Your tax dollars at work...

Bardox

Loved Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2009
Posts
2,234
Media
38
Likes
551
Points
198
Location
U.S.
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
If that doesn't show the divide I don't know what does. And take a look at the actual people in those shots. The people against healthcare are old, white, and out of shape. These are the people that should be crying out for healthcare. The people against the war are all seemingly in good health, all age groups, and looks like they put alot more work in on their signs.

Left photo is comprised of people from all walks of American life. Right photo is comprised of people you find in florida's seniors communities. Could this mean that Liberalism is growing and Conservatism is dying?
 

balsary

Sexy Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Posts
1,805
Media
4
Likes
66
Points
193
Location
Indianapolis (Indiana, United States)
Gender
Male
Would you like to group the violent OWS in your Left group?

Obviously there are exceptions on both sides. Hell, I'd even go so far as to bet that you could find a conservative that cares about others.

See how my reply adds nothing to the conversation while at the same time insulting the other side? I call it my thousand island approach.
 

balsary

Sexy Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Posts
1,805
Media
4
Likes
66
Points
193
Location
Indianapolis (Indiana, United States)
Gender
Male
Can you prove to me that all of those people in the liberals picture are in fact liberals?

It is a funny picture, but not really all that relevant or truthful.

Not relevant? Where have you been the past year or two?

I'm sure that there are a few in the left picture that are conservative, just as I'm sure that there could be a few in the right picture that are liberal. I'm pretty sure slurper was referring to the fact that most conservatives are die hard military and war, while most liberals are as adamant about social programs. Dismissing the picture is one thing, but are you trying to dismiss the thought behind it?
 

lovinglife

Superior Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2012
Posts
1,731
Media
100
Likes
3,370
Points
208
Location
Houston (Texas, United States)
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Not relevant? Where have you been the past year or two?

I'm sure that there are a few in the left picture that are conservative, just as I'm sure that there could be a few in the right picture that are liberal. I'm pretty sure slurper was referring to the fact that most conservatives are die hard military and war, while most liberals are as adamant about social programs. Dismissing the picture is one thing, but are you trying to dismiss the thought behind it?
Most of the conservatives that are die hard military and war are people that either have served or do serve in the military. And I imagine most of them are not really pro-war so much as they arent as adamantly against the notion of war. I also know quite a few poor conservatives that like their social programs.

I dismiss the general thought behind it because "conservative" and "liberal" is a pretty broad definition. There are lots of people that lean one way or another but take a specific stance against the norm.
 

citr

Experimental Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2009
Posts
282
Media
0
Likes
7
Points
53
This is why I can't take seriously any "small government" conservative who is unwilling to even think about touching the defense budget. Really they're just "no more social programs, more pointless invasions" types. They like to beat their chests to the sound of us obliterating peeps with our missiles.




Most of the conservatives that are die hard military and war are people that either have served or do serve in the military.

Very unlikely. I'd bet that these types are a very small percentage of the extremely pro-war neocon types.

Some people are just kind of ruthless--so long as they aren't the ones doing the killing.
 

balsary

Sexy Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Posts
1,805
Media
4
Likes
66
Points
193
Location
Indianapolis (Indiana, United States)
Gender
Male
This is why I can't take seriously any "small government" conservative who is unwilling to even think about touching the defense budget. Really they're just "no more social programs, more pointless invasions" types. They like to beat their chests to the sound of us obliterating peeps with our missiles.






Very unlikely. I'd bet that these types are a very small percentage of the extremely pro-war neocon types.

Some people are just kind of ruthless--so long as they aren't the ones doing the killing.

I don't think they mind being the one doing the killing, rather they don't like to be the one in harms way. In war, the other side shoots back.
 

lovinglife

Superior Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2012
Posts
1,731
Media
100
Likes
3,370
Points
208
Location
Houston (Texas, United States)
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
This is why I can't take seriously any "small government" conservative who is unwilling to even think about touching the defense budget. Really they're just "no more social programs, more pointless invasions" types. They like to beat their chests to the sound of us obliterating peeps with our missiles.


Very unlikely. I'd bet that these types are a very small percentage of the extremely pro-war neocon types.

