Show of HandsShow of Hands

Krystina October 28th, 2014 9:33pm

As a group, which do you think is more critical of their own party and/or politicians?

20 Liked

Comments: Add Comment

ladyniner81 no hope for humanity
10/29/14 8:36 pm

Republicans (the Tea Partiers) they hate everyone but Sarah Palin & Ronald Reagan

Reeze The TARDIS
10/29/14 10:26 am

Conservatives are able to admit our faults. We acknowledge when a politician's motives aren't true and judge them carefully.

Reply
TheeCourt Realville
10/28/14 10:29 pm

Most Liberals, if not sociopathic, are likely to be so indoctrinated & devoid of critical thought, they just tow the line. It's akin to terminal mental disorders that used to require a lobotomy to ease the vicious nature of primordial senselessness.

Reply
LordAF
10/28/14 7:12 pm

The fact that a majority of liberals still support Obama even after the NDAA, M.P.Act, NSA spying+lying, drone strikes, and further warmongering- etc is what made me put my answer.
However Neocons are excessively protective of Bush as well, remember.

Reply
LordAF
10/28/14 7:14 pm

Many Conservatives are actually moving towards Libertarianism now, since Libertarians don't (typically) support crap like gay marriage bans, drug bans, US warmongering, etc- the type of crap that Neocons started which messed up other Conservatives.

ScrewU Gone
10/29/14 3:53 pm

The tea party actually started under Bush.

LordAF
10/29/14 3:58 pm

@3gun but so did NSA spying, the Patriot Act, Operation Fast And Furious- etc. :/ No good presidents these past two or three or so decades

ladyniner81 no hope for humanity
10/29/14 7:41 pm

The Tea Party is the new religious right. They've been dormant since 1988

ScrewU Gone
10/30/14 3:07 am

The Teamsters and other liberal organizations were a significant part of the tea party. Religion had nothing to do with it.

TreeHugs Oregon
10/28/14 3:50 pm

Several conservatives have left politics or switched parties because of the backlash they received for "stepping out of line" by publicly approving of something Obama did, being pro choice or believing climate science...

Reply
Reeze The TARDIS
10/29/14 10:26 am

Climate science. That's a new one.

jvc1133 61535
10/28/14 3:14 pm

Liberals March in locked step

Reply
EarlyBird Portland
10/28/14 3:13 pm

This is a very tough question. Both libs and cons seem very protective of their own.

Reply
Reeze The TARDIS
10/29/14 10:27 am

I've seen MANY conservatives that are critical of Bush.

cowboy Here and There
10/28/14 2:54 pm

Definitely Conservatives. Liberals can't move left of Stalin fast enough.

Reply
swervin Maryland
10/28/14 2:53 pm

I'm very critical of republicans. I think the morons who are against marriage equality need to remove their heads from their butts.

Reply
gamerguy217
10/28/14 4:51 pm

I agree with you, but in all honesty, we have way bigger issues to deal with than that.

And I understated that pretty heavily.

LordAF
10/28/14 7:09 pm

Neocons are typically painful to deal with, regardless of party. (Unless you are a Neocon as well lel)

LordAF
10/28/14 7:17 pm

@gamerguy217 I'm Libertarian t(._.t)
(Lel, no hard feelings)

TheeCourt Realville
10/28/14 10:33 pm

At least Conservatives and Libertarians know the definition of marriage, its history and overall impact on society.
You can't redefine something that is generations upon generations old. Your "equality" violates most contract laws.

swervin Maryland
10/28/14 10:50 pm

I'm republican. I still think that just because 2 people are the same gender that doesn't mean they shouldn't get the same privileges of 2 people of different genders. That is moronic.

gamerguy217
10/28/14 10:55 pm

TheCourt is correct in what he said about the definition of marriage. But I don't see the issue as any concern if mine. If a state wants to broaden how it recognizes that contract, it can. It shouldn't be forced to tho.

gamerguy217
10/28/14 10:57 pm

Same goes with religious institutions. Separation of church and state, so whether or not the state recognizes that shouldn't make a difference there.

