Anonymous
Anonymous asked in Politics & GovernmentOther - Politics & Government · 1 decade ago

Why are Conservatives so opposed to differing points of view?

And why do they think they have the right to wipe them out?, write them off?, or have legislative bills written, and voted into law that change the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights that protect all other fellow Americans? Yet they welcome illegals with open arms.

Is it because they can't comprehend or understand the word Compromise with their fellow Americans? And enforce the laws broken by illegals?

Update:

paul_foster44 - Clinton was in office and the right still weren't Open to anything, only Opposed to every thing. The Dems have control of both houses since Novembers vote of 2006 - and Bush has vetoed 2 bills so far put forth before him. How many did he veto when the Cons had both houses? And under these definitions - Dems aren't by all means perfect, but Cons (not all) pretty much represent every one of them in a negative way. Meaning they are for change if it represents them, or suits them. Perserving parts of the Constitution, and Civil Rights - but erroding others. Looking forward to Roe v Wade being overturned for one.

No equal rights or protection under the laws for hate crimes for another.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18473074/

Doesn't make sense to me. They're either just as 2 faced or Flip-floppers too.

opposed

against somebody or something: disagreeing with or taking an active stance against somebody or something

a government opposed to change of any sort

Update 2:

open

3. unconcealed state: the state of being no longer hidden or held back

It's good to get all the facts out in the open.

6. frank and honest: not trying to hide anything or deceive anyone

8. receptive: ready and willing to accept or listen to something such as new ideas or suggestions

9. vulnerable: in a position in which blame, criticism, or attack are likely

13. freely accessible: accessible to all, with no restrictions on entry, membership, or acceptance

15. accessible to particular group: accessible to a particular group of interested people

18. not predetermined or decided: remaining undecided or unresolved

22. U.S. not having legal restrictions: not having restrictions that limit activities such as gambling or drinking

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Auris...

Update 3:

Funny bjornthefellhand - If you are refering to Rush Limbaugh - he deserves to be shut down as he tells equal lies as Bush, and the Bush Administration. Probably because he too is a part of this or in on it. http://www.rationalrevolution.net/war/putting_it_a... - http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0308-20.htm and http://spp.gov/myths_vs_facts.asp

I understand that when Bush, and his Adminstration was being talked about on a public television broadcasting station - Bush and his Administration tried to shut down the entire channel off the air. This wasn't recently either. It was when he went into office. Couldn't happen though because it is entirely supported and funded by public donations. So it seems to me that it's the Cons that fear what they cannot control. Why do you think they developed and pay with federal funds to create the FOX News Channel? They did the same thing (built a station) for news out of Iraq.

Update 4:

Great and Glorious Chase - Afraid you're close, but not enough. Cons want the new immigration law just slightly tougher from what the Dems want slightly softer. Which means (imo) that they want to compromise on this issue by still allowing the illegals the right to remain here under the new work visas, and some sort of back door amnesty. The illegals (not all) who only want the work visas Do Not Want to become Americans. Still the politicians are being awfully lienient when it comes to our laws on illegal entry into the country.

Don't believe me! Look it up on these.

http://federalistblog.us/2006/07/delegated_powers_...

http://idexer.com/articles/immigration_response.ht...

When the Cons Party had control, and 2 Con Presidents in office before Dem Clinton, (Cons still in control of both houses) and then Bush another Con - In part this one reads -

Update 5:

1978: The US government amends the Immigration Reform Act to allow a global ceiling of 290,000 immigrants annually. In reality, since 1965, the annual numbers of immigrants have been much higher.

1980: The US government passes the Refugee Act defining refugees as anyone "who is unable or unwilling to return to, and is unable or unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country because of persecution, or a well-founded fear of persecution, on account of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion."

1987: The US government passes the Immigration Reform and Control Act which grants amnesty to any illegal immigrant who entered the US before

Update 6:

1987: The US government passes the Immigration Reform and Control Act which grants amnesty to any illegal immigrant who entered the US before 1982 and had continuously resided here since. Of the 3.7 million eligible for amnesty, 2.6 million accepted it. Employers who hired illegal aliens became subject to fines and jail sentences if a pattern of hiring illegals could be found. Employers were not obligated to verify the validity of documents. Consequently, many growers simply ignored the growing reality of counterfeit documents for illegals.

1996: The US government passes the Immigration Law Amendments to enforce the pledges of sponsors to support arriving relatives and workers. Sponsors must prove their income is at least 25% above the poverty line ($20,000 for a household of four) and must promise to maintain support until the arriving immigrant has worked 10 years or become a citizen.

