Mapleleaf, that's basically what I've been saying for a while, that the Republicans and Democrats are basically the same, and that we need true conservatives in power. Michele Bachmann, Ted Cruz, and Rand Paul come to mind.

@Mendax: Well that would explain why you are more socialist than anyone else on the forum.

I totally agree with the first part of your comment - the Republicans and Democrats are far too close on a huge number of issues. They're not the same - the Democrats are a lot better for women and the LGBT community - but in many ways they are both corporate parties that don't really care for the ideology that we're all told that they supposedly represent.

For the second comment, I am not sure that I am the most socialist (I don't even identify as such), but I am well used to being on the left of most people.

Here's who I side with. No true conservative my ass...
http://www.isidewith.com/results/284870646

It would work better, though, if the author knew what the debt ceiling meant or what probable cause was. And this test is quite flawed as well for example, here's what one of the questions was and what it says Libertarians and Republicans believe.

"Should children of illegal immigrants be granted citizenship?
You and Libertarians: Yes, if they were born here
Republicans' similar answer: No"

That's simply not true that Republicans believe children born in the United States to illegal immigrant parents should not be citizens. Some people may think that that, but it is very much a minority view. It's a gross misrepresentation of the Republican Party to claim it wants to get rid of birthright citizenship.


From the foreign policy section-

"Should the U.S. maintain a presence at the United Nations?
You, Democrats and Libertarians: Yes
Green Party's similar answer: Yes, and use the U.N. peacekeeping forces to protect U.S. interests"

Lower down on the website's list, it says the Republicans do not want to maintain a presence at the United Nations. What?!?! I have absolutely no idea where that's coming from. It's just not the case that the GOP wants to withdraw the United States from the United Nations.


Again, flawed methodology leads to flawed results. All of you should who picked to stay with the UN should have a higher level of agreement with the GOP than the tests says you do. Same with those who believe in birthright citizenship. I'm not going to go through all the questions, but this is a fairly fatal flaw.

Why can't we have "true" liberals in power then, Sbyvl? Because you don't like them? After all, there is no such thing as "true" (i.e extreme) conservatism without moderate conservatism, and there is no moderate conservatism without liberalism. The same goes for the whole spectrum. But you don't see that; you just think that everyone has the freedom to speak their mind, as is promised in the Constitution, unless they disagree with you of course.

Repost from earlier. I want Sybvl36 to address it.

" I have my quadrant as well, considering I don't believe Invictus to be a true conservative"

I'll have to watch my back at the next party purge, then. I suppose believing in limited government, individual liberty, free markets, low taxes, sound money, a robust national defense, God, and school vouchers isn't enough to be a True Conservative anymore. The fact that I voted for a Democrat as Champaign county coroner in 2008 (his opponent was a Green) must rule me out too, despite all the rest in my three elections being Republicans. It's people like you, Syblv36, who are doing real harm to the GOP.


And, just so we remember, this test [political compass] is deeply flawed to the point of being basically useless.

Let's start at the beginning:

Limited Government (Do you want to abolish Social security, Medicare, Medicaid?)
Individual Liberty (Are you Pro-Life?)
Free Markets (Would you abolish all government regulations on business?)
Low Taxes (How about ZERO federal taxes, and instead have tariffs?)
Sound Money (Gold Standard, I presume?)
Robust National Defense (Good)
God (Good)
School vouchers (Good)

Answer my questions correctly and I'll accept you as a true Conservative.

Tubes now, no linger yokels? Glad to see you joined the 20th century with your insults. I believe tubes was popular in the 20s, right? You'll be telling us to "sit on it" before long.

I'm glad I've had exposure to intelligent Canadians. I feel sorry forbthose who have you as their only example.

That's not what limited government is. And no.
That's not what individual liberty is. And yes.
That's not what free markets are. And no.
That's not what low taxes are. And no.
That's not what sound money is. And no.
Guess we have the other three, though.

By your gold standard and zero tax criteria alone, there are no conservative politicians. Nutjob.

Wow that got all fucked up. I didn't realize there was a tenth page, so I was responding to mapleduches post on the ninth, then I had some Autocorrects. I'll just start over ...

@maple
Rubes now, no longer yokels? Glad to see you joined the 20th century with your insults. I believe rubes was popular in the 20s, right? You'll be telling us to "sit on it" before long.

I'm glad I've had exposure to intelligent Canadians. I feel sorry for those who have you as their only example.

That is what sound money was when Coolidge was around. Gotta give him props for living in the 1920s, that's actually quite a bit more modern than I thought he was.

One last question, invictus: Do you believe in a strict interpretation of the Constitution, specifically Article One Section Eight and the Tenth Amendment?

According to Sbyvl, there are only three true conservatives in Congress, so its no surprise that Invictus is not a "true" conservative.

I have to back up Invictus here. Sbyvl, you might think you want to turn the clock back to 1880, or whatever, but it is a denial of reality to think that such a program is realistic in 2013. Denying reality is insanity.

"Politics is the art of the possible." -- Otto von Bismarck

It's not about turning back the clock. The economy would be better, and the government would make more money, if we reverted to the tariff system of before Woodrow Wilson.

"Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies."

-Groucho Marx

"Individual Liberty (Are you Pro-Life?)"

Erm... what? Are you suggesting that pro-life, is pro-liberty? Because that is a very strange argument.

For those not affecting a deep knowledge of the Constitution, here's what Sbyvl36 is referring to

Article 1 Section 8
http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_A1Sec8.html

Tenth Amendment
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.


I don't understand the question,though. I would say I schizophrenically shift between originalism and textualism when it comes to constitutional interpretation. So I guess that's "strict." However, since we live in a common law system the weight of precedent has real importance as well. But I really don't know what you're trying to ask.

Liberty for everyone, including the unborn.

I think you are mistaking Life, for Liberty Sbyvl. You'll not the US constitution distinguishes between the two.

What I'm asking is, are you willing to follow exactly what the Constitution says?

Article One Section Eight lays out exactly what the government is allowed to do, and the Tenth Amendment gives everything else back to the states. Do you agree with that, is what I am asking.

"The economy would be better, and the government would make more money, if we reverted to the tariff system of before Woodrow Wilson."

That would be an unparallelled economic disaster. Worldwide. You believe in fairytale economics.


I guess you're unaware of how solidly left-wing Groucho Marx was. Otherwise you'd never dream of quoting him.

I agree with that, but not in the simplistic way I have a feeling you do.

Invictus, why bother defending yourself to this guy? Sbyvl is the outlier here on the conservative spectrum, not you.

It wasn't a disaster when it was tried.

And I am aware of that, but that quote was the perfect thing to counter what you said.

@2WL Invictus isn't a Conservative, he's a moderate.

Possibly the nicest thing anyone's ever said to me on the forum, 2ndWhiteLine.


"It wasn't a disaster when it was tried."

A lot of things worked fine 100 years ago but wouldn't work now.

"Invictus isn't a Conservative, he's a moderate."

You're not a conservative, you're just insane.

Such as?