Let me start by saying that I've been a conservative and Republican my entire adult life, but lately I have been finding myself veering away from the Grand Old Party. Conservativism is, or at least was, based on the principle of a small government that provides people with both personal and economic freedoms. Unfortunately now being a conservative seemingly means that you you want a big and powerful government, just like the liberals want. Initially I supported the status quo, keeping everything the way it has been, since while the world most certainly isn't perfect, it's still around and America is still the best and most powerful hegemony in the world. Being a conservative has always meant that you disagree with the liberals, but now you're not only supposed to disagree with them, but you're supposed to hate them, harass them, and blame everything that ever goes wrong on them. These new leaders of conservativism such as Sarah Palin, they don't represent what I believe in. I have some very differing political beliefs, incorporating ideas from both parties. For instance, I support gun ownership, abortion, animal rights, stem cell research, eugenics, genetics, Jonathanland independence, LGBT rights, prostitution, marijuana legalization, human cloning, womens' rights, teen rights, space exploration, energy conservation, environmental protection, Americanization, globalization, sexual freedoms, NATO, pro-Israel, pro-South Korea, lowering the age of consent to 13, and lowering the drinking age to 18. However I'm opposed to illegal immigration, censorship, government surveillance, recognition of the Palestinian Territories, terrorism, school uniforms, slavery, unethical business practices, creating an unfriendly environment for businesses, pork barrel projects, rewriting the US Constitution, Muslims who want special treatment, Westboro not-Baptist Church, and the death penalty. I'm mixed on issues such as the War on Terrorism, massive military spending, socialized healthcare, NAFTA, ban of fully automatic weapons, and socialized education. So I really just don't know where I stand anymore and am changing my political lean to independent.
They don't represent true conservatism either. The Tea Party is less about being a conservative and more about being what I would call a "jackass".
Independent is a healthy place to be. It forces you to think about the specific issues and specific candidates.
I had always been confused on the whole "Republicans want less government", "Democrats want more government" thing becuase my views were looking at it from the wrong angle. Republicans want less government, mostly, in terms of your financial life and how much the government taxes you and takes that tax money to fund various services and programs. But they want "more" government in the way of controlling your way of life, i.e. being against receational drug use, abortion and same-sex marriage. In otherwords they're "less government in my wallet, more government in my pants!" Democrats, on the otherhand, want more government in terms of taking taxes and using that tax money to give people, society, a better life. And, naturally, since they have more to give most of that tax revenue comes from the rich to fund programs that help the poorer or middle class. I'm okay with that and, sure, I say that as a middle-class person but I'd still be okay with it if I was rich. If I got the money to give and make lives better that's great. But the thinking of some rich is that they worked for their money and to-hell with using any of it to help less-fortuante people in any meaningful way; and giving 5% of your income to a charity that provides collected can-goods and day-old bread to poor people isn't exactly helping people in the greatest of ways. Democrats also, on the whole, want people to have the freedom to make choices, live their lives as they want to see fit. Smoke pot, gamble, sleep with hookers, have abortions just try and be a bit responsible about all of it. Democrats want more government in your wallet and less government in your pants. I prefer the latter over the former, I well paid but I can also afford to pay a few extra dollars of taxes every month to ensure some people getting friggin' health care. Republicans this past year fought STRONGLY against a 3% tax raise to the wealthiest of Americans, I would think for someone making over 250K a 3% raise wouldn't be too hard of a hit, at least it shouldn't be if you're living responsibly. I'm do not advocate "punishing the rich" for being sucessful through taxing them greatly it's just that they can better "afford" to lose the money. A person making 30,000 a year paying 10% of his wages out to taxes now makes 27,000 a year an impact that could make a person's life difficult. A person making 250,000 a year now makes 225,000 a year which should still be a sufficent living. But some act like that'd be an enormous hardship on rich people and it's not fair that that poorer person needs more of their money to subsist.
GOP are really weird and I can understand why they would put off so many people, from the outside they look like wacko's. * Bang on about the budget but demand Bush Tax Cuts for people earning over $250,000k despite the fact it would plug a MASSIVE gap in the budget deficit * They seem to want such a small government, would do they plan on doing for 4 or 8 year terms...just sit there * They are so paranoid over public options replacing Private ones * They seem to want to throw out state superceeds Chruch * Bang on about personal freedoms but seem to curtail it at every point. * There so ANTI teacher am surprised they don't start knocking down schools * There sance on welfare, gay rights and UHC is nothing short of seemingly being just mean mean evil spirited bastards I could go on...
