "leaders" must gather around them as large a group as possible that would have a uniformity of opinion and the political clout to impose that opinion on the rest of society by force. There are several necessary characteristics of such a group, Hayek wrote in his chapter entitled "Why the Worst Get on Top." First, "if we wish to find a high degree of uniformity and similarity of outlook, we have to descend to the regions of lower moral and intellectual standards where the more primitive and ‘common’ instincts and tastes prevail." The largest group of people whose values are similar "are the people with low standards," the "lowest common denominator," wrote Hayek.

Moreover, if a "numerous group" in a democracy is strong enough politically "to impose their views on the values of life on the rest, it will never be those with highly differentiated tastes – it will be those [who are] the least independent, who will be able to put the weight of their numbers behind their particular ideals."

The political leader will also have to recruit many others to "the same simple creed," whatever it is. He will succeed by being able "to obtain the support of all the docile and gullible, who have no strong convictions of their own but are prepared to accept a ready-made system of values if it is only drummed into their ears sufficiently loudly and frequently. It will be those whose vague and imperfectly formed ideas are easily swayed and whose passions and emotions are readily aroused who will thus sell the ranks of the totalitarian party."

Finally, the "skillful demagogue" will be able to "get people to agree on a negative program – on the hatred of an enemy . . . the common fight against those outside the group, seems to be an essential ingredient" in "the armory of a totalitarian leader." In Nazi Germany, for instance, the "enemy," wrote Hayek, was "the Jew" who "had come to be regarded as the representative of capitalism . . . German anti-Semitism and anti-capitalism sprang from the same root . . ."

It is not surprising that the self-described "godfather" of neoconservatism," Irving Kristol, has mocked and ridiculed what he called "the Hayekian notion that we are on the road to serfdom . . . . Neoconservatives do not feel that kind of alarm of anxiety about the growth of the state." (The Weekly Standard, August 25, 2005). As long as the neocons are in charge, and kept in power by the masses of Fredheads, Freepers, bloodthirsty "evangelicals" and other primitive and easily-swayed followers, they will continue to destroy what is left of America’s constitutional republic.

September 22, 2007

Thomas J. DiLorenzo [send him mail] professor of economics at Loyola College in Maryland and the author of The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War, (Three Rivers Press/Random House). His latest book is Lincoln Unmasked: What You’re Not Supposed To Know about Dishonest Abe (Crown Forum/Random House).

Copyright © 2007 LewRockwell.com
Link: http://www.lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo130.html

actsnoblemartin
09-23-2007, 01:56 AM
I have some interesting questions for you

what does the phrase united we stand devided we fall mean to you?

what is the difference between a conservative, a republican, and a neo-con

do you believe that anyone who for a biblical reason, which includes the jewish and muslim faith (as well as the christian faith) are bad people, and/or not entitled to their opinion. Surely, I dont think, and most fair minded conservatives want you or anyone who disagrees with any policy in jail

I am ashamed of those in my camp, who call you unamerican, for simply the act of not blindly going along, as if the you must agree at all times.

Disagreeing used to be allowed in this country, heck you could be friends, best friends, husband and wife, but now, many on both sides, look at you like, die bitch :poke:

avatar4321
09-23-2007, 06:22 AM
you are serious paranoid.

diuretic
09-23-2007, 06:24 AM
you are serious paranoid.

No, paranoia is a psychopathology. Awareness is normal.

actsnoblemartin
09-23-2007, 06:48 AM
thank you diuretic. I am merely aware of our violent culture, and its quick tempered anger, if someone has a view, that upsets them. Rather then just live and let live, the media, and some want us at war with each other.


No, paranoia is a psychopathology. Awareness is normal.

Gaffer
09-23-2007, 09:37 AM
Gee a writer who writes about the liberals and replaces liberals with neoconservative. There's something new and novel. It's nothing but a long wordy name calling article.

Guernicaa
09-23-2007, 01:33 PM
If the "conservatives" acted more like Libertarians who just opposed taxes and firmly believed in capitalism instead of insane neo-con Evangelical morons...than I would probably consider myself to be more middle of the road.

But because the "conservative" party is currently run by insane Republicans, I have to define myself as "far left".

Properly understood, the Republican party wants more control over peoples lives (something they say they're against) than Hitler did:
-No abortion
-No gay marriage
-No gays (some say this) in general (outlaw homosexuality)
-Must mix Church and state
-Prayer in schools (Christian prayer)
-Sexual themes are bad
-No sex education
-Companies shouldn't be allowed to sell birth-control
This last ones my opinion:
-I believe if they could, some of them would put people in jail for years over protesting military actions and "disrespecting" the military.

