Well, I think it does take a lot to overthrow this country. But you make a point that has substance. There are so many parallels between the United States and the Roman Empire that is is eery. I don't maintain that the US will last forever or that it is not subject to deline and fall. But I think we are far from the kind of decay that led to the fall of Rome. And I think it would take a lot more than these isolated groups of ragheads to do it. That is part of my worry. Rome fell when the whole world turned against it and it had no friends in its time of need. If this fight with the islamic terrorists sours the world against us, it puts us on the path of the romans. But right now, the United States has the biggest economy in the world, unparalled technological superiority, the stongest military, and the most stable democracy ever seen on the planet. For all our problems, our current enemies are woefully ill-equipped to cause our collapse.
to defeat the US you would have to be rich. to be as rich as us you would have to be a free market capitalist democracy. if you were a free market capitalist democracy, it would be exceedingly unlikely you would want to defeat the US. the US isnt going anywhere for a long, long time.
It is important to make the distinction between conquering the US and destroying the US as we now know it. It is highly unlikely that any nation would ever be able to successfully invade this country and take over. America, as it is today, could very well be destroyed from within if liberals are allowed to take over and exert the will of the minority upon us. Each victory by the ACLU leads us one step closer to socialism, which is what the liberal faction of America represents. Also, look at the "Muslimization" of Europe and how it is affecting life in various nations there. Those nations are gradually being taken over from within by the Muslim religion. So, while we are quite a bit away from the possibility of being "conquered", we aren't all that far from losing the America we have today.
You have to explain this one. There have always been liberals and conservatives and the balance between them is what makes America successful. The curve changes between left and right from time to time but, on the average, it tends make the country moderate, as is proper. The notion that "liberals" are trying to "take over" is pretty paranoid and far more narrow-minded than I've come to expect from you. A country that goes too far to the right is in trouble, too. Fascism has proven to be much more dangerous than socialism. Look what happened when Germany lost it's liberal voice in the 1930's. Balance is what is important. The closeness of this election and the last proves that there isn't a "liberal minority". Neither candidate, if he wins, will have a mandate from the people to radically move the country to the left or right. What we need is a balanced political party, a balanced candidate, and balanced policies, . . . but none exist. Only extremists from both sides. This polarization is hurting America. We need our conservatives and our liberals, but most of America in is the center and by George, we need a moderate government that will utilize the best approaches of both camps to be most effective and represent the will of the people properly. The ACLU promotes civil liberties, not socialism. There is a big difference. I don't agree with many of the ACLU's positions either, but I can recognize them for what they are. Liberty does not lead to socialism, and indeed it is essential for democracy. Advocates for liberty are only a threat to those who desire more authoritarian government.
we do not need a moderate government. we need a government far far to the right of the current government on economic freedom issues (lower taxes, smaller government), and far far to the left (legal drugs, sex, gambling, everything) on social issues. we dont need moderates. we need libertarians.
No, neither candidate will have a mandate to go left or right, but the middle isn't what it used to be and is gradually shifting further and further left. As for the closeness of the election, in past elections the DNC would have never thought about offering up a candidate as liberal as Kerry with any thoughts of winning. But, with so much of a resentment of Bush, I guess the liberals think it's their time to sneak one in. Bush gets labeled as far right, why I don't know. Is it because he is openly willing to talk about God, or is it because of the war in Iraq? He wasn't right wing when he was elected, when did he become such a fanatic? Kerry has a 20 year history to back up his label. His healthcare plan to include 300% of the poverty level is a prime example of the push to institute socialized medicine in this country. Why is there such a polarization? The ACLU is largely to blame. I have no problem with them representing the rights of the minority, their rights should be protected. But when the rights of the minority infringe on the rights of the majority, there is a problem. Court ruling such as ones to remove crosses from town seals against the will of the majority of citizens are tearing small towns apart, and instances like these are where the polarization is coming from. Trust me Red, I am not way right, even though you may think I appear to be. Like I said earlier, the middle just ain't where it used to be. We are sliding further and further toward the leftist liberal way of thinking in this country. If you don't believe me, turn on your television and see for yourself. The liberals are gradually getting their way because they are the ones who scream the loudest.
Libertarians ARE considered to be right-leaning moderates by many. Progressives are left-leaning moderates. Centrists are balanced moderates. Try this quick test: Worlds Smallest Political Quiz According to their responses most of us are libertarians. My results:
On TV yes, and probably Hollywood, too. But the right owns talk radio and the bookstore best-sellers. It all evens out.
Are more children and teenagers' minds shaped and opinions formed by watching TV and following Hollywood or by listening to talk radio and reading bookstore best-sellers? Television (Hollywood and mainstream radio included) reach a much wider audience, particularly easier influenced younger minds than talk radio and books. You have to search out right leaning radio and literature. When you buy a book by Limbaugh or tune in to Michael Savage, you are doing so because that is what you are looking for. Liberalism is often thrown at people without them realizing it. A 15 year old who watches some of the crap on MTV isn't necessarliy looking for liberalism, but that's what they are getting, and that's how their mind is being molded. Don't believe me, go to the mall sometimes and watch and listen. (And yes, I know I sound like an old fart)
i mean real libertarians, not moderates. legal drugs. taxes cut by huge amounts. legal prostitution. no social programs. anything less than the dot all the way on the corner of your graph is unacceptable. people who call libertarians "right leaning moderates" are morons.
