[somamasoso]

The Democratic party was hijacked by , eh, how else can I say it, communists, "Jews", "minorities", and subversives of every stripe.

The word "liberal" has also been corrupted from it's original meaning.

As "gay" once meant happy, carefree or "queer" once meant strange, odd, "liberal" once meant generous or flexible.

A person can't use either of these terms in their original meaning because the terms have been hijacked.

A person can no longer speak of conservatives either without denoting the NEO-"conservatives" who also hijacked that party.

If you look to see who the people were that took over the Democratic Party you will find that they belong to the same ethnic group that changed the Republicans to neo-conservatives.


You can identify them by looking at campaign financing for the amounts of contributions coming from whom going to whom.

The correlation between the contributions and the ethnic group providing the bulk of them is unmistakable.


When it comes to the preserving the environment I believe that we should be conservative in the use of them, by which I mean that we should avoid polluting ourselves, destroying the natural environment, and consuming resources at a rate faster than they can be replaced.

In other words try to aim for a state of "sustainable" growth, one which is not destined to result in overcrowding and all the terrible problems associated with it. Waste is not a conservative principle.

But because of the madness of some people who have used frugality and needful concern as an excuse to attack industry I am unable to express my position without being unduly associated with them.

My "liberality" is simple. The availability of certain goods are not much use if clean air and water are unavailable. A population of humans can not continue indefinitely unabated without eventually meeting natural limitations imposed by nature any more than bacteria in a Petri dish. This is common sense.


Where I live farm land is being rapidly depleted by people fleeing the congestion of the north and all it's associated head aches. The supply of land in not unlimited. Who wants to live in a place like India or China?

"silent reply"

Neither do they or they wouldn't be competing with each other to leave the place and come to the US.

You can take a bunch of rats or monkeys and force them to live in crowded conditions and the results are hellish. With humans it is no different.

If people do not learn to contain their urges to procreate within a viable limit eventually these conditions will arise and someone or something will happen to reduce the population. If it is not a war or something some action taken by the rulers, as in China, then Mother Nature herself will address the problem by disease and starvation.



The problem is that white people know this and are conscientious about producing offspring they cannot afford.

This is much less true with blacks while Hispanics are making a deliberate effort to overwhelm the Gringo wherever they settle, while the Jews are encouraging the whole demographic shift so that no homogenous nation will exist, leaving them the only organized structure capable of acting in concert.


So while I believe that there is an optimal point of equilibrium in which the rate of consumption of resources should not exceed sustainable growth, I also see a pressing need to address the demographic shift occurring in the US with as much concern as is being shown for that of Israel.