Now I consider myself to be a "Liberal libertarian". I'm a strong supporter of objectivism. In fact, my beliefs are very similar to Ayn Rands. I believe that we should have strong capitalism, and although I think it would help a lot of people, universal health care isn't something that I'll be for or against. I think too many taxes are a bad thing. But at the same time, I believe that we should be guiding ourselves by reason. Ayn Rand was a staunch atheist, and believed in the values of science. That is why I take so much concern with issues like homosexuality, global warming, and evolution. "live and let live"

JackDaniels
09-23-2007, 01:46 PM
Gee a writer who writes about the liberals and replaces liberals with neoconservative. There's something new and novel. It's nothing but a long wordy name calling article.

You understand that neoconservatives are liberal, right? And that the neoconservative movement was started by followers of Leon Trotsky?

5stringJeff
09-23-2007, 01:58 PM
Properly understood, the Republican party wants more control over peoples lives (something they say they're against) than Hitler did:

Wrong on all counts. Here's what Republicans want:

-No abortion - which is a protection of the life and liberty of the unborn human baby involved.
-No gay marriage - which is a protection of the basic unit of society, the family.
-No gays (some say this) in general (outlaw homosexuality) - this is not a plank of any GOP platform, nor is it a commonly held GOP belief.
-Must mix Church and state - in what ways? Allowing communities to display religious symbols during religious holidays? Allowing state workers off during religious holidays? Please be specific.
-Prayer in schools (Christian prayer) - actually, we want people to have the choice whether or not to pray in school
-Sexual themes are bad - yet we don't outlaw sex in TV, movies, etc. People still have the choice whether to see them.
-No sex education - we want parents to have the choice whether their kids should receive sex ed as the school deems necessary
-Companies shouldn't be allowed to sell birth-control - I have never heard of the GOP outlawing the sale of birth control.

See the trend? The GOP (not the neoconservative branch) believes in freedom, liberty, and choice.

avatar4321
09-23-2007, 05:12 PM
See the trend? The GOP (not the neoconservative branch) believes in freedom, liberty, and choice.

And thats exactly what liberals dont want.

JackDaniels
09-23-2007, 11:45 PM
And thats exactly what liberals dont want.

The point that you're failing to understand is that neoconservatives and liberals control the GOP....therefore, voting GOP undermines freedom and liberty.

Gunny
09-24-2007, 06:12 AM
You understand that neoconservatives are liberal, right? And that the neoconservative movement was started by followers of Leon Trotsky?

What a joke. Neocons are former moderate liberals who abandoned ship when Jimmy Carter took the helm. Way to try and make it something WAY more than what it is.:laugh2:

PostmodernProphet
09-24-2007, 06:36 AM
Properly understood, the Republican party wants more control over peoples lives (something they say they're against) than Hitler did:
-No abortion
-No gay marriage
-No gays (some say this) in general (outlaw homosexuality)
-Must mix Church and state
-Prayer in schools (Christian prayer)
-Sexual themes are bad
-No sex education
-Companies shouldn't be allowed to sell birth-control
This last ones my opinion:
-I believe if they could, some of them would put people in jail for years over protesting military actions and "disrespecting" the military.

your conclusion is absurd, but can probably be excused by your youth.....you don't remember how these things came to be.....

abortion: for thousands of years, abortion was considered a bad thing....then along came the liberals and in 1970, imposed upon us all the change that it was no longer a bad thing, it was a good thing....

gay marriage: since time began marriage has been considered a relationship between a man and a woman....now, along come the liberals and again, want to impose a change upon us all the concept that the relationship between two men is the same thing....

mix Church and state: since the US began church and state had a fine relationship of non-involvement....then, along came liberals and decided they had to impose a change on us.....eliminate church from everything....

Prayer in schools:......hate to keep piling on a common theme, but hey, what can I say.....liberals decided to impose their beliefs on everyone else and throw prayer out of schools.....

Sex education: I recall sex education when I was young.....the primary message was "Don't do it till you are married"......I didn't know anyone when I was in school who didn't know HOW someone got pregnant......the liberals decided to change that method of sex education to "We know you wanna do it!....That's okay"


Now, who is it again that wants to impose things on people?

(I'm not going to bother to comment on "no gays", "sexual themes", and "selling birth control", because I don't think anyone will actually take you seriously in thinking these are Republican or even conservative themes)

JackDaniels
09-24-2007, 07:14 AM
What a joke. Neocons are former moderate liberals who abandoned ship when Jimmy Carter took the helm. Way to try and make it something WAY more than what it is.:laugh2:

LOL, learn history bud.