I really dont know if I should take this seriously...you support the age of consent at 13?? Wow there's a dangerous way to go right there. RAMA
Spain's age of consent is 13. Japan's is 13. In Italy and Austria it's 14. These are developed, civilized nations. They don't seem to be on the brink of annihilation or the end of their society. I'm not saying I'm in agreement with those ages, but it's hardly worth disregarding an idea out of hand simply because of the age itself in relation to other developed nations.
That's not even true of most of the Tea Party. There are indeed some loudmouthed jackasses who get a lot of coverage for BEING loudmouthed jackasses, but that is not representative of all who want the government to butt out of their lives. Nor does being conservative mean hating those with whom you disagree. Let me be blunt: that is happening on BOTH sides of the aisle. The hatred, the disdain, and so forth is blatantly obvious. Why do you think so many debate threads here degenerate into vitriol and ridicule? Let me tell you, if only one side was doing it, it would come to a stop FAST. The only reason it goes on is because both sides keep shooting back. Nobody gets a free pass!
^ Exactly. Just because some people in the Tea Party act like jackasses (the people holding signs showing Obama as Hitler really come to mind) doesn't mean that all of us in the Tea Party are like that. Conversely, just because some liberals act like jackasses (Chris Matthews and Rachel Maddow really come to mind), I don't think all liberals are like that. If you want a good idea of where I stand politically, watch some of these videos.... http://www.youtube.com/user/southernavenger?blend=1&ob=4 I agree with just about everything this guy says.
It sounds like you're equating conservatism with being a republican. Those two things are not the same... and their similarities have have dwindled in recent decades.
Sounds to me that you're not changing anything, but that you already are a "liberal" and that you should look more carefully at what the politicians you vote for actually stand for instead of just looking at party id. Most of your positions there are mainstream leftist by US standards, some even further left.
Republicans favor smaller government not because they view it as intrusive, but because they view it as competition. Conservatives generally believe in a strong social order based on the family, religion, tradition, etc. Government has a habit of superseding these institutions via laws and that is what Conservatives oppose. They are not necessarily pro-freedom and individuality the way libertarians are. The best example of this is a group like the Amish who are strongly opposed to any government intrusion into their lives, but at the same time have a very rigid social order. Also I think you'll find many democrats who are just as strong moral crusaders as we think Republicans are. You'll probably find more pro-pot and hookers folks on the right than than left and I am not just talking libertarians. Liberals are often staunch moralists because they believe in the use of social engineering to create a better society.
Conservatives believe in whatever their rich masters tell them to. Liberals believe whatever that butterfly just told them.
Until 2008, I had voted Republican out of sheer momentum. I had fallen under the spell of Reagan as a youth, and had just kept pushing that "R" button because I thought that's what was right. Towards the end of W.'s presidency, I started examining myself and my beliefs (not to mention critically examining the things coming out of places like Fox news). Like the OP, I had long held a lot of views that were very left-leaning and I just hadn't realized it. I began to seriously look at the Democratic way of thinking, and realized I had felt that way about a lot of things for a long time, but hadn't thought about what they meant to me (such as, during the Clinton years, I had thought the sexual impropriety impeachment was silly, looking back I see it for the hypocritical witchhunt that it truly was). I think a lot of the country is like this. Maybe not as far left as I am, but certainly more towards center than they think they are. And my biggest issue with the Tea Party is spelled out in that list that goes around the internet starting with "You didn't get mad when..." (such as "when the Supreme Court handed W. the election on a silver platter with a sprig of parsley on the side). They were way too quiet for 8 years of government abuses, and then a brown skinned fella who wants to give people health care is all of a sudden a threat to America? Yeah...no.
Why do you bring race into this? This is exactly what I meant about unnecessary vitriol and personal attacks, and both sides being guilty of it. I don't give a damn what someone looks like; I only give a damn about their policies. If you were to see my voting record, it would speak for itself in that regard. I don't care about the color of a candidate's skin as long as they are in favor of the government butting out of my life. Most people are the same on both sides of the aisle--and frankly, it looks like an attempt to demonize those one disagrees with to try to paint them as racists, rather than a coherent argument on policy.