SA@TAC - Peter King's Radical Ignorance

[r6racer53]

This peter king dude is an idiot and i will say it here right now.

If you are religous shut your fucking mouth. Wake up everyone, religons only breed hate.

Realize we evolved on this planet and we are all the children of mother nature, she is the only real god, and the true life giver!!

[chintitoken]

Good analysis. There has not been a single Muslim terrorist in recent times who has stated that he commited murder to further the cause of Islam. ALL cited revenge for foreign policy and justice for slaughtered coreligionists by the US and its allies in Iraq,Afghanistan,Pakistan. This however, does not form part of the narrative the powers that be want to pushed in the mainstream so its duly neglected by politicians and the media who are really propagandists for the powerful military industry.

[lemmieatit]

Dumb Black people believe Islam is their calling. But Arab Muslims and their African converts were responsible for The Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade. It was them who sold their infidel brothers to the European. Also Mr King, can you do anything about domestic terrorism? I don't allow my kids outside for fear of stray bullets. Crips and Bloods are running my neigbhorhood and politicians don't seem to have a problem with it!

[s4njuro]

I'm about as far left as they come, and I would like to say: well said sir!

[RPenta]

Southern Avenger: when you see King just say: UP THE RA!

[jigglyfidda125]

Muslims should not live in segregated neighbourhoods.

They should be forcefully integrated among the rest.

[72nc]

If muslim terrorist were doing what they're doing for the reason of "American Imperialism", then why the fuck are they blowing up THEIR OWN PEOPLE TOO!

[combatjm89]

@iwustudent101 100% correct. "They hate our freedom" is neocon BS.

[bigboss686]

@combatjm89 What crap. Only a truly deluded fool(people who watch these videos) could think that's not a contributing factor, after all sharia law is soooo in-line with the traditional values/rights of human beings in Western cultures LOL. Yep, American imperialism or the shaw of Iran making these people blow EACH OTHER up. Nevermind the fact that Islam is a throwback to the eighth century or the countless Muslims speak about the decadent West eroding the morality of Islam. You guys are a joke

[TulliusVII]

Great to see Jack on the Judge... would love it if he got his own show. As someone pointed out to me he is too anti-war for the zionists to promote and I suppose this is correct. Jack will probably be largely ignored. However, to see him on Judge Napolitano's show is heartening.

[yakyakyak69]

The US Statists (NeoCon-Fascists & Democrat-Socialists) have 700+ US military bases OCCUPYING over 135 nations PRODUCING hatred & jihad RESISTANCE!

They attack us HERE because we have been OVER THERE for almost 100 years.

Starve the beast.... END THE FED!

[suitabledude]

God I love the southern avenger! Always telling it like it is, with no deviations. Just simple logic.

[cushmandavis]

Peter King pals around with Irish Republican Army terrorists.

[MarmaladeINFP]

@controversyking That is the problem. People like you have almost no understanding about what is liberalism. Too often liberals get described as the far leftwing such as socialists, but if you look at the actual positions of liberals they tend to agree with moderates. The actual leftwing is almost entirely left out of the equation. The problem is the centrist position of the media & of Washington is far to the right of the center of public opinion. So a moderate liberal looks like a leftwinger.

[TheSouthernPlanter]

love 2:20

[Ponerology]

Jack, you have had numerous videos just like this (all good). At this point we have even more serious problems than Afghanistan. This country now has a policy of endless war coupled with unquestioned support for Israel. Nothing will change this short of a street revolution.

[337noname]

After years of voting in politicians on the concept that the redistribution wealth to the top 2% will trickle down to the rest of us, it hard to take the GOP or Tea Party seriously. After starting two wars while gutting of the treasury, why do we still called the Right wing "conservative"?

[MarmaladeINFP]

@337noname This is another part of the label problem. Most politicians are corporatists &, if we are to go by recent policies such as union-busting, the GOP & Tea Party is unashamedly corporatist. What goes for conservative is the far right neocon & libertarian neoliberal. Conservatives traditionally supported govt, but conservatives in the US have become radicalized. Traditional conservatives are hard to find & many of them instead identify as moderates, independents, & Democrats.

[337noname]

I don't disagree with your main point but why the generalizations about what "most" liberals think?

Screw the extreme Tea Party along with all the other extremists on the Left and Right. Middle of the road liberals and conservative should wake up and stop the blame game.

