Conservatives = Fear & Angry, Liberals = Secure & Loving

Their messages, positions & make this clear (obviously there are exceptions to every rule).

Conservatives:
We need guns! A basic principle of martial arts is that the man who never fights, never fears losing a fight. Animals that are afraid, show aggression. People who are afraid, arm themselves. Those without fear, have no need to. And men who are insecure about their manhood? BIG guns baby. Because you know, a Glock .17 (like I have in the home) isn't BIG enough. Not only that, they're afraid to leave the house without their gun. Parks, theaters, schools, whatever. They need their gun. Fear.
Oh and on that subject, gotta love the people who say they need AR-15's to protect themselves from the gubmint! What are they gonna do, carry it to work with them every day? Even then, do they really think they would have a chance against a Rifle Company of Marines? (Besides, our military is largely Republican, so do they really think those guys would follow orders to attack Americans?)


We need to spend more on defense than the next ten countries COMBINED. That's not just fear, it's stupidity. Are our armed forces so bad at their jobs, we can't defend ourselves with the same budget as China or Russia? How about if we just spent twice as much as anyone else? But the Military Industrial Complex preys on... Fear.

How about them gays, huh! Boy, talk about a way to get a Conservative angry! I mean JEEZ some of these people on FOX (yes I watch it) seem like they're ready to have a cow. And they are scared of the strangest friggin' things. Have you heard this whackjobbery about how if we allow gay marriage, people will just "turn gay"! Seriously? Then of course, everyone will want polygamy and to marry their horse! Personally, I don't feel threatened at all if Susie and Sally get married. I don't know Susie and Sally so I'm not afraid they'll come convert my wife (do they get a prize for converting people?). And even if gay marriage was legal, There ain't a guy in the world I could look at, and get aroused. Of course with all the Republicans who get busted being secretly gay, I guess I can understand their fear. Fortunately, they're realizing that gay marriage is inevitable and are now changing their message to help with the youth vote. But it's still scary!

Liberals?
They would rather spend tax money on providing health care and food for the poor, than outdated tanks. They know that tax dollars are going to be spent on something and this seems like good stuff. They feel more secure about defense and more loving toward our citizens.

They would rather boys who want to fight, have to do so with their fists. Even knives are better because a guy with a knife is going to have a much harder time shooting down and killing 26 first graders and their teachers. Especially if I'm there. They're more secure that way.

Gays? They want everyone to have equal rights and protection under the law. Loving. Or they simply aren't bothered by the idea that two consenting adults may want to enter into a formal, monogamous relationship. Secure.

The examples could go on but you get the idea.

 

I was hoping this was going to be an honest thread, instead of a partisen one.

I would say Conservatives = National Security Fear

Liberals = Racism Fear

They both live off of fear though.

 

It's hard to believe that there are partisan shills still out there like this. Oh where to begin.

Liberals are as much afraid of gun owners as gun owners are of government taking them from them. Trouble is, the Founders were bitter clingers as well and saw to it to write the 2nd Amendment. Deal with it.

To think that the government will cut back on military spending is just fantasy. After all, we are talking about the United States government. What often puzzles me is the notion liberals have of an ever expansive and all intrusive government that will simply change gears when it comes to military spending and international involvment. It's like creating Frankenstien and then wandering why he broke his chains and is now terrorizing pedestrians in the streets. Again, deal with it.

As for the gays, I don't hear any mention of polygamists. Why? Are you really for the "rights" of all citizens? If so, what about those who just live together and are not sexually involved? Shouldn't they be afforded the same rights as everyone else? The truth of the matter is, government should not even be in the marriage business. It is absurd. That's right, no tax perks. No special privlidges that other Americans are denied for one reason or another.

 

1. You realize I mentioned I own a gun, right? Yet I have no need to take it to the grocery store. Why? I'm not afraid.
2. Well I agree with you but take a guess at which group and which party have been trying to cut defense spending? Give ya a hint: Obama.
3. I guess you missed the Rush Limbaugh brooha when he used those exact examples and the posts here that followed that exact train of thought (or parroting). Guess what category of individuals listen to and parrot Rush? Hint: Not Liberals.

 

Is it your principle that a woman who submits to a rapist is not raped?

 

What about when it comes to unborn human children? Liberals have a circuit breaker in their brain that suddenly shuts off all their empathy at the first mention of the word abortion.

 

What in my post would evidence such a position?

You're correct on that and I can appreciate your position. They simply don't see a zygote and a child as being the same thing. Is their opinion more valid than yours? No ore than your opinion is more valid than theirs. Both sides have very valid reasons for their beliefs.

