There are very few young people who think anything like boggie does. All I'm saying is it's only a matter of time before people who think like he does, a very old way of thinking, to die out and then will be greatly out numbered by more "progressive" type thinking. I am merely stating the fact that all I have to do is wait for people like me to be a great majority.

It's pretty sad when "conservatives" can't understand personal choice and personal responsibility, not imposing your beliefs on others.

You be surprised how many young conservatives out there who are like minded like DBL, Twerker..I think that bodes hope for your country's future imo.

A progressive democrat espousing personal responsibility..... bloody hell, Twerker, you've officially jumped the shark.

Yes... that's right, I'm for all of that and so much more. But then I've said this many times here before. In fact, I have even responded to posts by you advocating such things saying that I agreed with you.

Curiously, I can't recall ever seeing any feedback from you when I have ageed with you.

And while we're on the subject of smaller, limited and less intrusive government as well as personal responsibility, I am also for a host of ther things that would get the government out of our lives and wallets.

Quite apart from the highly selective issues those on the left champion when it comes getting government out of our lives, I would go much, MUCH farther because I am much more Libertarian than I am conservative.

I would scrap our entire current tax code, repeal the 16th Amendment and implement the Fair Tax which would END the federal government's ability to use the tax code for crony capitalist ends.

I would abolish a large number of federal agencies, starting with the Dept of Education and then rolling that out to the Dept's of Energy, Commerce, Labor, Agriculture, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development and Transportation; none of these (save Commerce, but only marginally in its current form) serves a constitutionally enumerated power of the federal government.

I would slash the monstrous and job-destroying federal register of regulations to only those necessary to ensure that sensible laws were being obeyed and nothing more. No more micromanaging of private sector businesses by a meddling federal bureaucracy only interested in its own survival. I'm all for sensible regulations to ensure against fraud, abuse of employees, consumers and the environment, but what we have now goes FAR beyond that and our regulatory system is being abused for crony capitalist ends.

Sadly, those leftists who are for the things you listed above (save the 2nd Amendment naturally), are only for getting the government out of their lives in those areas and are all for MASSIVE government interventions in markets and businesses, and these interventions DIRECTLY impact our personal and economic freedoms.



A fair question. I'm not arguing against abortion, I'm arguing against murder. When the fetus has reached a stage of development that would allow it to survive outside the womb, and since the science has proved that that fetus is, indeed, a thinking, self-aware and sentient human being, then the libertarian in me says that perhaps aborting a fetus at that stage could be seen as a violation of the most sacred of all our inalienable rights, the right to life.

You see, I'm willing to change or modify a position I've held for decades on the basis of solid scientific proof. I saw a documentary that followed the development of the human fetus and by 26 weeks of gestation there is just no mistaking that this is a fully formed human being. Once a fetus's lungs are capable of gas exchange, all other possible shortcomings or development can easily be done outside the womb. In fact, a significant amount of human development occurs well after birth, even in those that go full term.

And apparently I'm not the only one who holds this position as most of the civilized countries of the world also place severe restrictions on late-term abortions.

So I'm not against abortion, I'm just against the murder of a sentient human being no matter where that human being may reside.

As for the rest of your post, you really need to lighten up. This an anonymous forum, none of us knows who the others here really are. I could be a precocious 18-year-old for all you know. I wish I were of course, but you take my point... I hope.

Then we're not really that far off then.

I'm just in favor of returning to the tax code we had in the 60's and 70's where ALL socioeconomic classes did well, and not just those at the top. I believe this is "fair" whether you do or not. You can have a heart for unborn babies. I can have a heart for everyone who's not wealthy. Whether conservatives acknowledge it or not, "the game" is rigged and unbalanced in favor of the wealthy. Their money allows them to manipulate things normal people cannot. Citizens United is an example of this, and all the power that goes with it.

The rich may feel like they are being stolen from, but that's just too bad. History has proven that a "fairer" tax code works and is good for the country, including the rich too. The middle-class needs disposable income to buy the stuff the rich is making.

And when I say "fairer tax code" I mean the tax code of the 60s and 70s that was actually fair, not your "Fair Flat Tax" which is not even close to fair and would stifle commerce, especially retail.

Progressive Libertarian. Democrats are pussies.

Libertarian on social issues. Progressive on economic issues like tax code, but not really that much on things like welfare, etc.

You've misinterpreted something.

You'd be surprised how few young people are conservatives.

XenaGuy, first of all, I don't have anything against you personally. You seem a fairly decent guy, and you actually responded and explained the last time I questioned an edit, which was refreshing.

But, while I don't actually know what was in the text you removed, I assume it was something about the old. Given your age, I would just say that, as a moderator, you should not make edits based on personal feelings.

Either disallow generalizations about groups, or allow them, but don't edit them only if they apply to yourself.

Just this for now, but by way of introduction to my upcoming response to the rest of the post, I should just say that the equation of the thoughts of a man with his speech is not necessarily true.



Do you, or do you not?