[MarmaladeINFP]

@337noname Extremists are often problematic no matter what their proclaimed ideology. But who are the real extremists? It's easy to point to hated groups like Islamic fundies, anarchists, & commies. It's more difficult to point out more respectable groups such as Christian fundies, secessionists, & militias. Many Americans will attack the former while defending the latter. The data shows the political ruling elite & political activists are more polarized than the majority of Americans.

[MarmaladeINFP]

@337noname The challenge for moderates is many of them don't realize they are moderates. The media's portrayal of the centrist position doesn't represent most Americans because the media is describing the center of Washington. Also, there is a confusion of labels. The Dem Party is supposed to be liberal despite it consisting of equal numbers of conservatives & despite about 1/2 of liberals being independents. To add to the confusion many who identify as conservative hold many liberal positions.

[337noname]

@MarmaladeINFP It's getting pretty ridiculous. Words like conservative and liberal have almost no meaning anymore and are used mostly to make agenda driven taking points based on generalizations and assumptions. The more bombastic the rhetoric that better the ratings and/or more hits your video gets. Higher ratings and more hits creates echo chambers and circle jerks not public discourse.

[MarmaladeINFP]

@337noname Yeah, almost no meaning, but there is still some meaning left in such labels. I don't mind labels if they are used to make accurate and clear distinctions. The confusing part for me is that the word 'liberal' gets described by many as if it meant leftwinger, but when it's broken down into actual issues 'liberals' have more in common with 'moderates'.

[bkiser10]

Not sure I follow.

If American terrorists and terrorism is a result on the War in Afghanistan, then using that logic how do you explain September 11th?

[cavalucho]

There isn't any logig reason to diskile Barack Hussein Obama.

Besides his Kenyan Birth Certificate.

[combatjm89]

As usual, Mr. Hunter is spot on. I'm reminded of the 2008 Republican debate where Ron Paul spoke the truth about our foreign policy and Rudy Guiliani attacked him with the party line "they hate our freedom". NO, they hate the domination of their cultures for the past 200+ years, by the British and American Empires.

[aynaristo]

@combatjm89 We can talk ad infinitum about the causes ,real or aggravated ,what is important is to talk about the solution !

Ban muslim savages from immigrating to the west ,if anyone of them is found to voice symbols of extremism like Burka /Sharia/Honour killing deport them immediately upto their third cousins

[snorkymn]

Jack, another spot on video. Keep em' coming!

[jskyroe]

Muslims always explain they kill in the name of allah its allah will. READ versus from the koran. You can even read them from muslim made websites! And for those saying just let the muslims slaughter the Jews. You all need mental help! Prisons are over crowded just let serial killers kill! Right? "Idiots"

[jskyroe]

Its simple, look at ANY and ALL post made by muslims imams and clerics. They want WORLD domination. And have proven time and time again the WILL slaughter to get it! Look at march 4 sharia website now calling for the removal of Lady Liberty. ANY one that IGNORS the THREATS and the ACTIONS of Muslims are just AS responsible as the muslims for their hateful vicious crimes against HUMANITY!

[aynaristo]

@jskyroe Exactly ,ban immigration of muslims in the west ,no more multiculturalism ,no more mass immigration !

[AcePilot101]

Lenin called for an alliance between socialists and Islamic radicals in 1924.

We can see how that turned out in Iran (1979).

[combatjm89]

@AcePilot101 And Iran had close ties with the Nazis, whose ambassador to Iran encouraged them to change their name from Persia to Iran, which means "Aryan", BTW.

[AcePilot101]

Few people understand Islamic jihad and it's intolerance towards other religions.

Just recently, a Buddhist monk was killed in Thailand by Jihadists agitating for an independent state in that country.

[Desnoxvu]

We should be more concerned with facist radicals like Peter King who should not be holding power in this country.

[manifestliberty]

Peter King is one smiling sack o' sunshine eh?

[Cheedillow]

2:10, guy holding a sign that read "Welcome to France"

I lol'd.

[vonPeterhof]

@Cheedillow That made me wonder if any of the French protesters against the raising of the retirement age held signs saying "Bienvenue dans l'Amérique" ;)

[mrhulot101]

I am often told by progressives that their approval of massive immigration to america is due to their belief immigrants should be allwowed here in massivve numbers due to US governmemt policies that harm economies of foreign nations. there is a disconnect in their logic as they ignore the poor people here affected by immigration and progressives assume somehow massive immigration will hurt those making foreign policies, which is so unlikely as to be absurd.

