Political Views

AntrelAntrel Join Date: 2005-02-11 Member: 40737Members
<div class="IPBDescription">Iraq, Conservative Politics, Immigration</div> I'm just curious. I've read quite a few political discussion threads and can't really determine if the majority are moderates or conservative. I haven't noticed very many 'liberals.' I was just interested in some reflection on common topics that are very real in America today.

How do you feel about Iraq? Was it right to go there? Should Bush be held responsible for relying on dated and circumstancial intelligence? Or will the supposedly humanitarian outcome outweigh that negative? Should we remain there much longer? Do you feel Iraq will slip into a theocracy eventually (something Saddam managed to avoid, like it or not)?

And as far as conservative politics are: Do you believe the U.S. should move towards more socialist reform? Or do you believe that Reagan's way was the right way? Do you believe that, in spite of the 1st Amendment, it should be illegal for homosexuals to be legally married? Should 'God' be thrown out of politics in all? Should Affirmative Action be withdrawn completely?

And finally, what should come of immigration? Should leniency be expressed, or is a crackdown long overdue? Do you believe that illegal immigration has had more of a positive effect on America's economy than a negative one? Do you support any kind of amnesty plan?

Answer one or as many as you'd like. Just make sure you're coherent and have atleast done one bit of research. If you're going to make outrageous claims, support them with data.

Comments

  • theclamtheclam Join Date: 2004-08-01 Member: 30290Members
    <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->How do you feel about Iraq? Was it right to go there? Should Bush be held responsible for relying on dated and circumstancial intelligence? Or will the supposedly humanitarian outcome outweigh that negative? Should we remain there much longer? Do you feel Iraq will slip into a theocracy eventually (something Saddam managed to avoid, like it or not)?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    I feel that we were lied to about Iraq. First the justification was that there were Al-Qaeda connections, which was false. Second, they said there were WMDs, which was also false. Finally, we were told that we needed to liberate Iraqis from an oppressive dictatorship. I don't know if that is our duty, or not. I don't think it is.

    I find it ironic that we've killed more Iraqi civilians, than there were dead Americans on 9/11. I find it depressing that Iraqis are worse off today, then they were during Sadam, with the sole exception of political freedoms. We need to get out of Iraq ASAP. Our troops are just causing strife, in Iraq, and among radical Muslims worldwide. As soon as the Iraqi troops are trained, we should leave immediately. I think Iraq stands a good chance of slipping into theocracy, but I wouldn't bet on anything, at this point.

    <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->And as far as conservative politics are: Do you believe the U.S. should move towards more socialist reform? Or do you believe that Reagan's way was the right way? Do you believe that, in spite of the 1st Amendment, it should be illegal for homosexuals to be legally married? Should 'God' be thrown out of politics in all? Should Affirmative Action be withdrawn completely?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    What do you mean by socialist reform? Do you mean reform against socialism, or reform towards socialism? Frankly, I think that certain socialist institutions are necessary, especially public education, Social Security, and public healthcare. I don't know enough about Reagan's politics to go one way or the other, in my opinions about him, but I haven't heard anything of his that I've liked. I don't see what the 1st amendment has to do with **** marriage, but I think that **** people should enjoy the exact same marital rights that straight people enjoy. Frankly, I would say that the best solution would be for the government to stop granting marriages, only grant civil unions (with the same privileges as marriages have) and allow religious institutions to marry people as they see fit. I think God should be removed from politics entirely and I bristle every time that I hear God mentioned by an elected official. I think Affirmative Action is wrong, it causes more problems than it solves, and it is unecessary. If any Affirmative Action-type program should be installed (which I don't think should happen, I prefer different ways of reducing disparity), then it should be based upon income, not race. Blacks aren't poorer than whites because they are black, but because their ancestors were poor. It has nothing to do with racism, any more.

    <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->And finally, what should come of immigration? Should leniency be expressed, or is a crackdown long overdue? Do you believe that illegal immigration has had more of a positive effect on America's economy than a negative one? Do you support any kind of amnesty plan?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    I think we should be more lenient about who we let in, but be stricter against people who come in illegally. Whatever we do, there will still be people who immigrate here. America used to be a refuge for people suffering from oppressive regimes or inhuman living conditions. It would be nice if we could have that role again.

