- This topic has 125 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 5 months ago by (former)FormerSanDiegan.
-
AuthorPosts
-
June 5, 2008 at 8:08 PM #218110June 5, 2008 at 8:49 PM #217963anParticipant
You refer to Obama as black, but guess what, he’s mixed. You’re denying/rejecting 1/2 of his ethnicity, so who’s the racist here. I’m not the one who brought up racism, just trying to point out how silly it is to put a label on someone with mixed background. You still didn’t answer my question about what label would you put on a 1/2 Black 1/2 Asian person, born in America. We’re in America, not Asia. Since America is a melting pot, can’t we just call mixed people American instead of trying to find a label for them?
June 5, 2008 at 8:49 PM #218051anParticipantYou refer to Obama as black, but guess what, he’s mixed. You’re denying/rejecting 1/2 of his ethnicity, so who’s the racist here. I’m not the one who brought up racism, just trying to point out how silly it is to put a label on someone with mixed background. You still didn’t answer my question about what label would you put on a 1/2 Black 1/2 Asian person, born in America. We’re in America, not Asia. Since America is a melting pot, can’t we just call mixed people American instead of trying to find a label for them?
June 5, 2008 at 8:49 PM #218075anParticipantYou refer to Obama as black, but guess what, he’s mixed. You’re denying/rejecting 1/2 of his ethnicity, so who’s the racist here. I’m not the one who brought up racism, just trying to point out how silly it is to put a label on someone with mixed background. You still didn’t answer my question about what label would you put on a 1/2 Black 1/2 Asian person, born in America. We’re in America, not Asia. Since America is a melting pot, can’t we just call mixed people American instead of trying to find a label for them?
June 5, 2008 at 8:49 PM #218103anParticipantYou refer to Obama as black, but guess what, he’s mixed. You’re denying/rejecting 1/2 of his ethnicity, so who’s the racist here. I’m not the one who brought up racism, just trying to point out how silly it is to put a label on someone with mixed background. You still didn’t answer my question about what label would you put on a 1/2 Black 1/2 Asian person, born in America. We’re in America, not Asia. Since America is a melting pot, can’t we just call mixed people American instead of trying to find a label for them?
June 5, 2008 at 8:49 PM #218125anParticipantYou refer to Obama as black, but guess what, he’s mixed. You’re denying/rejecting 1/2 of his ethnicity, so who’s the racist here. I’m not the one who brought up racism, just trying to point out how silly it is to put a label on someone with mixed background. You still didn’t answer my question about what label would you put on a 1/2 Black 1/2 Asian person, born in America. We’re in America, not Asia. Since America is a melting pot, can’t we just call mixed people American instead of trying to find a label for them?
June 5, 2008 at 8:56 PM #217973zkParticipantUnfortunately the two parties are socially/fiscally liberal and socially/fiscally conservative
I also consider myself fiscally conservative/socially liberal. But I don’t consider the republican party socially/fiscally conservative. The republican party has become socially conservative/fiscally liberal. Beyond liberal. Fiscally irresponsible. The democrats are also too liberal fiscally.
It absolutely boggles my mind that the socially liberal/fiscally conservative libertarian party isn’t a major party. It would make total sense and would a much better balance.
I totally agree. The actual real life libertarian party goes to far, I think, in its fiscal conservativeness and its social liberalness. Maybe that’s why it isn’t a major party. I think a more middle of the road, fiscally conservative/socially liberal party is a party whose time has come.
June 5, 2008 at 8:56 PM #218061zkParticipantUnfortunately the two parties are socially/fiscally liberal and socially/fiscally conservative
I also consider myself fiscally conservative/socially liberal. But I don’t consider the republican party socially/fiscally conservative. The republican party has become socially conservative/fiscally liberal. Beyond liberal. Fiscally irresponsible. The democrats are also too liberal fiscally.
It absolutely boggles my mind that the socially liberal/fiscally conservative libertarian party isn’t a major party. It would make total sense and would a much better balance.
I totally agree. The actual real life libertarian party goes to far, I think, in its fiscal conservativeness and its social liberalness. Maybe that’s why it isn’t a major party. I think a more middle of the road, fiscally conservative/socially liberal party is a party whose time has come.
June 5, 2008 at 8:56 PM #218085zkParticipantUnfortunately the two parties are socially/fiscally liberal and socially/fiscally conservative
I also consider myself fiscally conservative/socially liberal. But I don’t consider the republican party socially/fiscally conservative. The republican party has become socially conservative/fiscally liberal. Beyond liberal. Fiscally irresponsible. The democrats are also too liberal fiscally.
It absolutely boggles my mind that the socially liberal/fiscally conservative libertarian party isn’t a major party. It would make total sense and would a much better balance.
I totally agree. The actual real life libertarian party goes to far, I think, in its fiscal conservativeness and its social liberalness. Maybe that’s why it isn’t a major party. I think a more middle of the road, fiscally conservative/socially liberal party is a party whose time has come.
June 5, 2008 at 8:56 PM #218113zkParticipantUnfortunately the two parties are socially/fiscally liberal and socially/fiscally conservative
I also consider myself fiscally conservative/socially liberal. But I don’t consider the republican party socially/fiscally conservative. The republican party has become socially conservative/fiscally liberal. Beyond liberal. Fiscally irresponsible. The democrats are also too liberal fiscally.
It absolutely boggles my mind that the socially liberal/fiscally conservative libertarian party isn’t a major party. It would make total sense and would a much better balance.
I totally agree. The actual real life libertarian party goes to far, I think, in its fiscal conservativeness and its social liberalness. Maybe that’s why it isn’t a major party. I think a more middle of the road, fiscally conservative/socially liberal party is a party whose time has come.
June 5, 2008 at 8:56 PM #218135zkParticipantUnfortunately the two parties are socially/fiscally liberal and socially/fiscally conservative
I also consider myself fiscally conservative/socially liberal. But I don’t consider the republican party socially/fiscally conservative. The republican party has become socially conservative/fiscally liberal. Beyond liberal. Fiscally irresponsible. The democrats are also too liberal fiscally.
It absolutely boggles my mind that the socially liberal/fiscally conservative libertarian party isn’t a major party. It would make total sense and would a much better balance.
I totally agree. The actual real life libertarian party goes to far, I think, in its fiscal conservativeness and its social liberalness. Maybe that’s why it isn’t a major party. I think a more middle of the road, fiscally conservative/socially liberal party is a party whose time has come.
June 5, 2008 at 9:08 PM #217986anParticipantzk, thanks for bringing this thread back on topic.
patientlywaiting, sorry for high jacking your thread.
June 5, 2008 at 9:08 PM #218076anParticipantzk, thanks for bringing this thread back on topic.
patientlywaiting, sorry for high jacking your thread.
June 5, 2008 at 9:08 PM #218099anParticipantzk, thanks for bringing this thread back on topic.
patientlywaiting, sorry for high jacking your thread.
June 5, 2008 at 9:08 PM #218127anParticipantzk, thanks for bringing this thread back on topic.
patientlywaiting, sorry for high jacking your thread.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.