[ITheProfessorI]

Peter King Disliked This Video....

[btigtime2]

Another one would be Government ending entitlements for people who are hooked on them without addressing the bonds owed to banks because the Governments have gone on a 30 year spending spree

[maximuslaurius]

Given his past, King is the LAST person who should be talking about terrorism.

[webfulcrum]

More and more, Peter King reminds me of Thaddeus Stevens.

[wolgreth]

Dear Jack,

What happened to your other, older videos?

[billyboy647]

This is right on the button with the Neocons--who will not entertain Muslim objections to us being in their nations, dictating terms and making war. This is analogous to the so-called "conservatives" who promote small government but defend Lincoln. Unless they see Lincoln as the cause of Consolidation, the loss of states rights and the rise of Imperial America they'll never get to the root of the problem--and, therefore, never find an adequate solution, because they made the devil their god.

[webfulcrum]

@billyboy647 Well Said! You have identified the problem precisely. It is incredibly naive [or hypocritical] to support "10th amendment issues," while still thinking that deranged, mass-murdering psychopath [Lincoln] was a good president (much less, a good man).

I truly believe that we can draw a thick, straight line from the front porch of the McClean house in Appomattox, right down through history to the insolvent, rotting corpse of our current empire.

[billyboy647]

@webfulcrum "rotting corpse .." Perfect. Why do establishment historians and devil--uh, I mean, Lincoln worshippers not connect the huge rise in taxes & government corruption in Grant's administration with Lincoln? It can all be laid at his & the radical Republican's feet. Had Al Jolson lived in 1874 he would be saying, "Folks, you ain't seen nothin' yet." Down with the bloody red Empire! Well said, Web! Well said, indeed. Our present government is a renegade, illegitimate Jacobin monstrosity.

[DrGordon31]

Nonsense, Islam by nature is a religion that preaches radicalism and violence

[sykopath66190]

@DrGordon31 ALL religions preach radicalism and violence. Islam doesn't have exclusive rights to that. Islam did, however, set the standard for treating enemy combatants with dignity, set up the largest social welfare system on the fucking planet, AND revolutionized math, science, and philosophy. All you've done is sit here and pontificate about that which you know precisely nothing about.

Eat a dick and read a book.

[combatjm89]

@sykopath66190 Yes they did, and it worked great, if you were a Muslim. Compare the pre-and post-flight verses in the Koran, you will see Mo change his tune about violence and Jews. And the Hadith reveals even more hatred of "infidels", and how they must be converted or live in dhminni as second-class citizens, humiliated and highly taxed.

[flowerdrop1]

Israel is the f#cking problem!!!

[webfulcrum]

@flowerdrop1 It's the Jooooos! If we get rid of them, it will solve all our problems.

Go for it, it's been tried before... and it will be tried again, in a little place called Armageddon.

[SupositoryRepository]

@webfulcrum The rapture is an invention of a nineteenth century hobo "preacher." There will be no Armageddon that you Evangelicals don't create yourself. Or as Bill Buckley would say "immanentize the eschaton."

[combatjm89]

@SupositoryRepository I agree. The "biblical basis" for rapture is a misinterpretation of the Apostle's words. He was addressing the Thessolonians about their concern for their dead, would they rise again. It is not a separate event from the Second Coming found elsewhere in Scripture.

[flowerdrop1]

@webfulcrum when he puts the Jewish community on trial for spying Israel does on us (Pollard, AIPAC), the money raised at synagogues for Israeli west bank settlements and the excess influence the Israeli lobby group has on Washington, then I''ll believe he's fair. Elstwise he's just a tool

[kraksc]

This is a Commentary I have been waiting for. Thank you Jack for getting back to a real issue (in my earnest opinion). This is a topic that is almost taboo for the right leaning population and also fodder for the left. I consider myself a new breed of "INDEPENDENT" right leaning roots and left leaning ideals. I no longer see Red or Blue but just and rational. "How Religion Poisons Everything"

[sharinganclan213]

The religion of "peace" is not very peaceful, Jack. Although I agree that the US militarism does not help with our relationshp with the muslim world, why ignore tha hate filled in the koran and hadith?