    I have no party affiliations. I am more likely to vote for Democrats than Republicans, but I don't especially like democrats. If you have to classify me in some way, then I would be a member of the libertarian left.
  • reasareasa Join Date: 2002-11-10 Member: 8010Members, Constellation
    <!--QuoteBegin-Antrel+Feb 24 2005, 06:37 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Antrel @ Feb 24 2005, 06:37 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> How do you feel about Iraq? Was it right to go there? Should Bush be held responsible for relying on dated and circumstancial intelligence? Or will the supposedly humanitarian outcome outweigh that negative? Should we remain there much longer? Do you feel Iraq will slip into a theocracy eventually (something Saddam managed to avoid, like it or not)?

    <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
    I feel it was right to go into Iraq, as you well know <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->.
    As for the WMD/faulty intelligence, I would have supported an invasion of Iraq with or without it. I believe Saddam was a threat, now and most especially in the future when his sons would have taken control. I personally think we should have taken care of him in 1991, he was our mess and we owed it to the people of Iraq, and the entire Middle East, to remove him.
    We should remain there as long as is necessary, I can't stand the people who literally demand we bring the troops home now, for what? So all those who have given their lives would have died for nothing as Iraq collapses around the fledging Iraqi forces? Recent events in Europe have given me hope that we will be able to pull out sooner then before, but again I stress leaving before the time is right would be far worse then staying the course. Iraq will slip into what ever kind of government the Iraqi people want, as it should be. But I have a strong feeling they will be a good strong democracy in the future; the elections have proven how the people thirst for freedom.

    <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->And as far as conservative politics are: Do you believe the U.S. should move towards more socialist reform? Or do you believe that Reagan's way was the right way? Do you believe that, in spite of the 1st Amendment, it should be illegal for homosexuals to be legally married? Should 'God' be thrown out of politics in all? Should Affirmative Action be withdrawn completely?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->

    Reagan's way.

    Now when it comes to religion this is where I conflict with the conventional conservative doctrine. I have put a lot of thought into the subject of **** marriage lately, although I avoided those homosexual topics as of late. I believe that if we are to be a country that preaches equality and equal rights we can not have such blatant hypocrisy taking place within our own borders. I no longer think the problem is the homosexuals, I think it is the mixed connotations about marriage that is the problem. *** want to have all the legal benefits of a married couple but unfortunately those legal rights are also tangled up in religion due to marriage being a sacrament. I think the best solution is to remove religion from the idea of marriage entirely. I won't elaborate on this any more as I have much more to address, but if anyone wishes to take me up on this they should take a trip to Vegas and see just how religious marriage has become. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->

    Affirmative action should be abolished, destroyed, burned, and buried, then never spoken of again. It does nothing but cause trouble and raises suspicion. Ironic that a system meant to speared equality is a major source of unfairness and resentment. Get rid of it.

    Welfare needs much tighter restrictions. I do not want it removed entirely, it serves its place in society, but abuse is far, far to rampant. People should not be able to literally "live" off welfare, live off working Americans tax dollars, because they are too lazy/ worthless to get a job.

    <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->And finally, what should come of immigration? Should leniency be expressed, or is a crackdown long overdue? Do you believe that illegal immigration has had more of a positive effect on America's economy than a negative one? Do you support any kind of amnesty plan?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->

    This is one of the things I am very adamant about and I can tell you if Kerry would have said the words "shut down the Mexican border" I would have voted for him in a heartbeat. I fully believe this problem if left ignored could be the major factor to the demise of our country. Millions of unskilled, uneducated, non-English speaking illegal aliens flooding across a meagerly defended border more and more every year; I blame two parties, the Mexican government, and certain American corporations. Mexico seems to think the solutions to all its problems lie in America, as if we could just absorb their entire populous overnight and not collapse under the burden. Mexicans come across the border; use our public systems, hospitals, welfare, police and fire departments. They aid the economy by providing cheap labor for greedy companies and "opportunists". They harm the economy and the country by eagerly fulfilling the agendas of said companies who will never charge minimum wage so Americans can make a living off those jobs. "Jobs we don't want"...heh jobs we can't have because the money they get paid is only enough to buy food in Mexico. They don't pay any taxes and send back/ spend the money they make in Mexico, that’s so much money right out of our system every year.
    That’s just the economic problems, our open border is also a national security risk, and terrorists know how open our borders are and will take full advantage of them. Heck they shouldn't have much trouble recruiting poor Mexicans from the slums, they may make their money here but I doubt their loyalties lie with America.

    The other part of this deadly duet are the companies that aid these aliens, provide them with jobs and pay them next to nothing so no American could ever fill the position. They are the Brutus of America, worse then the companies that send their jobs overseas, while they just take jobs away; these companies bring an entirely new problem right onto our door steps.

