Difference between revisions of "Debate:Are there any conservatives left in the Republican Party?"
From Conservapedia
(The Republican Party has swung '''''very''''' liberal.... big spending, even tax increases (although subtle and targetted)) |
|||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
:I mean the science behind the theory, or whatever it is. You know what I mean. I'm not a liberal parodist. I find that really insulting. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 01:41, 24 January 2008 (EST) | :I mean the science behind the theory, or whatever it is. You know what I mean. I'm not a liberal parodist. I find that really insulting. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 01:41, 24 January 2008 (EST) | ||
::There is a ton of "science behind global warming", and even Richard Lindzon agrees with that statement. (StephenW you aren't a "conservative parodist" are you? Nobody likes to be called names.) It's rather ignorant to say otherwise. At any rate, politicians are not scientists, so Dan's right -- it doesn't matter if they actually know what's going on, that's the scientist's job. It matters what they will do or not do about it. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 11:30, 24 January 2008 (EST) | ::There is a ton of "science behind global warming", and even Richard Lindzon agrees with that statement. (StephenW you aren't a "conservative parodist" are you? Nobody likes to be called names.) It's rather ignorant to say otherwise. At any rate, politicians are not scientists, so Dan's right -- it doesn't matter if they actually know what's going on, that's the scientist's job. It matters what they will do or not do about it. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 11:30, 24 January 2008 (EST) | ||
| + | :The Republican Party has swung '''''very''''' liberal.... big spending, even tax increases (although subtle and targetted).... [[User:Pandeism|Pandeism]] 22:25, 14 March 2008 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 02:25, March 15, 2008
Are there any conservatives left in the republican party?
- I think a good litmus test for a conservative is whether or not they subscribe to global warming theories. Global warming is a liberal scheme to have government involvement in everything. Control energy usage, enslave the masses. Now that Fred Thompson has bowed out, I don't think we have any viable conservative candidates left in the Republican party. SW♠·♥·♣ 23:28, 23 January 2008 (EST)
- That's fallacious. Whether somebody personally believes the science behind global warming or not does not necessarily affect their political opinions per se, or even how they approach the issue of environmentalism. That being said, I'd say one of the most conservative Congressmen is Jeff Flake (R,AZ). DanH 23:45, 23 January 2008 (EST)
- I mean the science behind the theory, or whatever it is. You know what I mean. I'm not a liberal parodist. I find that really insulting. DanH 01:41, 24 January 2008 (EST)
- There is a ton of "science behind global warming", and even Richard Lindzon agrees with that statement. (StephenW you aren't a "conservative parodist" are you? Nobody likes to be called names.) It's rather ignorant to say otherwise. At any rate, politicians are not scientists, so Dan's right -- it doesn't matter if they actually know what's going on, that's the scientist's job. It matters what they will do or not do about it. HelpJazz 11:30, 24 January 2008 (EST)
- The Republican Party has swung very liberal.... big spending, even tax increases (although subtle and targetted).... Pandeism 22:25, 14 March 2008 (EDT)