Update 7:

1997: The US government passes the Immigration Amnesty Bill giving amnesty to all Nicaraguan and Cuban immigrants. All who applied automatically received permanent residency.

1998: The US government passes the Omnibus Budget Bill authorizing the H-1B visa program that allows the entrance of 115,000 foreign workers annually who have training or experience in high-tech fields - especially engineering, accounting, and programming. An H-1B visa allows a stay of up to three years but can be renewed for a total of six years.

1999: The US government passes the H-1B Visa amendments to close the loophole allowing Americans to be openly fired and replaced by H-1B workers.

Update 8:

2000: The US government passes the H-1B Visa amendments which almost doubles the number of temporary visas for foreign skilled high-tech workers from 115,000 annually to 195,000 annually for the next three years. the legislation was changed in response to the arguments of tech companies that contend they face a shortage of 300,000 workers and a 1.4 percent unemployment rate in the information technology industry. If they cannot draw the needed workers from abroad, they argue, they will be forced to more their facilities and research overseas.

Update 9:

US Census Bureau estimates that the number of illegal immigrants in the US more than doubled during the 1990s. About 8.7 undocumented immigrants live in the US - about 115,000 are from the Middle East (many of whom are "quasi-legal" or political refugees) and 3.9 million (44%) are from Mexico. Latinos numbered 35.3 million in the census. Estimates today place number of illegal immigrants in the U.S. from Mexico any where from 12 million to over 20 million due to high pregnancy rates among poor immigrant woman who seek welfare and anchor babies to make deportation difficult under current political climate.

Update 10:

What I want is for them all to stop the petty games, and bickering, and get the real issues resolved. Even if that means going to the voters to ask what they (Cons and Dems) should do. And that includes whether or not - to keep pan-handling to a President who is stubborn and arragant... Or doing what we voted them in to do. Certainly the hits and losses the Cons took in the last election suggests that even other Cons are ready to bring the men and women home from Iraq.

12 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    They think they are superior, and that anyone with a different view is insignificant. It isn't their fault it is just what has been drummed into them since childhood. That is the bad thing about propaganda. It encourages narrow mindedness, by telling people if they are open to new and different ways of thinking that the devil will swoop in and take their souls. They encourage hate and bigotry by portraying their was as the only way and the righteous way.

    They are to be pitied and ignored. It does no good to argue with them, because how do you reason with the unreasonable?

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Conservatives? Bush? Yeah, we dropped the ball concerning immigration when W. took office. However, it is the Dems who typically attempt to erode, dilute, distort, or wholesale attack the Constitution. Freedom of speech is only when a minority makes a racial slur or when some psychopath wants to burn a flag. Forget the 2nd. Amendment...they think it refers to the upper limbs God sent you with. Libs exploited the brutality of the Rodney King incident, then chuckled with glee at the ensuing riots. They then have the temerity to sell murdering your unborn children as a safe constitutionally protected act. Talk about nazism...extermination of the innocent. Yeah, enforce the immigration laws, this is part of many conservatives' platform. But lets deal with liberalism they way it really is.

    Source(s): NOT the media.
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Are you really serious ?

    You have to many points for me to spend my time trying to answer all of them for a 2 points and maybe an additional 10 if I get chosen as the best answer.

  • 1 decade ago

    I think its funny to read answers by some Cons. when they say Libs are against free speech. No Liberals are just against speech or actions that limit freedom. If your speech is about forcing everyone to live under Christian rules and be good slaves to the corporations, then I'm going to be against every thing you say. I will grant you the right to say it, but hope no one can hear you over the din caused by people with real morality...oh yeah, and a pie in the face as well

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 1 decade ago

    The old adage,"an @ss likes to hear himself bray" certainly holds true here. There is so much BS in this (question?) that there is no way to answer the question legitimately.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    That has to be the longest question I have ever seen.

    Answer: you are confusing Facist and Conservative. There are very few Conservatives in the republican Party and what they are doing is certainly not conservative.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    I feel it is the left who want only their opinion voiced. You control 95% of the media in this country and yet they introduce legislation to shut down talk radio the only true opposition to all the liberal propaganda. Why does the left fear what they cannot control?

  • Chase
    Lv 5
    1 decade ago

    You do realize the main question goes to libs as well, right? Look who are the ones welcoming the illegals! We want them kicked out of here but liberal groups want them to stay!

    Long winded, aren't we?

  • Who says they have to be open to different points of view? When the Democrats are in office will you cry for the left to be open to the opinions of the right?

  • 1 decade ago

    They feel that it is the "moral" thing to do. Most wouldn't know moral if it slapped them in the face though. They also consider stubborness and lack of compromise as characteristics of an effective leader. Strange, isn't it?

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.