    For more information I suggest you read an excellent cover story done by TIME a while back, it highlights the problem very well.
    <a href='http://www.time.com/time/covers/1101040920/' target='_blank'>http://www.time.com/time/covers/1101040920/</a>

    My solution is simple, shut down the border, entirely, except for the main roads for travel and trade. Use the National Guard troops from the border states to patrol the borders, combined with Border Patrol, police from border towns, and civilian watch groups. Immediately deport all illegals back to Mexico, do not arrest them, this wastes time and resources. Penalize all companies found to be hiring illegal aliens to the harshest extent of the law and deport all the workers back to Mexico. Force the company to ether pay minimum wage or shut down. It's clear that something needs to be done, if the government will not act, the people well start to. <a href='http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/02/21/border.minutemen.ap/' target='_blank'>http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/02/21/border.minutemen.ap/</a>
  • SnidelySnidely Join Date: 2003-02-04 Member: 13098Members
    edited February 2005
    Welcome to the discussion forums, by the way.
    -----
    As far as Iraq goes: I resent the attempt at making WMDs look like a threat. I can't speak about Dubya, beacuase I'm from the UK and I don't know the full scoop there, but Blair did a terrible job. The 45 minute claim and the "dossier" made up of cribbed essays rather than intelligence didn't convince me that Saddamm had WMDs. I also hate it when people directly connect 9/11 and Iraq together. The only connection AFAIK is that 9/11 caused America to adopt a more energetic foreign policy.

    Having said that...I think that leaving would do more harm than good, and I'm not sorry that Saddam's gone. If we can make it a better place than it is now, then we're obliged to, having invaded and all.
  • SpacerSpacer Invented dogs Join Date: 2003-05-02 Member: 16008Members
    I think it's pretty important that religion be removed from the system of government entirely, due to the fact that America/the UK are countries where people of multiple religions live, thus meaning that if a government is mostly christian dominated, there will be bias against hindus or muslims, for example.
  • SnidelySnidely Join Date: 2003-02-04 Member: 13098Members
    edited February 2005
    I don't believe that. The Government wants as many votes in possible. The Christian vote doesn't make a huge impact like it seems to in the USA.

    Do you have any examples of this behaviour in the UK?
  • SpacerSpacer Invented dogs Join Date: 2003-05-02 Member: 16008Members
    Not really, but it'd be rather a double standard if we deemed it nessesary for a fair government without doing it ourselves.
  • TommyVercettiTommyVercetti Join Date: 2003-02-10 Member: 13390Members, Constellation, Reinforced - Shadow
    edited February 2005
    I believe invading Iraq was wrong, simply because of the sheer number of casualties. The time to have invaded Iraq was during the First Gulf War, before Saddam was able to quell the rebels. After that, Iraq had restabilized and there were no rebels to aid. It was fairly obvious that Saddam had no WMDs, and even if he did that North Korea constituted a clear and present danger whereas Iraq didn't. Also, there's that little issue of blatantly lying to the American public. I'm still amazed so many accepted that fact.

    I believe that now that the US is involved with Iraq it should stay there until the country can defend itself from threats, both from external forces (Iran) and those within. I can't say whether it will become a theocracy, but that seems to be the trend among Middle Eastern nations. Tens of thousands (or even more) have died, don't make their deaths pointless. Make Iraq a democracy.

    Socialist reform.

    I agree completely with theclam on the issues of both homosexual union and affirmative action.

    On immigration, I believe that the border should have better defenses, that anyone attempting to sneak into the country should be deported, those who are already here should be penalized but possibly given citizenship (pay those taxes!), and that it should be easier to come to the US. Oh yea, and like Reasa said, businesses employing illegal immigrants should be punished severely.

    My ideal form of government would be a Socialist Republic.
  • SkySky Join Date: 2004-04-23 Member: 28131Members
    edited February 2005
    I'm confused how positions on the war in Iraq relate to our linear (and very restrictive) definitions of liberal, conservative, moderate, Republican, Democrat, etc.
  • theclamtheclam Join Date: 2004-08-01 Member: 30290Members
    <!--QuoteBegin-Sky+Feb 25 2005, 02:57 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Sky @ Feb 25 2005, 02:57 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I'm confused how positions on the war in Iraq relate to our linear (and very restrictive) definitions of liberal, conservative, moderate, Republican, Democrat, etc. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
    I don't think that Conservative/Republican = Pro-war, or that Liberal/Democrat = Anti-war, necessarily.

    It's a single issue, which rarely makes or breaks your party affiliations. The exception is the neocons, who are generally very liberal in domestic policy, but have a very aggressive foreign policy.
Sign In or Register to comment.