Tag Archives: politics


Source (Though I wouldn’t stray for too long, blood may shoot out of your ears.) 

1.) Conservatives opposed the American Revolution

– Republicanism is deeply rooted in our history, going all the way back to ancient Greco-Roman times.  The ideals of Republicanism was based off of virtue and duty of a citizen to their republic.  It was these Republican ideals that helped light the whisk to the American Revolution.  With the growing tariffs being implemented on the colonies (taxation without representation), Britain appeared as more of a corrupt persevere overseer than as a guiding hand.  The true opposition to the Revolution were the Tories.  They came from all socioeconomic structures, but a large amount of them had a financial stake in the British maintaining their thumb in the new world’s pie.  Conservatives didn’t oppose the Revolution, but it was those who relied on GB to pay their salaries that primarily did; And who does that sound like? 

2.) Conservatives supported Slavery 

This is where the intellectual dishonesty is troubling in the Democrats.  They attempt to paint Lincoln as something he simply never was: A Democrat.  The Civil war was a war to end slavery, the secession of the south was fueled by Democrats who wanted to continue to twist the Constitution to fit their liberal interpretation.  That’s where these classifications come from, liberals have a loose interpretation of the constitution, hence why they’re liberal.  The same liberal interpretation that allowed them to have as their platform that POC’s were only 3/5ths of a man when compared to white men.  Conservatives held to the constitution that nothing and no one can take away a persons right to life, liberty, and their pursuit of happiness. 

3.) Conservatives opposed blacks and women voting 

The civil rights act of 1964 saw 82% and 80% of the Republican Senate, and House respectively, voting in favor of the right to vote for any and all.  

This is as opposed to a 69% and 63% ‘yay,’ vote (Senate/House) for what was a Democrat controlled Congress. 

If the Republicans were so against the right to enfranchisement for women and POC, then why did they vote more in favor of it than their liberal counterparts?

4.) Conservatives opposed Child Labor Laws

That’s insanely interesting considering that the very first mentioning of the Federal government stepping in to regulate child Labor was in 1924 by a Ohio congressmen by the name of Israel Moore Foster

Oh, did I mention he was a Republican…which was a part of a Republican controlled Congress…Which was ratified in all Republican states except for the Democratic South? 

The support for this amendment died out around 1938 when the Fair Labor Standard was passed with the tack on provision of ending child labor, though the main provision in it was to raise minimum wage

Kind of hard to oppose something you’re party not only introduced, but tried to pass a decade before.  Weird. 

5.) Republicans opposed the New Deal, Public Unions, Handout Programs.  

I’m tying in the next couple of claims made by our photo creator because they all stem from the same time period in which Roosevelt dragged the US economy through the mud.  It’s no surprise that the new deal is being heralded as possibly one of the worst things ever done…ever

Because it was, it sought the end of a deep depression, an admirable task, but the myriad of Keynesian economics to help off set the failing economy only put more of a burden on the working poor than it did to uplift them.  

The same goes for public unions, as the Detroit auto crisis has shown.  The inflated wages and pensions of the workers under the union broke the back of the auto sector.  The fact that the government bailed them out did not allow for the companies to settle their differences in Bankruptcy court.  Because of this, these companies were unable to renegotiate their contracts with UAW in order to mitigate the costs, the government had essentially paid the balance for them.  Furthermore, Public unions are the creator of every pension problem in this country, and will more than likely continue to be until that bubble bursts.  

The problems resides in the notion that it is forced tax payer dollars paying for it.  It’s a fancy way of wealth redistribution, and everyone’s involved.  

The Supreme Court originally passed rulings that had eventually led to the passing of several Federal standards for the employer-employee relationship.  These mandated programs were opposed because it had introduced a third party into what was originally an arms length relationship between employer and employee.  

Conservatives opposed these things because the government shouldn’t be in the business of regulating the private sector.  This was, at the time, an over reach of the governments power.  Before the ‘new deal,’ the government wasn’t a part of the private sector, they didn’t have any regulations because they were in two different worlds.  Conservatives sought to keep it that way, not because they sought to keep in place unfair labor laws, but because it was an issue for the employer-employee relationship; and the people were handling it just fine

Republicans didn’t want to expand the power of government, true to their conservative Republican values.  Certainly not after it was the roaring 20’s were our free market economy turned our nation into a production powerhouse and conservatives believed we could do it again. 

Mandated programs will always be opposed by Conservatives, because it comes out of your wallet.  All of these mandated programs are essentially coercion with no promise of the same benefits when we’re eligible for the same services.  If a guy asked to borrow five dollars, and promised to repay you forty years from now, would you really expect to seem him in 40 years? Neither would I. 

6.) Conservatives opposed the Affordable Care Act. 

Remember that this upcoming election when the glitz and glamour of Democrats can’t change what’s on the inside of an envelope holding your policy termination letter, or the broken website, or the hundreds of dollars of premiums, or the long emergency room lines, or your old doctor/hospital not covered under your plan.  

Remember, that Conservatives tried to keep your money in your pocket, as they always have and always will.  



Remember this all you easily fooled young women out there.  No one in the Republican Party, or any other party to my knowledge, is trying to restrict access to birth control.  It simply is not true.  However this doesn’t matter for complete liars, like Elizabeth Warren, who make absurd claims that Republicans (the women included mind you) are trying to do so.

There is no Republican “war on women.”  It is a completely bogus political catchphrase to coax women to vote Democrat.