[iwillspyonyou]

Neo-cons ruined the GOP.

[steve0281]

No matter what the US does anywhere the Shariah says that Islam must conquer the world. People who are devout Muslims therefore cannot adhere to both the Shariah and the Constitution. They are guilty of sedition and should be deported.

[LibertaerUeberAlles]

@steve0281

Talmudism also seeks to conquer the world. So, while Zionists have directed our attention to Islam imposing Sharia on rural Idaho, the Zionists have long since colonized the United States and proceeded to dismantle it. A nice video for you:

The Hate Mongers Among Us

[watcher0777]

ok so if someone disagrees with a political policy or disagrees with another countries foreign policy it is ok to commit terrorism because this is the effect due to the cause stated? get real! radicalization is happening because of the ideology of islam and the radical internet connections with the radical imans. this is unfortunately being facillitated with tax dollars by our own state dept. granted king may be ignorant but we all have plenty to learn. thanks jack for provoking that.

[xavierspade666]

@watcher0777 The "Cause" or "Motive" being stated is not "Disagreeing with a political policy or Disagreeing with other countries' foreign policy"; but rather Anger at those countries for interfering in their sovereign affairs, invading with military forces into their countries to decide who will be victorious and control those regions of the world, and killing thousands upon thousands of their innocent civilians.

When I say "their", I am implying that "terrorists" belong to a faction or place.

[theracemixer]

Last i checked Afghanistan came after 9/11 not before thus the argument they are doing what they do because of "we are there" is false

[hellsunicorn]

@theracemixer We were in Afghanistan long before 9/11, go back to the 70s and 80s. Furthermore, this isn't about Afghanistan per say, but about the whole Mid-East. Bin Laden's assertions of our militarism deals specifically with our presence in Mecca (aka Saudi Arabia).

Please get educated.

[CripplingDuality]

@hellsunicorn

Mecca? I doubt that, unless they're American Muslim troops going to Mecca on the Hajj. But yes, there are American bases in Saudi Arabia, which is a major point of contention for Bin Laden.

[combatjm89]

@CripplingDuality And now Israeli troops are in Saudi also. Incredible...

[theracemixer]

@hellsunicorn or should i say johnny come lately.

The US was there in the 80s to kick out USSR and left Afghanistan when the USSR left.

As for the Saudi issue the US was there to stop Saddam after he threatened to invade Saudi jsut after Kuwait. Furthermore Muslims have been doing this same shit back in the 1800.

[combatjm89]

@hellsunicorn Yes, OBL and his followers/allies see non-Muslim presence in their holy land as the #1 reason for attacking us. Good ol' neocon foreign policy, ain't it great?

[EVFCobs]

@theracemixer Check again. The US has been interfering in the middle east since long before 911.

[theracemixer]

@EVFCobs

Yup it goes backs as the 1800s

[combatjm89]

@theracemixer In the 70s Brezinski, Carter's NS advisor, wrote a book detailing the need to take control of the Middle East and to A-stan. He used the CIA to use the Afganis to raid the USSR. This, along with destabilization of the socialist Afghani gov't, led to the Soviet invasion. We provoked it! He brags about it! And he wrote years ago about what is happening NOW. It is all planned out. Iran, Iraq, etc. we've been manipulating sovereign nations for years. Now our empire dies...

[theracemixer]

@combatjm89

I see no problem with what he was trying to do, he was a NS adviser ( thats what NS advisers do)

But Muslims predate Brezinski.

[MarmaladeINFP]

Good analysis except for one part. You portray liberals as a stereotype in dismissing the liberal criticisms of the Tea Party as being mere stereotypes. I understand you were using a rhetorical device to make a point, but I would suggest taking seriously the criticisms of liberals as seriously as you take the criticisms of the Tea Party. If you don't, you are part of the problem you are criticizing.

[hellsunicorn]

@MarmaladeINFP Spoken as if the liberals who helped elect the current president weren't already part of the problem. tsk tsk, you've definitely missed the boat, and this post is just 2 inches shy of NeoCon rhetoric.

[MarmaladeINFP]

@hellsunicorn Wake the fuck up! All recent presidents (& most recent politicians in general) of both parties are part of the problem. Anyway, the Democratic Party is hardly the party just of liberals. Only about a 1/3 of Democrats identify as liberals & about 1/2 of liberals identify as independents. I'm a liberal who didn't vote for Obama nor ever supported him. There are many liberals like me. The Democratic Party isn't the liberal Party. Wake up, please.