swervin Maryland
10/28/14 10:58 pm

The states aren't being forced to, people are voting to allow it. That's how a democracy works. The problem is, some people hold to their "traditions" even at the expense of others.

gamerguy217
10/28/14 10:59 pm

And as for the this absurd notion that a gay couple can force a business to do business with them, it is that business's right to refuse service. They don't, and shouldn't have to serve everyone or anyone for that matter.

gamerguy217
10/28/14 11:00 pm

When the Feds force states to recognize it, yes they are forced to. I don't know where you're coming from saying that they aren't.

gamerguy217
10/28/14 11:02 pm

I understand that the constitution guarantees equal protection under the law as well, but unless that state has a law requiring them to recognize all marriage contracts (or a business has a policy requiring service to all), then there is...

gamerguy217
10/28/14 11:05 pm

....no law from which they are not being protected equally. Unless such policies are in place, then the matter should be up to the states to recognize, and service should be at the business's discretion.

TheeCourt Realville
10/28/14 11:11 pm

We are a Republic 1st, with democracy function 2nd. My state voted to ban same-sex marriage, yet our weak and feeble courts unconstitutionally overturned the people's votes.
Equal protection does not mean "equality"!

TheeCourt Realville
10/28/14 11:13 pm

The gay community, which is quite small but very loud, didn't do itself any favors, by bastardizing the sanctity of marriage. They weakened it as an institution and were tools for the most vile of Liberals goals: the destruction of religious Liberty.

TheeCourt Realville
10/28/14 11:16 pm

Much like most Liberal causes, this one wasn't thought all the way through. Now no one has a valid contract or sacred covenant of marriage, thanks to the shortsighted dim-witted moronic flailing of the overly sensitive & falsely entitled few.

gamerguy217
10/28/14 11:17 pm

^See this is what I mean. It never does any good forcing a group of people. All it does is breed resentment.

Unless said policies are in place, it has nothing to do with the federal constitution & should be a state issue.

swervin Maryland
10/28/14 11:25 pm

You are arguing 2 totally different points. I have no issue at all with business denying service to whoever they want. It's their money they are losing. If they want to be dumb and not serve gay people,those gay people will spend that money elsewhere

swervin Maryland
10/28/14 11:28 pm

And the "sanctity" of marriage was ruined along time ago. The divorce rate is 50%, that shit isn't a joke. Again, if your traditions are at the expense of people, they need to change. Why shouldn't 2 men be allowed the same tax advantages of

gamerguy217
10/28/14 11:28 pm

Exactly. And yeah, I know. But both points tend to come up, so I was covering both to begin with.

swervin Maryland
10/28/14 11:29 pm

1 man and 1 woman? Explain that to me and I could maybe see your point. Don't use the bible or any religious text as proof though.

gamerguy217
10/28/14 11:31 pm

And guys, the issue isn't "why shouldn't they..." Because it's an issue to be voted on by the states. Marriage isn't a constitutional right.

gamerguy217
10/28/14 11:32 pm

And I already addressed the equal protection clause & how it may or may not apply to a particular state.

gamerguy217
10/28/14 11:34 pm

So "the sanctity of marriage" and "but they should be able to" are both equally constitutionally irrelevant.

swervin Maryland
10/28/14 11:40 pm

Why are you talking about the constitution? I never said anything about that. It's like you are trying to argue with me using points the other guy made. Lol!

gamerguy217
10/28/14 11:44 pm

What other guy? theCourt is reading off republican morals. I'm saying that you guys can argue about it all you want, but it's something to be voted on.

And the legality of both sides has everything to do with the constitution.

swervin Maryland
10/28/14 11:46 pm

It is being voted on. Each state is voting on it and several have approved of same sex marriage.

gamerguy217
10/28/14 11:48 pm

And the federal government has forced the decision to legalize it on several states. Which is counterproductive. Only breeds resentment.

Other than that, we seem to agree.

gamerguy217
10/28/14 11:50 pm

Since I'm libertarian, of course I'm for same sex marriage. But I'm not for forcing approval of it in areas where it can't find a favorable vote locally.