I'll give you your first name to look up: the Godfather of the Neoconservative movement, Irving Kristol. Do your homework before you make yourself look like an idiot.

diuretic
09-24-2007, 06:30 PM
What a joke. Neocons are former moderate liberals who abandoned ship when Jimmy Carter took the helm. Way to try and make it something WAY more than what it is.:laugh2:

Not so. Jack is right on the money. These are totalitarians, they are of a totalitarian bent. They crave control, they despise dissent, opposition and democracy. They just want obedience and submission.

diuretic
09-24-2007, 06:32 PM
LOL, learn history bud.

I'll give you your first name to look up: the Godfather of the Neoconservative movement, Irving Kristol. Do your homework before you make yourself look like an idiot.

Neocon hero - David Horowitz -

http://www.nndb.com/people/812/000049665/

JackDaniels
09-24-2007, 06:42 PM
Neocon hero - David Horowitz -

http://www.nndb.com/people/812/000049665/

Exactly :)

There are many, many more examples of the Communist roots of the Neoconservative movement.

PostmodernProphet
09-24-2007, 06:43 PM
you see, the byplay between diuretic and gunny underscores the problem with the term 'neo-con'......

some attribute the label to right wing Christian evangelicals that moved to the Republican camp with the Reagan presidency.....if that label is correct, then I guess I am a neo-con, since I am a Reagan Democrat....got fed up with liberalism following the Carter administration and have never gone back.....

however, others attribute the label to the current Bush administration, which is the anti-thesis of Reagan Republicanism.....

if you recall, Bush 1 was named as the VP on the Reagan ticket to offset the objections of old-school GOP who couldn't tolerate Reagan's vision of "Republican".....

logically, if the current crowd, which are all old school GOP, are neo-cons, then the group which Reagan brought into the party, which is a more post-modern approach, cannot be......

diuretic
09-24-2007, 08:22 PM
Good points.

I have to explain that I'm largely ignorant of the shades of opinion in the two major parties in the US. I've read terms like "yellow dog Democrat", "Dixiecrat, "blue dog Democrat" (I think I've read that somewhere), "Goldwater Republican" and so on. Now there's no way I'm gong to fully appreciate the subtleties in each of those terms so I won'r pretend to.

But when I use the term "Neocon" I'm referring to the followers of Leo Strauss. Many of whom were on the Left (as has been discussed some were Dems and some were Marxists and Trotskyists) but moved to an area of politics previously unknown. Maybe they inhabited the GOP or not, I don't know, but they sought and won influence and power and in my mind they're not interested in anything but control. They don't care about free speech, they don't care about social issues, they just want to exert control over US domestic and foreign policy and the sole direction of foreign policy, they believe, should be pro-Israel and pro-Zionism. In that sense they're actually hijacking US foreign policy for the interests of another country. I don't know what you call it but I have my own word for that.

JackDaniels
09-24-2007, 08:49 PM
Good points.

I have to explain that I'm largely ignorant of the shades of opinion in the two major parties in the US. I've read terms like "yellow dog Democrat", "Dixiecrat, "blue dog Democrat" (I think I've read that somewhere), "Goldwater Republican" and so on. Now there's no way I'm gong to fully appreciate the subtleties in each of those terms so I won'r pretend to.

But when I use the term "Neocon" I'm referring to the followers of Leo Strauss. Many of whom were on the Left (as has been discussed some were Dems and some were Marxists and Trotskyists) but moved to an area of politics previously unknown. Maybe they inhabited the GOP or not, I don't know, but they sought and won influence and power and in my mind they're not interested in anything but control. They don't care about free speech, they don't care about social issues, they just want to exert control over US domestic and foreign policy and the sole direction of foreign policy, they believe, should be pro-Israel and pro-Zionism. In that sense they're actually hijacking US foreign policy for the interests of another country. I don't know what you call it but I have my own word for that.

Your ideas of neoconservatism are fairly accurate. Irving Kristol himself, the Godfather of the movement was a Trotskyist and unapologetic regarding their far left liberalism.

Kristol discusses neoconservatism here http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/000tzmlw.asp

To support the NeoCon GOP is to support big government, and there is no debate regarding that.

PostmodernProphet
09-24-2007, 08:54 PM
But when I use the term "Neocon" I'm referring to the followers of Leo Strauss.

never even heard of him.....