 

"Liberals?
They would rather spend tax money on providing health care and food for the poor..."

Taxcutter says:
There's more votes in free stuff for EBT-swipers. In Roman times it was bread and circuses.

 

Some liberals are loving and kind as long as people agree with them. If they don't, they turn pretty nasty pretty quickly. Of course, many liberals are perfectly nice people. But to say that all conservatives live of hate is nonsense.

 

Your position is that they don't fear losing a fight since they never fight. Therefore, the option they have is to submit. I was thinking that if you believe that submission to rape was not rape, then you wouldn't be supporting rape. Perhaps I am wrong and you support rapists in their endeavors and would see them protected from those who would fight back. I think it was fair that since you make assumptions about the motives of others, that assumptions be made about your motives.



You're correct on that and I can appreciate your position. They simply don't see a zygote and a child as being the same thing. Is their opinion more valid than yours? No ore than your opinion is more valid than theirs. Both sides have very valid reasons for their beliefs.[/QUOTE]

 

You can be secure and loving and still be an idiot.

 

Ah. Didn't realize the concept would be too difficult to understand. Okay, let me simplify it for you. The first thing taught in martial arts is that it is always best not to fight. No fight, no losing a fight. That's all. However from there, they teach defense. Black belts and real BadAzzes generally, don't come off as such. They are so confident, they don't need to. Of course there are exceptions but the phrase "I never would have imagined that guy was a black belt!" if pretty common.
Guys who can't leave the house without a gun? Well, either they can't handle situations in such a way as to avoid a fight, they can't win a fight without a gun or they want a fight so they can use it and prove their manhood.

I have lived in lots of dangerous places both domestically (grew up in Detroit) and abroad (Mexico, Peru & The Ukraine). 99.9% of the time, streets smarts kept me safer than a gun ever would. .1% of the time, my wits or abilities were fine and a gun would only have made things worse. Do I have a gun in my home for protection? Sure. I have a beautiful wife and teen-age daughter and both know how to handle it. Do I need to carry it to church on Sunday? To go see "Olympus has Fallen" tonight? Of course I'm not afraid to go to church or the movies without a gun!

Oh Optimate, this post is actually just tongue-in-cheek. There was another post about how Conservatives are manly and Liberals are feminine and I decided to have a little fun parodying it.
I have lots of friends who are Conservative and lots who are Liberal. In real life, none of them are as nasty as what is seen on the net.

 

In fairness, while the conservatives care so much about whether the baby is born or not, they stop caring about that child as soon as it is born. They want people to have babies they can't afford, and don't want their tax dollars going toward food stamps or medicaid for the child afterward.

 

OP, the next time you post, try using things called "facts" and "logic" instead of spouting random gibberish.
k? thx.

 

Why do you go to Church? Are you afraid a God will smite you in the afterlife if you dont?

 

I didn't realize that Conservatives were the devil & Liberals were angels. Thanks for clearing that up for me, it all makes sense now.

 

Once again, I cannot help but point out the irony in your name. As you have - predictably - laid out a less than honest representation of the respective positions. If you want to use this one to troll the right, that's fine. I have no problem with that. But all that I ask is that you lay out an equally trolling representation of the other side. Just in the interest of fairness. Which, let's be real here, would look more like this:


Liberals:
If we don't tighten gun control, all of our children will be shot and killed! Our schools won't be safe! We must do something about this terrible and growing threat! Nevermind the fact that illegally purchased handguns are responsible for the majority of actual gun crimes in the United States. Instead, let's focus on legally purchased "assault weapons." Which does...... next to nothing, really...... in actually reducing the number of annual gun fatalities. Buuuuuut these are the ones that make us the most emotional when we see them on tv during these relatively rare but frequent-enough-to-be-scary "mass shootings," so these are the ones that should trigger (no pun intended) the most reaction in us. Because, I mean, if we cared about actual numbers and saving the lives of as many children as possible, we'd organize a legitimate effort to clean up the streets of Chicago. But, hey, those are black kids anyway. Who's gonna miss a few black kids? Despite the fact that they are being killed constantly, it's easier to market a one-off tragedy like Sandy Hook as sad because the kids there were mostly white. That's the beauty of being politically correct. We don't actually have to practice any of the principles we talk about. As long as we just pay lip service to minorities, we don't actually have to do anything to really help them.

So does the gun control lobby. And the "women's rights" lobby ("war on women," anybody?"). And just about every special interest lobby you can think of. Fear is big business. In fact, half of Obama's re-election strategy was about selling fear - "Don't vote for the Republicans. They'll take away women's rights, put blacks back in chains, deport all the Mexicans, and leave all the poor people with no health insurance." The other half, of course, was about giving away "free" stuff.