[utubehayter]

@MarmaladeINFP

Please know who you are talking to. This is one example of "Wake the fuck up!" that sounds like the crazy mutterings of mad people. Hellsunicorn is quite well educated in such things, no need to "wake him".

And thanks for not identifying with Obama or the democrats, we need your kind of people on both sides.

[MarmaladeINFP]

@utubehayter I was responding to his commment that was dismissive & misinformed. Not all liberals vote for the Democratic Party. In fact, there are equal numbers of Democrats who identify as conservative as who identify as liberal. Also, Obama won the popular vote which means many conservatives and independents voted for him. I never said ("2 inches shy of Neocon rhetoric") that people who voted for Obama (or any other president) wasn't part of the problem as hellsunicorn claimed I was saying.

[utubehayter]

@MarmaladeINFP

Please define liberal. I ask, because in certain interpretation of the word Hellsunicorn is a liberal too. Which interpretation are you talking about. Also, please comment on the liberalism of the following folks, Barrack Obama, Maxine Waters, Joe Lieberman. Do you think they are liberal? and if so why? It might be too long a comment, so I apologize for your trouble fitting it in here.

[MarmaladeINFP]

@utubehayter It's probably meaningless to try to apply such labels to politicians. Liberal, libertarian, or socially conservative rhetoric doesn't make a politician liberal, libertarian, or socially conservative. What determines a politician's decisions are campaign money, past favors, social relations, potential private job offers after politics, etc. The confusion is that center of Washington politics is to the right (on many issues) of the center of the majority of Americans.

[MarmaladeINFP]

@utubehayter I define liberal as positions/policies typically labeled as 'liberal' including views of most liberals but also many classical liberals (eg libertarians) & oddly many self-identified conservatives (because 'liberal' has become such a dirty word). Going by the data, 'liberal' & 'moderate' seem to have much in common with leftwingers (anarchists, commies) as almost entirely outside of public debate

benjamindavidsteele.wordpress. com/2010/01/23/us-demographics­-increasing-progressivism/

[utubehayter]

@MarmaladeINFP

So if someone labeled the policy of killing every Jew as "liberal" that would be liberal to you? Yep, cause Nazi party was a socialist party, socialists are on the left, leftists are liberal, hence Hitler was liberal? LMAO!

Why don't you admit that you have no basis of judging what the word "liberal" means?

[MarmaladeINFP]

@utubehayter The problem with your question is that it's silly & disingenuous. And the problem with your comments is that you're misinformed to the point of ignorance. As far as I know, no one has ever defined killing every Jew as 'liberal'. Someone would be ignorant to even imply it. The Nazis were socialists in the way that the Chinese is a Republic. People can label themselves anything. In reality, however, the Nazis killed & imprisoned socialists & other leftwingers such as union leaders.

[combatjm89]

@MarmaladeINFP Nazis were fascists, although Mussolini did develop the concept as he went along. The merger of state and corporate powers = fascism. And we have it now. Megabanks own the Federal Reserve, a private corp. that controls our monetary policy as they wish. And the revolving door between the private sector and public "service". Corruption is the fruit. Both parties are guilty.

[utubehayter]

@MarmaladeINFP

Read your own words "People can label themselves anything".

So how can liberal mean anything that gets labeled "liberal"?  Which was precisely my point. If you don't have any standard of measuring what liberal means, you are just talking nonsense like "Hitler is liberal" or "China is a republic".

Oh test this against contemporary liberalism. "Everything for the community, everything inside the community and nothing against the community"

[MarmaladeINFP]

@utubehayter People can label themselves anything, but only the ignorant believe that labels can mean anything. Labels are words with a history. Modern liberalism has it's roots in classic liberalism, specifically in the tradition of social democracy. Read Thomas Paine & you will see American liberalism described to you in detail. Read Henry David Thoreau & you will see the justification for the liberal civil rights movement described to you. China is technically a republic (ie not a monarchy).

[utubehayter]

@MarmaladeINFP

Hold on, you think classical liberals were for social democracy? Oh boy, what Thomas Paine are you reading? The same anarchist that almost got himself killed by the Jacobins for his anti-democracy stance? And Henry David Thoreau, the "almost an anarchist" classical liberal?