PostmodernProphet
09-24-2007, 09:04 PM
I tend to think in terms of modernist/postmodernist patterns....they are evident in both parties.....

on one hand you have a belief in Big Government....modernists tend to strive for federal government solutions to our problems....examples would be Nixon, Bush 1, Cheney, most of the current Bush administration for that matter....on the Dem side you would have folks like Kennedy, Kerry and I think, Hillary Clinton....

postmodernists tend to think in terms of local government solutions, individual freedoms.....I think both Reagan and Bill Clinton fall in that category......

JackDaniels
09-24-2007, 09:06 PM
never even heard of him.....

He's only one of the most famous political scientists of the Twentieth Century.

One of my professors in college studied under Strauss at the UofC. Needless to say, Dr. Lindberg was not one of Strauss' NeoCon followers :)

diuretic
09-24-2007, 10:47 PM
Small point. I have a problem with far left "liberalism". I think the far left would too. They'd be very quick to point out the "liberalism" is really just another bourgeoise idea. The far left are a bunch of totalitarian nutters, they don't want individual freedoms, they're utter collectivists and want an elite to run things. Check Strauss out, he firmly believed in the rule by the elite, not liberal democracy.

5stringJeff
09-25-2007, 04:12 AM
Re: "neo-con": many on the American Left tend to use that word to describe all political philosophies on the right, both neo-conservative and paleo-conservative, and its use as a euphemism probably confuses people as to its real meaning. I certainly do not consider myself a neo-conservative, although, as Toby Keith says, "I sometimes think that war is necessary... but every night I pray for peace on earth."

diuretic
09-25-2007, 04:42 AM
I like Toby Keith - got a couple of his cd's (I bloody well hate putting that possessive apostrophe in there but if I write "cds" everyone thinks it's an acronym - hey, life's tough for a pedant :laugh2:). But his politics stink. Still a great voice though and his "How Do You Like Me Now" video used to crack me up every time I saw it.

Where was I?

Oh yes.

Labels are crap.

Ideas are good.

avatar4321
09-25-2007, 05:07 AM
I like Toby Keith - got a couple of his cd's (I bloody well hate putting that possessive apostrophe in there but if I write "cds" everyone thinks it's an acronym - hey, life's tough for a pedant :laugh2:). But his politics stink. Still a great voice though and his "How Do You Like Me Now" video used to crack me up every time I saw it.

Where was I?

Oh yes.

Labels are crap.

Ideas are good.

Some labels are good.

Some ideas are crap

diuretic
09-25-2007, 05:23 AM
Some labels are good.

Some ideas are crap

Good label - "beer". Crap label "insert political self-identifying or other-identifying label cramping all free thought"

JackDaniels
09-25-2007, 09:22 AM
Small point. I have a problem with far left "liberalism". I think the far left would too. They'd be very quick to point out the "liberalism" is really just another bourgeoise idea. The far left are a bunch of totalitarian nutters, they don't want individual freedoms, they're utter collectivists and want an elite to run things. Check Strauss out, he firmly believed in the rule by the elite, not liberal democracy.

I completely agree with your analysis of Strauss.

I suppose you have, but if you haven't, I would recommend his Natural Right and History

He was indeed a classicalist in the sense that he wanted rule by the philosopher king.

April15
09-25-2007, 03:23 PM
Wrong on all counts. Here's what Republicans want:

-No abortion - which is a protection of the life and liberty of the unborn human baby involved.
-No gay marriage - which is a protection of the basic unit of society, the family.
-No gays (some say this) in general (outlaw homosexuality) - this is not a plank of any GOP platform, nor is it a commonly held GOP belief.
-Must mix Church and state - in what ways? Allowing communities to display religious symbols during religious holidays? Allowing state workers off during religious holidays? Please be specific.
-Prayer in schools (Christian prayer) - actually, we want people to have the choice whether or not to pray in school
-Sexual themes are bad - yet we don't outlaw sex in TV, movies, etc. People still have the choice whether to see them.
-No sex education - we want parents to have the choice whether their kids should receive sex ed as the school deems necessary
-Companies shouldn't be allowed to sell birth-control - I have never heard of the GOP outlawing the sale of birth control.

See the trend? The GOP (not the neoconservative branch) believes in freedom, liberty, and choice.

So basically a restriction of freedoms.

diuretic
09-25-2007, 06:52 PM
I completely agree with your analysis of Strauss.

I suppose you have, but if you haven't, I would recommend his Natural Right and History

He was indeed a classicalist in the sense that he wanted rule by the philosopher king.

Reading it now. I'm only halfway through but it's interesting.