I have to be honest with you here, NoPartyAffiliation. You've completely gotten this one right. Clearly, this is what we conservatives are afraid of. We know that if you make gay marriage legal, then everyone will obviously turn gay. I mean, you and I might become a couple for all we know. Who's to say? The only thing keeping us straight right now is the law. We might be holding hands together in the gay pride parade once we get all that hate out of the government. So queerly..... er...... clearly we must fight to oppress gays for no other reason than reacting to our own homophobia! It's the 'merkin way!

The problem here is that you guys (yes, I said "you guys," let's be honest.... you're a liberal) even have a zero tolerance policy for fist fighting. You make no distinction between the bully and the kid standing up for himself. What you teach kids is to tattle when someone is bothering them. So that they grow up to be life-long wimps, sissies, and (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*). This is not quality problem solving. It is fear of confrontation rationalized into moral superiority.

Indeed, the examples could go on forever. And yet interestingly, not a single one of you was willing to defend necrophilia when I pointed out how technically it could be consentual and there was no logical reason to discriminate against it. Most of you just felt that it was "icky."

 

And when some mugger decides to rob you, and then attacks you with a knife and slashes you 10 times, while you're you're lying in the hospital (after receiving multiple blood transfusions), you can think about how non-afraid you were, also how smart you could have been - to carry a gun (with a license).

 

If you look at the libs on PF, a majority of them are far from secure and loving. Not that conservatives are much better.

 

Then why own one at all if you're not afraid? Clearly the world around you is safe enough for you not to need one. For that matter, why should anyone pushing for gun control be afraid? Is not gun control the very essence of fear? Fear of guns?

 

What is confusing about it is, the more liberal the city the poorer it is, the more likely the schools are failing, the environment is polluted, and the less secure you are both in your job and in your person. In fact, more then 85% of gun deaths occur in liberal controlled cities, just the top 30 the most dangerous the Democrats run gets you there. I guess one party is afraid of the other, and the other is secure with the job they are doing in Democrat strongholds like Detroit and Flint Michigan. Or Buffalo, or Chicago, or Oakland, West Palm Beach, Tampa, Orlando, Kansas City, St Louis, LA, etc.. etc..

 

I thought it was liberals who were fighting school choice because they dont care as much about a child's education as they do their unions. Am I wrong here?

 

I think this depicts it just about right:

 

[/QUOTE]

No I'm not afraid of that at all. I enjoy the message, the music, the friends and so on. Oh and I don't carry in services.

Glad I could clear that up! Not what I said but if that's the lightbulb that went off over your head, well good for you!

LOL! You're entertaining when you get your panties in a bunch like this.

The main problems with your scenario are: 1. Most normal people don't carry a gun to the theater or say, 1st grade so I wouldn't have mine with me anyway. 2. I have had people attack me with knives on two occasions. The first was when I was in the military and we were at a bar in Subic bay (way back when). Fortunately there were two of us and one of him. That wouldn't have done any good if he had a gun.
The second time was in Odessa in The Ukraine. The idiot pulled a knife on me while I was holding a pool cue. Now I have trained in Chinese and Japanese, as well as fencing (Epee). I poked him in the eye with the cue. It was actually kinda funny because he was drunk. Now if I had been in a bar in Arizona (where packing is okey dokey!), it could have been a disaster for many people.

No I'm quite adept with a gun and strongly believe in the right to own a gun for protection. In the home, the store, jewelers or anyone with legitimate reason to carry or have a gun is fine by me.
Extremists always have the same view: If you don't agree with me completely, I must project the opposite extreme view upon you.
Because you know, there is no such thing as common sense gun laws. Even Scalia has made clear there is no such thing as an absolute right - including when it comes to the 2nd amendment and yes, we already have some common sense gun laws.

 

That's what you implied. By the very notion of your OP, you state that Conservatives equal fear & anger while Liberals equal secure & loving. I only took what you gave me and created my interpretation of your meaning.

I can chose to go the patronizing route, as you've clearly done. Instead, I'll simply demonstrate how your words aren't being implied the way you think they are. Of which, I've come to terms that what I feel like I'm saying isn't always what others perceive it to be. Many times I've corrected myself, even on this board.

Furthermore, Jars by Chevelle is 'tongue-in-cheek', your OP isn't. If you think it was, I can ensure you that most of the folks on this thread don't believe it was, hence why you've gotten the responses that you have.

[video=youtube;kQeHSC-kwlk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQeHSC-kwlk[/video]