Here’s the rest of Ted Cruz’s amazing speech about the Democrats assault on free speech:


A lot of people are asking: Why is the number of casualties lower in Israel than in Gaza? While Hamas hides behind Palestinian civilians, the IDF protects Israel. Share it.









Real Christians aren’t assholes

In High School I had a friend who was super religious, her whole family was. Despite this, she was pro-marriage equality, pro-choice, and never once tried to convert me or make me feel bad about my own religious decisions (I was and still am an agnostic). She was always kind, and treated everyone with respect, regardless of race, religion, or orientation. For her the heart and soul of being a Christian was to love others and treat others with dignity. She was a real Christian. 


Person you described is NOT a Christian. She may think she is, you may thing she is, but she isn’t. Not even close.

Okay, let’s step back for a second.

First, God welcomes anyone with open arms on one condition: drop your sin. Yes, drop it. If He could not look upon His perfect Son when Jesus took on the whole sin of the world, what makes you think that will happen with people? God is love, very true, but He cannot permit sin in His presence.

That being said, we all have sin. I must get rid of my sin and strive to live as God wants me. I’ll be the first to say I am not perfect and hate how I am never good enough for God. But He loves me anyway. He helps me get rid of all my baggage when I turn it over to Him. People must do the same thing and this includes sexual immorality.

Am I nice to everyone? Sure. Do I have to agree with what everyone says? Absolutely not. God is my provider, not the world. I don’t have to vote for legalizing gay marriage to be Christian. I have to treat everyone with love, but a loving father would do his dead level best to keep his children out of trouble and sin. You can hate me for my decisions but that doesn’t mean they are wrong. I pray for many people every day.

I’ll end with this final point: there are many Christians who treat others badly. I’ll call them out daily. But disagreeing is not treating you badly. I have known Christian gay people to know homosexuality is wrong and take a cow of celibacy. This shows that it isn’t of necessity Christians who keep homosexuals out of the church. And it isn’t of necessity Christians who oppose homosexuality either. May God bless you all.

Always support them. God is the one who judges. Hate the sin, but not the sinner.

Comic is misleading (on purpose), and person described in post is acting against the teaching of the Church.

Thats not a true christian sorry thats just how it is. I guess they can be nice to them but o would not think they couls ever be accepting of them.

As a Christian, this is something I must deal with on a daily basis. I live in Washington, for crying out loud, it’s liberal as hell out here… But I’ve worked with homosexuals, done business with homosexuals, and there’s a cool guy I talk to on this site who is also – you guessed it – homosexual. If any of the homosexuals I know would accept an invitation to the church where I go, I would be thrilled. I’m pro-life, both in the physical sense and the spiritual sense, and if I can lead people to the truth I am fulfilling my duty on Earth.

However, I’ve got to agree with whytestallion on this. My gay Christian friend (waterkid72) looks to Christ for his salvation, and our discussions have revealed some of the extensive research he’s done in an attempt to justify holding to his sexual orientation. Can’t say that I always agree, but we’ve found other things in common and now hold a mutual respect for one another. What does this mean? It means that Christians look at the Bible and try to understand what it says to them. All Christians should draw their beliefs from the Bible, for it holds all the answers to the world’s problems, one way or another. When you hold in your heart faith to the One who took all of mankind’s sins (moral, sexual, inherited, or otherwise) upon His shoulders and paid the ultimate price for our souls, why would you let the evil influences of this world dictate your thoughts and actions? 

My stance is is follows, and I believe it should be a core belief in the Christian community: Love your neighbor as yourself. Treat them as fellow fallen human beings, treat them as you would anyone else. Share your love for Christ with them, and if they also believe then encourage them down the righteous path as you would your other fellow Christians. 

That’s ultimately the interpersonal attitude we all should have. Since we are supposed to be the guiding light of the world until Christ’s return, however, Christians need to bring that perspective into the political arena. I oppose gay marriage, and seeing the American media put homosexuality up on a pedestal for all to see at every turn disgusts me. Biologically, humans are made for man-woman marriages. The Bible speaks about what is good, and it explicitly says that a man and a woman shall cleave one to another and become one – straight marriage. So here’s my worldly solution to balance the discussion: get the government out of marriage entirely. Personally I hate the thought of ‘marriage licenses’. I sure as hell don’t need any government’s permission to marry who I want. Marriage was ordained by God and not Man. Marriage tax breaks? Lower taxes across the board. Let the churches handle marriage, and if some congregations see fit to perform ‘marriages’ without God’s blessing… well, their loss. God will handle them as He sees fit. Perhaps this solution would relieve the tensions towards homosexuals.

Now, the Media is a whole different problem. But for now, I’m going to let it be. That’s a whole different post, theenwhitenment.

peterdwebb, what are your thoughts on this topic?





quick note: her name is mary yu, there’s a typo in the original caption.

As a Washingtonian, here’s what I don’t like:


This makes me think that there’s a high chance this lady was appointed to meet a quota. And I HATE quotas.

Personally, the only problem I have with her is the lesbianism. But that’s because it goes against my beliefs. It’s something I overlook on a daily basis because I’m a nice guy.

Overall, I don’t know anything about her besides what this post lays out. She’d better have a really solid background in law, she’d better be fair, not liberal, and worthy of her seat. If she is, then welcome aboard.

But if this is just to fill a damn quota, the liberals responsible need to pay for their stupidity.

So mixed feelings.