JackDaniels
09-26-2007, 09:46 AM
What a joke. Neocons are former moderate liberals who abandoned ship when Jimmy Carter took the helm. Way to try and make it something WAY more than what it is.:laugh2:

:lol: Kinda funny how you abandoned this thread after you were proven wrong :lol:

Hugh Lincoln
09-26-2007, 09:05 PM
What a joke. Neocons are former moderate liberals who abandoned ship when Jimmy Carter took the helm. Way to try and make it something WAY more than what it is.:laugh2:

"Neocon" is a euphemism for Jew.

There is no disputing that the prominent "neocons" of the Bush adminsitration, like Perle, Feith, Wolfowitz, etc. are all Jews whose first loyalty is to Israel, and who sought the war in Iraq for Israel's purposes, not ours. Even Tim Russert on NBC got that much.

They were only "liberals" once because "liberals" were seen as Good for Jews. When liberal/Jewish domestic goals were well on their way to being achieved, the gentile liberal favoring of Arabs via the Soviet Union got the Jews pissed. So they became Republicans. But not because they gave two shits about America or conservatism. Because they wanted War for Israel.

They got it.

Abbey Marie
09-26-2007, 09:40 PM
All content aside for the moment, kudos to the thread maker for knowing not to putting an apostrophe in Totalitarians. :clap:

JackDaniels
09-27-2007, 06:58 AM
All content aside for the moment, kudos to the thread maker for knowing not to putting an apostrophe in Totalitarians. :clap:

LOL, while I do know grammar, the credit goes to the original author as I just copy/pasted the title :)

Abbey Marie
09-27-2007, 02:03 PM
LOL, while I do know grammar, the credit goes to the original author as I just copy/pasted the title :)

Good grammar + honesty = respect. :beer:

actsnoblemartin
09-27-2007, 05:50 PM
I agree 100% with you.

1. Abortion ends life and decreases our overall population

2. Gay marriage is not what god or nature intended, and I dont believe gays deserve any special rights.

3. I see atheists, and many on the left to want to exclude religion in any shape or form in our culture, and treat pornography with more reverance then then the bible, torah, or koran.

4. Why cant their be a choice, what, jewish, christian, hindu, and muslim kids cant pray, because the aclu will be offended?

5. True, the government does not ban porn, or dis-allow sexual themes on tv.

6. Sex education is better left up to parents. I believe the government has no place teaching people how to f***, the parents bore the child, they are responsible for all aspects of his well being, and while possibly good intentioned, it takes away a right and responsibility of parents, to decide what to teach their kids about sex

7. Individual companies have the right to not pay for birth control, its not a gaurantee in the constitution about birth control.

Liberalism, should not get to impose its morality on others, by saying, if you dont agree, your a bigot, and you must have things, that most people dont want.




Wrong on all counts. Here's what Republicans want:

-No abortion - which is a protection of the life and liberty of the unborn human baby involved.
-No gay marriage - which is a protection of the basic unit of society, the family.
-No gays (some say this) in general (outlaw homosexuality) - this is not a plank of any GOP platform, nor is it a commonly held GOP belief.
-Must mix Church and state - in what ways? Allowing communities to display religious symbols during religious holidays? Allowing state workers off during religious holidays? Please be specific.
-Prayer in schools (Christian prayer) - actually, we want people to have the choice whether or not to pray in school
-Sexual themes are bad - yet we don't outlaw sex in TV, movies, etc. People still have the choice whether to see them.
-No sex education - we want parents to have the choice whether their kids should receive sex ed as the school deems necessary
-Companies shouldn't be allowed to sell birth-control - I have never heard of the GOP outlawing the sale of birth control.

See the trend? The GOP (not the neoconservative branch) believes in freedom, liberty, and choice.

actsnoblemartin
09-27-2007, 05:52 PM
what about this for an interesting idea.

Since most liberals and conservatives have different ideas, and wants.

Let each state, or city, or county, vote. You can vote for or against abortion, gay marriage. But let local government make the decisions, not some big non caring beuracracy.

any comments?

JackDaniels
09-28-2007, 01:19 PM
:lol: Gunny, Kinda funny how you abandoned this thread after you were proven wrong :lol:

Gunny....chirp.....chirp....

Psychoblues
10-03-2007, 10:48 PM
If it's not crawfishing, it's disappearing altogether when Gunny get's outclassed, JD.



Gunny....chirp.....chirp....

He must have been some damn sure 'nuff Marine? I dunno? His avatar suggests he thinks more of himself than any of us do.

MtnBiker
10-03-2007, 10:51 PM
All content aside for the moment, kudos to the thread maker for knowing not to putting an apostrophe in Totalitarians. :clap:

Good point, so true.