Where the hell do these people preach social democracy?

Also,

"Not monarchy" does not mean "a republic". And you are calling others ignorant?

[combatjm89]

@MarmaladeINFP I for one believe hellsunicorn is wide awake and quite intelligent. We may not see eye 2 eye but I definitely defend his intellectual capacity and common sense. Look at the leaders of both parties to see what the parties represent. Big govt liberalism on one side, big govt corporatism on the other. Both spend like drunken sailors and make token gestures of "change". They are two sides of the same debased, shaved coin. Maybe you should be the one setting your alarm clock...

[MarmaladeINFP]

@combatjm89 He may be wide awake & quite intelligent, but that doesn't change the fact his comment was dismissive & misinformed. If he is willing to admit his comment was wrong, I'm willing to take back my telling him to wake up. I liked the clever use of words you used to remove any responsibility from conservatives. The Dem Party is the 'liberal' party despite it consisting of equal numbers of conservatives & liberals. The Repub Party is the 'corporatist' despite consisting of conservatives.

[combatjm89]

@MarmaladeINFP I wasn't trying to be clever, I am speaking of the extremes in BOTH parties, not the rank and file per se. Does Howard Dean as DNC head represent all Dems - I think not. Same for Michael Steele for the GOP. I believe both parties are so rotten and corrupt that they are equally worthless. All I want is a return to the Constitution, it's been abused since 1791, but the real decline started with Lincoln, that war-mongering dirtbag. Reminds me of Dubya and Obama both.

[tylerwylie]

@MarmaladeINFP I would say I'm a liberal, however in the true sense of the word, via the Mises / Rothbardian route of classic liberalism, or more modernly put... Anarchism :)

[MarmaladeINFP]

@tylerwylie 'True' sense of the word? If you want to read some true classic liberalism in the American tradition, then read Thomas Paine & Henry David Thoreau. Both were radically liberal, but neither was an anarchist. Paine was a social democrat & Thoreau was a left-libertarian. Neither would agree with the 'classic liberalism' of Mises or Rothbard. Also, the anarchism you speak of is rightwing anarchism. For left anarchism, you'd have to read someone like Chomsky.

[tylerwylie]

@MarmaladeINFP I was just teasing, though Mises was probably one of the last classic liberals to get published.

[MarmaladeINFP]

@tylerwylie The confusion is that some of the contemporary classic liberals like Mises are more fiscally conservative & less socially liberal than many of the original classic liberals. Both Paine & Thoreau weren't socialists & were for free markets, but they were also wary of capitalism in general & acknowledged that it was problematic when capitalism wasn't constrained by the morality of public good. Paine & Thoreau were on the far left & Mises was on the far right.

[combatjm89]

@tylerwylie Long live the Austrian school!

[hellsunicorn]

@MarmaladeINFP I'm sorry, but while I agree with your general assertion about all recent presidents and the 2 major parties, your assertion about liberals is categorically false. The vast majority of self-described liberals (many of them Noam Chomsky drones) voted for Obama at said Linguist's advice despite their party affiliation. If 1/2 of liberals are independent, how come I don't see 3rd party candidates breaking the 5% mark? Get a grip man, and wake yourself up before telling me to.

[MarmaladeINFP]

@hellsunicorn Many liberals voted for Obama for similar reasons many conservatives voted for Obama (anyway, there are equal number of liberals & conservatives in the Dem Party). I can't speak for those who voted for Obama as I'm an independent liberal who votes third party, but I suppose that at the time many Americans (whether liberal, conservative, moderate, or independent) thought Obama seemed like a better choice than the alternative of an old man going senile with nitwit for a running mate.

[Southernjuggalo63]

@MarmaladeINFP until liberals recognize conservatives as not republicans then i think it will get better for both sides recognizing that neither are part of any of the parties we think today

[MarmaladeINFP]

@Southernjuggalo63 The GOP is the party of rightwingers. But rightwingers & conservatives aren't the same in the way liberals & leftwingers aren't the same. Conservatives are found in both parties (generally speaking, white conservatives as Repubs & minority conservatives as Dems). I'd guess most moderate, traditional conservatives vote Democratic. But the confusion is that what gets labeled as conservative in the US is usually neither moderate nor, in the larger historical sense, traditional.

[mike1988123]

welcome to france, lol