Some people are just kind of ruthless--so long as they aren't the ones doing the killing.
Nobody wants to touch the defense budget. Oddly enough, in terms of overall spending, Obama and Paul Ryan (dunno about simpson-bowles) are remarkably similar. Paul Ryan pushed for something like 540billion in defense and Obama pushed for 510billion.

Also, the extremely pro-war neocon types are a very small percentage of people that are in any way for war.
 

balsary

Sexy Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Posts
1,805
Media
4
Likes
66
Points
193
Location
Indianapolis (Indiana, United States)
Gender
Male
Nobody wants to touch the defense budget. Oddly enough, in terms of overall spending, Obama and Paul Ryan (dunno about simpson-bowles) are remarkably similar. Paul Ryan pushed for something like 540billion in defense and Obama pushed for 510billion.

$30 billion is nothing to you? To say that nobody wants to touch the defense budget is a joke. Hell, there was a $2 trillion difference over ten years, that's a lot to me. If Obama could get an even lower defense budget passed, I'm certain he would.

Also, the extremely pro-war neocon types are a very small percentage of people that are in any way for war.

We're talking about the extremely pro-war neocon types...conservatives.
 

citr

Experimental Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2009
Posts
282
Media
0
Likes
7
Points
53
Nobody wants to touch the defense budget. Oddly enough, in terms of overall spending, Obama and Paul Ryan (dunno about simpson-bowles) are remarkably similar. Paul Ryan pushed for something like 540billion in defense and Obama pushed for 510billion.

Also, the extremely pro-war neocon types are a very small percentage of people that are in any way for war.

You must have a pretty tight definition of neoconservative. The general stance is pretty popular.
 

lovinglife

Superior Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2012
Posts
1,731
Media
100
Likes
3,370
Points
208
Location
Houston (Texas, United States)
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
You must have a pretty tight definition of neoconservative. The general stance is pretty popular.
I think we have a different definition of die hard military. I live in TX now and it has opened my eyes to a lot of the die hard military when compared to when I lived in other states.
$30 billion is nothing to you? To say that nobody wants to touch the defense budget is a joke. Hell, there was a $2 trillion difference over ten years, that's a lot to me. If Obama could get an even lower defense budget passed, I'm certain he would.
$30 billion is nothing when the deficit is a trillion and the debt is 16 trillion. I would be happier if it were cut down to $450 billion. Both plans are a $100-$150 billion cut in military due to the wars ending though.
 

balsary

Sexy Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Posts
1,805
Media
4
Likes
66
Points
193
Location
Indianapolis (Indiana, United States)
Gender
Male
I think we have a different definition of die hard military. I live in TX now and it has opened my eyes to a lot of the die hard military when compared to when I lived in other states.

$30 billion is nothing when the deficit is a trillion and the debt is 16 trillion. I would be happier if it were cut down to $450 billion. Both plans are a $100-$150 billion cut in military due to the wars ending though.

Do you think that we are going to be able to cut the entire deficit from one program? It's going to take several cuts in spending as well as increasing revenue. $30 billion is $30 fucking billion any way you look at it.
 

citr

Experimental Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2009
Posts
282
Media
0
Likes
7
Points
53
I think we have a different definition of die hard military. I live in TX now and it has opened my eyes to a lot of the die hard military when compared to when I lived in other states.

$30 billion is nothing when the deficit is a trillion and the debt is 16 trillion. I would be happier if it were cut down to $450 billion. Both plans are a $100-$150 billion cut in military due to the wars ending though.

I think I know what you meant by diehard military. I just mean that there's not even close to enough diehard militarymen out there to explain away the popularity of neoconservatism.
 

lovinglife

Superior Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2012
Posts
1,731
Media
100
Likes
3,370
Points
208
Location
Houston (Texas, United States)
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Do you think that we are going to be able to cut the entire deficit from one program? It's going to take several cuts in spending as well as increasing revenue. $30 billion is $30 fucking billion any way you look at it.
I just dont think that $30 billion difference is enough to demonize the alternative defense spending plan saying "they arent willing to touch the defense budget". Its not even a 6% difference. Had they offered up $600 billion you might have a case, but I dont think these numbers are different enough to say such things.

Also, like I say $30 isnt enough imo. $450 is where it should be cut to.